There are two predominant views regarding the genesis and development of humankind which differ markedly. What if a bridge could be built which joined them together not as two opposing views running distantly parallel, but rather along the exact same line? Evolution confidently states there is no Creator; with humans the random result of millions of years of rather coincidental mutations occurring with seemingly impossible odds. Scientists like atheists, eliminate a spiritual component from the equation of biogenesis, relying on a purely physical explanation. Creationists in the main, teach that a divine God created everything by His Spirit; yet accounting for an impossible human history condensed within a chronology of a mere six millennia.
What if the two could be married together? What if the time frames involved for mankind’s evolution is not millions or only thousands of years, but instead tens of thousands of years? With the Solar System and the Universe beyond, hundreds of thousands of years old? What if the beginning of life is explained through supernatural means, yet the physical dimensions constructing our world are a creation within a creation? What if a supreme Creator is the first source, but other beings have been responsible for preternatural interference and genetic manipulation in the incredible project here on planet Earth? It would mean that evolution is a viable theory, yet just not in the way scientists might think – refer article: Chance Chaos or Designated Design? Likewise, creation is a credible answer, though not quite in the manner Christians may imagine – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
We will focus on the scientific field of genetics, principally Haplogroups and the evidence they provide for ancient lineal lines of descent through to our present day, resulting in the vast family tree that is the world’s two hundred countries, containing thousands of ethnicities. In turn, we will consider humanities ancestors who are named in the Bible and any credence to the three (actually four) broad ancestry groups and the sixteen (in reality twenty-one) major races descending from them. For those readers who may take umbrage with the word race, please refer to the concluding Chapter finalis verbum.
A Haplogroup is a series of mutations found in a chromosome. Specifically, they are a combination of alleles or Haplotypes and though located at different chromosomal regions, they are closely linked and tend to be inherited together. An allele (or allelomorph) may occur in pairs, or in multiple alleles which influences the expression or phenotype of any given human trait. The combination of alleles that in this instance a human carries, constitutes their genotype – the chemical composition of their personal DNA. Therefore, Haplogroups are detectable in the DNA of an individual and reveal with who, they share a common paternal or maternal ancestor.
Haplogroups are normally identified by a code comprising an initial letter of the alphabet, and ‘refinements consist of additional number and letter combinations, such as’ for example R → R1 → R1a and R1b, or R2 and so forth. This simplifies genealogical tracing of the genetic mutations.
In human genetics, the Haplogroups studied are: the patrilineal line consisting of a Y-DNA Haplogroup from a Y sex chromosome passed only from fathers to sons and the matrilineal line comprising a mtDNA Haplogroup consisting of mitochondria passed from mothers to offspring of both sexes. Females inherit an X chromosome from both their mother and father and have two X chromosomes. Therefore, females are XX. Conversely, males inherit one X chromosome from their mothers and a Y chromosome from their fathers. Thus, males are XY.
Haplogroups define every ethnicity or racial strand of descent. Haplogroups are split between the genetic information received from ones mother, mtDNA and from ones father, Y-DNA. The proviso is that a daughter does not receive the Y chromosome Haplogroup from her father. Whereas a son receives both the mitochondrial DNA from his mother and the Y chromosome from his father. Thus, there are two sets of Haplogroups for males.
Y-DNA is how paternal Haplotypes are inherited through a direct ancestral male line for countless generations. Because females do not inherit Y-DNA, they do not possess a paternal Haplogroup. Whereas maternal Haplogroup information, including for males is found within the mitochondria of our cells; hence the term mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA. ‘Mitochondria are small organelles that lie in the cytoplasm of eukaryotic cells… Their primary function is to provide energy to the cell.’ Scientists are not exactly sure why mitochondrial DNA is not passed down from fathers. Neither recombines and both Y-DNA and mtDNA change only by chance mutation at each generation with no intermixture between parents’ genetic material.
The remainder of about 98% of an individual’s genetic material – other than the two sex chromosomes X and Y, inherited from both parents – are autosomal chromosomes. These contain segments of DNA that a person shares with everyone they are related to. In essence, the fundamental difference between autosomal DNA and Haplogroup DNA is that the latter provides a genetic snapshot. One that follows a single line of your father’s fathers and mother’s mothers, revealing Haplogroup sub-clades which formed hundreds or thousands of years ago.
Though Haplogroups only provide surface ancestral information for an individual and are not as comprehensive as autosomal results; they do reveal ancient origins of ethnicities and shared common ancestry. Autosomal DNA concentrates on traces from perhaps five to ten generations back in time, over a few centuries but in so doing includes all of ones ancestral branches in its scope, including not just their father’s father, but ones mother, her mother and father and so forth; providing more detail about a person’s personal and immediate ancestry.
An enumeration of the chemical process in analysing Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups is provided in the following article:
The Genetic Origin of the Nations, Christian Churches of God, 2006 & 2020 – emphasis mine:
‘The YDNA and mtDNA are measured in two different ways. YDNA is measured in what are termed polymorphs. These polymorphs are allocated a numeric value and, according to the value when tested, the sub-groupings that are formed are called clades and subclades of the overall grouping which is called a Haplogroup. These values record the change in YDNA mutations and lines. The YDNA system that has been allocated to the male human species is grouped into a series of Haplogroups from A to R. The usual extensive measurement (using the Arizona system) is usually of 37 sites as markers. Basic testing is done for the first twelve, then to 25, and then on to 37 of these polymorphic sites, or locations to determine relatedness and Haplogroup association. There could be some 100 or more markers tested for changes (a.k.a. polymorphisms).’
‘The mitochondria, first sequenced in 1981, became known as the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS). The CRS has been used as a basis for comparison with individual mtDNA. In other words, any place in an individual mtDNA that has a difference from the CRS is characterized as a mutation. If a result shows no mutations at all it means that the mtDNA matches the CRS. A mutation happens when: a) a base replaces another base – for example a C (Cytosine) replaces an A (Adenine); b) a base is no longer in that position, or a deletion; and c) a new base is inserted between the other bases without replacing any other (an insertion).
The mtDNA is determined by reporting the polymorphic site such as for example 311C, meaning a mutation has occurred at base pair 16,311 and the base that changed here was actually changed to cytosine. The number 16,000 is the commencement point for DNA numbering and thus the 16,000 is dropped and the numbers used are the numbers in excess. So 16,311 becomes 311 and the letter indicates the chemical at that point in the polymorph. It is this change of the polymorphic site that determines the genetic ancestry, as the parent passes on to the offspring the DNA polymorphisms that they have with the same or similar numerical values. When tested, these values that are not exactly the same as the parent are termed mutations. The values thus vary and have determined the tribal groupings of the world’s nations.’
The scientific confirmation of an original female Homo sapiens progenitor is discussed in the following quote. Mitochondrial Eve was the name chosen by researchers for the woman who is understood to be the most recent common female lineal ancestor of all living humans.
Gods of the New Millennium, Alan Alford, 1997 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 1987, Allan Wilson, Mark Stoneking and Rebecca Cann, from the University of California at Berkeley, declared that all women alive today must have had a common genetic ancestor… How did they arrive at this conclusion? This… has been made possible by the discovery of mitochondria the tiny bodies within a cell that are responsible for production of energy through breakdown of sugars. Unlike our other DNA, which is scrambled by sexual recombination, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited virtually unchanged through the female lineandis thus a perfect marker to trace ancestral relations. Moreover, it mutates at a predictable rate. The number of differences between the mtDNA in a worldwide sample of 135 different women allowed Wilson, Stoneking and Cann to compare how far back the ancestors of these women had diverged.
In order to calibrate the divergences, the researchers used a comparison of mtDNA between man and chimpanzees, based on a separation 5 million years ago. And that led to the conclusion that a common ancestor named “Mitochondrial Eve” must have lived 250-150,000 years ago. This genetic evidence has been challenged, due to its calibration with the chimpanzees, whose separation date from man is not known with certainty. As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, this does not mean that Eve was the only woman on Earth at that time, just that she is the only one who has an unbroken line of female descendants. The chances are that many earlier Eves have descendants alive today, but their ancestry has passed, at some point, through the male line only. Despite the new mtDNA dates, most studies still tend to support and cite the 200,000 BP common ancestor.’
Constant readers and those who have read Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology will be aware the time frame for Adam and Eve may be as recent as thirty-thousand years ago. The supposed separation between chimps and man is not a given let alone the dating proposed. The purpose is not to discuss or digress on topics discussed in preceding chapters and articles. These include Homo erectus, Neanderthal man, the creation of Homo sapiens and the origin of Adam and Eve. Please refer to Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Homo neanderthalensisI, II, III & IV.
The above trees for patrilineal Y-DNA and matrilineal mtDNA are reasonably accurate.
First, an introduction to each of the Haplogroups and a synopsis for each, while presenting where applicable Noah’s sons and grandsons; matching where we can the Y-DNA Haplogroups and mtDNA with Noah’s sons wives.
Maternal mtDNA Haplogroups are lettered as such:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, HV, I, J, K, L0, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6, M, N, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z.
Haplogroups are used to define genetic populations invariably explained from either a chronological origin or a geographic orientation. The following are recognised divisions for mtDNA Haplogroups:
African:
L0, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, L6
West Eurasian – including North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia:
H, T, U, V, X, K, I, J, N, R, W
East Eurasian:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, M, Y, Z
Native American:
A, B, C, D, X
Austronesian-Melanesian:
P, Q, S
Mitochondrial Haplogroups are divided into three main groups, designated by the sequential letters L, M and N. Early Homo sapiens first split within the L group between L0 and L1 to L6. Haplogroups L1 to L6 ‘gave rise to other L groups, one of which, L3, split into the M and N [groups].’ The M group comprises the first lineages of Haplogroup M found throughout Asia, the Americas, Melanesia, parts of the Horn of Africa and North Africa.
The N Haplogroup is thought to represent another later macro-lineage. This maternal line split into another group called R. ‘Haplogroup R consists of two subgroups defined on the basis of their geographical distributions, one found in southeastern Asia and Oceania and the other containing almost all of the modern European populations. Haplogroup N(xR), [that is] mtDNA that belongs to the N group but not to its R subgroup, is typical of Australian aboriginal populations, while also being present at low frequencies among many populations of Eurasia and the Americas.’
Haplogroup L comprises nearly all sub-Saharan Africans. L0 is the most ancient mtDNA Haplogroup. L1 is the next oldest branch of the maternal family tree, being a daughter of the mitochondrial Eve Haplogroup L and a sister to L0. It is most frequently found in western and central sub-Saharan Africa; seldom appearing in eastern or southern Africa. It is L1 which is the ancestor to branches L2 to L6.
Fascinatingly, it was the group L3 mutations which gave rise to all the non-African Haplogroups found today in both West Eurasians and East Eurasians. Haplogroup L3 comprises some 40% of the sub-Saharan maternal variation. L2 is found in a third of sub-Saharan Africans. Its subgroup L2a, is not only the most common mtDNA Haplogroup among African Americans, but is the most frequent and widespread mtDNA cluster in Africa. For further in-depth discussion on the L0-L6 Haplogroups, refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
The Genetic Origin of the Nations, 2006 & 2020:
“Noah was understood to be pure in his generations. The Bible also maintains that the people in the Ark were all the family of Noah. Thus, to properly account for the genetic diversity, Noah must have maintained the capacity to throw genetically distinct offspring, and this offspring had the characteristics of the line from which it came, but not the entire sequence that Noah had originally. For Noah to be the father of the human structure he is held to have had the capacity for the… YDNA substructure, as all humans are descended from him. Any male on the planet will have only the mutations that signify his branch and path. Noah held the base YDNA that was able to mutate into… other subgroups.
… when we examine the tree of mtDNA we find some interesting group derivatives. The so-called “supergroups” are really only in three basic groups. In other words, they came from three main female lines. That is what we would expect to find if we assume there were only three females that bred on from the Ark, namely the wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth. These Haplogroups are all descended from a single female supergroup, namely Haplogroup L. So in reality, all females are descended from one female line, Hg L. That is super L. This line then split into L1, and then L2 and L3. The line L3 diverged and from L3 came the other mtDNA mutations. Thus, all females came from one Eve whose mtDNA line was L.
The supergroups M and N were next to diverge or mutate. From a biblical point of view we can argue easily that L was formed with Eve and the other groups were pre-Flood divisions that came on to the Ark. Thus, we could correctly argue that L, M, and N came on to the Ark within the accepted biblical account. All mtDNA Haplogroups are subdivisions of L, then M and N and subsequently R, which itself is a mutation of Hg N.
Thus, we can assume that Eve produced the line L and the three wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth are at least the three groups L, M and N. There may have been further divisions given the fact that Noah may have had daughters not mentioned and their mtDNA line may have been L, or M or N. It may have even been R, if we assume that the entire L line came in through the wife of Ham, as the L line is almost confined to the sub-Saharan tribes.
We also have to address the fact that Eve was dark skinned… Thus the capacity for the development of skin colour was an original trait [even if recessive] of the human creation.
M produced three subdivisions… including C [and Z, which split from each other], and D and G… [with subdivisions] E and Q… [all associated with East Asian peoples].
We might thus also deduce that the wives of the sons of Noah were taken from the one family lineage, maintaining purity in the generations in the female line also. The L2 and L3 split may have come from the family structure before the Flood. [Any] daughters of Noah and the wives of the sons could have carried all three of the L subdivisions and the basic core sub-groups of M, N and perhaps R. It is therefore possible that the women of the Ark… could easily have contained the basis for the modern mtDNA diversity.
The supergroup N… split… [including] Haplogroups I and W… The R supergroup split into the following: B; F; HV, which split into H and V; P; The J and T subdivision; and U, from which came K… [all associated with European peoples].”
According to the author, the mtDNA super Haplogroup L originated with Eve… and split into (L0) L1, L2 and L3. All mtDNA L Haplogroups from L0 to L6 are primarily associated with Black African people and to a lesser extent, Arabs. The remainder of the mtDNA Haplogroups then derived or mutated from L3. L3 gave rise to the super subgroups M and N. Broadly speaking, L3 relating to African peoples; M with East Asian; and N with Europeans. The author states that Japheth, Ham and Shem’s wives would have carried these new mutations. For the three wives of Noah’s sons to each represent these three core racial strands, the connecting dots not suggested by the author are that these wives could have also been daughters of Noah by his wife Emzara. Though there is reason to believe this is not the case.
Noah would have passed on to each son the paternal genetic sequencing (Y chromosome DNA) for Japheth and his subsequent seven sons; Ham and his three sons; Shem and his five sons; and finally Canaan and his six sons – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Noah’s wife would have received the maternal recessive genes (Mitochondria DNA) originating in the L3 line from Eve, which included Haplogroups M and N. Thus, L3, M and N were new mutations that had not existed during the antediluvian epoch. The new Haplogroups had lain dormant until being activated or awakened by congress with Noah.
The new racial characteristics could have been carried by Noah’s daughters (in law), ‘Adataneses, Na’eltama’uk and Sedeqetelebab who then married respectively, Japheth, Ham and Shem whose descendants would exhibit the new mutations, revealing two new racial strands – bluntly and broadly: yellow from Japheth (C, D) and ‘Adataneses (M); and white from Shem (G) and Sedeqetelebab (N, R); to add to an original brown skin tone. The latter now carried a new mutation too; creating extra diversity in Ham (H, J) and Na’eltama’uk (L0, L1-L6). Canaan (A, B, E) is a separate line again and is discussed in depth in Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
What is of fascinating interest is that while the white line when it mutated long after the Flood was new; the yellow line of descent was a throwback to the people of Day Six – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV; and Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.
‘Adataneses
It is understandable why these eight people were saved and that not just Noah was genealogically pure, but so was his wife. They then had (probably) three to (possibly) six children prior to the flood who received the genetic sequencing for the three (actually four) new core racial lines, which then mutated into the sixteen (in reality twenty-one) new sub-racial strands through their children after the flood – Noah’s and Emzara’s grandchildren.
This leaves the L and specifically the L0 pre-flood line from Eve. The simple answer is that L was passed to Cain and his family line and L0 was passed to Seth and his line of descent which later included Noah and his wife. L3 with M and N, being the later mutations from Seth’s line L0 after the flood. The L and L0 lines were mid-toned skinned lines, with the darker and lighter shades of skin and racial diversity included in the L3 line we presently have now, deriving from Noah’s descendants. The undeniable scientific support for this argument, is that a black couple can have white children, but a white couple cannot have a black child.
Science confirms white skin is a mutation – the SLC24A5 gene on Chromosome 15 – of an originally darker human. For instance, East Asians have acquired mutations in other genes which result in lighter skin, while retaining black hair. The gene mutation SLC24A5 changes just one building block in the protein, contributing about a third of the pigment loss that makes black skin white; accounting for the differences in skin tone between peoples of African and European ancestry for example – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidenatlis.
Sedeqetelebab
The fact of the matter is that everyone descends from mutated DNA genetic code which originally began with ancestors of the distant past. So which peoples today are they most closely aligned with? The oldest Haplogroup from the mtDNA tree passed from mothers to sons and daughters, originating from mitochondrial Eve, is L0. This Haplogroup is indicative of the peoples of Southern Africa. The Khoisan are a good example and they possess a light brown skin. Thus ‘Eve’ would have been in all probability… light brown – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
It is important to understand that recessive genetic information is shared amongst family members, sometimes in surprising ways. Just as cousins can be more alike and develop a closer bond than with their own siblings. What is significant is that the mtDNA Haplogroup L, though shared in common origin by Europeans and East Asians through Shem, Japheth and their wives ‘Adataneses and Sedeqetelebab in the form of the L3 mutation, it was the L0 to L6 mutations which have been overwhelmingly carried by Noah’s^ fourth and youngest son, Canaan.
Coupled with this, is that as the macro-Haplogroup M is almost exclusively associated with East Asians, macro-Haplogroup N is not just the domain of Europeans descended from Shem but also for Arabs, Indians and Pakistanis descended from Ham. The most logical answer for this occurrence is that Ham’s sons – Cush, Mizra and Phut – must have taken wives from Shem’s line and hence why they share mtDNA in common with them.
Following L, the next major maternal Haplogroup branch is M. M1 intrigues scientists with its presence in Ethiopian, Somali and Indian populations, where M3 is located. These are descendants of Canaan’s sons and from Ham’s son Cush. What may have a bearing is that Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk is the mother of both Canaan and Cush who share different fathers.^
Na’eltama’uk
Yet the Haplogroup mutations stemming from M as follows, are all defining maternal markers for sons from Japheth. Haplogroups derived from super group M include: CZ found in Siberians; with branch C found amongst Amerindians; while branch Z is carried by the Saami; and minimally in Korean, North Chinese and Central Asian populations. Haplogroup C is a founding lineage of the indigenous Amerindian, the seventh and youngest son of Japheth, Tiras.
Haplogroup mtDNA D is the principal East Asian lineage, with D1 found amongst Amerindians and D4 prevalent in Central Asians and much of Siberia, the descendants of Japheth’s third son, Madai.
Haplogroup E is found in Southeast Asia: in Malaysia, Borneo in Indonesia, the Philippines, Taiwanese aborigines and in Papua New Guinea – who are all descendants of Japheth’s fourth son, Javan.
Widespread Haplogroup G includes northeast Siberians, northern East Asians and Central Asians.
Haplogroup Q is found in Melanesian, Polynesian and New Guinean populations in southeast Asia and the Pacific, primarily descended from Noah’s grandson Javan.
The next major split is found in super Haplogroup N and its mutations are more widely spread globally than Haplogroup M.
Haplogroup A is found predominantly in many Amerindians and some East Asians and Siberians.
Haplogroup mtDNA I is the first mutation associated with Europeans, who are descended from Noah’s youngest son Shem (though may well originate with Ham’s line and his wife Na’eltama’uk). Haplogroup I is quite rare and ‘found in average in 2% of Europeans and under 1% of Near Easterners… Elevated concentrations are found in Daghestan’, for example Chechens (6%) and in isolated areas of Europe, such as Latvia (4.5%), Brittany (3%), Great Britain (4%), Ireland (3%) and Croatia (3%) to name a few. Haplogroup I is absent from the Basque country, which alternatively has high levels of mtDNA U5 and HV0+V. Haplogroup I sub-clades include I1 to I7 found in Armenia and Kuwait. It is thought to have been brought to Europe across the Caucasus.
Haplogroup S is specific to some Australian aborigines.
Haplogroup W is a crossover mtDNA Haplogroup in that it is commonly found in Eastern Europeans, as well as Central Asia, East Asia and southwest Asia. This means it is found in all three of Noah’s sons and daughters descendants. Maximum frequencies of W are observed in countries such as Finland (9.5%) and Hungary (5%). This is interesting as Finnish men (from Shem) exhibit high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 from admixture with Japheth. Finland shares with Hungary the unique and minority Finno-Ugric language group.
‘In Asia, haplogroup W is most common among the northern Pakistani… but is also found around 1.5% among the… Kazakhs, and at trace frequencies (< 0.5%) among many North Asian ethnic groups… Haplogroup W is descended from haplogroup N2.’
Geographic distribution of Haplogroup W matches the historical population movements of Y-DNA R1a for the Balto-Slavic speaking peoples. Haplogroup W is ‘considerably more common among the upper castes’ of India. Blond hair is believed to have originated within the R1a branch of the Indo-Europeans and therefore ‘propagated by women belonging’ to Haplogroup W. The Haplogroup like I is split into seven sub-clades. And like Haplogroup I, may well have a Hamitic origin or be the result of repeated admixture between the lines of Shem and Ham.
Haplogroup X is another crossover Haplogroup found in southern Siberians, Southwest Asians, North Africans and in Southern Europeans. ‘Haplogroup X is one of [the] rarest matrilinear haplogroups in Europe, being found only in about 1% of the overall population. The highest incidence of haplogroup X is observed in Greece [4%]… In Western Europe, X peaks in Orkney [7%], Scotland [2.5%], Catalonia 2.5%) and the Basque country [2.5%]. The only Eurasian ethnic group possessing a relatively high percentage of haplogroup X are the Druzes of Lebanon, Syria and Israel, among whom X makes up 15% of maternal lineages. The Druzes also have the greatest diversity of X lineages of any population…’ Its subgroup X2a is one of the founding lineages of indigenous North Americans; notably among the Sioux (15%).
Haplogroup X with I and W is one of the few ‘West Eurasian’ groups that does not descend directly from R but from the older macro-Haplogroup N, which is upstream of R. These are called ‘Basal Eurasian’ as they are closer to the N Haplogroup in the phylogenetic tree. The sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) ‘belonged to the very rare Haplogroup X1c’ which has been found in the Levant amongst the Druzes and in Tunisia. ‘Isolated samples have been reported in Italy, Ireland and Norway.’
This again with Haplogroups I and W, points to either a Hamitic origin (specifically Na’eltama’uk) or repeated intermixing. The fact it is a founding lineage for the Sioux Indian, hints at a Hamitic infusion in the Japhetic Line of the Sioux. In the mind of this writer, it raises a question as to the accuracy of the phylogenetic mtDNA tree. The apparent blurring between M, N and R and the Haplogroups downstream of each of them paints a confusing picture of the mutational evolution for the four main divergent races and the twenty-one principal ethnicities in the world.
Haplogroup Y is exclusively associated with Japheth like mtDNA Haplogroup A. Found in Siberian populations and at low frequencies in Central Asian, Japanese, Korean and Austronesian peoples.
The most recent significant maternal Haplogroup mutation is R. It is deemed ‘ancient and complex’ and is a large group literally found all over the world. Haplogroup R derives not from M but N and has the most Haplogroup mutations. Populations contained in Haplogroup R are divided ‘geographically into West Eurasia and East Eurasia. Almost all European populations and a large number of Middle-Eastern population today are contained within this branch.’
The first is Haplogroup B which is a principal East Asian lineage found in varying percentages amongst the Chinese, Tibetans, Mongolians, Central Asians, Koreans, South Siberians, the Japanese and Austronesians. With Haplogroups A, C and D, B is also found in the Amerindian.
Haplogroup F is one of the primary mitochondrial lineages in East and Southeast Asia. Its greatest frequency and sequence diversity can be found among coastal Asian populations, especially Vietnam. Enigmatically, F is found at 8.3% on Hvar Island in Croatia.
R0 is not East Asian and is found in Arabia, Ethiopia and Somalia. Following R0 is HV, the parent of Haplogroups H and V and found in Europe, Western Asia and North Africa. It is the most successful maternal lineage and dominates western European lineages, with over ‘half of the European population and between 25% and 40% of the Near Eastern population’ descending ‘from a single common female progenitor.’ This aspect more than hints at an origin which Shem’s wife and admixture with Ham’s descendants.
Most Europeans belonging to the HV lineage descend from a branch that was renamed H. A secondary though sizeable European branch was called V. There are seventeen sub-clades which are neither classified as H or V, ranging from HV0+V to HV13.
Haplogroup HV is found between 4% to 9% in the Middle East, for instance in Iraq (9%). In Europe, HV is very rare in Finland, Scandinavia, the British Isles, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland and Austria – all descendants of Abraham or his brother Haran (apart from Finland). The highest percentages for Haplogroup HV in Europe are observed in Italy, such as Calabria (10%) and Tuscany (5%) as well as in Ukraine (3.5%) and Greece (3%). The distribution of mtDNA HV is particularly reminiscent of Y-DNA Haplogroup T. ‘Haplogroup HV is found as far south as Ethiopia and Somalia, which are also hotspots of Y-haplogroup T.’ This is an interesting link between HV and the paternal Haplogroup T of Hamitic origin.
While Haplogroup HV is frequent in the Middle East, Haplogroups HV0 and V are rare. HV0+V are found in less than 1% of the Middle Eastern population and is almost absent from the Arabian Peninsula. Haplogroup V has 21 sub-clades ranging from V1a1a in Scandinavia, Finland and the Baltic to V20 in Norway. Both Benjamin Franklin the American founding father and Bono from rock band U2 are mtDNA Haplogroup V.
Haplogroup H [2] is the most common mtDNA Haplogroup of all, as well as the most diverse maternal lineage throughout the northern Hemisphere. There are many basal sub-clades of Haplogroup H, including up to H95a. H1 for instance, is found from Europe and North Africa to ‘the Levant, Anatolia, the Caucasus, and as far as Central Asia and Siberia.’ The frequency of Haplogroup H in Europe ranges between 40% and 50%. The lowest frequencies are observed in for instance, Finland (36%) and Ukraine (39%). Regions where it exceeds 50% include Galicia (58%) in northern Spain and Wales (60%).
‘The Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS), the human mitochondrial sequence to which all other sequences are compared, belongs to haplogroup H2a2a.’ Certain H sub-clades are ‘rare in Europe and geographically confined mostly to the Middle East. This includes H14 and H18.’ Though the precise sub-Haplogroup is unclear, the lineage of Queen Victoria belongs to mtDNA Haplogroup H. Napoleon Bonaparte possessed the rare 16184T mutation within Haplogroup H15a1b. In Europe, H15 is found in Scotland, Germany, Poland, Austria and northern Italy; while H15a is found mostly in northwestern Europe including Scotland.
The remaining mtDNA Haplogroups includes Pre-JT which splits into J and T. Haplogroup J [3] is one of four major European-specific Haplogroups and is evenly distributed across Europe. The highest frequencies of Haplogroup J include: Cornwall (20%), Wales (15%), Iceland (14%), Denmark (13.5%), Scotland (12.5%), England (11.5%), Switzerland (11.5%) and the Netherlands (11%). As Haplogroup HV is rare amongst the descendants of Abraham, Haplogroup J is relatively frequent (following Haplogroup H).
In the Middle East, it is most frequently found in countries such as Saudi Arabia (21%) and Iraq (13%). Haplogroup J is split into J1 and J2 with many sub-Haplogroups within each.
Haplogroup T [4] is one of the youngest Haplogroup mutations and is composed of two main branches T1 and T2. ‘The two of them have very different distributions, which are diametrically opposed in most regions.’ The highest percentages of T1 include the Udmurts (15%) of the Volga-Ural region of Russia, Romania (6%) and Iraq (5.5%). While Haplogroup T2 also peaks among the Udmurts (24%) and is frequently encountered in the Netherlands (12%). Haplogroup T2b is of interest to this writer and is found in higher percentages in Europe, especially around the Alps and is commonly found in Britain (T2b4b, T2b4d, T2b4f), particularly in England (T2b2b, T2b19, T2b24) – as well as in Scotland, (T2b9) and Ireland, (T2b13).
Haplogroup U [1] is one of Europe’s oldest and most diverse Haplogroups, with numerous sub-clades. About 10 to 11% of Europeans and European Americans belong to U.
Haplogroup U5 is prevalent in Europe, between 5% to 12% and in particular shows high frequency in Scandinavia and the Baltic countries with the highest percentage in the Sami people. Outside of Europe, U exhibits a high frequency in the Indian sub-continent (U2, U7) and in North Africa, where U6 is common.
Finally, there is Haplogroup K, where certain lineages are found in Central Asia and Northern Africa. In Europe, mtDNA K is common in northwest Europe, peaking in Belgium (14%), then Ireland (12%), the Netherlands (10%), Iceland (10%), Denmark (9%) and France (8.5%). As with Haplogroup J, mtDNA K is prevalent amongst Abraham’s descendants.
‘In the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East, haplogroup K reaches high frequencies in Cyprus (20%), among the Druzes of Lebanon (13%), [and] in Georgia (12%)…’ K1a1a for instance is found in Central Asia, as well as central and western Europe and could be linked to the diffusion of R1b. K1c is common in Central Asia; while K1c1 is common in Slavic countries. K1c2 is more common in Germanic countries. Both could be associated with R1a.
Haplogroup K ‘is known for its presence in distinct population groups, such as the prehistoric Basques and the Ashkenazi Jews. Ashkenazi Jews are the ethnic group with the highest percentage of mtDNA K lineages today: 32% in average, and up to 50% among Ashkenazi Jews from Germany. There are only three typically Jewish subclades of K: K1a1b1a, K1a9, and K2a2a. There are other subclades, like K1a7, K1a8 and K2c, which are also found among people of Jewish descent, but they are very rare.’
Analysing the Haplogroup family trees of the world, it is evident, that mtDNA passed from mothers to all their children, includes (alphabetically) the principal Haplogroups for ‘Adataneses (Japheth) of A, B and D; the key Haplogroups for Na’eltama’uk (Ham) of H, M and U; and (for the Canaanites) Haplogroup L; while the main Haplogroups for Sedeqetelebab (Shem) are H, U, J, T and K. Notice the crossover Haplogroups H and U, which each logically contain more diverse mutations and are further widespread, than any other maternal mtDNA Haplogroup.
DNA from the Y chromosome passed from fathers to their sons is perhaps a more reliable and stable tracker for lines of lineal descent and lettered as follows.
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S and T.
African:
A, B, E1b1a
West Eurasian – including North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia:
E1b1b, G, H, I1, I2, J1, J2, L, T, R1a, R1b, R2
East Eurasian and Native American:
C, D, K, N, O1, O2, Q
Austronesian-Melanesian:
M, S
The male Y sex chromosome Haplogroups are divided broadly into four major groups on the phylogenetic tree which in turn produce a sequence of different Haplogroup mutations.
The first is Haplogroup BT = C, D, E & (F); then F = G, H, I, J & (K); K = L, T, N, O, M, S & (P); and Haplogroup P = Q, R.
The most ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup originating from Y-DNA Adam, is A. Like Haplogroup B, it only appears in Africa. Haplogroup A is indicative of sub-Saharan Africans and the oldest clade of A00a, L1149, known as ‘Perry’s Y’ was discovered in 2012 in an African American. Haplogroup A00 was first discovered in Mbo Bantu men from West Cameroon. Bantu can vary in skin tone from light brown to medium brown. The highest concentration of Haplogroup A00 found in 2015, belonged to the Bangwa Grassfields Mbo Bantu.
‘Haplogroup A is the NRY (non-recombining Y) macrohaplogroup from which all modern paternal haplogroups descend. It is sparsely distributed in Africa, being concentrated among Khoisan, M91 populations in the southwest…’ Recall the Khoisan also possess the ancient mtDNA Haplogroup L0. Haplogroup B, M60 is prevalent amongst the Pygmies in Africa. Both A and B are without the M168 (and M294) mutation that defines all other Haplogroups, beginning with C, D and E. ‘Haplogroup BT is a sub-clade of Haplogroup A, more precisely of the A1b clade…’
Haplogroup A
Haplogroup A00 (F6)
Haplogroup A0 (formerly also A1b) (V148)
Haplogroup A1 (also A1a-T)
Haplogroup A1a (M31)
Haplogroup A1b (also A2-T; P108, V221)
Haplogroup A1b1a1 (also A2; M14)
Haplogroup A1b1b (also A3; M32)
Haplogroup BT (M91, M42, M94, M139, M299)
Haplogroup B (M60)
Haplogroup CT (P143)
It is fair to say that Adam as Y-DNA Adam, possessed Haplogroup A and specifically A00. For this to transfer to the post-diluvian age, Noah must have carried the same Haplogroup, passing either A00 or early mutations of A0 and A1 to his three sons. Subsequent mutations likely began with Noah’s twenty-one grandsons.
What is of note, is that it is Noah’s illegitimate fourth son Canaan’s male descendants, who carry Haplogroups A and B – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.
Haplogroup C (M130, M216) is the first clade which is not indicative of sub-Saharan African men. Though C1 is found in low frequencies in India, C1b1a1 (M356); Europe, C1a2 (V20); and the Australian Aborigine, C1b3b (M347); it is almost exclusively a defining marker Haplogroup for the descendants of Japheth. For instance, C1a1 (M8) in Japan; C1b1a2b (F725) in China; C1b3a (M38), indicative of males in Indonesia, New Guinea, Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia; C2, (M217) common amongst Mongols and the predominant Haplogroup for the Kazakhs of Central Asia at 40%; and P39 in the Amerindian.
Haplogroup D with E derives from its parent clade DE (M1, M145, M203). D1 (M17) is found exclusively amongst Japheth’s descendants. D1a1 (M15, P99) is found in Tibetan men (52%) and D1a2 (M55) is found in Japanese men at 40%. Whereas D2 is peculiar to Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria and African American men and thus perhaps misnamed as Haplogroup D
Haplogroup E (M40, M96) on the other hand could not be more different from its supposed mutational relative Haplogroup D. Thus far, Haplogroup A and Haplogroup B are exclusively sub-Saharan (with the exception of M13 [A1b1b2b]) and C with D are almost entirely East Asian. Whereas Haplogroup E is very much split between its origin in sub-Saharan Africa with those men somewhat related in North Africa and the Middle East on one hand; and those peoples with Haplogroup E predominantly located in the Balkans, yet also scattered throughout the majority of European nations.
Countries with high percentages in their male populations include Montenegro, 27%; Macedonia, 21.5% and Greece, 21%. The former two have more men with Haplogroup I2a1 and in Greece there are more with J2. The Island of Sicily has 20% and ‘Ashkenazi [Jewish men] also exhibit approximately 20% of E1b1b, which falls mostly under specific clades of E-M123 [E1b1b1b2a1].’
European nations with E1b1b as the majority male Haplogroup include, Kosovo, 47.5%; Albania, 27.5% and Bulgaria, 23.5%. Most universally assume that the strain V13 is evidence of a bona-fide European lineage of E1b1b. Yet, the contention exists that it more accurately proves a mutated lineal descent from either African males who originally possessed E1b1b (M215); or Arab related peoples who carry E1b1b from admixture themselves.
Haplogroup E is one of the most branched groups – in parallel with the descendants of Canaan, represented by sub-Saharan Africans (Chapter XII Canaan & Africa) – with many sub-Haplogroups. Haplogroup E mutated into E1 and E2 (M75) which is found in sub-Saharan Africans, for instance the Zulu with 20.69%. E1 split into E1a (M33, M132]) formerly E1 and E1b (P177) formerly E2.
From E1b derives E1b1 formerly E3 and then again into E1b1a (V38) an ancient brother to E1b1b, but which has left a completely different fingerprint on the world today. Haplogroup E1b1a is as indicative of Black Africans from Canaan as the mutated E1b1b is for the Berbers who are a mixture with Ham’s son Mizra. In fact, E1b1a formerly E3a, is the defining marker Haplogroup for African males. Far more predominant than either Haplogroup A and B. E1b1a diversified into E1b1a1 (M2) – the Niger-Congo speaking peoples, the most common and diversified Haplogroup in West Africa between 70 to 97% – and E1b1a2 (M329) found in Ethiopia and Omotic speaking populations. Haplogroup E1b1b mutated into E1b1b1 (M35), found in the Horn of Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, the Mediterranean and the Balkans.
All these peoples share mutual paternal ancestors and so the Mediterranean and Balkan males, for instance the Greeks with E1b1b (formerly E3b), are in one sense more related to the Berbers of North Africa who they share E1b1b than they are to other Greek men say, who carry J2, R1b, or R1a Haplogroups. Therefore if accurate, the parent clade DE highlights a partial blurring between Black African and East Asian genes and thus reveals Black people and East Asians could have more in common paternally than they do with Europeans.
Support for this may lay in the fact that both Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk and Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses were of different descent from Adam and Eve’s son Seth of whom Noah (and probably his wife) descended. For Na’eltama’uk was of the line of Cain; who’s mother was Eve, but Cain’s father was not Adam – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘Adataneses was from the Neanderthal line of Day Six of creation and so she was not related to Noah in part, as Na’eltama’uk or fully, as Shem’s wife Sedeqetelebab – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
From an early humankind perspective the shared Japheth-Ham DE clade is in contrast to the F mutation from which Europeans descended from Shem appear to wholly derive.
Aside from Kosovo with 47.5% E1b1b, other nations with high percentages include: ‘Morocco (over 80%), Somalia (80%), Ethiopia (40% to 80%), Tunisia (70%), Algeria (60%), Egypt (40%), Jordan (25%), Palestine (20%), and Lebanon (17.5%).’
All this data reveals beyond question a Canaanite origin and infusion of Haplogroup E(1b1b) primarily into Hamitic lines and to a lesser degree into Shem’s male descendants.
Famous persons of note perhaps considered fully European, yet their Y-DNA Haplogroup E1b1b descent saying otherwise, includes:
Skanderbeg (Albanian feudal lord); Giuseppe Garibaldi; Lyndon B Johnson (36th President); Napoleon; Albert Einstein; Nicolas Cage; Franz Kafka; Caravaggio (baroque painter); Adolf Hitler; Zinedine Zidane; the Wright brothers; Clan Colquhoun (Calhoun); Larry Page (Google co-founder); William Harvey (blood circulation); Steven Pinker (psychologist/scientist); David Attenborough (broadcaster); Richard Attenborough (film director); Tom Conti (actor).
Perhaps surprise inclusions include Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and Ramesses III, because the first two men at least, one would have thought they were Y-DNA Haplogroup E1b1a (or E1a, E2, A, B) instead.
For example the men above all look ostensibly white (European), yet a closer inspection of their physiognomy indicates the plausibility for a black paternal ancestor, resulting in not just distinctive faces – such as born by Adolf Hitler, Nicholas Cage and Larry Page – but exhibiting mixed facial features akin to someone from North Africa (Berber) or the Middle East (Arab).
The next Haplogroup after the intriguing E mutation, is group F. The Haplogroups descending from macro-Haplogroup F are found in some 90% of the world’s male population and almost exclusively outside of sub-Saharan Africa. F is the immediate parent of Haplogroups G, H, I, J and K, a further macro-Haplogroup. However, excluding these common Haplogroups the sub-clade F* (M89) – and F1 (Sri Lanka), F3 (M48), India and Nepal] – appears in the Indian sub-Continent countries of India and Pakistan, peaking in Sri Lankan males with 10%.
F2 (M427) on the other hand is found in minorities located in Southern China and Continental South East Asia. Rather like D, Haplogroup F is split between mainly Cush and Phut from Ham and partially East Asians from Japheth. F1 (P91), F2 and F3 (formerly F5), are all quite rare and exclusive to the regions where they are located. ‘In such cases, however, the possibility of misidentification is considered to be relatively high and some may belong to misidentified subclades of Haplogroup GHIJK.’ Haplogroup FT (P14, M213) also has the M89 mutation and is found in China, Vietnam and Singapore.
The first Haplogroup mutation from the major ancestor intersection group of F is Haplogroup G. It is an ancient lineage, though unlike Haplogroups A through to E which preceded it, its paternal origin and lineage is not as clearly delineated. Though undoubtedly it is the first identifiable Haplogroup for Shem’s descendants. It is probably an early precursor lineage to Haplogroup I which is similarly spread throughout many nations, but even when a majority frequency, it isn’t a defining marker Haplogroup for the peoples of that country – with the exception of Georgia.
An online encyclopaedia states: ‘In 2012, a paper by Siiri Rootsi et al. suggested that: “We estimate that the geographic origin of haplogroup G plausibly locates somewhere nearby eastern Anatolia, Armenia or western Iran. Previously the NGS placed its origins in the Middle East 30,000 years ago and presumes that people carrying the haplogroup took part in the spread of the Neolithic.
Two scholarly papers have also suggested an origin in the Middle East, while differing on the date. Semino et al. (2000) suggested 17,000 years ago. Cinnioglu et al. (2004) suggested the mutation took place only 9,500 years ago. A more eastern origin has also been mentioned, believed by some to originate in an area close to the Himalayan foothills.’ Two important points are highlighted here. First, the time scale suggesting 9,500 years ago is supported by an unconventional chronology. Second, an origin at the Himalayan foothills concurs with this writer’s research – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
Haplogroup G (M201) splits into two main divisions, G1 (M285, M342) and G2 (P287). Haplogroup G2 is more prolific and divides into G2a (P15) and G2b (M377). Haplogroup G is found in Western Europe, Northwest Africa, East Africa, Central Asia and India. Even so, it is a minority male Haplogroup with frequencies of between 1 and 10% of the population. The exceptions are the Caucasus region and parts of central, southern Italy and Sardinia, where frequencies range from 10% to 30% of male lineages. The highest percentages are found in Georgians (30%), Karachay-Cherkessians (40.5%), Abkhazians (47.5%), the Adygei (53.5%) and Ossetians (56%). ‘The highest genetic diversity within haplogroup G is found in the northern part of the Fertile Crescent, between the Levant and the Caucasus…’
European men in the main who exhibit Haplogroup G belong to the G2a sub-clade; with most northern Europeans where it is relatively rare and Mediterranean Europeans primarily within either L140 (G2a2b2a1) or M406 (G2a3a). Almost all carriers of G2b (L72+, formerly G2c [G5]) found in Europe are Ashkenazi Jews, G2b is found in the Middle East and Pakistan. Similarly, Haplogroup G1 is found predominantly in Iran and also in the Levant among Ashkenazi Jews, as well as in Central Asia, primarily in Kazakhstan.
G2a is generally located in the mountainous regions of Europe, whereas ‘some sub-clades of L140 are found uniformly throughout Europe, like Scandinavia and Russia…’ as well as ‘the Caucasus, Central Asia and throughout India, especially among the upper castes, who represent the descendants of the Bronze Age Indo-European invaders. The combined presence of G2a-L140 across Europe and India is a very strong argument in favour of an Indo-European dispersal… [where] G2a-L140 came from Anatolia to eastern and Central Europe… (a fact proven by ancient DNA test). Once in Southeast Europe men belonging to the U1 [G2a3b1a1] branch founded the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (with men of other haplogroups, notably I2a1b-L621 around modern Moldova). The oldest known G-L293 [G2a1] sample is a Neolithic man from western Iran. Nowadays, G-L293 is the most common G2a clade in the central and northern Caucasus, peaking at 64% of the population in North Ossetia.’
This concentration Of G2a in West Asia, comprising the Caucasus (Azerbaijan, 18%; Armenia, 11%), Turkey (11%) and Iran (10%+) lends support to two conclusions.
First, the origin of Haplogroup G like I1 and I2 is associated with Shem and not Ham. Support for this is that in sub-Saharan Africa, G is rarely found among native populations. In the Middle East, it accounts for only about 3% of the population in almost all areas, including North African Berbers. About 10% of Jewish males are Haplogroup G.
Second, as with Haplogroup I or E1b1b from Canaan, it is an ancient mutation found in a minority of Shem’s descendants, scattered within countries where other Haplogroups are the defining marker, such as R1a and R1b. Higher than average percentages for G exist in various parts of Eastern Europe, like I2a1. For instance: ‘In the Tirol (Tyrol) of western Austria, the percentage of G-M201 can reach 40% or more… In north-eastern Croatia, in the town of Osijek, G was found in 14% of the males. Farther north, 8% of ethnic Hungarian males and 5.1% of ethnic Bohemian (Czech) males have been found to belong to Haplogroup G’ and ‘In Wales, a distinctive G2a3b1 type (DYS388=13 and DYS594=11) dominates there and pushes the G percentage of the population higher than in England.’
Encyclopaedia: ‘Three of the main maternal lineages thought to have evolved conjointly with Y-haplogroup G2 are mt-haplogroups N1a1a, W1 and X, all minor lineages… Interestingly, N1a, W (aka N2b) and X are directly descended from the very old haplogroup N*, rather than from the more recent macro-haplogroup R (the ancestor of HV, JT and UK, representing 90% of European mtDNA lineages). The long bottleneck evolution of N1a and X mirror that of Y-haplogroup G2. These haplogroups are called Basal Eurasian.’
Famous men included in carrying Haplogroup G: Joseph Stalin, G2a1a (originally from Georgia); Al Capone, G2a-P303 (G2a2b2a); Larry Bird G-Z6748 (American Basketball player); and Jewish actor Jake Gyllenhaal.
Haplogroup H as with G, shares the same M89 mutation stemming from Haplogroup F. Haplogroup H is a lineage from Noah’s son Ham and descends primarily through his son, Cush. It is prevalent in the Indian sub-Continent in the form of H1 and the rarer H3. ‘Its sub-clades are also found in lower frequencies in Iran, Central Asia, across the middle-east, and the Arabian peninsula.’ H2 (P96) formerly F3, is present in Europe and western Asia.
The principal sub-Haplogroups for Y-DNA Haplogroup H.
H-L901/M2939 is a direct descendant of Haplogroup GHIJK. There are three direct descendants and their defining SNPs are as follows:
H1 (L902/M3061)
H1a (M69, M370)
H1bB108, Z34961, Z34962, Z34963, Z34964
H2 (P96, L279, L281, L284, L285, L286, M282)
H2a FGC29299/Z19067
H2b Z41290
H2c Y21618, Z19080
H3(Z5857)
H3a (Z5866)
H3b (Z13871)
The primary branch of H1 is the most predominantHaplogroup (H1a) amongst populations in South Asia particularly its descendant H1a1* (M52). A branch of M52, H1a1a (M82), is commonly found among the Romani in the Balkans (60%) who originated in South Asia, migrating into the Middle East and Europe, from the beginning of the second millennium CE and the Medieval period. H1a (M69) is common amongst populations living in Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and Nepal; while in the Pashtuns of Afghanistan (6.1%) and Pakistan (4.2%) it is not as common.
The highest percentages of H1a are found in Dravidian men of southern India with 32.9%; Bangladesh at 35.71%; and Sri Lanka with 25.3%. In northern India, Haplogroup H is most commonly found amongst Rajput men at 44.4%. Haplogroup H1a is found in Europe, Central Asia and South East Asia, though in very small percentages as evidence of admixture and intermarrying.
Haplogroup H1b was only discovered in 2015. It was ‘detected in a single sample from an individual in Myanmar. Due to only being classified recently, there are currently no studies recording H1b in modern populations.’ Haplogroup H2 is the only primary branch of H located mainly outside South Asia. Known as F3, H2 was reclassified as Haplogroup H as it shared the marker M3035 with H1. H2 has been found in a number of ancient samples, yet only rarely in ‘modern populations across West Eurasia.’
H2 is commonly found with G2a samples, with two main clades of H2m and H2d. ‘H2d was found along the inland/Danubian route into central Europe, but most H2m individuals are found along the Mediterranean route into Western Europe, the Iberian Peninsula and ultimately, [in] Ireland. There were also two occurrences of H2a found in the Neolithic Linkardstown burials in the southeast [of] Ireland. More Neolithic H2 samples have been found in Germany and France. H3 like H2 is newly classified and is not readily found in modern population studies. Samples belonging to H3 have been labeled under F*. In consumer testing, it has been found principally among South Indians and Sri Lankans, and other areas of Asia such as’ in Bahrain and Qatar.
Haplogroup I (M170) is a clear European paternal Haplogroup and considered the oldest major Haplogroup in Europe. Yet its roots likely lay in the earlier G Haplogroup. Haplogroup I ranges from frequent to infrequent in European males and though spread across Europe it is principally found in two distinct locations resulting from a mutational split. I-M170 is not part of the M89 mutation which bonds Haplogroups F, G and H. It derives originally from Haplogroup IJK, L15/L16 mutations and then IJ (M429). Haplogroup I is found sporadically in the Middle East due to admixture and is virtually absent elsewhere in the world.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Haplogroup I appears to have arisen in Europe, so far being found in Palaeolithic sites throughout Europe (Fu 2016), but not outside it. It diverged from common ancestor IJ*… (Karafet 2008).’ This writer is not convinced* this is necessarily the case; as Haplogroups I1 and I2 are paternal marker Haplogroups for Shem’s descendants, while J1 and J2 are related to Ham.
‘Early evidence for haplogroup J has been found in the Caucasus and Iran (Jones 2015, Fu 2016). In addition, living examples of the precursor Haplogroup IJ* have been found only in Iran, among the Mazandarani and ethnic Persians from Fars. This may indicate that IJ originated in South West Asia. Haplogroup I has been found in multiple individuals belonging to the Gravettian culture… [which] expanded westwards from the far corner of Eastern Europe, likely Russia, to Central Europe. They are associated with a genetic cluster that is normally called the Věstonice cluster.
The earliest documentation of I1 is from Neolithic Hungary, although it must have separated from I2 at an earlier point in time. In one instance, haplogroup I was found far from Europe, among 2,000-year-old remains from Mongolia. The role of the Balkans as a long-standing corridor to Europe from Anatolia and/or the Caucasus is shown by the common phylogenetic origins of both haplogroups I and J in the parent haplogroup IJ (M429). I and J were subsequently distributed in Asia and Europe in a disjunctive phylogeographic pattern typical of “sibling”* haplogroups. The existence of Haplogroup IJK – the ancestor of both haplogroups IJ and K (M9) – and its evolutionary distance from other subclades of Haplogroup F (M89), supports the inference that haplogroups IJ and K both arose in Southwestern Asia. Living carriers of F* and IJ* have been reported from the Iranian Plateau.’
Haplogroup I split into the key Haplogroup divisions of I1 (M253) and I2 (M438). Haplogroup I1 is dominant in Nordid and Nordic Europids of Scandinavia and north western Europe; whereas I2 is located primarily in Dinarid and Dinaric Europids of Central and southeast Europe, Sardinia and the Balkans. There is one mutation of I2 which enigmatically occurs more frequently in northwest Europe – M223. Though since 2018 I2a2 is now known as I2a1b1. The main mutations shown on the map above include: I1 (M253); I2a1 (P37.2); I2a1a (M26); I2a1b (M423); and I2a2a [I2a1b1] (M223).
The main I Haplogroups consist of the following classifications:
I M170
I1 M253
I1a DF29
I1a1 CTS6364 / Z2336
I1a2 Z58
I1a3 Z63
I1b Z131
I1c Z17925
I1d Y19086
I2 M438
I2a L460
I2a1 P37.2
I2a1a M26
I2a1b M423
I2a2 M436
I2a2a[I2a1b1] M223
I2b L415
I2c L596
Haplogroup I1 is found mostly in Scandinavia and Finland, where it typically represents Y chromosomes of 35% of men. I1 is associated with the Norse ethnicity and is found in regions invaded by the Vikings and ancient Germanic tribes. ‘After the core of ancient Germanic civilisation in Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in other Germanic-speaking regions, such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands’ which all have I1 lineages averaging between 10% to 20%.’
Thus, as we saw with mtDNA Haplogroups J and K, Y-DNA Haplogroup I1 is the most frequently present in nations containing the offspring of Abraham. Yet what is vital to appreciate is that Haplogroup I1 is indicative of a lineage from Peleg and older than the R1b-U106 predominantly carried by Abraham’s male descendants – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Outside Fennoscandia, distribution of Haplogroup I1-M253 is closely correlated with that of Haplogroup I2a2-M436; but among Scandinavians (including both Germanic and Uralic peoples of the region) nearly all the Haplogroup I-M170 Y-chromosomes are I1-M253.’
‘Another characteristic of the Scandinavian I1-M253 Y-chromosomes is their rather low haplotype diversity (STR diversity): a greater variety of Haplogroup I1-M253 Y-chromosomes has been found among the French and Italians, despite the much lower overall frequency of Haplogroup I1-M253 among the modern French and Italian populations. This, along with the structure of the phylogenetic tree of I1-M253 strongly suggests that most living I1 males are the descendants of an initially small group of reproductively successful men who lived in Scandinavia during the Nordic Bronze Age.’
‘L22+ (aka S142+) is a… big Nordic branch. It is… very common in Britain, especially on the east coast where the Vikings settled most heavily, in the Low Countries and Normandy… [the heritage of the Danish Viking], as well as in Poland and Russia (Swedish Vikings). Z58+ is chiefly West Germanic, with a… strong presence in Germany, the Low Countries and Britain. It is… found to a lower extent in Nordic countries and throughout Continental Europe. Its age has been estimated around 4,600 years before present. Z138+ (aka Z139+) is a… disparate subclade. It is found at very low frequency throughout the Germanic world, with a peak in England and Wales… it has also been found in Ireland, Portugal, southern Italy, Hungary and Romania. Z60+ is found throughout the Germanic world. Z63+ is a strongly Continental Germanic subclade, virtually absent from Nordic countries. It is most common in Central Germany, the Benelux, England, Lowland Scotland, as well as Poland.’
Haplogroup I2, M438 is the most common paternal lineage in former Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria as well as in Sardinia. It is a lineage (I2a1b, M423) in many Slavic countries. ‘Its maximum frequencies are observed in Bosnia (55%, including 71% in Bosnian Croats), Sardinia (39.5%), Croatia (38%), Serbia (33%), Montenegro (31%), Romania (28%), Moldova (24%), Macedonia (24%), Slovenia (22%), Bulgaria (22%), Belarus (18.5%), Hungary (18%), Slovakia (17.5%), Ukraine (13.5%), and Albania (13.5%).’
Today, ‘I2a1, P37.2 is five to ten times more common than G2a in Southeast Europe, while during the Neolithic period G2a was approximately four times more common. What can explain this complete reversal?’ A possible answer is due to the fact that as the defining marker Haplogroups R1a and R1b for Europeans are voluminous in their dispersion compared with Haplogroup I, from which they descend; so to is Haplogroup I compared with the older Haplogroup G from which it in turn descends.
An interesting I2 sub-clade is I2a1a-M26. It is notable for its strong presence in Sardinia, where it dominates comprising 40% of Haplogroup I patrilineal lineages. Haplogroup M26 is virtually absent east of France and Italy. It is found in low frequencies in the Balearic Islands, Castile-Leon, the Pyrenees, southern and western France, parts of the Maghreb in North Africa, Great Britain, Ireland and the Basque Country. It is the only sub-clade of I-M170 found among the Basques. Fascinatingly, the M26 mutation is found in indigenous males inhabiting every ‘geographic region where megaliths may be found, including such far-flung and culturally disconnected regions as the Canary Islands… Corsica… and Sweden.’
The distribution of Haplogroup I2a2, M436 and I2a2a (I2a1b1), M223 closely correlates with that of Haplogroup I1 except in Scandinavia and Finland. It is thought that the lack of correlation between the distributions of I1 and I2a2 in Fennoscandia is a result of Haplogroup I2a2 being affected in the ‘earliest settlement of this region by founder effects and genetic drift due to its rarity.’ A sub-clade of Haplogroup I2a2, namely I2a2a1, M284 is found almost exclusively among the population of Great Britain. This indicates that the clade may have a long historical presence on the island. It is more than a coincidence that distribution of M253 and M436 correlate with the Germanic peoples historical migrations.
Both Haplogroups have been detected in Bithynia and Galatia in Turkey, areas linked with the ancient Gauls of Thrace, invited by Nicomedes I of Bithynia. ‘This suggestion is supported by recent genetic studies regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup I2b2-L38 [which] have concluded that there was some Late Iron Age migration of Celtic La Tène people, through Belgium, to the British Isles including north-east Ireland.’
There is an interesting link between height and Haplogroup I in Europe. Nations with taller than average men, such as the Netherlands, Scandinavia and in the Balkans all have higher than average Haplogroup I percentages in their male populations. The averages in the Dinaric Alps are reputed to be the tallest in the world, with an average male height between 180 cm (5 ft 11 in) to 182 cm (6 ft 0 in) in the cantons of Bosnia; 184 cm in Sarajevo; and 182 cm to 186 cm (6 ft 1 in) in the cantons of Herzegovina.
‘A 2014 study examining the correlation between Y-DNA haplogroups and height found a correlation between the haplogroups I1, R1b-U106, I2a1b and tall males. The study featured the measured average heights of young German, Swedish, Dutch, Danish, Serbian and Bosnian men. The German male average height was 180.2 cm, the Swedish men were on average 181.4 cm, the Dutch men were 183.8 cm, the Danish men were 180.6 cm, the Serbians were 180.9 cm, and men from Herzegovina were 185.2 centimeters on average.’
Famous male members of Haplogroup I1 include: Clan Hamilton, Z63; Clan Lyon, L22; Richard Henry Lee, founding father, L22 and his descendant Robert E Lee, Commander of the Confederate States Army during the Civil War; James Wilson, founding father; Alexander Hamilton, founding father, Z58; Andrew Jackson, 7th President; Ludwig van Beethoven, I1a Z138 from Z58; Samuel Morse, inventor and painter, L22; Leo Tolstoy; Chester A Arthur, 21st president, Z63; John Harvey Kellog Z58; Calvin Coolidge, 30th President; William Faulkner, Z60; Chris Pine, actor, I1-A13819; Robert I of Scotland, Clan Bruce, I1-Y17395; Jimmy Carter, 39th President; Warren Bufffet, business magnate and multi billionaire; Bill Clinton, 42nd President; Sting – Gordon Matthew Thomas Sumner.
Famous members from Haplogroup I2a1 include: Martin Luther, I2a, L147.2; Novak Djokovic, I2, PH908 downstream of L147.2; Clan Monroe, I2a1a, L161.1; Clan Lindsay I2a1a, L233; Clan Barclay, I2a1a, M26.
Famous members of Haplogroup I2a2 include: House of Clinton, I2a2a [I2a1b1], M223; George Clinton founding father and 4th Vice President; Bill Gates, I2a2a1a1a2a, Y3684; Vince Vaughn, actor, I2a2a1, M284; Eddie Izzard, I2a2a, L1229; Davy Crockett, I2, L801; John Tyler, 10th President, I2, L801; Ralph Waldo Emerson, Philosopher, I2, L801; Andrew Johnson, 17th president, I2a2a, L801; George Armstrong Custer, I2, L801; Chuck Norris, I2, L801.
Stephen King, I2a2a3a – L801 > Z170 > CTS6433 > S2364 > S2361 > Z78 > CTS8584 > Z185 > Z180 > L1198 > FT73935 > Y6060 > Y5748 > Y46018 > Y7272. Born September 21, 1947, renowned American author of horror, science fiction and fantasy. King has been awarded numerous prize awards and in 2003, the National Book Foundation awarded him the Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
House of Hohenzollern, I2a2a2a, P78 > Y7219. ‘The Hohenzollern originated from Swabia in the 11th century, became Counts of Hohenzollern in 1204, then Margraves of Brandenburg in 1411, Dukes of Prussia from 1525, Kings of Prussia from 1701, and eventually German Emperors from 1871 to 1918 under Wilhelm I and Wilhelm II.’
Ted Danson, I2a2b, L38.
Elvis Presley, b. 1935, d. 1977; I2c1a2a1a1a, F2044 – ‘Elvis’s paternal grandfather was born out of wedlock’ and received his mother’s surname. ‘His Y-DNA test showed numerous exact matches’ with the last name of Wallace in Scotland, who belong ‘overwhelmingly to the rare’ Haplogroup derived from I2c1.
An important point to understand is that labelling a paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup as purely one ethnic group can be limiting. Even so, Haplogroups can certainly be largely indicative of a specific ancestor group. Though Haplogroup I1 (M253) is characteristic of Scandinavians and Germanic peoples, in reality its origin may lay with neither. The Haplogroup tree reveals Haplogroup I as a rather old Haplogroup for European descended peoples.
Yet Haplogroup I is a bit mysterious, for which Europeans is it the paternal ancestor? Like G2a, it is a diminished Haplogroup which has been superseded by its descendant Haplogroup lines, in this case R1a and R1b. Haplogroup I1 with the U106 sub-clade of R1b and Z284 of R1a are all strongly associated with migrations of Germanic tribes from Scandinavia and northern Germany. Haplogroup I1 was close to non-existent outside of these regions. Like R1a, I1 (and I2) is a result of admixture, as it is R1b which is the defining marker Haplogroup for northwestern European men descended from Abraham.
Like R1a and R1b, Haplogroup I has split so that I2a1 is very much associated with the Balkans and southeastern Europe. Whereas (formerly) I2a2 (I2a1b1) with I1 are each reflective of western and northwestern Europe respectively. Therefore, just as an ancient ancestor carried R1 which split into R1a and R1b; the same has occurred for I1 and I2. But (as mentioned), the difference with I1 compared to say R1b in western Europeans is that the definitive defining marker Haplogroup for Scandinavians and Germans is for example R1b and not I1. A similar comparison is in eastern Europe where the defining marker Haplogroup for Slavic speaking peoples is R1a. Yet within these nations there can be quite high percentages of I2a1 carrying males.
R1b and R1a as the dominant Haplogroups in Europe overall, reveal a common paternal ancestor for R1b males, another one for R1a males and an older common ancestor for both in R1. Within these nations there are other males who possess an even older ancestor who carried Haplogroup I. So that in Sweden for instance where 21.5% of men are R1b, these are the true Swede for the want of a better word, descended from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. It links them with all the other related R1b peoples in Scandinavia, the Benelux nations, Germany, Austria, Britain and Ireland.
Unlike Finland, where the predominant N1c1 is from admixture; it is I1 that is the original Haplogroup for Finns. Haplogroup I1 males in Sweden even though comprising a majority of some 37% of the population, are in reality while still ‘Swedish’, separate and distinct – even if only minutely because of centuries of intermixing – because of their decidedly different and older paternal lineage.
The question of whether I1 is Scandinavian or Germanic is similar to whether I2a1 is wholly Slavic like R1a or is it indicative of a different, older male lineage. Very like Sweden, Croatia has 24% of its males who possess R1a, yet the majority carry I2a1 with 37%. The true Croat male may carry the more recent Slavic R1a and those Croats with I2a1 – as with the Swedes who carry I1 – are from an earlier paternal ancestor and clearly not the same – by varying degrees, according to admixture. That said, it may be the other way around for the men of the Balkan nations descended from the former Yugoslavia, in that the R1a males are a spillover from the Slavic peoples of central eastern Europe and it is in fact the I2a1 males who are the true Croats and Bosnians for example.
So in a seeming contradiction, the Swedish (probably) and Croat (possibly) males who carry the older Haplogroup mutations I1 and I2a1 are not as ‘Scandinavian or Slavic’ as those exhibiting R1b and R1a respectively. It is not intended for this premise to offend anyone and it is hoped that the concept is received in its context and not misunderstood as any slight on any specific peoples within the nations used as examples. And so, a curious conundrum is that the I1 Swedish men and I2a1 Croatian men while geographically distant share a closer paternal (Y-DNA) ancestry than they do with kindred R1b and R1a Swedes and Croats living in Sweden and Croatia…
A brief summary of the Y-DNA Haplogroups surveyed thus far. Haplogroups A and B are associated with peoples of Black African heritage as are the later mutations of Haplogroup E, including E1a, E1b1a and E2. Haplogroup E1b1b is associated mainly with Berbers and related ‘non-Arab’ peoples in East Africa and those in southern Europe from admixture.
Haplogroup H is indicative of peoples in the southern portion of the Indian sub-Continent and Bangladesh. All these peoples descend from Noah’s son Ham.
Haplogroups C and D are associated primarily with Central Asians and East Asians, who descend from Noah’s eldest son Japheth.
Haplogroup F is an intersection Haplogroup for A, B, C , D and E which preceded it and those which derive from F: G, H, I and J. Haplogroup G is the first ostensibly European Haplogroup followed by the later mutations from Haplogroup I of I1 and I2. These are indicative of Shem’s descendants, the youngest son of Noah.
Put another way, Haplogroups A, B, E1b1a and E1b1b are indicative of the offspring of Canaan; while Haplogroup H of the sons of Cush. Haplogroup C is located the most frequently amongst Madai today and Haplogroup D in Tarshish, the second son of Javan. Haplogroup G is more difficult to isolate beyond Shem, whereas Haplogroup I is indicative amongst descendants of Shem’s third born son, Arphaxad.
Most of these Haplogroups, whether ancient or old have a lower frequency in the world with less mutations, which include A, B, C, D, F and G. Haplogroup H though old, is found in high concentrations, while contrastingly intermediate Haplogroup I is less concentrated with numerous sub-clades. It is Haplogroup E which stands out, as a widespread Haplogroup; one with high concentrations; and numerous mutations and sub-clades.
The final Haplogroup derived indirectly from Group F is the intermediate Haplogroup J (M304). It is not part of the M89 mutation which bonds Haplogroups F, G and H. It derives originally from the Haplogroup IJK, L15 and L16 mutations and then (arguably) IJ (M429). Thus J split from IJ and IJ and K derive from IJK. It is only at this point that IJK joins with Haplogroup G (M201) and H (L901) as immediate descendants of Haplogroup F (M89).
Haplogroup J has two main sub-groups, J1–M267 and J2–M172, believed to have arisen 10,000 years ago in Armenia and the Zagros mountains respectively. Yet chromosomes F-M89* and IJ-M429* ‘were reported to have been observed in the Iranian plateau (Grugni et al. 2012).’
Haplogroup J has also been detected in two ancient Egyptian mummies ‘excavated at the Abusir el-Meleq archaeological site in Middle Egypt, which date from a period between the late New Kingdom and the Roman Era.’ This is significant, as the sons of Mizra though not the only Egyptian dynasties or Pharaohs through history, have been the predominant rulers in later dynasties. And, we will find that Haplogroup J mirrors the demographic of E1b1b dispersal amongst Berbers and related peoples in southern Europe.
Haplogroup J-M304 is found in its greatest concentration in the Arabian Peninsula in contrast with E1b1b in North Africa. ‘Outside of this region, haplogroup J-M304 has a significant presence in other parts of the Middle East as well as in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and Caucasus. It also has a moderate occurrence in Southern Europe, especially in central and southern Italy, Malta, Greece and Albania’ as well as in Turkey. A sub-clade of J, M140 is found in Anatolia, Greece and southern Italy, while M172 is also found in Central Asia and South Asia. Haplogroup J* (J-M304*) is rare outside the island of Socotra in Yemen.
Haplogroup J1 (M267) is found in ‘Semitid/Bedouinid Arabids’ and is associated with Semitic languages speaking people in the Middle East, Ethiopia and North Africa, as well as in Mediterranean Europe though in smaller frequencies like Haplogroup T. J1 is also found in Dagestan, Iran, Pakistan and India. Haplogroup J1 highest concentrations include: the Marsh Arabs of southern Iraq, 81%; Yemen, up to 76%; Saudi Arabia, 64%; Qatar 58%; Arab Bedouins, 62%; Ashkenazi Jews, 20%; Iraq, 28%; and Egypt, 20%.
‘To some extent, the frequency of Haplogroup J-M267 collapses at the borders of Arabic/Semitic-speaking territories with mainly non-Arabic/Semitic speaking territories, such as Turkey [Elam] (9%), [and] Iran [Lud] (5%)…’ J1 ‘is also highly frequent among the… [Jewish] Kohanim [Cohen] line (46%) (Hammer 2009).’ This lands a huge blow for the contention that the Cohen line is descended from Jacob’s son, Levi – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
Wherever J1 and T1 are present in high frequency, mtDNA haplogroups HV, N1 and U3 are also found. To a lesser extent, Haplogroups J, K and T are also exhibited. Understandably, J-M267 as a non-European lineage is uncommon in Northern and Central Europe. Through integration and intermarriage J1 has pocket level frequencies of 5% to 10% among various populations in southern Europe.
The original or true lineage of the historic Arab people – purportedly from Jordan or Saudi Arabia – is deemed as J1-FGC12, aka S21237. The view is that this sub-clade began to spread in the Arabian Peninsula about 3,000 years ago and appeared to experience a tremendous expansion during the past 1,300 years. These ‘Arabic’ J1-FGC12 lineages ‘are found throughout the Arabic-speaking world, but they only represent a small minority of lineages in any region but the Arabian peninsula.’
Other sub-clades of J1 ‘cannot be considered to be the paternal descendants of [the] first speakers of Arabic. These other J1 lineages were Arabicized alongside other haplogroups [such as E1b1b and] J2… during the Islamic expansion from the 7th century onward. More importantly, J1-FGC12 is not the only haplogroup that spread with the Arabic expansion linked to the diffusion of Islam. Nowadays only 40% of Saudis and 30% of Jordanians belong to J1 (most but not all to FGC12). E1b1b-M34** [through admixture] is another important Arabic lineage… found in 25% of Jordanians and 10% of Saudis.’
J1 (L255, L321, M267)
J1*clusters are found in Eastern Anatolia and parts of the Caucasus.
J1a(M62) Found at very low frequency in Britain.
J1b (M365.1) Found at low frequency in Eastern Anatolia, Iran and parts of Europe.
J1c (L136)
J1c* Found at low frequency in Europe.
J1c1(M390)
J1c2(P56) Found sporadically in Anatolia, East Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and Europe.
J1c3
J1c3* Found at low frequency in the Levant and the Arabian Peninsula.
J1c3a (M367.1, M368.1) Previously known as J1e1.
J1c3b (M369) Previously known as J1e2.
J1c3c(L92, L93) Found at low frequency in South Arabia.
J1c3d (L147.1) Accounts for the majority of J1, the predominant Haplogroup in the Arabian peninsula.
J1c3d* Accounts for the majority of J1 in Yemen, Cohen Jews (both Rabbinical and Karaitic) but missing from Quraysh including Sharif of Makkah of Banu Hashem clan.
J1c3d1(L174.1)
J1c3d2 (L222.2) Accounts for the majority of J1c3d in Saudi Arabia. An important element of J1c3d in North Africa.
J1c3d2*
J1c3d2a (L65.2/S159.2)
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Like J1-P58, E-M34**… is… shared with their Semitic cousins, the Jews. Haplogroup E1b1b is considered the prime candidate for the origin and dispersal of Afro-Asiatic languages across northern and eastern Africa and south-west Asia. The Semitic languages appear to have originated within a subclade of the M34 branch of E1b1b.One specific deeper subclade is surely associated with the development of Arabic language and with J1-FGC12, but it hasn’t been identified yet. Note that E-M34 itself is many thousands of years old and is also found in non-Semitic countries, including Turkey, Greece, Italy, France and Spain.’
‘The two most common Jewish subclades of J1 downstream of P58 are Z18297 and ZS227. The latter includes the Cohanim haplotype. Most of the other branches under P58 could be described as Semitic, although only FGC12 seems to be genuinely linked to the medieval Arabic expansion from Saudi Arabia. J1-P58 (J1a2b on the ISOGG tree, formerly known as J1e, then as J1c3) is by far the most widespread subclade of J1. It is a typically Semitic haplogroup, making up most of the population of the Arabian peninsula, where it accounts for approximately 40% to 75% of male lineages.’
Famous male J1 individuals include: Clan Graham, J1a-P58; Dustin Hoffman, J1-Z18271 downstream of ZS227; Noah Webster Jr, American Lexicographer, J1-BY161126 downstream of L858; Alan Dershowitz, American lawyer and author.
Haplogroup J2 (M172) follows a seemingly slightly different ethnic and geographic pattern from J1 (M267). Though that said, the closeness of the two lineages supports the contention that the ‘non-Arabic’ J2 is related to the defining marker Arab Haplogroup, J1.
Haplogroup J2 is found primarily in ‘Syrid/Nahrainid Arabids’ located in North Africa, West Asia, Central Asia, Italy, Greece, the Balkans as well as Turkey, Iran, the Caucasus and South Asia.
Encyclopaedia: ‘The world’s highest frequency of J2 is found among the Ingush ([87.4%] of the male lineages) and Chechen [55.2%] people in the Northeast Caucasus. Both belong to the Nakh ethnic group, who have inhabited that territory since at least 3000 BCE. Their language is distantly related to Dagestanian languages, but not to any other linguistic group. However, Dagestani peoples (Dargins, Lezgins, Avars) belong predominantly to haplogroup J1 (84% among the Dargins) and almost completely lack J2 lineages.
Other high incidence of haplogroup J2 are found in many other Caucasian populations, including the Azeri (30%), the Georgians (27%), the Kumyks (25%), and the Armenians (22%). Outside the Caucasus, the highest frequencies of J2 are observed in Cyprus (37%), Crete (34%), northern Iraq (28%), Lebanon (26%), Turkey (24%…), Greece (23%), Central Italy (23%), Sicily (23%), South Italy (21.5%), and Albania (19.5%), as well as among [Sephardic Jews from 15% to 29% and Ashkenazi Jewish men with 15% to 23%].
Ancient J-M410 [J2a], specifically subclade J-Y12379*, has been found, in a mesolithic context, in a tooth from the Kotias Klde Cave in western Georgia dating 9.529-9.895 cal. BP. In Italy, J-M172 is found with regional frequencies ranging between 9% and 36%… In Greece, it is found with regional frequencies ranging between 10% and 48%. Approximately 24% of Turkish men are J-M172 according to a recent study… with regional frequencies ranging between 13% and 40%… Combined with J-M267, up to half of the Turkish [male] population belongs to Haplogroup J-P209.’
It is important to remember that it is Haplogroup R1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Greeks and R1b for Turks and Italians. The J1 and J2 lineages are older lines of lineal descent from originally Ham and not to be equated with the R1a and R1b lineages inherited through Shem’s five sons.
‘It was reported in an early study which tested only four STR markers… that a small sample of Italian Cohens belonged to Network 1.2, an early designation for the overall clade now known as J-L26, defined by the deletion at DYS413. However, a large number of all Jewish Cohens in the world belong to haplogroup J-M267…’
‘Haplogroup J2 has been present in South Asia mostly as J2a-M410 and J2b-M102… J2-M172 was found to be significantly higher among Dravidian castes at 19% than among [northern Indian] castes at 11%. J2-M172 and J-M410 [J2a] is found [at] 21% among Dravidian middle castes, followed by upper castes, 18.6%, and lower castes 14%.
Within the Indian subcontinent, J2a peaks at frequencies of 15-25% around the Indo-Pakistani border, from Punjab to Gujarat and Sindh.In Pakistan, the highest frequencies of J2-M172 were observed among the Parsis at 38.89%… J2-M172 is found at an overall frequency of 16.1% in the people of Sri Lanka…’
Famous J2a individuals include: Clan Montgomery, J2a1-L26; Vincent van Gogh, J2a1-L26; the Rothschild Family, J2a1-Y23457 under M67, Z467 and Y15238; John Curtin, 14th Prime Minister of Australia, J2a1-F3133; Burt Bacharach, J2a1-L556/L560; Bernie Sanders, J2a; Adam Sandler, J2a1-Z30390 downstream of M67 and L210; Ben Affleck, J2a1d; Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury and author of the Magna Carta, J2a1-M319.
The Younger brothers sub-clade is J2a1h2a1-FGC24630: ‘Cole, Jim, John, and Bob Younger were notable members of the 19th-century James-Younger gang of American outlaws, which also included Jesse James. Their deep clade is downstream of L25 > L70 > Z2177 > PH185.’
Famous J2b individuals include: John Stamos, actor and singer, J2b2a-Z631; John Field, Astronomer in the Court of Elizabeth I, J2b2a-Z8429.
Haplogroup K [M9, (P128, P131, P132)] is the third intersection Y-DNA Haplogroup following CT and F. Haplogroup K derives from the Haplogroup IJK L15 and L16 mutations. Haplogroup K in turn is the parent of the groups with mutation M9. They include Haplogroup LT or K1 (L298/P326), from which L and T derive; K2 (M526) ancestor of Haplogroup NO or K2a2 (M214), from which N and O descend; Haplogroup S (B254) and Haplogroup M (M256) from K2b1; with finally, Haplogroup P or K2b2, from which Haplogroups Q (M242) and R (M207) descend.
While Haplogroup K is the ancestral parent Haplogroup of groups L to R, K also includes minor sub-Haplogroups, which are present at low frequencies in dispersed geographic regions all around the world. Haplogroup K is complex with mutational splits which include primarily descendants from Japheth (K, N, O, Q) as well as Ham (L, M, R2, S, T) and Shem (R1). Haplogroup K-M9 is spread all throughout ‘Eurasia, Oceania and Native Americans’, and found on every continent except Antartica.
The main clades of K* [LT (K1), K2a, K2b], K2c, K2d and K2e are mainly found in ‘Melanesia, Aboriginal Australians, India’ – all descended from Cush – ‘Polynesia and Island South East Asia’ – each descended from Javan. Basal K* is exceptionally rare with confirmed examples of K-M9* most common amongst a few populations in Archipelago South East Asia and Melanesia. ‘The only living males reported to carry the basal Haplogroup K2* [M256] are indigenous Australians. Major studies published in 2014 and 2015 suggest that up to 27% of Aboriginal Australian males carry K2*, while others carry a subclade of K2.’
Preceding K2 was K1, also known as LT (L298); yet it ‘has never been found in basal form (LT*).’ Sub-clades ‘are widely distributed at low concentrations.’ Haplogroup L-M20 (K1a) [M22 (L1), M317 (L1b), M349 (L1b1), M27 (L1a1), M357 (L1a2), L595 (L2)] ‘is found at its highest frequency in [southern] India, [19%], Pakistan [13%] and among the Baloch of Afghanistan [28%].’
Whereas Haplogroup T-M184 (K1b) [T1-L260, T1a-M70, T1a1-L162, T1a2-L131, T1a3 (T2)] ‘is most common among: Fulanis, Toubou, Taureg, Somalis, [the Horn of Africa amongst Cushitic-speaking peoples] Egyptians, Omanis, some [inhabitants in the] Middle East, Sephardi Jews, the Aegean Islands and among Kurru, Bauris and Lodha in India.’ Haplogroup T, while geographically widespread, is relatively rare. Maternal lineages associated with T include: HV, N1a and U3 (all Arab). The third United States President, Thomas Jefferson belonged to Haplogroup T1a1a-L208.
Haplogroup K2a (M2308) derives from K2. ‘K2a* – found only in the remains of Ust’-Ishim man… found in Omsk Oblast, Russia… [and] were initially classified, erroneously, as K2*…’ K-M2313* has only been found in one Telugu male and in one ethnic Malay. From K-M2313, Haplogroup NO (M214) or K2a2 mutated.
Branching off from K2a is K2b (P331) and then K2b1 which is the parent of Haplogroups S (B254) and M (P256). Also descending from K2b is K2b2 or Haplogroup P, which is the fourth and final intersection Haplogroup. Other sub-clades branching off from K2 include: K2c (P261), a minor lineage found in Bali, Indonesia; K2d (P402), also a minor lineage, found in Java, Indonesia; and K2e (M147), a rare lineage located in South Asia.
Haplogroup N (M231) and N1c (L729) [including N1c2 (L666)] has a wide geographic distribution amongst populations throughout northern Eurasia, including China, North and South Korea, Japan, Mongolia and particularly Uralic speakers of northern Siberia, as well as Central Asia.
‘Haplogroup N1c[1] is found chiefly in north-eastern Europe, particularly in Finland (61%), Lapland (53%), Estonia (34%), Latvia (38%), Lithuania (42%) and northern Russia (30%), and to a lower extent also in central Russia (15%), Belarus (10%), eastern Ukraine (9%), Sweden (7%), Poland (4%) and Turkey (4%). N1c is also prominent among the Uralic speaking ethnicities of the Volga-Ural region, including the Udmurts (67%), Komi (51%), Mari (50%) and Mordvins (20%), but also among their Turkic neighbours like the Chuvashs (28%), Volga Tatars (21%) and Bashkirs (17%), as well as the Nogais (9%) of southern Russia.’
Haplogroup N1c1 is strongly associated with Uralic peoples through admixture, which is divided in the following families.
Samoyedic (Nganasans, Enets, Nenets and Selkups)
Finno-Ugric
Finno-Permic
Baltic Finnic (Finnish, Karelian, Estonia, etc.)
Permic (Komi, Udmurt)
Saamic (Saami)
Volgaic (Mari, Mordvin)
Ugric
Hungarian
Ob-Ugric (Khanty, Mansi)
The most frequent sub-clade of L729 is N1c1 (M46). ‘It probably arose in a Northeast Asian population, because the oldest ancient samples comply with this genetic profile. [Haplogroup] N has experienced serial bottlenecks in Siberia and secondary expansions in eastern Europe…’ Though certain sub-clades are very common in Finland and the Baltic nations comprising Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the origin of Haplogroup N sits squarely as a lineage from Japheth. For instance, ‘in Siberia, haplogroup N-M46 reaches a maximum frequency of approximately 90% among the Yakuts, a [Turko-Mongol] people who live mainly in the Sakha… [a] Republic [in Russia].’
Unlike Haplogroups I and J which are associated with Shem and Ham respectively; Haplogroups N and O are both lines of descent deriving from Japheth. In Finland the two main patrilineal Haplogroups are N1c at 61.5% and I1 with 28%. The contention is that the Finnish men with N1c1a (M178) are an intertwined Japheth line, whereas those with I1 represent if not the true Finnish male, a more ancient unmixed Finn descending from Shem. Similarly, the 32% of men in Estonia with R1a perhaps represent an original Estonian line of descent compared with the 34% of men with Haplogroup N.
PaternalHaplogroup O (M175) is a major defining marker Haplogroup for the descendants of Japheth. Lineage O represents nearly 60% of chromosomes for males in East Asia and it is numerically dominant throughout East Asia, Southeast Asia and by degree in the South Pacific and Central Asia. There are some 1.4 billion Chinese, with the peoples of East Asia and South East Asia numbering approximately another 870 million. Adding the populations for these two regions together and then dividing them in half, provides an approximate figure for the male populations. It is a staggering amount of people, yet there is one other group which outnumbers O and that is Haplogroup R.
Haplogroup O descends from NO-M214 and has two main branches identified as O1 (F265), also known as F75 and O2 (M122). Haplogroup O1 divides again into the primary lineages O1a (M119) and O1b (M268, P31). One source puts forward that ‘O1-F265 should have existed as a single haplogroup parallel to O2-M122 for a duration of approximately 762 years (or anywhere from 0 to 13,170 years considering the 95% CIs and assuming that the phylogeny is correct) before breaking up into its two extant descendant haplogroups, O1-MSY2.2 and O1b-M268.’
Haplogroup O-M175 appears in 80% to 90% of most populations in both East Asia and Southeast Asia. Plus it is almost exclusive to this region of the world as a massive marker for Japheth’s sons, Magog, Tubal, Meshech, Gomer and Javan. Haplogroup O is virtually non-existent in the rest of the world except through migration and inter-marriage. ‘However, certain subclades of Haplogroup O-M175 do achieve significant frequencies among some populations of Central Asia, South Asia, and Oceania. For example, one study found it at a rate of 65.81% among the Naimans, a tribe in Kazakhstan, even though the rate among Kazakhs in general is believed to be only about 9%…’
Haplogroup O is associated with the spread of Austronesian languages. For example, Haplogroup O-M50 has even been found with O-M95(xM88) among the Malagasy people of Madagascar with a combined frequency of 34% – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. Haplogroup O-M175 is found in 88.7% of Asian Americans; 1.6% in Hispanic Americans; 0.5% in White Americans; and 0.3% to 0.5% in African Americans.
The first of the three major sub-Haplogroups for group O is O1a (M119). It is found principally in the populations of southeastern China [Tubal], Taiwan [(Tubal), Javan-Rodan], Malaysia [Javan-Elishah], Indonesia [Javan- Kittim], the Philippines [Javan-Dodan], the Pacific Islands [Javan-Rodan] and Madagascar.
Haplogroup O1a is associated with the spread of the Austronesian languages, including Formosan and Malayo-Polynesian as well as Kra-Dai and Tai. The majority of these peoples are associated with Japheth’s fourth son, Javan and three out of four of his sons.
High frequencies of O1a have been found in populations ‘spread in an arc through southeastern China, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Indonesia. It has been found with generally lower frequency in samples from Oceania, mainland Southeast Asia, Southwest China, Northwest China, North China, Northeast China, Korea, Japan, North Asia, and Central Asia.’ Haplogroup O1a occurs in a low average frequency of about 4% among the Han populations of northern China. Whereas the peoples of southwestern China and Southeast Asia who speak Tibeto-Burman languages and in the Han population, show a higher frequency of carrying between 15% to 23% O1a.
One source ‘suggests that modern Southern Han populations may possess a non-trivial number of male ancestors who were originally affiliated with some Austronesian-related culture, or who at least shared some genetic affinity with many of the ancestors of modern Austronesian peoples’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
A link between Tubal, the southeastern Chinese and Javan, Archipelago South East Asia is supported by Karafet’s 2005 findings – Ezekiel 27:13. ‘This lineage is found frequently in Austronesians, southern Han Chinese, and Kra-Dai peoples… [and] is presumed to be a marker of the prehistoric Austronesian expansion, with possible origins encompassing the regions along the southeastern coast of China and neighboring Taiwan, and is found among modern populations of Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania.’
The second of the three major sub-Haplogroups of group O is O1b (M268, P31). O1b exhibits a less uniform dispersal than O1a and is somewhat peculiar in its geographic distribution. It is associated with the spread of the Austroasiatic languages (O1b1a1a-M95), Munda and Mon-Khmer. Found amongst Tai peoples [Gomer-Minni], Hlai, Balinese, Javanese [Javan-Kittim], Malagasy, Manchus, Ryukyuans, Japanese [Javan-Tarshish] and Koreans [Gomer-Togarmah]. O1b concentration aligns with the descendants of Gomer’s sons and two of Javan’s four sons – and not so much with Magog, Tubal and Meshech of China.
Encyclopaedia:
‘… Haplogroup O-P31 is generally found with high frequency only among certain populations, such as the Austroasiatic peoples of India, Bangladesh and Southeast Asia, the Nicobarese of the Nicobar Islands in the Indian Ocean, Koreans, and Japanese. Besides its widespread and patchy distribution, Haplogroup O1b-P31 is also notable for the fact that it can be divided into three major subclades that show almost completely disjunct distribution. One of these subclades, O1B1-K18 can be mainly divided into two subclades O1b1a1-PK4 (formerly O2a) and O1b1a2… (formerly O2*(xM95,M176)).
O1b1a1-PK4 is found among some (mostly tribal) populations of South and Southeast Asia, as well as among the Japanese… Javanese, Sundanese, and Balinese of Indonesia and some Zhurong related Chinese.’ The link between the Japanese and peoples of Malaysia and Indonesia is addressed in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia& Polynesia; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.
‘O1b1a2… is relatively rare and mainly distributed in East Asia, especially in some Yue, Baiyue related Chinese. Another subclade, Haplogroup O1b2-M176 (formerly O2b), is found almost exclusively among the Japanese, some Buyeo Koreans and Jin Manchurians. A broad survey of Y-chromosome variation among populations of central Eurasia found haplogroup O-M175(xM119, M95, M122) in 31% (14/45) of a sample of Koreans… However, nearly all of the purported Korean O-M175(xM119, M95, M122) Y-chromosomes may belong to Haplogroup O-M176 and later studies do not support the finding of O-M175* among similar population samples… The reported examples of O-M175(xM119, M95, M122) Y-chromosomes that have been found among these populations might therefore belong to Haplogroup O-M268*(xM95, M176) or Haplogroup O-M176 (O1b2).’
The third of the three major sub-Haplogroups for group O is O2 (M122). Haplogroup M122 is primarily associated with Chinese people (Magog, Meshech, [Tubal]), yet it forms a substantial component of the Y-chromosome diversity in many modern populations of the East Asian region. Haplogroup O2 is associated with the spread of Sinitic and Tibetan-Burman languages (O2a2b1-M134), as well as Hmong and Mien languages – O2a2a1a2 (M7). ‘Haplogroup O-M122 comprises about 50% or more of the total Y-chromosome variation among the populations of each of these language families.
The Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman language families are generally believed to be derived from a common Sino-Tibetan protolanguage, and most linguists place the homeland of the Sino-Tibetan language family somewhere in northern China. The Hmong–Mien languages and cultures, for various archaeological and ethnohistorical reasons, are also generally believed to have derived from a source somewhere north of their current distribution, perhaps in northern or central China.’
Haplogroup O2 formerly O3, ranges across East Asia and South East Asia where it dominates the paternal lineages with extremely high frequencies.
Online Encyclopaedia: ‘Researchers believe that O-M122 first appeared in Southeast Asia… In a systematic sampling and genetic screening of an East Asian–specific Y-chromosome haplogroup (O-M122) in 2,332 individuals from diverse East Asian populations, results indicate that the O-M122 lineage is dominant in East Asian populations, with an average frequency of 44.3%. Microsatellite data show that the O-M122 haplotypes are more diverse in Southeast Asia than those in northern East Asia. This suggests a southern origin of the O-M122 mutation to be likely [rather northern]. However, the prehistoric peopling of East Asia by modern humans remains controversial with respect to early population migrations and the place of the O-M122 lineage in these migrations is ambivalent.
Haplogroup O-M122 is found in approximately 53.31% of all modern Chinese males… about 40% of Manchu, Chinese Mongolian, Korean, and Vietnamese males, about 33.3% to 62%… of Filipino males, about 10.5% to 55.6% of Malaysian males… about 25%… of Indonesian males, and about 16% to 20% of Japanese males’, 25% to 32.5% of Polynesian males, 18% to 27.4% of Micronesian males and 5% of Melanesians [Cush].
‘Haplogroup O-M122* Y-chromosomes, which are not defined by any identified downstream markers, are actually more common among certain non-Han Chinese populations than among Han Chinese ones, and the presence of these O-M122* Y-chromosomes among various populations of Central Asia, East Asia, and Oceania is more likely to reflect a very ancient shared ancestry of these populations rather than the result of any historical events. It remains to be seen whether Haplogroup O-M122* Y-chromosomes can be parsed into distinct subclades that display significant geographical or ethnic correlations.’
The third paragraph supports the premise that China is principally composed of three primary paternal lines from Magog, Tubal and Meshech, identified by perhaps the variant O2 Haplogroups for non-Han Chinese, northern Han Chinese and southern Han Chinese.
A comparison of select countries who possess Haplogroups K, O1a, O1b and O2 with percentage levels.
Japan: K [2%] – O1a [2%] – O1b [33%] – O2a [19%]
N & S Korea: K [4%] – O1a [3%] – O1b [33%] – O2a [42%]
Most nations do not always exhibit a preceding intersection Haplogroup, yet in East Asia the Haplogroup O males invariably possess percentage levels of their parent Haplogroup K. In Taiwan and Vietnam it is absent and for Japan, the Koreas and China it is low. In Malaysia the levels are higher, while the Filipinos stand out with 20% of males carrying Haplogroup K. These two nations, both descend from Javan and have a larger number of men with an older Haplogroup than O.
The Philippines is dominant in Haplogroup O2a (M324) yet with a high proportion of O1a too. Apart from Japan and Malaysia, the other nations surveyed are all dominant in O2; particularly China and Taiwan. Malaysia like Japan has a higher frequency of O1b, yet in Malaysia it marginally beats O2. Though in Japan unlike the others and only mirrored in Tibet, it has a higher level still of the ancient Haplogroup D1a2 with 39%. All the nations selected have a similar high level of O1b, except China, Taiwan and the Philippines. In contrast, all have lower levels of O1a, except China and especially the Philippines.
In Japan, there appears to be two distinct peoples, as evidenced by the two paternal Haplogroups D1 and O1b. One which has fairer skin and more aquiline facial features and one with tawny skin and broader body attributes. The Koreans like the Vietnamese both descend from Gomer and are split between O2 and then O1b. Which is the defining marker Haplogroup is not clearly ascertained. Malaysia is similar, yet with O1b edging O2.
The Philippines are a bit of an anomaly with such a high ratio for Haplogroup K and a far higher percentage of O1a than all the other nations. China and Taiwan are clearly O2 driven. Haplogroup O2 is prevalent in all the nations whether it is dominant or not, ranging from 19% in Japan to 56% in China. It would seem possible that other Eastern Asian nations like Japan, have more than one distinct lineage as a common denominator. So that in the Koreas and Vietnam it is O2, then O1b. In Malaysia, O1b then O2; and in the Philippines, O2 and then O1a.
What does all this tell us? Observing the overall pattern for Haplogroup O in these eight selected nations, O1a is more prevalent in Archipelago South East Asia (Javan); O1b is more prevalent outside China (Magog, Tubal, Meshech) and then mainland Asia, diminishing in the island nations and especially heading towards the Southeast; and O2 is more prevalent on the Asian mainland (Gomer) and particularly in China.
Next on the K-M9 Haplogroup tree is Haplogroup S (B254). Unlike Haplogroups NO, N and O which derive from K-M2313, which in turn mutated from K2a (M2308), Haplogroup S derives from K2b1, which descends from K2b, P331.
Haplogroup S is only found in a specified geographic area where it is ‘numerically dominant in the highlands of Papua New Guinea: subclades of S1, such as S1a3 (P315) and S1a1a1 (P308), have also been reported at levels of up to 27% among indigenous Australians, while S1a (P405; previously K2b1a) has also been found at significant levels in other parts of Oceania. S2 (P336; previously K2b1b) has been found on Alor, Timor and Borneo… S3 (P378; previously K2b1c) [is] found among Aeta people of the Philippines.’
Encyclopaedia: ‘Prior to 2002, there were in academic literature at least seven naming systems for the Y-Chromosome Phylogenetic tree. This led to considerable confusion. In 2002, the major research groups came together and formed the Y-Chromosome Consortium (YCC). They published a joint paper that created a single new tree that all agreed to use. Later, a group of citizen scientists with an interest in population genetics and genetic genealogy formed a working group to create an amateur tree aiming at being above all timely.’
Haplogroup S1a1b (M230, P202, P204) was ‘demoted’ in 2016 from its previous position as the basal Haplogroup S* (K2b1a4). From 2002 to 2008, Haplogroup S* was known as Haplogroup K5. S-M230 is found principally in New Guinea and at lower frequencies in Melanesia and eastern Indonesia. It is the most numerically significant sub-clade of Haplogroup S1a. A study reported Haplogroup S1a1b in ‘52% (16/31) of a sample from the Papua New Guinea Highlands; 21% (7/34) of a sample from the Moluccas; 16% (5/31) of a sample from the Papua New Guinea coast; 12.5% (2/16) of a sample of Tolai from New Britain… [and] 2% (2/89) of a sample from the West New Guinea lowlands’ and its coast.
Haplogroup S is associated with Melanesian peoples in South East Asia and the Pacific. The Melanesians are related to the peoples of India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. The Melanesians have also intermarried with the Polynesian peoples which is discussed in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.
Closely related to Haplogroup S and a second branch from K2b1 is Y-DNA Haplogroup M* [P256]. Haplogroup M is also known as K2b1b and previously as K2b1d. It is the most common paternal Haplogroup in West Papua and Papua New Guinea. Is is also found among indigenous Australians and parts of Melanesia and Polynesia. Haplogroup M With Haplogroup S (B254) is the only primary sub-clades of K2b1, also known as MS.
Haplogroup P256 is found at low frequencies in New Guinea and Flores. Haplogroup M is divided into three main sub-clades. M1 (M4) which is found frequently in New Guinea and Melanesia and less frequently in Indonesia, Micronesia and Polynesia. A study by Kayser in 2003 found frequencies of 77.5% in West Papua lowlands and coasts, 74.5% in the highlands; 29% in Papua New Guinea coasts and 35.5% in the highlands. An M1 sub-clade M1b1 (M104) is found in New Guinea, Fiji, Tonga and Samoa and M2 (M353) is found in Fiji, as is M3 (P117).
Though Haplogroup P (P295) also known as K2b2 is a second branch from K2b (MPS; P331), it is also an intersection Haplogroup and the fourth and final one of the three which preceded it: CT, F and K. Haplogroup P has two primary branches: P1 (M45) and P2 (B253). There is considerable speculation regarding the geographic genesis of Haplogroup P.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Karafet et al. 2015 suggests an origin and dispersal of haplogroup P from either South Asia or Southeast Asia as part of the early human dispersal, based on the distribution of subclades now classified as P2, and more ancient clades such as K1 and K2. Hallast, Agdzhoyan, et al. concluded that the ancestral Eurasian haplogroups C, D, and F, either expanded from the Middle East or from Southeast Asia. Based on the modern distribution of basal lineages, the authors propose Southeast Asia as [the] place of dispersal for all Eurasian lineages, before the split between West-Eurasian and East-Eurasian (including Oceanian) populations. According to a study by geneticist Spencer Wells, haplogroup K, from which haplogroup P [descends], originated in the Middle East or Central Asia. It is likely that haplogroup P diverged somewhere in South Asia into P1, which expanded into Siberia and Northern Eurasia, and into P2, which expanded into Oceania and Southeast Asia.’
As discussed in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla, the landing of the Ark – during the post-flood descent of sea water – was in the Himalayan Mountain range towards modern day Kashmir. Significant re-settlement after the flood began in the Indus Valley, with movement of Noah’s sons and grandson’s descendants heading west to Mesopotamia, Anatolia and Egypt. Therefore hypotheses of Haplogroup origination in southeast Asia are incorrect. A chronological order of South Asia to the Middle East and then Central Asia and beyond is accurate.
Haplogroup P has been detected at low frequencies in the Caucasus and India; with P* also found in 28% of the Aeta men of the Philippines and 10% in Timor. Haplogroup P1 (M45, PF5962) with basal P1*, known as K2b2a is located in Central Asia and Siberia. P1 is found between 22.2% and 35.4% in Tuvan men as well in the Andamanese peoples of India. The only primary sub-clades of P1 are Haplogroup Q (M242) and Haplogroup R (M207). These Haplogroups comprise most of the male lineages among Native Americans, Latino-Hispano America, Europeans and parts of Central Asia and South Asia. ‘It is possible that many cases of haplogroup P1 reported in Central Asia, South Asia and/or West Asia are members of rare or less-researched subclades of haplogroups R2 and Q, rather than P1* per se.’ Haplogroup P2 (B253) is extremely rare and has only been found in the Aeta of Luzon in the Philippines.
Haplogroup Q (M242) is found in varying levels throughout Asia – particularly in Central Asia and Siberia – Europe and the Middle East. While in the Americas Q1a3a (M3) is the dominant Y-DNA Haplogroup amongst the Amerindian – Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian. M242 has one primary sub-clade, Haplogroup Q1 (L232/S432).
2008 ISOGG tree
Q (M242)
Q* India, Pakistan, Afghanistan
Q1 (P36.2) Iran
Q1*
Q1a (MEH2)
Q1a*
Q1a1 (M120, M265/N14) Found with low frequency among Bhutanese, Dungans, Han Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Mongolians, Naxi and Tibetans
Q1a2 (M25, M143) Found at low to moderate frequency among some populations of Southwest Asia, Central Asia and Siberia
Q1a3 (M346)
Q1a3* Found at low frequency in Pakistan, India and Tibet
Q1a3a (M3) Typical of indigenous peoples of the Americas
Q1a3a*
Q1a3a1 (M19) Found among some indigenous peoples of South America, such as the Ticuna and the Wayuu
Q1a3a2 (M194) South America
Q1a3a3 (M199, P106, P292) South America
Q1a4 (P48)
Q1a5 (P89)
Q1a6 (M323) Found in a significant minority of Yemeni Jews
Q1b (M378) Found at low frequency among samples of Hazara and Sindhis. Widely distributed in Europe, South Asia and East Asia. Includes Mongols, Japanese and Uyghurs of north western China. Sub-branches of sub-clade L245, Y2200 and YP1035 belong to Ashkenazi Jews. While Sephardic Jews belong to other sub-clades of L245, BZ3900, YP745 and YP1237. Q1b has also been found in Panama, Central America and the Andean region in South America.
Encyclopaedia: ‘In Y chromosome phylogenetics, subclades are the branches of a haplogroup. These subclades are also defined by single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or unique-event polymorphisms (UEPs). Haplogroup Q-M242, according to the most recent available phylogenetics has between 15 and 21 subclades. The scientific understanding of these subclades has changed rapidly. Many key SNPs and corresponding subclades were unknown to researchers at the time of publication [and] are excluded from even recent research. This makes understanding the meaning of individual migration paths challenging.’
While Haplogroup P is an intersection Haplogroup, those men who carry P1 and P2 visibly descend from Japheth and so it applies with Haplogroup Q, like Haplogroup N before it, that Haplogroup Q is found in populations other than from Japheth, yet remains a defining marker Haplogroup for Japheth’s descendants from his seventh son, Tiras – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
‘It is unclear whether the current frequency of Q-M242 lineages represents their frequency at the time of immigration [by the major founding groups to the Americas] or is the result of the shifts in a small founder population over [a long period of] time. These… groups of founders must have included men from the Q-M346 [Q1a3], Q-L54 (Q-Z780), and Q-M3 lineages. In North America, two other Q-lineages also have been found. These are Q-P89.1 (under Q-MEH2) [Q1a5] and Q-NWT0. They… instead [came] from later immigrants…’
Amongst the native Americans of North America, Q-M242 is found in Na-Dene speakers with an average rate of 68%. The highest frequencies include the Navajo with 92.3%; the Apache with 78.1%; and the North American Eskimo populations with about 80%. Q-M3 accounts for 46% of the men with Haplogroup Q in North America. ‘Q-M242 is estimated to occupy 3.1% of the whole US population in 2010.’ Whereas Haplogroup Q-M242 has been found in approximately 94% of Indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica and South America.
The frequencies of Q among the male population of Central and South American countries:
61% in Bolivia
51% in Guatemala
40.1% to 50% in Peru
37.6% in Ecuador
37.3% in Mexico
31.2% in El Salvador
15.3% to 21.8% in Panama
16.1% in Colombia
15.2% in Nicaragua
9.7% in Chile
5.3% to 23.4% in Argentina
5% in Costa Rica
3.95% in Brazil
In Siberian Tatars, the Ishtyako-Tokuz sub-group of the Tobol-Irtysh peoples have a frequency of Q-M242 at 38%. The highest frequencies of Q-M242 in Eurasia are observed in Kets in central Siberia with 93.8%. Various subgroups of Q-M242 are observed in Mongolia such as Q1a1, Q1a2 and Q1b, for an average frequency in male Mongols of about 4% to 5%. Most of the peoples in East Asia belong to sub-clade Q1a1 (M120) and across northern China it is found in 4.5% of the men. In southern China it decreases to about 2%. Amongst the Uyghurs it is 15.38%; in South Korea it is 1.9% of the male population; in Japan 0.3%; and between 0.3 to 1.2% for Taiwanese men.
Haplogroup Q shows lower frequencies overall in Southeast Asia: 5.4% in Indonesia; approximately 4% in Vietnam; 3.1% in the Philippines; 2.8% in Myanmar; and 2.5% in Thailand. In Central Asia, Haplogroup Q is found between 2% to 6% in Kazakh men; 5% to 6% of Tajiks; 5.5% of Uzbeks; and 6.9% of Afghans.
In Iran, Haplogroup Q averages 5.5%; in Saudi Arabia, 2.5%; in Syria, 1.1%; 2% in the Lebanese; and 2% in Turkey. In Pakistan, Haplogroup Q is found at 2.2%, while in India it is 2.38%; in Sri Lanka it is 3.3%; and in Tibet, 3.2%.
In central to eastern Europe, Haplogroup Q averages 1.7%. In northern Europe it can be higher such as in Sweden at 2.5% and in southern Europe, lower at around 0.5% to 1%. Amongst Ashkenazi Jewish men, Haplogroup Q (M378/L245) averages 5.2%; and in Sephardic Jews, it ranges between 2.3% to 5.6%. Combining the data, Q-M242 is ‘estimated to be in about 3.1% of males of the world.’
Famous Haplogroup Q individuals host a variety of people including a number of Jews, such as J Robert Oppenheimer a theoretical physicist, who played a major role as the Director of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic bomb – Article: Nuclear Nefariousness.
Dr Julius Robert Oppenheimer, physicist and “father of the atomic bomb”
As well as the Oppenheim Family, ‘a German-Jewish… family [of Barons] which has been a prominent family in banking and finance… since at least the 18th century. According to Forbes magazine’s Family Dynasties, the Oppenheim Family divides control of their multibillion-dollar fortune among 46 family members.’
Apart from Haplogroup Q deriving from Haplogroup P1 (M45), Haplogroup R (M207) also mutated from P1. Haplogroup R mutated into R2 (M479) and R1 (M173) with R1 diverging into R1a (M420) and R1b (M343). Haplogroup R is both numerous and widespread, like Haplogroup O.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Only one confirmed example of basal R* has been found, in… old remains, known as MA1, found… near Lake Baikal in Siberia… While a living example of R-M207(xM17, M124) was reported in 2012, it was not tested for the SNP M478; the male concerned – among a sample of 158 ethnic Tajik males from Badakshan, Afghanistan – may therefore belong to R2. It is possible that neither of the primary branches of R-M207, namely R1 (R-M173) and R2 (R-M479) still exist in their basal, original forms, i.e. R1* and R2*.
No confirmed case, either living or dead, has been reported in scientific literature… Although in the case of R2*, relatively little research has been completed. Despite the rarity of R* and R1*, the relatively rapid expansion – geographically and numerically – of subclades from R1 in particular, has often been noted: “both R1a and R1b comprise young, star-like expansions” The wide geographical distribution of R1b, in particular, has also been noted.’
Haplogroup R2a (M124) is geographically concentrated in India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Its highest levels have been found in the Burusho people in northern Pakistan. Low levels of R2 are found in Iran, Anatolia, the Caucasus, Central Asia and Europe. A rare sub-clade of R-M124 is found amongst Ashkenazi Jews. Tests on R2a and R2b are still in their infancy, with further studies required. ‘The paragroup for the R-M479 lineage is found predominantly in South Asia, although deep-rooted examples have also been found among Portuguese, Spanish, Tatar (Bashkortostan, Russia), and Ossetian (Caucasus) populations…’
The colour pink represents Haplogroup R1a dispersion and red, Haplogroup R1b.
Haplogroup R1 is the most common Haplogroup in Amerindians following Haplogroup Q. Though the reasons for high levels of R-M173 among Native Americans remains a matter of controversy, as some scholars claim it is the result of ‘colonial-era migration’ from Europe; while other authorities point to the similarity of R-M173 sub-clades found in North America to those found in Siberia, supporting ‘prehistoric immigration’ from Asia. R1 is found throughout western Eurasia, yet its origins ‘cannot currently be proved.’
Haplogroup R1a (M420) is found in descendants of Shem in Eastern Europe and Scandinavia (Balto-Slavic), yet it is puzzling for it is also found in South Asia (proto-Indo-Iranian) and Central Asia, where descendants of Ham and Japheth dwell respectively. Haplogroup R1b (M343) is principally found in Western Europe and their descendants in the Americas; while sparsely represented in Asia and Africa. The marker sub-clade R1b1a1b (M269) is associated with the Italo-Celtic and Germanic peoples.
The combined R1a and R1b peoples include: India, 1.4 billion; South Asia, 370 million; Europe, 750 million; North America, 370 million; and Latino-Hispano America of 670 million, with a total of approximately 3.5 billion. Divided in half for the respective male percentage, results in Haplogroup R being far more prevalent, than the second most common Haplogroup O.
While R1a is thought to have originated during the Last Glacial Maximum, its sub-clade M417 (R1a1a1) may have diversified into Z282 (Eastern Europe) in Slavic speakers as well as Z93 (South Asia) and speakers of an Indo-Iranian language as recently as circa 5,800 years ago – Underhill, 2014. The place of origin for the sub-clade ‘plays a role in the debate about the origins of Proto-Indo-Europeans… and may also be relevant to the origins of the Indus valley civilisation.’
It is assumed to have occurred in eastern Turkey and northern Iran. Of course the location is not key, but rather with whom. In this instance the R1a mutations have been carried by at least two of the five sons of Shem, in Asshur and Arphaxad by Joktan. Similarly, R1b has been carried by descendant’s of Aram and Arphaxad through Peleg. Elam (Turkey) and Lud (Iran) each exhibit lower R1a and R1b frequencies and are not so easy to delineate.
Encyclopaedia: ‘The SNP mutation R-M420 [R1a] was discovered after R-M17 (R1a1a), which resulted in a reorganization of the lineage in particular establishing a new paragroup (designated R-M420*) for the relatively rare lineages which are not in the R-SRY10831.2 (R1a1) branch leading to R-M17.’ According to Pamjav (2012), ‘Inner and Central Asia is an overlap zone for the R1a1-Z280 [Central and Eastern Europe] and R1a1-Z93 [South Asia] lineages [which] implies that an early differentiation zone of [R1a1a]-M198 conceivably occurred somewhere within the Eurasian Steppes or the Middle East and Caucasus region as they lie between South Asia and Central and Eastern Europe. A study proposes that R1a in South Asia originally expanded from a single Central Asian source as there are at least three ‘R1a founder clades within the Subcontinent, consistent with multiple waves of arrival’ – Silva, 2017.
‘South Asian populations have the highest STR [Short Tandem repeats] diversity within R1a1a, and subsequent older TMRCA [time to most recent common ancestor] datings… From these findings some researchers have concluded that R1a1a originated in South Asia, excluding a more recent, yet minor, genetic influx from Indo-European migrants in northwestern regions such as Afghanistan, Balochistan, Punjab, and Kashmir… Sengupta also described […]:
“We found that the influence of Central Asia on the pre-existing gene pool was minor. The ages of accumulated microsatellite variation in the majority of Indian haplogroups exceed 10,000-15,000 years, which attests to the antiquity of regional differentiation. Therefore, our data do not support models that invoke a pronounced recent genetic input from Central Asia to explain the observed genetic variation in South Asia.”
‘This suggests that the origins of paternal haplogroup R1a point to the Indian subcontinent and not Central Asia. Part of the South Asian genetic ancestry derives from west Eurasian populations, and some researchers have implied that Z93 may have come to India via Iran and expanded there during the Indus Valley civilisation… [so that] the roots of Z93 lie in West Asia… [with] “Z93 and L342.2 [expanding] in a southeasterly direction from transcaucasia into South Asia”, noting that such an expansion is compatible with “the archeological records of eastward expansion of West Asian [peoples].”
The investigation into the descendants of Cush and Phut residing in the Indian sub-continent, revealed that they had migrated from eastern Africa, present day Ethiopia and Somalia, into the Arabian Peninsula and then eastwards into South Asia – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. The arrival of non-Indian, Aryan – derived from Iranian – peoples into northern India was either from West Asia, Central Asia or both.
Scientists are correct in stating a. that Haplogroup R1a is a West Eurasian Haplogroup and also in stating that genetic input from ‘Aryan’ migrations has been minimal. Therefore the high diversity and older TMRCA datings of R1a may actually support ancient paternal ancestors outside South Asia, yet who did intermix with Indian and related women and b. in that the majority of Indian Haplogroups by their accumulated micro-satellite variation do attest to an original Haplogroup heritage which clearly preceded the introduction of a lineal R1a descent.
First, what are the original Haplogroups of the Indian males? They are primarily Haplogroup H and secondarily Haplogroup L. Second, when did a DNA infusion from Shem’s line mix with Cush? It is very possible it was during the epoch between the Great Flood and the Tower of Babel, extending from circa 10,837 to 6755 BCE. It was this period which saw the first phase of the great Sumerian (Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) civilisation (for it had three) and preceding that, the first Indus Valley civilisation immediately following the flood – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
Before continuing with the two specific strains of R1a (Z283 and Z93) in more detail, we will investigate the main sub-Haplogroups of R1a. Forming after R-M207; R2-M479; R1-M173; and beginning from R1a-M420, the next major sub-clades are:
R1a1 M459
R1a1a M17/M198
R1a1a1
M417: a widely found sub-clade, though not in western Europe.
M417 is the major R1a sub-clade from which all the following derive. To assist in reading the Haplogroup letter sequencing after R1a1a1, hyphens are inserted so that mutational descent and progression is more easily followed.
R1a1a1-a
L664/M56: found in Northwest Europe. It is extremely rare with only 1% traced in Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and England. Haplogroup L644 is also located in Western Germany.
R1a1a1-b S224*/M157
R1a1a1-b1 Z283: found within Central and Eastern Europeanmen.
R1a1a1-b1a Z282: encompasses most of Eastern Europe.
Especially in Russia at 20% out of 46% of R1a males, as well as in Ukraine and Belarus.
R1a1a1-b1a1 M458: northeastern Europe
R1a1a1-b1a1a L260: West Slavic or Polish (8%) R1a.
Found principally, apart from Poland, in the Czech Republic and Slovakia; as well as in East Germany, Eastern Austria, Slovenia and Hungary. ‘The founding ancestor of R-L260 is estimated to have lived between 2000 and 3000 years ago, i.e. during the Iron Age, with significant population expansion less than 1,500 years ago.’
R1a1a1-b1a2 Z280: includes Finno-Ugric and Balto-Slavicspeakers.
Found all over central and eastern Europe, with very low frequencies in the Czech Republic and rarely found in the Balkans.
R1a1a1-b1a3 Z284:Germanic, Scandinavia, Ireland, Scotland and Northern England.
Peaks in Norway with 20% out of 25.5% R1a males.
R1a1a1-b2 Z93: Central Asia, Southwest Asia, South Asiaand India.
Ashkenazi Jews carry R1a-CTS6 ‘formed 3,500 years ago’ and Z93 ‘pervaded the genetic pool of the Arabs [R1a-F1345].’ It is also found in the Romani people.
R1a1a1-b2a Z94
R1a1a1-b2a2 M780, L657: India
R1a1a1-c M87, M204, M64.2: very rare found in 1 out of 117 males in southern Iran.
R1a1a1-d P98
R1a1a1-e PK5
R1a1a1-f M434
R1a1a1-g1 (M334 R1a1a1-g1a): only found in one Estonian man.
The highest frequencies of Haplogroup R1a in Europe: ‘Poland (57.5% of the [male] population), Ukraine (40 to 65%), European Russia (45 to 65%), Belarus (51%), Slovakia (42%), Latvia (40%), Lithuania (38%), the Czech Republic (34%), Hungary (32%), Norway (27%), Austria (26%), Croatia (24%), north-east Germany (24%) Sweden (19%), and Romania (18%).’
The origin of R1a lays with Shem and his sons, tracing back through the European Haplogroup lineages: the intermediate Haplogroup I and the older Haplogroup G. The first prime R1a mutation Z283 or R1a1a1-b1 includes the majority of eastern European men and the second prime R1a mutation of Z93 or R1a1a1-b2 includes males outside of Europe, located mainly in Central Asia, Southwest Asia and South Asia. Z93 is a later mutation and its sub-clades show admixture of R1a males into the female line of Cush, the first son of Ham. Though related to Indo-European migrations of Scythians and Indo-Iranians, the initial infusion of R1a as evidenced previously goes back much further in time.
R-Z93 for instance is common in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia (30%+); and in Kyrgyzstan at 6%; while in Iranian populations, it averages 1% to 8%. The most common R1a Haplogroups in Pakistan are M17 and M434. R-M434 (R1a1a1-f) is a sub-clade of Z2125 and was detected in 14 people out of 3,667 people tested. They lived in a restricted geographical range from Pakistan to Oman. ‘This likely reflects a recent mutation event in Pakistan.’ Biblically, Pakistan is Phut the third son of Ham; yet also comprises Ham’s grandson from Mizra, Lehab – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Ethnically, they are a mixed and diverse people.
The main paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups found in Pakistan include:
R1a [37.1%] – J [20.2%] – L [11.6%] – R2 [7.8%] – H [6.2%] – G [6.2%] –
Q [3.4%] – C [3%].
Haplogroups Q and C are men descended in part at least, from Japheth. Haplogroup G is indicative of the Caucasus and a line from Shem. The frequency of R1a is high, in nearly two out of five men and is a conundrum. Particularly when weighed against Haplogroup J1 which is distinctly Arab and equates with the line from Lehab. This leaves Haplogroups H and L. Both these are found in higher frequencies in India; with H highest in Bangladesh (35.7%); and Haplogroup L highest in Sri Lanka (19%).
Which paternal Haplogroup defines the men of Pakistan and consequently Phut? If it is Haplogroup R1a, then how and why did this occur? It should be considered that Shem and Ham both carried the future mutations for Haplogroup R-207 and that R2-479 is Hamitic as it is found principally in Phut and Cush. Nor can Haplogroups H and L be entirely ruled out as secondary Pakistani Haplogroups. The relatively high frequency of Haplogroup J2 stands out as probably the integral marker Haplogroup for Pakistani males.
Eupedia: ‘The Indo-Iranian migrations have resulted in high R1a frequencies in southern Central Asia, Iran and the Indian subcontinent. The highest frequency of R1a (about 65%) is reached in a cluster around Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan. In India and Pakistan, R1a ranges from 15 to 50% of the population, depending on the region, ethnic group and caste. R1a is generally stronger [in] the North-West of the subcontinent, and weakest in the Dravidian-speaking South (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh) and from Bengal eastward. Over 70% of the Brahmins (highest caste in Hindusim) belong to R1a1, due to a founder effect.’
The Y-DNA Haplogroup frequencies for India overall:
India: R1a [28.3%] – H [23%] – L [17.5%] – R2 [ 9.3%] – J2 [9.1%] –
T [3.1%] – F [3%] – P [2.7%] – C [1.4%] – R1b [0.5%] – Q [0.4%] – G [0.1%]
Indian men possess a fascinating array of paternal Haplogroups. The key Haplogroups identifying Indian men are Haplogroups H, L and possibly R2, which add up to 49.8%. Almost exactly half of all Indian men. The ancient or rare Haplogroups which likely still identify descendants from Cush include, F P and T, totalling 8.9%. Combined they amount to almost 58.7% of Indian men.
Thus the remaining Haplogroups represent admixture from Shem’s line in G, R1a and R1b (total 28.9%) and intermixing from Japheth’s line in C and Q (total 1.8%).
The highest frequencies of Haplogroup H are found in southern India amongst the Dravidians with 32.9% and in Bangladesh higher still with 35.7%. The highest frequency of Haplogroup L is found in Sri Lanka with 19%. In India it is highest in southern India overall, with the Dravidian possessing 11.6%; though the Lambadis carry 17.1% and the Punjabi Indian, 12.1%. Haplogroup R2 is highest in southern India with 21.5% and then eastern India with a frequency of 15.5%.
Haplogroup R1a is found highest in northern India, with the Punjabi carrying 47%, next is Sri Lanka with 27%. This equates to considerable admixture, as India’s position means it has been a thoroughfare for human migration. In other parts of the world, such as Central Asia and southwest Asia the evidence of voluminous migration also reveals an eclectic list of Y-DNA Haplogroups. Thus men from Pakistan who are less mixed from admixture, descending from Phut may only account for the 39.6% represented by Haplogroups J, L and R2. This is intimated in Ezekiel 30:5.
Eupedia: ‘Maternal lineages in South Asia are, however, overwhelmingly pre-Indo-European. For instance, India has over 75% of “native” mtDNA M and R lineages and 10% of East Asian lineages. In the residual 15% of haplogroups, approximately half are of Middle Eastern origin. Only about 7 or 8% could be of “Russian” (Pontic-Caspian steppe) origin, mostly in the form of haplogroup U2 and W (although the origin of U2 is still debated). European mtDNA lineages are much more common in Central Asia though, and even in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. This suggests that the Indo-European invasion of India was conducted mostly by men through war. The first major settlement of Indo-Aryan women was in northern Pakistan, western India (Punjab to Gujarat) and northern India (Uttar Pradesh), where haplogroups U2 and W are the most common today.’
This paints a very different picture compared with the Y-DNA Haplogroup frequencies and reveals the extent of foreign male admixture into the South Asian gene pool.
Eupedia: ‘Comparing the regions where haplogroup R1a is found today with the modern mtDNA frequencies, it transpires that the maternal lineages that correlate the most with Y-haplogroup R1a are mt-haplogroups C4a, H1b, H1c, H2a1, H6, H7, H11, T1a1a1, U2e, U4, U5a1a and W, as well as some subclades of I, J, K, T2 and V.’
Both Haplogroups R1a and R1b are associated with the ‘diffusion of the A111T mutation of the SLC24A5 gene, which explains approximately 35% of skin tone difference between Europeans and Africans, and most variations within South Asia. The distribution pattern of the A111T allele (rs1426654) matches almost perfectly the spread of Indo-European R1a and R1b lineages around Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia. R1a populations have an equally high incidence of this allele as R1b populations. On the other hand, the A111T mutation was absent from the [ancient] R* sample (Mal’ta boy) from Siberia, and is absent from most modern R2 populations in Southeast India… Consequently, it can be safely assumed that the mutation arose among the R1* lineage…’ and that R2 is a distinct Hamitic line separate from R1.
Famous male R1a individuals include: Francis Drake, L664; Somerled of Argyll, founder of Clan Somhairle, father of the founder of Clan MacDougall and the paternal grandfather of the founder of Clan Donald [which includes certain MacDonalds and MacAlisters], L448/L176.1 from Z284* (Germanic, Scandinavian, British), though not all MacDonalds, MacAlisters and MacDougalls descend from Somerled as the 70% majority are members of the Celtic R1b Haplogroup; Clan Cochrane and Earl of Dundonald, L448; Clan Home or Hume, L448; David Hume, L448; Tom Hanks*, R1a-Z284; Nikola Tesla, R1a-M458 (L1029).
Tom Hanks ancestry is of interest as while his mother was Portuguese, his father had English ancestry and through his line, Hanks is a distant cousin of both Nancy Hanks and her son President Abraham Lincoln.
Even so, his Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a-Z284 belies a paternal ancestor with an Eastern European Haplogroup and a Scandinavian mutation through intermixing. Remember, an unmixed English ancestry would carry R1b-U106 or downstream mutations.
Rudolph Hess: “The DNA analysis of the only known extant DNA sample from prisoner ‘Spandau #7’ proved to be a match to the Hess male line, thereby refuting the Doppelgänger Theory”, M458 (Proto-Slavic). Max von Sydow, Z280, (P269); King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands, Z280 (S18681); Alexander Pushkin, Russian Poet, Z92; the Ottoman Dynasty: ‘All sultans of the Ottoman Empire (1299-1922) descend in patrilineal line from Osman I, making it one of the longest reigning Y-chromosomal lineage in history’, Z93; Benjamin Netanyahu, Z93 (Y2630 Jewish sub-clade); Jesse James*, ‘R1a-Y2395 > Z284> L448 > CTS4179> YP386, a Scandinavian branch of R1a also found in Britain.’
The final Y-DNA Haplogroup is R1b (M343, M415). It is a ‘younger’ sibling to R1a (M420). Both descend from R1 (M173) and R-M207 (K2b2a2). The Haplogroup R branch with the older Q -M242 (K2b2a1), derives from P1-M45 (K2b2a). P1 is the primary branch from P-295 (K2b2) and P descends from K2b (P331).
Encyclopaedia: ‘Haplogroup R1b (R-M343), [was ] previously known as Hg1 and Eu18… It is the most frequently occurring paternal lineage in Western Europe, as well as [in] some parts of Russia (e.g. the Bashkirs) [Bashkir men have also been found to belong to R1b-U152, while some from southeastern Bashkortostan, are Haplogroup Q-M25 (Q1a1b) as opposed to R1b-M73 which is found in 23.4% of males] and pockets of Central Africa (e.g. parts of Chad and among the Chadic-speaking minority ethnic groups of Cameroon).
The clade is also present at lower frequencies throughout Eastern Europe, Western Asia, as well as parts of North Africa, South Asia and Central Asia. The age of R1 was estimated by Tatiana Karafet et al. (2008) at between 12,500 and 25,700 BP, and most probably occurred about 18,500 years ago. Since the earliest known example has been dated at circa 14,000 BP, and belongs to R1b1 (R-L754)… R1b must have arisen relatively soon after the emergence of R1.’
The emergence of Haplogroup R would have been post-flood – which occurred in 10,837 BCE according to an unconventional chronology – and within 12,000 years ago amongst the descendants of Shem. All Haplogroup mutations have arisen in a concertinaed fashion, without tens of thousands of years between them but rather thousands to hundreds of years.
R1b has two primary branches: R1b1 (L278) and R1b2 (M335, PH155). R1b2 is very rare and has been found in Bahrain, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Tajikistan, Turkey and even western China. This clade R1b2 is a residue of ancient R1b inhabitants in these regions and not an evolved R1b mutation. From L278 is L754 (R1b1-a) and from L745 are two major divisions with L388 (R1b1-a1) and V88, or R1b1-a2 (M18, V35, V69). Haplogroup R1b1a2 is found rarely, either in the Levant or more commonly in North Central Africa; though M18 and V35 are found almost exclusively on the Italian Island of Sardinia. The maternal lineages associated with the spread of V88 in Africa, include mtDNA Haplogroups: J1b, U5 and V.
From L388 is P297 (R1b1-a1a). Here it divides into R1b1-a1a1 (M73, M478) a rare clade found in Central Asia, the Caucasus, Siberia and Mongolia, and the major sub-clade R1b1-a1a2 or M269, widespread throughout western Europe – re-classified as R1b1a1b since 2018. Both V88 and M73 are residue Haplogroup clades from ancient R1b male inhabitants and integration with local women.
Encyclopaedia:
‘Early human remains found to carry R1b include:
Several males of the Iron Gates Mesolithic in the Balkans buried between 11200 and 8200 BP carried R1b1a1a [P297].
Several males of the Mesolithic Kunda culture and Neolithic Narva culture buried in the Zvejnieki burial ground in modern-day Latvia c. 9500–6000 BP carried R1b1b.
Several Mesolithic and Neolithic males buried at Deriivka and Vasil’evka in modern-day Ukraine c. 9500-7000 BP carried R1b1a [L745].
A male of the Botai culture in Central Asia buried c. 5500 BP carried R1b1a1[a1] (R1b-M478).
No confirmed cases of R1b* (R-M343*)… have been reported in peer-reviewed literature. In early research, because R-M269, R-M73 and R-V88 are by far the most common forms of R1b, examples of R1b (xM73, xM269) were sometimes assumed to signify basal examples of “R1b*”. However, while the paragroup R-M343 (xM73, M269, V88) is rare, it does not preclude membership of rare and/or subsequently-discovered, relatively basal subclades of R1b such as R-L278*… R-P297*… or R-PH155… The population believed to have the highest proportion of R-M343 (xM73, M269, V88) are the Kurds of southeastern Kazakhstan with 13%.
R-L278 among modern men falls into the R-L754 and R-PH155 subclades, though it is possible some very rare R-L278* may exist as not all examples have been tested for both branches. Examples may also exist in ancient DNA, though due to poor quality it is often impossible to tell whether or not the ancients carried the mutations that define subclades. R-L754 contains the vast majority of R1b. The only known example of R-L754* (xL389, V88) is also the earliest known individual to carry R1b: “Villabruna 1”, who lived circa 14,000 years BP (north east Italy).
R-L389, also known as R1b1a[1] (L388/PF6468, L389/PF6531), contains the very common subclade R-P297 and the rare subclade R-V1636. It is unknown whether all previously reported R-L389* (xP297) belong to R-V1636 or not. The SNP marker P297 was recognised in 2008 as ancestral to the significant subclades M73 and M269, combining them into one cluster. A majority of Eurasian R1b falls within this subclade, representing a very large modern population. Although P297… has not yet been much tested for [itself], the same population has been relatively well studied in terms of other markers.’
R1b-M269 is the most common R1b Haplogroup – carried by some ‘110 million males in Europe’ – and the defining marker for Shem’s descendants aside from R1a and not withstanding those men who carry Haplogroups G2a, I1 and I2a1. R1b-M269 ‘is closely associated with the diffusion of Indo-European languages…’
Encyclopaedia: ‘Distribution of R-M269 in Europe increases in frequency from east to west. It peaks at the national level in Wales at a rate of 92%, at 82% in Ireland, 70% in Scotland, 68% in Spain, 60% in France… about 60% in Portugal, 50% in Germany… 47% in Italy, 45% in Eastern England and 42% in Iceland. R-M269 reaches levels as high as 95% in parts of Ireland.’
M269 (R1b1a-1a2) diverges into a number of significant sub-clades. Joint oldest being PF7562 (R1b1a-1a2b), re-classified as R1b1a1b2 and located in the Balkans, Turkey and Armenia; and L23 (R1b1a1a-2a), re-classified as R1b1a1b1. Related to PF7562 is one of two branches from L23; Z2103 (R1b1a-2a2) found in Eastern Europe and West Asia. Sub-clades within L23 ‘appear to be found at their highest frequency in the Central Balkans, especially Kosovo with 7.9%, North Macedonia 5.1% and Serbia 4.4%.’
The other is L51 or R1b1a-1a2a1 (M412), indicative of Central Europe and also found in southern France and northern Italy R-L51*/R-M412*. Though, deriving from L51 is L151 ([P310, P311] R1b1a-1a2a1a) and its sub-clades which ‘include most males with R1b in Western Europe. The oldest samples classified as belonging to R-M269, have been found in Eastern Europe and [the] Pontic-Caspian steppe, not Western Asia. Western European populations are divided between the R-P312/S116 and R-U106/S21 subclades of R-M412 (R-L51).’
R1b-Z2103
Eupedia: ‘Haak et al. (2015) tested six Y-DNA samples from… the Volga-Ural region, and all of them turned out to belong to haplogroup R1b. Four of them were positive for the Z2103 mutation. In all likelihood, R1b-Z2103 was a major lineage of the Poltavka culture, which succeeded to the Yamna culture between the Volga River and the Ural mountains. It eventually merged with the Abashevo culture (presumably belonging chiefly to R1a-Z93) to form the Sintashta culture. Through a founder effect or through political domination, R1a-Z93 lineages would have outnumbered R1b-Z2103 after the expansion to Central and South Asia… R1b-Z2103 would have become an Indo-Iranian lineage like R1a-Z93. This is true of two Z2103 subclades in particular: L277.1 and L584. The former is found in Russia to Central Asia then to India and the Middle East, just like the R1a-L657 subclade of Z93.’
Z2103 is an ancient R1b clade which perhaps hasn’t mutationally evolved as far and so is not found in modern western European populations. Showing it is likely a R1b residue from ancient admixture, as is the case with M335, V88, M73 and PF7562. The alternative explanation is that Z2103 is primarily indicative of Elam’s descendants, the Turks – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Distribution (below) for Haplogroup R1b-ht35 (Z2103) in Europe
Descending from L151 are three R1b lineages via L11 ([P310] R1b1a-2a1a):
U106 ([S21] R1b1a–1a2a1a1), P312 ([S116] R1b1a-1a2a1a2); and CT4528 (R1b1a-1a2a1a3a).
R1b-U106
L11 is found in Central England, though the first major R1b lineage from L151 is U106 (S21, M404) which encompasses all the Germanic speaking nations of northwestern Europe; including: Germany (Ishmael),Austria (Hagar), Switzerland (Haran), Scandinavia (Keturah) the Benelux nations (Keturah), the United Kingdom (Judah, Benjamin, Simeon, Reuben) and Ireland (Gad) – bold = Abraham.
‘It appears to represent over 25% of R1b in Europe. In terms of percentage of total population, its epicenter is Friesland, where it makes up 44% of the population. In terms of total population numbers, its epicenter is Central Europe, where it comprises 60% of R1 combined.’
One cannot but equate U106 with the Patriarch Abraham. With the exception of Austrians who derive from Hagar and her mystery husband and the Swiss who descend from Abraham’s brother Haran, these nations embody the progeny of Abraham; either through Ishmael, Isaac or the sons of Keturah – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians -Ishmael & Hagar. Granted, the beginning of the U106 mutation may not have originated with Abraham, though the compelling evidence is that this sub-Haplogroup identifies predominantly with his lineage.
Significant branches deriving from U106 include: FGC3861 (R1b1a1a-2a1a1a); Z18 (R1b1a1a-2a1a1b); Z381 (S263); FGC396 (R1b1a1a-2a1a1d); and S12025 (R1b1a1a-2a1a1e).
Sub-clade Z381 has three main offshoots: S264 ([Z156] R1b1a1a–2a1a1c1); S499 ([Z301] R1b1a1–2a1a1c2); and M1994 (R1b1a1a-2a1a1c3).
Also stemming from Z381 is M323 found uniquely in Britain. Significant branches of Z301 include L48 and S1688 from which U198 derives. Sub-clade U198 is common throughout Southern and Eastern England.
Eupedia: ‘The principal Proto-Germanic branch of the Indo-European family tree is R1b-S21 [U106, M405]… This haplogroup is found at high concentrations in the Netherlands and north-west Germany. It is likely that R1b-S21 lineages expanded in this region through a founder effect during the Unetice period, then penetrated into Scandinavia around 1700 BCE (probably alongside R1a-L664), thus creating a new culture, that of the Nordic Bronze Age (1700-500 BCE). R1b-S21 would then have blended for more than a millennium with preexisting Scandinavian populations, represented by haplogroups I1, I2-L801, R1a-Z284. When the Germanic Iron Age started c. 500 BCE, the Scandinavian population had developed a truly Germanic culture and language, but was divided in many tribes with varying levels of each haplogroup. R1b-S21 became the dominant haplogroup among the West Germanic tribes, but remained in the minority against I1 and R1a in East Germanic and Nordic tribes…
The presence of R1b-S21 in other parts of Europe can be attributed almost exclusively to the Germanic migrations that took place between the 3rd and the 10th century. The Frisians and Anglo-Saxons [and the Jutes] disseminated this haplogroup to England and the Scottish Lowlands, the Franks to Belgium and France, the Burgundians to eastern France, the Suebi to Galicia and northern Portugal, and the Lombards to Austria and Italy. The Goths help propagate S21 around Eastern Europe, but apparently their Germanic lineages were progressively diluted by blending with Slavic and Balkanic populations… Later the Danish and Norwegian Vikings have also contributed to the diffusion of R1b-S21 (alongside I1, and R1a)… mainly in Iceland, in the British Isles, [and] in Normandy…
From the Late Middle Ages until the early 20th century, the Germans expanded across much of modern Poland, pushing as far as Latvia to the north-east and Romania to the south-east. During the same period the Austrians built an empire comprising what is now the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, and parts of Romania, western Ukraine and southern Poland. Many centuries of German and Austrian influence in central and Eastern Europe resulted in a small percentage of Germanic lineages being found among modern populations.
O’Sullivan et al. (2018) tested the genomes of Merovingian nobles from an early Medieval Alemannic graveyard in Baden-Württemberg’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘Apart from one individual belonging to haplogroup G2a2b1, all men were members of R1b, and all samples that yielded deep clade results fell under the R1b-U106 > Z381 > Z301 > L48 > Z9 > Z325 clade’ – see Phylogenetic tree above.
The lineage of the Kings of France was inferred from the Y-DNA of several descendant branches… and also belongs to R1b-U106 > Z381′ – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. Their earliest-known male-line ancestor was from Robert II, Count of Hesbaye, a Frankish nobleman from present-day Belgium.
The House of Wettin… one of the oldest dynasties in Europe, which ruled over many states at various times in history, was yet another well-known noble Germanic lineage part of R1b-U106 > Z381′ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Distribution (below) for Haplogroup R1b-S21 (U106) in Europe
The second dominant lineage from L11, apart from the Germanic U106, is R1b-S116 (P312). It has three prominent downstream groups: DF27 (S250); U152 (S28); and L21 (M529). Haplogroup L21 is classified as Atlantic-Celtic; U152 as Italian-Gallic; and DF27 as Iberian-Atlantic. ‘Myres et al. described [R-P312] as originating in and spreading from the west of the Rhine basin. R-P312 has been the subject of significant, ongoing study concerning its complex internal structure.’
This raises an important point, for this writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, it’s most recent mutations. Input from geneticists would be welcome concerning this idea. Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.
R1b-DF27
Two distinct lines from DF27 include the ZZ12 phylogenetic tree and Z195.
Haplogroups of note from the Z195 tree include M153 which is found mostly in Basques and Gascons, though also amongst Iberians in general. R1b-M167 is relatively common among Basques (11%) and Catalans (22%). It is also found in the Spanish, French, Germans and British, principally in Cornwall and Wales. The sub-clade L165 ‘is defined by the presence of the marker S68… It is found in England, Scandinavia, and Scotland… [and] mostly found in the Northern Isles and Outer Hebrides…’
Eupedia: ‘Martiniano et al. (2017) sequenced the genomes of various skeletons from West Iberia dating from the Middle and Late Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Middle Bronze Age (since the Early Bronze Age did not reach that region). They found that Neolithic and Chalcolithic individuals belonged to Y-haplogroups I*, I2a1 and G2a. In contrast, all three Bronze Age Portuguese men tested belonged to R1b (one M269 and two P312)… they carried Neolithic Iberian maternal lineages (H1, U5b3, X2b)…’
Though DF27 is found in western Europe it is primarily indicative of the SpanishVisigoths and Portuguese Suebi, the descendants of Shem’s fifth son Aram – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain,Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Distribution (below) for Haplogroup R1b-DF27 (S250) in Europe
R1b-U152
Encyclopaedia: ‘R-U152 is defined by the presence of the marker U152, also called S28. Its discovery was announced in 2005 by EthnoAncestry and subsequently identified independently by Sims et al. (2007). Myres et al. report this clade “is most frequent (20–44%) in Switzerland [Haran], Italy [Nahor], France [Lot] and Western Poland, with additional instances exceeding 15% in some regions of England and Germany.” Similarly Cruciani et al. (2010) reported frequency peaks in Northern and Central Italy and France. Out of a sample of 135 men in Tyrol, Austria, 9 tested positive for U152/S28. King et al. (2014) reported four living descendants of Henry Somerset, 5th Duke of Beaufort^ in the male line tested positive for U-152.’
R1b-U152 while found in Central Europe, is indicative of the Northern and Central Italians, the Swiss and the French: equaling the descendants of Abraham’s two older brothers Nahor, Haran and his nephew Lot respectively.
Eupedia: ‘Furtwangler et al. (2020) analysed 96 ancient genomes from Switzerland, Southern Germany, and the Alsace region in France, covering the Middle/Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. They confirmed that R1b arrived in the region during the transitory Bell Beaker period (2800-1800 BCE). The vast majority of Bell Beaker R1b samples belonged to the U152 > L2 clade (11 out of 14; the other being P312 or L51).’
‘Antonio et al. (2019) analysed the genomes of Iron Age Latins dating between 900 and 200 BCE, and the samples tested belonged primarily to haplogroup R1b-U152 (including the clades L2, Z56 and Z193), as well as one R1b-Z2103 and one R1b-Z2118.’
Distribution (below) for Haplogroup R1b-S28 (U152) in Europe
R1b-L21
Haplogroup R1b-L21 is also known as M529 and S145. It is a quintessentially Celtic group, though it is also found in England. ‘Myres et al. report it is most common in Ireland [Gad, Reuben], Scotland [Benjamin] and Wales [Simeon]’ accounting for between 25% to 50% of the whole male population. Haplogroup M529 (R1b-L21) with U198 and M323 from R1b-U106 are prime groups reflecting the descendants of Jacob’s sons and the Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples.
Eupedia: ‘The Proto-Italo-Celto-Germanic R1b people… [as the] first wave of R1b presumably carried R1b-L21 lineages in great number (perhaps because of a founder effect), as these are found everywhere in western, northern and Central Europe. Cassidy et.al (2015) confirmed the presence of R1b-L21 (DF13 and DF21 subclades) in Ireland around 2000 BCE. Those genomes… differed greatly from the earlier Neolithic Irish samples. This confirms that a direct migration of R1b-L21… was responsible for the introduction of the Bronze Age to Ireland.
The early split of L21 from the main Proto-Celtic branch around Germany would explain why the Q-Celtic languages (Goidelic and Hispano-Celtic) diverged so much from the P-Celtic branch (La Tène, Gaulish, Brythonic)… Some L21 lineages from the Netherlands and northern Germany later entered Scandinavia with the dominant subclade of the region, R1b-S21/U106. The stronger presence of L21 in Norway and Iceland can be attributed to the Norwegian Vikings, who had colonised parts of Scotland and Ireland and taken slaves among the native Celtic populations, whom they brought to their new colony of Iceland and back to Norway… about 20% of all Icelandic male lineages are R1b-L21 of Scottish or Irish origin.
In France, R1b-L21 is mainly present in historical Brittany and in Lower Normandy. This region was repopulated by massive immigration of insular Britons in the 5th century due to pressure from the invading Anglo-Saxons. However, it is possible that L21 was present in Armorica [earlier]… given that the tribes of the Armorican Confederation of ancient Gaul already had a distinct identity from the other Gauls and had maintained close ties with the British Isles…’
R1b-L21 sub-clades of interest include: R-M222; L159.2; L193; L226; and L371.
Distribution (below) for Haplogroup R1b-L21 (M529) in Europe
Encyclopaedia: ‘… [M222] within R-L21 is… estimated to have arisen between 1400 and 2000 BCE. It is particularly associated with male lines which are Gaelic (Irish or Scottish), but especially north-western Irish… it is suggested to have been the Y-chromosome haplogroup of the Ui Neill dynastic kindred of ancient Ireland, often referred to as that of the prominent Dark Age monarch Niall of the Nine Hostages… [also] associated with the closely related Connachta dynasties, the Ui Bruin and Ui Fiachrach. M222 is also found as a substantial proportion of the population of Scotland which may indicate substantial settlement from northern Ireland or at least links to it. Those areas settled by large numbers of Irish and Scottish emigrants such as North America have a substantial percentage of M222’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
The L159.2 sub-clade within R-L21 is known ‘as… a parallel mutation that exists inside haplogroup I2a1 (L159.1). L159.2 appears to be associated with the Kings of Leinster and Diarmait Mac Muurchada; Irish Gaels belonging to the Laigan. It can be found in the coastal areas of the Irish Sea including the Isle of Man and the Hebrides, as well as Norway, western and southern Scotland, northern and southern England, northwest France, and northern Denmark. Many surnames with [the L193]… marker are associated geographically with the western “Border Region” of Scotland. A few other surnames have a Highland association. R-L193 is a relatively young subclade likely born within the last 2000 years… marker L226, also known as S168. Commonly referred to as Irish Type III, it is concentrated in central western Ireland and associated with the Dal gCais kindred… marker L371, [is] referred to as the Welsh modal and associated with ancient Welsh Kings and Princes.’
Prominent members of R1b include: Charles Darwin; Kevin Bacon; Robert Downey Jr; Harry Connick Jr. ‘Yehia Z Gad… at the Ancient DNA lab of the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization in Cairo retrieved the DNA of several members of the 18th Dynasty of Egypt… which included Amenhotep I to III, Thutmose I to IV… Akhenaten and Tutankhamun. The Y-DNA analysis established that the royal male lineage belonged to Y-haplogroup R1b.’
Rogaev [2009] ‘tested the DNA of the presumed grave of Tsar Nicolas II of Russia and all his five children, and compared them against archival blood specimens from Nicholas II as well as against samples from descendants of both paternal and maternal lineages. The results unequivocally confirmed that the grave was the one of the last Russian Royal family’ – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. ‘Nicholas II belonged to Y-haplogroup R1b and mt-haplogroup T2‘ – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
‘Consequently, all Russian emperors of the Romanov dynasty since Peter III (1728-1762) also belonged to haplogroup R1b [particularly the later Tzars of the House of Romanov who descended from the ‘House of Holstein-Gottorp in Schleswig-Holstein’]. This paternal lineage ultimately descends from the House of Oldenburg, which includes all the Kings of Denmark since Christian I (reigned from 1448) as well as several Kings of Norway, Sweden and Greece, and the current heirs to the British throne’ Prince William and his son Prince George – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
John Adams, second President and his son John Quincy Adams, sixth president, R1b-S2100; Thomas Edison, R1b-S2100; Clan Grant, R1b-P312 (DF19); Clan Armstrong, astronaut Neil Armstrong, P312; Woodrow Wilson, 28th President, P312; Nicolaus Copernicus, Renaissance astronomer, R1b-P310 (and mtDNA H).
Clan Bruce, Robert the Bruce and David II of Scotland and High King of Ireland, Edward Bruce, Earls of Elgin and Earls of Kincardine, R1b-DF27 > ZZ12 > Z46512 > FGC78762 > ZZ41 > S7432; Clan Boyle, Earls of Glasgow, DF27 (Z196); House of Bernadotte, Royal House of Sweden since 1818, DF27 (Z195).
Matthew Calbraith Perry, ‘the man who forced Japan to open its ports to western ships’, DF27 (Z196); George W Bush, 41st President, descended from Reynold Bush (1600-1686) who emigrated from Fering Parish in Essex England, to the Massachusetts colony about 1640, R1b-DF27 > Z196 > Z209 > CTS4065 > S16864; Pierre Trudeau and his son Justin Trudeau, DF27 (Z196).
Clan Murray and Clan Sutherland “both descend from a Flemish nobleman by the name of Freskin, who settled in Scotland during the reign of King David I and was granted lands in West Lothian and the ancient Pictish kingdom of Moray (which would become known as Sutherland). Freskin’s descendants were designated by the surname de Moravia (“of Moray” in the Norman language), which later became ‘Murray’. Freskin’s great-grand-son was William de Moravia (c. 1210–1248).. [and] became 1st Earl of Sutherland, a title that the clan chief [kept] until 1535, when it passed to Clan Gordon. Clan Murray descends from William’s cousin… the ancestral Sutherland line belongs to R1b-DF27 > ZZ12 > FGC23071 > FGC23066 > BY48361 > BY130907 > BY67446 and has Y-chromosomal matches in modern Flanders, confirming Freskin’s origins. It is believed that Clan Douglas also descends from Freskin and… indeed matches the Sutherland and Murray haplotype.”
Before moving on to the next R1b sub-Haplogroup, it is important to highlight that even though these illustrious men are principally British through and through, they all without exception had at one time a paternal ancestor who descended from an R1b line which was not of Abraham (U106), but from Aram (DF27) and his four sons; equating today to the peoples of Spain and Portugal and their Spanish and Portuguese descendants in the Americas.
House of Hapsburg, R1b-U152 > L2 > Z41150 > DF90 > FGC59564; Richard III of England ‘… three modern relatives with the surname Somerset and descended from House of Lancaster all belonged to haplogroup R1b-U152 (x L2, Z36, Z56, M160, M126 and Z192). Although this points to a non-paternity at some time in the Plantagenet lineage, it is likely that most if not all Dukes of Beaufort, and possibly most Plantagenets monarchs outside the House of York belonged to R1b-U152.’ Clan Erskine, U152 (Z36); Grover Cleveland, 22nd and 24th President, L2 (L20); Kevin Costner, L2; Matthew Perry, L2 (Z142).
The same situation exists for U152 as it does with DF27. In this case the above men have had a paternal ancestor descended not from Abraham, but one of his brothers; either Nahor, northern and central Italians; or Haran, Switzerland and by his son Lot, the French and French Canadians.
So it is of great interest that Abraham Lincoln who possessed a rare mtDNA Haplogroup from his mother (X1c) should have inherited R1b-U152 from his father.
Abraham Lincoln’s Mother, Nancy Hanks
Recall, Haplogroup X is found in only 1% of the world’s population; with X1c being rarer still. It has been found in Norway, Ireland and interestingly, Italy.
Abraham Lincoln^, 16th President, likely belonged to ‘R1b-U152 > L2 > Z142 > Z150 > S20376… as several descendants from Samuel “the weaver” Lincoln, who was Abraham Lincoln’s great-great-great-great-grandfather… all [shared] the same haplotype.’
Perhaps this explains Lincoln’s features and colouring as not being an archetypal Celtic-Saxon-Viking lineage. That said, the sub-clade of U152 which Abraham Lincoln perhaps possessed is a mutation specifically carried by British men (Z150) and in found in England (S20376).
Though a further explanation is found in the article, The Establishment: Who are they… What do the want? Where it is offered that a. Nancy Hanks was of Scottish extraction and b. Abraham Lincoln’s biological father was not actually Thomas Lincoln (whom in all honesty he does not resemble) and was in fact his adoptive father.
Abraham Lincoln’s real Father was allegedly A A Springs, who originally came from a line of the Rothschilds which had changed their name. Thus Lincoln’s Y-DNA Haplogroup could have been a different R1b and even R1a, J2, J1 or E1b1b.
A A Springs and Abraham Lincoln
Recall that Tom Hanks (R1a) is related to Abraham Lincoln on Hank’s father’s side.
O’Neil Dynasty, Gaelic Irish lineage, Northern Ireland, descended from Niall of the Nine Hostages, R1b-L21 (DF13, DF49); Clan Maclean, L21 (DF13, DF1); Clan Gregor (McGregor), folk hero Rob Roy MacGregor, L21 (DF13); Clan Campbell, L21 (DF13); House of Stuart, ‘who ruled Scotland from 1371, then also England and Ireland from 1603 until 1707, belongs to R1b-L21 > DF13 > Z39589 > DF41/S524 > Z43690 > S775 > L746 > S781. The most prominent members were King Robert II of Scotland, Kings James I, Charles I, Charles II and James II of England & Ireland.’
Clan MacKenzie, R1b-L21 (DF13); George Washington, 1st President, R1b-L21 > DF13 > ZZ10 > Z253 > Z2186 > BY2744; Zachary Taylor; L21 (DF13); William Gladstone, L21 (DF13); Rutherford B Hayes, 19th president, L21 (DF13); J P Morgan, financier and banker, L21 (DF13); William McKinley, 25th President, L21 (DF13); Warren G harding, 29th President, L21 (DF13); Che Guevara, Argentine Marxist revolutionary, R1b-L21; Matt LeBlanc, L21 (DF63).
Notice the royal lineage of the Stuart kings and numerousAmerican presidents all falling under the Celtic R1b Haplogroup M529. This sub-clade with the Germanic U106, are the defining markers for men descended from Isaac, the son of Abraham.
John Smith, ‘the founder of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement, belonged to haplogroup R1b-M222 (R1b-L21 > DF13 > DF49 > Z2980 > Z2976 > DF23 > Z2961 > S645 > Z2965 > M222)’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. The following personalities are all members of M222: Henry Louis Gates, American writer; Bill O’Reilly, American television host; Bill Maher, American comedian; Rory Bremner, Scottish comedian; Adrian Grenier, American actor.
Clan Boyd, Earl of Kilmarnock, R1b-U106 > Z381 > S1684 > U198 > S15627 > DF89 > FGC12770 > FT69836 > JFS0024 (the sub-clade U198 is typically an English haplotype); Franklin Pierce, 14th President, R1b-U106 > Z381 > Z156 > S497 > DF96; Alec Baldwin, Z381; Woody Harrelson, Z18; Clan Gordon, R1b-U106; Benjamin Franklin, R1b-U106 (Z18, DF95); James K Polk, 11th President U106 (S263, L48 [Z301]); Ulysses S Grant, 18th president, L48 (Z301); Ernest Hemingway, L48 (Z301).
House of Bourbon, R1b-U106 (Z381). ‘All kings of France being descended in patrilineal line from Robert the Strong (820-866), unless a non-paternity event happened some time before Louis XIII… belonged to the same R1b-Z381 lineage. The House of Bourbon also includes all the kings of Spain from Philip V (1683-1746) to this day with King Juan Carlos, all the kings of the Two Sicilies, the grand dukes of Luxembourg since 1964, and of course all the dukes of Orléans and the dukes of Bourbon.’
‘The lineage of the House of Wettin was identified as R1b-U106 > Z2265 > Z381 > Z156 > Z305 > Z307 > Z304 > DF98 > S18823 > S22069 > Y17440 > A6535… Members of the House of Wettin include the Kings Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII and George VI of the United Kingdom, all the Kings of the Belgians, the Kings of Portugal from 1853 to 1910, the Kings of Bulgaria from 1887 to 1946, several Kings of Poland and Grand Dukes of Lithuania, the Margraves of Meissen from 1075 to 1423, the Electors of Saxony from 1423 to 1806, the Kings of Saxony from 1806 to 1918, and the rulers of the numerous smaller Saxon duchies.’
The House of Wettin haplotype S8350 while loosely British, is more accurately ‘Germanic’ as in Germany rather than England – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Of interest to this writer is the Z30 sub-clade downstream from Z301, which includes: Clan Sinclair, Earl of Orkney and Earl of Caithness, R1b-U106 > Z381 > L48 > Z9 > Z30 > Z7 > Z346 > S5246 > S5629 > FGC15254 > FGC35613 > ZS5151; William Howard Taft (Skull & Bones), 27th President, R1b-U106 > Z381 > Z301 > Z30 > Z338 > FGC1954; and James D Watson, one of the first two ‘human beings to have their whole genome sequenced… and [co-discoverer] of the structure of DNA… [member] of Y-DNA haplogroup R1b-S21 (U106)… subclades… L48 > Z9 > Z30′ a descendent of Scottish ancestors.
Nathan Bedford Forrest (1821-1877) ‘was a prominent Confederate Army general during the American Civil War, renowned as a cavalry leader and military strategist.’
‘He was the only general on either side who began as a private. After the war he became the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, which has made him a controversial figure in American history, R1b-U106 > S263 > S499 > L48 > Z9 > Z30 > Z349 > Z2 > Z7 > S5945 > FGC17344 > Y28576 > FGC51332.’
From our previous summary of Y-DNA Haplogroups A to I, we have in addition, J through to T. Recall Haplogroups A, B, E1a, E1b1a and E2 are associated with peoples of Black African heritage. Haplogroup E1b1b is primarily associated with Berbers in North Africa and related ‘non-Arab’ peoples in southern Europe.
Added now to these peoples are the intermediate mutations of J1 and J2, found in – related peoples through admixture in southern Europe and – origination with men now in West Asia and the Arabian Peninsula.
Haplogroup H is indicative of peoples in the southern portion of the Indian sub-Continent and Bangladesh. Added now to these same peoples are Haplogroups L and T. Related to the peoples of South Asia are the Melanesian peoples of Southeast Asia and the Pacific who carry the additional Haplogroups M and S. All these peoples descend from Noah’s son Ham (with one exception) and their Haplogroups include:
[F], H, J, L, M, [P], S and T.
The exception being Canaan and his male descendants Haplogroups:
A, B and E.
Haplogroups C and D are associated primarily with Central Asians and East Asians, who descend from Noah’s eldest son Japheth. Added now to these are Haplogroups N, O and Q. Haplogroup Q being the defining marker Haplogroup for the Amerindian. Thus Japheth’s male descendants Haplogroups include:
C, D, [K], N, O and Q.
The intersection Haplogroups F and P are both found on the Indian sub-continent, while K is found in South East Asia.
Haplogroup G is the first ostensibly European Haplogroup followed by the later mutations from Haplogroup I and are indicative of Shem’s descendants, the second son of Noah. The Key addition to these are the relatively recent mutations of R1a and R1b. Thus the Haplogroups of the male descendants of Shem include:
G, I and R.
Therefore Haplogroups A, B, E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b and E2 are indicative of the offspring of Canaan; J1, the sons of Mizra and J2 of Phut; while Haplogroup H (and L) of the sons of Cush. Haplogroup C is located the most frequently amongst Madai in central Asia today and Haplogroup D in Tarshish, the second son of Javan. Haplogroup O is found in Gomer, Javan, Magog, Tubal and Meshech in East Asia and Q in Tiras, the native American Indian.
Haplogroup G is more difficult to isolate beyond Shem, whereas Haplogroup I is indicative amongst descendants of Shem’s third born son, Arphaxad. Haplogroup R, split into R1a is the marker in Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan of Eastern Europe and in Asshur of Russia, and by degree, Lud in Iran; while R1b is the marker in Arphaxad’s great grandson Peleg of Western Europe, Aram in Latin Europe and Latino America, and by degree, Elam of Turkey.
While Haplogroups may indicate admixture through intermixing, integration and intermarriage and mutate accordingly, such as Haplogroup N of East Asian origin yet also found in high concentrations in the European Baltic nations and Finland; N remains an Oriental, Asian, Eastern line of descent from Japheth originally.
Likewise with major divisions in Haplogroups such as E1b1a and E1b1b, J1 and J2 and R1a and R1b, these are indicative of related peoples respectively from Canaan and in part Mizra for Haplogroup E; Mizra and Phut for Haplogroup J; and Joktan and Peleg for Haplogroup R.
As discussed regarding Haplogroups A to I, most of these Haplogroups, whether ancient or old have a lower frequency in the world with less mutations and include A, B, C, D, F and G. Haplogroup H though deemed old, is found in high concentrations, while contrastingly Haplogroup I is less concentrated with numerous sub-clades. It is Haplogroup E which stands out, as a widespread Haplogroup; one with high concentrations; and numerous mutations and sub-clades.
Considering the intermediate to younger Y-DNA Haplogroups which have a lower frequency in the world with less mutations they include K, M, P, S and T. They can be added to Haplogroups A, B, C, D, F and G. Haplogroups found in either relatively ‘high concentrations’ or with ‘numerous sub-clades’ include L, N and Q. They in turn can be added to Haplogroups H and I. This leaves Haplogroups J, O and R. Like Haplogroup E, they are indicative of being widespread; highly concentrated; with many mutations; and found in large population clusters. While E is old, Haplogroup J is intermediate and O and R are far more recent.
Haplogroup J mirrors E in two ways in that a. it splits into two, J1 and J2; and b. they broadly represent two different yet closely related peoples from Ham – Mizra and Phut. Haplogroup O finds community with E and J in that it has split into two main sub-Haplogroups O1 and O2, yet is a marker Haplogroup for nearly all of Japheth’s descendants. Finally, Haplogroup R has also split into two primary groups of R1a and R1b. Though perhaps more than Haplogroups E, J and O even, R1 represents 95% to 99% of Shem’s descendants.
Listing all the Y-DNA Haplogroups, results in a total of twenty:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S and T.
If we were to minus the Haplogroups one could term connecting Haplogroups, that is the ones which spawned each major set of mutations, then they would broadly include B(T), F, K and P. Thus lowering the total to sixteen. If we again subtract those Haplogroups which even though they may be dispersed over a wide geographic area, they remain smaller in regard to population numbers. These would include Haplogroups L, M, N, S and T. The total is now eleven. Of those remaining there are five which have split into two major sub-clades and they comprise Haplogroups E, I, J, O and R.
Thus, a configuration for major paternal lines as evidenced by Haplogroup groupings would be:
A, C, D, E1b1a, E1b1b, G, H, I1, I2, J1, J2, O1, O2, Q, R1a and R1b.
A total of sixteen, representing Noah’s grandsons and equating to the sixteen major ethnicities on the Earth. The expansion of the core Haplogroups into the myriad sub-clades today, is the scientific record of the story unfolding of a very small family grown incredibly large.
While this works for a conventional explanation of chapters nine and ten of Genesis, it is not accurate. As Canaan was not Ham’s son but his step son after an encounter between his wife Na’eltama’uk and Noah – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Therefore we are seeking twenty-one grandsons from four sons of Noah. For Ham only had three sons and Canaan had six – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
If we were to categorise the paternal Haplogroups according to the number of Noah’s grandsons it would result if manipulated one way in five major Haplogroups representing Japheth’s sons. Though Japheth had seven sons in total, the grouping of Magog, Tubal and Meshech as one represents China (Chapter X China: Magog,Tubal & Meshech), with Tiras, Madai, Gomer and Javan – the Haplogroups being C, D, O1, O2 and Q, with Haplogroup C2 indicative of Central Asia; D1a in Japan; O in East Asia and South East Asia; and Q in the Americas.
If reshuffled another way, there are seven paternal Haplogroups which define East Asian (oriental) men, coincidently equaling the seven sons of Japheth. This configuration resulting in the Y-DNA Haplogroups C, D, K, N, O1, O2 and Q; though if one wished to add O1a and O1b, then possibly the interconnecting Haplogroup K could be omitted: C, D, N, O1a, O1b, O2 and Q. Perhaps this alignment is feasible and most accurate and conveniently squares with seven Haplogroups for seven grandsons.
Interestingly, the three sons of Ham are represented by the three major paternal Haplogroups consisting of H, J1 and J2, with H1a in South Asia, J1 in the Middle East and J2 in West Asia.
The major Y-DNA Haplogroups for Canaan include A, B and E. Haplogroup E can be split into E1b1a and E1b1b, making four. If manipulated further, Haplogroups E1a and E2 are bonafide enough to result in six Haplogroup lines, fascinatingly matching the six sons of Canaan – Sidon, Heth, Amor, Hiv, Arvad and Hamath. All Black African males fall into one of these six lineages, even though granted the majority possess E1b1a or E1b1b.
While Shem’s Haplogroups do not need any shuffling as his five sons correspond with the major Haplogroups G, I1, I2, R1a and R1b. Haplogroup G2a is indicative of the Caucasus; I1 in north western Europe; I2a1 in southeastern Europe; R1a in Eastern Europe; and R1b in Western Europe.
Thus the final configuration for paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups numbering twenty-one instead of sixteen would be:
A, B, C, D, E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b, E2, G, H, I1, I2, J1, J2, N, O1a, O1b, O2, Q, R1a and R1b.
Japheth: C, D, N, O1a, O1b, O2 and Q
Canaan: A, B, E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b and E2
Shem: G, I1, I2, R1a and R1b
Ham: H, J1 and J2
The Haplogroups in bold are dominant not just in geographic frequency but in geographic concentration as well. Three each for eldest son Japheth and third son Ham and two each for second born son Shem and the illegitimate youngest son of Noah, Canaan.
The field of genetics is fascinating and the facts being uncovered are of great interest. It would be enough for geneticists to stay with what is known, but as is scientist’s proclivity, it is the explanation of them where theoretical inaccuracies can be exposed. A case in point are scientists explanations of where a specific Haplogroup mutated or when. It includes considerable guesswork, yet often the terminology used, conveys the impression that the theories presented are factual.
Geneticists have elongated the chronological timeline for each mutation in support of the evolutionary theory. The reality, is that they should be concertinaed down to a considerably shorter time window as per an unconventional chronology – refer Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.
Thus, a misdirection in studying Haplogroups is focusing on where and when a Haplogroup mutation originated. The key to understanding Haplogroups more clearly, is rather with whom did the mutation derive? Yet what record would provide this information?
To really grasp the meaning of the data, the answer amazingly, is in a book with a rather dusty cover, as not many people open it, or if they do, they perhaps do not know where to look or how to decipher it. As the constant reader will know, the identity of all the peoples and nations in the world are in the scriptures. In the book of Genesis in chapter ten there is what biblical scholars call the Table of Nations. A family tree if you will, of all the peoples in the world today. A 2021 genetic study highlighted that the many ethnicities on Earth can be placed into at least three broad categories, from which everyone descends – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
On Earth today there are twenty-one major racial lines of descent; which have sprung from four original founding ancestor groups. These progenitors were Noah’s four sons, Japheth, Shem, Ham and Canaan, in the order with which they were born (Genesis 10:21), his twenty-one grandsons and their wives. The period for paternal and maternal Haplogroup evolution falling between the creation of Adam and Eve circa 27,000 BCE, the births of Noah’s three sons circa 12,000 BCE and the birth of Abraham circa 2000 BCE.
A universal misnomer is that Japheth is the progenitor of the European, Western, White peoples of the Earth; when in fact it is Noah’s son Shem. Broadly, the peoples descended from Noah’s four sons are the following.
A. Japheth: Central Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, Polynesia and the Amerindian – Genesis 10:2–5
B. Ham: North Africa, the Middle East, Arabia, South Asia and Melanesia – Genesis 10:6-7, 13-14
C. Canaan: Sub-Saharan Africa (and North Africa) – Genesis 10:15-19
D. Shem: Europe, West Asia, North America, Brazil, Latino-Hispano America, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – Genesis 10:8-12, 21–31
The following are the major ethnic lines of descent, which have sprung from the four original founding ancestor groups:
A
1 Chinese
2 Japanese
3 Koreans
4 Continental South East Asians: for example, Vietnamese
5 Archipelago South East Asians: for example, Indonesians/Malays
6 Central Asians: for example, Kazakhstan/Turkic-Mongols
7 The Amerindian of North, Central and South America
B
1 Indians and related peoples: for example Sri Lanka
2 Pakistan
3 Arabs
C
1 Southern Africa
2 Central Africa
3 Western Africa
4 Eastern Africa
5 Horn of Africa
6 North Africa (Berbers)
D
1 Iranians/Persians
2 Turks
3 Latins: Portugal, Spain, Brazil and Latino-Hispano Americans: for example Mexico and Argentina
4 Russians
5a Eastern Europeans: Finns, Balts, Slavs, Balkans and Greeks
5b Western Europeans: British, Irish, Scandinavian, Benelux, Germans, French, Swiss and Italians
Ostensibly, twenty-two major ethnicities exist. Though for reasons the constant reader will be aware, the correct answer is twenty-one as Eastern Europeans and Western Europeans both descend from Shem’s third born son, Arphaxad.
It is worth mentioning that Italy contains a complex population demographic in that four major biblical lines of descent are included: from Abrahams’s brother Nahor and his wife Milcah (1) and Nahor with his concubine Reumah (2); descendants from one of Aram’s four sons, Uz (3); as well as peoples descended from one of Joktan’s thirteen sons, Uzal (4).
The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for these twenty-one lines of descent; beginning with Japheth. The main group for Chinese men (Magog, Tubal and Meshech) is O at 82% and it is O2a in 56% of them which is dominant. For Japanese men (Tarshish) Haplogroup O represents 51% of the population, with O1b the highest at 30%. Though, the single biggest Haplogroup is D1a with 40%. In South Korean men (Togarmah) it is Haplogroup O with 79% and O2a the most dominant at 42%.
Another son of Gomer in South East Asia (Ashkenaz) are Vietnamese men who have Haplogroup O at 79%; with the dominant clade being O2a with 40%. Amongst other sons of Javan in South East Asia are Filipino men (Dodan) with 70% of Haplogroup O and O2a at 39%. In Malaysia (Elishah) it is Haplogroup O also at 70% and O1b edging O2a with 32% to 30% respectively. In Indonesia (Kittim), Haplogroup O stands at 69% and in Java O1b dominates with 42%; whereas in Sumatra, O2a is the biggest Haplogroup with 40%.
In the Central Asian nation of Kazakhstan (Madai) the dominant Haplogroup is C at 40%, while O is only 8%. Similarly in Mongolia, Haplogroup C is 51% and O, 16%. The North American Indian (Tiras) is defined by Q, with 77% of men carrying the Haplogroup and O virtually non-existent. In Javan’s descendants in Micronesia, Haplogroup K dominates in 65% of men and O at only 9%. Contrastingly in Polynesia, the Cook Islanders carry C as the highest Haplogroup, with 83% and O at only 5%.
Haplogroup O is by far the most dominant Haplogroup marker for Japheth’s male descendants. Of the three main sub-clades, it is O2a which is clearly the most frequent. Other Haplogroups in order, such as Q, C, D, K and N are far less numerous in frequency or in concentration compared with Haplogroup O. What is interesting about this is how relatively young or recent the O mutation is in comparison to other older Haplogroups. Haplogroups N and Q can be added as relatively recent too.
Haplogroup K is an intermediate intersection Haplogroup and though old, it is Haplogroups C and D which are legitimately called ancient. Those peoples who exhibit these Haplogroups more frequently, such as Kazakhs, Mongolians, Tibetans and the Japanese are reflecting an ancient lineage with incredibly less mutations. Reflecting endogamy and isolation perhaps. All the East Asians with Haplogroup O are showing a recent mutation stemming from C originally, yet having undergone a gigantic expansion relatively recently in humankind’s evolutionary history.
Ham would have originally carried similar genetic DNA with Japheth, yet the potential for different sets of mutations would have existed alongside his older brother. As each were the sons of Noah, who as ancestor zero was unique in history. Either, Noah’s genetic inheritance was manipulated in some fashion prior to his birth or, he simply carried what was common to the line of Seth in the first place – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. In any case the original Y-DNA Haplogroup A with its close descendant Haplogroup B, have remained lesser markers for Noah’s youngest son Canaan. Even so, in Namibia Haplogroup A found in 64% of males, compares with Haplogroup B found in 20% of the Zulu men in South Africa.
Haplogroup E1b1b is carried by 63% of Ethiopian men. The dominant Haplogroup in sub-Saharan Africans is Haplogroup E, with E1b1a having the highest frequency. For men in Ghana it is as high as 92%. The link between Canaan’s descendants throughout Africa is revealed in the shared Haplogroup E1b1b. It is a defining marker Haplogroup for the Berbers in the Arab world. In Morocco, it is found in 83% of the male population.
As one heads east, E1b1b decreases and Haplogroups J1 and J2 from Ham increase. Haplogroup J1 dominates the Arabian Peninsula and Middle Eastern Arabs, with Yemen men carrying 73% Haplogroup J1. Haplogroup J2 is the link between the Arab world descended from Mizra and the peoples of Pakistan from Phut. Haplogroup J2 has spilled over into the Levant and the Middle East, where 26% of Lebanese men exhibit J2 for instance.
In Pakistan, Haplogroup J2 is logically the true ancestral paternal Haplogroup and found in 20% of Pakistani men; rather than the Eurasian R1a Haplogroup from admixture. The descendants of Phut’s brother Cush, carry J2 from intermixing, though it is Haplogroup H and to a lesser degree L which are the true ancestral lineages for Cush’s sons. The highest concentration of Haplogroup H is found in Bangladeshi men with 36%; then India with 23%; Sri Lanka with 15%; and Pakistan with 6%. The highest percentage of Haplogroup L is found in Sri Lankan men at 19%; then India at 18%; Pakistan with 12%; and Bangladesh with 5%.
Haplogroups M, T and S as discussed, are found in small quantities or isolated geographic regions. Thus the core paternal Haplogroups for Ham’s descendants include the old to intermediary Haplogroups comprising H, J1, J2 and L. Melanesians also exhibit old to intermediary mutations in Haplogroups M and S (aka K2b1).
The obvious question, is why would a younger brother carry older Haplogroup mutations? One answer is that it is through Noah’s illegitimate youngest son Canaan, that the pre-flood genetics as typified by the paternal Haplogroup A0 were retained by Canaan’s descendants, even though once the ancestral Haplogroup for all twenty-one grandsons. This genetic inheritance has remained strong in Canaan’s line. Perhaps and likely, Canaan physically took after his mother Na’eltama’uk more than her other sons, Cush, Phut and Mizra – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.
Whatever the reason, it is undoubtedly Canaan who has retained the original A Haplogroup and its sub-clades, which began with Adam, passed to his third son Seth, to righteous Enoch and finally to Noah. Black Hebrew Israelites claim African Americans descend from ancient Israelites. This is inaccurate, having incorrectly appropriated a white line of Shem as their own; while at the same time disdaining any link with the line of Canaan. The irony, is that sub-Saharan Africans not only descend from Canaan, but as Canaanites, they embody the original line of lineal descent from Adam to Noah. To be a physical descendant of Abraham (b. 1977, d. 1802 BCE), one would be required to possess a ‘recent’ Haplogroup mutation some 4,000 years old. Whereas Haplogroup R1b-U106 fits the bill, Haplogroups A, B and E certainly do not.
While Canaan’s male descendants retain the ancient groups A, B and E, and Japheth’s retain the ancient groups C and D, the oldest significant Haplogroup for Shem’s descendants is G. Not quite ancient but the oldest of the groups before the intermediary Haplogroups, comprising I, J, K, and LT. Haplogroup G is found predominantly in the Caucasus region and does not equate specifically to the six sub-groups of Shem’s descendants as outlined earlier in Group C.
The same applies to Haplogroup I and its major mutations, I1 in the Nordic countries and I2 in the Balkans. It is only when we arrive at the recent Haplogroup mutation labelled R1 that we can appoint specifically the European peoples. The other recent Haplogroups comprise N, O and Q. Of Shem’s five sons, the split between R1a and R1b is it seems, exactly half way with two and a half sons each.
Iran has a very complex ethnic demographic – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. This was foretold in the scriptures, for not just Lud but also Phut and Cush, where it says in Ezekiel 30:5 KJV: “[India] and [Pakistan], and [Iran], and all the mingled people…” The original Hebrew words are: Cush, Phut and Lud. In other words, India, Pakistan and Iran. As we have discovered in India and Pakistan, both have an array of paternal Haplogroups and admixture with peoples of Arabic and Eastern European stock. Iran is different in that the Persians are not descended from Ham but Shem. Though Iranians are similar in that they have a widespread number of Haplogroups, with none being overly dominant. Revealing heavy admixture as a result of their geography.
There are a percentage of Iranian men with Japheth’s Haplogroups Q (5.5%) and N (1%). Haplogroups indicating mixture with Mizra’s sons Ludim, Lubim and others are revealed in part with J2 (23%) and principality with J1 (8.5%) and E (6.5%). Similar descent from Ham is included in Haplogroups L (6.5%) and T (3%). Haplogroups indicating a common descent with the rest of Europe include the ancestral lines of G (10%) and I (0.5%). Haplogroup R1b is held by 9.5% of men and R1a in 15.5%. Comparing Iran with other sons of Shem it appears that R1a is the marker Haplogroup for Iranian men.
The Turks who descend from Elam, also possess a complicated demographic with an equal array of diverse paternal Haplogroups – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. And again indicative of heavy admixture influenced by their geographic location. Haplogroups Q and N account for 6% of men, while J1 (9%), J2 (24%), E1b1b and T account for 46.5%. The lineages of Shem, G and I add up to 16.5%. Turkish men who carry R1a account for 7.5% of the population and those who possess R1b, 16%. Turkey is a mirror opposite to Iran regarding R1a and R1b. Thus the defining Haplogroup for Turkish men appear to be R1b.
The Latin peoples of southern and western Europe and their descendants in the Americas are all dominant in R1b and descend from Aram – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. In Mexico, the R1b percentage is 50%; Brazil, 54%, Portugal, 56%; and Spain, 69%.
The Eastern Europeans descend from Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan and their primary Haplogroup is R1a as it is for the Russians from Asshur – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia;and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Russian men have 46% R1a and in Poland it is 58%, the highest in Europe. Which leaves the Western Europeans, the family of Abraham and his brothers who all descend from Arphaxad’s great grandson Peleg and where the defining Y-DNA Haplogroup is R1b. The highest incidence of R1b in males is in Ireland with 81%, though some figures give Welsh men, 92%.
Similarly with Japheth’s descendants who have less defining Haplogroups (O) than Ham’s descendants (H, J1, J2); Shem’s descendants also are almost entirely defined by relatively recent, younger Haplogroups. In this case, R1a and R1b. If we were to ascribe a different alphabetic code for paternal Haplogroups as pertinent to N for Noah, J for Japheth, H for Ham, C for Canaan and S for Shem, then the mutational sequence would look something like this.
A – N
B – C
C – J
D – J1
E – C1a, C1b
G – S
H – H
I – S1a, S1b
J -H1a, H1b
L – H2a
T – H2b
M – H3a
S – H3b
N – J2
O – J3a, J3b
Q – J4
R – S2a, S2b
This sequence highlights the fact that the quantity of Haplogroups are staggered with the most numerous for firstly Japheth, closely followed by Ham; thirdly for Shem and fourthly Canaan. Linked with this, are the number of increased mutations associated with Ham and Canaan compared with either Japheth or Shem.
Canaan’s descendants paternal Haplogroups have been impacted by primarily inheriting the genetic similarity of antediluvian humankind; while Japheth’s descendants have likewise been affected by a genetic inheritance, this time influenced by Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III& IV; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
These are both ancient lines and so it shouldn’t be a surprise that Shem’s DNA received from Noah who happened to look different from everyone else, is recessive and mutated after the other two pre-existing lineages which crossed over into the post-flood world – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis.
Considering mtDNA maternal Haplogroups and Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups, sub-Saharan Africans for example have inherited an older sequence of genetic material than Indians and Arabs; Indians and SArabs an older set than East Asians and East Asians an older set than Europeans. Black people also possess the widest variation in their genome than any other people on the planet. In fact, there is more variation amongst the peoples of Africa than the rest of the world combined.
Europeans are the bridge between Black Africans and East Asians. Between Europeans and the sub-Saharan Africans are the remaining peoples descended from Ham, the Arabs and Indians.
A principal component analysis (or PCA) graph, confirms the association of these four ancestral groups. Millenniums of mutations have resulted in the East Asians being the most distantly separated from Africans.
The fact that East Asians possess the highest percentages of Neanderthal DNA and Black people possess virtually none is symptomatic of their contrasting genetic relationship.
This study poses more questions than answers. Why have paternal Haplogroup mutations followed the patterns they have for Noah’s four sons and twenty-one grandsons? Why for instance, does the fifth grandson son of Japheth, the second son of Javan, Tarshish and the Japanese have a high percentage of Haplogroup D1a compared to all other descendants from Japheth? Why does Tiras the Amerindian, the youngest son of Japheth have a markedly different Haplogroup (Q) from his brothers who all share principally O?
Why are Canaan’s descendants the Black Africans so obviously different in physiognomy and Haplogroups (MtDNA L0-L6 and Y-DNA, A, B and E) from their brothers, the Arabs, Pakistanis and Indians?
This question was certainly a puzzle until it became clear that Canaan is their half brother, sharing the same mother with Mizra, Phut and Cush but not the same father.
Even so, the pressing question remains in how and why Noah’s youngest son has retained the oldest paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups. Not to mention his descendants possessing the oldest mtDNA Haplogroups as well.
This article is not a definitive study by any stretch and is very much a work in progress. Particularly as this writer’s knowledge and understanding of Haplogroup lineages grows with additional research.
God began by making one person, and from him came all the different people who live everywhere in the world. God decided exactly when and where they must live.
Originally this addition was to correct an error, now rectified in the main body of the article. Though it is worth retaining as per below for the important point it presents.
An error which requires correction is that of Y-DNA Haplogroup E.
As the map above shows, E1b1b is indicative of North African and East African men and not of Arab related males in the same regions who carry J1 or J2.
In other words, Berber and Ethiopian men who carry E1b1b are more closely related in paternal lineage with men of sub-Saharan Africa who possess E1b1a, E1a or E2.
AddendumI
The information following, lends support against the Out of Africa hypothesis as discussed here and in other articles. It also highlights the difference between Black Africans and White Europeans, in that the latter may not have descended from the former as paternal Haplogroups have indicated through their alphabetisation sequence. Lastly, it corroborates our ancestor being Cro-Magnon man and tellingly, approximately 30,000 years ago – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.
“Out of Africa” Theory Officially Debunked, Robert Sepehr, May 3, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘Scientific evidence refuting the theory of modern humanity’s African genesis is common knowledge among those familiar with the most recent scientific papers on the human Genome, Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomes. Regrettably, within mainstream press and academia circles, there seems to be a conspicuous – and dare we say it – deliberate vacuum when it comes to reporting news of these recent studies and their obvious implications.
Australian historian Greg Jefferys explains that, “The whole ‘Out of Africa’ myth has its roots in the mainstream academic campaign in the 1990′s to remove the concept of Race. When I did my degree they all spent a lot of time on the ‘Out of Africa’ thing but it’s been completely disproved by genetics. Mainstream still hold on to it.”
It did begin the early 90’s. And the academics most responsible for cementing both the Out-of Africa theory and the complementary common ancestral African mother – given the name of “Eve” – in the public arena and nearly every curriculum, were Professors Alan C. Wilson and Rebecca L. Cann. In their defense, the authors of this paper were fully aware that genealogy is not in any way linked to geography, and that their placement of Eve in Africa was an assumption, never an assertion.
A… paper on Y-chromosomes published in 2012, (Re-Examining the “Out of Africa” Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasians) in the Light of DNA Genealogy written by Anatole A. Klyosov and Igor L. Rozhanski) only confirms the denial of any African ancestry in non-Africans, and strongly supports the existence of a “common ancestor” who “would not necessarily be in Africa. In fact, it was never proven that he lived in Africa.”
Central to results of this extensive examination of haplogroups (7,556) was the absence of any African genes. So lacking was the sampling of African genetic involvement, the researchers stated in their introduction that, “the finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from “African” haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid, as well as all non-African groups do not carry either SNI’s M91, P97, M31, P82, M23, M114, P262.”
‘With the haplogroups not present in any African genes and an absence of dozens of African genetic markers, it is very difficult nigh on impossible to sustain any link to Africa. The researchers are adamant that their extensive study “offers evidence to re-examine the validity of the Out-of-Africa concept”. They see no genetic proof substantiating an African precedence in the Homo sapien tree, and maintain that “a more plausible interpretation might have been that both current Africans and non-Africans descended separately from a more ancient common ancestor, thus forming a proverbial fork”.
We regard the claim of “a more plausible explanation” as a gross understatement, since there is absolutely nothing plausibly African turning up in any test tubes. In fact, the researchers made note of their repeated absence stating “not one non-African participant out of more than 400 individuals in the Project tested positive to any of thirteen ‘African’ sub-clades of haplogroup A”. The only remaining uncertainty relates to the identity of this “more ancient common ancestor”. All that can be stated with confidence is that humanity’s ancestor did not reside in Africa.
Unfounded accusations of racism have become common as the prevailing Afrocentric hypothesis is constantly being challenged by the growing mountain of conflicting scientific evidence, especially in the evolving field of genetics. It is now scientifically irrefutable fact that the “human species” has been found to contain a substantial quantity of DNA (at least 20%) from other hominid populations not classified as Homo sapien; such as Neanderthal, Denisovan, African archaic, Homo erectus, and now possibly even “Hobbit” (Homo floresiensis).
If not given drugs to prevent infant death, the pregnant body of a rhesus negative mother will attack, try to reject, and even kill her own offspring if it is by a rhesus positive man. The Domestic dog (Canis lupusfamiliaris) is a sub-species of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), and they produce hybrids. There are numerous other examples of where two separate species (for example with different numbers of chromosomes) can also produce viable offspring, yet are considered separate species.
That said, humanity has been shown to be, genetically speaking, a hybrid species that did not all share the same hunter-gatherer ancestry in Africa. Recent sequencing of ancient genomes suggests that interbreeding went on between the members of several ancient human-like groups more than 30,000 years ago, including an as-yet unknown human ancestor. “there were many hominid populations,” says Mark Thomas, evolutionary geneticist at University College London.’
Addendum II
The idea that the sequential, chronological age of paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups may correlate with the births of Noah’s grandsons is an intriguing one.
Comparing the sons of Ham, results in a perfect match with the order of birth and the age of their prime Y-DNA Haplogroup:
Cush – H
Mizra – J1
Phut – J2
Regarding Canaan’s sons there doesn’t seem to be any correlation apart from perhaps with Sidon and Hiv. Though as E1b1a, E1b1b and A are the predominant African Haplogroups, it would need to be investigated further and thus an alignment may yet be found.
Sidon – A
Heth – B
Amor – E1a
Hiv – E1b1a
Arvad – E1b1b
Hamath – E2
Shem’s sons all carry R1a or R1b as their prime Haplogroup. Their order of birth in Genesis is as follows below, but if Elam and Lud were swapped and Peleg and Joktan as well, it would be 100% accurate. One wonders if the biblical order for Shem’s sons is correct?
Elam – R1b
Asshur – R1a
Arphaxad
Peleg – R1b
Joktan – R1a
Lud -R1a
Aram – R1b
The new order would be: Lud, Asshur, Joktan, Peleg, Elam and Aram.
The sons of Japheth are perhaps the most complex, but if we stay with the prime Y-DNA Haplogroup (regardless of percentages for other Haplogroups from integration) then the results are the following.
Gomer
Ashkenaz – O1b
Riphath – O1b
Togarmah – O1b
Magog – O2
Madai – C
Javan
Elishah – O1b
Tarshish – O1b
Kittim – O1b
Dodan – O1a
Tubal – O1a
Meshech – O1b
Tiras – Q
Tiras as the youngest son correctly possesses the most recent Haplogroup mutation for Japheth: Haplogroup Q.
Magog (O2), Tubal (O1a) and Meshech (O1b) who are all males in China each carry a different mutation for Haplogroup O. Apart from the order – though scientists admit the O1 and O2 mutations could have been simultaneous – actually confirms the tripartite component in China’s population as discussed in Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
The sons of Gomer all carry O1b, as do the sons of Javan. With the exception of the Philippines (Rodan) which exhibits a low percentage of O1b and is a bit of an anomaly anyway.
Madai caught in the middle (as his name means) with Haplogroup C runs against the pattern, though with the exception of Madai (and Rodan), the descendants of Japheth follow an almost perfect pattern like his brother Ham.
The most damaging aspect of the biblical identity doctrine has been the element of whatever someone new to the subject first hears, reads or learns for any given identity, it is this knowledge that becomes firmly implanted and invariably impossible to shift. As Proverbs 18:17 ESV rightly observes, the first case heard always has the advantage, whether right or wrong by virtue of being first.
“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him”
Any secondary information has a herculean task in gaining consideration, let alone replacing the previously held incorrect premise.
Yet, the accurate definition and explanation of the nations identities in the Bible in our modern age is crucial in understanding future prophecy and by extension past history. The credibility of the Bible has been at stake and those who have taught erroneous identities have been unwittingly holding the Eternal’s word to ransom. Now is the time for the truth to go out to those who truly seek wisdom and understanding – for the ending of the latter days are nearly upon us. J H Allen understood the foundational basis of this knowledge in proving the veracity of the Bible, as written under inspiration by holy men and not the ramblings of eccentric or fanatical prophets.
‘We have been moved by the Holy Spirit to thus write concerning the earthly history of God‘s chosen race, because so very little of it is known by the masses of our people, and yet it is the foundation upon which the entire structure of Christianity must rest.
A knowledge of these earthly things not only renders the claims of Christianity impregnable, but they are also the basis upon which we must rest our faith for better things. For Jesus has said, “If I have told you of earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” The truth… as set forth in this book – that is, the realization of the promises made to ISRAEL… has… [brought] more skeptics to the light of his truth, than in all our previous ministry… [and]… We are… sure… that the faith of those who have made shipwreck could not have failed, if they had known these things.’
Dictionary.com:
‘Genetic evidence has undermined the idea of racial divisions of the human species and rendered race obsolete as a biological system of classification. Race therefore should no longer be considered as an objective category… There are times when it is still accurate to talk about race in society. Though race has lost its biological basis, the sociological consequences of historical racial categories persist. While the scientific foundation for race is now disputed, racial factors in sociological and historical contexts continue to be relevant.
First recorded in 1490-1500; from Middle French race “group of people of common descent,” from Italian razza “kind, species”…’
We can say, the English people or the country of England rather than calling them what they are. The scientific community has imposed a politically correct use, or rather less use of the word race. It would make sense if the word was banned outright, yet it is still applicable for social or historical definitions, just not for the actual aspect it is defining – our biological inheritance. Whether we use alternative words such as ethnicity or ancestry, it does not make the physical, biological differences between people disappear or obsolete.
Following are synonyms: tribe, clan, family, stock, line, breed, blood, colour, culture, nation, people, offspring, progeny, seed, stock, strain, ethnicity. Some of these words could have a more inflammatory impact than the word race in this writer’s opinion. There is an agenda to attack the White race. The expression, Black lives matter, could be better expressed as ‘all lives matter.’ There is pressure to make white people uncomfortable and to do away with a concept of white people. It is blatant passive aggressive discrimination. Will brown, red and yellow people also come under fire?
The term race is unhelpful in relation to all humanity. The term mankind is preferable or if you will, humankind; not the human race. We are a kind, as there are animal kinds. The races are like species within the kind. It is very hard to do away with genetic lines of people that make them common to each other and distinct from other racial lines. They are simply, different races.
With this in mind, Greg Doudna reflects the frustration and division this issue causes, in the questions he poses. The discord, confusion and strength of emotion it arouses exist in part, because people do not appreciate the differences in people. This is heightened due to the fact people do not know who they are. Yet, it is observed online, mammoth interest in tracing family ancestry and forming a sense of self-identity; particularly with the breakthrough with Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. People want to understand their own race or racial heritage. Ironically, Haplogroups have also contributed to people becoming even more scathing, condemning and incorrect in their summations.
Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989, 2006, pages 143-144 – Italics his:
‘…consider three questions. Think:
(1) Is there any biblical basis to such a notion of classification as a “white race” in history?
Are Italians part of the “white race”? Why? Are Russians? What about Assyrian Christian Iraqis who descend from the Assyrians of old?’ Not correct – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XX Will the real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
‘What about Jordanians? Are Arab tribes who claim descent from Ishmael?’ Refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria:Ishmael & Hagar.
‘Are Spaniards part of the white race? Are Portuguese? Are Greeks? Are Poles? How about Muslim Shi’ite Azerbaijanis from the Caucasus? How about Armenians and Georgians and Chechens from the Caucasus area, otherwise known as Caucasians, or in Russia known negatively as blacks (because their skin is typically darker and more “ethnic” looking than that of Russians)? Are these Caucasians, who are Russia’s blacks, members of the “white race”? (Remember, historically Armenians and Georgians from the Caucasus started out defining the so-called Caucasian/white race). Are Hungarians part of “the white race”? Rumanians? Czechs? Gypsies (Roma)? Albanians? Serbs?
How about the Persians of Iran, Iran’s largest ethnic group, who descend from the ancient Aryan Persians?’ Not correct – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.
A resounding Yes to nearly all. Yes, they are white. They do descend from Shem. In the main, the author has selected the descendants from Shem’s sons Lud, Elam in part, Asshur and Aram in part, as well as a handful from Arphaxad in Eastern Europe. The exception above is the true Arab who descends from Mizra and his father Ham. It was white peoples living in the Caucasus Mountain area who were classified as Caucasian; notthe Armenians or Georgians specifically, who came to dwell in the region later.
The Iranian Persians are descended from Lud and not the original Persians of Elam, as we have studied in Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Doudna: ‘(2) What is the actual basis for such a notion of a “white race” in history?’
Again, a resounding yes. Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups with autosomal DNA support the Bible record of a major three way split as evidenced by Noah’s three (actually four) sons and the sixteen lines (really twenty-one) of variation represented by Noah’s grandsons – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. They provide the scientific data, for all those with a stubborn, ‘prove it to me with scientific facts only, and not all this Bible nonsense’ view – article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.
The author’s use of the word notion three times is insightful as notion means: ‘a general understanding; vague or imperfect conception or idea of something, an opinion, view, or belief, a fanciful or foolish idea; whim.’ The reality of the peoples of the earth being all one blood and from one source, yet each possessing a variety of physical, mental and emotional characteristics, is so much more than just a notion.
1 Corinthians 3:18-20
New Century Version
‘Do not fool yourselves. If you think you are wise in this world, you should become a fool so that you can become truly wise, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. It is written in the Scriptures, “He catches those who are wise in their own clever traps.” It is also written in the Scriptures, “The Lord knows what wise people think. He knows their thoughts are just a puff of wind.”
Doudna: ‘Same questions as above, repeated. How did some of these groups get to be members of “the white race” while others did not? Who decided, and why? And finally,
(3) Has this notion done more good or harm?
I leave these questions open, to encourage reflection.’
The constant reader appreciates the supreme Creator in His wisdom separated the races for His purpose; while the powers that be, have separated peoples according to their self-serving agenda and yes, created more harm than good – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?
The Creator planned the different races. The Creator must be racist? The Creator chose to work more closely with one family. The Creator must be playing favourites? If both are true… deal with it. Or, if both are not true, then why do people think they are wiser than the Creator?
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 224-225, emphasis his, bold mine:
‘… Benjamin Disraeli… [British] prime minister… was a Christianised Jew whose writings on race are so profound that they are today largely ignored by politically correct present-day historians. In his book Tancred… 1868, Disraeli wrote:
“All is race – there is no other truth“… and in his book Endymion… he wrote: “No man will treat with indifference the principle of race. It is the key to historyand why history is so often confused is that it has been written by men who were ignorant of this principle and all the knowledge it involves… Language and religion do not make a race– there is only one thing which makes a race, and that is blood“…’
In academic and scientific fields of research whether private or public, the key for support is financial funding, sponsorship and donations. Hence in the main, there is pressure to only research; publish findings; and to teach; that which follows a curriculum or agenda as per the ones holding the purse strings. Independent research is thus few or far between or most often, non-existent.
‘Scientists [Anthropologists, ethnologists, geneticists, theologians, ministers] joining an organization have to follow their managers’ orders. Those managers will have been through the same school of indoctrination, and probably additional levels of it too. So they know what’s at stake [if] they try to investigate something that’s even slightly outside the mainstream.
The penalties include:
loss of credibility
loss of funding
loss of tenure
ridicule from their peers
refusal by their peers to review their work
refusal by mainstream publications to review or publish their work
As a result, mainstream scientists refuse to have anything to do with these things, even if you provide them with irrefutable evidence.They don’t want to be associated with it. They see it as potentially career-damaging, and… they label it “pseudoscience” or “yet another stupid hoax” to emphasize their dismissal of it, usually without even looking at it. Another problem with scientific teaching [dogmatic belief] is that it follows a single, rigid pathway [creed]. Anything that isn‘t on that pathway “can’t possibly be true.”
Hence the reason and motivation, this work and its findings has been compiled and collated together and why many could and would not, do likewise. Though in doing so, this writer has unwittingly and unintentionally, become both a contrarian and an iconoclast.
Contrarian: a person who takes an opposing view, especially one who rejects the majority opinion.
Iconoclast: a person who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional institutions… as being based on error or superstition. A breaker or destroyer of images, especially those set up for religious veneration.
Lloyd Pye, pages 64-65 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘[There is] resistance to change within any status quo of the mainstream scientific [and scholarly] community. Truth has nothing to do with it; proof has even less to do with it than truth; and forget logic – logic is wasted on people with a sharp axe to grind.
What counts in such disputes is usually about 50 years, two generations, which have to retire before any controversial new reality will be fully accepted. First is the status quo crowd at the time of discovery [or proposal]. They reject it because to them it means three very bad things:
being wrong on a major issue;
having to rewrite a large portion of their purview; and
a ripple effect of doubt cast on everything else they have achieved or profess to know.
The next generation spawns two groups: those who cling to the old status quo, and those who accept the new reality. As a whole they never fully embrace it, but they produce enough converts to grant it limited acceptance, allowing it to be openly supported without committing career suicide. The converts then teach their views to the next generation, and when they take over they see to it that what had been a “heresy” is accepted wisdom. It always requires time, but time and the truth invariably win out.
For as harsh as criticism is toward dissent from outside the scientific [or the historic research] establishment, dissent from within [identity adherents] is often worse.’
Why it may take decades for this work – The Noachian Legacy – to be even remotely valued or viewed as credible. And, how long for any would be detractors or academic intelligentsia in desisting from impugning or assailing the material contained herein. It is of little consequence; they will not inherit the last word, but ultimately the truth and those precious souls who embrace it will. If this work impacts only a handful of people, or even just finds one… you; it will have been worth every hour of the thousands invested over the past thirty years.
1 Kings 19:18
Complete Jewish Bible
“… Still, I will spare seven thousand in Isra’el, every knee that hasn’t bent down before Ba’al…”
Luke 12:32
Common English Bible
“[and] little flock… your Father delights in giving you the kingdom.”
Treasured reader, you have in your hands a seminal work. Not because of its authorship or style of writing; rather for its profound revelation, submitted humbly and solemnly. When we read to the end of the book that is called the Holy Bible; right through to the last chapter and on the very final page, it is the aspirants of truth and the followers of Him who declares it, that win…
Revelation 22:14-15
New Century Version
“Blessed are those who wash their robes so that they will receive the right to eat the fruit from the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside the city are the evil people, those who… love lies and tell lies.”
Dedicated with heartfelt encouragement and admiration to those faithful and true earthly sojourners some three centuries hence; who will complete the good work of the Way to the One who gives life eternal and whom will value what is yet concealed herein, for today’s generation will not; for they look, but do not see; read, but do not comprehend; listen, but do not hear.
Isaiah 6:9-10
English Standard Version
“… Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”
“… To the righteous and the wise shall be given books of joy, of integrity, and of great wisdom. To them shall books be given, in which they shall believe… and all the righteous shall be rewarded, who from these shall acquire the knowledge of every upright path.”
Book of Enoch 103:10-11
“It is dangerous to seek the truth, if one does not desire to truly change.”
Michael Logan
“Thine hope that many, could well receive;
alas ’twas vanity,thy seeker’s mind did conceive.
Ye scattered, thy hand doth write,
an urgent plea to thine precious few;
strike a chord, thee with sight, a gift immeasurable and true.”
The identities of Asshur, Edom, Judah and Dan have been investigated, discussed and written about more than all the other biblical identities put together, many times over. Anyone with more than a passing interest in the Bible and conversant in the scriptures, will recognise that these four peoples feature significantly in the end time prophecies. We have investigated three of the four and deduced their correct identities as all three so far have been inaccurate, in some instances for hundreds of years. All having major repercussions in interpreting future world events through biblical prophecy.
The prevalent view has been that Asshur as ‘the instrument of God’s wrath’ in bringing Israel to its knees in repentance is the nation of Germany. Yet, geography, history, migration, with autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups has revealed that the Germans are in fact descended from Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. As the dominant nation of the descendants of Peleg – from Eber, from Arphaxad and from Shem ( in Western Europe) – the Germans are also the leading nation of Joktan’s children also descended from Eber, in Eastern Europe.
A German led European Union – a United States of Europe – will ally itself with the Assyrians – Numbers 24:24. Our studies have revealed it is in fact Russia, who is Asshur and modern day Assyria – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Russia is the future King of the North (Article: Four Kings & One Queen) and the instrument of God’s wrath against (the tribes of) Israel and (true) Judah – Zephaniah 2:13, Isaiah 10:5.
Coupled with this, is the extraordinary switch of identities between Esau and Judah, where the Jews are not from Judah but rather Edom and the tribe of Judah is not the Jewish people, but actually the nation of England – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
It is against this panorama of mistaken identities and incorrect interpretation of biblical prophecy that we now arrive to the most written about and most sought after tribal identity, Joseph. The son of Jacob chosen to be the recipient of the Birthright blessings usually given to the firstborn son. Jacob’s eldest sons, Reuben, Simeon and Levi all disqualified themselves. Even so, Levi was chosen to be the Priestly tribe and even after his own personal misdemeanours, Judah was selected to receive the blessings of the throne, orb and sceptre of royal rulership – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Even though Joseph was the eleventh of twelve sons, he was still a firstborn son of Jacob and his wife Rachel. We will learn that the prophesied blessings to Joseph and his sons Manasseh and Ephraim are specific enough to quickly identity these peoples in our modern world. It is thus beyond all belief and comprehension, that for nearly five centuries the identification of Jacob’s grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim have been, quite simply… wrong.
When we first meet Joseph, Rachel was feeling the pressure as Leah was seven nil ahead when it came to children, or nine to two if the hand maiden’s sons are included.
Genesis 30:22-24
English Standard Version
22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”
24 And she called his name Joseph, saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!”
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Joseph meaning: ‘Increaser, May He Add’ from the verb (yasap), to add, increase, repeat or do again. The name Joseph means Increaser, Repeater or Doubler, and even the fulfillment of his name is dual: Benjamin becomes Joseph’s younger brother, and Joseph himself becomes father of two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (see Ezekiel 47:13).
For a meaning of the name Joseph, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads two meanings: (1) May He (Yahweh) Add (assuming that the “He” of our name is YHWH), and (2) Increaser. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads He Shall Add. And BDB Theological Dictionary has He Adds, Increases. Spiros Zodhiates (The Complete Word Study Dictionary – New Testament) translates the name Joseph with May God Add, but note that the “God” part is implied and not actually incorporated in the name Joseph.’
From Genesis chapter thirty-seven through to chapter fifty, the narrative is dominated by Joseph’s life. Of which twelve chapters representing twenty-four percent of Genesis are devoted to Joseph. Slightly less than for Abraham from chapter twelve through to twenty-five, with twenty-six percent. Even Adam and Noah only have three chapters devoted to each of them, or six percent each of the Genesis story. Jacob on the other hand, ostensibly the most flawed of all the Patriarchs has eight chapters, or sixteen percent devoted to him, yet he also figures (though less than Joseph) prominently in the final thirteen chapters of Genesis – with a total of over forty percent of the Book of Genesis devoted to Jacob’s life.
We have discussed in previous chapters regarding the brother’s betrayal of Joseph and selling him to the Ishmaelite traders at the behest of Judah. The early part of Genesis chapter thirty-seven is of interest as it provides the factors which led to his brothers jealousy-turned-hatred.
Genesis 37:2-11
English Standard Version
‘Joseph, being seventeen years old, was pasturing the flock with his brothers. He was a boy with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, his father’s wives [symbolically, not literally as they had been loaned to Jacob purely for reproduction, though were not his concubines (Genesis 29:24, 29)]. And Joseph brought a bad [H7451 – ra] report of them to their father.’
We learn that Joseph was with certain ones of his brothers… specifically: Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher. For whatever reason not divulged these four brothers were up to no good and Joseph told on them. At first reading, one could easily assume that Joseph was a tattle tale and acting like a spoilt brat, belying his youthful age.
Two reasons suggest otherwise. First, the Bible does not label him as such. If the charge of youthful foolishness were considered, it would have to be quickly dropped for when Joseph was harshly rejected by his brothers and while he served Potiphar in Egypt, Joseph for a young man was focused, efficient and honourable. Far from a spoilt brat. In fact, he accepted his brutal injustices with immeasurable maturity.
Second, the bad report Joseph made of his brothers was not merely a superficial thing, it was a very serious matter. The Hebrew word ra is translated by the KJV as evil, 442 times; wickedness, 59; mischief, 21; affliction, 6; adversity, 4; and harm 3 times. It includes a wide range of negative meanings: ‘misery, distress, calamity, malignant’ and ‘grievous.’
As we have yet to discuss Jacob’s son Dan, more detail will be investigated in the following chapter. Though it can be stated that Dan is the bad boy or black sheep of the family and if he was involved, he may well have been leading the other three bothers down a dark path which Joseph had no choice but to divulge – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Support for Joseph being honourable in this incident is revealed by the fact that Joseph is rather unique in the scriptures and part of a very select band of people who do not have one word writ against them. Of all the prominent people in the Bible, not including peripheral characters, it is only Daniel and Christ whom have nothing negative recorded and for prominent women, only Ruth, Esther and Mary are included in this exceptional group. Recall that Daniel is also one of the three men described as most righteous in the Bible with Noah and Job. This may have some bearing on why the Eternal revealed the most profound and impacting prophecies of all the prophets to Daniel; for the prophecies of the Book of Revelation through John are in many cases, amplifications of those originating in Daniel – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
Genesis: 3 ‘Now Israel loved Joseph more than any other of his sons, because he was the son of his old age. And he made him a robe of many colors. 4 But when his brothers saw that theirfather loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.’
With what we have just learned about Jospeh and the view the Creator had of him, it is clear that Jospeh didn’t act like the favoured son, it was Jacob who created the issue as verse four says. As Jacob is guilty of innumerable unwise decisions this should not come as a surprise; yet one would have thought that growing up in a family with a pronounced and marked divide between parents and sons as Jacob and Esau had with Isaac and Rebecca, that Jacob would have shied away from repeating this tragic pattern.
As touched upon previously, for the want of a better explanation, the understanding that Joseph’s coat was tartan or plaid is interesting. Particularly, when we consider the two nation’s who have upheld this unique textile design more than any other, are Scotland – the tribe of Benjamin – and the United States.
Genesis: 5 ‘Now Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his brothers they hated him even more. 6 He said to them, “Hear this dream that I have dreamed: 7 Behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and behold, my sheaf arose and stood upright. And behold, your sheaves gathered around it and bowed down to my sheaf.” 8 His brothers said to him, “Are you indeed to reign over us? Or are you indeed to rule over us?” So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.’
One would have to assume with what we know of Joseph’s character that he was being matter of fact and not boasting. Of course, what the brothers were not to know, is that the dream foretold of Joseph being their servant in saving his brothers from starvation in a few short years hence. Though regarding the distant future into our present time, Joseph as the preeminent brother, serves as the protector for all his brothers.
A component of this story not readily touched upon, is that Joseph had the Holy Spirit and was converted to the truth of the Eternal. His brothers were not and so could not perceive spiritual matters the same way. This would have put considerable distance between himself and his brothers – much like David experienced with his brothers and parents (Psalm 27:10; 69:8). It also explains why Jacob favoured Joseph over Judah, the son actually most like himself in character, for the son who was like himself, spiritually.
Recall that the Eternal had a different view from Jacob, in that though the Bible reveals Joseph’s people are special to the Creator, it is in fact Judah who He loves – Psalm 78:68. In His mind, giving the royal sceptre of rulership for the very throne that His Son will return to sit on, was the favoured blessing.
Genesis: 9 ‘Then he dreamed another dream and told it to his brothers and said, “Behold, I have dreamed another dream. Behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.”
10 ‘But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?” 11 And his brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the saying in mind.’
Jacob did not like hearing this from Joseph, yet considered the matter and deduced that it was of future importance with a positive outcome.
Genesis 39:1-10, 21-23
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there. 2 The Lord was with Joseph, and he became a successful man, and he was in the house of his Egyptian master. 3 His master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord caused all that he did to succeed in his hands. 4 So Joseph found favor in his sight and attended him, and he made him overseer of his house and put him in charge of all that he had. 5 From the time that he made him overseer in his house and over all that he had, the Lord blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; the blessing of the Lord was on all that he had, in house and field. 6 So he left all that he had in Joseph’s charge, and because of him he had no concern about anything but the food he ate.’
This is an incredible occurrence and shows it was more to do with the Eternal’s intervention on Joseph’s behalf, though of course, the Eternal was only able to bless Joseph and Potiphar’s household because Joesph was not only capable but obedient to the Creator. This enhances the case we have built regarding Joseph’s spirituality. To be clear, it is not that Jospeh was perfect, for all sin, but rather some people are more blameless than others and Joseph was such an individual. Potiphar was the captain of the Pharaoh’s personal retinue of soldiers and thus a high ranking official who had a palatial residence adjacent to the actual palace of the Pharaoh. Joseph was merely seventeen when he arrived in Egypt in 1709 BCE.
Joseph
Genesis: ‘Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance. 7 And after a time his master’s wife cast her eyes on Joseph and said, “Lie with me.” 8 But he refused and said to his master’s wife, “Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge. 9 He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” 10 And as she spoke to Joseph day after day, he would not listen to her, to lie beside her or to be with her’ – Exodus 20:3, 14-15, 17.
Here the Hebrew words say that Joseph was not just handsome but also had a good physique. Notice his spiritual mindset; Joseph say’s it would be sinning against God to sleep with Potiphar’s wife, not just that he would be betraying his employer. It is a simple case of sexual harassment committed by Potiphar’s wife. Though Joseph could not divulge the reason, could Joseph have requested a transfer or found a way to move? When the opportunity arose and the house was empty, she made her move, grabbing his outer garment. Joseph flees, leaving it behind.
Potiphar’s wife then frames Joseph for an indecent proposition and Potiphar in understandable anger sends Joseph to the prison reserved for the Pharaoh’s enemies circa 1703 BCE at the age of twenty-two or twenty-three and like David who worked in the service of Saul for six years (1022-1016 BCE), so did Joseph for Potiphar. Though Satan had tried to tempt Joseph and thwart the Creator’s plan, it was not to be.
Genesis: 21‘But the Lord was with Joseph and showed him steadfast love and gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison. 22 And the keeper of the prison put Joseph in charge of all the prisoners who were in the prison. Whatever was done there, he was the one who did it. 23 The keeper of the prison paid no attention to anything that was in Joseph’s charge, because the Lord was with him. And whatever he did, the Lord made it succeed.’
In Genesis chapter forty we read of the Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker who are put into Joseph’s prison for misdemeanours circa 1698 BCE, when Joseph was twenty-seven or twenty-eight. They both have dreams of which Joseph interprets them. He requests that the cupbearer who’s dream is favourable, remembers him to the Pharaoh, though he does not and Joseph remains in prison. Two years later, Pharaoh has a dream. None of his wise men or magicians can interpret it. Pharaoh’s cupbearer, then recalls his encounter with Joseph and finally remembers him to Pharaoh.
Genesis 41:14-16, 25-32, 37-57
English Standard Version
14 ‘Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they quickly brought him out of the pit. And when he had shaved himself and changed his clothes [after seven years in prison – again much like David who was a vagabond eluding King Saul for seven years (1016-1010 BCE)… both men also became rulers (David, King; Joseph Vizier) by the age of thirty], he came in before Pharaoh.
15 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I have had a dream, and there is no one who can interpret it. I have heard it said of you that when you hear a dream you can interpret it.” 16 Joseph answered Pharaoh, “It is not in me; God will give Pharaoh a favorable answer” – much like Daniel with King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:27-28).
25 ‘Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, “The dreams of Pharaoh are one; God has revealed to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 26 The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good ears are seven years; the dreams are one. 27 The seven lean and ugly cows that came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty ears blighted by the east wind are also seven years of famine’ – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?
28 ‘… God has shown to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 29 There will come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt, 30 but after them there will arise seven years of famine, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt. The famine will consume the land, 31 and the plenty will be unknown in the land by reason of the famine that will follow, for it will be very severe. 32 And the doubling of Pharaoh’s dream means that the thing is fixed by God, and God will shortly bring it about.’
Joseph then suggests Pharaoh appoints a wise and discerning person to oversee the storing of twenty percent of grain for each year of plenty and its division during the seven years of famine so that the Egyptians did not perish.
Genesis: 37 ‘This proposal pleased Pharaoh and all his servants. 38 And Pharaoh said to his servants, “Can we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?” 39 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Since God has shown you all this, there is none so discerning and wise as you are.40 You shall be over my house, and all my people shall order themselves as you command. Only as regards the throne will I be greater than you.” 41 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.”
42 Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his hand and put it on Joseph’s hand, and clothed him in garments of fine linen and put a gold chain about his neck. 43 And he made him ride in his second chariot. And they called out before him, “Bow the knee!” Thus he set him over all the land of Egypt. 44 Moreover, Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no one shall lift up hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.”
45 And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphenath–paneah[H6848 – Tsophnath Pa`neach: treasury of the glorious rest].
And he gave him in marriage Asenath [H621 – ‘Acnath: belonging to the goddess Neith], the daughter of Potiphera [H6319 – Powtiy Phera‘: he whom the Ra gave] priest of On [H204 – own: strength, vigour]’ – much like Moses marrying Zipporah the daughter of Jethro the priest of Midian (Exodus 2:16, 21).
‘So Joseph went out over the land of Egypt.’
Asenath
The parallelism does not end there for Hagar, daughter of Pharoah Djer (3rd King of the 1st Dynasty from 1922 to 1875 BCE) found a princess wife from Egypt for her son Ishmael (Genesis 21:21) – Chapter XXVIII The True identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.
Thus it is probable that Joseph married a woman of similar aristocratic lineage to Ishmael’s wife. Not an Arab, but rather someone from the line of Arphaxad, Eber and Joseph’s great, great grandfather, Terah. This in itself, becomes of particular interest when we later survey the relationship between Ishmael’s offspring and Joseph’s descendants.
From this account we can appreciate how the Eternal moved Pharaoh beyond just appointing an overseer but actually elevating Joseph to Vizier of all his kingdom; while recognising that God’s spirit was working in Joseph. It was a wise decision on Pharaoh’s part and showed a level of humility in his character. Aside from Joseph having the Creator blessing him; being mature; as well as good looking; it becomes apparent that Joseph must have been very personable and charismatic.
The jealousy exhibited by his brothers makes more sense now we have a clearer picture of Joseph. It is Joseph’s integrity which makes him a good candidate as saviour of Egypt and thus a type of the Messiah himself, and so it is at a similar age as Christ when he began his ministry in his thirtieth year, that Joseph embarks on his own ministry of service at age thirty – refer article: The Christ Chronology.
Psalm 105:16-21
English Standard Version
16 ‘When he summoned a famine on the land and broke all supply of bread, 17 he had sent a man ahead of them, Joseph, who was sold as a slave. 18 His feet were hurt with fetters; his neck was put in a collar of iron; 19 until what he had said came to pass, the word of the Lord tested him. 20 The king sent and released him; the ruler of the peoples set him free; 21 he made him lord of his house and ruler of all his possessions…’
Joseph received an Egyptian name, thus looking for the name Joseph in Egyptian records would be fruitless (Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?) There is considerable debate on what the name Zaphenath-paneah means. Of all the definitions offered, the two which resonate the most are: ‘the man to whom secrets are revealed’ and ‘the Nourisher of the Two Lands, the Living One.’ Either way, it was through Joseph’s God and His revelation that life in Egypt was preserved.
As intimated, Joseph’s wife Asenath is unlikely to have descended from Ham’s son Mizra (Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia) but rather from the Egyptian ruling elite. The Priest of On may have had a link with the same order as Moses’s father-in-law Jethro, the Priest of Midian (Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia) and the On-etrue God.
The city of On (or Heliopolis), the City of the Sun, bordering the land of Goshen, was a centre of worship for the sun-god Ra – Jeremiah 43:13. Of which the meaning of Potiphera’s name refers. The priests of On were considered the most intelligent, cultured and learned people in Egypt. The High Priest of On held the title, Greatest of Seers.
When Joseph married into this family, he joined a social class befitting a national leader. Implied is that the marriage was selected by Pharaoh because of his confidence that Joseph too, was a seer or prophet of the highest calibre. Perhaps even a candidate for next High Priest. If this was the case, then Asenath must have embraced her husband’s faith in the God of Israel as nothing negative is mentioned of the marriage in the Bible. Remembering too, she was the mother of Joseph’s sons of unique prophetic consequence – Genesis 46:20. This high profile marriage ordained by Pharaoh, also removed any doubt about the shocking story circulating throughout Egypt, of a former slave and prisoner rising (legitimately) to second in command of the whole of Egypt.
Asenath like her father, bore a name signalling an intended path initially at least, that was aligned with the gods of Egypt – Article: Thoth. In this instance, the goddess Neith. Neith was a powerful and popular deity worshiped primarily in the city of Sais and is considered one of the oldest deities in the Egyptian pantheon.
Neith statuette – Louvre Museum Paris
Neith is associated with the creation of the world; as the mother of the crocodile god, Sobek; as well as the mother of the sun-god Ra no less. While always appearing feminine – with a prominent bosom* like Asherah – Neith also possesses the male characteristics of an androgynous creator.
She was the patron of Lower Egypt and a goddess of wisdom and war. With a number of symbols, two stand out. One linked with war were arrows, which are of interest, as these figure prominently on the seal of the peoples descended from Joseph.
The other being a cow, whereby as a cow, Neith daily gives birth to a reborn sun. The cow (or calf), is steeped in a system of worship which was endemic in ancient Israel, particularly in Ephraim after King Solomon’s reign, but had begun during the Exodus from Egypt – clearly having an Egyptian origin (Article: The Calendar Conspiracy). The bull coincidently is a symbol of Ephraim, stemming from the Hebrew root for his name.
At the request of Thoth, Neith interceded in the kingly war between Horus and Seth (Set) over the Egyptian throne; recommending that Horus rule – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Neith (Asherah) is the mother of Isis (Lilith), hence the grandmother of Horus – the son of Osiris (Nimrod).
Encyclopaedia: ‘The veil of Isis is a metaphor and allegorical artistic motif representing the inaccessibility of nature’s secrets, personified as the goddess Isis shrouded by a veil or mantle (Article: Lilith). The motif traces back to a statue in the ancient Egyptian city of Sais. As recounted by Greco-Roman authors, the statue of the veiled goddess bore the inscription:
“I am all that has been and is and shall be; and no mortal has ever lifted my mantle.”
The “Parting of the Veil”, “Piercing of the Veil”, “Rending of the Veil” or “Lifting of the Veil” refers, in the Western mystery tradition and Neopagan witchcraft, to opening the “veil” of matter, thus gaining entry to a state of spiritual awareness in which the mysteries of nature are revealed.’
Isis as a veiled ‘goddess* of life’ with a French translation of the Sais inscription on the pedestal, mysteriously located at the Herbert Hoover (31st President of the United States from 1929 to 1933) National Historic Site in Iowa.
Most interesting is how Neith in predynastic and early dynasty times is referred to as the ‘Opener of the Way’ (refer Article: Belphegor), with references to Neith as the ‘Opener of Paths’ occurring during Dynasty IV through Dynasty VI. Neith is observed in the titles of women serving as priestesses of the (mother) goddess – the Queen of Heaven (Article: Asherah).
Encyclopaedia: ‘Such epithets include: “Priestess of Neith who opens all the (path)ways”… “Priestess of Neith who opens the way in all her places” – el-Sayed, I: 67-69… ‘el-Sayed asserts his belief that Neith should be seen as a parallel to Wepwawet, the ancient jackal god of Upper Egypt’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
The question remains, who was this unusually accommodating, good-hearted Pharaoh at the time of Joseph? In exact antithesis to the later hard-hearted Pharaoh of the Exodus. According to an unconventional chronology, not only are the Egyptian king lists misinterpreted by conventional chronology – as exposed by the revisedchronology of David Rohl; in that dynasties can be hundreds of years out of alignment within an incorrect time frame – various Egyptian dynasties have been misunderstood as chronologically falling one after the other and not recognised as invariably being concurrent instead.
Revising the Egyptian Chronology: Joseph as Imhotep, and Amenemhet IV as Pharaoh of the Exodus, Anne Habermehl, 2013 – emphasis mine:
‘From previous discussion it is clear that if the plagues and the Exodus caused the collapse of the concurrent 6th and 12th Dynasties, we need to look for our Exodus pharaoh at the end of one of these dynasties.The 12th Dynasty, ruling Lower Egypt in the north, is the one which would produce our Exodus pharaoh because the Children of Israel lived in the Delta there (the 6th Dynasty would have ruled Upper Egypt in the south).
We suggest that Dynasties 3 to 12 cannot have reigned one after the other in the order that Manetho listed them. Dynasties 5 & 6 may have run concurrently with Dynasties 11 & 12. The First Intermediate Period (at the end of the 6th Dynasty) and Second Intermediate Period (at the end of the 12th Dynasty),both times of great disorder in Egypt, appear to be the same period,as mentioned earlier. Dynasties 7, 8, 9 and 10 would therefore have reigned after the Exodus at the same time as Dynasties 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Versions of this scheme have been offered by various revisionists (e.g., Courville, 1971, volume 1, page 101; Ashton & Down, 2006, page 206). This alone could potentially remove close to 500 of the 675 years by which we wish to shorten the secular timeline.’
It makes sense to agree with the author’s proposal, in that the end of the twelfth dynasty matches the time of Moses, though would differ on the Pharaoh of the Exodus with one in the thirteenth dynasty instead. This would mean the Pharaoh of Joseph’s dream interpretation is a king from the third dynasty. The first king of the third dynasty was Pharaoh Djoser, also named Netjerikhet. Records are unclear to his length of reign, from either 19 years according to Manetho; 28 or 29 years according to the royal annals; and 37 or 38 years according to other lists and historians. Lists for the dynasty also have a variance of the number of kings, with either four, five or even eight kings.
Therefore the options favoured are the middle number for the reign and the lower for the number of kings – which fits the chronology of Pharaohs until the time of Moses and a date of reign for Joseph’s Pharaoh circa 1700 to 1672/71 BCE. The Saqqara Tablet is viewed by this writer as the most accurate as it lists Djoser as the first of four kings and was found in a tomb near the Djoser Pyramid in Saqqara.
Duplication, short reigns and doubt result in only two viable rulers – of either Djoser or the final dynastic ruler, Huni also named Qahedjet, who ruled for 24 years – as the Pharaoh in question, for both had Viziers. The other three, six or most probably two rulers sandwiched between these two Pharaohs are not realistic candidates. As there was a turbulent transition from Huni to Amenemhet I, not matching the peaceful reign of Joseph, Huni is consequently ruled out. Djoser was the son of the final 2nd Dynasty king, Pharaoh Khasekhemwy from 1718 to 1700 BCE and his wife Queen Nimaathap (or Nimaethap), “Mother of the King of the Two Lands.”
Djoser is derived from the Djed symbol for stability and is also associated with the god Osiris and appears on numerous monuments built during his reign. Though it was common for Pharaohs to have a Queen and lesser wives, Djoser only had one wife, who was his half-sister, Hetephernebti. They had a daughter called, Inetkawes.
His passion was building projects, something he continued non-stop as soon as he assumed the throne. Cities had begun to grow in Egypt during the 1st Dynasty, though under Djoser they became widespread throughout Egypt, with architecture becoming more ornate. During his reign, the borders of Egypt were made secure and expansion into the Sinai was achieved through military expeditions. This led to lucrative turquoise (Article: The Pyramid Perplexity) and copper mining in the Peninsula, which created great wealth for Egypt.
Djoser also defeated the Libyans descended from Phut (Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut) and annexed parts of their land. Overall, his reign was marked by great technological innovation; whereby, agriculture, the arts, trade and Egypt’s civil administration all flourished.
Djoser
There were a number of Viziers in Egyptian history, though it can be no coincidence that the first known Vizier as well as the most famous one was Imhotep, Vizier to Djoser. Not only chancellor to the Pharaoh, Imhotep was reputed to be an architect, engineer, physician as well as possibly a high priest at Heliopolis. Imhotep is credited to be the designer of the Step or otherwise named, Djoser Pyramid at Saqqara. This pyramid contains a large vertical shaft under it and the complex has many similar structures that appear to have been used to store grain. The name or title, Imhotep means: ‘he that comes in peace.’ Imhotep was a renowned scholar, contributing greatly to Egyptian society. Apart from Amenhotep, he is the only other Egyptian to be deified – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man, different name?
Joseph, son of Jacob (Israel), was Imhotep, of Egyptian History, Nigel Hawkins, 2012 – emphasis mine:
‘It is also interesting to note that circumcision was widely practiced among Egyptians from the third dynasty onward. Although Abraham did visit Egypt, it seems more likely that this practice wasintroduced by Joseph-Imhotep in the third dynasty. Egyptian records show that before Imhotep, the bodies of Egyptian royalty were not embalmed. Instead, they were entombed in early Egyptian structures called mastabas, (or mastabahs), oblong structures with flat roofs and sloping sides built over the opening of a mummy chamber or burial pit.
Djoser appears to be the first king to have be embalmed,Jacob (Israel) was embalmed by Joseph and buried in a coffin and Joseph himself was embalmed and given a royal Egyptian burial. The Biblical account suggests that only Joseph’s bones were preserved as was the practice in the early dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Preservation of the whole body was not practiced until the Era of King Tut (New Kingdom).’
Imhotep
Genesis: 46 ‘Joseph was thirty years old when he entered the service of Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt.
From the Book of Jubilees, we learn Joseph’s birthday. Therefore Joseph became Vizier of Egypt sometime after late July in the year 1696 BCE.
“And the Lord was gracious to Rachel, and opened her womb, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Joseph, on the new moon [1st day] of the fourth month [June/July]…” – Book of Jubilees 28:24.
Genesis: 47 ‘During the seven plentiful years the earth produced abundantly, 48 and he gathered up all the food of these seven years, which occurred in the land of Egypt, and put the food in the cities. He put in every city the food from the fields around it. 49 And Joseph stored up grain in great abundance, like the sand of the sea, until he ceased to measure it, for it could not be measured.
50 Before the year of famine came, two sons were born to Joseph. Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On, bore them to him.
51 Joseph called the name ofthe firstbornManasseh. For, he said, “God has made me forget all my hardship and all my father’s house.”
52 The name of the second he called Ephraim, “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Manasseh meaning: ‘Forgetting, Evaporating’ from the verb (nasha), to forget.
The name Manasseh is generally seen as derived from the verb… to forget but forgetting due to “evaporation” of a memory the way water evaporates due to solar heat, or the way a principle evaporates due to interest…[describing] an upward motion, generally of something that is being pulled up and out so as to remove it. This verb occurs very often and can usually be translated with (1) to lift or lift up, (2) to bear or carry, and (3) to take or take away. An identical verb (or rather the same one used in a specialized way) means to loan on interest. The practice of loaning on interest causes the principal sum to slowly but surely evaporate and was prohibited under Mosaic law. A third identical verb (or again the same one) means to deceive or beguile.
The name Manasseh is probably due to a grammatical form in Hebrew that is comparable to the English present continuous. It fixes the letter (mem) to the root. That would give the name Manasseh the meaning of Forgetting. Another reason why a mem may occur in front of a root is when it comes from a particle that means “from”. Hence the name Manasseh may also mean From A Debt. This is significant because Manasseh’s brother is named Ephraim, a name with a distinctly bitter secondary meaning.
Perhaps Joseph named his son From A Debt, because he figured that besides his gratitude for being rescued, he felt that either God or his family owed him a debt for tearing him away from his father.
For a meaning of the name Manasseh, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Forgetting, Forgetfulness. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Making To Forget.
The name Ephraim meaning: ‘Two-fold Increase, Doubly Fruitful, Exhausted, Ashes’ from the verb (para), to be fruitful. From the verb (‘pr), to be depleted.
We would expect the people from Ephraim to be called (Ephraimites), but that word does not occur in the Bible. Instead, the Bible mostly speaks of sons of Ephraim (Numbers 1:32, Joshua 16:5, 1 Chronicles 9:3). But on occasion, the Ephraimites are referred to as (Ephrathites), for instance in Judges 12:5, where the men of Gilead capture strongholds opposite Ephraim arrest fugitives of Ephraim and asks them if they are Ephrathites.
The meaning of the name Ephraim is somewhat debated: Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names and NOBSE Study Bible Name List go after Genesis 41:52, “…For […] God has made me fruitful…” and take the name from the Hebrew verb (para), meaning to bear fruit or be fruitful:
The verb (parar) means to split, divide andusuallymake more, expand or multiply. This root belongs to an extended family that also contains (paras,) to break (through), (paras and parash), to spread out or declare, (paras), to break in two or divide, and (pa’ar) means to branch out or to glorify.
Noun (par) means young bull and (para) means young heifer. Note that the first letter (aleph) is believed to denote an ox-head, while its name derives from the verb, to learn or to produce thousands. The second letter, (beth) is also the word for house (or temple or stable). The familiar word “alphabet,” therefore literally means “stable of bulls” or “house of divisions” or “temple of fruitful learning”.
It’s not clear what the unused verb (‘apar) might have meant but it’s clearly not very positive and possibly has to do with being exhausted or depleted of inner strength and inherent merit. Noun (‘eper) means ashes, which is what remains when all useful energy is extracted from a fuel. Noun (‘aper) means covering or bandage, which is what is applied over a limb when its inherent strength is broken.
Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Two-fold Increase. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Doubly Fruitful. Taking the aleph from the Qual imperfect first person singular would yield a meaning of I Am Twice Fruitful.
It’s true that the aleph is quite a weak letter which is applied often without essentially changing the meaning of a word. But it’s perfectly conceivable, and perhaps even preferred, that father Joseph casts a wry word play in the naming of his sons.
He names his first born Manasseh (Making To Forget), because, “God has made me forget all my toil and all of my father’s house”. When his father’s house finally shows up, it becomes clear that Joseph had a hard time forgetting them and was in fact happy to see them. His second son he names Ephraim, a name with a strong connection to the word fruitfulness but equally so to the word for ashes, the symbol of worthlessness and grief.
Perhaps Joseph was not at all happy for having been made to forget his father’s house, and deemed ‘fruitfulness in the land of affliction,’ the golden bars of a still dismal cage. Perhaps the duality of the name Ephraim does not denote a double portion of the same, but rather as a reminder that the coin of his wealth and status had two sides.’
Genesis: 53 ‘The seven years of plenty that occurred in the land of Egypt came to an end, 54 and the seven years of famine began to come, as Joseph had said. There was famine in all lands, but in all the land of Egypt there was bread. 55 When all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread. Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, “Go to Joseph. What he says to you, do.”
56 So when the famine had spread over all the land, Joseph opened all the storehouses and sold to the Egyptians, for the famine was severe in the land of Egypt. 57Moreover, all the earth came to Egypt to Joseph to buy grain, because the famine was severe over all the earth.’
Jospeh’s son Manasseh was born circa 1691 and Ephraim in 1690 BCE. The seven years of plenty ran from 1696 to 1689 BCE, with the following seven years of famine lasting from 1689 to 1682 BCE. Counting for fourteen years of Joseph’s life from age thirty to forty-four years of age. This was no ordinary famine but a disaster of very serious consequence. The Famine Stela or Stele is an inscription in hieroglyphs, located on Sehel Island in the Nile River, which is near Aswan, Egypt. It records this very disaster and tells of a seven year period of drought and famine during the reign of Pharaoh Djoser of the third dynasty.
The stele is inscribed into a natural granite block with forty-two columns. There are three Egyptian deities on the top with Djoser facing them, with offerings in his outstretched arms. The account is set in the eighteenth year of Djoser’s reign and the seventh year of the famine which had gripped Egypt, in 1862 BCE; testifying of Djoser’s deep concern as the suffering and desperation of the people had grown to breaking point. This, in light of Joseph’s forward planning. What if none or only a small quantity of grain had been stored? It is fully at the end of seven years that the drought finally breaks and the river Nile begins to flow again.
Online Encyclopaedia – italicisation theirs:
‘The Famine Stela is one of only three known inscriptions that connect the cartouche name Djeser (“lordly”) with the serekh name Netjerikhet (“divine body”) of king Djoser in one word. Therefore, it provides useful evidence for Egyptologists and historians who are involved in reconstructing the royal chronology of the Old kingdom of Egypt.’
The pressure felt by Djoser as Pharoah would make sense if after seven years, Egypt had been selling grain worldwide* and not just locally. Even though Joseph had stored a consecutive yearly twenty percent of the vast abundance during the seven years of plenty, the demand in the next seven years may have meant it was a close run thing regarding dwindling grain supplies as the seventh year of famine ran its course. Understandably, Djoser would perhaps not share the same confidence in the Eternal’s deliverance as possessed by Joseph. An extension of this period into an eighth year would then have been catastrophic and would support Djoser’s alarm as evidenced on the Famine Stela.
The World Famine Verified, Lujack Skylark – emphasis mine:
‘Shang Dynasty emperor Cheng Tang [of which] some Chinese historians stated his reign began in 1747 B.C. There are others who believe his reign began in 1675 B.C. Chinese emperor Cheng Tang [1st king of the dynasty]… very early in the dynasty recorded a 7 year famine verifying Joseph’s account of the 7 year global famine in Egypt[from 1689 to 1682 BCE] (Genesis 41:57).
Grant Jeffery wrote a book called “Signature of God” where he said the Yemen marble tablet inscription [reputed to be written at the time of the famine] about people living in a Yemenite castle during the seven years of plenty and the seven years of famine confirm the Genesis account. He also wrote about the Yemen stone found in a rich woman’s tomb where this woman sends her [servants] to meet Joseph [who is apparently mentioned by name]!
The pygmy Woolly Mammoths on Wrangel island die out [circa] 1700 B.C…’
“Wrangel island is north of Russia… The migrations of people’s during the worldwide* famine is fascinating. Some [archaeologists] have given the migrations of these people’s from 1700-1500 B.C. window. The migrations at 1700 B.C. makes sense since people were migrating in search of food.”
‘The Kushite kingdom in eastern Africa arises [circa] 1700 B.C. as Africans fleeing famine come together living in [a] close knit community along the Nile river south of Egypt. Some Black tribes migrate from central Africa and settle in southern Africa fleeing from famine. [Archaeologists] dated their artifacts to [circa] 1700 B.C. Nordic Bronze culture in northern Europe becomes established [circa] 1700 B.C. where bronze weapons are produced used in hunting wild game.
Starving Indo-Europeans from western Russia migrate to central Europe and produce bronze weapons to hunt wild game [circa] 1700 B.C. Starving Indo-European tribes invade Dravidan dominated India [circa] 1700 B.C… [and] destroy the Dravidan Mohenjo-Daro civilization… Olmecs migrate into the Yucatan Peninsula [circa] 1700 B.C. [Archaeologists] state the Olmecs invented plumbing and the Olmecs were interested in water conservation at this time in world history.’
Not only did Joseph prepare for the famine by stock piling grain, he also had the foresight to store water. Samuel Kurinsky states:
‘The most critical and important factor affecting the economy of Egypt was the engineering of an effective control of its water resources. Legends, both Hebraic and Arabic, have it that Joseph and his people made a great and everlasting contribution to Egypt in this regard. The application of Mesopotamian mathematics served in the planning of new systems of irrigation and in expanding the primitive systems previously installed in Egypt. The storage of water is even more effective as a hedge against years of drought and famine than the storage of grain, which, we are told, was a first step recommended by Joseph to the pharaoh’ – The Eighth Day: The Hidden History of the Jewish Contribution to Civilisation, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc. 1994, page 127.
As the famine was worldwide it impacted Jacob and his family in Canaan. He sent all his sons, except Benjamin to Egypt to purchase grain. We have discussed Genesis forty-two to forty-six and the highly charged meetings between Joseph and his estranged brothers of twenty-two years and then seeing his father Jacob, when studying Jacob, Judah, Reuben, Simeon and Benjamin – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. For the year is now 1687 BCE, two years into the famine. One cannot forget the bitter-sweet first meeting with his little brother Benjamin and the poignant jolt of a reminder, that Joseph would never see his mother Rachel again.
The one resounding point that beams very bright is that even though Joseph toys with his brother’s and father’s emotions; making them sweat a lot – of which the Creator does not condemn, for does He not put us through our paces when we are in the wrong? – none was done from bitterness, revenge or hatred. There is a sense of humour on Joseph’s part for dragging out the eventual reunion and the suspense created in so doing.
No, what leaps out is Joseph’s profoundly all consuming emotion of ecstatic joy at finally being reunited with his family. He harboured only love and forgiveness towards his brothers who did not really know him. Here was truly a converted man, filled with the spirit of God. Joseph was a worthy type of the future deliverer and Saviour of all humankind. With his grandfather Isaac and his distant cousin Moses, he is in a select group of people to have been given a saviour’s role in imitation of the true Saviour.
In Genesis forty-five, Joseph finally reveals himself. It says in verse three, that his brothers ‘could not answer him.’ The understatement of the Book of Genesis and perhaps the whole Bible. The word dumbstruck comes to mind. It also says the brothers were ‘dismayed at his presence.’ I bet they were. Here was a ghost which had risen before them. A man who should have either been dead, at the bottom of some hideous mine or looking like skin and bone of a man twice his age, a victim of a tortuous slave gang. Yet here he was; here was their long lost brother Joseph. Brother Joseph, who just won’t go away. As a youngster following them, albeit at their father’s behest and here he was again, a revenant from if not the grave, a large shadow from the past following them still. A phantom who was second in power and authority of at least Lower Egypt, if not all the land.
It is testament to Joseph that he didn’t try to punch or slap any of them, considering the looks on their faces at that moment. Joseph instead alerts them to the five years remaining of famine and invites them to live in the land of Goshen in the Nile delta, where he can provide for them and nurture their flocks and wealth. Pharaoh learns of Joseph’s brothers and provides gifts and provisions for their return journey. Joseph’s sense of humour is exhibited in verse twenty-four, when his last words to his departing brothers are: “Do not quarrel on the way.” He knew them all too well. Jacob in verse twenty-six believing Joseph to be dead, understandably became numb and fainted from the shock of what his sons revealed to him.
Did Jacob ever find out what his sons had done to Joseph? Did the sons of Jacob dare divulge their crime and did Joseph’s honour mean he would not hurt his father in such a way, nor exact any kind of revenge on his brothers. It must have always been that slight bit awkward for the brothers when in Joseph’s presence and therefore, punishment enough. Until such time* that it did come to light…
On the journey down to Egypt, the Creator speaks to Jacob reassuring him, for Jacob must have remembered what had been said to his grandfather Abraham – Genesis 15:13.
Genesis 46:2-4
English Standard Version
2 ‘And God spoke to Israel in visions of the night and said, “Jacob, Jacob.” And he said, “Here I am.” 3 Then he said, “I am God, the God of your father. Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for there I will make you into a great nation. 4 I myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I will also bring you up again, and Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes.”
In Genesis forty-seven, Pharaoh Djoser meets five of Joseph’s brothers and Jacob. It is interesting to learn of Jacob’s perspective of his own life.
Genesis 47:9-10
English Standard Version
9 ‘And Jacob said to Pharaoh, “The days of the years of my sojourning are 130 years. Few and evil have been the days of the years of my life, and they have not attained to the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their sojourning.” 10 And Jacob blessed Pharaoh [as one king to another] and went out from the presence of Pharaoh.’
It was an important observation to Jacob that his life in comparison with his father Isaac of 180 years and his grandfather Abraham of 175 years had been shorter and more difficult. Jacob does live longer, though he dies younger at age 147. The difficulties in his life had in large part been caused by himself and here he does seem to be in contrast again, with his family.
We also learn that the famine was so severe that when Egyptians ran out of money, they then had to purchase grain with their livestock and when that ran out, they then sold their lands to Pharaoh. After that, they were tenant farmers as Jospeh gave them seed to plant with the agreement they would give twenty percent of their harvests to Pharaoh.
Skipping to the final chapter of Genesis, we learn of the respect towards Joseph and Jacob and their status as rulers and kings shown to them from the lands of Egypt and Canaan.
Genesis 50:1-3, 7-11, 15-26
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then Joseph fell on his father’s face and wept over him and kissed him. 2 And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father. So the physicians embalmed Israel. 3 Forty days were required for it, for that is how many are required for embalming. And theEgyptians wept for him seventy days.
7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. With him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his household, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, 8 as well as all the household of Joseph, his brothers, and his father’s household. Only their children, their flocks, and their herds were left in the land of Goshen. 9 And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen. It was a very great company.
10 When they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, they lamented there with a very great and grievous lamentation, and he made a mourning for his father seven days. 11 When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning on the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians.”
Joseph’s brothers ask for his forgiveness, concerned for their own safety after Jacob dies.
15 ‘When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “It may be that Joseph will hate us and pay us back for all the evil that we did to him.” 16 So they sent a message to Joseph, saying, “Your father gave this command before he died: 17 ‘Say to Joseph, “Please forgive the transgression* of your brothers and their sin, because they did evil to you.” And now, please forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father.”
Joseph wept when they spoke to him. 18 His brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.” 19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. 21 So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones.” Thus he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.’
The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:
‘Perhaps the most amazing revelation to be found in Rohl’s book relates to Joseph. The excavations at Tel ed-Daba (Avaris in Bible times) have revealed a large Egyptian-style palace dating from the early 13th Dynasty [later 12th Dynasty]…Rohl concludes that this must have been the retirement palace of Joseph, built in the midst of his people.
In 1987 the excavators began to uncover a large pyramid-style tomb adjacent to the palace. They discovered that the tomb had been carefully emptied in antiquity [by Israelites]. There was no evidence of the ransacking that characterizes the work of grave robbers.Further, they discovered the head of a very large statue [twice the size of a normal male]of the man who had been buried in the tomb.The head is most unusual in that it displays very un-Egyptian type features[Asiatic not Semitic] like a mushroom shaped coiffure or wig. The figure is also clean shaven. Most remarkably, this person is wrapped in a coat of many colors! Rohl concludes that this is a statue of Joseph…’
It is worth noting that over his right shoulder is a throw stick, representing a holder of authority and an office. Dramatically, the face of the statue has been cleaved off, with marks on the head where somebody has tried to split the stone. It is possible it was desecrated in vengeful retaliation for the humiliation of the Exodus related events, including the plagues and the plundering by the exiting Israelites – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?
Genesis: 22 ‘So Joseph remained in Egypt, he and his father’s house. Joseph lived 110** years. 23 And Joseph saw Ephraim’s children of the third generation.The children also of Machir the son of Manasseh were counted as Joseph’s own. 24 And Joseph said to his [remaining] brothers, “I am about to die, but God will visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land that he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.”
25 Then Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here.” 26 So Joseph died, being 110 years old. They embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.’
Joseph died in 1616 BCE. Most of his brothers had already died shortly before him, beginning with Simeon in 1630 BCE; with only three remaining brothers who died not long after Joseph, namely Naphtali (1612 BCE), and lastly Benjamin and Levi in 1611 BCE.
Exodus 13:18-19
English Standard Version
‘But God led the people around by the way of the wilderness toward the Red Sea. And the people of Israel went up out of the land of Egypt equipped for battle. Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones with you from here.”
There is an interesting parallel between Joseph and his descendant born exactly one hundred and fifty years later, Joshua from the tribe of Ephraim, the successor to Moses.
Numbers 13:8
English Standard Version
‘… from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea [Joshua] the son of Nun…’
Joshua 24:29-32
English Standard Version
29 ‘After these things Joshua the son of Nun, theservant of the Lord, died, being 110** years old. 30 And they buried him in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash. 31 Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua and had known all the work that the Lord did for Israel.
32 As for the bones of Joseph, which the people of Israel brought up from Egypt, they buried them at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money. It became an inheritance of the descendants of Joseph [located in Samaria of the tribe of Ephraim].’
Jacob and Joseph are included in the faith chapter of the Bible. The importance of Jacob’s blessing for Joseph’s sons was the beginning and fulfilment of the special birthright blessing of great national prosperity and preeminence for Abraham’s descendants which was filtered to his son Isaac, passing over Ishmael (though Ishmael did receive his own blessing – Genesis 17:20), then Jacob over Esau, then Joseph instead of Reuben and Simeon and split between his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. Destiny did not decree for the peoples of Germany, the Jews, Northern Ireland or Wales to be the recipients of the principal birthright blessing.
Hebrews 11:21-22
English Standard Version
‘By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.’
Prior to Jacob’s death, Jacob blessed his grandsons. Jacob blesses Joseph, yet the specifics are not given to his son, but rather his two grandsons; undoubtedly due to the Eternal’s inspiration. Manasseh and Ephraim are youngsters according to the account. In fact it would appear that not long after Jacob’s arrival in Egypt in 1687 BCE, he blessed the lads, so that their ages^ appear to be about five or six for Manasseh and four or five for Ephraim.
Genesis 48:2-20
English Standard Version
2 ‘… it was told to Jacob, “Your son Joseph has come to you.” Then Israel summoned his strength and sat up in bed. 3 And Jacob said to Joseph, “God Almighty appeared to me at Luz in the land of Canaan and blessed me, 4 and said to me, ‘Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will make of you a company [multitude] of peoples…’ 5 And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt [circa 1691/1690 BCE] before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, asReubenandSimeon are.’
The destinies of Reuben and Simeon were radically altered when they forfeited their right to the birthright blessings through transgressions. The small nations of Northern Ireland and Wales are testimony of their alternative, yet actual histories and what might have been – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
Genesis: 8 ‘When Israel saw Joseph’s sons, he said, “Who are these?” 9 Joseph said to his father, “They are my sons, whom God has given me here [in Egypt].” And he said, “Bring them to me, please, that I may bless them.” 10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim with age, so that he could not see. So Joseph brought them near him, and he kissed them and embraced them. 11 And Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face; and behold, God has let me see your offspring also.”
12 Then Joseph removed them from his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. 13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. 14 And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, crossing his hands (for Manasseh was the firstborn).’
Different translations state that the lads were either between Joseph’s knees or on his lap. Others, that they were on Jacob’s knees. The one point in common is that they were very young, as in infants or very small boys^ of pre-school age. Due to the understandable order that Joseph presented them as eldest and youngest to Jacob, Jacob had to cross his hands like a saltire – of which the significance and symbolism will be apparent as we progress – for Jacob understood, as had happened repeatedly in his family’s line, that the youngest was being elevated to eldest.
Genesis: 15 ‘And he blessed Joseph and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked,theGod who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day, 16 the angel who has redeemed me from all evil,bless the boys; and in them let my name [Israel] be carried on, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude [H7230 – rob; abundance, great number, numerous, many] in the midst [H7130 – qereb] of the earth.”
We arrive at a small word with massive ramifications. A major clue to the location of Joseph’s descendants has been there all along. Even so, it has remained hidden. Its clarification is an important step in identifying Manasseh and Ephraim. Yet biblical identity researchers and experts in the field have been so distracted by the teaching that England – and by extension, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, (Scotland) – is Ephraim, it has not been given second consideration or thought.
The Hebrew word for midst can be translated as ‘among, within’ and ‘inwards.’ Its meaning includes, ‘inner part, middle, the centre’ whether in a literal, geographic sense or in a figurative sense as in the ‘heart’ and core. The significance of this is revealed, when an atlas of the world is looked upon and instead of a European or Asian centric map, drawing or satellite image as is most common, an Americas centric map is viewed.
For there, between the continents of Europe to the east and Asia to the west, sit the continents of North and South America ‘in the midst of the earth.’ Sitting astride this vast land mass are the descendants of Joseph in the nations of Canada and the United States of America.
Not only do these nations occupy a geographic centre on the globe, they exert an influence on the world that figuratively is the heart or centre of our global civilisation. As Joseph was separated from his brothers, so to have the descendants of Jospeh been separated from their brother nations – Genesis 49:26.
Genesis: 17 ‘When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him, and he took his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. 18 And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.”
19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. [Manasseh] also shall become a people[a nation], and he also shall begreat[H1431 – gadal].’
The Hebrew word used for great is different from the Hebrew word used for great in connection with Ishmael.
Genesis 17:20
English Standard Version
‘As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful [H6509 – parah: bear fruit, grow] and multiply [H7235 – rabah: become great, numerous, increase greatly, enlarge] him greatly [to a great degree]. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: older, mighty, important, proud, insolent] nation.’
It is noteworthy that Ishmael was to become a great people like Isaac’s descendants. The subtle difference is that Ishmael was to act like a firstborn, of which he was literally entitled, though he had a tendency to lean towards a self-importance that was proud and selfish. The German nation, thanks to their leaders and not always a reflection of themselves have displayed this negative edge to their inherited greatness during their history – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.
The Hebrew word great used for Manasseh, does not carry this slight negative edge. It is translated as ‘magnify, grow, nourish up and grow up.’ Interestingly, it has the connotation of becoming ‘great or important, make powerful, do great things, to grow up.’
In the previous chapter, we touched upon how two nations from the sons of Jacob could experience an influx of immigration way beyond their current populations. One was New Zealand, which could easily accommodate millions more people. The other nation is Canada; which could receive tens of millions more people. It may well still be growing into its greatness. If Germany as a prophesied ‘great’ nation has a population of nearly eighty-five million people, then it is conceivable that Canada may grow to a population well beyond fifty million people and upwards towards one hundred million people.
Genesis: ‘Nevertheless,his younger brother shallbe greater [H1431 – gadal] than he, and his offspring [descendants, seed] shall become a multitude [H4393 – mlo] of nations.”
The Hebrew word for multitude can be translated as ‘fulness, all that is therein, handful(s).’ It means ‘that which fills, mass, entire contents, full length.’
It is speaking of many more people than that of Manasseh. A population say, more in line with the United States of America.
Genesis: 20 ‘So he blessed them that day, saying, “By you Israel will pronounce blessings, saying, ‘God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh.’” Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’
There are two vital points or keys that need to be remembered and discussed in depth regarding Manasseh and Ephraim. The first is a little unique and has not been seen in discussions anywhere else in books, papers or on the internet. It is the fact that as Joseph’s inheritance was divided into two between his sons; the tribe of Manasseh also divided into two, as we have discussed in part already. As Manasseh’s name means forgotten, it is an irony that biblical identity researchers have forgotten this salient point.
In the original allotment of land in Canaan, the half tribe of East Manasseh chose to live on the East side of the River Jordan with Gad and Reuben. The remaining half tribe of West Manasseh chose to dwell with Ephraim. We will look at this in detail and the scriptures supporting Manasseh receiving two inheritances.
This part of the puzzle may have helped identity researchers realise more quickly than they are doing, that equating Ephraim with England and Manasseh with the United States, doesn’t just go contrary to their both being together in the midst of the earth; or that Manasseh is suddenly more powerful than Ephraim; but… who and where on Earth, are the missing half tribe of West Manasseh?
The second point is to do with the phrasing ‘a multitude of nations.’ The Israelite identity movement, driven by its biggest following, British Israel have been so taken with the height of the British Empire approximately one hundred plus years ago – when the movement was at its most active – and its descendant Commonwealth of nations, they have not seen the waning devolvement of England’s power and stature before their very eyes and the waxing evolving of the United States’s power – Article: 2050. They have only ever seen an England of many colonial parts and a United States, though enormous, powerful, prosperous beyond measure, and a great nation, still only as one giant singular country. The former colonies of England are extensions that now give it no power.
Comparing England and the United States highlights that something is very wrong with saying England is mighty Ephraim and the United States is the lesser birthright recipient. For the scripture says in verse twenty: ‘Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’ The United States was founded on the saying on their great seal: E pluribus unum – Latin for “Out of many, one.”
Manasseh
Before we study the prophecies and blessings given to Joseph’s descendants by Jacob, Moses and Deborah, we will now look at the meaning of a multitude of nations more closely and the predominant view that it refers to the British Empire as well as the radical view – as deemed by the conservative status quo of the Israelite identity community – that maybe the fifty individual and distinct law making and self-governing states of America are in fact the biblical fulfilment of an astounding prophecy given 3,500 years before they began to dramatically unfold.
Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna 1989 & 2006, pages 176, 183 & 185 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The argument that the United States is Israel basically consists of the following four points.
First, some of the… prophecies of physical blessings and greatness to Abraham’s descendants… were not completely fulfilled by Israel anciently.
Second, the house of Israel and the house of Judah were separate and never reunited.
Third, prophecies concerning the house of Israel in theend-time show them to be in captivity, which means they must exist in our time as an identifiable people (and distinct from the Jews).
And fourth… the greatest nation on earth in our time would not be ignored in Bible prophecy.’
Though this writer disagrees with the second point as discussed in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes, the other three are real and vital proofs of an Israelite identity for nations today and not that the tribes are scattered forever amongst the nations as non-entities. As we learned in Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech, a gigantic nation like China cannot be dismissed or ignored from any biblical investigation and identification. Similarly, the greatest nation in humanity’s history cannot be ignored or dismissed from a rigorous biblical examination and explanation. For if we cannot correctly identity these two nations, then one may as well close ones Bible and never read it again. Yet, that has very nearly happened as the identity of the United States has not been understood until very recently.
Doudna: ‘… Jacob was promised his progeny would become “a nation and a company (qahal) of nations” … Ephraim… would become “a fullness (melo) of nations”… the word qahal, “company”… is used of armies or assemblies and refers to a single political unit. The plural goiim, “nations”… does not mean multiple political states (as in ” British Commonwealth of Nations”).
Rather goiim means peoples or tribes or ethnic groups… Ephraim would become one political entity… consisting of multiple ethnic groups… better rendered “company of peoples”… [or, a union of states]… “United States” means in English, literally, a “company of political states,” and “state” is, of course, used synonymously in English for“nation.”
Therefore “United States” is, by a pun, “company of nations” in its very name… the fifty states in the United States are not independent, but then neither were the goiim or “nations” in the earlier fulfilment of “company of nations,” the ancient house of Israel. This I saw as the point missed by Anglo-Israelites.’
This writer whole heartedly concurs with Greg Doudna’s insightfulness. The United States is the prophesied company of peoples. Out of many, one. This phrase incredibly applies to the United States of America; its population genesis; and continued evolving demographic.
It is not indicative of the nation of England in any shape or form. It was shockingly fifty years ago, when Doudna impressively recognised the truth regarding Ephraim, if not Manasseh. Yet today, very few people attach the identity of the United States with Ephraim. Why?
The United States in Prophecy: The Case for Identifying the United States with Ephraim (not Manasseh), Greg Doudna, 1974 – emphasis mine:
‘If Ephraim really has become many separate and sovereign peoples, then Ephraim = Great Britain [England, Wales, Scotland], Ephraim = Canada, Ephraim = Australia, Ephraim = New Zealand, and Ephraim = other English settlers in British colonies worldwide… then Australia for example, is as much Ephraim as is Great Britain. Then when Hosea and other prophets speak of “Ephraim” doing this or doing that, just who is meant –will Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand simultaneously “call to Egypt” and “go to Assyria” (Hosea 7:11), to cite but one of many similar scriptures?
Those who support the traditional view must deal with the inconsistency of holding that Ephraim is the British Commonwealth and then applying prophecies concerning Ephraim toward only one of that “company of nations” instead of all of them… The other settlements of Britain are Manassite…The fact Britain has colonies in no way proves she is a company of nations. Britain is a single nation [composed of three countries: England, Wales and Scotland] in the same way that other Israelite nations with colonies are still single nations.
Which land is a land of “coasts”… theUnited States… has one of the longest usable coastlines of any nation in the world… The… Hebrew word yam is translated “sea” and “west.” The “isles of the sea” or “coasts of the sea”… can easily be translated “coasts of the west.”
Though the author rightly highlights the inconsistency, untenableness and nonsensicalness of equating four different nations all as Ephraim, he then forgets – pun intended – that Manasseh splitting into four or more nations is not scripturally supported either. This highlights the wider error as we have discussed in the previous three chapters of mis-identifying nations not descended from Jacob as Israelite and then apportioning the remaining English speaking nations as all descended from Joseph. Rather than the correct understanding that all the English speaking nations are the individual Israelite tribes today.
Ephraim
Genesis 49:22-26
Evangelical Heritage Version
22 ‘Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a spring. His branches run over the wall.’
The image of a vine’s branches spreading like tentacles is reflected by the small trickle of English colonists who eventually became a torrent of people arriving in conquest of the American continent. With the inexorable march westwards after the first English settlement of the Virginia Colony Jamestown, in 1607 and the Pilgrims of the Plymouth Colony in 1620. It also refers to the blessings of America, extending outwards and overflowing to other nations such as the financing in rebuilding Germany and Japan after World War II.
Genesis: 23 ‘The archers have fiercely attacked him. They shot at him and harassed him, 24 but his bow remained steady. His arms and hands were made strong by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob, by the name of the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel…’
The fledgling and vulnerable colonies were able to navigate the conflicts on American soil and win those crucial in their survival, including: the American Revolution from 1775 to 1783, the Indian Wars of 1775 to 1890, the French War from 1798 to 1800, the Great Britain War of 1812 to 1815, the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848, the Spanish-American War in 1898 and the most potentially devastating conflict of all, the American Civil War during 1861 to 1865.
This war had more at stake than historians realise, for there was more than the question of the survival of the Federal United States and its splitting into two, with a Confederate South. For the people of the South* embody in large part the half tribe of West Manasseh and the North, Ephraim – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.* It was a fight for sibling supremacy and the fulfilment of prophecy.
This marked divide is understood when one appreciates the United States is in fact one and a half tribes. This is why the Bible calls these peoples either Ephraim after the dominant tribe, or Joseph as the United States comprise two peoples from two tribes.
Canada is technically half a tribe and called Manasseh, Gilead or Machir in the Bible, while its French component was explained in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Therefore, the half tribe of East Manasseh is the nation of Canada and the tribe of Ephraim with the half tribe of West Manasseh, is the nation of the United States of America.
Though Israelite identity researcher Linda Watson is subtly adrift in her conclusions, she is considerably closer to the truth than nearly all biblical identity of nations commentators – capitalisation hers.
“… the tribe of Manasseh was itself divided into two half tribes – one located EAST of the Jordan [River], in Palestine, and one WEST of the Jordan [River]… just NORTH of the Tribe of Ephraim. Interestingly, in modern times this same geographic position has been maintained by the descendants of these ancient tribes. Today, Manasseh – represented by England (east of the body of water we call the Atlantic Ocean), and Canada (west of that body of water) – still lies NORTH of Ephraim, the United States of America!” – Who is America, Ephraim and Manasseh.
Genesis: 25 ‘by the God of your father, who will help you, by the Almighty, who will bless you with blessings from heaven [H8064 – shamayim: the abode of God] above [H5920 – al: on high, the most High, God], blessings from the deep that lies below, blessings from the breasts and from the womb.’
Jacob is predicting the physical blessing of many progeny, as well as spiritual prosperity. This is a verse that is overlooked or ignored when studying the American psyche. Explanations are sought for America’s religiosity, especially the American South, yet the simple answer is that Americans are a more believing peoples by nature through the Creator’s design.
United States one of the most religious countries, Diane Swanbrow – emphasis mine:
‘The United States remains among the most religious nations in the world, according to a worldwide study by the University [of Michigan]. About 46 percent of American adults attend church at least once a week, not counting weddings, funerals and christenings, compared with 14 percent of adults in Great Britain, 8 percent in France, 7 percent in Sweden and 4 percent in Japan. Moreover, 58 percent of Americans say they often think about the meaning and purpose of life, compared with 25 percent of British, 26 percent of Japanese and 31 percent of… Germans, the study says.’
Sixty percent of Americans say that religion is ‘very important’ to them; whereas only twenty-one percent of Western Europeans think the same and more than eighty percent of ‘American adults call themselves Christians’ with more than a third of adult Americans claiming to be ‘born-again.’
“While traditional religious belief and participation in organized religion have steadily declined in most advanced industrial nations, especially in Western Europe, this is not the case in the United States,” says Ronald Inglehart, a researcher at the Institute for Social Research (ISR) and director of the ISR World Values Surveys, which were conducted in more than 80 nations between 1981 and 2001.
Some possible reasons cited for the results: Religious refugees set the tone long ago in America; religious people tend to have more children than non-religious groups; and the United States has a less comprehensive social welfare system, prompting people to look to religion for help.
Inglehart and [Pippa] Norris, a political scientist at Harvard University, also examined the reasons the United States remains an “outlier” in religiosity among postindustrial nations. “The U.S. was founded by religious refugees who attached so much importance to religion that they were willing to risk their lives in a dangerous new environment in order to practice their religion, and to some extent this outlook has been successfully transmitted to succeeding waves of immigrants.”
Their conclusion is that the more ‘self-perceived vulnerability, the greater the importance of religion.’ Though ‘America seems an anomaly: a rich society in which people worship, pray, and believe, as if they lived in a poverty-stricken nation.’
‘The Bible Belt is an informal term for a region in the Southern United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is generally higher than the nation’s average. By contrast, religion plays the least important role in New England and in the Western United States.’
The more religious mindset of the United States should come as no surprise, for it was founded with a tolerance for freedom to worship unlike any other nation. The aim was to eliminate any dominant denomination of Christianity from becoming an official or national religion.
The U.S. was founded as a Christian nation – here’s more proof, Bryan Fischer, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘At the time of the founding, 99.8% of the population of the fledgling country identified themselves, to one degree of sincerity or another, as followers of Jesus Christ. And 98.4% identified themselves as Protestants. Catholics represented 1.4% of the population, and the other 0.2% were followers of Judaism. Virtually 100% of those living in America at the time of its founding were adherents of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
This truth is reflected in our First Amendment, which… was designed specifically to protect the free exercise of the Christian faith in the new nation, and to prevent competition among the various Christian denominations. It did this by prohibiting Congress from picking one Christian denomination and making it the official church of the United States.
States, on the other hand, were free to establish Christian denominations in their individual states, and somewhere between six and ten of the original 13 states did so.
As [Joseph] Story writes, “The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical patronage of the national government.”
… Maryland’s first state constitution, enacted in 1776, specifically granted religious freedom to every denomination of Protestants and Catholics, i.e., to followers of the Christian faith. Article 33 of that first Constitution read this way:
“That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons, professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty… wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate on account of his religious persuasion or profession, or for his religious practice… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax for the support of the Christian religion.”
Article 55 laid down the following requirement for anyone who wanted to serve in public office in the newly established state:
“That every person, appointed to any office… shall… take the following oath: I… do swear, that I do not hold myself bound in allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland; and shall also subscribe a declaration of his belief in the Christian religion.”
In other words, no one but Christians were allowed to hold public office. Now Maryland’s constitution has undergone subsequent revisions, but still to this day it requires “a declaration of belief in the existence of GOD” as a qualification for holding elected office.’
Genesis: 26 ‘The blessings of your father are greater than the blessings of my parents, greater than the treasures of the ancient hills. They will rest on the head of Joseph, on the forehead of him who is elevated above [set apart from]his brothers.’
Jacob is telling Joseph that the blessing he has passed to Joseph is considerably greater than that which was given to him by his father Isaac and that the proof is in the difference between his inheritance and that of his brothers.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Far from being an isolated depository of utterly alien dictums, Israel was the melting pot and refinery of the greatest traditions the world had come up with (Psalm 12:6). Israel was never intended to be anything other than a phenomenon from which every family mentioned in Genesis 10 would actively derive blessings, right away and from the “family-level” up(Genesis 12:3).
Long before it was formally established, Israel was an international project; a USA of its days, with myriads of cultural and economic tributaries…’
Abraham Lincoln, sixteenth President of the United States:
“We find ourselves in the peaceful possession of the fairest portion of the Earth, as regards fertility of soil, extent of territory, and salubrity of climate… We … find ourselves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We toiled not in the acquirement or the establishment of them.”
The United States economy is the largest in the world as measured by nominal Gross Domestic Product and has been since 1890. Its 2025 GDP was $30.51 trillion – a 26.8% share of the global economy. The biggest contributor to its GDP is the economy’s service sector which includes finance, real estate, insurance, professional and business services and healthcare.
The United States has an open economy, ‘facilitating flexible business investment and foreign direct investment in the country. It is the world’s dominant geopolitical power and is able to maintain a large external national debt as the producer of the world’s primary reserve currency.’ Although America’s population is only 4.2% of the world’s total, the United States holds 29.4% of the total wealth of the world, the largest share held by any country. The United States ranks first in the number of billionaires and millionaires in the world, with 724 billionaires and 10.5 million millionaires as of 2020.
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in American global shipments during 2022.
Mineral fuels including oil: US$378.6 billion
Machinery including computers: $229.6 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $197.7 billion
Vehicles: $134.9 billion
Aircraft, spacecraft: $102.8 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $99.1 billion
Gems, precious metals: $92.5 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $83.5 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $83.3 billion
Organic chemicals: $51.1 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories year over year, up by 57.5% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was the organic chemicals category which rose 18.5%. United States’ shipments of aircraft and spacecraft posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 14.9% year over year.’
Canada has the ninth biggest economy in the world with a 2025 GDP of $2.23 trillion. ‘Canada has a well developed energy extraction sector, with the world’s third largest proven oil reserves. Canada also has impressive manufacturing and services sectors, based mostly in urban areas near the U.S. border.’
Canada’s free trade relationship with the United States means that three-quarters of all its exports head to the United States market each year. Canada’s close economic ties to the United States means it has grown largely in parallel to the world’s most powerful economy.
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Canadian global shipments during 2022.
Mineral fuels including oil: US$180 billion
Vehicles: $50.3 billion
Machinery including computers: $37.7 billion
Gems, precious metals: $23.9 billion
Wood: $19.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $17.3 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.7 billion
Aluminum: $14.2 billion
Fertilizers: $13.7 billion
Ores, slag, ash: $11.5 billion
Fertilizers represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.7% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 50.1% led by coal, petroleum gases and oils. Canada’s shipments of electrical machinery, equipment: posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 16.7% year over year.’
Canadian Flag 1868 – 1921
The blessings afforded to the sons of Jacob, not just Joseph, are evident by the statistics of the world’s wealthiest nations. For instance based on 2018 figures and according to market research company New World Wealth, the world had accumulated $215 trillion in private wealth in 2018, a 12% increase over the previous year. ‘Incredibly, the vast majority of this wealth, about 73.5% is held by just 10 countries.’ Of those ten nations, four of them are descendants of Jacob and three more of the remaining six are descended from Abraham in Germany and his two brothers Haran and Nahor in France and Italy respectively.
Canadian Flag 1922 – 1957
The United States was the number one wealthiest country in the world with $62.584 trillion; the United Kingdom was at fourth with $9.919 trillion; Canada at number eight with $6.393 trillion; and Australia at nine with $6.142 trillion. Adding New Zealand’s net wealth of $1.5 trillion, the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations (not including Ireland and South Africa) possessed a combined wealth of $86.538 trillion, which equated to 40.25% share of the entire world’s wealth for only six percent of the world population. An economic influence and prosperity well beyond their relative population size.
Moses confirmed the spectacular prosperity as foretold by Jacob in his prophecy for Joseph.
Deuteronomy 33:13-17
Evangelical Heritage Version
13 ‘Concerning Joseph he said: His land is blessed by the Lord:blessed with the best giftsfrom the heavens, blessed with dew and with the deep waters hidden below, 14 blessed with the best gifts produced by the sun, blessed with the best gifts yielded by the seasons, 15 blessed with the best crops from the ancient mountains, blessed with the best gifts from the everlasting hills, 16 blessed with the best gifts of the earth and its fullness, blessed with the favor of the one who was dwelling in the burning bush. May all these come on the head of Joseph,on the forehead of the one set apart from his brothers.’
Both Canada and the United States are breadbasket nations providing massive food surpluses. Canada, is the fourth most important food provider in the world. The Canadian Prairies, comprised of the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan are vital to the world for their grain production. The region’s mainstay is agriculture and industries process the agricultural produce. Main crops cultivated include durum wheat, canola, barley, oats, lentils, brassica and assorted horticultural products, with also the farming of sheep, cattle and poultry.
Canadian Flag
The United States is the second most important food provider in the world. The state of California is a massive contributor to the total agricultural produce of the United States and accounts for 12.8% of the country’s agricultural yield. Most of this produce comes from the San Joaquin Valley. For instance, the county is the single biggest producer of almonds worldwide, with production constituting 70% of the total global almond yield and supply.
In the top ten nations with the most Natural Resources, the United States ranks seventh. Mining is an integral industry in the United States. In 2015, total metal and coal reserves in the country were estimated to be worth $109.6 billion. The United States has been the leading producer of coal for decades and it accounts for just over 30% of global coal reserves. Total natural resources for the United States are an astounding estimated $45 trillion, almost 90% of which comprises timber and coal. Other major resources include substantial reserves of copper, gold, oil and natural gas deposits.
Canada is third in the world. The vast territory of Canada has an estimated $33.2 trillion worth of commodities; is a major exporter of energy; with the third largest oil deposits and a 13% global share, after Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Deposits include industrial minerals, such as gypsum, limestone, rock salt, and potash, as well as energy minerals, such as coal and uranium. Metals include copper, lead, nickel, zinc, cobalt, cadmium and precious metals like gold, platinum and silver. Canada is the leading supplier of natural gas and phosphate in the world and is the third largest exporter of timber.
Canada and the United States rank in the top ten technologically advanced or driven economies in the world. Canada at number eight has a highly efficient technology sector and continues to strongly encourage science and research. Canada is responsible for creating resourceful interactive machines and chip less credit and debit cards.
The United States is second in the world, being a significant contributor in terms of technology and development. Aviation, nuclear energy, pharmaceuticals, defence systems and telecommunications have all been inventions by the world’s only hyper power. It has produced the world’s biggest technology companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Intel, IBM, Microsoft and Amazon; completely transforming modern society and the way we live. The United States ranked third in the Global Innovation Index in 2023, behind Switzerland and Sweden.
The United States tops the top ten countries with the largest gold reserve holdings, with 8,133.5 tonnes – nearly as much as the second to fifth placed nations of Germany, Italy, France and Russia combined – amounting to 77.5% of foreign reserves, the third highest allocation. The majority of United States gold is held at Fort Knox in Kentucky, with the remainder held at the Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the San Francisco Assay Office and the West Point Bullion Depository. ‘Which state loves gold the most? Well, the state of Texas went so far as to create its very own Texas Bullion Depository to safeguard investors’ gold.’
While the United States of America experiences social and economic challenges like any other nation, it is one of a minority where overall, its inhabitants aredeemed as… happy.
Notice all the descendants of Jacob – aside from those who dwell in the troubled nation of South Africa – are living in nations who are not just blessed with material prosperity but are relatively content compared with the vast majority of the planet’s population.
Deuteronomy: 17 ‘Like a firstborn bull, he has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox [H7214 – r’em: great auroch, unicorn]. With them he will gore the peoples, all the peoples, to the ends of the earth. Such are the ten thousands of Ephraim. Such are the thousands of Manasseh.‘
No one does razzamatazz or pomp and ceremony like America does. It exudes a pride and power like no other nation on earth. This is why Moses likens Joseph to the extinct giant auroch bull or the otherwise ‘mythical’, unicorn.
As voiced in the introduction (primus verba), heraldic images do not provide definitive conclusions on an identity but rather a trail which may lend support. The nations of Austria (Hagar) and the Netherlands (Midian) are related family members and thus using similar symbols in their heraldry is not a surprise.
The United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh) either employ their own animals (Eagle) or ones inherited (Unicorn) from England (Judah) and Scotland (Benjamin). From a biblical perspective, Canada has more right to use the Unicorn than either England (Lion) or Scotland (Wolf).
The fact that Canada’s coat of arms closely resembles that of the United Kingdom supports their identity as Manasseh and its early (unique) relationship with Judah. One would expect Ephraim to be more clearly defined in its separateness from Judah as pictured by America’s use of an eagle and not a lion for example in its heraldry – Numbers 24:8-9.
The United States of America’s growth from a new born nation barely two hundred and fifty years ago to fully fledged nation only just approaching middle age has been spectacular and a phenomena never before witnessed; standing as a clear testimony to the truth of the words anciently promised to Abraham and his seed through Joseph.
Mark Lane: ‘The reference [by] Moses to the wild ox has caused some observers to associate the star sign Taurus with the [west] side of the Israelite camp’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘The constellation Taurus prominently features two giant horns as if thrusting upward in attack. The constellation is almost completely above the ecliptic, indicating it is a righteous person or nation. The sign does not reveal the rest of the bull’s body. Could this mean the nation never ‘sees their tail’? In other words, its days are shortened? Or, its days as a righteous nation are shortened? Or both?’
America relates to the symbol of the Bull – Large Bull Statue on Wall Street below.
The United States possesses the most powerful and technologically advanced military capability, that is typically, approximately ten or more years ahead of any other country’s development. Annually, America spends more on its military than the next seven highest ranking countries in military spending combined. Making up more than a third of global military spending, it is the foremost military power in the world and internationally the leading political, cultural and scientific force. This power has allowed America to use its horns so-to-speak in getting its way diplomatically and politically, since the First World War.
United States economic power is demonstrated by the fact that its GDP is more than the other developed G7 nations – comprising Japan, Italy, France, Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom – combined.
Moses speaks of the physical numerical dominance of Ephraim over Manasseh. Those who subscribe to England being Ephraim and America being Manasseh have yet to successfully and rationally explain this verse.
The population of the United states is 347,444,880 people and Canada has 40,161,936 people. If we include the American south, the half tribe of West Manasseh with the people in Canada of principally British and Irish heritage, the half tribe of East Manasseh, they are still outnumbered by the peoples of Ephraim descended principally from British and Irish stock through the numerical superiority of the eastern, northern and western states of America.
According to World Population Live: ‘Unlike China and India, the United States population is expected to continue to grow throughout the century with no foreseeable decline. By 2067, the U.S. population is expected to surpass 400 million people.’ It is worth under scoring the point earlier regarding Canada’s potential population explosion. WPL – emphasis mine:
‘The population is growing at a steady pace and, based on current projections will surpass 50 million by 2070. Canada has one of the fastest growth rates of any G7 nation, growing faster than many other industrialized countries. Canada’s growth rate has been anywhere between 0.8% and 1.2% for the past ten years. While Canada’s fertility rate is 1.53 births per woman, below the population replacement rate, the population continues to grow as migration plays an increasing role in the population.Canada’s net migration rate is 6.375 per 1,000 people, the eighth-highest in the world. Unlike many other countries, Canada is “underpopulated” and celebrates a growing population. There are many job vacancies to be filled and more people means more economic growth and prosperity for Canada.’
Judges 5:7, 13-14
English Standard Version
7 ‘The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be until I arose; I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel…13 Then down marched the remnant of the noble; the people of the Lord marched down for me against the mighty. 14 From Ephraimtheir root [H3828 – sheresh: bottom, deep, heel] they marched down into the valley… fromMachir marched [descended]down the commanders^ [H2710 – chaqaq – governor, law giver]…’
As discussed in previous chapters, certain tribes joined the Judge Deborah in the fight against the Canaanites more readily than others depending by degree on how directly it impinged on their territories. Deborah’s headquarters were located in Ephraim, so it would have been unlikely for them not to have given support. Manasseh had one son Machir, a name which can also be used in describing the descendants of Manasseh from Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh.
Grand Union flag of 1775 with the Union Jack, the union of Jacob’s sons in the canton.
The verse in Judges containing Ephraim includes Amalek. As we have discussed Amalek in depth (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), but not specifically this verse, it is worth comparing it in different translations as the English Standard version decided to completely miss the word Amalek out from its translation.
Judges 5:14
American Standard Version
‘Out of Ephraim came down they whose root is in Amalek…‘
New International Reader’s Version
‘Some came from the part of Ephraim where some Amalekites lived…’
Young’s Literal Translation
‘Out of Ephraim their root [is] againstAmalek…’
New English Translation
‘They came from Ephraim, who uprooted Amalek…’
New Century Version
‘They came from Ephraimin the mountains of Amalek.’
The tribe of Ephraim included territory lived in by a residue of Amalekites. A people who existed before Esau’s grandson with the same name and who were related to the Horites. In fact, the Amalekites are traceable to the antediluvian ruler Lamech. Not Lamech, the father of Noah, but evil Lamech, descended from Cain – Genesis 4:18. The Amalekites were Nephilim related and a line of Elioud giants. Esau’s posterity intermarried with Amalek and descendants exist to this day.
The Betsy Ross flag of 1776 with a circle of stars on a blue background in the canton, very similar to the current European Union flag.
Certain scattered Jews carry this ancestry and the Bible is indicating that they have a presence in Ephraim. There are a significant number of Jews in the United States, with approximately six to seven million people, particularly in the Northeast, where old family wealth with political leverage is located and who wield the real power and control in America – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?
Numbers 26:28, 35-37, 29-34
English Standard Version
28 ‘The sons of Joseph according to their clans: Manasseh and Ephraim.
35 These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans:
of Shuthelah [noise of breaking], the clan of the Shuthelahites;
of Becher [young camel], the clan of the Becherites;
of Tahan [camp], the clan of the Tahanites.
36 And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran [watcher], the clan of the Eranites.
37 These are the clans of the sons of Ephraim as they were listed, 32,500.
29 The sons of Manasseh: of Machir [H4353 – Makiyr: sold], the clan of the Machirites; and Machirwas the father of
Gilead [H1568 – Gil’ad: rocky region]; of Gilead, the clan of the Gileadites.’
1 Chronicles 7:14-17
English Standard Version
14 ‘… Manasseh… [with] his Aramean concubine bore… Machir the father of Gilead… 16 And Maacah the wife of Machir bore a son, and she called his name Peresh; and the name of his brother was Sheresh; and his sons were Ulam and Rakem. 17 The son of Ulam: Bedan.
30 These are the sons of Gilead: of Iezer [no help], the clan of the Iezerites; of Helek [portion], the clan of the Helekites; 31 and of Asriel [I shall be (a) prince of God], the clan of the Asrielites; and of Shechem [back, shoulder], the clan of the Shechemites; 32 and of Shemida [wise], the clan of the Shemidaites; and of Hepher [a well], the clan of the Hepherites.
33 Now Zelophehad [H6765 – Tslophchad: first born] the son of Hepherhad no sons, but daughters.
And the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.
34 These are the clans of Manasseh, and those listed were 52,700.’
1 Chronicles 5:23-26
English Standard Version
23 ‘The members of the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh lived in the land. They were very numerous from Bashan to Baal-hermon, Senir, and Mount Hermon.
24 These were the heads of their fathers’ houses: Epher [family name of Abraham’s son, Midian], Ishi, Eliel, Azriel, Jeremiah, Hodaviah, and Jahdiel, mighty warriors, famous men, heads of their fathers’ houses.
25 But they broke faith with the God of their fathers, and whored after the gods of the peoples of the land, whom God had destroyed before them. 26 So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day.’
Part of the puzzle in understanding why Manasseh split into two is the fact that the tribe of Judah and Manasseh intermarried early in Israel’s history. Something that is easily missed and glossed over.
It explains why the half tribe of East Manasseh today (as Canada), is such a resolutely patriotic, supporter and defender of the English throne and former Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. For many Canadians will have more English blood from the tribe of Judah and his son’s Pharez heritage than they realise.
This injection of Judah’s line has created a marked distinction between Americans of the South and Canadians. Many future Canadians fled the United States and crossed the northern border on grounds of differences in political ideology. They espoused loyalism to the Crown rather than the rebellion of a Republic. In fact, after the American Civil War, many Confederate generals fled to Canada as did their President, Jefferson Davis of Welsh and Scottish forebears. Canadians have a different sense of humour, more in keeping with the English than that of Americans.
1 Chronicles 2:4-5, 21-23
4 ‘[Judah’s] daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all.
5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.
21 Afterward Hezron* went in to the daughter of Machir [the son of Manasseh] thefatherof Gilead, whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub.
22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead.’
The flags of the Canadian provinces and territories. Notice the preponderance of British (Judah and Benjamin) symbols: the four Union Jacks, the three English St George’s Cross flags, the two English passant Lions, the Scottish rampant Lion and the Scottish Saltire.
1 Chronicles 12:16-22
English Standard Version
16 ‘And some of the men of Benjamin and Judah came to the stronghold to David [descendant of Hezron*]. 17 David went out to meet them and said to them, “If you have come to me in friendship to help me, my heart will be joined to you…
18 … Amasai, chief of the thirty… said, “We are yours, O David, and with you, O son of Jesse! Peace, peace to you, and peace to your helpers! For your God helps you.” Then David received them and made them officers of his troops.
19 Some of the men of Manasseh deserted to David when he came with the Philistines for the battle against Saul. (Yet he did not help them, for the rulers of the Philistines took counsel and sent him away, saying, “At peril to our heads he will desert to his master Saul.”)
20 As he went to Ziklag, these men ofManassehdeserted to him [David of Judah]: Adnah, Jozabad, Jediael, Michael, Jozabad, Elihu, andZillethai, chiefs of thousands in Manasseh. 21 They helped David against the band of raiders, for they were all mighty men of valor and were commanders^ [Judges 5:14] in the army. 22 For from day to day men came to David to help him, until there was a great army, like an army of God.’
Joshua 13:29-31
English Standard Version
29 ‘And Moses gave an inheritance to the half-tribe of Manasseh. It was allotted to the half-tribe of the people of Manasseh according to their clans. 30 Their region extended from Mahanaim, through all Bashan, the whole kingdom of Og king of Bashan, and all the towns of Jair, which are in Bashan, sixty cities, 31 and half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, the cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan. These were allotted to the people of Machir the son of Manasseh for the half of the people of Machir according to their clans.’
Canadian men
Joshua 17:1-18
English Standard Version
‘Then allotment was made to the people of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph. To Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, were allotted Gilead and Bashan, because he was a man of war. 2 And allotments were made to the rest of the people of Manasseh by their clans, Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, Hepher, and Shemida. These were the male descendants of Manasseh the son of Joseph, by their clans. 3 Now Zelophehad the son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, had no sons, but only daughters, and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.
4 They approached Eleazar the [high] priest and Joshua the son of Nun and the leaders and said, “The Lord commanded Moses to give us an inheritance along with our brothers.” So according to the mouth of the Lord he gave them an inheritance among the brothers of their father.
5 Thus there fell to Manasseh ten portions [half tribe of West Manasseh], besides the land of Gilead and Bashan, which is on the other side of the Jordan, 6 because the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance along with his sons [next to the land of Ephraim]. The land of Gilead was allotted to the rest of the people of Manasseh [the half tribe of East Manasseh].’
The five daughters of Zelophehad had raised the matter previously with Moses and so it was reconfirmed in front of Joshua. The only stipulation was that the daughters had to marry within the tribe of Manasseh so that the inheritance would remain in Manasseh and not be lost to another tribe.
Canadian women
Numbers 27:1-7
English Standard Version
‘Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad… 2 And they stood before Moses… saying, 3 “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah… And he had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.”
5 Moses brought their case before the Lord. 6 And the Lord said to Moses, 7 “The daughters of Zelophehad are right. You shall give them possession of an inheritance among their father’s brothers and transfer the inheritance of their father to them.”
Numbers 36:10-12
English Standard Version
10 ‘The daughters of Zelophehad did as the Lord commanded Moses, 11 for Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married to sons of their father’s brothers [cousins]. 12 They were married into the clans of the people of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father’s clan.’
The five daughters of Zelophehad received territory included within the ten portions of land which comprised the half tribe of West Manasseh adjacent to the territory given to Ephraim. This was in addition to the land of Gilead and Bashan which the half tribe of East Manasseh received. As East Manasseh today is Canada, so West Manasseh reflects much of the American south.
Our Twelve Tribes: ‘The Tribe of Manasseh is in the middle of the United States. The vast lands from the Mississippi River to the Rockies are the heartland of America.’
It is an interesting correlation that the core eleven states of the South, nearly equate to the ten portions given to West Manasseh. If the Carolinas were added together as one; it would be an exact ten. Two states which joined the confederacy, though did not secede from the Union and would make thirteen, were Missouri and then Kentucky. The first seven states to permanently join the Confederation are listed first as they were ratified between March and April 1861. The following four states are listed in the order they were admitted between May and December of 1861.
Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Florida…
Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee.
An anomaly which would change the above configuration to ten states matching ten portions, would be the exclusion of the Lone Star State, Texas. The following chapter will seek to address how this could eventuate – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Joshua: 7 ‘The territory of Manasseh reached from Asher to Michmethath, which is east of Shechem. Then the boundary goes along southward to the inhabitants of En-tappuah.
8 The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but the town of Tappuah on the boundary of Manasseh belonged to the people of Ephraim.
9 Then the boundary went down to the brook Kanah. These cities, to the south of the brook, among the cities of Manasseh, belong to Ephraim.
Then the boundary of Manasseh goes on the north side of the brook and ends at the sea, 10 the land to the south being Ephraim’s and that to the north being Manasseh’s [in geographic reversal to today], with the sea forming its boundary… 12 Yet the people of Manasseh could not take possession of those cities, but the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land.
13 Now when the people of Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not utterly drive them out.
14 Then the people of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, “Why have you given me but one lot and one portion as an inheritance, although I am a numerous people, since all along the Lord has blessed me?”
15 And Joshua said to them, “If you are a numerous people, go up by yourselves to the forest, and there clear ground for yourselves in the land of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, since the hill country of Ephraim is too narrow for you.”
16 The people of Joseph said, “The hill country is not enough for us. Yet all the Canaanites who dwell in the plain have chariots of iron, both those in Beth-shean and its villages and those in the Valley of Jezreel.”
17 Then Joshua said to the house of Joseph, to Ephraim and Manasseh,
“You are a numerous people and have great power. You shall not have one allotment only, 18 but the hill country shall be yours, for though it is a forest, you shall clear it and possess it to its farthest borders. For you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have chariots of iron, and though they are strong.”
Joshua 16.8-9
English Standard Version
8 ‘… Such is the inheritance of the tribe of the people of Ephraim by their clans, 9 together with the towns that were set apart for the people of Ephraim within the inheritance of the Manassites, all those towns with their villages.’
Nearly all maps drawn show Ephraim inland with only the half tribe of West Manasseh possessing a coastline on the Mediterranean Sea. The one below is rare, detailing an accurate rendition of the western boundaries for the two tribes – Joshua 8:16.
These verses clearly highlight that Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh were broadly allotted their own region and cities. That said, the boundary lines were flexible so that for instance, certain cities of Ephraim were technically in Manasseh’s territory.
United States of America Flag
The people were at first grumbling, yet the tribe of Ephraim, as ‘the possessor of the primogeniture of Joseph’ had been given a superb region of Canaan, in the very centre of the land which reached from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean and bordered Benjamin and Dan in the South and Manasseh in the North.
It was a rich and beautiful hill country, well watered and richly wooded, abounding in corn fields and orchards, and secure from attacks by foreigners. This allotment, which included the greater part of the region afterwards called Samaria, contained numerous important towns and cities, of which Shiloh – where the Ark of God and the Tabernacle were homed for several hundred years – was the religious centre of the nation during the period of the Judges and the early monarchy – Article: The Ark of God.
Washington DC, capital of the United States
There was the city of Shechem between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerezim, once occupied by the ancient Hittites and later venerated as the burial place of Jacob; and the city of Samaria, which throughout the history of the separate Kingdom of Israel was the capital of the northern kingdom. Shiloh and Samaria are both cited often in the scriptures and today could represent first, the heart and soul of the nation, New York and second its capital, Washington DC.
New York City
What is disheartening yet parallels Israel’s past, is how New York is more rotten apple than big apple.
American men
Isaiah 7:5-17
English Standard Version
5 ‘Because Syria, with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, has devised evil against you, saying, 6 “Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Tabeel as king in the midst of it,” 7 thus says the Lord God: “It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass.
8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin.
And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.
9 And thehead of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.”
17 The Lord will bring upon you and upon your people and upon your father’s house such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from Judah – the king of Assyria!”
A plot by Ephraim to conquer Judah was not permitted to unfurl. Instead, Ephraim was to be conquered by Assyria. As this prophecy is dual, the King of the North will one day defeat modern day Ephraim. As unlikely as that may seem today, it will not seem so in the future, when Russia’s economy and military strength overtakes a divided and fragmented United States of America – refer articles: 2050; Four Kings & One Queen; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
American women
Jeremiah 50:19
English Standard Version
‘I will restore Israel to his pasture, and he shall feed on Carmel [in Ephraim] and in Bashan [Gilead], and his desire shall be satisfied onthe hills of Ephraim [and half tribe of West Manasseh] and in Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh].’
The territory of Joseph was in the West and comprised Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh to its north, equating to the United States today in reverse and Gilead (or Bashan) was in the East and comprised the half tribe of East Manasseh, equating to Canada today.
City of New York
Psalm 60:6-8; (108:7-9)
English Standard Version
God has spoken in his holiness: “With exultation I will divide up Shechem and portion out the Vale of Succoth. Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”
The flags of the American States. Notice the preponderance of the colour red in the Southern States as well as stars and saltires. The crossing over of Jacob’s hands are symbolised on Scotland’s flag (tribe of Benjamin, Joseph’s brother). The American Declaration of Independence also echoes the Scottish Independence Declaration of Arbroath.
The states in the South with obvious saltires include Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. The state alluding to a saltire includes Arkansas; and with Texas, Tennessee, Georgia and North Carolina exhibits both stars and the predominant colour red. While in the northern states blue is the primary colour, it is worth noting that Canada like the American south favours the colour red on its Flag.
District of Colombia – containing the Capitol, Washington – sandwiched between the states of Virginia (south) and Maryland (north).
Gilead is Manasseh, and Manasseh is also an identity linked with Ephraim. Though Gilead is not Ephraim. The Handmaid’s Tale is a dystopian novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood and was published in 1985. It is set in a near future New England, with a strong patriarchal and totalitarian ‘theonomic state’ known as the Republic of Gilead, which has overthrown the legitimate United States government.
There are a number of interesting correlations. First, Atwood is Canadian and technically, Canada is modern day Gilead, though she has chosen to call the United States Gilead in her story. Atwood also uses the term Commanders for the key administrators of the Republic of Gilead. Again, this is a term in the Bible used for military leaders from Machir of Gilead.
Judges 5:14
English Standard Version
‘… from Machir marched down the commanders…‘
The main plot line is that women are having difficulty in conceiving children. Handmaids are used by the ruling families in producing children for the barren wives of commanders. The apostasy in Gilead is stated in the Book of Hosea, though most of Hosea is a warning to Ephraim. Pregnancy is discussed in a dual prophecy in the Book of Amos and eerily connects Gilead and Canada with the Ammonites of French Quebec – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Hosea 12:11
English Standard Version
‘If there is iniquity in Gilead, they shall surely come to nothing: in Gilgal they sacrifice bulls; their altars also are like stone heaps on the furrows of the field.’
Amos 1:13-14
English Standard Version
‘Thus says the Lord:“For three transgressions of the Ammonites [French Quebec], and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead [Canada], that they might enlarge their border. So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah [Quebec, Quebec], and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind…’
Toronto, Canada
A chilling future prophetic indictment on Ephraim, reminiscent of Atwood’s Republic of Gilead is revealed in the Book of Hosea.
Hosea 9:3-16
English Standard Version
3 ‘They shall not remain in the land of the Lord, but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean food in Assyria. 8 The prophet is the watchman of Ephraim with my God; yet a fowler’s snare is on all his ways, and hatred in the house of his God…
11 Ephraim’s glory shall fly away like a bird –no birth, no pregnancy, no conception! 12 Even if they bring up children, I will bereave them till none is left. Woe to them when I depart from them!
13 Ephraim, as I have seen, was like a young palm planted in a meadow; but Ephraim must lead his children out to slaughter. 14 Give them, O Lord – what will you give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.
16 Ephraim is stricken; their root is dried up; they shall bear no fruit. Even though they give birth, I will put their beloved children to death.’
Hosea 5:3, 5, 9-14
English Standard Version
3 ‘I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hidden from me; for now, O Ephraim, you have played the whore; Israel is defiled… 5 … Israel and Ephraim shall stumble in his guilt; Judah also shall stumble with them. 9 Ephraim shall become a desolation in the day of punishment; among the tribes of Israel I make known what is sure. 10 The princes of Judah have become like those who move the landmark; upon them I will pour out my wrath like water.
11 Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in judgment, because he was determined to go after filth. 12 But I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like dry rot to the house of Judah. 13When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah his wound, thenEphraim went to Assyria, and sent to the great king [of the North]. But he is not able to cure you or heal your wound. 14 For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear and go away; I will carry off, and no one shall rescue.’
Hosea 6:4, 8 -10
English Standard Version
4 ‘What shall I do with you, O Ephraim? What shall I do with you, O Judah? Your love is like a morning cloud, like the dew that goes early away… 8 Gilead is a city of evildoers, tracked with blood. 9 As robbers lie in wait for a man, so the priests band together; they murder on the way to Shechem; they commit villainy. 10 In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing; Ephraim’s whoredom is there; Israel is defiled.’
Hosea 7:1, 8-9, 11–13
English Standard Version
1 ‘… the iniquity of Ephraim is revealed, and the evil deeds of Samaria, for they deal falsely…
8 Ephraim mixes himself with the peoples; Ephraim is a cake not turned[becomes dark]. 9 Strangers devour his strength, and he knows it not; gray hairs are sprinkled upon him, and he knows it not…’
A provocative prediction regarding the future ethnic demographic of the United States. The increase in numbers of African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans in the United States, from births, immigration and mixing with each other as well as with the white population, will eventually impact the American people and blacken its population in which the majority of its citizens will ultimately become overwhelmingly black, brown or mixed.
While this is not a slur on people ethnically, it is a warning on the resulting impact on America’s collective will, economic standing and political process – Article: 2050.
Hosea: 11 ‘Ephraimis like a dove, silly and without sense, calling to Egypt [the Arab world], going to Assyria [Russia]. 12 As they go, I will spread over them my net; I will bring them down like birds of the heavens; I will discipline them according to the report made to their congregation. 13 Woe to them, for they have strayed from me! Destruction to them, for they have rebelled against me! I would redeem them, but they speak lies against me.’
Hosea 8:5-6, 8-9, 11, 14
English Standard Version
5 ‘I have spurned your calf, O Samaria… 6… The calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces. 8 Israel is swallowed up; already they are among the nations as a useless vessel. 9 For they have gone up to Assyria, a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers… 11 Because Ephraim has multiplied altars for sinning, they have become to him altars for sinning… 14 For Israel has forgotten his Makerand built palaces, andJudah has multiplied fortified cities; so I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour her strongholds.’
Along with the United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh), England (Judah) comes under similar condemnation and will suffer the same punishment.
Flag of Hawaii: the eight stripes represent its islands and like the Cambridge (or Grand Union) flag, contains a Union Jack in it canton
‘The first thing recorded of Jeroboam, as [the first] king of Israel, is that he built the city of Shechem, in Mount Ephraim, and dwelt there. This city was the first capital of that kingdom. From there the king of Israel went out and built the city of Penuel, and seemed to prosper for a short season.
But Jeroboam fell to thinking that, if his subjects were allowed to continue going to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord, their hearts would turn again to Rehoboam, whose capital city it was, and they would then kill him, and go again to the kingdom of Judah.
Therefore he made two calves of gold, and said unto the people, “It is too much (trouble) for you to go to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And he set one in Bethel [Tribe of Benjamin on border with Ephraim in the south], and one in Dan [Tribe of Dan in the far north]. And this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one (in Bethel), and even unto Dan. And he made a house of high places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi.
“And Jeroboam ordained a feast in theeighth month[October/November],on the fifteenth day [sabbath]of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he offered upon the altar.
So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made. So he offered upon the altar which he had made in Bethel, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised in his own heart; and ordained a feast unto the Children of Israel, and he offered upon the altar and burnt incense,” I Kings 12:28-33.
‘This was the great sin which was such a curse to the people. But we want you to note just how the Lord speaks of it. After the prophet whom he had sent out of Judah had proclaimed the doom of Jeroboam, he further adds:
“The Lord shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of his good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves [worship of the Mother Goddess, Asherah – refer article: Asherah], provoking the Lord to anger. And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin,” I Kings 14:15, 16.’
What is incredible, is that Jeroboam instituted a new feast and Holy day holiday one month after the Feast of Tabernacles of the seventh month of Tishri (September/October) of each year. This mirrors and foreshadows the Americans millennia later instituting their own celebration approximately one month after the Old Covenant Feast of Tabernacles. That is, Thanksgiving on the fourth Thursday in November, which is one month later during the eighth month according to the sacred lunar calendar – Article: The CalendarConspiracy.
While Thanksgiving invariably falls between November 22nd and the 28th, the Eighth Astrological House is October 24 to November 22. Scorpio is the eighth astrological sign and is linked with the Tribe of Dan – where one of Jeroboam’s golden calfs was erected. The significance of this will become apparent in the next and final chapter.
Hosea 11:2-6, 8-10
English Standard Version
2 ‘The more they were called, the more they went away; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning offerings to idols. 3 Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk; I took them up by their arms, but they did not know that I healed them. They shall not return to the land of Egypt [captivity], but Assyria shall be their king, because they have refused to return to me.
6 The sword shall rage against their cities, consume the bars of their gates, and devour them because of their own counsels. 8 How can I give you up, O Ephraim? How can I hand you over, O Israel? How can I make you like Admah? How can I treat you like Zeboiim?’ – Genesis 14:2.
9 ‘I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, theHoly One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath. 10 They shall go after the Lord; he will roar like a lion; when he roars, his children shall come trembling from the west [Article: Four Kings & One Queen]; 11 they shall come trembling like birds from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria, and I will return them to their homes, declares the Lord.
12 Ephraim has surrounded me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit, but Judah still walks with God and is faithful to the Holy One[until the time of their punishment and captivity over one hundred years later].’
Hosea 12:1, 8, 14
English Standard Version
‘Ephraim feeds on the wind and pursues the east wind[the Orient, East Asia, China and Japan] all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence; they make a covenant with Assyria, and oil is carried to Egypt… Ephraim has said,
“Ah, but I am rich; I have found wealth for myself; in all my labors they cannot find in me iniquity or sin.” Ephraim has given bitter provocation; so his Lord will leave his bloodguilt on him and will repay him for his disgraceful deeds.’
Abraham Lincoln’s proclamation on April 30, 1863, for a nation-wide day of fasting and prayer:
“It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God… and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord… We have been the recipients of the choicest blessings of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation ever has grown; but we have forgotten God!
We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us. It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.”
How far has America come from this standard? How far indeed.
The last good man?
Isaiah 17:3-4
English Standard Version
3 ‘The fortress[military defence, strength] will disappear from Ephraim… 4 And in that day the glory of Jacob will be brought low, and the fat of his flesh will grow lean.’
Zechariah 9:10, 13
English Standard Version
10 ‘I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth. 13 For I have bent Judah as my bow; I have made Ephraim its arrow…’
Isaiah 9:9, 12, 19-21
English Standard Version
9 ‘… Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria, who say in pride and in arrogance of heart… 12 The Syrians [Spanish, Portuguese]on the east and the Philistines [Mexicans, Colombians]on the west devour Israel with open mouth. 19 Through the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land is scorched, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no one spares another. 20 They slice meat on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours the flesh of his own arm,
21 Manasseh devours Ephraim, and Ephraim devours Manasseh; together they are against Judah.’
A tragic time when Canada and the United States in desperation, will turn against each other, as well as turning on England. This is in contrast with the current relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, which has been born and refined during two world wars and several joint military operations over the decades. Churchill described it a ‘special relationship’. All the more meaningful when their individual identities, are rightfully understood.
In 1946, March 5, Winston Churchill in an oration, The Sinews of Peace, at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri – which incidentally, he also lodged ‘iron curtain’ in the diplomatic lexicon – describes the friendship between Great Britain and the United States.
“Now, while still pursuing the method of realising our overall strategic concept, I come to the crux of what I have travelled here to Say. Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organisation will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States.
This is no time for generalities, and I will venture to be precise. Fraternal association requires not only the growing friendship and mutual understanding between our two vast but kindred Systems of society, but the continuance of the intimate relationship between our military advisers, leading to common study of potential dangers, the similarity of weapons and manuals of instructions, and to the interchange of officers and cadets at technical colleges.”
When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited with the then United States President, Barack Obama, they lavished praise on their nations relationship during the first official visit by a Canadian leader in nearly twenty years. Trudeau toasted the two nations as ‘siblings’ at a state dinner and Obama said that the United States and Canada were ‘blessed to be neighbours.’ Yet former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau does not fully comprehend how the United States of America and Canada really are related brothers, bonded by blood. As with Barak Obama, the blessing in being neighbours, far transcends sharing an undefended border thousands of miles long. Yet their observations like Churchill’s, are no less true.
In fact this element of deep trust between Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah – with Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben – extends to Asher and Naphtali.
Not everyone is aware that the only nations considered true allies by the United States are Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. A 2013 report disclosed by the German publication Der Spiegel noted that while the United States has a massive cyber-espionage program, ‘only Canada, Australia, Britain and New Zealand were explicitly exempted from spy attacks.’
European nations such as Germany and France want the United States to treat them the same way they treat the Anglo-nations, which have been called the “five eyes.” There are longstanding and deep tensions over intelligence sharing between the United States, Germany and France. The United States has for decades, with few interruptions, strictly shared intelligence with just these four principal countries under the ‘five eyes’ agreement (FVEY), which includes a proviso that they do not spy on each other.
Potent symbols of American military power
“Germany and France have long resented this special relationship in intelligence,” according to Tim Naftali (Naphtali), of the New America Foundation, “But the question is whether (France and Germany) would be able to accept the coordination of their foreign policies that comes along with the agreement.” When intelligence agencies discuss targeting they are giving away what they know, said Naftali. “Is the US prepared to do that across the board with France and Germany?” The United States of America officially considers Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand as its most trusted and possible only non-hostile, allies.
Hosea 4:17-19
English Standard Version
‘Ephraim is joined to idols; leave him alone. When their drink is gone, they give themselves to whoring; their rulers dearly love shame. A wind has wrapped them in its wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices.’
Isaiah 28:1, 3, 7
English Standard Version
‘Ah, the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim, and the fading flower of its glorious beauty, which is on the head of the rich valley of those overcome with wine! The proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim will be trodden underfoot; These also reel with wine and stagger with strong drink; the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink, they are swallowed by wine, they stagger with strong drink, they reel in vision, they stumble in giving judgment.’
The prophet Isaiah may have meant this figuratively, as in drunk with power and success, though a literal explanation is probably also intended. There are nations with higher rates of alcohol consumption nationally and per person than the United States, but figures for rates of alcoholism tell a different story. The core of the United States population primarily descended from the tribe of Ephraim, is ahead of any other English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking nation.
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:
Hungary – 21.2%
Russia – 20.9%
Belarus – 18.8%
Latvia – 15.5%
South Korea – 13.9% (tie)
Slovenia – 13.9% (tie)
United States – 13.9% (tie)
Poland – 12.8%
Estonia – 12.2% (tie)
Slovakia – 12.2% (tie)
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of female Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:
United States – 10.4%
Russia – 7.4%
Sweden – 7.3%
Hungary – 7.2%
South Korea – 6.8%
Belarus – 6.2%
Austria – 6.1%
United Kingdom – 4.7%
Latvia – 4.6%
Slovenia – 4.5%
Psalm 78:9, 67-68
English Standard Version
‘The Ephraimites, armed with the bow, turned back on the day of battle. They did not keep God’s covenant, but refused to walk according to his law. They forgot his works and the wonders that he had shown them… He rejected the tent of Joseph; he did not choose the tribe of Ephraim, but he chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which he loves.’
Isaiah 11:13-14
English Standard Version
‘The jealousy of Ephraim shall depart, and those who harass Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not harass Ephraim. But they shall swoop down on the shoulder of the Philistines in the west, and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put out their hand against Edom and Moab, and the Ammonites shall obey them.’
Zechariah 10:6-7
English Standard Version
“I will strengthen the house of Judah, andI will save the house of Joseph.I will bring them back because I have compassion on them, and they shall be as though I had not rejected them, for I am the Lord their God and I will answer them. Then Ephraim shall become like a mighty warrior, and their hearts shall be glad as with wine.”
Jeremiah 31:6, 8, 9, 18, 20
English Standard Version
‘For there shall be a day when watchmen will call in the hill country of Ephraim… Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth… for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.
I have heard Ephraim grieving, ‘You have disciplined me, and I was disciplined, like an untrained* calf; bring me back that I may be restored, for you are the Lord my God. Is Ephraim my dear son? Is he my darling child? For as often as I speak against him, I do remember him still. Therefore my heart yearns for him; I will surely have mercy on him, declares the Lord.’
‘Ephraim is called a “bullock” or young* bull. In Hebrew “bullock” is “aegel”. Historically this very same name, “Aegel”, pronounced in the same way, was an alternative form for the ethnic term “Angle”. The Angles gave England (i.e. “Angle- land”) its name. Together with the Saxons, Jutes… and others the Angles conquered from the Celts the land that was later named England.
The Angles were also called “Aegels”. The appellations “Angle” and “Aegel” were employed interchangeably.The Hebrew word for young bull is “Aegel”. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yistchaki 1040-1105 CE) was the foremost Medieval Jewish Commentator. In commentating on this verse (Jeremiah 31:18) Rashi states that the Hebrew word “Aegel” (Young Bull) was a name applied to Ephraim.’
It was circa 449 to 477 CE that the Angles – the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh from Angeln – followed the Jutes, departing from their lands in the Cimbrian Peninsula as part of a full-scale migration (invasion) across the North Sea to Britain, where they founded several kingdoms in newly conquered territory. Angeln was reputedly left abandoned and empty by the mass population movement, allowing the Danish Vikings from Asher to migrate south and west to fill the gap.
During this period, the Danes became an ever greater threat to the Frisian hegemony of the North Sea and the northwestern European coastal territories. The Angles as part of the Saxon peoples – who also comprised the Jutes from Judah and the Frisians from Issachar and Zebulun – left little imprint on Anglia and Mercia, their strongholds in west and east Middle England (refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes).
Chromosomes Sketch New Outline of British History, New York Times:
‘But surprisingly, there is little sign of Anglo-Saxon heritage in southern England. “One tends to think of England as Anglo-Saxon,” Dr. Goldstein said. “But we show quite clearly there was not complete replacement of existing populations by either Anglo-Saxons or Danes. It looks like the Celts [or rather Jutes] did hold out.”
Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen 1902 – emphasis mine:
‘When Jacob transferred the birthright to the sons of Joseph he, with one hand resting on the head of each, prayed: “Let my name (Israel) be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac.” The birthright kingdom did, as we have seen, inherit the name of Israel, and also that of Isaac. For Amos says: “And the high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel (Bethel and Dan) shall be laid waste, and I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword,” (Amos 7:9). Here we have Isaac, Israel and the house of Jeroboam used as interchangeable names for the ten-tribed kingdom.
Thus the name of Isaac was named upon the house of Joseph, and it is true, both in race and name, that, in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” It seems that the Jews [Edom] had a preference for the name of Jacob, but Israel clung to the name of Isaac, especially after they were taken into captivity; they dropped the name of Israel and called themselves “Saac” – Sacae, or Saxae,as per Latin derivation – which is nothing more or less than the Hebrew name of Isaac, from which the initial letter “I” has been dropped.
It is now a well-authenticated fact that the word Saxon is derived from the Hebrew name of I-saac, together with an affix which means sons of. Professor Totten says: “In most of the Eastern languages ‘sons of’ is written ‘sunnia.’ It is equivalent to the Scottish ‘Mac’ and the English and Irish ‘Fitz’ – Mac Donald, son of Donald; Fitz Henry, son of Henry. So, in the distant home of our ancestors, Saac-Sunnia means sons of Isaac. Stambul is formed of Istanbul by dropping the prefix I, and so the Saxon is a direct descendant of our father Isaac.
Doctor W. Holt Yates accepts this derivation of the Saxon name as positive, and the Reverend W. H. Poole, D. D., speaks of it as follows: “It is a little curious to glean from the ancient nations and from the stone monuments of the early times the various forms in which this word is to be found.
I will here insert a few from a list of my own gleaned from ancient history, thus: Sons of Isaac, Sons of Saac, Saac-Sunnia, Saac-Suna, Saac-Sena Saaca-pena, Esakska, Sacae-Amyrqui, Beth-Sakai (House of Isaac), Sunnia-Sakai, Sakai-Suna, Saca-Suna, Sacae-Sunnae, Sackisina, Sacka-Sunia, Saca-cine, Saka-Suna, Sacas-Sani, Sakas-Saeni, Saxi-Suna, Sach-Suni, Sachi, Sacha, Sakah, Saachus, Saacus, Sacho, Saxo, Saxoi, Saxonia, Saxones, Saxae, Sach-sen, Sack-sen, Saxe-sen, Saxone, Saxony, Saxon.” – “Our Race.”
Concerning the etymology of the word Saxon, Yatman says: “Its history is as follows: The Persians used the terms Sacae and Scythian as convertible, whether from a corrupt rendering of one from the other or because the Sacae, a great tribe of Scythians (wanderers) bordering upon them, were so called by a tribal name.
Of the fact of the identity of the Sacae and the Scythians there is not the shadow of a doubt, and it is clear that these people called their country Sacasena.It is equally clear that the Saxons of England were the Scythians or Celte-Scythians. Their geographical position in Europe is accurately described by Plutarch, Tacitus, Ptolemy, and other authors.” To this testimony all the historians agree. Strabo asserts that the most ancient Greek historians knew the Sacaea as a people who lived beyond the Caspian Sea.
Diodorus says: “The Sacaea sprung from a people in Media who obtained a vast and glorious empire.”
Ptolemy finds the Saxons in a race of Scythians, called Sakai, who came from Media.
Pliny says: “The Sakai were among the most distinguished people of Scythia, who settled in Armenia, and were called Sacae-Sani.”
Albinus says: “The Saxons were descended from the ancient Sacae of Asia.”
Prideaux finds that the Cimbrians came from between the Black and Euxine (Caspian) seas, and that with them came the Angli.
Sharon Turner, the great Saxon historian, says: “The Saxons were a Scythian nation, and were called Saca, Sachi, Sacki, Sach-sen.”
Gawler, in “Our Scythian Ancestors” (Page 6), says: “The word ‘Saacae,’ is fairly and without straining or imagination, translatable as Isaacites.”
‘But why has it been necessary for the historians of these various nations thus to trace this name, search records, tablets and monuments, and hunt for the origin of the Anglo-Saxons? Are they an obscure people? Are they a feeble nation? Are they an ignorant folk? Are they an uncivilized race? No; they are diametrically opposite to all this… but they do not know where they originated, nor who were their ancestors – they are lost.
Some of these historians whom we have quoted do not agree among themselves as to the origin of the Saxons, but belong to different schools of contention, and are wrangling over the question whether these lost people belong to the Aryan, or to the Semitic race. The only use which we have, just here, for their contention is to show that they all trace the Saxons to the very place where the captive ten tribes of Israel were deported by Shalmanesar, the King of Assyria.
These same historians also show that the Sax-ons sprang into existence, in so far as their modern and medieval history is concerned, about three years after the Israelites were taken to that country, and that there they lose them and can trace them no further.’
Helmet of East Angle King Raedwald
In the Book of revelation we read about the 144,000 saints who live at the end of days. They are the loyal and faithful ones gathered from the sons of Jacob. In counterpoint to the mark of the Beast (or the mark of Cain), on (in) everyone’s forehead, these elect are sealed by the Holy Spirt with special protection from the Tribulation.
Revelation 7:1-8
English Standard Version
1 ‘After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2 Then I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, with the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm earth and sea, 3 saying,
“Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.”
4 And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:
verses 5-8
12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed, 12,000 from the tribe of Reuben, 12,000 from the tribe of Gad,
12,000 from the tribe of Asher, 12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali, 12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh,
12,000 from the tribe of Simeon, 12,000 from the tribe of Levi, 12,000 from the tribe of Issachar,
12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun, 12,000 from the tribe of Joseph, 12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed.
What various commentators have righty observed though wrongly interpreted, is that Joseph at number eleven and Manasseh at number six, are mentioned twice in place of the missing tribe of Dan. The answer is less to do with Dan and more to do with the fact that the 12,000 people from Manasseh means from the British and Irish descended peoples of Canada. The 12,000 people from Joseph, means from the British and Irish descended peoples of the United States; comprising the tribe of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. Hence recall in the Bible, they are known and called, either Ephraim or, Joseph. Manasseh on the other hand remember, is known variously as Machir, Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh or simply as, Manasseh.
As we have learned from previous chapters: Judah is England; Reuben is Northern Ireland; Gad is the Republic of Ireland; Asher is Australia; Naphtali is New Zealand; Simeon is Wales; Levi are scattered, though mainly in England, Wales and Scotland; Issachar and Zebulun are the British in South Africa and Zimbabwe; and Benjamin is Scotland.
Why representation from the tribe of Dan is missing will be discussed in the following chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Key moments and dates in Canadian history.
1688 – War fought between King William’s New England and New France.
1713 – The British gained control of much of Eastern Canada under the Treaty of Utrecht.
1755 – The British expelled the Acadians from their lands.
1759 – The British occupied Quebec City in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham.
1763 – France lost the French and Indian War, also known as the Seven Years War to the British. The British gained control of all the French lands in Canada as a result and these were absorbed into the British Empire.
1775 – The invasion of the Continental Army of America is stopped at the Battle of Quebec.
1783 – The Treaty of Paris established official borders between the United States and Canada.
1784 – The colony of New Brunswick was established.
1791 – Quebec was divided into Upper Canada, today’s Ontario and Lower Canada, today’s Quebec.
1812 – War between the British and the United States. American forces attempted to invade Canada.
1818 – The 49th parallel is determined as the border between much of the United States and Canada.
1837 – Rebellion occurred throughout Canada towards the British government.
1838 – The Durham Report was issued which recommended that Upper and Lower Canada be united.
1840 – Upper and Lower Canada were merged into a single colony, the United Provence of Canada by the Act of Union.
1846 – The border between the United States and Canada in the west is decided by the Oregon Treaty.
1867 – The Dominion of Canada is formed as the Canadian Confederation. It included the four provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario.
1870 – The province of Manitoba joins Canada and in 1871, British Columbia becomes the sixth province of Canada.
1873 – The Northwest Mounted Police were established. They become the Canadian Mounted Police.
1896 – Gold was discovered in the Yukon. The Klondike Gold Rush occurred as thousands of prospectors moved to Canada to find gold.
1905 – Saskatchewan and Alberta became provinces.
1931 – The Statute of Westminster was authorised, whereby Canada became an independent nation.
1982 – The year Canada actually became fully independent from the United Kingdom, adopting its own constitution.
Canada is a federation composed of ten provinces and three territories (10+3=13). The etymological origins of the word Canada is accepted as coming from the St Lawrence Iroquian word kanata, meaning ‘village’ or ‘settlement.’ The national motto A Mari Usque Ad Mare means ‘From Sea to Sea.’ Covering 3.85 million square miles, Canada is the world’s second largest country by total area, after Russia. Its southern and western border with the United States, stretching 5,525 miles, is the world’s longest (undefended) bi-national land border. Canada’s capital is Ottawa, with 1,323,783 people.
Britannica – emphasis mine:
‘Although Canada shares many similarities with its southern neighbour – and, indeed, its popular culture and that of the United States are in many regards indistinguishable – the differences between the two countries, both temperamental and material, are profound.
“The central fact of Canadian history,” observed the 20th-century literary critic Northrop Frye, is “the rejection of the American Revolution.” Contemporary Canadians are inclined to favour orderly central government and a sense of community over individualism; in international affairs, they are more likely to serve the role of peacemaker instead of warrior, and, whether at home or abroad, they are likely to have a pluralistic way of viewing the world.
More than that, Canadians live in a society that in most legal and official matters resembles Britain – at least in the English-speaking portion of the country.’
Canadian Coat of Arms – not so far removed from the United Kingdom’s as discussed.
Key moments and dates in American history.
1492 – Christopher Columbus ‘discovered’ the Americas. The origin of the name America is often attributed to the explorer Amerigo Vespucce. Yair Davidy offers an alternative derivation from the term Machir, the son of Manasseh. The Western Hemisphere is referred to as either North, Central or South America, though when the term ‘American’ is used, this is normally a universal reference to the peoples of the United States. The nickname ‘Yankee’ for a North American derives from a form of the name Jacob. The Latinos themselves, use the term Norte Americanos to refer to Americans in the United States.
America may have even taken its name from a Welshman called Richard Amerik, a chief investor in late fifteenth century voyages of discovery. The word Amerik itself is derived from ap Meuric, Welsh for ‘son of Maurice’ – the latter was anglicised further to Morris. The American state of Pennsylvania is possibly named after the Welsh word for head, pen.
In an audio study course called An Invitation to Hebrew in its section on the ‘Vocabulary of Jewish Life’ the teacher confirms that ‘covenant in Hebrew is… b’rit. He mentions its occurrence in the term b’nai b’rit, or the ‘children of the covenant’ in reference to the United States of America, which is called in Hebrew, Artzot Ha-Brit, ‘the lands of the covenant’ (Mordecai Kamrat, Spoken Arts, Incorporated, 1960).
1513 – Juan Ponce de Leon visited Florida.
1540 – Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto explored the Southeast.
1565 – St. Augustine was established as the first permanent settlement in the United States.
1607 – The Jamestown settlement and Virginia Colony was founded by John Smith.
1620 – The Mayflower landed with the pilgrims at Plymouth.
1629 – The Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded.
1692 – The Salem witch trials took place in Massachusetts.
1765 – The British government imposed the Stamp Act on the colonies. The colonies protested with the Stamp Act Congress.
1770 – The Boston Massacre occurred.
1773 – Bostonians protested the Tea Act with the Boston Tea Party dumping tea into the Boston Harbor.
1774 – The First Continental Congress was held. The British government imposed the Intolerable Acts on the colonies. The American colonies grew unhappy with what they called “taxation without representation”.
1775 – The Revolutionary War began with the Battle of Lexington and Concord. The Second Continental Congress was held and the Battle of Bunker Hill occurred. The American Revolutionary War fought by the Thirteen Colonies against the British Empire, was the first successful war of independence by a non-European entity against a European power in modern history.
1776 – The American colonies declared their independence as the United States of America.
1777 – The Continental Army stayed at Valley Forge for the winter.
1781 – The British surrendered at Yorktown, Virginia. The Articles of the Confederation were ratified by the colonies.
1783 – The Revolutionary War officially ended with the Treaty of Paris.
1787 – The Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Convention.
1789 – George Washington became the first President of the United States.
1791 – The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution as the first ten amendments.
1793 – The cotton gin (engine, machine) was invented by Eli Whitney.
1803 – The size of the United States was nearly doubled with the Louisiana Purchase from France.
1812 – The War began against Great Britain.
1815 – United States troops led by Andrew Jackson defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans.
1823 – The Monroe Doctrine was declared by President James Monroe. North and South America were closed to any further colonisation and to any interference by a European power.
1836 – The Battle of the Alamo in Texas.
1838 – The Cherokee Nation was forced to march from the Southeast to Oklahoma in what was known as the Trail of Tears.
1846 – The Mexican-American War began.
1849 – Prospectors travelled to California in the California Gold Rush.
1860 – Abraham Lincoln was elected president.
1861 – The American Civil War began.
1863 – The Union Army won the Battle of Gettysburg. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves in the South.
1864 – Union General Sherman made his famous “march to the sea.”
1865 – The American Civil War came to an end with General Robert E Lee surrendering at the Appomattox Court House. President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated.
1865 – Slavery was outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment.
1867 – Alaska purchased from Russia.
1869 – The First Transcontinental Railroad was completed.
1876 – The telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell.
1914 – In both World Wars the United States tried to remain neutral but ended up on the side of the United Kingdom and the Allies.
Britannica – emphasis mine:
‘Probably no other country has a wider range of racial, ethnic, and cultural types than does the United States. The nation’s wealth is partly a reflection of its rich natural resources and its enormous agricultural output, but it owes more to the country’s highly developed industry.
Despite its relative economic self-sufficiency in many areas, the United States is the most important single factor in world trade by virtue of the sheer size of its economy. Its exports and imports represent major proportions of the world total. The United States also impinges on the global economy as a source of and as a destination for investment capital. The country continues to sustain an economic life that is more diversified than any other on Earth, providing the majority of its people with one of the world’s highest standards of living.
America was the first of the European colonies to separate successfully from its motherland, and it was the first nation to be established on the premise that sovereignty rests with its citizens and not with the government. In the 20th century the United States emerged as a world power, and since World war II it has been oneof the preeminent powers. It has not accepted this mantle easily nor always carried it willingly; the principles and ideals of its founders have been tested by the pressures and exigencies of its dominant status. The United States still offers its residents opportunities for unparalleled personal advancement and wealth.’
The Lightkeeper, 2050:
‘America is compellingly and utterly unique in all history, in the modern world and in our life times. No single nation has been so materially blessed or prosperous beyond belief. No single nation has so heavily influenced the rest of the whole world in its export of American culture through film, television, literature and music. Never, has a single nation so comprehensively dominated civilisation in its development of trade, information technology, media, telecommunications, munitions, missiles and defence systems.
As an active superpower and hyper power since 1991, the United States has undeniably built an empire unlike anything seen in the world, for though they do not have a mass of territorial conquests or colonies like the [former] British Empire, their financial investment and influence worldwide intertwines the global economy like the roots of a tree that grow underground, wrapping themselves around everything in its path.’
Yair Davidy describes the link between the name Joseph and Parthian rulers, as well as metallurgy in ancient Spain and of Samaria in ancient Israel.
Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:
‘Arsacides were the rulers of the Parthian* Empire in Persia. The Parthians rulers were of Israelite descent’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. ‘Some scholars trace the name “Aspourgos” to the Iranian “aspa” meaning horse or to the Akkadian-Syrian “aspuraku” meaning “horseman”. The name however had a different original connotation and any similarity with the word for “horse” and the like deviates from the primary root of the name.
Haynman traces the name “Aspourgos” to the Semitic-Hebrew root “asaph” (to gather in) and to “biraka” which she understands to, mean “thy self-creation” or something similar. She points out that the name Joseph has the same origin.
The people of Tanais did have their own independent form of monotheistic belief, similar to but not derived from Judaism. They did not eat pork’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘They were part of the Sacae-Scythian people who had Israelite tribal names and are shown for other reasons to have been of Israelite descent. It may therefore be concluded that they revered “Joseph” under the name “Aspourgos” because they were descended from Joseph. The guilds connected with Aspourgos really did have ceremonies commemorating traditions about Joseph. They also retained some degree of monotheistic sentiment because they were of Hebrew origin. This was also the reason they did not eat pork whereas all other peoples in the region at that time did.
… researchers have suggested that the features found in Tanais were part of the Sakae-Scythian culture in general. Tanais was abandoned in the early 400s CE, about the time of the Hun invasion of Europe, and its inhabitants apparently joined their Scythian brothers and moved westward.’
Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:
‘Ammianus Marcellinus said that the original inhabitants of Tartessos had been called Dorians. The Dorians in Classical literature were a branch of the Greeks but in this case the intention is to people coming via the port of Dor on the coast of Israel. Dor was the major port on the coast of Central Israel and in Assyrian times it was the name given to a province comprising the whole coastal area. Bochart using Greek and Latin sources demonstratedthat the Dorians who migrated to Gades and Tartessus were descendants of a legendary “Dorus and Phoenicius” i.e. of Dorians and Phoenicians. Bochart traced them to Dor in Israel and says that originally they were identified as Galicians, i.e. Galatians’ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.
‘… the original Dorians of Tartessus, the first settlers of Baetica in southern Spain, and the Galatians were all essentially one and the same people and that amongst them were members of the Tribe of Manasseh. “Dor and her towns” had been part of the region inherited by the Tribe of Manasseh whose original Canaanite inhabitants at first could not be driven out but were put to tribute (Joshua 17:11-12, Judges 1:27- 28). Later the area was considered Israelite. “All the region of Dor” became one of the 12 administrative districts into which the Land of Israel was divided by King Solomon and it was governed by Abinadab who “had Taphah the daughter of Solomon to wife” (1-Kings 4:11).
When the Assyrians conquered Israel they named the whole coastal region of Manasseh and Ephraim after Dor. Ptolemy records the “Menesthei Portus”, i.e. the Port of the Tribe of Manasseh in the region of the Turdulorum just to the east of Gades off the southwest coast of Spain! The port of Gibraltar is within the area most consistently connected with Tartessos and therefore was Israelite before Spain existed. Gibraltar since 1704 CE has belonged to Britain [Judah*]. This is not a coincidence!
Metal produced in Baetica (in southeast Spain) was called “Samarian metal” (Pliny N.H.) after Samaria in Israel. There was also a port named “Samarium” in Galatia of northwest Spain. The Samar (Somme) River in north Gaul and neighboring city of Samarobriva (Amiens) and the Sambre River just to their north in Belgium were also named after Samaria in Israel.’
The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘When Americans spread westward toward the Pacific Ocean, they migrated in wagon trains. In doing so, they carried on a tradition of the ancient Scythians.The Scythians also migrated via covered wagons, which are described in the following words:
“The wagons in which the women and children traveled had from four to six wheels. They were covered with felt roofs and the space inside was divided into two or three compartments. Little clay models of these prototypes of the modern caravan have been found in some… Scythian burials.”
Like the cowboys of the American “West,” the Scythians also “excelled at lassoing.”
With their horse riding, lassoing, and “wagon trains,” Scythian culture resembled the pioneer days of the American West (without the six shooters). Perhaps the power of genetic influence is more potent than generally realized.
The original twelve tribes of Israel grew to became thirteen when Joseph was subdivided into the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.Since Ephraim was given its portion before Manasseh, Manasseh essentially became “the thirteenth tribe.” The number “13” has uniquely been associated with the founding of America. The United States of America was born as a union of thirteen separate colonies, with its flag exhibiting thirteen stripes and thirteen stars. The prominence of the number “13” in the founding of America indicates a divine hand influencing world events to appropriately place the number “13” on this new Manassehite nation.’
This is circumlocutory reasoning to fit a theory. It could be argued that thirteen represents Ephraim as the thirteenth born and the last or youngest even though receiving a blessing greater than Manasseh. Thirteen could also represent Jospeh as in, he represents twelve and thirteen. Apportioning Manasseh to the number thirteen is convenient but doesn’t make sense by itself, particularly when we know the United States is principally Ephraim or one and a half tribes comprising Joseph. It is Canada which is Manasseh and to be fair, it is the one whom is forgotten – with its ten provinces and three territories.
Collins: ‘A common symbol of the United States of America is an eagle clutching “an olive branch” and a “group of arrows” in its talons. The olive branch signifies America’s desire for peace while the arrows signify prowess in war. Is it only coincidence that the ancient Scythians (a “Sacae” nation) used the same war sign as modern America (a “Saxon” nation): a clump of arrows? [recall the meaning of Asenath’s (Joseph’e wife) name and the goddess Neith being associated with arrows]. Furthermore, the eagle was also a common Scythian symbol.
One Scythian eagle crest was found in a pose resembling the eaglecrest of the United States: both show eagles with modern outstretched wings and flared tail feathers(the Scythian eagle holds prey in its talons, while the American eagle holds a branch and a clump of arrows in its talons). Indeed, the eagle crest of the United States not only has its roots in the Scythian eagle crest, but also proclaims [an Israelite] origin by having thirteen arrows in one talon, thirteen leaves on the olive branch in the other talon, thirteen stars over the eagle’s head, thirteen bars in the shield over the eagle’s body, and even thirteen letters in the phrase “E PLURIBUS UNUM.”
If this sounds surprising, consider the fact that in 1857, two messages were given by a Rev. F. E. Pitts to a joint session of the U.S. Congress, presenting evidence that the United States of America was descended from the ten tribes of Israel! Pastor Pitts had little of the information presented in this book available to him, so he based his conclusion on biblical prophecies alone. He utilized prophecies in the books of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Hosea to show that America had fulfilled many prophecies about the ten tribes of Israel. Pastor Pitts wrote:
“The United States of America, our great country, is foretold in the Holy Scriptures… The United States of America is the nationality that is promised in the prophetic Scriptures to arise in the latter times as Israel Restored… Such… was ancient Israel, and such is the United States of America.”
An alternative argument on the re-occurring number thirteen, is presented by Stewart A Swerdlow in his book, Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, 2002:
‘The United States was established with 13 colonies, one for each of the Illuminati families. The original flag had 13 stars, and still has 13 stripes. The eagle, the symbol of the United States, holds 13 arrows in its talons. The United States is actually a corporate asset of the Virginia Company that was established in 1604 in England with direct involvement of the Rothschilds. The finances of the Rothschilds were necessary to fund the exploration and exploitation of the North American continent. The assets of the Virginia Company, including the United States, are owned by the Holy Roman Empire via the Vatican. Executorship remains with the British royal family, but actual ownership lies with the Roman Catholic Church’ – Articles: The Life & Death of Charles III; and The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?
The United States of America is not named after Amerigo Vespucci, as you learned in school. The Illuminati would never name a continent, actually two continents, after an Italian mapmaker.
The name is actually a combination of words.
“Am” is the Hebrew word for “people”
“Ame” is also the command form of the Spanish/Latin verb “to love”
“Eri” or “ari” is a Hebrew term for “lion”
“Rica” is the feminine form of the Spanish word for “rich”
“Ka” is the ancient Egyptian word for soul, or spirit force within a body
The symbolic statement of America is that it is a combination of Lemuria and Atlantis; a blend of the… Lyrae with… Draco… [and] the combination of these… civilizations would produce the most powerful, technological Empire ever known!’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
There are two other words worth noting that may have an etymological link with the word America. The first is Amorica (or Aremorica), which literally means ‘place in front of the sea.’ The word differs merely by one vowel letter. It was the name for the northwestern extremity of ancient Gaul, now known as Brittany. In Celtic, Roman and Frankish ages, Amorica also included the western area of what later became known as Normandy. Both Normandy (from the Normans) and Brittany (derived from Britons) have strong Israelite association – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
The other word is Mercia, which derives from the Old English word Merce, meaning ‘people of the Marches’ or boundaries. Swapping two letters, gives Merica. Mercia was a powerful Saxon kingdom with its capital in Tamworth, during the seventh to ninth centuries and was prominent amongst the six other great Saxon kingdoms: East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex.
‘The first national flag of those original United States had thirteen Stars and thirteen Bars. The bars symbolize the Union, and the constellation of thirteen stars was intended to symbolize the nation formed of thirteen independent states. In this, the Great Seal of our country… we have the arms and crest of the United States of America.
We would first call your attention to the fact that the eagle is holding in what is called the “Dexter” talon an Olive Branch. In the fourteenth chapter of Hosea, that prophet, who has so much to say about lost Ephraim-Israel, we have the following: “O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God; I will heal their backslidings; I will love them freely; for mine anger is turned away from him… I will be as the dew to Israel; he shall grow like the lily (the national flower of Egypt), and cast forth his roots as Lebanon (royal cedar). His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the OLIVE tree. Ephraim will say, What have I to do any more with idols?”
Ephraim is the representative of the house of Joseph, and we have placed this Scripture before our readers that they may see that the Olive tree is among theinsignia of the birthright family, and that it is here represented as belonging to one of the Branches of the birthright kingdom, and since the birthright is Joseph’s, it is theOlive Branch of Joseph which has been placed in the “Coat of Arms” of [Ephraim], the thirteenth tribe in Israel, who has now fulfilled the prophecy of becoming a great [company of nations].
Still this fact, if it stood alone, might not mean so much, but in the other talon, which is called the “Sinister,” is a “Bundle of thirteen Arrows,” which represents the nation individually and collectively prepared for war.
It is marvelous that the Olive Branch should have been made our official insignum of Peace, and that the Arrows should have been made by law to represent the War Power of the country, for theArrows were in the heraldry of Israel, as well as the Unicorn and Lion, when Balaam was compelled to bless instead of curse them.’
“God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of [a] unicorn [ox]: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.”
“He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee” – Numbers 24:8-9, BRG Bible.
Verse eight is as a clear reference to the United States of America (Joseph) as verse nine is to England (Judah) – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Allen: ‘Also, the Josephites were Bow-men, and Jacob, after speaking of Joseph and his branches, said,
“The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him. But his Bow (munitions of war) abode in strength, and theArms of his hands were made strongby the hands of the mighty God of Jacob,” Genesis 49:23-24.
It is a well-known, and much-rejoiced-over fact that the Bow of the United States, which has sent her Arrows into the ranks of her enemies, has always abode in strength, and that both her chief men and people have always said: “God has helped us.”
… and theEagle, like everything else that pertains to national Israel, has fallen to the birthright family, andis now the national ensign of the thirteenth tribe of Israel, the people of which are not only the descendants of [Ephraim]… but they also compose the firstborn nation out of the “MANY NATIONS,” which were promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and whose ensign Eagle holds in his beak a scroll upon which is written their national motto, “E Pluribus Unum,” which hasthirteen letters, and means “One out of MANY.”
“He (Israel) shall fly as an Eagle, and spread his wings over Moab,” Jeremiah 48:40. No wings except those which are spread out can be shadowing wings, and the Shadowing wings of Israel’s Spread Eagle are in the ensign of the United States of America. Hence, America is the land shadowed by wings of which Isaiah wrote, whose ambassadors cross the sea in vessels of bulrushes, or, literally, of caldrons which absorb water; i. e., the modern steamship. The Shield, or escutcheon, which is borne on the breast of the Spread Eagle, has thirteen pieces, called pales, or paleways, which comes from the same word as palings or pickets. These thirteen paleways are united by one at the top. The Lord said to Abraham: “I am thy Shield.”
‘On the national seal of America, the “Great People,” above the shadowing wings and the scroll, is a Cloud emitting rays of Glory. “Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel… and behold theGlory of the Lord appeared in the Cloud.” To our fathers that glory Cloud was significant of the presence of Jehovah. That Glory Cloud, which hung over Israel, guided those who had but just escaped from the Egyptian bondage, and it stood between them and their enemies. But this is not all, for this Cloud of our American heraldry surrounds what is called “The Constellation.” This constellation is a group of thirteen stars, or planets, on a field of azure sky, which is exactly the same number of planets that appeared on the azure sky in the dream of Joseph, which drove him into separation from his brethren.
Any one of these features in the blazonry of our nation might have been a coincidence, but when we see that there is not a single feature, but that which is Josephic and Israelitish, it is simply astounding.
But when we turn our face upon the reverse side of that great national seal we are overwhelmed, for there stands the Great Pyramid of Egypt [Article: The Pyramid Perplexity], which is one of the two great monuments of Egypt, the birthplace of Ephraim and Manasseh, the Egypto-Israelitish sons of Joseph, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham. And, marvel of marvels! The national Crest of England has that other great monument of Egypt, the Sphinx [Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega], on its reverse side. Thus do the people of Great Britain and the United States of America, the Brother nations, by that which speaks louder than words, for signs are arbitrary, say that they are the offsprings of the Egypto-Israelitish holders of the Abrahamic birthright.
The people of the United States made this declaration by that which was made a law on Thursday, June 20, 1782, for on that day the ensign which bears those shadowing wings of Israel, together with the Heraldry of Joseph, became a law among us. Also over the pyramid on the reverse side of the Great Seal of America is another thirteen-lettered motto, which, of course is not only lawful, but also national; i.e., “Annuit Coeptis,” – “He (the Lord) hath prospered our undertakings.” This also is Josephic, for we read, “The Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man.” “The Lord was with him (Joseph), and that which he did the Lord made it to prosper,” Genesis 39:3-23.
Those who understand the Cabala and the arithmography of the Scriptures, it is known thatthe number thirteen is significant of rebellion, but all that we can say about it here is that the first time this number occurs in the Bible it is with reference to Rebellion (Genesis 14:4)’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘Surely that people whose characteristic number is thirteen did rebel in 1776, and prospered in it, too. They also prospered in 1814, in another little affair concerning the acquisition of a vast stretch of territory known as Louisiana.
This people have also had rebellion within their own borders, and it is a remarkable fact that, although thirteen was not the number of states in the Confederacy, the Confederate Congress, in 1863, formally adopted a battle flag for the Confederacy, and also a Confederate flag.’
Recall there were actually thirteen states supporting the Confederacy. The first seven member states were: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina and Florida. The next four states to join were: Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. The final two who allied with the confederacy, making thirteen were Missouri and Kentucky.
Allen: ‘The Battle Flag was a white field with a blue cross of this (X) shape, in which there were thirteen stars.’ The Scottish Saltire is white with a blue (diagonal) cross.
(Confederate) Rebel Flag
Allen: ‘The flag for the Confederacy was white, with a red field in the Dexter chief corner, bearing this same (X) cross with its thirteen stars. Here again is both rebellion and the birthright cross of the house of Joseph. In his struggle the government also prospered, and it was essential that it should thus prosper, not only in this case, but also in the others of which we have spoken, in order to fulfill a prophecy concerning one feature of their history, namely: “Shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to undo the heavy burdens, and let the OPPRESSED GO FREE, and that YE break every yoke?” These are the reasons for which Our Race go to war. England freed her slaves in 1838 and America freed hers in 1861.’
Tribal Emblems of Ephraim – National symbols of America, Mark Lane – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In Numbers Chapter 2 it says “Everyone of the children of Israel shall camp by his own standard, beside the emblems of his father’s house” (Numbers 2:2).
We thus conclude that each tribe of Israel had emblems, or tribal symbols. The tribal symbols of Ephraim would likely have been:
Symbol of a Bull or Wild Ox or Horn
Symbol of fruitfulness of the land: Sheaf of Wheat or Fruit Laden Bough
Symbol of Strong Arm or Arrows
If the USA is the prophetic fulfillment of Ephraim we would expect to see its citizens rallying to their county’s protection under similar national symbols. That is precisely what we see. Ephraim was granted the blessing of divine protection. In the Bible this is signified by the figure of an eagle. The Lord said that he protected Israel on the exodus from Egypt “on eagle’s wings” (Exodus 19:4). Therefore, the eagle is the symbol of God’s protection: it is not the symbol of a nation per se. Many of the national symbols of the USA match the symbols of the tribe of Ephraim.
(1) Great seal of the United States:
Eagle grasps a clutch of arrows in one claw
Eagle grasps a fruitful bough in the other claw Eagle’s breast displays a shield (allusion to spiritual protection) Eagle’s head is turned to its right: facing West (allusion to the West side of the Camp) Over the Eagle’s head is a cloud (allusion to the cloud of God which traveled with the Camp) Obverse side displays a pyramid (allusion to Joseph who ruled Egypt) Obverse side display the “eye of God” (another allusion to God’s watchful protection)
(2) American Money:
The penny displays two sheafs (two tribes) [representing Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh] of wheat: on the left and on the right
The US one dollar bill has both sides of the Great Seal printed on it
(3) American Mottos:
“In God We Trust” placed on pennies (1865) official motto of US (adopted in 1956) “New World Order” NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM (Great Seal) “Out of Many One” E PLURIBUS UNUM (Great Seal) “He has Prospered our Undertakings” ANNUIT COEPTIS (Great Seal)
In the US national symbols the number 13 is prominent. There are 13 stars in the cloud, 13 arrows in the clutch, 13 leaves on the bough, 13 fruits on the bough, 13 strips on the shield… The spiritual number 13 signifies “Rebellion” and in truth the United States gained its independence by rebelling against the authority of its… brother the United Kingdom. There were also 13 states in the original colonies of the United States. Normally rebellion has a negative connotation, however at the core of the American ideal of liberty and pursuit of happiness is the concept of resisting over-authoritarian governments.
It is fair to say Americans love their country and they express that on many occasions by honoring their flag, or their ‘colors’. One of the possible pitfalls of a nation being as great as America is its citizens might fall into a love of country that surpasses their love for God. To them the flag is a symbol of protection, much as the skins protected the tabernacle in the desert. When citizens begin to look to their government for protection, and not to God for protection, they put their trust in the wrong place. Instead of ‘In God We Trust’ it is ‘In our Natural Resources We Trust’, or ‘In our Military We Trust’, ‘In our Government We Trust’, or ‘In America We Trust’. When an American… looks at the stars and stripes, the colors should remind him that the great nation of the United States depends for its existence and prosperity on the blessing and protection of God, not the government of the day.’
Symbol of United States protection – the American Bald Eagle
Commentators correctly attribute symbols relating to Joseph (who is indicative of Ephraim) of olives and arrows to the United States of America; yet incorrectly define them as belonging to the tribe of Manasseh.
The Meaning of the Great Seal of The United States, American Heritage Education Foundation, 2017:
‘The Great Seal of the United States is the official emblem and heraldic device of the United States of America. It was adopted by the Continental Congress in 1782 [on June 20] to represent the nation and to demonstrate to other nations of the world the ideas and values of its Founders and people. The Great Seal of the United States guarantees the authenticity of official U.S. documents. It is used 2,000-3,000 times per year to seal documents. Such documents include treaties, presidential proclamations, appointments of government officials, and presidential communications to heads of foreign nations. The seal is also printed on the U.S. $1 bill, providing U.S. citizens with a ready reference to the nation’s foundational ideas.
The custody of the Great Seal is assigned to the U.S. Department of State. The seal can be affixed by an officer of the Secretary of State. The Great Seal… was first used officially on September 16, 1782, to guarantee the authenticity of a document that granted full power to General George Washington “to negotiate and sign with the British an agreement for the exchange, subsistence, and better treatment of prisoners of war.” Thomas Jefferson was the first Secretary of State to have custody of the Great Seal. The Great Seal has two sides and displays a number of important symbols. The front (obverse) side of the seal displays the coat of arms of the United States. The coat of arms is officially used for coins, postage stamps, stationary, publications, flags, military uniforms, public monuments, public buildings, embassies and consulates, passports, and items owned by the U. S. government.’
While the above definitions repeatedly mention God (the Creator); it is not really the Eternal who is being venerated but actually His adversary – refer articles 33; and Asherah.
The long held belief amongst biblical identity adherents that Ephraim is England and its colonies, while Manasseh is the United States; is after some five hundred years, like cemented stone masonry which is long dried and set. For those who tightly hold onto this explanation, there is on the one hand little point in attempting to loosen this deeply imbedded paradigm of error. Those who support this premise feel real indignation from any argument which presents the opposing view.
Rightly so, as it is intrinsically flawed arguing that England is Manasseh, when such is clearly not the case and they can correctly see through this inaccuracy. Even so, the perceived threat of the truth regarding Ephraim is felt so strongly, that extensive lists are compiled to validate the United States is still Manasseh.
Since Canada is the real Manasseh and not the United States let alone England or its offshoots, many of the points used as proof suddenly lose their relevance or veracity as applicable evidence. It still may be of value to look at a selection of points raised by high profile researchers, only as they relate to the United States and Ephraim, while ignoring the blind tangents of those relating to the United Kingdom, Great Britain or England – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator.
‘Jacob placed Ephraim before Manasseh, and he was called the Firstborn’ – Genesis 48:14-19, Jeremiah 31:9.
It is argued that Ephraim’s (prophetic) destiny was to be fulfilled before Manasseh’s because the roles were reversed. If such is the case, then the United states (July 4, 1776) did become a nation… before Canada (July 1, 1867). The younger did become the firstborn.
Tzvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov (1784-1840):
“Why did Jacob not command that Manasseh be placed on his left side and Ephraim on his right? Why did Jacob have to cross his hands over? The truth is that Manasseh is the firstborn! This is why it says ‘guiding his hands wittingly’ (Genesis 48:14). He did not change Manasseh over to the left side for in truth Manasseh is the firstborn and the most important but he put Ephraim before Manasseh concerning the chronological precedence.’
‘Ephraim set before Manasseh means he would be first in both time and greatness’ – Genesis 48:20.
It is argued that Ephraim would be set before Manasseh in terms of position, chronology and in sense of occurrence and importance. If such is the case, then the United States is a greater nation than Canada and was formed before Canada became a nation.
Fishel Mael, Hashevetim, page 490:
“The order of placing of the sons was important both in regards to their positioning concerning Joseph and in that concerning Jacob. Concerning Joseph… Ephraim is the one who fulfills his place and most continues his path… Therefore Joseph set Ephraim on his right-hand side to show that Ephraim is the main principle of his might and the continuer of his path…
However concerning Jacob it is just the opposite. Manasseh is closer… to the path of Jacob… Jacob however guided his hands wittingly to indicate that the greatness of Manasseh would not be revealed so soon… Jacob agreed only that Manasseh remain at his right-hand side for he is destined to complete the quality… of Jacob…”
‘Manasseh would become a great people after Ephraim.’
It is argued that though Manasseh is the elder son of Joseph, he would additionally or subsequently to Ephraim, become a great people – the second to come into greatness. If such is the case, then Canada (who is still growing into its greatness) has definitively been second to America.
‘Manasseh would be a republic with a representative government, not a monarchy.’
As the scriptures do not say this, it cannot be a valid point of argument. This commentator defines the name Manasseh as ‘responsible representation’ as in a republic, Ephraim as ‘aristocracy’ as in royalty and Machir as ‘capitalism’ and the ‘principle of salesmanship.’ These definitions in this writer’s view are stretching Hebrew definitions to fit incorrect suppositions that cannot be used as objective evidence.
Judah was to be defined by its monarchy. Both Manasseh and Ephraim were not. Though if Manasseh was to be a great people, or a ‘multitude gathered as a unit’, as in one people, one nation; and Ephraim a ‘company of nations’, as in multiple groups of peoples comprising diverse peoples… then Canada and the United States have uniquely fulfilled scripture.
Bible exponent William Dankenbring, based on Greg Doudna’s research, became perhaps the most vocal supporter of the belief that Ephraim was the United States, prior to his death in 2017. It is a view only a minority of people have been able to comprehend within the identity movement. Ironically, there are a number of people in America who do not have any allegiance or ties to British-Israelism or a Church of God affiliation, who understand that the United States is Ephraim of the Bible.
The United States as Ephraim, William F Dankenbring – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Although virtually no one has noticed it, God has left the identity of modern Israel in the most obvious place one could imagine – in the very name of our great nation! Our nation is the only nation in the world directly named ‘company of nations’!
The house of Israel was a company or union of equal members, none of whom were sovereign. This fits the United States. It does not fit Great Britain or the British Commonwealth. The British Commonwealth has never been a company of equal states. Britain has always been one great nation. Whereas the British Commonwealth is a collection of scattered, independent, satellite nations around the world under the authority of the single great nation Britain.
The United States is an assembly of fifty united states who have given up their sovereignty in the interests of collective political union and are, for the most part, united geographically, as was the house of Israel anciently. The United States began with thirteen states. When we reached the West Coast we had ‘filled up’ our land with forty-eight states, perhaps paralleling the forty-eight cities for the Levites in ancient Israel. Then we added two more to reach a ‘fullness’ of fifty, or five times the number in the house of Israel of old (and the Jubilee number). The United States is the company, fullness, assembly, or convocation of states that Ephraim was to become.’
‘In Hebrew, the word for “nations”… is goyim, and means “peoples, nations, states, a troop, a flight,” a word that has the sense of “massing.” Thus Jacob really said the descendants of Ephraim would become a TROOP of people, a MASS of people, MANY states, families, or groupings. Thus we have in fulfillment of this prophecy THE FIFTY STATES of the United States – we became 50 different states, UNITED, but ONE PEOPLE. Each state has its own constitution and government.
Obviously, the prophecies directed toward Ephraim in the Bible are directed to ONE UNITED COUNTRY, one sovereign nation, UNITED TOGETHER – as Ephraim was historically, and as the United States is, today! The very words of the U.S. Constitution reveal our national identity! The Constitution begins, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union…”
The U.S.A. – A Union of “Nation-States” Ephraim was to become a united company or assembly of peoples. Isn’t it interesting that the United States is famous around the world for being the “melting pot” of the nations? The United States has more emigrants from more diverse locations, than any other nation on earth! This is both a strength, anda fatal weakness. The prophet Hosea foretold this condition would describe Ephraim in the last days! Hosea wrote, “Ephraim MIXES with the nations; Ephraim is a flat cake not turned over (white on one side, baked black or brown on the other side). Foreigners sap his strength, but he does not realize it. His hair is sprinkled with gray, but he does not notice” (Hosea 7:8-9).
Ephraim’s very name means “double fruit.” It is the United States which exploded onto the world scene, becoming a world power in the days of Theodore Roosevelt at the turn of the century, and the twentieth century has been hailed as “America’s Century,” and world peace “Pax Americana.” Jacob prophesied that the younger brother, Ephraim, was to be greater than his older brother, Manasseh. Manasseh, the firstborn, was the older brother. Which nation is older – the United States or Great Britain?
But what about the United States? Is it greater than Great Britain… Let’s face this question honestly and squarely, without pride, pretence, or hypocrisy. The United States is the wealthiest nation in the world in terms of resources, business and assets, and gross national produce – although we have also become the world’s biggest debtor nation by far due to our… living beyond our means… Either California or New York could be the world’s fifth or sixth richest nation in the world. The state of Illinois produces more than the entire continent of Africa! The eight industrial states from New York to Illinois produce as much as the Common Market, [Russia], or all of Latin America, Africa, most of Asia except Japan, and the Middle East combined!
The United States is greater than Britain by far. It is the United States which is the greatest and most powerful nation the world has ever seen. It has been the United States which has soared to the status of the richest of nations… not Great Britain. The comparison in national wealth is meaningless – there is no comparison. The economy of the United States has been the engine that has driven the free world since the end of World War II. It has led to postwar recovery of the entire Western World. Further, there is no comparison in military power between the two nations [today]…
If the United States is NOT Ephraim, the most populous, “doubly fruitful” Israelitish nation – then who is? Fruitfulness, flourishing population, can also refer to the rate of growth. The growth rate of the United States has been nothing short of phenomenal… an exponential population growth of nearly 70 times over! No country in history has, like the United States, literally come from out of nowhere, and literally EXPLODED in population growth and power, both [in its] military and economic [influence]! Truly, the United States – modern “Ephraim” – has experienced a dramatic population increase. Truly it has lived up to its name – and is “DOUBLY fruitful”!’
Two great powers, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben) and the United States of America (Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh). Both have the word united as part of their official names as the House of Israel and the House of Judah were once the United Kingdom of Israel. Don’t forget the forgotten nation, Canada (the half tribe of East Manasseh).
Early during the American Civil War, the Union’s plan was to economically strangle the Confederacy via naval blockades in all the major Southern Ports. The Confederacy sent Ambassadors to Britain in an attempt to drum up opposition support. They bypassed the Union blockade and reached Cuba. James Mason and John Slidell boarded the British mail ship, the Trent. The Union intercepted the ship and arrested the two diplomats.
The Union had violated all principles of international law relating to neutrality, with the British government rightly pointing out that the United States Congress had declared war on Britain in 1812, when the British had seized American vessels en route to France.
It looked as if Britain might enter the war against the North but was averted by Lincoln’s apology and the release of the Confederate commissioners. Britain openly favoured the South, letting them build warships in British shipyards. According to Kemp, the link was ‘cemented by the personal friendship of the British Jewish Prime Minister… Benjamin Disraeli, and the Confederate Jewish Secretary of State, Benjamin Judah. Disraeli’s views on race… made him personally sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and when Judah fled the South at the end of the war, he stayed as Disraeli’s personal guest at the latter’s private house in England.’
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Battle of the Bull Run [July 21, 1861] was an early defeat for the Union, which at first believed it would easily be able to crush the Confederates by launching an attack into northeastern Virginia. Repulsed by the Confederates, the Union army fled in disarray to Washington DC. The Confederates pursued the Union army, and seemed to threaten the Northern capital. The battle exhausted both sides, with the Union suffering 14,500 casualties and the South 9,100 in the seventeen-day-long engagement.
On April 6, 1862, a confederate army, which had crept undetected on Grant’s forces, launched a surprise attack on the Union camp at Pittsburg Landing on the Tennessee River. The engagement, which became known as the Battle of Shiloh, saw the Confederates repulsed after two days of savage fighting. The losses inflicted in the battle gave both sides cause for concern. The Union forces suffered some 13,000 casualties and the Confederates around 10,700. Around 3,400 of these were killed outright, a record which was soon surpassed in later battles of the war.’
Abraham Lincoln at the end of the war, had instructed Grant to be generous with the defeated Confederates as he intended a policy of reconciliation to restore the Union. The President also intended repatriation of the Black slaves to Africa or the Caribbean. With his assassination, the Northern floodgates of hate spilled forth against the South. The United States Congress sought revenge through a series of laws known as the Reconstruction Acts with the design to punish the South for everything, including slavery, secession and the war.
The Flag on the right is remarkably similar to the state flag of Georgia and was the first Confederate flag from 1861 50 1863 and known as the ‘Stars and Bars’.
Special Field Order No. 15 had instigated exclusive rights for the freed Blacks in parts of the coastal regions of South Carolina and Georgia; creating black homelands and enclaves within American borders. Remarkably, this order was revoked by the incoming President, Andrew Johnson. Not only had the Civil War ended slavery across the entire nation, it also made clear that the federal system of government had won out, in that the government had the right on certain matters to override the individual ‘state’s rights’, as supported by the confederate ideology.
The war produced devastating loss of life with a total of 610,000 deaths of which 250,000 were from the South. This represented 4.5% of the total population of the South numbering 5.5 million people, as compared to 1.6% of the North with a population of 19.4 million people. The half tribe of West Manasseh after the Civil War, was not only defeated, it was destroyed and plundered. During the reconstruction, the best of the South left for the western territories. It is there that the vibrancy of the old South was relocated to Texas, California, the Northwest and the Cowboy states.
Destiny decreed the breaking up of the ‘company of nations’; the multitude of people; the union of states; was not to occur in 1861, for Ephraim and West Manasseh had not come into the fullness of their birthright blessings which would peak exactly one hundred years later during the 1960s.
The union of America’s fifty states is what gives it its strength. The opposite condition would erode, diminish and destroy America’s power.
From Information Warfare to the Break-Up of the USA… Decoding the Work of Dr. Igor Panarin, New Dawn, 2017 – emphasis mine:
‘In 2010 Dr. Panarin predicted the USA would balkanise, amidst social conflict, and split into separate states. Certainly the proposition of a ‘United States’ based on constitutionalism rests on weak foundations and has nothing of an organic character about it. There is no defining feature of an American ‘ethnos’, and no basis for a positive symbiotic relationship enduring between the sundry ethnicities. Panarin claims the United States is on course to balkanise due to the stressors of its huge debt, deficit and social protests. “The overlapping financial, economic and social challenges may eventually cause the world’s strongest superpower of the 20th century to collapse,” notes Panarin.
Far from being a fanciful scenario, the US military recently addressed the same problems emerging from rapid urbanisation in ‘megacities’. The US military regards ‘megacities’ (populations of 10,000,000 or more) as an approaching problem of instability. The US Army comments that megacities are a unique environment that they do not fully understand. One of their reports gives a picture of proliferating criminal networks and underground economies, natural disasters and the inability of decaying infrastructures to withstand stressors. A predicted feature is the breakdown of civic order through ethnic and religious conflict among diverse groups that are forced together to share diminishing resources and utilities.’
“As resources become constrained, illicit networks could potentially fill the gap left by over-extended and undercapitalized governments. The risk of natural disasters compounded by geography, climate change, unregulated growth and substandard infrastructure will magnify the challenges of humanitarian relief. As inequality between rich and poor increases, historically antagonistic religions and ethnicities will be brought into close proximity in cities. Stagnation will coexist with unprecedented development, as slums and shanty towns rapidly expand alongside modern high-rises. This is the urban future.”
‘The report comments on the increasingly heterogeneous populations inherent in a megacity as potentially “explosive.”
“One of the hallmarks of megacities is rapid hetero and homogeneous population growth that outstrips city governance capability. Many emerging megacities are ill-prepared to accommodate the kind of explosive growth they are experiencing. Radical income disparity, and racial, ethnic and sub cultural separation are major drivers of instability in megacities.As these divisions become more pronounced they create delicate tensions, which if allowed to fester, may build over time, mobilize segments of the population, and erupt as triggers of instability.”
‘The US Army analysis accords with the 2010 analysis of Dr. Igor Panarin.’
A special report in the Guardian newspaper, entitled The last days of a white world, by Anthony Browne, September 3, 2000, ominously confirms – emphasis mine:
“It was news and no news; the most significant milestone in one of the most profound changes to affect the US in the past century, and yet a non-event. Last week the US Census Bureau issued figures showing that non-hispanic whites made up 49.8 per cent of the population of California. Now they are an ethnic minority in the country’s most populous state, the one most usually identified with the American dream.
As recently as 1970, eight out of 10 Californians were white. Fuelled by immigration at its highest rate since the start of the last century, and higher fertility rates, the Asian and Latino populations of California have risen by almost a third since 1990. At the same time, with limited immigration and low birth rates, the population of non-hispanic whites has fallen by 3 per cent. By 2040, hispanics are expected to be the overall majority in the state. Where California goes, the rest of America is predicted to follow. At present 72 per cent of the US population is non-hispanic whites; the US Census Bureau predicts they will become a minority between 2055 and 2060.
Not every one likes the new face of America. White far-right extremists predict the break-up of the union. Thomas W. Chittum, a New Jersey-based Vietnam War veteran, declared in his book Civil War Two, that the US, like Yugoslavia, will shatter into new, ethnically-based nations. ‘America was born in blood, America suckled on blood, America gorged on blood and grew into a giant, and America will drown in blood,’ Chittum warned.
The separatists have set up groups such as Americans for Self-Determination. One of the founders, Jeff Anderson, said: ‘We are suggesting the US be partitioned into states for blacks, whites, hispanics, and so on, along with multi-racial states for those who wish to continue with this experiment. Now is the time to begin such a multi-racial dialogue about separatism, before a storm of violent racial conflict erupts.’
Canada possesses one of the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world. Influenced principally by economic policy and family reunifications. In 2019, a total of 341,180 immigrants were admitted to Canada, mainly from Asia.
India, the Philippines and China are the top three countries of origin for immigrants moving to Canada, with new immigrants settling mainly in the urban areas of large cities such as Toronto with 5,928,040 people, Montreal with 4,098,927 people and Vancouver with 2,463,431 people. Canada accepts large numbers of refugees, accounting for over ten percent of the annual global refugee resettlements. Canada resettled more than 28,000 people in 2018.
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘According to the 2016 Canadian Census, the country’s largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (accounting for 32 percent of the population), followed by English (18.3 percent), Scottish (13.9 percent), French (13.6 percent), Irish (13.4 percent), German (9.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent), Italian (4.6 percent), First Nations (4.4 percent), Indian (4.0 percent)… Ukrainian (3.9 percent), [Dutch (3.23%) and Polish (3.21%)]. There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands, encompassing a total of 1,525,565 people.
The Indigenous population in Canada is growing at almost twice the national rate, and four percent of Canada’s population claimed an Indigenous identity in 2006. Another 22.3 percent of the population belonged to a non-Indigenous visible minority. In 2016, the largest visible minority groups were South Asian (5.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent) and Black (3.5 percent).
Between 2011 and 2016, the visible minority population rose by 18.4 percent. In 1961, less than two percent of Canada’s population (about 300,000 people) were members of visible minority groups. Indigenous peoples are not considered a visible minority in Statistics Canada calculations.’
Those people identifying as British and Irish amount to 45.6%. Added with the 32% that identify as Canadian, which is primarily English (followed by French) as in the main, they are founding families from whom the majority were ‘English’ and have dwelt in Canada for two or three centuries they understandably and logically perceive themselves as Canadians, rather than English, Scottish or Irish.
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:
‘In Canada, Third World immigrants are called “visible minorities” and according to the 2006 census, their numbers increase at a rate five times the growth in the population as a whole [Genesis 9:27]. In the five years between 2001 and 2006, the Third World population increased 27.2 percent to nearly 5.1 million individuals, with the majority coming from China, the Philippines, and India. In 2009, Third World immigrants made up 42.9 percent of Toronto’s residents, and 41.7 percent of Vancouver’s population. As of 2007, nearly 20 percent of Canada’s population [were] born elsewhere, and official government projections are that by 2031, 33 percent of the country’s population will be of Third World immigrant origin. This figure is most likely an underestimate, as the higher reproduction rate… has not been factored in. In reality, Canada is set to lose its white majority population by 2040.’
The United States while comprising a diverse population demographic still harbours a core British and Irish element that influenced not only the genesis of the American nation but still strongly influences American society today… though, for how long?
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 2018, there were almost 90 million immigrants and U.S.-born children of immigrants in the United States, accounting for 28% of the overall U.S. population. The United States has a diverse population; 37 ancestry groups have more than one million members. White Amercans of European ancestry, mostly German, Irish, English, Italian, Polish and French including White Hispanic and Latino Americans from Latin America, form the largest racial group, at 73.1% of the population. African Americans constitute the nation’s largest racial minority and third-largest ancestry group, and are around 13% of the total U.S. population. Asian Americans are the country’s second-largest racial minority (the three largest Asian ethnic groups are Chinese, Filipino, and Indian).’
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… the European-origin element of the American population stood at 64 percent at the beginning of 2010. This is a dramatic decline from 1960, where whites made up 88 percent of the US’s population… In 2009, non-Hispanic whites made up just under half of all children three years old… Just ten years earlier, more than 60 percent of children in that age group were white.According to the 2010 data, nonwhites babies under the age of two outnumbered white babies for the first time…Illegal immigration from Latin America is America’s single largest demographic issue, and if allowed to continue unabated, will see much of the US turned into a Third World country within a few decades.
… even though [white Americans] percentage of the total population is set to drop further, their real numbers will remain relatively constant for several decades. After the year 2050 there will be a sudden and dramatic decline, however as old age takes its natural toll(unless the white birthrate increases).’
The 2020 Census broke down the United States demographic as the following. White and European – not including Hispanics (refer Chapter XV The Philstines: Latino-Hispano America) – comprised 57.8% of the population of America. The two largest groups were those of German ancestry as well as English. The English percent of 7.1 is bolstered by those old families who now identify as ‘American’ and are predominantly of English heritage at 6.1%. Thus 13.2% is the exact same as the 13.2% who say they are German.
From a Celtic-Saxon-Viking perspective, including all British and Irish stock who would represent the peoples of Joseph living in America, one could add the Irish with 9.7% and the Scottish at 1.7%. Thus the principal descendants of Joseph, would equate to 24.6%. The reality though, as we will investigate, is that the peoples of German descent may actually be descendants of Joseph too and possibly the peoples of Norwegian (1.3%) and Dutch (1.2%) descent. This would produce a grand total of 40.3% of the total population, or approximately 135 million people.
The peak immigration period for Germans was in the mid-nineteenth century, when thousands were driven from their homes by unemployment and unrest. Despite having no successful New World colonies, the first significant groups of German immigrants arrived in the United States in the 1670s and settled principally in New York and Pennsylvania. Germans were attracted to America for familiar reasons to other immigrants, such as open tracts of land and religious freedom. Their contributions to the nation included establishing the first kindergartens, Christmas trees (refer article: Asherah), hot dogs and hamburgers.
Is there any evidence when ‘Germans’ as an example, emigrated to the United States, that they were closer ethnically to Israelites in America than Ishmaelites in Germany? Actually, it would seem yes.
‘… many people of Israelite descent remained in Germany, especially in the west, until around the 1800s when there was a massive migration to the USA. The migrants from Germany to America were different physically, sociologically, and ideologically from those who stayed behind.
They were… more liberal and independently minded, often of non-conventional, more fundamental religious persuasion and of a different physical type. In Germany they had belonged to groups and social classes that never actually really belonged to the mainstream of historical German society.
Similarly, in Britain, the migrants to America either came mostly from the west and north or they belonged to socially distinct elements that had formed a separate grouping alongside the feudal stratifications that had previously existed.
In the case of Germany we have descendants of Israelites separating themselves from their non-Israelite neighbors and moving out: Often one village would remain and all inhabitants of the community next door emigrate to America. What applies to Britain and Germany has been studied and documented but the same phenomenon appears to have taken place throughout Europe wherever people of Hebrew origin were to be found.’
Biblical identity Researcher Raymond McNair looked into this question and reported the following – emphasis & bold mine.
‘Most true Germans are characterized by“Alpine”round skulls… Yet ethnologist Madison grant writes, “In the study of European populations the great and fundamental fact about the British Isles is the almost total absence there of true Alpine round skulls”.
Ripley, in The Races of Europe says, “The most remarkable trait of the population of the British Isles is its head form; and especially the uniformity in every respect which is everywhere manifested. The prevailing type is that of the long and narrow cranium, accompanied by an oval rather than broad or round face”. Remember that this is the same type as the northern Celtic type. It is also the same as the Teutonic, Scandinavian type – the Scythian type!’
In a 1915 article – “Are We Cousins to the Germans?” – Sir Arthur Keith wrote that “the Britons and German represent contrasted and opposite types of humanity”. He explained, “The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye.
In the majority of the Briton – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects prominently backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width”. Keith then pointed out that “in the vast majority of Germans,” the back of the head is flattened” – indicating “a profound racial difference”… “The explanation,” according to Keith, “is easy. With the exodus of the Franks to France and the Anglo-Saxons to Britain in the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth centuries of our era, Germany was almost denuded of her long-headed elements in her population”.
… an older study from R.F. Parsons… showed that the German heads were indeed more rounded than the British heads. The study also reported: In 1925 [a sample of] Germans [shows] the glabello-maximal length averages [are] 189 mm and the breadth 155. In 127 British soldiers they are 191 mm and 149 respectively, and in 103 medical students of British parentage, 194 and [152] (Parsons, R.F. Anthropological observations on German prisoners of war. The Journal of the Royal Anthropologic Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 49, January-July 1919, pages 20-35).
Britannica [11th Edition, Volume 11] … The total number of those who sailed for the United States from 1820 to 1900 may be estimated at more than 4,500,000. The greater number of the more recent immigrants was from the agricultural provinces of northern [western] Germany… It is clear then that the Anglo-Saxon peoples are not Germanic – at least in the modern sense of the term.’
This writer concurs with Davidiy and McNair. The Germans who departed Germany to live in America during the 1800s and particularly before, were different from those who stayed behind. German officials who witnessed the emigration remarked on the physical differences and the ethnic distinction. The distinction also included areas of origin in Germany, religious orientation and social outlook.
Aside from German ancestry, citizens who claim to be English-American are the next largest group. Predominantly found in the Northwest, the West and northeast of the United States, the number of people directly claiming to be English-American has dropped by over twenty million people, since the 1980 United States Census because more citizens who originated from the land of Pilgrims have started to identify themselves as simply: American.
The majority of the founding fathers of the United States were of English ancestry as have been the majority of United States presidents. But by English – while an original origin from England is obvious – it is meant within the United States and what is not so obvious, in that these ‘English’ people are descendants from the tribes of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh.
Online Encyclopaedia:
‘In 1982, an opinion poll showed respondents a card listing a number of ethnic groups and asked, “Thinking both of what they have contributed to this country and have gotten from this country, for each one tell me whether you think, on balance, they’ve been a good or a bad thing for this country.” The English were the top ethnic group, with 66% saying they were a good thing for the United States, followed by the Irish at 62%.’
The most English states according to the 2000 census in numbers of people were [southern States in bold]:
1. California 7.4%; 2. Florida 9.2%; 3. Texas 7%; 4. New York 6%; 5. Ohio 9.2%; 6. Pennsylvania 7.9%; 7. Michigan 9.9%; 8. Illinois 6.7%; 9. Virginia 11.1%; 10. North Carolina 9.5%.
The states with the highest percentages of people with English ancestry [New England states in bold] included: 1. Utah 29%; 2. Maine 21.5%; 3. Vermont 18.4%; 4. Idaho 18.1%; 5. New Hampshire 18.0%; 6. Wyoming 15.9%; 7. Oregon 13.2%; 8. Montana 12.7%; 9. Delaware 12.1%.
The English as discussed, were the first non-Native Americans to settle the eastern seaboard area that became the United States of America. The first permanent colonies were established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay during 1620 to 1622 and also James Oglethorpe’s settlement in Savannah, Georgia, in 1732.
‘English joint-stock companies, proprietors, and Crown officials sought to create a modified version of their native society in their American colonies. While many Englishmen came to America to exercise their own religion, and others sought liberation from the religious intolerance on both sides of the Atlantic – as did Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island – most English settlers were drawn by the economic opportunities and cheap land’ – S Hanft, English Americans.
Between 1820 and 1930 over four million British immigrants chose the United States as their new home. They brought with them technological skills which helped turn the United States into a major industrial nation by the end of the nineteenth century. Cultural alignment and a common language allowed British immigrants to integrate more rapidly, giving rise to a unique Anglo-American culture.
America and Britain in Prophecy, Raymond McNair, 1996:
‘Sharon Turner (1768-1842) … says, “Europe has been populated by three great streams of population from the East… The earliest of these… comprised the Cimmerian and Celtic race. The second consisted of the Scythian, Gothic, and Germanic tribes; from whom most of the modern nations of continental Europe descended… third and most recent… Slavonian and Sarmatian nations… who established themselves in Poland, Bohemia, Russia, and their vicinities.
It is from the first two generations of European population that the ancient inhabitants of England successively descended… The earliest of these that reached the northern and western confines of Europe, the Cimmerians and Celts, may be regarded as our first ancestors; and from the German or Gothic nations who formed, with the Scythians, the second great flood of population into Europe, our Anglo-Saxon and Norman ancestors proceeded”.’
Ezekiel 34:11-12
Amplified Bible
11 ‘For thus says the Lord God, “Behold, I Myself will search for My flock and seek them out. 12 As a shepherd cares for his sheep on the day that he is among his scattered flock, so I will care for My sheep; and I will rescue them from all the places to which they were scattered on a cloudy and gloomy day.’
Even though the tribes were so-called lost, they would be sifted through the nations and eventually allotted new homes. It was understood during the apostolic age that the tribes existed under different nomenclature.
Colossians 3:11
English Standard Version
‘Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.’
The author of Colossians (refer article: The Pauline Paradox) confirms that the Israelites were known as barbarians and Sycthians as they migrated westwards through Europe. This verse is contrasting between Greeks, Jews and Israelite Scythians, whether ethnically or spiritually, because they had responded to a gospel preached ostensibly by Paul (or perhaps the apostles) – Article: The PaulineParadox. They could be a slave physically, yet still free spiritually. These same Scythians were synonymous with the later peoples called Saxons.
It was reported in 2010 “that when teams of geneticists led by Professor Bryan Sykes took DNA samples in the Celtic regions of Britain they discovered ancestries in the Caucasus, which lay within ancient Scythia, and Mediterranean Europe”.
For the most common variant of the Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3 the Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database has DYS389i, ii values of 13 and 29, and DYS385a, b values of 11 and 14. This Haplotype differs by just one step upward on the most quickly mutating marker. This Haplotype is very interesting, from the perspective of the YHRD database, because most of the top frequencies are not in Europe but in the United States. Of the top twenty, twelve are among United States populations. Two are Hispanic samples, three are African-American and the rest are European American.
These samples congregate in areas of the United States settled by English, Scottish, Irish, German and French immigrants. This accords with the Western European origin of the AMH. The Republic of Ireland and London in England appear among the top ten European frequencies, along with four separate locations in The Netherlands. Although descendants would have likely acquired this Haplotype through British ‘Celtic’ ancestry, the multiple hits in the Netherlands suggest a Saxon origin is more than likely.
This confirms observations made by the late Raymond McNair and others that those immigrants who arrived in America, were somehow different from other Europeans such as the Germans who lived nearby, but who stayed behind in Europe. This physical evidence supports the proposition that Americans of Western European origin are different compared to the peoples they left behind in England, Ireland and Germany and that they are in fact a unique tribe of the sons of Jacob. In this case, the tribe of Joseph and his sons Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh.
Based upon the information above on Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3, immigration and other data, Raymond G Helmer concluded: ‘In short – haplotype R1b came to the United States from exactly the immigrants that we would expect to carry it’ – R G Helmer, The Blood of Mankind – Part III The Blood of America.
Another group who joined the great story of the United States were the Irish, with the great potato famine of the late 1840s, early 1850s sparking mass migration from Ireland. Between 1820 and 1920, some 4.5 million Irish are believed to have moved to the United States and settled in large cities like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco. Currently, almost ten percent (9.7%) of the total population of the United States claim Irish ancestry, some 32.5 million people compared with a total population of nearly seven million for the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland today (figures include Scots-Irish). Irish ancestry citizens of note include John F Kennedy and Neil Armstrong.
Other White and European peoples on the 2020 census include Italian (5.1%), French (3.0%) and Polish (3.0%) ancestry. One of the most influential nationalities to migrate in large numbers to the United States were the Italians. Between 1880 and 1920, more than 4 million Italian immigrants arrived in the United States forming ‘Little Italys’ wherever they went. Italians brought their cuisine, culture and entertainment to the United States. A further large wave of Italian immigrants arrived in the country following World War II.
Historically, along with the English, the French colonised North America first and most successfully in the North East along the border areas of Quebec and in the south around New Orleans and Louisiana. The largest of the Slavic speaking groups to live in the United States, were Polish Americans, who were some of the earliest Eastern European colonists to the New World. Up to 2.5 million Poles arrived in the United States between the mid-nineteenth century and World War I, flocking to the largest industrial cities of New York, Buffalo, Cleveland, Milwaukee and Chicago.
According to the 2020 Census, the largest ‘non-white’ minority group is the Hispanic and Latino American peoples comprising 18.7% of the total population. Dominated by Mexican descent at 10.29%. Other Latinos include Puerto Rican 1.49%, Cuban 0.57% and the remainder at 6.35%. From 1990 to 2000, the number of people who claimed Mexican ancestry almost doubled in size.
Those with Mexican ancestry are most common along the Southwestern border of the United States and they are the largest ancestry in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Phoenix. In many states, the Hispanic population doubled between the 2000 and 2010 census. In New Mexico, Hispanics outstripped whites for the first time, reaching forty-six per cent compared to forty per cent.
While Hispanic communities cover a swath of states from California to Texas, American Indians are more dispersed, with pockets of populations in states including Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and the Dakotas, with a higher concentration of Alaska Natives in Alaska of the total 0.7% they comprise of the American population. The Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders account for 0.2% of the population.
The second biggest minority group is African-American at 12.1%. Black or African-American is a term for citizens of the United States who have ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa. The majority of African Americans are descended from slaves from West and Central Africa and have become an integral part of the story of the United States, gaining the right to vote with the 15th amendment in 1870, but struggling with their civil rights for at least another century – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Predominantly living in the south of the nation where they were brought to work on the cotton plantations and as slaves in the late eighteenth to mid-nineteenth centuries; Black Americans also have sizeable communities in the Chicago area of Illinois and in Detroit, Michigan.
The third biggest minority group is Asian American at 5.9%. It comprises Chinese 1.2%; Filipino 1.1%; Indian 1.0%; Vietnamese 0.5% and other Asians at 2.1%. Finally, Middle Eastern peoples according to the 2010 Census accounted for 3.2% of the total population, of which there were Arab 0.54%; Iranian 0.1501%; Armenian 0.1537%; and Jewish at 2.11%.
The United States has its roots as a welcoming homeland for immigrants, though that hasn’t always been the case. As waves of new arrivals flooded United States shores in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a movement to restrict who was allowed into the country took hold as well. In 1882, Congress enacted the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first major federal law to put immigration limits in place and the only one in American history aimed at a specific nationality. It came into being in response to fears primarily on the West Coast, that an influx of Chinese immigrants was weakening economic conditions and lowering wages. This law was extended in 1902.
Other laws followed. For instance the Immigration Act of 1917, which created an Asiatic Barred Zone to restrict immigration from East Asia and the Emergency Quota Act of 1921, which limited the number of immigrants from any country to three percent of those people from that country who had been living in the United States as of 1910. The 1924 Immigration Act capped the number of immigrants from a particular country at two percent of the population of that country already living in the United States in 1890. This favoured immigrants from northern and western European countries like Great Britain over immigrants from southern and eastern European countries such as Italy.
It prevented any immigrant ineligible for citizenship from coming to America. Since laws already on the books prohibited people of any Asian origin from becoming citizens they were completely barred entry. The law was revised in 1952, though retained the quota system based on country of origin in the United States population and still only allowed low quotas for Asian nations.
‘Speaking to the American Committee on Italian Migration in June 1963, President Kennedy cited the “nearly intolerable” plight of those who had family members in other countries who wanted to come to the U.S. and could be useful citizens, but were being blocked by “the inequity and maldistribution of the quota numbers.” Two years later, in signing into law a replacement system that established a uniform number of people allowed entry to the United States despite national origin, President Lyndon B Johnson said it would correct “a cruel and enduring wrong in the conduct of the American nation.”
As discussed in length in the preceding chapter (Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali –the Antipodean Tribes) it is next to impossible to find studies on the European component of the English speaking nations outside of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Though an excellent study is the one presented by Richard Morrill.
Morrill touches upon the lack of research to draw upon. It is recommended that Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, are read prior to the next section in this chapter. What is proposed is that the core American, whether they be descended from Manasseh or Ephraim will have variations in their paternal and maternal Haplogroups, showing they are similar yet distinct from other English speaking, Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples.
The key Y-DNA Haplogroup for the male descendants of Jacob is R1b (U106, U198, M529, M222). We would expect to find mutations of the same sub-clades and similar ratios within the British and Irish descended American peoples.
Race, Ancestry, and Genetic Composition of the U.S. Richard Morrill, Professor Emeritus of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Washington, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Race and ancestry, or countries/peoples of origin, are popular topics, with large amounts of data attempting to help us understand the ethnic nature of the country. In this paper I attempt a summary description of the intersections of race, ancestry, and genome, at the state level,but I hasten to emphasize that the “findings” are tentative, highly uncertain, and based on astoundingly unreliable data.I hope some readers may point the way to better data or safer interpretations.
Table 1 presents a summary of numbers of people by “race” by broad ancestral/ethnic or countries of origin together with the main Y-DNA (male) genetic haplogroups associated with the racial and ancestral groups. [Note: No figures have been altered in Tables 1, 2 or 3. Certain words in the cells have been edited for clarity and accuracy, though not to change any meaning].
The haplogroups are male individuals who share a particular mutation or common male ancestor up to 50,000 years ago. All this is uncertain and speculative, for these reasons. The race and ancestral identifications are self-reported, and subject to lying as well as ignorance. But we still can make beautiful detailed maps, down to the county level! The numbers of persons with good DNA analyses are too few to permit highly confident estimates at useful levels of geography. But let’s see what we have.’
Table 1
Race, Ancestry, Haplogroups
Group
Number (millions)
Ancestry group
Number (millions)
Haplogroups
White
215
White, non-Hispanic
192
England, Scotland, Ireland
87
R1b
I
Germany
50
R1b
I
Scandinavia
10
I
R1b
France & Belgium
12
R1b
Italy
16
R1b
J
Eastern Europe
16
R1a
I,J,N
Balkans, Near east
2
J, G
White Hispanic
23
Mexico
16
R1b
Central America, Caribbean
7
R1b
African
40
E
Asian
14
Moderate white admixture
O
Native American
34
US, AK
5
Q
R1b
Latin America
29
Pacific Islander
0.4
Hawaii white admixture
up to 50%
Mixed
9
M
‘Well, some 215 million people are probably mainly white (69%), of which 192 million (61%) are self-identified non-Hispanic white. The difference of 23 million are people who identify as white and Hispanic. About 40 million identify as Black or African-American, although there is probably an admixture of 20 percent or more of “whiteness”. Up to 14 million identify as of Asian origin, but as many as1 million may be white in genetics and appearance, e.g. people from Afghanistan, NW India or West Pakistan. Finally less than 1 million identify as Pacific Islanders.’
We have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, the identity of the Indian and Pakistani peoples from Hamitic, or equatorial descent. They are not descended from European or western peoples via Shem. The Latino-Hispano peoples of the Americas are a mix of Aram, from Shem; Tiras from Japheth; Mizra from Ham; and Canaan – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Morrill: ‘This leaves a large number of 34 million who identify as all or partly Native American, including about 5 million Alaskan or US Native American, about half of whom are clearly Native American, but about half of whom appear to be and are probably genetically mostly white. Then 29 million are “Mexican” or Caribbean, etc., not a race, but a perceived or actual combination of Spanish (some Portuguese) and Native Americans, from the US southwest, central America, the Caribbean, and South America. Even though these people legitimately identify as a mix of Native and Spanish, most are genetically “white”.
Ancestry, country of origin, or ethnicity are even harder categories. The complexity is incredible. Not only have the “countries” changed again and again over the last few centuries, but persons’ stated identities, which can be multiple, are often bewildering, because of centuries of mixing, often with people who may not know their heritage. For example, some 20 million identify as “American” which is perfectly reasonable, if they are descended from early immigrants(1620 to 1820). People also do reasonably identify with more than one country/people, but these combinations are not tabulated, and it is difficult to claim accuracy from the data on ancestry. Finally, most of our ancestries are European countries, but we know from both history and genetic analysis that people have mingled and moved within “Europe” for thousands of years.’
This is where Haplogroups and their sub-clades are key as they point towards a European origin that is either more British (Irish), Germanic (Benelux), Scandinavian, French, Italian, Iberian, Baltic or Slavic.
Morrill: ‘Given these warnings, what do we almost know? The largest groupings of non-Hispanic whites [are] first the
English-Scottish-Irish at some 87 million, 28% of the population, followed by
Germans (including Dutch, Austrian, Swiss) at about 50 million, and
Scandinavians at 10 million.
Others from Western Europe include 16 million from Italy and probably 12 million from France.
Eastern Europe is the origin of about 16 million, including 9 million from Poland, 3.5 million from Russia, and 1.5 million from both Hungary and Czechoslovakia, and over 1 million from Greece. About 2 million are from the eastern Balkans and the Middle East.’
A high percentage of those people claiming German, Dutch and Scandinavian ancestry are likely the same peoples as the British and Irish. A proportion of the French, if they originated from northwestern France may also be included.
Morrill: ‘As discussed above, self-identified Hispanic whites number some 23 million, people with an African origin perhaps 40 million, of an Asian origin, 13 million, then up to 34 million as from Native American or Native-American-Spanish admixture. Much has been learned about the genetic evolution of humans and of their complex migration… across the globe. Since the majority of Americans are of European ancestry, the genome story of Europe translates to the genetic structure of the United States. Table 2 summarizes the numbers of persons by haplogroup estimated for the US population. In Table 1 I added an estimate of the haplogroups associated with the racial-ancestral combinations. These are tentative and will be worked on further.’
Table 2
Major haplogroups
Group
Population
% of population
Areas
R1b
156
50
Western Europe
E
43
14
Africa
I
44
13
Central Europe
R1a
16
6
Eastern Europe
J
14
5
Southeast Europe & Near East
G
12
4
West Asia
O
10
3
Asia
Q
9
3
Native American
N
2
0.7
Baltic, Siberia
M
0.5
0.2
Pacific Island
‘The relevant haplogroups are:
E… still dominant in Africa, and the many descendant groups… equally old
F, which developed in south Asia (India-Pakistan)… All F subgroups seem to have differentiated in the same hearth area (India to the Caucasus)…
G occurs in modest numbers in Italy, Turkey and the Balkans
N in the Baltic countries and Siberia,
I divided into I1, still strongly Scandinavian and I2 in south Italy and the west Balkans
J in Greece and the Middle East (includes most Jews).
R1b… Europe, dominant from Italy through France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium on through England and Ireland (plus North Africa).
R1a is strongest in Eastern Europe (Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Russia)
O, Asian
Q, Native American
In the tables and maps I distinguish between the R1B peoples dominantly English, German or French-Italian, and an R1bh population, which is the self-reported American Hispanic population…’
Haplogroup G is an old paternal Haplogroup from the line of Shem. It is found predominantly in the men of the Caucasus region, such as in Georgia. Haplogroup N is an intermediate Haplogroup from the line of Japheth and found in European men – for example the Finns – through admixture. Meanwhile Haplogroup E is an ancient mutation inherited from Canaan and indicative of Berbers and sub-Saharan Africans. European men who carry E1b1b have had a paternal African ancestor.
While Morrill is correct regarding Haplogroup J, it is important to appreciate that J firstly splits into J1 and J2 and secondly is indicative of men descended from Ham. Haplogroup J1 found in Middle Eastern men (Arabs) and J2 in Southwest Asia (Pakistan). Those men in Iran, Turkey, Greece and who are Jewish, carry Haplogroup J as a result of intermixing.
Morrill: ‘How does this translate to US states (besides with difficulty)? The estimates are based on the self-reported ancestry of people by states and related to the haplogroups of those ancestries. Please see Table 3 and three maps of states the classification is based on the top 2 or 3 relevant haplogroups. [Hawaii] is unique as the only state with a dominant O, Asian, group, and the District of Columbia as the only area dominated by E (African origin).
Four states, KS, ME, NH, and WV are most strongly just R1b (West European – English, German and Italian-French). The largest number of states, 12, the historic south, plus MO, are primarily R1b and secondarily E. Six states are also strong in R1b and E, but also in R1a, eastern Europe, IN, MD, MI, OH, NY (also has Hispanic and Jewish), and PA. Somewhat similar are IL and NJ (notice that many of these are contiguous), with R1b, E, and R1bh.’
Estimated Haplogroups for US states
State
Dominant group
Share
2nd (share)
3rd (share)
4th (share)
R1bEnglish
R1bGerman
R1bFrench-Italian
AL
R1b
50
E 25
38
8
4
AK
R1b
56
Q 13
I 7
R1a 6
28
21
7
AZ
R1b
53
R1bh 25
E 7
R1a 6
28
17
8
AR
R1b
70
E 13
38
28
4
CA
R1b
37
R1bh 30
O 14
E 7
R1a5
19
11
7
CO
R1b
68
R1bh 16
R1a 6
I 6
33
25
10
CT
R1b
76
R1a 15
34
13
29
DE
R1b
69
E 14
38
18
13
DC
E
43
R1b 31
17
8
6
FL
R1b
52
R1bh 20
E 15
R1a8
J 5
30
12
10
GA
R1b
50
E 30
37
9
4
HI
O 40
R1b 22
M 16
13
1
8
ID
R1b
70
I 8
41
22
7
IL
R1b
56
E 15
R1bh 12
R1a 6
27
22
9
IN
R1b
69
E 7
R1a 6
37
27
5
IA
R1b
81
I>10
33
43
5
KS
R1b
70
35
32
3
KY
R1b
71
E 7
50
17
4
LA
R1b
55
E 25
24
9
22
ME
R1b
97
56
10
31
MD
R1b
53
E 24
R1a 8
29
16
8
MA
R1b
80
R1a 8
42
8
30
MI
R1b
69
E 14
R1a 11
J 5
30
27
12
MN
R1b
68
I 16 +
R1a 8
23
38
7
MS
R1b
44
E 28
32
7
5
MO
R1b
74
E 12
38
29
7
MT
R1b
78
I 11
Q 7
40
30
8
NE
R1b
79
R1a 11
I 9
32
41
6
NV
R1b
51
R1bh 20
27
14
10
NH
R1b
96
50
10
37
NJ
R1b
58
E 17
R1bh 13
R1a >12
J 8
26
13
19
NM
R1b
55
R1bh 35
Q >10
33
17
5
NY
R1b
56
E 15
R1a 10
R1bh 9
J 7
26
13
17
NC
R1b
55
E 20
36
12
7
ND
R1b
72
I>10
R1a 9
19
46
7
OH
R1b
66
E 12
R1a >10
28
29
9
OK
R1b
55
Q 10
E 7
34
17
4
OR
R1b
67
I 9
36
23
8
PA
R1b
77
R1a 11
E 10
34
29
14
RI
R1b
89
R1a 7
38
6
45
SC
R1b
53
E 28
37
11
5
SD
R1b
70
I 20?
Q 9
R1a6
25
40
5
TN
R1b
59
E 17
43
12
4
TX
R1b
49
R1bh 30
E 13
22
12
15
UT
R1b
65
I 13
R1bh 12
44
15
6
VT
R1b
93
R1a 5
50
12
31
VA
R1b
56
E 20
37
13
6
WA
R1b
63
I >10
O 7
R1bh 6
33
22
8
WV
R1b
73
45
21
7
WV
R1b
77
I >10
R1a >10
24
45
8
WY
R1b
80
Q 5
I >5
43
29
8
Morrill has separated R1b into four groups: Hispanic, English (western), German (central) and French (southern). Constant readers will be conversant with these groups. For new readers to the subject, the phylogenetic tree below delineates the prominent R1b mutations.
Thus the Hispanic R1b derives from the R1b exhibited by male ancestors from Spain and Portugal: the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250). Whereas the R1b carried by French, Swiss and Italian men is the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28).
The R1b indicative of North West Europeans and carried by German men is the Proto-GermanicU106 (S21). What Morrill terms an English R1b, is in fact also U106. Though if one were to be more specific, many English men possess a mutation derived from U106, the West GermanicU198.
Perhaps an addition to the four groups proposed by Morrill would be the Atlantic CelticM529 (L21), found in Irish, Scottish and Welsh men.
‘The [first] map includes a set with the R1b and I1 combination (high in Scandinavian also), ID, IA, and OR, a related pair with a significant R1bh presence, UT and WA, which also has a sizeable O population. Also related are MT and SD, with R1b, I but also Q (Native American). States with R1b, I and also R1a (Eastern Europe) include MN, NE, ND and WI. Three states have R1b, then Q or Q and I: OK<WY and AK (the highest Q share at 13%).’
‘The [second] map shows first four states with R1b and R1a, all in New England: CT, MA, RI and VT. CO and NV have the combination of R1b and R1bh.’
‘CA [California] is quite complex, with only a modest R1b share [Western European], a very large r1bh share [Hispanic], and also a sizeable O [East Asian and Polynesian] and then E [African-American] share. AZ and NM also have R1b, R1bh, but also Q (Native American). FL is also complex, with R1b, R1bh, but also E, R1a and J.’
California shows a higher Hispanic element in its population as well as Black and Asian compared to European stock. If we contrast New Hampshire and New Mexico with each other; New Mexico has 55% R1b and 35% R1bh as indicative of its Latino element being 35% of the State’s population and 10% Q of its Native American component, either separate or part of the Hispanic proportion. The R1b split shows that its white population have 5% southern European influence; 17% Central European; and 33% Western European.
New Hamphire on the other hand reveals its beginnings with purely European stock of 96% with little or no Black and Hispanic influence. Its R1b split shows that 10% of its population have central European ancestry; 37% have southern European heritage; and 50% have western European or British and Irish descent.
The state of Maine has the highest western European R1b percentage at 56%. Rhode island has the highest southern European R1b percentage at 45%; and North Dakota has the highest central European R1b influence at 46%. Connecticut appears to have the highest level of eastern European R1a at 15%; New Mexico the highest Latino R1bh at 35%; and Washington DC the highest level of African-American E1b1b at 43%.
Morrill: ‘I also present a few maps of ancestry combinations. The shares of English (plus Scot and Irish), German (plus Austria, Netherlands and Switzerland) and French-Italian (plus Belgium) – all part of the R1b group, are also shown in Table 3. English and German (19 states) and German and English (7) are the most common ancestries of Americans (Map 4). English and German by themselves dominate most in KS and WV. Scandinavian is added to English-German for ID, OR and WA (which also adds Asian), and to German-English, for IA, MN, ND, SD, then together with East European for NE and WI. These 11 states are the most “northern European”. Native Americans are added most for MT, OK, WY and especially AK (now 15 states) and then a Hispanic component to CO and UT.’
‘The English-German and German-English sets include 8 more states with a sizeable Black population, AR, DE, IL, IN, KY, MI and MO, and OH, then PA with a sizeable French-Italian and East European population as well. The full set is also a contiguous bloc across much of the north, and crossing into the south central. Not surprising (Map 5) is the English Hispanic (AZ, NV) and Hispanic-English, (NM, plus CA and TX, with additional Asian and German, and Black and French-Italian, respectively), covering the southwest, plus FL, adding a Black population). An English-Black combination covers the rest of the southern portion of the country – LA (Black English, French), then AL. GA, MS, NC, SC, TN and even MD.’
‘This leaves, (Map 6) besides HI and DC, a northeastern set of 8 states with a distinctive combination of English and French-Italian, CT, ME, NH, RI, VT, plus MA, adding E European) and complex NY, adding Black and East European. The entire mosaic reveals the fascinating stories of immigration and subsequent migration, still ongoing and becoming ever more complex.’
Regarding Haplogroups, constant readers will recognise the tables below as we conclude this chapter. Newer readers are encouraged to read Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, in helping perhaps to gain more from the following material.
Since we lack major MtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroup studies for British Canadian and American citizens; the main mtDNA Haplogroups are reproduced below for the British, Irish and closely related peoples of western Europe.
Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob
H HV0+V J K T2 U4 U5 T1
France 44 5 8 9 6 3 8 2
Ireland 44 6 11 12 5 1 8 1
Scotland 44 3 13 7 6 3 8 2
England 45 3 12 8 6 2 9 2
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8 3
Germany 45 4 9 7 8 3 9 3
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11 2
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12 3
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6 2
Flanders 47 3 6 12 9 3 3 2
Sephardim 56 9 5 8
Wales 60 4 15 8 1 4 2
One would expect Canadians and Americans of Celtic-Saxon-Viking stock to be somewhere within this grouping of family nations descended principally from Abraham; which includes Keturah, Ishmael, Esau and Jacob. The question, is where? Possibly between Ireland and Scotland for Americans and for Canadians, between Scotland and England.
Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase.
Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
It is here that we would obtain an indication of how German the migrants from Germany are in the United States, for if they are German as in descending from Ishmael, the dominant R1b the males would likely carry is U106. If though they are from the tribe of Joseph, then one would expect these German men to carry more recent mutations from R1b-U106. Until more research is conducted, or studies made available, this will be a tantalising question remaining to be answered.
We have kept a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations studied.
Turkey M269 14% – U106 0.4%
Slovenia M269 17% – U106 4%
Russia M269 21% – U106 5.4%
Poland M269 23% – U106 8%
Ukraine M269 25% – U106 9%
Austria M269 27% – U106 23%
Czech M269 28% – U106 14%
Denmark M269 34% – U106 17%
Germany M269 43% – U106 19%
USA M269 46% – U106 15%
France M269 52% – U106 7%
Italy M269 53% – U106 6%
Netherlands M269 54% – U106 35%
England M269 57% – U106 20%
Swiss M269 58% – U106 13%
Ireland M269 80% – U106 6%
With the addition of the United States we can see that its Central European component of R-U106 matches the most closely, the Czechs, Swiss, Danes, Germans and English. Its broadly western R1b Haplotype R-M269 percentage, most closely matches ironically, Germany, then France, Italy, the Netherlands and England. Overall, the United States matches Germany the most closely. This is an interesting finding and a little surprising perhaps that it does not match England more closely?
The question, is whether this is because the white, western European, British and Irish driven R1b percentages for Americans are truly more aligned with Germany, or whether they very probably, show admixture, that only a comprehensive study of British and Irish descended Americans could answer the question… if there are with England for instance, comparable R-U106 mutations.
The blurring of the two near related streams of male DNA exhibited by the English and Germans is reflected in the following similarities.
The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in English men.
Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry.
Interestingly in comparison, 15% of American men carry R1b-U106.
Y-chromosome haplogroups in US populations, Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘For the US population as a whole: The most common haplogroup is R-M269 (37.8%), which is found in all of the ethnic groups. This haplogroup predominates in Western European populations.
E-P1 [E1b], the second most frequent haplogroup in the U.S. (17.7%), is the most common haplogroup in West African populations [V38 – E1b1a]. It is found at high frequencies in our AA samples, and at lower frequencies in HA samples from the Eastern U.S.
Three haplogroups that originate in Northern and Western European populationsinclude I-P30 [I1, M253] (6.1%), the third most common haplogroup in our U.S. sample, I-P19 [I, M170] (2.8%) and I-P37* [I2a1, M438] (1.6%).
Haplogroups that likely originate in Eastern and Southern* European populations are also present in our U.S. database, including R-M17 [R1a1a] (3.4%), E-M78 [E1b1b1a, L539] (2.4%), G-P15 [G2a] (2.4%), and J-M172 [J2] (1.5%).
The fourth and fifth most frequent haplogroups in our database, Q-P36 (5.9%) and Q-M3 (5.8%), along with C-P39 (1.5%), are founding Native-American Y chromosomes. These haplogroups are frequent in our NA and HA samples, and are found at low frequency in our AA, EA, and SA samples. Asian-derived chromosomes, primarily in haplogroups O and N, are extremely rare in all but our SA sample.’
This article presents an overall picture of Y-DNA Haplogroups which is helpful in part, yet still lacking the specific R1b sub-Haplogroups we require for the original Israelite core of the American male demographic.
Remember, it is Haplogroups G, I1 (I2), R1a and R1b which are exclusively associated with Shem’s descendants and it is R1b-U106 which is indicative of a heritage from Abraham; whether by his six sons with Keturah; his son Ishmael; and importantly, his son Isaac.
Combining this information with the more recent percentage for R-M269 and adding to the table below gives an idea of where the United States sits in relation to its brother and cousin nations, if not a precisely comprehensive view.
R1b J E1b1b G R1a I
Ireland 81 2 2 1 3 12
N Ireland 77 2 2 20
Wales 74 0.5 4 3 1 16
Scotland 73 2 2 0.5 9 14
England 67 4 2 2 5 21
Flanders 61 5 5 4 4 20
France 59 8 8 6 3 16
Netherlands 49 4 4 5 4 25
United States 46 2 [21] 2 3 11
Germany 45 5 6 5 16 22
Italy 39 19 14 9 4 10
Sephardim 30 28 19 8 4 12
The five countries of Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the European continent. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. A reflected scenario of these factors in England is indicative of the United States, which has also experienced a great inpouring of waves of emigrants over a period of three hundred years.
While the demise of the United States of America is both foretold and irreversible, it has at least another century or more before the gradual fading into the shadows becomes noticeable enough to be alarming for its citizens.
Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 90:
‘For thirty years it has been fashionable to predict the imminent or ongoing decline of the USA. This is as wrong now as it was in the past. The planet’s most successful country is about to become self-sufficient in energy, it remains the pre-eminent economic power and it spends more on research and development for its military than the overall military budget of all the other NATO countries combined. Its population is not ageing as in Europe and Japan… and… in… [2013] Shanghai University listed what its experts judged the top twenty universities of the world: seventeen were in the USA. The Prussian statesman Otto von Bismarck… said more than a century ago that “God takes special care of drunks, children and the United States of America.”
It appears still to be true.’
As Mark Twain quipped in ironic parallel with the America set before us today:
“Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”
God Bless America…
The final chapter in The Noachian Legacy concentrates on the most written about son of Jacob, the tribe of Dan. Yet in all the articles and books dedicated to him, not one actually reveals Dan’s modern identity.
… and [they] who have lived wisely and well will shine brilliantly, like the cloudless, star-strewn night skies. And those who put others on the right path to life will glow like stars forever. This is… for your eyes and ears only… [a] secret. Put the book under lock and key until the [time of the] end. In the interim there is going to be a lot of frantic running around, [by people] trying to figure out what’s going on.
Daniel 12:3-4 The Message
“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”
Mahatma Gandhi
“With great power there must also come – great responsibility.”
For the constant reader – those reading the chapters in order – you may have a good idea now, on what is to be unfurled on subsequent pages, let alone the remaining chapters. For others, the information which follows will undoubtedly challenge, vex or astound, without a background of a comprehensive context. Cries of racism and simple mindedness could be the thoughts of many. The weight of proof thus far for the identities we have studied, means there is little room to manoeuvre in trying to deny the plain truth. For truth is singular and any other versions of it, whether it be our own or someone else’s, is still, but a mis-truth. Thus, it is a hopeless and forlorn endeavour indeed, to try and support old errors over new evidence, but alas it is a given that most will continue along a path that is comfortable yet restrictive, rather than one which is challenging yet enlightening.
Judah is the fourth son of the Patriarch Jacob and was his fourth son with first wife, Leah. It is interesting to learn that of all his twelve sons, it is Judah who is most like his father, Jacob. For all this, Jacob favours his second youngest son Joseph; the eldest son by his favourite wife, Rachel. It is to Joseph that Jacob passes the birthright blessings, normally given to the literal eldest son; the promises, which were passed from Abraham to Isaac and then from Isaac to Jacob – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Yet, the most similar son is not ignored, in that Judah was promised a unique and separate blessing of his own, the royal orb and sceptre of kingship.
This was not just any royal kingly line, for it has two distinct components not possessed by the royalty of other nations. First, there would always be someone alive from the tribe of Judah and specifically from his descendant King David, who is qualified to sit on the throne. The massive spin on this and one that many Israelite identity believers have missed, is that though the Creator promised that someone from Judah would always occupy the throne, He did not pledge that the most eligible person descended from David would be the monarch – refer articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III.
This throne has survived until the present era, yet those who sit on it are not entirely true descendants of Judah, but usurpers – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
The second component of Judah’s blessing was that the throne given him was on loan; that those who sit on it are temporarily holding it for someone else. The identity of that person means the incumbent King or Queen is behooved to reign justly and to be countered righteous themselves. For the seat belongs to the Son of Man and it is to Him that it will be given at His second coming. A throne He qualified for – and one that He will rule the whole world from – when He defeated sin and death; the two main instruments of weaponry, the Adversary uses in their ongoing war of enslavement against humanity (Isaiah 9:7, Hebrews 1:8; 2:14-15) – Article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, June 2, 1953, Westminster Abbey, London, England
Israelite identity (or British Israelite) proponents have failed to interpret the Bible, history and world events accurately for they have mis-identified Judah. We have seen the disastrous results of this in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Esau is the second most mentioned identity in the scriptures, some 30%, of all biblical identity references. The tribe of Judah is stated the most, some 60%, of all biblical identity references with the remaining 10% accounting for all the sons of Japheth, Ham and the remaining descendants of Shem, even including Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim.
Yet the identities ascribed to both Edom and Judah, as well as to Joseph have been incorrect for nearly five hundred years from when knowledge of the subject began to gain universal appeal. Granted, most understand half of Joseph, that is, his eldest son Manasseh in part, yet even here the identities of Joseph’s two sons have been in continual error until the early 1970’s, when it was first brought to attention that the identity for Manasseh was incorrect.
So, the four main peoples in the Bible, Judah, Edom, Ephraim and Manasseh have been incorrect since the subject was first addressed hundreds of years ago. The truth on Ephraim – to this writer’s knowledge – first came to light nearly fifty years ago, yet has remained very much in the shadows. The truth on Edom has been known far longer in some circles outside of the identity movement, particularly amongst the Jews themselves, though it too has only been discussed and revealed since the 1970’s. Unlike Ephraim, a number of works have been written on Edom and the truth has been available to the public for some time.
Given the many, clear and distinctive clues available in the scriptures, it is baffling how blindness has afflicted it would seem, nearly everyone to the real identities of Joseph and Edom. More puzzling still, are the profound verses surrounding the tribe of Judah and how they have remained hidden while in plain sight all along. We will learn that the identity of Judah is the key… the Key, that unlocks the whole third of the Bible which is prophetic. Judah is the key that unlocks the second third of the Bible which is historical. Finally, the remaining third of the Bible – though written by extension to the whole world – is generally written to the remaining tribes of Israel; but specifically, it is to Judah that it primarily pertains.
Matthew 10:5-6
Common English Bible
‘Jesus sent these twelve out and commanded them, “Don’t go among the Gentiles or into a Samaritan city. Go instead to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.’
Matthew 15:24
New Century Version
Jesus answered, “God sent me only to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.”
It is appreciated this is unpalatable for some readers and maybe abhorrent to others, as it appears to be a statement which is both racist and anti-Semitic all at once. The reader must understand and appreciate two points.
First, the Jews as studied in Chapter XXIX Esau: the Thirteenth Tribe, are not the tribe of Judah.
Abraham of Ur, David A Snyder, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘It is very seldom that a father admits that he learned something from his son. But in my case, in a roundabout way that is what happened several years ago on our annual fishing trip to Alaska. One night after dinner at Redoubt Mountain Lodge on Crescent Lake, we were discussing the Incarnation. He asked why God chose the tiny country of Israel over the highly advanced cultures of China or India to send His son to mankind. Even with my Miller Light induced keen insight, I found I could not answer the question to his or my satisfaction. I must admit that this question has haunted me ever since.
Little did I know at the time that this question is known by theologians as The Scandal of Particularity and has been asked by theologians for centuries. Fortunately I think I have answered it, at least to my satisfaction, at the end of this book when I give my theories as to what part Abraham played in God’s plan of salvation. So, I must thank my son Paul for spicing my life with this riddle that had so much to do with the writing of this book.’
David Snyder’s book was very helpful with regard to research about Abraham. The author highlights a major concern, that we looked at in the previous chapter. The Messiah was sent to His Father’s people, albeit small at that time, from the tribe of Judah in Galilee, north of Judea – which included Idumea (Edom) in the southern portion of the land south of Galilee. It was not about the size of the populace, but the fact they were the Creator’s chosen people. That said, Christ visited areas of the world where the bulk of the Israelites had migrated over the course of five or more centuries – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.
Second, we shall learn that the Creator chooses whom He wills. If this is racist by our own individual definition, then it runs contrary to His.
In Acts 17:26 NIV it says:
‘From one man [Adam, via Noah] he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.’
If one thinks this world is marked by national boundaries that are either happenstance or merely the creation of human governments, then this is not what has occurred. There is a curious verse in Deuteronomy 32:8 NET:
‘When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided up humankind, he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to thenumber of the heavenly assembly.’
The footnotes in the New English Translation states:
‘The Hebrew term (ʿelyon) is an abbreviated form of the divine name El Elyon, frequently translated “God Most High”… This full name (or epithet) occurs only in Genesis 14, though the two elements are parallel in Psalm 73:11; 107:11; etc. Here it is clear that Elyon has to do with the nations in general whereas in verse 9, by contrast, Yahweh relates specifically to Israel. The title depicts God as the sovereign ruler of the world, who is enthroned high above his dominion. The idea, perhaps, is that Israel was central to Yahweh’s purposes and all other nations were arranged and distributed according to how they related to Israel… a Qumran fragment has “sons of God,” while the LXX reads (angelōn theou, “angels of God”)…
“Sons of God” is undoubtedly the original reading; the MT and LXX have each interpreted it differently. MT assumes that the expression “sons of God” refers to Israel (Hosea 1:10), while LXX has assumed that the phrase refers to the angelic heavenly assembly (Psalm 29:1; 89:6; Psalm 82). The phrase is also attested in Ugaritic, where it refers to the high god El’s divine assembly. According to the latter view, which is reflected in the translation, the Lord delegated jurisdiction over the nations to his angelic host (Daniel 10:13-21), while reserving for himself Israel, over whom he rules directly [via the Archangel Michael].’
Thus, the nations and peoples of the world are actually allotted to and governed by, invisible higher authorities and angelic powers. The Creator has reserved Israel – the twelve sons of Jacob – for Himself. Verse eight is translated a number of ways in different versions.
English Standard Version
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.
New International Version
When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.
New Century Version
God Most High gave the nations their lands, dividing up the human race. He set up borders for the people andeven numbered the Israelites.
The latter two have based their translation on the subject of verse nine, though the interlinear uses the Hebrew word Israel (H3478): ‘When most High divided nations their inheritance, where separated sons of Adam, set bounds people, according to number children Israel’ The word for ‘children’ is ben (H1121) and is translated in the KJV as: son (2978 times), children (1568), old (135), first (51), man (20), young (18) and stranger (10). Used as sons, it can mean sons of God or angels. The following verses clarify that the context is speaking of the sons of God, as the Creator is included.
Deuteronomy 32:8-12
Common English Bible
‘When God Most High divided up the nations – when he divided up humankind – he decided the people’s boundaries based on the number of the gods.
Surely the Lord‘s property was his people; Jacob was his part of the inheritance.
God found Israel in a wild land – in a howling desert wasteland – he protected him, cared for him, watched over him with his very owneye. Like an eagle protecting its nest, hovering over its young, God spread out his wings, took hold of Israel, carried him on his back. The Lord alone led Israel; no foreign god assisted.’
The Message verses 8-9
When the High God gave the nations their stake, gave them their place on Earth, He put each of the peoples within boundaries under the care of divine guardians.
But God himself took charge of his people, took Jacob on as his personal concern.
Living Bible verse 8
When God divided up the world among the nations, He gave each of them a supervising angel!
There are further verses which support angelic governance of specific nations and the Creator’s participation in this process.
Psalm 47:7-9
Common English Bible
‘… God is king of the whole world! Sing praises with a song of instruction! God is king over the nations.God sits on his holy throne. The leaders of all people are gathered with the people of Abraham’s God because the earth’s guardians belong to God; God is exalted beyond all.’
Psalm 2:1-2
New Century Version
‘Why are the nations so angry? Why are the people making useless plans? The kings of the earth prepare to fight, and their leaders make plans together against the Lord and his appointed one[the Son of Man].
Isaiah 41:9, 14
New English Translation
‘… you whom I am bringing back from the earth’s extremities, and have summoned from the remote regions[the antipodes, southern Africa, northern America and the British Isles] – I told you, ‘You are my servant.’ I have chosen you and not rejected you… Don’t be afraid, despised insignificant Jacob, men of Israel. I am helping you, says the Lord, your Protector, the Holy One of Israel.’
Daniel 10:1-6, 20-21
English Standard Version
‘In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar. And the word was true, and it was a great conflict. And he understood the word and had understanding of the vision… I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold, a man [an angel] clothed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude… Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? But now I will return to fight against the prince of Persia; and when I go out, behold, the prince of Greece will come. But I will tell you what is inscribed in the book of truth: there is none who contends by my side against these except Michael, your prince[the Prince of Israel].’
Before we delve into Judah and his half-brother Benjamin, we will complete our discussion on Jacob, begun in Chapter twenty-seven about Abraham (Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia); continued in Chapter twenty-eight on Ishmael (The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians –Ishmael & Hagar); and Chapter twenty-nine with Esau (Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe); for Jacob and Judah are much alike… though first, we shall address the British Israelite Identity movement itself.
British Israelism also known as Anglo-Israelism is the belief that the peoples of the British Isles are “genetically, racially and linguistically” the direct descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. There is an error right here already, in that we will learn that all twelve tribes – actually thirteen – were ‘lost’ and all thirteen after migrating through Europe, converged on the islands of Britain and Ireland.
The movement’s roots in the sixteenth century, gained increasing popularity in the 1800s – with its formal beginning sprung from works by John Wilson (1799-1870) and Edward Hine (1825-1891) – continuing on till the present day. A well known online encyclopaedia with a palpable bias, states that these central tenets of British Israelism ‘have been refuted by evidence from modern archaeological, ethnological, genetic and linguistic research.’ It would be enlightening to learn of all this supposed evidence – Article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator. It would also be fascinating to learn from this particular contributor, who then, are the descendants of ancient Israel today?
Any reader who has undertaken the dedicated and unswerving journey of reading every chapter in this quest, will now know that we have convincingly and undeniably found a modern counterpart for every biblical identity. There only remains a handful of nations around the world that could be the sons of Jacob. Anyone prejudiced, unyielding or upholding a misleading agenda, would be severely exposed in seeking to refute the massive body of evidence compiled and presented thus far.
One of the earliest expressions of the biblical identity doctrine was by a French Huguenot magistrate M le Loyer, in a work published in 1590, entitled, The Ten Lost Tribes. This may well be where the erroneous label ‘Ten Lost Tribes’ originated, as well as mistakenly presenting the Scandinavian and Germanic peoples as additional sons of Jacob; when in fact, they are descendants of Abraham, just not through his son Isaac. Apparently James VI of Scotland, (James I of England) believed he was the King of Israel. In 1919 the British Israel World Federation was founded in London and Covenant Publishing in 1922. The Federation has its headquarters in Bishop Auckland in County Durham.
From the 1930s Herbert Armstrong (1892-1986), founder of the Radio and later, Worldwide Church of God; promoted the doctrine to its widest appeal, as one of his central teachings in understanding biblical prophecy – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Much of his own book on the subject – The United States and Britain in Prophecy – was heavily based or copied from an earlier work in 1902 by J H Allen, Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright.
Criticisms of the movement by current scholars, include amateur research and scholarship in theology, anthropology, history and linguistics and of course the catch-all, sink the whole ship tactic, ‘its anti-semitic.’ As we have already addressed, the term anti-semitic is used in a linguistic context not an ethnic one and thus has been misleadingly misappropriated by opponents – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
One critic states: ‘the overwhelming cultural, historical and genetic evidence [is] against it.’ The presentation of this evidence would again be enlightening. Granted, the link between certain Hebrew and English words has shown to be a flawed argument – but not in every case. What no one seems to have considered, is the similarity between English and the Germanic (Teutonic) language it evolved from, revealing not just other language family members but related genetic family also – refer point number three in the Introduction.
English has evolved from Old English and Old English evolved from Low German. As Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – the Germans and English are closely related cousins. Not as closely related as Scotland and England who are half brothers, but still a family kinship as evidenced by not only the link in philology, but also the migration of the Saxon hordes from Northern Germany to England and the fact that from the east coast of England to the western border of Germany, it is merely two hundred miles.
Today there are provinces in both Germany and in Britain which are named after the Saxons and the primary tribe, the Angles. In Germany there are the federal states of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony); Sachsen-Anhalt (Saxony-Anhalt); and Sachsen (Saxony).
In Britain there was the former Kingdom of Wessex (West Saxony); and the modern counties of Sussex (South Saxony); and Essex (East Saxony). Immediately south of the German-Danish border, in the German part of Schleswig, is the province Angeln (Anglia). Until 1800, the foremost language in Angeln was Danish, but during the first part of the nineteenth century German became the primary language. In eastern England there is a region called East Anglia. The name England itself is derived from Angle-land. In everyday language Anglo-Saxon is another name for the English speaking peoples, regardless of how many of their ancestors were from the Saxon tribe known as Angles.
There is another movement called Christian Identity – a 1920s offshoot of British Israelism – that includes a racial interpretation of Christianity with a theology focus which is wholly white supremacist, racist and truly anti-semitic, embedded in fundamentalist teachings. This writer confirms that no connection exists between themselves and the Christian Identity or even the British Israel Federation. Nor has any of the material presented in this work been inspired or influenced by either organisation or its beliefs. Any similarity of suppositions, points or teachings are purely coincidental and cannot be perceived as the same or linked in either their formation or explanation.
Genesis 27:26-29
Christian Standard Bible
26 Then his father Isaac said to him, “Please come closer and kiss me, my son.” 27 So he came closer and kissed him. When Isaac smelled his clothes, he blessed him and said:
“Ah, the smell of my son is like the smell of a field that the Lord has blessed. 28 May God give to you – from the dew of the sky and from the richness of the land – an abundance of grain and new wine.
29May peoples serve you and nations bow in worship to you. Be master over your relatives; may your mother’s sons bow in worship to you. Those who curse you will be cursed, and those who bless you will be blessed.”
Isaac’s blessing to Jacob said he would inherit rich lands, be prosperous and have power over other nations, including his relatives: Edom, Ishmael and Hagar, Midian – and the other sons of Keturah – Haran, Moab, Ammon and Nahor – the Chaldeans. Today, they respectively equate to the Jews and Israel; Germany and Austria; the Netherlands; Scandinavia, Belgium and Luxembourg; Switzerland; France, French Quebec in Canada; and Italy. They are the non-Israelite countries descended from Abraham and his two brothers – the nations principally of northwestern Europe. (We learned in chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, that Edom has turned the table on Jacob as prophesied)
Aside from any other information, once we understand who Abraham’s other descendants are, we would have to objectively look throughout the world and say honestly which nations have had dominion over all these nations for the past five hundred years. There are only two nations that could answer to that enquiry and now, the reader will have worked out who they are.
What has alluded those who have already understood this mystery, is the exact identity of these two primary leading nations descended from the two most prominent sons of Jacob. For the first time, they can be revealed and explained.
Recall that Rebekah had been blessed by her family in Genesis 24:60 NKJV: “Our sister, may youbecome The mother of thousands of ten thousands; And may your descendants possess The gates [doors, cities] of those who hate them.” Some by extension teach this includes pivotal sea-gates around the globe. If so, then Great Britain and the United States have shared the lion’s share of strategic ports: the Straits of Malacca, Singapore, the Suez Canal, Bab el Mandeb, Strait of Hormuz, Cape of Good Hope, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands; plus the Panama Canal and other locations throughout the Pacific ocean.
Jacob receives additional blessings. One from Isaac when Jacob hastily departs from his home in escaping a wrathful Esau and again, in a vision while sleeping.
Genesis 28:1-17
Christian Standard Bible
1 ‘So Isaac summoned Jacob, blessed him… 3 May God Almighty bless you andmake you fruitful and multiply you so that you become an assembly [H6951 – qahal: multitude, company] of peoples. 4 May God give you and your offspring the blessing of Abraham so that you may possess the land where you live as a foreigner, the land God gave to Abraham.
10 Jacob left Beer-sheba and went toward Haran. 11 He reached a certain place and spent the night there because the sun had set. He took one of the stones from the place, put it there at his head, and lay down in that place. 12 And he dreamed: A stairway was set on the ground with its top reaching the sky, and God’s angels were going up and down on it. 13 The Lord was standing there beside him, saying,
“I am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your offspring the land on which you are lying. 14 Your offspring will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out toward the west, the east, the north, and the south. All the peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring.”
The promise of Jacob’s offspring being a blessing to all nations is an echo of what the Creator spoke to Abraham. Genesis 22:18 NKJV: ‘In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.’ Paul teaches that the fulfilment of this promise was through the Son of Man. Galatians 3:8, 16 ESV: ‘And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles [all nations] by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed”… Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.’
Hebrews 2:10-18
Common English Bible
10 ‘It was appropriate for God, for whom and through whom everything exists, to use experiences of suffering to make perfect the pioneer of salvation. This salvation belongs to many sons and daughters whom he’s leading to glory. 11 This is because the one who makes people holy and the people who are being made holy all come from one source. That is why Jesus isn’t ashamed to call them brothers and sisters… 14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, he also shared the same things in the same way. He did this to destroy the one who holds the power over death – the devil – by dying.
15 He set free those who were held in slavery their entire lives by their fear of death. 16 Of course, he isn’t trying to help angels, but rather he’shelping Abraham’s descendants. 17 Therefore, he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way. This was so that he could become a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, in order to wipe away the sins of the people. 18 He’s able to help those who are being tempted, since he himself experienced suffering when he was tempted.’
It is vital to grasp, that a two-fold promise was given: material prosperity and spiritual salvation. This is not something that very many people understand.
Genesis: 15 ‘Look, I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go. I will bring you back to this land, for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” 16 When Jacob awoke from his sleep, he said, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 He was afraid and said, “What an awesome place this is! This is none other than the house of God. This is the gate [stairway] of heaven.”
Jacob’s offspring were to be numerous and to spread in all directions of the globe, north, south, east and west. In modern times this has been fulfilled as the British and Irish peoples have spread abroad to all continents, as well as making permanent homes in the antipodes, southern Africa and the Americas.
Verse three is worth looking more closely at. An assembly of peoples hints at more than one nation. The Hebrew word qahal [H6951], is translated by the KJV, as congregation (86 times), assembly (17), company (17) and multitude (3). The Hebrew word preceding it is rabah [H7235], which the KJV translates as multiply (74), increase (40), many (28), great (8), exceedingly (2) and abundance (2); to be ‘many and numerous.’
Thus, Jacob’s children were to become numerous, while also more than one nation. Other versions translate in some insightful ways which assist in identifying the Israelite nations today.
NCV: … and may you become a group of many peoples.
NET: … and give you a multitude of descendants! Then you will become a large nation.
TLB: … may you become a great nation of many tribes!
NIRV: … May he make your family larger until you become a community of nations.
NLT: … And may your descendants multiply and become many nations!
VOICE: … and multiply your descendants so that you will give rise to nation after nation!
Jacob
Genesis 29:1-35
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the east. 2 As he looked, he saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks of sheep lying beside it, for out of that well the flocks were watered. The stone on the well’s mouth was large, 3 and when all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone from the mouth of the well and water the sheep, and put the stone back in its place over the mouth of the well.
4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers, where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the [grandson] of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.” 6 He said to them, “Is it well with him?” They said, “It is well; and see, Rachel his daughter is coming with the sheep!”
7 He said, “Behold, it is still high day; it is not time for the livestock to be gathered together. Water the sheep and go, pasture them.” 8 But they said, “We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together and the stone is rolled from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.”
9 While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10 Now as soon as Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, Jacob came near and rolled the stone from the well’s mouth and watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother.
11 Then Jacob kissed Rachel and wept aloud. 12 And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s kinsman, and that he was Rebekah’s son, and she ran and told her father.’
It was love at first sight for Jacob, just as it had been for his father Isaac, when he saw Rebekah for the first time.
13 ‘As soon as Laban heard the news about Jacob, his sister’s son, he ran to meet him and embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his house. Jacob told Laban all these things, 14 and Laban said to him, “Surely you are my bone and my flesh!” And he stayed with him a month.
15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my kinsman, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?” 16 Now Laban had two daughters. The name of the older was Leah [H3812: weary], and the name of the younger was Rachel [7354: ewe].’
Leah
17 ‘Leah’s eyes were weak [H7390 – rak: tender, soft, delicate as in soft of words, delicate of flesh, shy], butRachel was beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: comely, fair, beautiful]in form[body] andappearance[face].‘
Leah’s eyesight was not weak, rather her countenance was not as striking as her sister’s.
18‘Jacob loved Rachel. And he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.” 19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to any other man; stay with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed to him but a few days because of the love he had for her.’
Rachel
21 ‘Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife that I may go in to her, for my time is completed.” 22 So Laban gathered together all the people of the place and made a feast. 23 But in the evening he took his daughter Leah and brought her to Jacob, and he went in to her. 24 (Laban gave his female servant Zilpah to his daughter Leah to be her servant.)
25 And in the morning, behold, it was Leah! And Jacob said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Did I not serve with you for Rachel? Why then have you deceived me?” 26 Laban said, “It is not so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also in return for serving me another seven years.” 28 Jacob did so, and completed her week.
Then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife. 29 (Laban gave his female servant Bilhah to his daughter Rachel to be her servant.) 30 So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years.
31When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren [like her grandmother, Sarah]. 32 And Leah conceived and bore a son [1], and she called his nameReuben [See, a son], for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”
33 She conceived again and bore a son [2], and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his nameSimeon [heard]. 34 Again she conceived and bore a son [3], and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi [attached].
35 And she conceived again and bore a son[4], and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.”Therefore she called his name Judah [praise]. Then she ceased bearing [for the time being, as Leah had two additional sons and a daughter].’
Jacob fled from his brother Esau in 1760 BCE. The Seder Olam Rabba states that Leah and Rachel were themselves also twins and were twenty-two (or twenty-one in another version) when they married Jacob. In 1753 BCE, Jacob would have been sixty-four years old. His working for seven years makes sense if Rachel had only been fifteen when they first met. It may also explain how Jacob was deceived on his wedding day and night if they were twins, thinking Leah was Rachel.
Laban certainly knew what he was doing and had his plan regarding his daughters, unbeknown to Jacob. Reuben was born 1752 BCE; Simeon in 1750 BCE; Levi in 1748 BCE; and Judah was born in 1746 BCE according to an unconventional chronology.
Genesis 30:1-43
English Standard Version
1 ‘When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she envied her sister.
She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I shall die!”
2 Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?” 3 Then she said, “Here is my servant Bilhah; go in to her, so that she may give birth on my behalf, that even I may have children through her.” 4 So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife, and Jacob went in to her. 5 And Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son [1/5].
6 Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan [judged]. 7 Rachel’s servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son [2/6]. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his nameNaphtali [wrestling].’
It is worth noting that when we investigate Dan – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe – we learn he was a troublesome son. Dan was conceived in an atmosphere of a marital argument, where Rachel was consumed with envy towards her sister and Jacob was angry. This may be in part, due to further controversy surrounding Dan’s birth.
9 ‘When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Then Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son [1/7]. 11 And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad[good fortune]’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 12 ‘Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son [2/8]. 13 And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.” So she called his nameAsher [happy].
Dan was born later the same year as Judah in 1746 BCE and his brother Naphtali in 1744 BCE. Gad was also born in 1744 BCE and his brother Asher in 1742 BCE.
14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 16 When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night.
17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son [5/9]. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his nameIssachar [wages or hire]. 19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son [6/10]. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun[honour]. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.’
Issachar was born in 1742 BCE and his name may have been in part a homage to his grandfather Isaac. Zebulun and Dinah are thought to have been twins as it does not say Leah conceived Dinah, but rather she followed Zebulun – the Book of Jubilees corroborates twins. Leah was thirty-four when she had her last children; seven children in the space of twelve years. Additional information is provided in the Book of Jubilees regarding Leah and her sons, with the spacing between the births given.
Book of Jubilees 28:11-23
28:11 ‘And Yahweh opened the womb of Leah, and she conceived and bare Jacob a son, and he called his name Reuben, on the fourteenth day of the ninth month [November/December]… Yahweh saw that Leah was hated and Rachel loved. 13 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare Jacob a second son, and he called his name Simeon, on the twenty-first of the tenth month [December/January], 14 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare him a third son, and he called his name Levi,in the new month [1st – New Moon] of the first month [March/April]… 15 And again Jacob went in unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a fourth son, and he called his nameJudah, on the fifteenth [Sabbath] of the third month [May/June]…
17 And when Rachel saw that Leah had borne four sons to Jacob… she said to him: ‘Go in unto Bilhah my handmaid, and she will conceive, and bear a son unto me.’ 18… and she conceived, and bare him a son, and he called his name Dan,on the ninth of the sixth month [August/September]… 19 And Jacob went in again unto Bilhah a second time, and she conceived, and bare Jacob another son, and Rachel called his name Napthali,on the fifth of the seventh* month [September/October*]…
20 And when Leah saw that she had become sterile and did not bear, she envied Rachel, and she also gave her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob to wife, and she conceived, and bare a son, and Leah called his nameGad,on the twelfth of the eighth month [October/November]… 21 And he went in again unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a second son, and Leah called his name Asher,on the second of the eleventh month [January/February]…
22 And Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Issachar, on the fourth of the fifth month [July/August]…and she gave him to a nurse. 23 And Jacob went in again unto her, and she conceived, andbare two (children),a son and a daughter, and she called the name of the son Zebulon, andthe name of the daughter Dinah, in the seventh of the seventh* month [September/October*]…’
Confirmation Zebulun and Dinah were twins, with Zebulun the eldest. Levi was born on the New Moon or first day of the month. A day that was later celebrated like a Sabbath and Judah was actually born on what would be the second Sabbath day of the month, according to the lunar cycle calendar – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Genesis: 22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son [1/11] and said, “God has taken away my reproach.” 24 And she called his name Joseph [may he add], saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!” [this was fulfilled literally, with the birth of Benjamin and also figuratively, when Joseph became two, by having his own sons Manasseh and Ephraim].’
25 ‘As soon as Rachel had borne Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, “Send me away, that I may go to my own home and country.
26 Give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you, that I may go, for you know the service that I have given you.” 27 But Laban said to him, “If I have found favor in your sight, I have learned by divination that the Lord has blessed me because of you. 28 Name your wages, and I will give it.”
29 Jacob said to him, “You yourself know how I have served you, and how your livestock has fared with me. 30 For you had little before I came, and it has increased abundantly, and the Lord has blessed you wherever I turned. But now when shall I provide for my own household also?” 31 He said, “What shall I give you?” Jacob said, “You shall not give me anything. If you will do this for me, I will again pasture your flock and keep it: 32 let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages. 33 So my honesty will answer for me later, when you come to look into my wages with you.
Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen.” 34 Laban said, “Good! Let it be as you have said.” 35 But that day Laban removed the male goats that were striped and spotted, and all the female goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white on it, and every lamb that was black, and put them in the charge of his sons.36 And he set a distance of three days’ journey between himself and Jacob, and Jacob pastured the rest of Laban’s flock.
37 Then Jacob took fresh sticks of poplar and almond and plane trees, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the sticks. 38 He set the sticks that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, 39 the flocks bred in front of the sticks and so the flocks brought forth striped, speckled, and spotted. 40 And Jacob separated the lambs and set the faces of the flocks toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban. He put his own droves apart and did not put them with Laban’s flock. 41 Whenever the stronger of the flock were breeding, Jacob would lay the sticks in the troughs before the eyes of the flock, that they might breed among the sticks, 42 but for the feebler of the flock he would not lay them there. So the feebler would be Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.
43 Thus the man increased greatly and had large flocks, female servants and male servants, and camels and donkeys.’
Book of Jubilees 28:25-30
28:25 ‘And in the days when Joseph was born… Jacob’s possessions multiplied exceedingly, and he possessed oxen and sheep and asses and camels, and menservants and maid-servants. 30 And Laban and his sons envied Jacob, and Laban took back his [own] sheep from him, and heobserved him with evil intent.’
Joseph was born quite sometime after Zebulun and Dinah, fourteen years later in fact, in 1726 BCE. A real battle of wills, mind games and trying to out smart the other is the core of Laban and Jacob’s relationship. This must have grown wearisome to say the least for Jacob after thirty-four** years. It is though, another six years in 1720 BCE before Jacob finally has had enough and the call to return home to his parents has grown irresistible.
At some point, Jacob’s mother Rebekah dies and whether this influences Jacob’s return is not known. There are two schools of thought from Rabbis. The first is that Rebekah died at the age of 133 years in 1724 BCE, twenty-seven years before Isaac. Her death would have occurred prior to Jacob’s return to his parents’ home; ‘and it was [possibly] coincident with that of Deborah’ – Genesis 35:8. Her decease is not mentioned because Jacob had not arrived in time; so Esau was the only son present to attend to her burial.
One tradition holds the ‘ceremony was performed at night out of shame that her coffin should be followed by a son like Esau.’ Alternatively, according to the Book of Jubilees 31:8-11, 48, Jacob, when he arrived home, found his mother alive; and she afterward accompanied him to Beth-el to accomplish his vow – Genesis 28:19-20.
This would mean Rebekah died at the age of 155 years in 1702 BCE, some five years before Isaac’s death (Jubilees 35:1, 41), thus determining that her age when she married was twenty years old, while Isaac was forty. It is this version, which would be considered the more accurate.
Most readers assume that Jacob worked for Laban for twenty** years, yet the biblical math does not support this premise. An unknown author assist in providing the correct explanation:
“In Genesis chapter 30 we find the entire account of Laban talking Jacob out of leaving Haran following the birth of Joseph, and Jacob agreeing to stay on and work for some of Laban’s livestock. But note the statement in Genesis 30:36, where it is noted that Laban separates himself from Jacob by 3 days journey. Now if Jacob is separated 3 days journey from Laban then he is certainly no longer in Laban’s house (Genesis 31:41). And so the 20 years mentioned in Genesis 31:41 cannot include the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban. Thus, it appears that there were two separate 20 years periods, one in which Jacob lived in Laban’s house (verse 41), and another in which Jacob lived in Haran but outside of Laban’s house (verse 38), which included the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban.
In all likelihood, the 20 years in Haran but outside Laban’s house included the 14 years working for Laban’s daughters as well as the 6 years working for Laban’s livestock. All together this would mean that Jacob was in Haran for a total of 40 years, not just 34 years, and certainly not just 20 years. And so Jacob would have come to Haran at 57 years old (6 years before Ishmael died), and stayed until 97 years old before returning to Canaan. Now recall one of the difficulties of Jacob being in Haran for only 20 years is that this forces him to have 12 children in just 7 years, and forces Joseph to be roughly the same age as his brothers, making Genesis 37:3 (i.e., Joseph the son of Jacob’s old age) nonsensical.
But now that we see Jacob was in Haran for 40 years, this allows Jacob to start having children when he was 64 years old (7 years after coming to Haran at 57 years old). In which case it is very much possible that all of Jacob’s children were born by the time he was 76 years old, with the exception of Joseph, who we know wasn’t born until 15 years later when Jacob was 91 years old. Now in this scenario the statement of Genesis 37:3 makes much more sense, given that Joseph was born when Jacob was 91 years old and his other children much earlier, when Jacob was probably between the ages of 64 and 76 years old.”
Genesis 31:1-55
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now Jacob heard that the sons of Laban were saying, “Jacob has taken all that was our father’s [Bethuel], and from what was our father’s he has gained all this wealth.”
2And Jacob saw that Laban did not regard him with favor as before. 3 Then the Lord said to Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your kindred, and I will be with you.”
4 So Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah into the field where his flock was 5 and said to them, “I see that your father does not regard me with favor as he did before. But the God of my father has been with me. 6 You know that I have served your father with all my strength, 7yet your father has cheated me and changed my wages ten times…14 Then Rachel and Leah answered and said to him, “Is there any portion or inheritance left to us in our father’s house? 15 Are we not regarded by him as foreigners? For he has sold us, and he has indeed devoured our money. 16 All the wealth that God has taken away from our father belongs to us and to our children. Now then, whatever God has said to you, do.”
17 So Jacob arose and set his sons and his wives on camels. 18 He drove away all his livestock, all his property that he had gained, the livestock in his possession that he had acquired in Paddan-aram^ [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans], to go to the land of Canaan to his father Isaac. 19 Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole her father’s household gods. 20 And Jacob tricked Laban the Aramean^, by not telling him that he intended to flee. 21 He fled with all that he had and arose and crossed the Euphrates, and set his face toward the hill country of Gilead [the future territory of the half tribe of East Manasseh].
22 When it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob had fled, 23 he took his kinsmen with him and pursued him for seven days and followed close after him into the hill country of Gilead. 24 But God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream by night and said to him, “Be careful not to say anything to Jacob, either good or bad.”
25 And Laban overtook Jacob… 26 And Laban said to Jacob, “What have you done, that you have tricked me and driven away my daughters like captives of the sword? 27 Why did you flee secretly and trick me, and did not tell me, so that I might have sent you away with mirth and songs, with tambourine and lyre? 28 And why did you not permit me to kiss my [grandsons] and my daughters farewell? Now you have done foolishly… 30 And now you have gone away because you longed greatly for your father’s house, but why did you steal my gods?” 31 Jacob answered and said to Laban, “Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your daughters from me by force.
32 Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live. In the presence of our kinsmen point out what I have that is yours, and take it.” Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them. 33 So Laban went into Jacob’s tent and into Leah’s tent and into the tent of the two female servants, but he did not find them. And he went out of Leah’s tent and entered Rachel’s. 34 Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them in the camel’s saddle and sat on them. Laban felt all about the tent, but did not find them. 35 And she said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me.” [an outright lie perhaps or fortunate timing] So he searched but did not find the household gods.
36 Then Jacob became angry and berated Laban. Jacob said to Laban, “What is my offense? What is my sin, that you have hotly pursued me? 38 These twenty years I have been with you.
Your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried, and I have not eaten the rams of your flocks. 39 What was torn by wild beasts I did not bring to you. I bore the loss of it myself… 40 There I was: by day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night, and my sleep fled from my eyes. 41 These twenty years I have been in your house. I served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for your flock, and you have changed my wages ten times. 42 If the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac, had not been on my side, surely now you would have sent me away empty-handed. God saw my affliction and the labor of my hands and rebuked you last night.”
43 Then Laban answered and said to Jacob, “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine. But what can I do this day for these my daughters or for their children whom they have borne? 44 Come now, let us make a covenant, you and I. And let it be a witness between you and me.” 45 So Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. 46 And Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones.” And they took stones and made a heap, and they ate there by the heap… 48 Laban said, “This heap is a witness between you and me today… The Lord watch between you and me, when we are out of one another’s sight. 50 If you oppress my daughters, or if you take wives besides my daughters, although no one is with us, see, God is witness between you and me.”
51 Then Laban said to Jacob… 53 The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor [Laban’s grandfather], the God of their father, judge between us.” So Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac… 55 Early in the morning Laban arose and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned home.’
An amicable parting and agreement to not do each other any harm. Jacob, with the Creator’s help extricated himself from a difficult domestic noose. Jacob and Esau’s reconciliation in 1720 BCE was discussed in the preceding chapter. The Book of Jubilees contains additional details.
Book of Jubilees 29:5-20
29:5 ‘… Jacob turned his face toward Gilead in the first month [March/April], on the twenty-first thereof [what would become the seventh and last Holy day of Unleavened Bread]. And Laban pursued after him and overtook Jacob in the mountain of Gilead in the third month [May/June], on the thirteenth thereof… 7 And Laban spoke to Jacob. And on the fifteenth [full moon, Sabbath] of those days Jacob made a feast for Laban, and for all who came with him, and Jacob swore to Laban that day, and Laban also to Jacob, that neither should cross the mountain of Gilead to the other with evil purpose.
8 And he made there a heap for a witness; wherefore the name of that place is called: ‘The Heap of Witness’… 9 But before they used to call theland of Gileadthe land of the Rephaim… and the Rephaim were born (there), giants whose height was ten[15 feet], nine, eight down to seven [10’ 6’’] cubits. 10 And their habitation was from the land of the children of Ammon to Mount Hermon, and the seats of their kingdom were Karnaim and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, and Misur, and Beon.
11 And Yahweh destroyed them because of the evil of their deeds; for they were very malignant, and the Amorites dwelt in their stead, wicked and sinful, and there is no people today which has wrought to the full all their sins, and they have no longer length of life on the earth. 13 And he passed over the Jabbok in the ninth month [November/December], on the eleventh thereof [in 1720 BCE]. And on that day Esau, his brother, came to him, and he was reconciled to him, and departed from him to the land of Seir, but Jacob dwelt in tents.
14 And… he crossed the Jordan, and dwelt beyond the Jordan, and he pastured his sheep from the sea of the heap unto Bethshan, and unto Dothan and unto the forest of Akrabbim. 15 And he sent to his father Isaac of all his substance, clothing, and food, and meat, and drink, and milk, and butter, and cheese, and some dates of the valley. 16 And to his mother Rebecca also four times a year, between the times of the months, between ploughing and reaping, and between autumn and the rain (season) and between winter and spring.…
17 For Isaac had returned from the ‘Well of the Oath’ and gone up to the tower of his father Abraham [‘on the mountains of Hebron’], andhedwelt there apart from his son Esau [estranged]. 18 For in the days when Jacob went to Mesopotamia, Esau took to himself a wife Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael, and he gathered together all the flocks of his father [Isaac] and his wives, and went up and dwelt on Mount Seir, and left Isaac his father at the ‘Well of the Oath’ alone… [that is, he took his inheritance early and took what was Isaac’s wealth – recall Issac was old and blind] 20 And thitherJacob sent all that he did send to his father and his mother from time to time, all they needed, and they blessed Jacob with all their heart and with all their soul.’
Next, we learn of Jacob’s change of name, a specification on his blessing and the death of his wife Rachel followed by his father Isaac’s passing.
Genesis 35:1-21
English Standard Version
‘God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there. Make an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you fled from your brother Esau.” 2 So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Put away the foreign gods that are among you and purify yourselves and change your garments. 3 Then let us arise and go up to Bethel, so that I may make there an altar to the God who answers me in the day of my distress and has been with me wherever I have gone.” 4 So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that they had, and the rings that were in their ears. Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree that was near Shechem.
5 Andas they journeyed, a terror from God fell upon the cities that were around them, so that they did not pursue the sons of Jacob. 6 And Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him, 7 and there he built an altar and called the place El-bethel, because there God had revealed himself to him when he fled from his brother. 8 And Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried under an oak below Bethel. So he called its name Allon-bacuth.
9 God appeared to Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-aram, and blessed him. 10 And God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; no longer shall your name be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name.” So he called his name Israel.
11 And God said to him, “I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body [this was not fulfilled by the Edomite-Jew].
12 The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you.” 13 Then God went up from him in the place where he had spoken with him. 14 And Jacob set up a pillar in the place where he had spoken with him, a pillar of stone. He poured out a drink offering on it and poured oil on it. 15 So Jacob called the name of the place where God had spoken with him Bethel.’
Verse eleven is applied to Jacob, yet we will find that it is specifically addressing Joseph and Judah in the future. In fact, Joseph’s part of the verse is split between his sons Manasseh and Ephraim. From Judah would issue kings, and from Manasseh a nation and from Ephraim, a company of nations. There is another way of interpreting the verse and that is the nation is Joseph and the company of nations are the remaining ten brothers and their specific inheritances.
The Hebrew word for nation is goy [H1471] and is translated: nation (374 times), heathen (143), Gentiles (30) and people (11). We will study this further when we investigate Manasseh and Ephraim – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Alternative translations for this verse include:
MSG: … A nation – a whole company of nations! – will come from you.
NLT: … You will become a great nation, even many nations.
VOICE: … You will give rise to a great nation; indeed nation after nation will come from you.
Genesis: 16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor. 17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son [2/12].” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni[son of my sorrow or son of my strength]; but his father called him Benjamin [son of the right hand].
19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem), 20 andJacob set up a pillar over her tomb. It is the pillar of Rachel’s tomb, which is there to this day. 21 Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder.’
As Benjamin was considerably younger than Joseph – who had been born in 1726 BCE and was himself fourteen years younger than Zebulun and Dinah, arriving in Egypt at the age of seventeen in 1709 BCE, coupled with Jospeh not having known Benjamin, until he met him in Egypt in 1687 BCE and the fact that Benjamin is described as a ‘little one’ or a boy, who was given extra servings of food by Joseph – an age of twelve (plus or minus 2 to 3 years) is plausible, when Joseph was age 39 or 40. This means a birth of circa 1699 BCE for Benjamin as well as the untimely early death of his mother Rachel, at the age of seventy-five.
Book of Jubilees 36
21 ‘And Leah his wife died… and he buried her in the double cave near Rebecca his mother to the left of the grave of Sarah, his father’s mother. 23 And all her sons and his sons came to mourn over Leah his wife with him and to comfort him regarding her, for he was lamenting her for he loved her exceedingly after Rachel her sister died; 24 For she was perfect and upright in all her ways and honored Jacob, and all the days that she lived with him he did not hear from her mouth a harsh word, for she was gentle and peaceable and upright and honorable. 24 And he remembered all her deeds which she had done during her life and he lamented her exceedingly; for he loved her with all his heart and with all his soul.’
A difficult start to their marriage, with Leah being relegated behind Rachel to the point of ‘hatred’ must have mercifully eased over time and particularly after Rachel’s death. We saw earlier that though Leah wasn’t unattractive, possessing a gentle disposition, she was in the shadow of her outgoing and alluring sister. Rachel is a definite reminder of Rebekah and Leah has a certain hint of Sarah about her. Leah dies after Rachel her twin, yet apparently before Jacob travels to Egypt in 1687 BCE, as Leah is buried in Hebron. This means she died rather early herself, somewhere between seventy-five and eighty-seven years of age. If we say eighty-five, then she would have had ten years with Jacob after her sister died. Her death may have acted as a further prompt for Jacob to depart to Egypt during the famine.
It is worth noting that Jacob just prior to his death, was inspired to split the family blessing, so that a son of Rachel received the physical birthright blessing of prosperity and a son of Leah received the spiritual blessing of the Messianic line and promise – in the ongoing war begun in Genesis 3:15. Leah’s elevation in Jacob’s and the Creator’s eyes may have played a part in this fateful decision.
We will complete learning about Jacob’s latter life when we study Joseph.
The subject of the so-called Ten Lost Tribes is a voluminous one and many works have been undertaken to expound on it. Some are better than others and a number contain considerable detail.
It is not the aim to rehash these when they are already available and have intrinsic value and merit; yet some consideration to this aspect of the sons of Jacob is required as background and has relevancy with their migratory routes from what is now Palestine to the British Isles – either by way of the Mediterranean, southern Europe and Ireland, or via south-central Asia and across Europe to Scandinavia and finally Britain. The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints (Mormons), have an interest in the subject and regrettably misinterpreted the American Indian as one of the lost tribes – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. A series of Mormon articles address the topic.
What Became of the Tribes of Israel? – emphasis & bold mine:
‘How long Israel remained in Assyria after they had been carried away captive by Sargon II is not known. In the Apocrypha, Esdras describes the following vision: “But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt, that they might therekeep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land. And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river. For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. Then dwelt they there until the latter time.” (2 Esdras 13:41-46.) Elder George Reynolds commented on the direction of the travels of the tribes of Israel:
“They determined to go to a country ‘where never man dwelt,’ that they might be free from all contaminating influences. That country could only be found in the north. Southern Asia was already the seat of a comparatively ancient civilization; Egypt flourished in northern Africa; and southern Europe was rapidly filling with the future rulers of the world. They had therefore no choice but to turn their faces northward. The first portion of their journey was not however north; according to the account of Esdras, they appear to have at first moved in the direction of their old home; and it is possible that they originally started with the intention of returning thereto; or probably, in order to deceive the Assyrians, they started as if to return to Canaan, and when they crossed the Euphrates and were out of danger from the hosts of Medes and Persians, then they turned their journeying feet toward the polar star” – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
Elder Reynolds’s explanation takes into account the numerous prophecies that indicate that when the ten lost tribes return, they will come out of the north… Where they went is not known, and this fact has led to much speculation about their present whereabouts. The Lord has not seen fit to reveal their location, however, and until He does so, it is useless to try to identify their present locality.’
This is quite a statement, of defeat. One wonders how would the Lord reveal the tribes whereabouts… and when would He decide to? Would the Mormons be open to a source that did not derive from within their own Church?
The Return of the Ten Tribes – emphasis mine:
‘The prophets of old saw that in the last dispensation, thedispensation of the fulness of times, would come a complete gathering and restoration of the house of Israel… though the main body of ten of the tribes is lost, there are representatives of all twelve tribes scattered throughout the earth. This statement can be explained as follows:
When Assyria attacked the Northern Kingdom, many fled to the safety of the Southern Kingdom. As the ten tribes traveled north, some stopped along the way – many possibly being scattered throughout Europe and Asia.’
According to the article, the tribes of the northern Kingdom of Israel, either just disappeared amongst the southern Kingdom of Judah, or as they travelled, numbers of them split off and vanished amongst other peoples and nations.
The Lost Tribes to Come to Zion – emphasis mine:
‘In [the] April conference of 1916, Elder James E. Talmage… spoke of the lost tribes and their records:
“There is a tendency among men to explain away what they don’t wish to understand in literal simplicity, and we, as Latter-day Saints are not entirely free from the taint of that tendency… Some people say that prediction is to be explained in this way: A gathering is in progress, and has been in progress from the early days of this Church; and thus the ‘Lost Tribes’ are now being gathered; but that we are not to look for the return of any body of people now unknown as to their whereabouts. True, the gathering is in progress, this is a gathering dispensation; but the prophecy stands that the tribes shall be brought forth from their hiding place… [and their] scriptures shall become one with the scriptures of the Jews, the holy Bible…”
Then in [the] October conference, Elder Talmage spoke again of the lost tribes and made this remarkable prediction:
“The ten tribes shall come; they are not lost unto the Lord; they shall be brought forth as hath been predicted; and I say unto you there are those now living – aye, some here present – who shall live to read the records of the Lost Tribes of Israel, which shall be made one with the record of the Jews, or the Holy Bible…”
The ten tribes, however, are to eventually receive their land inheritance with Judah … In that day will be fulfilled the statement of Jeremiah: “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers”(Jeremiah 3:18). Elder Orson Pratt stated further:
“By and by, when all things are prepared – when the Jews have received their scourging, and Jesus has descended upon the Mount of Olives, the ten tribes will leave Zion, and will go to Palestine, to inherit the land that was given to their ancient fathers, and it will be divided amongst the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by the inspiration of the Holy [Spirit]. They will go there to dwell in peace in their own land from that time, until the earth shall pass away. But Zion, after their departure, will still remain upon the western hemisphere [the United States], and she will be crowned with glory as well as old Jerusalem [true Jerusalem, not the city by that name in the state of Israel – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe], and, as the Psalmist David says, she will become the joy of the whole earth.’
These series of articles raise a seemingly small issue, with enormous repercussions if understood incorrectly, that until now has been just that… misunderstood. The scriptures pertaining to Judah and Israel being reunited are part of the blessing that was given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The blessing wasn’t just to dwell in Canaan and that was the fulfilment – Genesis 28:14*. Punishment was promised to the Israelites if they erred grievously from the commandments, laws and statutes of the Creator – Deuteronomy 28:37, 64; Hosea 1:9; 3:4. It was prophesied that they would be sifted as a people or peoples – not individually and therefore completely lost – amongst the nations (Ezekiel 11:16).
Isaiah 8:16-18
Common English Bible
‘Bind up the testimony; seal up the teaching among my disciples. I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden his face from the house of Jacob, and I will hope in God. Look! I and the children the Lord gave me are signs and wonders in Israel from the Lord of heavenly forces, who lives on Mount Zion.’
The remnants of the two kingdoms would eventually re-unite as Jeremiah predicted. Christianity has, due to a misidentification of Judah, erroneously believed that the Jews – who are not Judah – and Israel have not yet re-united and that it will take place after the second coming of the Son of Man. Of course, the reason why Christians believe this error, is because they have swallowed the falsehood that Judah – falsely believed to be the Jews – were never lost and that only Israel was lost. The truth of the matter is that all twelve – actually thirteen tribes – went into respective captivities. All were sifted, all migrated, all arrived in Ireland and Britain and then travelled beyond. For they have all either been in a process of leaving* the British Isles, or are experiencing different evolving political statuses with regard to their allegiance to the very kingship of Judah… which will be explained.
The nations comprising the sons of Jacob are predicted to go into captivity one more time before the advent of the Messiah and this period in the Bible is referred to as the time of Jacob’s trouble, or the Great tribulation.
The state of Israel (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – which is not the tribe of Judah, nor does it comprise true Israelites – is not going to dwell with them, before the end of this age or afterwards. The land that the Jews have usurped from the Palestinian Arabs, will be given to the Israelites during the millennial rule of the Son of Man.
Events came to a head during the reign of King Solomon, whom we have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; articles: Thoth; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. His evil led to the splitting of the United Kingdom after his death in 930 BCE at the age of sixty-nine. Solomon was born in 999 BCE and began his reign as king in 970 BCE, initiating the building of the Temple in 966 BCE and completing it in 960 BCE. It was exactly 480 years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple – 1 Kings 6:1. King Solomon’s son, Rehoboam became king, born in 971 BCE to Solomon’s Ammonite wife, Naamah – Article: Na’amah. Rehoboam ruled seventeen years until his death at the age of fifty-eight in 913 BCE.
The Kingdom was rent in two, when Jeroboam became king of the tear away Israelite tribes of the north. Jeroboam ruled until 910 BCE. Jeroboam was the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite (from the tribe of Ephraim) and Solomon’s servant – 1 Kings 11:26, 28. Jeroboam was a ‘mighty man of valour’ and Solomon recognising his worth, had made him ruler over all the charge of the House of Jospeh.
It was some two hundred years later that the Kingdom of Israel went into captivity to the mighty Assyrian Empire from 721 to 718 BCE – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Josephus confirms their existence at the time of Christ when he wrote: ‘The entire body of the ten tribes are still beyond the Euphrates, an immense multitude not to be estimated by number.’ The early Church recognised that the tribes of Israel were ‘scattered abroad’ – James 1:1. The Israelites were planted by the Assyrians, in Media – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes, located in modern Iran (2 Kings 17:6).
It should come as no surprise that there is considerable debate regarding certain words and terms for historical peoples and equating them with the Lost Tribes. Identity believers place great credence in them, worldly scholars are very derisory and certain historians are somewhere in between. It appears to this writer that there is some correlation and substance to the argument and that a meeting in the middle would be mature, rational and scholastically honourable. We will look at examples and the reader can deduce for themselves. The key words used in this line of reasoning are the base words Isaac and the disobedient Israelite King Omri (885 to 874 BCE).
The full evolution of the etymological argument are the words Saxon and Celt, respectively. The words in between are numerous and varied. It is argued that the initial I of Isaac as a vowel was dropped and the name became known as Sakki, Saka, Sakka, Saaca, Sacae, Sacasone and Saxe.
This word apparently, is also linked to Scyth and therefore the name Scythian. Though, the term Scythian includes other peoples that were not Israelites, such as the Turanian Scythians unrelated to the Sacae Scythians. This no doubt has led some scholars to be sceptical of equating the sons of Jacob with Scythians in general and thus they have rejected the argument in its entirety instead of recognising the subset within. The first appearance of the Scythians in Central Asia occurred during the reign of the Assyrian King Sargon between 722 to 705 BCE. Exactly the time period of the fall of the Kingdom of Israel and the subsequent flight of Israelites out of Canaan.
The Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:
‘Herodotus, a Greek historian of the fifth century B.C., notes that the Scythians were interspersed with less civilized people. He describes the non-civilized nations of the steppes thusly:
“the ManEaters, a tribe that is entirely peculiar and not Scythian at all… [and] the Black Cloaks, another tribe which is not Scythian at all.”
Herodotus confirms the civilized qualities of the Scythians and the backwardness of the non-Scythian tribes in the following words.
“The Euxine Pontus [the Black Sea]… contains – except for the Scythians – the stupidest nations in the world.”
Colonel Gawler cites Epiphanius as stating “the laws, customs, and manner of the Scythians were received by other nations as the standards of policy, civility, and polite learning.” He also cites the following from book viii, iii, 7 of Strabo’s Geography:
“… ‘but the Scythians governed by good laws…’ And this is still the opinion entertained of them by the Greeks; for we esteem them the most sincere, the least deceitful of any people, and much more frugal and self-relying than ourselves.”
Zenaide Ragozin’s, Media, states:
“…Scythians was not a race name at all, but one promiscuously used, for all remote, little known, especially nomadic peoples of the north and northeast, denoting tribes…of Turanian as of IndoEuropean stock: to the latter the Scythians of Russia are now universally admitted to have belonged.”
The Scythian tag included a broad range of peoples, wherein the newly arrived Israelites were enveloped. Unlike the rest, these Scythians – the future Saxons – exhibited traits of a civilised, not an uncouth society, which were respected by their fellow ‘cultured’ relatives descended from Moab and Ammon (the French today), the later Greeks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Words derived from Omri, include: Ghomri, Kimerioi, Khumri and Cymry which likely easily evolved into the terms Cimmerii, Cimmerian and later, Celt. A similar tribe in Central Asia were known as the Massagetae, possibly associated with Jospeh’s son Manasseh – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The ‘c’ in Cimmerian is pronounced with an ‘s’ which is remarkably similar to the capital of the northern Kingdom of Israel, Samaria. The original Samarians had been taken captive by Assyria and transplanted to the cities of the Medes. These ‘Simmerians’ had appeared out of nowhere, yet an historical account states that the Assyrian King Esarhaddon in 674 BCE confronted an alliance of Median and ‘newly-arrived Cimmerian’ forces.*
Samuel Lysons in his book, Our British Ancestors: Who and What Were They? 1865, linked the Cimmerians ‘to be the same people with the Gauls or Celts under a different name.’ Historian George Rawlinson wrote: ‘We have reasonable grounds for regarding the Gimirri, or Cimmerians, who first appeared on the confines of Assyria and Media in the seventh century B.C., and the Sacae of the Behistun Rock, nearly two centuries later, as identical with the Beth-Khumree of Samaria, or the Ten Tribes of the House of Israel.’
Danish linguistic scholar Anne Kristensen confirms: ‘There is scarcely reason, any longer, to doubt the exciting and verily astonishing assertion propounded by the students of the Ten Tribes that the Israelites deported from Bit Humria, of the House of ‘Omri, are identical with the Gimirraja of the Assyrian sources. Everything indicates that Israelite deportees did not vanish from the picture but that, abroad, under new conditions, they continued to leave their mark on history.’
There were two main branches of Celts. The Goidelic Celts from whom the Gaels of Ireland descend and the Brythonic (or Brittonic) Celts from whom the Welsh and a proportion of the people of Brittany in France descend – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
The famous King Darius of Persia, inscribed on a rock in northern Iran: ‘This kingdom that I hold is from Sakka (the region where the Israelites lived) which is beyond Sogdiana to Kush and from India to Sardis.’ Those scholars who disagree with equating any of the Scythians or Cimmerians with the lost tribes, do not then provide an alternative, viable identity (apart from scattering); so it is a little difficult to entertain their arguments in a serious vein.
Amos 7:16
English Standard Version
Now therefore hear the word of the Lord. You say, ‘Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not preach against the house of Isaac.’^
Jeremiah 3:11-12
English Standard Version
‘And the Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel has shown herself more righteous than treacherous Judah.Go, and proclaim these words toward the north”, and say,“Return, faithless Israel, declares the Lord. I will not look on you in anger, for I am merciful”, declares the Lord;“I will not be angry forever.”
We learn from the prophet Amos that the Israelites, specifically the Kingdom of Israel were known by the names Israel and Isaac. From the prophet Jeremiah, we find out that tribes of Israel were living due north of Jerusalem, not to the north east as those who were transplanted to the cities of the Medes. This is a different body of people, located in the Black Sea region.
Certain Scythians migrated westward from Central Asia to southern Russia, Ukraine and eastern Europe. Approximately 300 to 100 BCE these Scythians migrated north west to Scandinavia. The Cimmerians steered a more southerly route through the Caucasus region and Asia Minor. At the time of Paul, the early church congregation of the Galatians (directly linked to the word Gaul), were believed to comprise Israelites (Cimmerians), from the ‘lost sheep of the House of Israel.’ About 650 BCE the first waves of Cimmerians migrated westwards through southern Europe, arriving in Gaul in northern France, then venturing onto Britain. The Scythians and Cimmerians were infinitely kinsmen, with the Encyclopaedia Britannica calling the Cimmerians** a ‘Scythian tribe.’
Historian Tamara Rice confirms: ‘The Scythians did not become a recognizable national entity much before the eighth century B.C… By the seventh century B.C. they had established themselves firmly in southern Russia… Assyrian documents place their appearance there in the time of King Sargon (722-705 B.C.), a date which closely corresponds with that of the establishment of the first group of Scythians in southern Russia.’
Boris Piotrovsky adds: ‘Two groups, Cimmerians** and Scythians, seem to be referred to in Urartean and Assyrian texts, but it is not always clear whether the terms indicate two distinct peoples or simply mounted nomads… The Assyrians used Cimmerians* in their army as mercenaries; with a legal document dated 679 B.C. referring to an Assyrian ‘commander of the Cimmerian regiment’, but in other Assyrian documents they are called “the seed of runaways who know neither vows to the gods nor oaths.”
When the Kingdom of Urartu (refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran) crumbled, the Scythians established themselves in northern Persia (modern Iran), occupying Urartu and setting up a capital at Sak-iz (Isaac?).
‘In addition to exile by land there was also an enforced maritime transportation: Amos (4:3) refers to the “cows of Bashan” “in the mountain of Samaria” (Amos 4:1) many of whom will be taken away in sailing vessels and the rest shall be cast “into the palace”. “Into the palace” has been translated from the Hebrew word “Harmona” which is also translatable as meaning “To the Mountain of Mannae”… Mannae was in the general area of Armenia to which Jewish and local sources say the Israelites were taken .
Amos said: HEAR, THIS WORD, YE KINE OF BASHAN, THAT ARE IN THE MOUNTAIN OF SAMARIA, WHICH OPPRESS THE POOR, WHICH CRUSH THE NEEDY, WHO SAY TO THEIR HUSBANDS, BRING, AND LET US DRINK… HE WILL TAKE YOU AWAY IN BIG SHIPS AND THOSE WHO REMAIN IN FISHING BOATS. EACH WOMAN WILL BE CARRIED STRAIGHT OUT THROUGH THE BREACHES AND CAST OUT BEYOND THE MOUNTAINS OF MANNAE” (Amos 4:1-3). The words rendered… as “BIG SHIPS” [Hebrew: “tsinot”] and as “FISHING BOATS” [“sirot-dugah”] are direct translations from the Hebrew.
The verse in the Hebrew Bible may therefore be understood as saying that one part of the exiles would be taken away in large and small sailing vessels and another part would be exiled to Mannae where the exiled Israelite “Cimmerians” and Scythians indeed appeared. “Isles of the Sea” [refers]… primarily to the Isles of Britain.Getting to the “Isles of the Sea” entails travel by boat.
The expressions “Isles of the Sea” (Isaiah 11:11), “Way of the Sea” (Isaiah 9:10), “large boats”, and “fishing-boats” (Amos 4:1-3) in connection with the exile of Northern Israel is consistent with transportation by sea which was logistically possible at that time and had been effected in other cases by Phoenician seafarers. Israelites had participated in Phoenician seafaring ventures.
The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel were conquered and exiled… by the Assyrian [monarch], Tiglathpileser. The later Assyrian rulers Shalmaneser, Sargon, and Sennacherib were responsible for exiling the remainder. Tiglathpileser (745-727 BCE) had been responsible for transforming the Assyrian Empire from a powerful but decaying entity to [a] major world power. Prior to his reign Assyria had been seriously threatened by the kingdom of Urartu to the north of Assyria. Urartu was centered around Lake Van (in Armenia), and had exercised suzerainty over Mannae, over the region of Gozan at the headwaters of the Khabur river, and also over parts of Cilicia with its port of Anatolian Tarsis.
The Assyrians took their cavalry horses to Mannae for training. Mannae was between Assyria and Urartu and linked to both of them. It was one of the major places to which Israelites had been exiled. Mannae was also one of the first regions from which the Cimmerians were first reported, “The Cimmerians went forth from the midst of Mannae,” says an Assyrian inscription. Mannae was also destined to become a Scythian centre.
The Scythians were one and the same people as the Cimmerians or at any rate Scythians and Cimmerians were: “… two groups of people who seem inclined to operate in the same geographical zones, and whose names seem to be interchangeable already in the Assyrian sources”. There were three main groups of people in the Cimmerian and Scythian forces: Cimmerians, Scyths, and Guti or Goths.’
The Guti (or Goths) were not Israelites – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Davidiy: ‘Cimmerians and Scyths were frequently confused with each other by foreigners and by historians. “SAKAI” is the name later given in Persian inscriptions to the Scyths. In Afghanistan the appellation, “SAK” (from Saka) was much later understood to be a form of the Hebrew “Isaac”. Other names applied to the Scythians such as Zohak (by the Persians), and Ishkuzai (by the Assyrians) support the “Isaac” equation.
Van Loon identifies a people in north Armenia (near Lake Leninkan close to the border with Iberia in Georgia) named “ISQI-GULU” as Scythians. “ISQI-GULU” is the equivalent of “ISAACI-Golu”! i.e. “The Exiles of Isaac” since “Golu” in Hebrew connotes ‘exiled”. Variations of the name Isaac were applied to the Scythians who in many respects were identical with (or identified as) the Cimmerians. A city named after the Cimmerians and called Gymrias or Gamir was to be found in the ISQI-GULU area. This city in Armenian was later referred to as “Kumayri” and this name is considered a sign of Cimmerian presence as well as being an alternate Assyrian pronunciation of “Omri” which was the name they gave to northern Israel.
In a few inscriptions the Scythians are referred to as Iskuzai (Ishkuzai) or Askuzai (Ashkuzai) though usually they are called either Sakai or Uman Manda or Gimiri like the Cimmerians. M.N. van Loon wished to emphasize this point: “It should be made clear from the start that the terms ‘Cimmerian’ and ‘Scythian’ were interchangeable: in Akkadian the name Iskuzai (Asguzai) occurs only exceptionally. Gimirrai (Gamir) was the normal designation for ‘Cimmerians’ as well as ‘Scythians’ in Akkadian.”
Both Cimmerians and Scyths were combinations in differing proportions of the same groups. The Cimmerians (i.e. West Scythians) were defeated by the Assyrians and disappeared. The East Scythians (Sakai) remained however for a time in the Middle East area, gained control of the Assyrian Empire, and eventually took the leading role in devastating the Assyrian cities. They too were destined to suffer defeat (at the hands of their Median and Babylonian allies who betrayed and ambushed them) andto be drivennorthwards,beyond the Caucasus Mountains into the steppe areas ofsouthern Russia (“Scythia”) whence they ultimately continued westward into Europe.
The Cimmerians were driven westward. They invaded Phrygia, Lydia, and Ionia. These States were all in modern day Turkey. Ultimately the Cimmerians to the west of Assyria were to be defeated and to leave the area of Turkey, crossing the Bosporus and advancing into Europe. They became the dominant factor of Celtic civilization, the Galatae of Gaul, the Cimbri of Scandinavia, and the Cymry of Britain. Homer and other Greeks reported Cimmerians in Britain at an early date.
The Scythians in the north split into two sections,one was to the north of the Caucasus west of the Caspian Sea and the other was east of the Caspian. The Scythians in the west at an early stage sent offshoots into Europe who joined the Cimmerians already there. Later the Western Scythians migrated to Scandinavia, which at first was named “Scath-anavia” in their honor,and to Germany. The Mesopotamians and Persians called all of the Scythians “Sakae”, while the Greeks called them “Scythians”.
Modern historians in order to distinguish between the two sections of Scythians often use the term “Scythian” to refer to those Scythians from west of the Caspian Seaand north of the Caucasus, while “Sakae” is used for those situated east of the Caspian. The Scythian-Sakae were also known as “Sexe” and as “Saxon” and theAnglo-Saxons emerged from them.
Diodorus Siculus (32:4 7) linked the Cimmerians of old, the Galatians, and the Cimbri altogether. Plutarch (in “Marius”) reported the opinion that the Cimmerians, Cimbri, and Scythians, were in effect all members of the one nation whom he calls “Celto- Scythians”. Homer placed the Cimmerians in the British Isles as did a poem allegedly written ca. 500 BCE by the Greek Orpheus. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (891 CE) begins by saying that the Britons came from Armenia and the Picts* (of Scotland)from the south of Scythia. “Armenia” is the land of Urartu wherein the Cimmerians had sojourned and from which as an historically identifiable entity they emerged. The idea that the Scots* came from Scythia is found in most legendary accounts of Ireland and Scotland.
FOR, LO, I WILL COMMAND, AND I WILL SIFT THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AMONG ALL NATIONS, LIKE AS CORN IS SIFTED IN A SIEVE, YET SHALL NOT THE LEAST GRAIN FALL UPON THE EARTH [Amos 9:9].
In east Scythia there had existed settlements of numerous civilized peoples of so-called “Nordic” appearance who disappeared shortly before the Barbarians were first recorded in Western Europe. The “Barbarians” had traditions that they came from Scythia and their artistic styles are actually identical to those known from the Scythian areas.
They had similar “Shamanistic” Scythian religious beliefs and customs; they wore the same armor, and fought with the same tactics, and they had the same tribal names in the same formations relative to each other as they would later have in the west. The Scythian peoples were destined to disappear from Scythia in the period between 300 BCE to ca. 600 CE. Just as the Scythians were leaving Scythia, they began to appear in the west as “Barbarians” largely after passing through Scandinavia, Pannonia (Hungary), and Germany.
The Scythian-Gothic nations had emerged from Scythia. In east Scythia, at least in the area east of the Caspian Sea whence the Sacae (Anglo-Saxons) were once centered, Aramaic was spoken. Aramaic is closely related to Hebrew. Some of the Israelite Tribes had spoken Aramaic while others used a type of Hebrew influenced by Aramaic, or Aramaic influenced by Hebrew. Aramaic was one of the official languages of the Assyrian Empire.
The Old Anglo-Saxon English language is a composite dialect and contains many Hebrew words. Linguistically, the west Barbarians may originally have spoken Hebrew or a related Semitic dialect. There is nothing to obviate such a possibility since new languages were sometimes learnt and old ones forgotten in historical experience. The Normans, for instance, came from Scandinavia and settled en-masse in Normandy, France, but within two generations they had forgotten their parent language and knew only French!
The Germanic languages probably did not exist before 500 BCE. They first appeared in Northern Germany and then spread outwards through conquest and cultural assimilation. It is generally agreed that approximately one-third of all early Germanic vocabulary is of an unknown (non-Indo-European) origin. These languages experienced changes in sounds and grammatical points that are symptomatic of Semitic tongues. Terry Blodgett proved that this additional element was Hebrew. Hebrew speakers must have been part of, or absorbed into, whatever originated the Germanic languages.The people in question had little or no relationship with the present day inhabitants of Germany other than a linguistic connection dating from the time when one group ruled over the other.
FOR I WILL NO MORE HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; BUT I WILL UTTERLY TAKE THEM AWAY (Hosea 1:6). Judah was not to be exiled with the Ten Tribes, BUT I WILL HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF JUDA [Hosea 1:7]. The third child is called “Lo-Ammi” meaning “Not-My-People”. At first the Ten Tribes will be rejected and exiled but later God will return and accept them [Hosea 11:12].
EPHRAIM COMPASSETH ME ABOUT WITH LIES, AND THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL WITH DECEIT: BUT JUDAH YET RULETH WITH GOD, AND IS FAITHFUL WITH THE SAINTS.’
The last sentence is key, in that it is not referring to Canaan but rather Judah’s new home far and away to the northwest of their former lands.
The link between the term Saka and Isaac is explained by Steven Collins as far older in origin than the seventh century BCE – emphasis mine:
‘There are very ancient records of correspondence from Canaanite rulers to the Egyptian Pharaohs desperately calling for help against the powerful invasions of a people called the “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” “Aberi” or “Saga.” These ancient letters were preserved on the famous“Amarna Tablets,” andthey apparently record the invasion of Canaan by the Israelites under Joshua! The “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” or “Aberi” are theHebrews, and the “Saga” are theSaka (the people of Isaac), albeit expressed in Canaanite terms.
Mrs. Sydney Bristowe, in Oldest Letters in the World, wrote in 1923 concerning the Amarna Tablets:
“The great importance of the Amarna Tablets has not been recognized because apparently, the [translators] have beenunwilling to admit that the Israelites are mentioned upon them and that they tell of the conquest of Palestine by Joshua! The translations shown with the tablets now in the British Museum, give little idea of the interest of the letters, the name Haberi, Khaberi or Aberi is hardly seen in these translations, yet that name, appears frequently in the tabletsand leading philologists certify that it stands for the Hebrews(Israelites). See Encyclopaedia Brittanica Edition 11, Volume 10, page 78.
Another name mentioned upon the tablets is Saga which is said to be identical with Haberi (Knudtzon, Die El Amarna Tafeln, page 51), and is proved to be so by the fact that it occurs upon the Behistan Rock in Persiawhere, according to Sir Henry Rawlinson, it represents the Israelites(the Sakai or ‘House of Isaac’).
Dr. Hall (of the British Museum) admits the fact that the tablets tell of the Israelite’s conquest of Palestine, for he writes: “We may definitely, if we accept the identification of the Khabiru as the Hebrews, say that in the Tel-el-Amarna letters, we have Joshua’s conquest seen from the Egyptian and Canaanite point of view’ (Ancient History of the Near East, page 409).”
“It seems very probable that the ‘SAGAZ’… and… the Khabiru who devastated Canaan… are no other than the invading Hebrews and other desert tribes allied with them… (and after presenting a philological analysis supporting this conclusion, he adds)… In my own, view, the probabilities are all in favour of the identification.”
‘Herodotus is cited above as stating that the Persians called all Scythians“Sacae(or Saka),” which is the equivalent of the Hebrew/Israelite “Saga” in the much older Amarna Tablets. It appears that the Canaanites knew the Israelite invaders were the “seed of Isaac,” but rendered this name as “Saga” instead of “Saka,” as did the Persians. (The letters “g” and “k” are closely related guttural phonetic sounds.) The above evidence that Canaanite and Assyrian sources indicate that the Israelites were known by the name of Isaac prior to their departure from Palestine confirms that it is their descendants who bore the name of Isaac in Scythia after their arrival in Asia.’
Steven Collins continues with various identifying points on the Scythians and their Israelite connection. He also recounts the Scythian’s invasion of Assyria, Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine, beginning in 624 BCE, ultimately contributing to Assyria’s fall as an empire in 612 BCE, with the defeat of their capital Nineveh at the hands of the Medes, Babylonians and… Scythians.
Noteworthy is the fact that the Scythians attacked Calah, burning it, which was the headquarters of the Assyrian army. Revenge against Assyria was one motive for their advance, the second was the liberation of Canaan and their kin, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin.
What is attention grabbing is that the Scythian march through Syria and Palestine was relatively bloodless and the sparing of Jerusalem peculiarly stands out. This only really makes sense if the Scythian hordes were there to liberate their previous homeland and in particular their brother tribes. Wild Asiatic nomads who were in Palestine for the first time, would not have blazed their way through Assyria to then spare city after city of the territory of Judah.
Herodotus records that ‘for twenty-eight years [624-596 BCE]… the Scythians were masters of Asia…’ This time frame includes the reign of righteous King Josiah (640-609 BCE) of Judah – as well as the life of Jeremiah the prophet – and his reforms to return to the Mosaic Law and restore the Temple in his eighteenth year (622 BCE) – refer rticle: The Ark of God.
Scythian is a Greek term, thus in the Bible, the Scythians (or Sacae) are referred to as the children of Israel in 2 Chronicles 35:17-18. Steven Collins states regarding the withdrawal of the Scythians from Palestine and Mesopotamia, that they would have realised that Canaan was not the Land of Milk and Honey it once was and now principally occupied by hostile foreign people, which they had no desire to subjugate or rule over, with their ‘unwanted customs and lifestyles.’
Added to this, was their large population numbers and the compactness of Palestine as an unrealistic region for a people who liked ‘wide open spaces’ to farm their flocks and herds, or to maintain their isolationism policies. Collins quotes Herodotus – emphasis & bold mine – who describes the Scythians as people who:
“… dreadfully avoid the use of foreign customs, and especially those of the Greeks… So careful are the Scythians to guard their own customs, and such are the penalties (Herodotus refers to the death penalty* for pagan religious activity) that they impose on those who take to foreign customs over and above their own.”
‘… evidence of the Israelite origins of the Scythians is found in this comment of Herodotus about the Scythians: “They make no offerings of pigs, nor will they keep them at all in their country.” Such a prohibition is very consistent with the longstanding Hebrew custom of forbidding the use of swine for either consumption or sacrifice because it was an “unclean” animal (Deuteronomy 14:78)’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and article: Red or Green?
‘Another interesting point is that Herodotus records that one of the Scythian kings was named “Saulius.” Given the Hebrew/Israelite background of the Scythians, it would appear that the namesake of this Scythian king was Saul, the first Hebrew king (I Samuel 9).
Herodotus also records that theScythians were very zealous in forbidding idolatry and the worship of “foreign gods.” In one instance, King Saulius of Scythia executed* his own brother for participating in the rites of a Greek “mother-goddess” festival and wearing “images” associated with the mother-goddess…’ – refer article: Asherah.
‘The fact that the Scythians executed, without mercy, even their own rulers and royalty who worshipped the mother-goddess or other pagan gods (or who kept “images” of such gods and goddesses) shows there was a very strict law among the Scythians against idolatry. Combining the fact that idolatry was a capital offense with the Scythian custom of avoiding swine flesh, it is clear that the Scythians were faithfully practicing two key features of the laws of God given to the Israelites under Moses. This further confirms that many of the Israelites of the ten tribes had experienced a “revival” in their new homeland near the Black Sea.
Herodotus also records that “The Scythians themselves say that their nation is the youngest of all the nations... [and]… from their first king… to the crossing of Darius into Scythia was, in all, one thousand years-no more, but just so many.” Colonel Gawler analyzes Herodotus-record as follows: “Now Darius’ expedition against the Scythians was about 500 B.C., and 1000 years before that brings us to the time of Moses.” Significantly, the Scythians traced their origin as a nation to the approximate time of Moses. It was after the Exodus [in 1446 BCE], under Moses that the Hebrews truly became a nation with their own distinct culture and laws.’
The Persian Empire had two major conflicts with the Scythians, one was instigated by Cyrus the Great who reigned from 559 to 530 BCE, against the eastern Scyths, who were situated east of the Caspian Sea and lead by the dominant tribe the Massagetae, which culminated in Cyrus’s death. These tribes comprised the two and a half tribes who had been taken into captivity by the Assyrians prior to the eventual fall of Samaria and are listed in 1 Chronicles 5:26, ESV: ‘So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan…’
Steven Collins elucidates:
‘Herodotus records that this Persian-Scythian war resulted from Persian aggression, writing that Cyrus “set his heart on subduing the Massagetae.” The Massagetae were living in peace at the time, and Cyrus launched a war of aggression on them to force them to be his subjects. When Persia’s invasion was imminent, Queen Tomyris sent the following message to Cyrus: “King of the Medes, cease to be so eager to do what you are doing… rule over your own people, and endure to look upon us governing ours” – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
‘It is noteworthy that the Scythians were willing to “live and let live,” but Persia persisted in its aggression. After some initial fighting, Queen Tomyris of the Massagetae offered Cyrus a second chance to cease hostilities and go back to his own land, but warned that “If you do not so, I swear by the sun, the lord of the Massagetae, that, for all your insatiability of blood, I will give you your fill of it.”
… Herodotus described the ensuing battle.
“Tomyris, since Cyrus would not listen to her, gathered all her host together and fought him. Of all the battles that were fought among the barbarians, I judge this to have been the severest, and indeed my information is that it is so. Long they remained fighting in close combat, and neither side would flee. But finally the Massagetae got the upper hand. Then most of the Persian army died on the spot and, among them, Cyrus himself… Tomyris sought out his corpse among the Persian dead, and…she filled a skin with human blood and fixed his head in the skin, and, insulting over the dead, she said:
‘I am alive and [a] conqueror, but you have… [robbed] me of my son (Tomyris’ son died in the war)… Now… I will give you your fill of blood, even as I threatened.”
‘We do not know the total casualties in this war, but they must have been immense. Persia ruled a vast area and could assemble armies of over a million men. The army which Xerxes assembled against the Greeks was 1,700,000 men, and the army of Darius [522-486 BCE] against the Black Sea Scythians was 700,000 men. Since the expedition against the Massagetae was led by King Cyrus himself, one would expect his army to have numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Yet the Massagetae utterly crushed the Persian army.
It is strange that modern history stresses the histories of the Assyrian and Persian Empires, but in the three great wars fought between their empires and the Scythians, the Scythians decisively won all three.History teaches much about the losers of these wars, but rarely mentions the victorious Scythians.’
A map of the Medo-Persian empire at its extant – note the two enclaves of Israelites, the Massagetae and the Parthians
The Parthians were mentioned briefly in the preceding chapter. For those who would like to pursue the subject of the Parthians, Steven Collins book, Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! is an excellent starting point; where he devotes two full chapters. Though an accord on his final conclusions regarding specific identities is not reached. Even so, his in-depth and pains taking research and presentation is invaluable, being a comprehensive contribution to the subject of the Israelite identity.
In summary: the Parthian Empire sat adjacent to the Roman Empire and as a geo-political counter weight held it in check. Parthia was no small region, for it stretched some nineteen hundred miles east to west and one thousand miles from north to south.
As we have discovered, the Romans are one and the same as the nation of Germany today and their descent is from Abraham’s first son, Ishmael – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. It is no small coincidence, that the Saxon and Celtic peoples have challenged and curbed the German nation’s warlike aspirations twice in the preceding century, so was their relationship similar during the days of Rome.
Though Rome invaded ancient Britain, it was never an easy occupation on its western extremity and similarly, on its far eastern border lay a strong empire that remained outside Rome’s control. The genetic, cultural and linguistic ties between the Parthians and (Sacae) Scythians is beyond question and though allies, it was not always a friendly relationship.
What is worth highlighting, is the fascinating connection between Judah and the Parthians. One of the early capitals of Parthia was Dara. Dara (1 Chronicles 2:3-6) was a son of Zerah (or Zarah), who was in turn one of Judah’s sons. Zarah was supplanted at the time of his birth by his twin brother Phares (also Pharez or Perez); as Esau was by Jacob. The name Phares is found repeatedly throughout Parthia. Phares was the ancestor of King David.
Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… emphasis mine:
‘A Parthian king who ruled in the area of West India was named Gondophares, and several kings ruling over the Caucasus mountain kingdom of Iberia [Caucasus Mountains] were named Pharasmanes… Strabo records that the Iberians [from Eber, Genesis 10:21-25] were the kinsmen of the Scythians… many kings of Parthia itself had names indicating that they were also royal members of the Davidic line of Judah. Such names include the key consonants of PHRS in Hellenized forms of their Parthian names (such Parthian royal names as Phraates, Phraortes, and Phraataces are examples).’
Collins shows how the Greeks interchanged the consonants B and P and thus the similarity between certain words is significant, particularly as the vowels may change, though the consonants do not. Parthia is PRTH which could easily be BRTH – as in the Hebrew word for covenant, berith. Thus words associated with the peoples of Britain are ostensibly linked and derive from a seemingly common source for BRTH. The Britannic Islands are synonymous with the Greek name Pretannic, from PRT and Parthia with Brithia (or B’rithia).
It was from Parthia that the wise men had travelled to visit the young Jesus. It may be more than coincidence that a people from Judah, were visiting their rightful king from… the tribe of Judah – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. Specifically, the wise men were actually priests of the tribe of Levi. Though Levi was to be scattered amongst Israel, we will find that they have remained predominantly with the associated tribes of the former Kingdom of Judah in larger numbers… those tribes being the houses of Judah, Benjamin and Simeon – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
Recall that within the tribe of Judah, there had been splits early on. There were those who had been taken captive by the Chaldean Babylonians and there were others who had returned to Jerusalem as we have learnt in the preceding chapter. It was these self same people of Judah which the Parthian peoples, also from Judah, came to assist during their decades long struggle against the Seleucids.
Their King Phraates I, had captured the Caspian gates for Parthia and his successor, Mithridates I, expanded the Parthian region through not just warfare but by clever organisation and diplomacy. He died in 136 BCE and his son Phraates II inherited a new, formidable empire. In 129 BCE the Seleucid Greeks attacked the fledgling empire with 400,000 troops against 120,000. Though soundly defeated repeatedly, the Parthian doggedness – reminiscent of the British bulldog spirit – culminated in the death of the Seleucid monarch, Antiochus and 300,000 of his troops. An historic turning point, for the Seleucid empire began to fail, squeezed between the growing powers of Rome and Parthia. This provided the opportunity for the Maccabees to assert their independence and temporary dominion over the Idumean Edomites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Collins mentions that ‘the Parthians treated [the conquered Seleucids] mercifully and their royal household intermarried.’ Not unlike the Trojans and Dardanians as discussed in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The strong family ties between Lot and Judah should be no surprise as the relationship in modern times between France and Britain was replicated in the Angevin monarchs and the one hundred years war.
A further parallel indicating the Parthians were primarily from the tribe of Judah, is that they enlisted the assistance of their allies and kin, the Scythians. The Scythians arrived late and they became suspicious that the Parthians had acted preemptively on purpose to secure the spoils of war for themselves. While the Parthians were reluctant to share, since the Scythians had not taken part. This reneging on promised payment led to their resounding loss at the hands of the more numerous Scythians, with the Parthian king dying. This is interesting for two reasons.
Firstly, as described by Steven Collins:
‘The whole event is strikingly similar to one described in the Bible (Judges 11 & 12).
After winning a great victory over the Ammonites, Jephthah and an army of Gileadites (the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben and Gad) were confronted by an army of Ephraimites which was upset that it had not been able to participate in the battle (and missed out on the booty).
The usually allied brother tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh then fought each other in a needless battle over war booty… making this Parthian Scythian battle a rerun of the war in Judges 12. After the warfare the Scythians (satisfied by their possession of war booty and the death of the Parthian king who “cheated” them) retired into their own land. This confirms the Scythians had no territorial designs against their Parthian kinsmen and were content simply “to teach the Parthians a lesson.” Nevertheless,Parthia had now replaced the Seleucids as thedominant power in southcentral Asia…’
Secondly, the Scythians included the main body of Israelites, led by the sons of Joseph. This wave of Scythian people eventually migrated to Scandinavia, the Low countries and northern Germany, later to be known as Angles, the predominant and most numerous Saxon tribe. Following them were the Parthians, who migrated from Sweden into northern Denmark, becoming the Jutes with their territory called Jutland, on the Cimbric (Cymric*) Peninsula.
The two separate migrations of the tribe of Judah – the first as the Parthians and the second as the remnant of Judah from Judea, forced to flee at the same time as the Idumeans of Edom, when Titus attacked Judea in 70 CE – subsequently led to two distinct invasions into Britain, by Judah’s descendants.
First, the Jutes who settled in the south of England when they entered Britain. The main areas including Kent – as did the second wave known as Normans in 1066 CE, in Hastings – and also the Isle of Wight, Sussex and Hampshire. We will study the Jutes and Normans closely, for both are of the House of Judah.
When the Parthian Empire fell in 226 CE, the Arsacid dynasty of Parthian kings and their people found refuge in Armenia until 429 CE, as ‘the first Christian nation in the world [not Rome]. Christianity was officially proclaimed in 301 A.D. as the national religion of Armenia’ – source: William McBirnie. The former Scythians now known as Saxons – comprising the Angles, Frisians and Jutes – began invading Britain about 450 CE… the Jutes primarily identifying as the former Parthians.
Some researchers link the Getae with the Goths, which is correct and they appear to be part of the wider Scythian umbrella – as Gothic, ‘Germanic’ peoples – though ascribing the label Goth to the Israelites is incorrect – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The consonants GTH comprising the word Goth, may well be linked to the word Gott or God as proposed by some and just as possibly, to Aram’s son Gether, also GTH. The Goths appeared in western Europe before the Saxons as they lived to the west of them and were forced to migrate as the Saxon-Scythians pressed upon them, who in turn were forced to move by the migration of the disintegrating Parthian nation.
The word German, has its roots in the word Kerman. The Kermans lived in the Parthian province of Carmania. They became known as Germanii and as they travelled west they were eventually known as Germans and their territory Germania, which was then applied to the majority of tribes who had headed westwards into northwestern Europe. Notice the similarity between the words Carmania (C-arm[e]nia) and Armenia. Pliny confirms that the once labelled Scythians, were now called Germans: ‘the name of the Scythians has altogether been transferred to the Sarmatae and the Germans.’
The Welsh, a name given them by the Saxons, meaning foreigner is not the name they called themselves. Their name for Wales is Cymru* from cymri (or cimri) – the name for the Welsh – a name relating to the Cimmerians. The term ‘cymric’ refers to the Brythonic group of Celtic languages, consisting of Welsh, Cornish and Breton in Brittany, France. There is another related Celtic language group Gaelic, found in Ireland and Scotland.
The rest of the ‘Celtic’ world who are not Israelite, though are descended from Abraham or his brother Haran are the Germanic lowland peoples of the Netherlands and Belgium – with the Alpine peoples of Switzerland. The Israelites who had constituted the Parthian Empire as discussed in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, later migrated across northern Europe and are known to historians as Jutes. Whereas the remaining (British) Saxons or Germans – not to be confused with the Deutsch ‘Germans’ (or Saxons) of Germany – are the descendants of the Sacae Scythians.
Ptolemy (85-165 CE) said there were: ‘a Scythian people sprung from the Sakai named Saxones.’ It is over one hundred years later in 286 CE that we hear of not only Franks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran – living on the Cimbric Peninsula, but also of an advance, early wave of Saxon ‘pirates’. The Saxons, led by the dominant Angle tribe, dwelt in Denmark, northern Germany and the northern Netherlands. Included with the Angles were the Saxon tribes, the Frisians and Jutes. These peoples left their names behind them in Frisia, Jutland and mentioned earlier three German states with Saxony as part of their name, as well as the French province Al-sace. The English rendition of ‘Saxon’ is with an X, though the German spelling is with a C: such as Sachsisch or Sachse, based on the Sac-root from Sacae.
Recall, the Saxons invaded the British mainland beginning 450 CE. Again, they were a Germanic speaking people as opposed to the earlier Celts. The word Saxon in German is Sachsen; Low German, Sassen; and in Dutch, Saksen. The Dutch female first name Saskia, originally meant ‘A Saxon woman.’ Sharon Turner in his History of the Anglo-Saxons reckons Saka-Suna or the Sons of Sakai abbreviated into Saksun, is the same sound as Sax-on and appears a reasonable and plausible etymology for the word Saxon.
When Jacob passes on the birthright blessing to Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, he says:
“The Angel who has redeemed me from all evil, Bless the lads; Let my name be named upon them, Andthe name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac;^ And let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth” – Genesis 48:16, NKJV.
This is a pivotal verse, for the sons of Joseph are associated with the names of Israel, Abraham and specifically in this case, Isaac. The link with the name Saxon will be explored further in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. We will discover just how massive a clue to their geographic location in the world it is, from the phrase ‘in the midst of the earth.’
Steven Collins stresses the slowness of ancient peoples travels: ‘… migrations took place at the speed of an oxcart, and took decades or centuries to accomplish. These migrating people needed to stop periodically to grow crops, hunt game or steal from other nations to feed their families. Undoubtedly, a large percentage of the elderly and the infirm died along the way. Wars (with native populations or each other) would have caused more casualties. Since the number of mouths to feed was at times greater than the food which was available, some starved. During severe shortages, they may have had to eat their horses, livestock, and seed grains. A nation on the move has few options. If it cannot obtain food peacefully, it has no choice but to take it by warfare or piracy from someone else.
If its people have success in warfare, they can prosper for a time. However, if it displaces another nation, that other nation must then look for a weaker nation to displace. Some tribes had to accept mercenary service to other nations in order to feed their own people. A tribe could think it had found security in a new location only to be dislodged by a stronger tribe moving into their area. It was a difficult time, as many nations and tribes were migrating and jostling each other for living space.’
There is biblical support for the Israelite migration through Europe in a northwestern trajectory, finally arriving at a set of isles located off a mainland coast.
Isaiah 24:15
New King James Version
‘Therefore glorify the Lord in the dawning light, The name of the Lord God of Israel in the coastlands of the sea.’
Isaiah 42:4, 12
Christian Standard Bible
“He will not grow weak or be discouraged until he has established justice on earth. The coasts and islands will wait for his instruction”… Let them give glory to the Lord and declare his praise in the coasts and islands.
Isaiah 49:1, 12
Amplified Bible
‘Listen to Me[the Messiah], O islands and coastlands, And pay attention, you peoples from far away… Behold, these shall come from afar, and behold, these from the north and from the west…‘
Isaiah 51:5
Amplified Bible
“My righteousness (justice) is near, My salvation has gone forth, And My arms will judge the peoples; The islands and coastlands will wait for Me, And they will wait with hope and confident expectation for My arm.”
Jeremiah 31:10
New King James Version
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, Anddeclare it in the isles [H339 – ‘iy: coast, island, shore]afar off, and say,‘He who scattered Israel will gather him, And keep him as a shepherd does his flock.’
Acts 1:8
King James Version
‘… ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.’
The Hebrew world translated isles (islands and coastlands), means ‘a habitable spot (as desirable), dry land, a coast, an island.’ This description does not pertain to the Israelites in Canaan, but rather where they have ended up. It is patently evident that they are on Islands, far away from Palestine – in ‘the north and west.’ In this case, an Atlantic archipelago – a people living remotely, far away and ignorant of biblical truth and the true nature of the Son of Man. The Creator calls out to them to return to Him.
Unbelievingly, Britain gradually began a reconciliation, beginning with the British royal family in the early first century, igniting again during the sixteenth century Reformation, though it is some way from escaping spiritual darkness, as the majority do not believe and of those who do, a minority truly understand or honour the true Christ – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. It is an ongoing process which will culminate climatically during the time of Jacob’s trouble.
Moses Margouliouth, a Jewish scholar of the nineteenth century, in his History of theJews wrote:
‘It may not be out of place to state that the isles afar off mentioned in chapter 31 of Jeremiah were supposed by the ancients to be Britannia, Scotia, and Hibernia, the isles often visited we know by the merchant mariners of Phoenicia whose fleets included ships and crews drawn from the tribes of Dan, Asher and Zebulun of the coastal areas of the Land of Israel.’
Jeremiah 31:9, 21
English Standard Version
With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, andEphraim is my firstborn… “Set up road markers for yourself; make yourself guideposts; consider well the highway, the road by which you went…”
Ephraim is counted as the Creator’s firstborn and charged with leaving a migratory trail. Aside from the terms, Saxon and Angle, a peculiar coincidence is the building of stone monuments called Dolmens. Dolmens are stone monuments made of two or more big upright stones with a single large stone lying across them. Their purpose is uncertain and like the pyramids most erroneously claim they were tombs. They could represent a doorway or portal of some kind – articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim*; and Belphegor.
The most widely known dolmens are found in northwestern Europe, particularly in the regions of Brittany, France, southern Scandinavia, Britain, Ireland and the Low Countries. As there are over five thousand dolmens documented in the Golan of northern Israel, this makes dolmens – if not erected by giants* – possible signposts of the Israelites. Dolmens are also found in Portugal and Spain in the Iberian Peninsula. The word Iber-ia is likely linked to the word Hebrew, for it is recognised as having derived from a grandson of Arphaxad, called Eber – Genesis 10:21-25.
Researchers have regularly drawn attention, to the word British which resembles two Hebrew words beriyth-iysh (or Brith-ish) which translates as ‘covenant man.’ The Bible often refers to this [Old] covenant (or agreement) the Eternal made with ancient Israel through Moses (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 4:13), aside from the ones which preceded it with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – refer article; The Sabbath Secrecy.
The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… found! Steven M Collins, 1992:
‘The early British chroniclers record that a King Brutus came from the Eastern Mediterranean with hundreds of ships to colonize the large island on the northwest of the European land mass, and gave it the name “Briton” or “Brittania.” The approximate date for this event is 1103 B.C., a time just prior to the beginning of the first millennium B.C. Although Brutus is attributed a Trojan ancestry in the ancient accounts, he bore the Hebrew word BRT in his name (Brutus), and applied the same Hebrew word (BRT) to their new homeland (Briton). Brutus’ name identified him as a member of the “Covenant People,” and in naming his new land “Briton,” he was claiming it as a territory for the “Covenant People.” That a Trojan leader bore an important Hebrew root word in his name argues that Israelites were present among the inhabitants of ancient Troy’ – refer Troy, Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Britain in its Perfect Luster (Cambria Triumphans), Percy Enderbie, 1661:
‘In the time of King Edward I [1272 to 1307]. At Lincolne, where (was) held a Parliament, after much diligent search of antiquities… letters were sent to the Pope of Rome, sealed with an hundred seals and witnesses… wherein is declared and justified that in the time of Hely (Eli) [born 1144, died 1046 BCE – Eli became a Judge at age 58 in 1086 BCE for forty years: 1 Samuel 4:14-18] and Samuel the Prophet [born 1090, died 1015 BCE in the tenth year of King Saul’s reign – Samuel became a Judge at age 44 in 1046 BCE for thirty-one years], Brutus a Trojan landed here, and by his own name called the Country Britannia, before named Albion.’
Brutus has a window of forty-four years from the birth of Samuel to the death of Eli – or four years from Samuel’s birth until Eli becoming a Judge – to have arrived in Britain. Thus circa 1100 BCE is credible. Brutus (or Brwt) is credited as the first king of Britain, descended from Aeneas of the Trojan Royal House of Zarah, son of Judah. The same Aeneas from whom the early Roman emperors also claimed descent. The word Brython or Brwth-ayn is ‘Brwt with the Celtic augmentative or plural suffix.’
The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals & emphasis his, bold mine:
‘The legends claim that the oldest town in the land of Troy (the Troad) was founded by Teucer, who was a son of the Scamander (a stream of Crete, according to John Tzetzes, the 12th century Byzantine poet and grammarian) and the nymph Idaea. During the reign of Teucer, DARDANUS – son of Zeus and the nymph Electra – drifted from the island of Samothrace in the Aegean to the Troad, following a great deluge in the Mediterranean area.
After he arrived in the Troad, Dardanus received a grant of land from Teucer and married his daughter Batea, shortly thereafter founding the city of DARDANIA at the foot of MOUNT IDA. On the death of Teucer, Dardanus succeeded him as king, and called the whole land DARDANIA.
He sired Erichthonius, who begat TROS by Astyoche, daughter of Simois. Tros named the country TROY (after himself) and the people TROES (TROJANS). By Callirrhoe, daughter of Scamander, Tros had three sons – Ilus, Assaracus and Ganymede. From two of Tros’ sons – Ilus and Assaracus – sprang TWO SEPARATE LINES; [1] Ilus, Laomedon, Priam, Hector; and [2] Assaracus, Capys, Anchises, Aeneas.
After building the city of Dardanus in the Troad, DARDA established his ROYAL LINE in the land, which continued as follows:
1/. DARDANUS (DARDA)
2/. ERICTANUS
3/. TROS
4/. ILUS
5/. LAOMEDON
6/. PRIAMUS (PRIAM)
Priam’s reign ended in 1181 – the year the Trojans were crushed in the First Trojan war by their brethren the Greeks. AENEAS, of the royal line, escaped the destruction of Troy and made his way to ITALY. The story of his migration is found in the Aeneid, written by the Roman historian Virgil. Funk and Wagnalls New Encyclopedia outlines the story:
“The AENEID is a mythical (according to the “experts”) work in twelve books, describing the wanderings of the hero AENEAS and a small band of TROJANS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas escaped from Troy with the images of his ancestral gods, carrying his aged father on his shoulders, and leading his young son ASCANIUS by the hand, but in the confusion of his hasty flight he lost his wife, Creusa. He collected a FLEET OF TWENTY VESSELS, and sailed with the surviving Trojans to THRACE, where they began building a city. Aeneas subsequently abandoned his plan of a settlement there and went to CRETE, but was driven from that island by a pestilence.
After visiting EPIRUS and SICILY (where his father died), Aeneas was shipwrecked on THE COAST OF AFRICA and welcomed by DIDO, Queen of CARTHAGE. After a time he again set sail; Dido, who had fallen in love with him, was heartbroken by his departure and committed suicide. After visiting SICILY again and stopping at CUMAE, ON THE BAY OF NAPLES, he landed at the MOUTH OF THE TIBER RIVER, SEVEN YEARS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas was welcomed by LATINUS, KING OF LATIUM.
Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus, was destined to marry a stranger, but her mother Amata had promised to give her in marriage to TURNUS, King of the Rutulians. A war ensued, which terminated with the defeat and death of Turnus, thus making possible the marriage of Aeneas and Lavinia. Aeneas died three years later, and his son ASCANIUS FOUNDED ALBA LONGA, the mother city of Rome” (Volume I. MCMLXXV, page 196).’
‘The Compendium of World History records that “the refugees of the First Trojan War settled… in Italy. They founded Lavinium two years after the First Trojan War – that is, in 1179 [BCE] – and later the city of Alba (the site of the Pope’s summer palace today) at the time of the Second Trojan War in 1149. The TROJAN ROYAL HOUSE founded in Italy a line of kings that reigned in Alba from 1178 until 753, when the center of government passed to Rome.”
The Annals of the Romans relate that after Aeneas founded Alba, he married a woman who bore him a son named SILVIUS. Silvius, in turn, married; and when his new wife became pregnant, Aeneas sent word to him that he was sending a wizard to examine the wife and try and determine whether the baby was male or female. After examining Silvius’ wife, the wizard returned to his home, but was killed by ASCANIUS because of his prophecy foretelling that the woman had a male in her womb who would be the child of death – for, as the story goes, the male-child would eventually kill his father and mother and be a scourge to all mankind.
During the birth of the child, Silvius’ wife died, and the boy was reared by the father and named BRITTO (BRUTUS). Many years later, fulfilling the wizard’s prophecy, the young man BRITTO killed his father by accident while practicing archery with some friends. Because of this terrible accident, BRUTUS was DRIVEN FROM ITALY and came TO THE ISLANDS OF THE TYRRHENE SEA. According to Herman L. Hoeh:
“A son, BRUTUS, expelled from Italy returned to the Aegean area and organized the ENSLAVED TROJANS, LYDIANS AND MAEONIANS. The Greeks were defeated and TROY WAS RECAPTURED. With the recapture of Troy in 1149 the list of Sea Powers of the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean began. According to the terms of the treaty with the Greeks BRUTUS MIGRATED, with all who wished to follow him, VIA THE MEDITERRANEAN INTO BRITAIN” (Compendium of World History. Volume I, page 454).
The tradition of Brutus’ migration to Britain was never questioned until the last century, when German scholars and rationalists decided that the story related in Homer’s Iliad of the siege and destruction of Troy by the Greeks, and the subsequent dispersion of the Trojan princes, was nothing but a “Poet’s dream” and a “mythological myth.” The coming of Brutus to Britain was therefore pronounced to be [a] “fabulous” legend that had no foundation in fact.
The following quotation from Drych y Prifoesedd (“The Mirror of the Principal Ages”), by Theophilus Efans of Llangammarch, Wales, sheds light on the origin of the discredit thrown upon the historical value of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings about Brutus.
There might be reason for uncertainty if the statements of Geoffrey of Monmouth stood alone, but when we find them constantly corroborated in the old manuscripts as well as by Welsh writers of repute, there is absolutely no reason to dismiss them as “Monkish fables”! Notice –
“The first reason for denying the coming of BRUTUS into this island of Britain was this. When Jeffrey ap Arthur, Lord Bishop of Llandaff (Geoffrey of Monmouth), died, an Englishman of the name of Gwilym Bach (little William or William the Less) arrived… who desired Dafydd ab Owen, Prince of Gwynedd, to make him bishop in Jeffrey’s place about the year 1169 A.D. But when it was not to the mind of Dafydd ab Owen to grant him his request the man went home full of hatred and commenced to exercise his mind how best to despise and malign not only the memory of the bishop, who was lying in his grave, but also the whole of the Welsh nation. THIS GWILYM BACH, OUT OF MALICE BECAUSE HE WAS REFUSED THE BISHOPRIC OF LLANDAFF, WAS THE FIRST TO DENY THE COMING OF BRUTUS HERE.
“Gwilym Bach says without shame, that no one had ever mentioned the coming of Brutus and his men from Caerdroia to this island until Jeffrey ap Arthur fabricated the tale out of his own imagination, but this is a statement or charge TOO NAKED AND FLIMSY WITHOUT ANY FOUNDATION AND AGAINST ALL AUTHORITY. Because Jeffrey ap Arthur did nothing but translate the Welsh Chronicles into Latin, so that the educated of the country might read them. And long, long before the time of Jeffrey one of the poems (penhillion) of Taliesin makes clear the CONSENSUS OF OPINION of his fellow-countrymen in regard to the matter, and he wrote about the year 566 A.D.” (Quoted in Prehistoric London, by E. O. Gordon. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA 1985, page 9).
After leaving the Aegean area Brutus “MIGRATED TO MALTA, and there was advised to reestablish his people in ‘the Great White Island‘ (an early name for BRITAIN due to its chalk cliffs). This advice is recorded in an archaic Greek form on the Temple of Diana in CAER TROIA (New Troy).” (Jacob’s Pillar, page 26).
‘Where BRUTUS and his people traveled to next is preserved by the British historian Nennius, who states that “Aeneas… arrived in GAUL (modern FRANCE), WHERE HE FOUNDED THE CITY OF TOURS, which is called Turnis…” (Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals, translated by John Morris. Phillimore, London and Chichester. 1980. Page 19). Nennius then says that “later he CAME TO THIS ISLAND, which is named BRITANNIA from his name, and filled it with his race, and dwelt there”.
The arrival of the Trojans in Britain is traced by E. Raymond Capt:
“The descendants of DARDA (DARDANNES or DANAANS) ruled ancient TROY for several hundred years, until the city was destroyed in the famous ‘Siege of Troy.’
AENEAS, the last of the ROYAL BLOOD, (Zarah-Judah) collected the remnants of his nation and traveled with them to ITALY. There he married the daughter of LATINUS, king of the Latins, and subsequently FOUNDED THE GREAT ROMAN EMPIRE. Aeneas’ GRANDSON, BRUTUS with a large part of the TROJANS migrated to ‘the GREAT WHITE ISLAND’… Tradition says that on the way to the ‘White Island’ Brutus came across FOUR OTHER TROJAN COLONIES UPON THE COAST OF SPAIN and persuaded them to join him.
‘At TOTNES on the RIVER DART [in England], twelve miles inland from TORBAY (the oldest seaport in South Devon) is an historical STONE that commemorates the coming of BRUTUS to Britain. (Circa 1103 B.C.) The stone is known as the ‘BRUTUS STONE,’ the tradition being that the TROJAN PRINCE set foot upon it when he first landed. The WELSH RECORDSstate thatTHREE TRIBES OF HIS COUNTRYMENreceived Brutus and his company asBRETHREN andproclaimed BrutusKING at a national convention of the whole island. His THREE SONS, born after his arrival in Britain were named after the three tribes – LOCRINUS [England], CAMBER [Wales], and ALBAN [Scotland]. Brutus’ name HEADS THE ROLE in all the genealogies of the British kings, preserved as faithfully as were those of the kings of Israel and Judah” (Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets, page 65-66).’
E. Raymond Capt continues by saying:
“Brutus founded the city of ‘CAER TROIA,’ or ‘NEW TROY.’ The Romans later called it ‘LONDINUM,’ now known as LONDON. The actual date of the founding of the city is suggested in the Welsh bardic literature: ‘And when BRUTUS had finished the building of the city, and had strengthened it with walls and castles, he consecrated them and made inflexible laws for the governance of such as should dwell there peacefully, and he put protection on the city and granted privilege to it. At this time, BELI THE PRIEST RULED IN JUDEA [1086-1046 BCE], and the Ark of the Covenant was in captivity to the Philistines [in 1046 BCE]’ (The Welsh Bruts) – Article: The Ark of God.
‘The reference, in the quotation above, to BELI THE PRIEST, is obviously of ELI of the First Book of Samuel. Such remote prehistoric antiquity of the site of London is CONFIRMED by the numerous archaeological remains found there, not only of the Stone Age and Early Bronze Ages, but even of the Old Stone Age. This indicates that it was already a settlement at the time when BRUTUS selected it for the site of his new capital of “NEW TROY.”
Within the last century or so an entirely new light has been cast upon the prehistoric history of London and its mounds, by Schliemann’s discoveries at Hissarlik – the ancient TROY in the north-west of Asia Minor. States author E. O. Gordon: “No longer need the story be regarded as fabulous, that Brutus the Trojan, the grandson of Aeneas (the hero of Virgil’s great epic), gave the name of CAER TROIA, TROYNOVANT or NEW TROY, to London. In site and surroundings… there seems to have been considerable resemblance between the historic Troy on the Scamander and New Troy on the Thames.
On the plains of Troy to-day may be seen numerous conical mounds rising from out of the lagoons and swamps that environed the citadel hill of Hissarlik, akin to those that dominated the marshes, round about the Caer and Porth of London, in prehistoric times” (Prehistoric London, page 83).
The Bible Research Handbook verifies the authenticity of the legends of Brutus:
“Various details of circumstantial evidence appear to lend their support to the legend of the TROJAN SETTLEMENT OF BRITAIN. Ancient Irish accounts relate that a PARTHOLANUS, whose life was in important respects SIMILAR to that of BRUTUS, reached over our islands at a very early date’ – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – The Celtic tribes. ‘Caesar’s ‘Commentaries,’ which tell of a people called TRINOBANTES, who lived in the vicinity of what is now MIDDLESEX AND HERTFORDSHIRE, seem clearly to bear out the story of the TROJANS having founded TROJA NOVA, later called TRINOVANTUM, and eventually LONDON”.
The Link, a magazine of the Christian Israel Foundation, mentions other confirming historians:
“According to FIRM ancient legends, transmitted both by British and by Continental writers, a TROJAN COLONY, led by one BRUTUS, settled in the BRITISH ISLES not long after the fall of TROY in 1184 B.C., and established the line of early BRITISH KINGS from which the famous CARACTACUS and BOADICEA were in due course descended” – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.
‘BRUTUS (or BRUT) OF TROY, grandson of AENEAS, left Troy, after the defeat of his countrymen by the Greeks, and with a band of followers journeyed to Britain by way of ITALY, where he FOUNDED LONDON, calling it NEW TROY. These traditions are chronicled by GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH, WACE, LAYAMON and OTHER EARLY HISTORIANS. There is support also from the writings of MATTHEW OF PARIS.
Although Geoffrey of Monmouth’s evidence in particular is discounted in certain quarters, THE BRUTUS STORY WAS CURRENT LONG BEFORE GEOFFREY’S TIME, so that whatever may have been added by him in the way of imaginative detail, at least he did NOT invent the basic tradition.
The evidence was certainly sufficient to convince the famous Lord Chief Justice Coke of the 17th century, for he wrote: ‘The original laws of this land were composed of such elements as BRUTUS (THE TROJAN) FIRST SELECTED FROM THE ANCIENT TROJAN AND GREEK INSTITUTIONS.’ In support of him, Lord Chancellor Fortescue, in his work on the Laws of England, states: ‘THE KINGDOM OF BRITAIN HAD ITS ORIGINAL INSTITUTIONS FROM BRUTUS OF THE TROJANS’
David Williamson, in his book Kings and Queens of Britain, comments on the authenticity of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings and equates their veracity to the books of the Old Testament:
“Geoffrey of Monmouth, writing in the first half of the twelfth century, sought to tell the story of Britain from its… FOUNDATION BY BRUTUS THE TROJAN until the coming of the Saxons… Geoffrey claimed that his History of the Kings of Britain was translated from ‘a certain very ancient book written in the British language’ which had been given to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. It was dedicated to two of the LEADING NOBLEMEN of the day, Robert, Earl of Gloucester (died 1147) [a]… son of King Henry I, and Waleran, Count of Mellent (died 1166). In it he tells of the wanderings of BRUTUS, the great-grandson ofAENEAS [timescale wise this is more accurate than a son or grandson which we have read in other sources in this article], forced to leave Italy after accidentally killing his father and eventually, after many adventures, COMING TO ALBION, which he renamed BRITAIN from his own name, after driving out the aboriginal giants.
The story continues with the… deeds of BRUTUS’ DESCENDANTS and successors FROM ABOUT 1100 B.C. until the coming of the Romans… Lewis Thorp’s introduction to his translation of Geoffrey’s History points out that it might ‘be said to bear the SAME RELATIONSHIP to the story of the early British inhabitants of our own island as do the seventeen historical books in the OLD TESTAMENT, from Genesis to Esther, to the early history of the ISRAELITES in Palestine” (Dorset Press, N.Y. 1992, page 8).
‘In the manuscript section of the British Library lies an old document – MS43968 – that used to be kept in Windsor Castle. This particular chart gives the descent of the British Royal Family from ADAM THROUGH BRUTUS. Also, charts published by the Covenant Publishing Co., Ltd., by W. M. H. Milner entitled The Royal House of Britain and by M. H. Gayer entitled The Heritage of the Anglo-Saxon Race both trace the ancestry of the Royal House THROUGH SEVERAL LINES OF DESCENT FROM THE PATRIARCH JUDAH – INCLUDING BRUTUS who is shown as a descendant of Judah’s son Zarah’ – refer article: The Life & death of Charles III.
‘Every British schoolboy knew by heart the letter British king Caractacus sent to Claudius Caesar’ – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. ‘But not many know about the letter, written about a century earlier, from King Cassibellaunus to Julius Caesar. This letter is quoted in full by Geoffrey of Monmouth, who possessed an ancient manuscript from BRITTANY that evidently contained the letter. Geoffrey quotes widely from this manuscript in his historical work. The letter reads as follows:
“Cassibelaun, king of the Britains, to Caius Julius Caesar. We cannot but wonder, Caesar, at the avarice of the Roman people, since their insatiable thirst after money cannot let us alone whom the dangers of the ocean have placed in a manner out of the world; but they must have the presumption to covet our substance, which we have hitherto enjoy’d in quiet. Neither is this indeed sufficient: we must also prefer subjection and slavery to them, before the enjoyment of our native liberty.
Your demand therefore, Caesar, is scandalous, since the SAME VEIN OF NOBILITY, FLOWS FROM AENEAS, IN BRITONS [Israelites descended from Jacob and Isaac] AND ROMANS [Ishmaelites descended from Isaac’s half brother, Ishmael], and ONE AND THE SAME CHAIN OF CONSANGUINITY SHINES IN BOTH [both descended from Abraham]: which ought to be a band of firm union and friendship.
That was what you should have demanded of us, and not slavery: we have learned to admit of the one, but never to bear the other. And so much have we been accustomed to liberty, that we are perfectly ignorant what it is to submit to slavery. And if even the gods themselves should attempt to deprive us of our liberty, we would to the utmost of our power resist them in defense of it. Know then, Caesar, that we are ready to fight for that and our kingdom if, as you threaten, you shall attempt to invade Britain.”
‘The reference in this letter to AENEAS provides support for the fact that the ancient British royal line STEMMED FROM TROY, as did, traditionally, the descent of certain of the EARLY RULERS OF ROME. And, as we have already seen, the tradition that the TROJAN LEADERS WERE JUDAHITES is upheld by testimony from many quarters.
Cassibellaunus was not the only king of Britain who knew of his Trojan blood-line. [So did] Edward I, who removed the Stone of Destiny from Scone in Scotland to London… “The Irish and Scottish kings, Fergus and EDWARD HIMSELFwere all DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH: in fact it is said that EDWARD [I] used to boast of his DESCENT FROM THE TROJANS!” (Co-Incidences? Pointers to Our Heritage, by Brigadier G. Wilson).
William F. Skene, author of a book on the Stone of Destiny, states that “the KING OF ENGLAND, by whom the kingdom of Scotland was derived from ALBANACTUS, THE YOUNGEST SON OF BRUTUS, THE EPONYMUS OF THE BRITONS, while that of ENGLAND WAS DERIVED FROM LOCRINUS, THE ELDEST SON.” (The Coronation Stone, page 21). Even James I [of England and James VI of Scotland] knew of his background, and let it be known on several occasions that he was descended from Brutus!’
The promised Abrahamic Covenant Blessing, included (1) a large number of descendants; (2) a plurality of nations; (3) a great nation; (4) a royal dynasty; (5) incredible prosperity; (6) and the possession of the ‘gates of their enemies’ – in other words, military superiority (Genesis 13:16, 17:2-7, 22:15-17).
These promises were passed on to Isaac (Genesis 17:21), to Jacob (Genesis 27:19-33), now named Israel, and then primarily to his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh, as well as his son, Judah – Genesis 48:14-20; 49:8-12.
There are no other body of peoples which fit these criteria – including those proposed by the Black Hebrew Israelite movement – than the British and Irish… Celtic, Saxon and Viking peoples who comprise the modern nations of England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the peoples in South Africa of British descent and by extension, Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.
The Black Hebrew Israelites claim Africans are the descendants of the ancient Israelites and that African Americans are the tribe of Judah. Yet while they may be able to incorrectly claim points one and two above – as could a number of other peoples – which African nation has fulfilled points three, four, five and six?
It may seem peculiar or coincidental that the nations of the United Kingdom and the United States of America should grow into the powers they became as if out of nowhere. In the Book of Leviticus, the Creator clearly defines that blessings would be given for obedience and removal of said blessings for disobedience. The Creator promised a vast period of struggle should they fall, which they did and then a re-birth so-to-speak, in the latter days. Not because of their inherent goodness, but because of the Eternal’s unconditional promise to faithful Abraham.
Herman Hoeh and Herbert Armstrong explain the punishment promise.
‘Israel was promised great national blessings, including national greatness if they would obey God. But God also promised that if they obstinately refused to obey Him, if they refused to follow His laws and let Him rule their lives, then He would punish them for a period called seven times(Leviticus 26).
The Bible itself defines this period of seven times… [in] Revelation the twelfth chapter… compare verses 6 and 14 you will see that the word time in prophecy simply means a year, hence seven times would be seven years or 2520 days. Now let’s notice another key. In Numbers 14:34, God said Israel would bear their iniquities in the wilderness after the number of days they searched the land of Canaan, forty days, each day for a year.
Then seven times or 2520 prophetic days would equal 2520 literal years! This period of seven times or 2520 years punishment did come upon Israel because they went their own ways and would not submit to the rule of God. Israel went into captivity about 721 B.C. and did not become a great people again until their times of punishment ceased about 1800 A.D. At that time the descendants of the ancient House of Israel – America and Britain and the democratic peoples of the world – began to rise to such wealth and power as the world has never enjoyed before all because of the promises made to Abraham’ – Herman Hoeh, 1955.
‘Now continue in Leviticus 26: “And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins” (verse 18). This expression “seven times” is translated into the English from a Hebrew word which conveys a dual meaning. The original Hebrew word Moses wrote is shibah. It is defined as “seven times,” and also as :sevenfold.” The “seven times” implies duration or continuation of punishment. But the word also conveys the meaning of “sevenfold,” or seven times greater intensity of punishment – as a punishment that is sevenfold more intense. In this sense, the meaning would be the same as in Daniel 3:19, where King Nebuchadnezzar, in a rage, commanded that the furnace into which Daniel’s three friends were to be thrown should be made seven times hotter.
Now understand the “seven times” – or seven prophetic “times.” For this is a prophecy. In prophecy, a “time” is a prophetic 360-day year. And, during Israel’s punishment, each day represented a year being fulfilled… But when that 2520-year withholding of the birthright had expired, God was faithful to His unconditional promise to Abraham! Not because of any British or American goodness, superiority, or worthiness, but because of God’s faithfulness to His promise, beginning in 1800 these two birthright peoples suddenly burst forth as the greatest world powers in all history!’ – Herbert W Armstrong, 1980.
In 1800 the Acts of Union occurred whereby the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was created. Thus began a century of expansion unlike anything ever witnessed before. It was also the same century, in which the United States threw off the royal sovereignty of the United Kingdom and began its own meteoritic rise to greatness. There were many acquisitions for the United Kingdom; a number of significant ones listed below…
1800 – Malta: Protectorate (sea gate) acquired by conquest 1806 – Cape of Good Hope: sea gate taken from the Dutch
1815 – Ceylon: (Sri Lanka), acquired
1825 – Tasmania: (formerly Van Diemen’s Land) formed into a colony 1832 – Western Australia: formed into a colony 1836 – South Australia: formed into a province
1841 – Hong Kong: sea gate taken from the Chinese 1841 – New Zealand: formed into a separate colony 1849 – The Punjab: formally annexed 1851 – Victoria: formed into a colony 1858 – India: transferred to the Crown 1859 – Queensland: formed into a colony
1874 – Fiji: formed into a colony 1876 – Queen publicly proclaimed Empress of India 1878 – Cyprus: (sea gate) possession taken from the Ottoman Empire
The territorial expansion of the British Empire, led to the expression that: “the sun never set” on its possessions. In fact ‘in 1913, 412 million people lived under the control of the British Empire, twenty-three percent of the world’s population at that time. It remains the largest empire in human history and at the peak of its power in 1920, it covered an astonishing 13.71 million square miles – that’s close to a quarter of the world’s land area’ – N McCarthy, The Biggest Empires In Human History, 2019.
Today, the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland retain the following:
Fourteen British Overseas Territories:
Anguilla Bermuda British Antarctic Territory British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Cayman Islands Falkland Islands Gibraltar Montserrat Pitcairn Islands Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia Turks and Caicos Islands
Three Crown dependencies:
Guernsey (Alderney, Sark), Jersey and the Isle of Man
The issue with thinking Judah is a small or persecuted nation and that it would be fragmented during the latter days, only then gaining a homeland or national status, all seemingly based on scripture; still remains an incorrect interpretation of key verses. Plus, the perpetuation of this error has hidden the singular most important key to unlocking the Bible regarding future events: the true identity of the tribe of Judah, which has gone tragically unnoticed – Revelation 3:7. These identifying signs are the markers for Esau (Edom), not Judah – Malachi 1:2-4, Obadiah 1-21, John 8:39-45. Judah is the royal tribe, with a ruling orb, sceptre and crown to prove it. A monarchy which has dominated royal lines throughout Europe and the thrones they sit on.
Blessed with national wealth and prosperity, giving birth to daughter nations and like the Parthians with a propensity to govern, to organise and rule, expanding as an empire; so too have the people who were known as Jutes and Normans. Yet, combining and in time using the name of their half brother tribe the Angli, forming the Angle name and becoming Angl-and and the Angl-ish.
For the Tribe of Judah is England and their descendants, the English.
Alternative options provided by those researchers who have deduced there is a problem with ascribing Judah to the Jews, are then non-plussed at who to then turn. Those who accurately identify the Jews with Edom, are then hindered in their argument by not providing a viable solution.
Alternative explanations for the descendants of Judah observed in other works include: Scotland; Ireland; and Germany. Yet Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – and Scotland and Ireland are both too small to fulfil the biblical verses in either the historic or prophetic contexts ascribed to the prominent House of Judah.
Seeking to gain the attention of the Houses of Judah and Israel is a thankless task, as the prophet Ezekiel was warned, but now is the time for the truth of their identity to be made known…
Ezekiel 33:30-33
Living Bible
“Son of dust, your people are whispering behind your back. They talk about you in their houses and whisper about you at the doors, saying, ‘Come on, let’s have some fun! Let’s go hear him tell us what the Lord is saying!’ So they come as though they are sincere and sit before you listening. But they have no intention of doing what I tell them to; they talk very sweetly about loving the Lord, but with their hearts they are loving their money. You are very entertaining to them, like someone who sings lovely songs with a beautiful voice or plays well on an instrument. They hear what you say but don’t pay any attention to it! But when all these terrible things happen to them – as they will – then they will know a prophet has been among them.”
Ezekiel 2:3-7
English Standard Version
‘And he said to me, “Son of man,I send you to the people of Israel, to nations[plural]of rebels, who have rebelled against me. They and their fathers have transgressed against me to this very day. The descendants also are impudent and stubborn: I send you to them, and you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God.’ And whether they hear or refuse to hear(for they are a rebellious house) they will know that a prophet has been among them. And you, son of man, be not afraid of them, nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions. Be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house. And you shall speak my words to them, whether they hear or refuse to hear…”
Ezekiel 3:4-6
English Standard Version
‘And he said to me, “Son of man,go to the house of Israel and speak wit my words to them.
For you are not sent to a people of foreign speech and a hard language, but to the house of Israel – not to many peoples of foreign speech and a hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely, if I sent you to such, they would listen to you.’
Ezekiel had been commissioned to speak to the Israelite people who all spoke the same language. Thus identity writers who teach that a number of nations in Europe with different languages are Israelite are incorrect. Today, the Israelites all speak English and that is how to begin identifying each individual tribe.
The English more than any other peoples, have migrated all over the world. By this, not those of ‘English’ descent in the United States or Australia for example, but rather those people who are British citizens, living in nations such as Spain or China and known as Ex-pats.
Isaiah 11:12
English Standard Version
‘He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.’
As we progress, the logic and truth of England’s real identity will become apparent and relentlessly convincing. Readers who may struggle the most are those entrenched in the paradigm that the Jews – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – are Judah and England is Ephraim and the apparent ease that verses applicable to Judah and Ephraim appear to fit the modern nation states of Israel and England.
Once we investigate a little deeper and more thoroughly, it will be clear that the relationship the Jews and England share and their historical alignment is actually entirely indicative of Edom and Judah, the most spoken about relationship in scripture. The relationship between say Turkey as Edom and the Jews as Judah falls inadequately short in aligning literally every single verse in the Bible. This jig-saw pattern does not work… simply, the former does.
It is worth noting a few key points in identifying true Israel and by extension Judah, which the Jews are not able to fulfil.
1. Jeremiah 31:33 shows that Israel was to come under the liberation of the New Covenant. The orthodox Jew remains under the shackles and imperfection of the old Law.
2. Hosea 1:10 states that Israelites were to become the sons of God, in accepting the Messiah. The Jewish people continue to reject Him as the Saviour and await a different messiah (Revelation 13:1-18)
3. Israel was to have a monarchy that would last forever – Jeremiah 33: 17. The Jewish people have no sovereign monarch on the earth.
4. Isaiah 54:17 and Leviticus 26:6-8, say that Israel was to be immune from defeat in major wars – not including individual battles and minor conflicts – yet the Jews have suffered an endless tide of either persecution or death prior to the formation of the state of Israel.
We are first introduced to Judah in Genesis 29:35 ESV: ‘And [Leah] conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she ceased bearing.’ Leah had Judah, her fourth son and then experienced a gap of a number of years, before giving birth to her remaining three children in quick succession.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Judah meaning: ‘Praised, Let [God] Be Praised’ from the verb yada, to praise
The original Judah is Jacob’s fourth son with Leah (Genesis 29:35). Judah becomes prominent when his three brothers Reuben, Simeon and Levi forfeit their places in the hierarchy (Reuben sleeps with Bilhah – Genesis 35:22, and Simeon and Levi avenge their sister Dinah’s rape by killing the entire male population of the village of Shechem, and looting the place – Genesis 34:25).
It should be noted that the feminine form of this name, Judith, occurs a generation earlier than Judah and may very well be the original (meaning that the name Judah is derived from Judith and not vice versa). Judith is the [‘Hittite’] aunt of Judah, married to Judah’s uncle Esau.
Other Judahs are: A postexilic Levite (Ezra 3:9); A Levite who divorces his foreign wife in the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:23); A postexilic overseer (Nehemiah 11:9); A Levite who returns with Zerubbabel (Nehemiah 12:8); A postexilic leader (Nehemiah 12:34); A priestly musician (Nehemiah 12:36).
The name Judah transliterated into Greek is Iouda, and occurs as such 7 times in the New Testament… The name Judas is the Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Judah.
When Leah gave birth to Judah she names him such by saying, “This time I will praise the Lord”. Perhaps she meant that she realized that her first three sons weren’t going to bring her closer to Jacob, and she should redirect her focus to God. Formally, the name Judah does not contain the appellative (Yah) = (Yahu) = (Yu), which in turn are abbreviated forms of the Tetragrammaton; the name of the Lord: YHWH, but no member of a Hebrew audience would fail to notice that thefirst two letters of the name Judah form (Yah).
And if the letter (daleth) would be omitted from the name Judah, the very name (YHWH) would appear. For the meaning of the name Judah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Let Him (God) Be Praised.’
Popular English names include Judith, Judy and Jude. When Joseph has a dream of his preeminence over his family and naively declares it to everyone, his brothers conspire against him. They decide to kill him, though Reuben suggests leaving him in a pit, so that he can secretly return to save him and take him back to his father. Was Reuben trying to atone for his sleeping with Bilhah and thus return to his father Jacob’s good books or was it a truly altruistic gesture. Either way, Judah steps into the starring role…
Genesis 37:23-35
English Standard Version
23 ‘So when Joseph came to his brothers, they stripped him of his robe, the robe of many colors that he wore. 24 And they took him and threw him into a pit. The pit was empty; there was no water in it. 25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt.
26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him.
28 Then Midianite traders passed by [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar]. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt.
29 When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that Joseph was not in the pit, he tore his clothes 30 and returned to his brothers and said, “The boy is gone, and I, where shall I go?” 31Then they took Joseph’s robe and slaughtered a goat and dipped the robe in the blood.32 And they sent the robe of many colors and brought it to their father and said, “This we have found; please identify whether it is your son’s robe or not.” 33 And he identified it and said, “It is my son’s robe. A fierce animal has devoured him. Joseph is without doubt torn to pieces.”
34 Then Jacob tore his garments and put sackcloth on his loins and mourned for his son many days. 35 All his sons andallhis daughters [H1323 – bath: daughter, girl] rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted and said, “No, I shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.’
We learn that Jacob may have had daughters in the plural. Thus, Dinah being mentioned with Zebulun gives further credence to her being his twin. It also means that her escapade with Shechem and the recounting of it, shows she may have stood out from her sisters. Alternatively, the Hebrew word bath can infer daughters-in-law. Joseph was seventeen when this event occurred and the year was 1709 BCE. Reuben was born in 1752 BCE and Judah in 1746 BCE; they were forty-three and thirty-seven years of age respectively, according to an unconventional chronology.
The act against Joseph is all the more cruel as we are not speaking of teenage boys or young men in their twenties with hot heads. These were older men, coldly plotting a young lads fate.
Judah meanwhile, reasons that culpability is substantially reduced if they cast Joseph to the whims of others rather than physically killing him themselves. Was this a gesture of kindness in sparing Joseph’s life, or was it to only ensure escape for blame for his possible death. Judah displays a wily solution to the problem in a similar fashion to how his father would; while standing to make an investment from the transaction. Apart from Joseph, no other son of Jacob has a chapter devoted to them in the Book of Genesis. The next chapter in Genesis describes Judah’s hit and miss love life.
Genesis 38:1-30
English Standard Version
1 ‘It happened at that time that Judah went down [or away] from his brothers and turned aside to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. 2 There Judah saw the daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua. He took her and went in to her, 3 and she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Er. 4 She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 5 Yet again she bore a son, and she called his nameShelah. Judah was in Chezib when she bore him.
6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death. 8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.”
9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also. 11 Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, “Remain a widow in your father’s house, till Shelah my son grows up” – for he feared that he would die, like his brothers. So Tamar went and remained in her father’s house.’
Judah separated himself from his brothers. We learn he is his own man. Judah may not have desired the women from his family of Nahor or Haran, or perhaps he was rebelling and seeking adventure. He did not make a sound choice, reflective of his Uncle Esau. Notice Judah named his first son and Shua’s daughter named the next two. It is not clear whether Shua’s daughter was a. a black Canaanite woman; b. if she was from one of the Nephilim descended clans; or c. neither.
The Book of Jubilees 34:20 gives her name as Betasu’el; while later in the book of Chronicles, her name is revealed as Bath-shua. Judah takes an invested interest again in the son he named, when he chooses Er’s wife for him. We do not know who Tamar is and her lineage not being stated is unusual, though the Book of Jasher provides information.
Book of Jasher 45:4, 23
4 ‘… Judah went at that time to Adulam, and he came to a man of Adulam, and his name was Hirah, and Judah saw there the daughter of a man from Canaan, and her name was Aliyath, the daughter of Shua, and he took her, and came to her, and Aliyath bare unto Judah, Er, Onan and Shiloh; three sons.
23 And in those days Judah went to the house of Shem and took Tamar the daughter [descendant] of Elam [refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey], the son of Shem, for a wife for his first born Er.’
It would be impossible using an unconventional chronology for Tamar to be the literal daughter of Elam, so a descendant would be applicable. As Er and Onan are both put to death, first without a reason given and then with a punishment that seemingly doesn’t fit the crime; Nephilim dalliance could possibly answer why her sons were evil.
Against this, is that Shelah is also born by Shua’s daughter. This writer would lean to considering that Shelah was half Israelite and half black Canaanite. For the events to unfold and add up mathematically, so that Pharez’s sons Hezron and Hamul are counted as part of the seventy souls who travelled with Jacob into Egypt, Judah would have to have married Shua’s daughter circa 1727 BCE and not in 1709 BCE as intimated in verse one. A year before Joseph was born in fact in 1726 BCE. This means Er and Onan were contemporaries of Joseph being born circa 1727 and 1726 BCE. Perhaps a motivation for Judah in sparing Joseph’s life. Er marrying Tamar in approximately 1709 BCE and then Onan in 1708 BCE.
Genesis: 12 ‘In the course of time the wife of Judah, Shua’s daughter, died [between 1708-1706 BCE]. When Judah was comforted, he went up to Timnah to his sheepshearers, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. 13 And when Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to shear his sheep,” 14 she took off her widow’s garments and covered herself with a veil, wrapping herself up, and sat at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that Shelah was grown up, and she had not been given to him in marriage.
15 When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. 16 He turned to her at the roadside and said, “Come, let me come in to you,” for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. She said, “What will you give me, that you may come in to me?” 17 He answered, “I will send you a young goat from the flock.” And she said, “If you give me a pledge, until you send it” – 18 He said, “What pledge shall I give you?” She replied, “Your signet and your cord and your staff that is in your hand.” So he gave them to her and went in to her, and she conceived by him. 19 Then she arose and went away, and taking off her veil she put on the garments of her widowhood.’
Judah and Tamar
Shelah would have been born circa 1725 BCE and by 1707 BCE was old enough to marry Tamar. For whatever reason, Judah had not given Tamar to Shelah. Tamar took matters in her own hands, made easier by her attraction for Judah, circa 1706 BCE.
Genesis: 20 When Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite to take back the pledge from the woman’s hand, he did not find her. 21 And he asked the men of the place, “Where is the cult prostitute who was at Enaim at the roadside?” And they said, “No cult prostitute has been here.” 22 So he returned to Judah and said, “I have not found her. Also, the men of the place said, ‘No cult prostitute has been here.’” 23 And Judah replied, “Let her keep the things as her own, or we shall be laughed at. You see, I sent this young goat, and you did not find her.”
24 About three months later Judah was told,“Tamar your daughter-in-law has been immoral. Moreover, she is pregnant by immorality.” And Judah said, “Bring her out, and let her be burned.” 25 As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law, “By the man to whom these belong, I am pregnant.” And she said, “Please identify whose these are, the signet and the cord and the staff.” 26 Then Judah identified them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not know her again.
27 When the time of her labor came, there were twins in her womb. 28 And when she was in labor, one put out a hand, and the midwife took and tied a scarlet thread on his hand, saying, “This one came out first.” 29 But as he drew back his hand, behold, his brother came out [reminiscent of Esau and Jacob’s birth]. And she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” Therefore his name was called Perez. 30 Afterward his brother came out with the scarlet thread on his hand, and his name was called Zerah.
Recall Judah’s wife, Bath-shua was dead and so Judah was a widow when he visited a prostitute. Judah was possibly not attracted to Tamar enough to marry Tamar, nor would it have been conventional to marry his son’s former wife. Their new sons, Pharez and Zarah were born out of wedlock circa 1705 BCE. Pharez was the ancestor of both King David and the Messiah.
The name Tamar means ‘palm’ or ‘palm tree.’ Er is interesting as it can mean ‘aroused, wild ass, watching’ and ‘watcher.’ A clue to a Nephilim interest? The verb ‘arar means ‘to strip and accumulate.’ Onan is also enlightening as it can mean ‘trouble, vigor, vigorous, strong’ and ‘iniquity.’ Shelah means ‘to send.’ Pharez means ‘a breach, to break through’ and Zarah means ‘rising, rising of light, dawn, break out.’ Pharez and Zarah both coincidentally mean to ‘break through’ or ‘break out.’
Due to severe famine, Jacob sends his sons to Egypt excepting Benjamin. Of course, Joseph has never met Benjamin. Joseph makes a pretext to withhold Simeon and requests the brothers return with the youngest brother Benjamin – who was born some twenty-seven years after Joseph circa 1699 BCE and is about twelve years of age.
Genesis 43:1-14
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now the famine was severe in the land. 2 And when they had eaten the grain that they had brought from Egypt, their father said to them, “Go again, buy us a little food.”
3 But Judah said to him, “The man solemnly warned us, saying, ‘You shall not see my face unless your brother is with you.’ 4 If you will send our brother with us, we will go down and buy you food.5 But if you will not send him, we will not go down…
6 Israel said, “Why did you treat me so badly as to tell the man that you had another brother?” 7 They replied, “The man questioned us carefully about ourselves and our kindred, saying, ‘Is your father still alive? Do you have another brother?’ What we told him was in answer to these questions.
Could we in any way know that he would say, ‘Bring your brother down’?” 8 AndJudah said to Israel his father, “Send the boy with me, and we will arise and go, that we may live andnot die, both we and you and also our little ones.
9 I will be a pledge of his safety. From my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever. 10 If we had not delayed, we would now have returned twice.”
11 Then their father Israel said to them, “If it must be so, then do this: take some of the choice fruits of the land in your bags, and carry a present down to the man, a little balm and a little honey, gum, myrrh, pistachio nuts, and almonds. 12 Take double the money with you. Carry back with you the money that was returned in the mouth of your sacks. Perhaps it was an oversight. 13 Take also your brother, and arise, go again to the man. 14 May God Almighty grant you mercy before the man, and may he send back your other brother and Benjamin. And as for me, if I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”
Poor Jacob with two sons at risk now, Simeon and Benjamin. It is highly prophetic that Judah should wish to take Joseph’s only full-blood brother and protect him. We will learn that Judah and Benjamin’s peoples have developed a very close relationship over the centuries, albeit turbulent at times, it has been a strong bond that was the heart, soul and core of the Kingdom of Judah.
The descendants of Judah have also had a protective hand over Simeon’s descendants and so the story of Judah fetching Simeon and protecting him with Benjamin’s safe return home is heavy with dual symbolism. The brothers return to Egypt and feast with Joseph. Joseph tests them on the return journey by hiding a ‘stolen’ cup in Benjamin’s bags; so they should return to Egypt yet again.
Genesis 44:14-34
English Standard Version
14 ‘When Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, he was still there. They fell before him to the ground. 15 Joseph said to them, “What deed is this that you have done? Do you not know that a man like me can indeed practice divination?”
16 And Judah said, “What shall we say to my lord? What shall we speak? Or how can we clear ourselves? God has found out the guilt of your servants; behold, we are my lord’s servants, both we and he also in whose hand the cup has been found.”
17 But he said, “Far be it from me that I should do so! Only the man in whose hand the cup was found shall be my servant. But as for you, go up in peace to your father.”
Joseph is certainly getting good measure of playful revenge on his brothers, saying he can divine and cornering them to leave behind Benjamin. Notice in all the exchanges with Joseph, it is not the elder brothers, Reuben, Simeon or Levi taking the lead, it is Judah who is speaking on all of their behalf.
18 ‘Then Judah went up to him and said, “Oh, my lord, please let your servant speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not your anger burn against your servant, for you are like Pharaoh himself.’
Judah confronts Joseph
19 ‘My lord asked his servants, saying, ‘Have you a father, or a brother?’ 20 And we said to my lord, ‘We have a father, an old man, and a young brother, the child of his old age. His brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother’s children, and his father loves him.’ 21 Then you said to your servants, ‘Bring him down to me, that I may set my eyes on him.’ 22 We said to my lord, ‘The boy cannot leave his father, for if he should leave his father, his father would die.’ 23 Then you said to your servants, ‘Unless your youngest brother comes down with you, you shall not see my face again.’
24 “When we went back to your servant my father, we told him the words of my lord. 25 And when our father said, ‘Go again, buy us a little food,’ 26 we said, ‘We cannot go down. If our youngest brother goes with us, then we will go down. For we cannot see the man’s face unless our youngest brother is with us.’ 27 Then your servant my father said to us, ‘You know that my wife bore me two sons. 28 One left me, and I said, “Surely he has been torn to pieces,” and I have never seen him since. 29 If you take this one also from me, and harm happens to him, you will bring down my gray hairs in evil to Sheol.’
30 “Now therefore, as soon as I come to your servant my father, and the boy is not with us, then, as his life is bound up in the boy’s life, 31as soon as he sees that the boy is not with us, he will die, and your servants will bring down the gray hairs of your servant our father with sorrow to Sheol. 32 For your servant became a pledge of safety for the boy to my father, saying, ‘If I do not bring him back to you, then I shall bear the blame before my father all my life.’
33 Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a servant to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers. 34 For how can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? I fear to see the evil that would find my father.”
Judah has deliberately laid it on thick here and making the point as dramatically as possible, in that he cannot under any circumstances leave Benjamin behind. It is at this point, that Joseph cannot keep up the charade and reveals his identity in an emotional reunion. Plans are agreed for Jacob’s family to move to Lower Egypt, the Nile delta situated in the north of Egypt.
Genesis 46:28-29
English Standard Version
‘[Jacob] had sent Judah ahead of him to Joseph to show the way before him in Goshen, and they came into the land of Goshen. Then Joseph prepared his chariot and went up to meet Israel his father in Goshen…’
We shall return to this dramatic reconciliation in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. In Genesis chapter forty-nine, Jacob gathers his sons prior to his death and gives a specific prophecy – which in turn are insightful identifying signs – for each son and their descendants. In Deuteronomy chapter thirty-three, Moses gives additional revealing prophecies for the respective tribes.
Genesis 49:8
The Voice
“… Judah, your brothers will praise you. Your hand will firmly grasp the neck of your enemy, andyour brothers will bow down before you in respect.”
England has certainly had the upper hand over their enemies. It has not lost a war since the American War of Independence in 1812. Before that, it lost a handful of battles with Scotland, though winning the pivotal majority. The United States on the other hand has had greater highs – influencing the outcome of both World Wars – and also greater lows, stalemates or losses in the Korean and Vietnam wars. England’s daughter nations have all looked to the Mother country in recognition of their origin and support. Similarly, the English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples have given their allegiance to England in having the English King (or Queen) as their own. It cannot be said that any country has ever bowed down to the Jewish nation.
Three countries have shaken off this obligation of fealty to the Monarch and formed Republics – the United States of America, South Africa and the Republic of Ireland. They represent Israelite tribes who do not wish to be subservient or subject to Judah’s monarchy. Though in the case of America, a ‘special relationship’ continues. Nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand are self-governing democracy’s which readily claim the King, as their Monarch – albeit Australia more reluctantly and possibly heading towards a republican future the earliest of the three.
The remaining three nations are tied exclusively with Judah and the throne in a Union. They comprise the Kingdom of Scotland; the state of Northern Ireland; and the nation of Wales – a principality until 1543, yet nation status only made official in 2011. Wales constitutes with England since 1542, the Kingdom of England. With the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, driven by the English majority, it remains to be seen if Scotland will take the path toward becoming an independent democracy or a Republic. This issue is significant and will become apparent when we discuss their identity.
Deuteronomy 33:7
English Standard Version
“… Hear, O Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in to his people. With your hands contend for him, and be a help against his adversaries.”
New English Translation
… May his power be great, and may you help him against his foes.
King James Version
… let his hands be sufficient for him…
Good News Translation
… listen to their cry for help; Unite them again with the other tribes[of Israel]. Fight for them, Lord, And help them against their enemies.
The peoples of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, South Africa (Rhodesia), Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States – with the exception of the Irish Republic – all came to England’s call in their darkest hours during the Great War and the Second World War. The loss of life, freely given to assist Judah’s cause was of great sacrifice, particularly from the smaller of Judah’s brother nations. Conversely, the Israelite people of the colonies around the world which became nations in their own right have all originated from the prominent nation on the largest of the British Isles: England. England is surrounded by water, as Judah is described in the Book of Isaiah. While the original territory of Judah was tellingly landlocked.
Isaiah 48:1
King James Version
‘Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, andare come forth outof the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness’[for England is gradually becoming a Godless land].
In Deuteronomy 33:7, the Hebrew word H7227 – rab for sufficient, means ‘power, contend.’ The word is translated as sufficient sixty-two times, spread across eleven translations. In the KJV it is translated as: many 190 times; great 118; much 36; captain 24; more 12; multitude 7; mighty 5; and greatly 3 times. It also means ‘abounding in, more numerous than, strong, greater than, exceedingly’ and ‘chief.’ Abundant as in ‘quantity, size, age, number, rank’ and multitude as in ‘plenteous, populous’ and a ‘prince.’
These definitions reveal that many would assist Judah. Though the context is that may his (Judah’s) power be great, as in plenteous and strong.
England has a population of 58,440,915 people; is a great nation economically and militarily; and was once a major power, a prototype superpower while it possessed a global empire; though now it is a shadow of itself as a regional power and head of a Commonwealth of nations, reflecting the residue of its former overseas empire – refer article: 2050.
The United Kingdom – spear headed by England – has the sixth largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $3.84 trillion in 2025. The United Kingdom economy is driven by a large service sector, particularly in finance, insurance and business services (recall Judah making money from selling Joseph). In the 1990s the United Kingdom was fourth in the world, subsequently passed by China and India.
‘… the following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in UK global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$67.6 billion
Gems, precious metals: $65.7 billion
Vehicles: $40.1 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $33.7 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $26.4 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $23.3 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $20.4 billion
Aircraft, spacecraft: $13.9 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $12.3 billion
Organic chemicals: $11 billion
Gems and precious metals represents the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 53.2% year over year since 2020 propelled by higher international sales of gold and platinum. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 27.8%.’
In the Global Innovation Index for 2023, the UK was ranked the fourth most innovative country in the world – across 80 indicators in seven categories. Recall, Germany was ranked number eight and Switzerland number one.
The post-exilic writer (or compiler) of 1 Chronicles, likely Ezra, wrote:
1 Chronicles 5:2
Amplified Bible
‘ThoughJudah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came (David) the leader (and eventually the Messiah), yet the birthright was Joseph’s…’
How did Judah prevail? During the leadership of Moses, the tribe of Judah became the strongest tribe. The census in Numbers chapter one shows that Judah was the leading tribe in population and in men who could go to war for Israel – Numbers 1:2-3, 27.
After the death of Joshua, the Creator chose the tribe of Judah to take the lead in conquering the Canaanite-Nephilim nations who were living in the land which had been promised to the sons of Jacob – Judges 1:2. The first chapter of Judges recounts that the tribe of Judah was the most passionate in driving out the Canaanites in the southern half of the land of Canaan. Notably, they were the only tribe to actually drive out the Canaanites in their territory, fulfilling the Creator’s command.
Israel was numbered by David in a census and it reveals an army of considerable size. A standing army of a million and half men is formidable even by todays standards. Notice the proportion of slightly over forty percent, that was contributed by Judah; much above an average of nearly just over eleven percent if nine tribes (not including Levi and Benjamin) contributed some 630,000 men.
1 Chronicles 21:5
English Standard Version
‘And Joab gave the sum of the numbering of the people to David. In all Israel there were 1,100,000 men who drew the sword, and in Judah 470,000 who drew the sword.’
During the time of King David, the tabernacle of the Eternal had long been in Shiloh in the territory of Ephraim, but David set the stage for the temple to be built on Mount Zion in Jerusalem.
Psalm 78:67-70
New King James Version
‘Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph,Anddid not choose the tribe of Ephraim, But chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loved. And He built His sanctuary like the heights, Like the earth which He has established forever. He also chose David His servant, And took him from the sheepfolds…’
The Creator chose Jerusalem – principally Mount Zion across from the Mount of Olives – in Judah, for His dwelling to be located… and chose David and his family, to hold the sceptreof kingship within the tribe of Judah.
Judah was a warrior^^ nation. The English too, are a warrior nation, with a reputation well founded for bulldog doggedness, stubbornness, determined resolve and do-or-die, true grit. These are characteristics shared by ancient Judah and modern England alike. England’s power has waned some since its military dominance during the nineteenth century and its economic peak in 1913. Even so, it would be a brave nation indeed to poke the Lion of Judah, as the verse following in Genesis forty-nine reveals.
While the above refers to the Patriarch Jacob, it could easily and just as accurately depict Judah and his descendants.
Why did the Creator choose Judah? Judah, the tribe he holds dear and loves. Judah did not seem to have the charisma or genuineness of Joseph, though the Eternal sees the heart and He must have perceived a strong warrior spirit in Judah and recognised someone with strength of character and determination; likening him to a young lion who would stand and fight. These qualities later evident in his descendant David and in the English people as a whole, must have influenced the Eternal’s desire to choose Judah to be His lawgiver and the tribe from which His Son would later be born – Hebrews 7:14.
David was undoubtedly inspired by this passage in Genesis forty-nine to twice say in the Psalms that ‘Judah is My lawgiver’ – Psalms 60:7; 108:8.
The tribe of Judah has not only been a lawgiver, but a preserver of the Creator’s law and message. Paul said, “What advantage then has the Jew [from true Judah]? … Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles – that which was spoken or commanded – of God” – Romans 3:1-2.
It is the English who disseminated the Bible to a wider public more than any other nation – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Not the Jews, who have faithfully preserved the Torah but disdain the New Testament and the Saviour who is central to it. Nor has the preservation of the Jewish calendar, erroneously called the Hebrew or sacred calendar by some, fulfilled Paul’s words. In a separate study we will learn the incredible and shocking truth about the Jewish calendar as well as the Gregorian-Julian calendar foisted on our modern world – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Genesis 49:9
New Life Version
“Judah is a young lion. Like a lion full of meat, you have become great, my son. He lies down and sleeps like a lion. And as a lion, who is willing to wake him?”
The Message
… Look at him, crouched like a lion, king of beasts; who dares mess with him?
When Jacob gave his dying blessing to his twelve sons, he associated each of them with an animal, object or a personal characteristic which became either an emblem of the tribe descended from him, or an identifying sign. The Lion, the emblem of Jacob’s fourth son Judah, is of special importance. This lion, in a couchant (lying down) position, became the emblem of the tribe of Judah; then, in a passant position (walking position with foreleg raised), it was an emblem of the Camp of Judah.
Later, with the addition of a crown, it was the emblem of the Royal House and throne of Judah. Finally, as a rampant lion (standing on hind legs with both forelegs elevated) posture with a crown, it became the symbol of the two Houses which comprise the Kingdom of Judah. For inspiration was drawn from the rampant Lion Royal standard of Scotland.
Kingdom of Scotland Coat of Arms – God me Defend – incorporating the Royal Banner of the Royal Arms, the Lion Rampant of Scotland
The Lion and the Unicorn, United Church of God – emphasis mine:
‘Moses said of Joseph: “His glory is like a firstborn bull, and his horns (weapons) are like the horns of a wild ox” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Where the New King James Version has “a wild ox,” the earlier King James had “unicorns.” Certainly a bovine animal was intended – tying back to the “bull” in the earlier part of the verse. Indeed, the medieval unicorn idea is believed by some to have been inspired by the Arabian oryx. Viewed from the side, particularly from a distance, these animals appear to have a single long horn.And sometimes they actually have only one. Consider also that unicorns, though portrayed with horse faces, have antelope hooves and long, lion-like tails – as oryx also have. The bull or unicorn thus became the symbol of Joseph – particularly of Ephraim.
As is widely understood, thelion became the tribal emblem of Judah… directly connected to kingship.
This was fitting, of course, since the lion is known as the “king of beasts” – and from Judah was to come the king of Israel, David, and ultimately the King of Kings, Jesus Christ. Jesus is even referred to as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (Revelation 5:5).
… the lion, as the emblem of Judah, was the symbol of the house of David. Notice how David’s son Solomon utilized this imagery to represent the greatest dynasty on earth: “The king made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with pure gold. The throne had six steps, with a footstool of gold, which were fastened to the throne (and the top of the throne was round at the back); there were armrests on either side of the place of the seat,andtwo lions stood beside the armrests. Twelve lions stood there, one on each side of the six steps; nothing like this had been made for any other kingdom” (2 Chronicles 9:17-19; 1 Kings 10:18-20).
One source explains: “King James VI of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I when she died childless in 1603, effectively uniting Scotland and England beneath one rule. The Scottish Royal Arms had up to that point used two unicorns as shield supporters. The English Arms had used a variety of supporters, but most frequently had included a lion. In a tactful gesture then, he placed a lion upon the left of the new Arms, and a unicorn upon the right.”
National motto of Scotland: Nemo me impune lacessit, meaning: No one provokes me with impunity.
United Church of God: “This was a potent bit of symbolism, for both the lion and the unicorn had long been thought to be deadly enemies: both regarded as king of the beasts, the unicorn rules through harmony while the lion rules through might, It came to symbolise a reconciliation between the Scottish unicorn and the English lion that the two should share the rule.”
This significant moment in history saw the rejoining of the Houses of Benjamin and of Judah into the formation of the ancient Kingdom of Judah. Thus the unification of the two separate Kingdoms of Scotland and England transformed them into the United Kingdom of Great Britain.
United Church of God: ‘… between the lion and unicorn is a garter around the central shield said to represent the Order of the Garter, an ancient order of knighthood of which the British monarch is sovereign. On the garter appear the Old French words, “Honi soit qui mal y pense,” which means, “Evil to him who thinks evil” – toward Britain that is. Is this not nearly the same as “cursed is he that curseth thee” in Numbers 24, a promise given in the same context as the lion and unicorn in Scripture? Surely this is no mere coincidence.
Beneath the shield and animals appears the motto of the sovereign, “Dieu et mon droit,” meaning, “God and my right,” that is, the right of kingly succession (as David’s line has by God’s promise) or right of birth… This was the military password chosen by King Richard I in 1198, but its origins may go even further back. In any event, it would seem to be more than happenstance that such is the royal motto of Britain.
And there is more. Upon the shield of the arms appear the golden passant lions of England – passant meaning walking with farther forepaw raised. Actually, these lions are considered to be running across the shield in a crouched position – stalking prey and attacking.Says one source: “Lions have appeared in our Royal Arms since the introduction of Heraldry. It is said that Henry II’s arms originally consisted of two lions, and that he added a third on marriage[in 1152]” (Patrick Montague-Smith, The Royal Line of Succession, Pitkin, 1968, page 2).’
‘The two lions had been the emblem of William the Conqueror prior to 1066 (Jiri Louda and Michael Maclagan, Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, 1981, page 16). William was apparently of the… line of Zerah, and may even have been of Davidic lineage’ – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. ‘The two golden lions could perhaps be reminiscent of the gilded lions upon the sides of Solomon’s throne’ – representing Pharez and Zarah.
‘When… Edward I took the Stone of Destiny from Scotland in 1296, he “ordered his goldsmith to make a fair bronze chair to contain it… The coronation chair, which still stands in Westminster Abbey today, has been used in almost all English coronations since that of Edward II in 1307. We are told that it was made by Walter of Durham in 1299… (who) was paid… for the carving and painting of two wooden leopards (‘leopard’ being the medieval term for a running as opposed to rampant lion) – kings of England during that period liked being shown with their feet resting on leopards (that is, lions), perhaps to model their throne on descriptions of King Solomon’s which had two lions standing by the stays” (Pat Gerber, Stone of Destiny, 1997, page 105).’
Judah is described as a lion cub, a lioness; and a lion. We will see links between the lion cub and the tribe of Dan and the association between Judah’s lion and the tribe of Gad. Both the symbols of a Dragon, via the Tudors of Wales and the Unicorn from the Stuarts of Scotland have been secondary symbols of England; though its prime and true symbol is the Lion as evidenced in heraldry and the Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.
Numbers 23:22-24; 24:8-9
King James Version
‘God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn. Surely there is no enchantment against Jacob, neither is there any divination against Israel: according to this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought! Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood^^ of the slain.
God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows [superior military strength]. He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir* him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, andcursed is he that curseth thee.’
The state of Israel and the Jewish people could not be honestly described in this fashion. They do not have the military might which Great Britain has possessed in the past or currently has at its disposal. The royal motto in Old French, is Dieu et mon Droit, meaning: God and my Right. The right to rule as the royal tribe of Judah. Balaam was hired to curse Israel and ended up blessing them and cursing anyone who cursed them.
Genesis 49:10
Good News Translation
“Judah will hold the royal scepter, And his descendants will always rule. Nations will bring him tribute And bow in obedience before him.”
1599 Geneva Bible
The Sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh [the Messiah] come, and the people shall be gathered unto him.
Ancient Jewish authorities interpret ‘Shiloh’ as a compound of shel and loh meaning, ‘to whom it belongs.’ Judah would always be identified with a monarchy, a throne and royal dynasties of kings and queens. This again, is not something that can be attributed to the Jewish people. To argue that the Jews are Judah, but some ‘Jews of Judah’ are the royal family in England, presiding over the tribe of Ephraim is not scriptural and exemplifies the classic forcing of a piece of the jig-saw puzzle that well and truly does not fit. In the Bible (and historically), Ephraim distanced himself from Judah and its monarchy and has only gone and done the same in our modern age as we shall discover. Ephraim doesn’t sit right underneath Judah’s monarch, forever ruled by them. This situation is not described or predicted in the scriptures.
The Son of Man was prophesied to descend from Judah and He did – one proof of his credentials as the Messiah. David was promised that he would always have an eligible descendant to sit on the throne of Judah, not that that there would necessarily always be someone from his line on the throne – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Psalm 89:3-4
English Standard Version
You have said, I have made a covenant with my chosen one; I have sworn to David my servant: ‘I will establish your offspring forever, and build your throne for all generations.’
Jeremiah 33:17, ESV: “For thus says the Lord: David shall never [H3808 – lo: not, no] lack [H3772 – karath: want, fail] a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel…’ It could be written that ‘… David would never be without or fail to have, a descendant to sit on the throne…’ Verse eighteen says the exact same thing regarding levitical priests always being available to offer burnt offerings, meat offerings and sacrifices. Yet the Levitical priesthood ended with Christ’s sacrifice – Hebrews 7:11-14.
The Hebrew word used for fail is karath, and is translated in the KJV as cut off (145 times), make (85), cut down (23), cut (9), fail (6), destroy (4), want (3), covenanted (2) and hew (2). The word also means ‘to cut asunder… by implication, to destroy or consume; specifically, to covenant (i.e make an alliance, or bargain…) make a league, to permit to perish.’
1 Kings 9:5
New King James Version
‘… then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, as I promised David your father, saying, ‘You shall not fail to have a man on [H5921 – meal: upon] the throne [H3678 – keceh: seat (of honour), stool] of Israel.’
This verse states descendants of David would sit on the throne perpetually. Yet the following verse says the monarchy would end if Solomon or his descendants did not follow the Eternal like David had. Regrettably, Solomon turned aside from the Eternal and both Israel and Judah went into captivity and were transplanted from the Promised Land – Articles: Na’amah; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
The current King and his son and grandson, the future heirs to the throne have a mixed pedigree consisting primarily of German-Jewish ancestry. Therefore, the inclusion of any pure English bloodline through the Saxon Jutes or the later Normans, all the way back to David himself, no matter how slight of a percentage, would it seems, accidentally fulfil the promise. Yet, the likelihood of this being the case is just as slim a chance – as discussed in the articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III.
For while there is reason to believe the line of Zarah may presently have representation in the crown in some percentage form; a line of descent from Pharez – which included David and the Messiah – does not have convincing support (Article: The Life & Death of Charles III).
‘Bow in obedience’ is a direct reference to other people – nations, Gentiles – towards Judah. This has also been fulfilled in the vast Empire Britain built and accumulated; the vestiges of which still remain in the British Commonwealth of nations today.
Genesis 49:11
Common English Bible
“He ties his male donkey to the vine, the colt of his female donkey to the vine‘s branches. He washes his clothes in wine, his garments in the blood of grapes.”
While Judah did not protest as loudly as Ishmael – the modern Germans – during the Protestant Reformation and the breaking away from the Universal Church of the Chaldeans – the modern Italians – and though Judah has not proclaimed their faith, their belief or Christianity as loudly as their brother, the United States; they did before anyone else, translate editions of the word of God into English, which irrevocably opened the Bible to the masses so that they could determine for themselves whether organised religion was teaching them the truth or not – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
John Wycliffe is credited with providing the first translation of the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate in 1384. His translation began a revolution, enabling the ordinary people to finally access the Bible in a language they could understand – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. So profound was the revolution Wycliffe ignited, he is called, ‘The Morning Star of the Reformation.’ Later, William Tyndale translated into English from the original Hebrew and Greek much of the scriptures, most notably the New Testament in 1525. In 1611, King James I of England (James VI Scotland) provided an updated English version which remains the standard till this day.
Jacob describes a rich blessing for Judah, in that his descendants will be satiated. Yet, it is interesting to note that Judah’s garments are not white as snow signifying purity and life (Revelation 3:5); but drenched in the blood red of sin and death – Isaiah 63:2-3.
Genesis 49:12
King James Version
“His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.”
An apt description online of Judah’s inheritance in the promised land:
‘The tribe of Judah received as its inheritance the largest and most [impressive] portion in the inmost and highest region of the land of Canaan – a mountainous district, yet rich and fertile in ancient times, [where] mountain sides would have been carefully terraced and covered with flourishing vineyards and olive groves. It was thus able to support a teeming population and a greater number of important cities and towns… [compared to] any other part of Palestine. [There] was Hebron, the most ancient capital of the country, and Jerusalem with Zion and the Temple, representing the heart and lungs of the nation… Here, then, throned the “lion of Judah” on his mountains, surrounded by Dan in the west and Reuben in the east; by Simeon to the south and Benjamin to the north.’
In the Book of Lamentations we find that the Nazarites – consecrated persons typically from Judah – were exceedingly fair: ‘Her Nazirites were brighter than snow And whiter than milk; They were more ruddy in body than rubies,Like sapphire in their appearance (blue eyes?)’ – Lamentations 4:7, NKJV.
The colours of England coincidently or not, are in fact, red and white. The Red Rose of England… the national sports teams colours of predominantly white and a splash of red. The War of the Roses between the white rose of Yorkshire and the red rose of Lancashire. The national flag consisting of a white background, overlaid with the red St Georges cross.
Red wine in the Bible symbolises Christ’s blood; white raiment symbolises purity, sanctification and forgiveness achieved through the shedding and application of his blood. England a Christian people, accepted the sacrifice of Christ the earliest of any nation – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.
Yet, as with the preceding verse (11), verse 12 signifies Judah’s greed, so that his eyes will become bloodshot from too much wine (alcohol) and his teeth would drip with imbibing an excess of milk (dairy).
William Blake wrote an exceptionally insightful poem entitled, Jerusalem (“And did those feet in ancient time”):
And did those feet in ancient time Walk upon Englands mountains green:
And was the holy Lamb of God, On Englands pleasant pastures seen!
And did the Countenance Divine, Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here, Among these dark Satanic Mills?
Bring me my Bow of burning gold: Bring me my arrows of desire:
Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold! Bring me my Chariot of fire!
I will not cease from Mental Fight, Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem, In Englands green and pleasant Land.
A poignant and truly accurate portrayal, for as we progress we will substantiate that ‘those feet in ancient time’ truly did walk on England’s soil (Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation) and that as Judah, the modern counterpart of Jerusalem is fulfilled in the capital of England: London.
As an important aside, anywhere in the scriptures Jerusalem is stated in a prophetic context – though not historical – it means London, not the city of Jerusalem in the state of Israel today. In the Book of Revelation, Jerusalem in Israel is called ‘the great city’ or in other passages of the Bible it is in fact, Bozrah the capital of Edom.
City of London Coat of Arms – O Lord, guide us (Master, direct us).
But which lord to guide and direct the capital (Jerusalem) in Judah? The Eternal Creator or the adversarial Dragon – refer article: Asherah.
Prophetically, Jerusalem is always London. An accurate understanding of Judah’s capital and Edom’s capital and thus the true intent of prophetic scriptures is only obtained if Jerusalem is decoded as London and Bozrah as Jerusalem. According to modern identity adherents who teach Judah is the state of Israel and Edom is Turkey for example; they would then have to attribute Bozrah of Edom to either Turkey’s capital, Ankara or possibly its major city, Istanbul. When scriptures are read using either of these cities and the city of Jerusalem in Israel, the relationship does not fit smoothly, make sense or elucidate prophecy in any meaningful manner.
English men
Prior to Isaac’s death in 1697 BCE at the age of one hundred and eighty, Jacob visits his father with his sons Levi and Judah. Jacob would have been one hundred and twenty, Levi, fifty-one and Judah, forty-nine.
Book of Jubilees 31:4-11, 18-23
31:4 ‘And Isaac said: ‘Let my son Jacob come, and let me see him before I die.’ 5 And Jacob went to his father Isaac and to his mother Rebecca, to the house of his father Abraham, and he took two of his sons with him, Levi and Judah… 6 And Rebecca came forth from the tower to the front of it to kiss Jacob and embrace him; for her spirit had revived when she heard: ‘Behold Jacob your son has come’; and she kissed him. 7 And she saw his two sons, and she recognised them, and said to him: ‘Are these your sons, my son?’ and she embraced them and kissed them, and blessed them, saying: ‘In you shall the seed of Abraham become illustrious, and you shall prove a blessing on the earth.’ 8 AndJacob went in to Isaac his father, to the chamber where he lay, and his two sons were with him, and he took the hand of his father, and stooping down he kissed him, and Isaac clung to the neck of Jacob his son, and wept upon his neck.
9 And the darkness left the eyes of Isaac, and he saw the two sons of Jacob, Levi, and Judah, and he said:‘Are these your sons, my son? for they are like you.’ 10 And he said to him that they were truly his sons: ‘And you have truly seen that they are truly my sons’. 11 And they came near to him, and he turned and kissed them and embraced them both together.
18 And to Judah he said: ‘May Yahweh give you strength and power To tread down all that hate you; A prince shall you be,you and one of your sons [Pharez], over the sons of Jacob [the Monarchy]; May your name and the name of your sons [including Zarah and Shelah] go forth and traverse every land and region.
19 Then shall the Gentiles fear before your face, and all the nations shall quake [And all the peoples shall quake]. In you shall be the help of Jacob, And in you be found the Yeshua of Israel [the Messiah]. 20 And when you sit on the throne of honor of your righteousness, There shall be great [peace]for all the seed of the sons of the beloved; Blessed be he that blesses you, And all that hate you and afflict you and curse you Shall be rooted out and destroyed from the earth and be accursed.’
21 And turning he kissed him again and embraced him, and rejoiced greatly; for he had seen the sons of Jacob his son in very truth. 22 And Jacob went forth from between his feet and fell down and bowed down to him, and he blessed them and rested there with Isaac his father that night, and they [ate] and drank with joy. 23 And he made the two sons of Jacob sleep, the one on his right hand and the other on his left, and it was counted to him for righteousness.’
English women
Jacob understood that Levi and Judah were selected for separate roles from the birthright promise going to his son Joseph. Of course, it was still ten years away before Jacob learns that Joseph is in fact alive in Egypt. One wonders who the alternative birthright recipient would have been should Joseph have been truly dead. Perhaps youngest son, Benjamin. Eventually, it is Jacob who in turn blesses Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, slightly reminisce of the blessing by Isaac on his grandsons, Levi and Judah. We will return to Levi’s blessing in the following chapter.
Notice Judah’s blessing from Isaac includes the power to overcome his enemies and the promise of a royal line which would rule over his brothers. No other nation has fulfilled these promises like England. Nor have any other people ‘traversed every land and region’ in the world in such manner as to take their culture, religion, language and colonialism to the furthest parts of the globe as the English have done.
In the Book of Chronicles we learn of additional descendants of Judah.
1 Chronicles 4:1-23
English Standard Version
1 ‘The sons of Judah: Perez,Hezron, Carmi, Hur, and Shobal. 2 Reaiah the son of Shobal fathered Jahath, and Jahath fathered Ahumai and Lahad.
… These were the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. 5 Ashhur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives, Helah and Naarah; 6 Naarah bore him Ahuzzam, Hepher, Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. 7 The sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan…
9 Jabez was more honorable than his brothers; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, “Because I bore him in pain.” 10Jabez called upon the God of Israel, saying, “Oh that you would bless me and enlarge my border, and that your hand might be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not bring me pain!” And God granted what he asked.
… The sons ofKenaz[a shared family name with Esau and his grandson Kenaz from Eliphaz]: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath and Meonothai. 14 Meonothai fathered Ophrah; and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Calebthe son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: Kenaz.
… 17 The sons of Ezrah: Jether, Mered, Epher [a shared family name with Midian], and Jalon. These are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco… 19 The sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the fathers of Keilah the Garmite and Eshtemoa the Maacathite…
21 The sons of Shelah the son of Judah: Er the father of Lecah, Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the clans of the house of linen workers at Beth-ashbea; 22 and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who ruled in Moab and returned to Lehem (now the records are ancient). 23 These were the potters who were inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah. They lived there in the king’s service.’
Hezron was Pharez’s first son, but listed separately. Notice an Ashhur [like Asshur] is a family name and Jabez is a classic case, ‘if you don’t ask, you don’t receive’ in reverse. Recall the sons of Kenaz** in the section on Midian in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
The mention of a Caleb, is not Joshua’s friend but the son of Hezron. When did Mered marry Pharaoh’s daughter? During the time of Joseph, before a new Pharaoh who began the Israelite slavery, or later still. Shelah was the only surviving son of Judah and his wife Bath-shua. He named his first son after his eldest brother, Er who died. If Saraph ruled in nearby Moab, he may have married a Moabite woman of high birth. In the second and third chapters of Chronicles, further genealogy for Judah is recorded including Judah’s highest profile personality aside from Christ, King David.
1 Chronicles 2:1-55
English Standard Version
1 ‘These are the sons of Israel… Judah… The sons of Judah: Er, Onan and Shelah; these three Bath-shua the Canaanite bore to him. Now Er, Judah’s firstborn, was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death. 4 His daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five* sons in all.
5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.
6 The sons of Zerah: Zimri, Ethan [everflowing, perennial], Heman [faithful], Calcol [Sustenance, to make perfect or whole], and Dara [the arm], five in all.
7 The son of Carmi[son of Zimri]:Achan, the troubler of Israel, who broke faith in the matter of the devoted thing[Joshua 6 & 7]; 8 and Ethan’s son was Azariah.
English man and woman
Zarah’s five sons were born circa 1685 to 1675 BCE: Calcol in 1677 BCE and Dara (or Darda) in 1675 BCE. Calcol is credited with either founding Athens or influencing its rise to prominence and power and Darda similarly with Troy as discussed earlier – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. They were extremely intelligent, capable men according to the Book of Kings.
1 Kings 4:29-31
English Standard Version
29 ‘AndGod gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore, 30 so that Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt.
31 For he was wiser than all other men, wiserthan Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, Calcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol, and his fame was in all the surrounding nations.’
1 Chronicles: 9 The sons of Hezron that were born to him: Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai [Caleb].
10 Ram fathered Amminadab, and Amminadab fathered Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah. 11Nahshon fathered Salmon, SalmonfatheredBoaz,
12 Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse. 13 Jesse fathered Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third, 14 Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, 15 Ozem the sixth,
David the seventh’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
16 ‘And their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. The sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, Joab, and Asahel, three. 17 Abigail bore Amasa, and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.‘
David later married an Abigail, of the same name as his sister. His sister married an Ishmaelite, the equivalent of a German today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. A close scrutiny of the Germans and English, results in a conclusion that they are different sides of the same coin. David’s lineage is through Judah’s eldest twin son with Tamar, Pharez and then his eldest son, Hezron and Hezron’s grandson, Ram. Ultimately, David was the eleventh generation from Judah and fourteenth from Abraham, and Boaz was his great grandfather with Ruth the Moabite, his great grandmother – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
1 Chronicles: 18 ‘Caleb the son of Hezron fathered children by his wife Azubah, and by Jerioth; and these were her sons: Jesher, Shobab, and Ardon. 19 When Azubah died, Caleb married Ephrath, who bore him Hur…
21Afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir [son of Manasseh] the father of Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub [1].
22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur^ and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead. 24 After the death of Hezron, [his son] Caleb went in to Ephrathah [step mother, the daughter of Machir], the wife of Hezron his father, and she bore him Ashhur [2], the father of Tekoa.’
Gilead was the brother of Machir’s daughter Ephrathah* who married Hezron from Judah. The tribe of Manasseh split in two during the division of Canaan by the sons of Jacob during 1406 to 1400 BCE. Half of Manasseh stayed on the west side of the river Jordan with the tribe of Ephraim and from now on were known as the half tribe of West Manasseh, or collectively with Ephraim as either Joseph or Samaria.
The other half journeyed to the east of the River Jordan and lived in Gilead to the north of two other tribes which journeyed east, Gad and Reuben. This second half from now on were known as the half tribe of East Manasseh, Manasseh, or simply as Gilead. This early injection of two royal lines of Judah (Hezron/Segub and Caleb/Asshur both by Ephrathah) into the half tribe of East Manasseh, altered their genome and personality traits dynamic. We will find that this half of Manasseh are staunchly pro-royal and Judah-like, diametrically opposite to their kith and kin who live with Ephraim. This split within Manasseh is paramount in understanding where Manasseh’s inheritance is in the world today and has been crucially missed in identity research circles – refer Chapter XXXIII – Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.
25 ‘The sons of Jerahmeel, the firstborn of Hezron: Ram, his firstborn, Bunah, Oren, Ozem, and Ahijah.
26 Jerahmeel also had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27 The sons of Ram, the firstborn of Jerahmeel: Maaz, Jamin, and Eker. 28 The sons of Onam: Shammai and Jada. The sons of Shammai: Nadab and Abishur. 29 The name of Abishur’s wife was Abihail, and she bore him Ahban and Molid. 30 The sons of Nadab: Seled and Appaim; and Seled died childless. 31 The son of Appaim: Ishi. The son of Ishi: Sheshan… 34 Now Sheshan had no sons, only daughters, but Sheshan had an Egyptian slave whose name was Jarha. 35 So Sheshan gave his daughter in marriage to Jarha his slave, and she bore him Attai…
The sons of Hur the firstborn* of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim, 51 Salma, the father of Bethlehem…
55 The clans also of the scribes who lived at Jabez: the Tirathites, the Shimeathites and the Sucathites. These are the Kenites** who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.‘
1 Chronicles 3:1-19
English Standard Version
These are the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron:
the firstborn, Amnon [1], by Ahinoam the Jezreelite;
the second, Daniel [2], by Abigail the Carmelite,
2 thethird, Absalom [3], whose mother was Maacah, the daughterof Talmai, king of Geshur;^
the fourth, Adonijah [4], whose mother was Haggith;
3 the fifth, Shephatiah [5], by Abital;
the sixth, Ithream [6], by his wife Eglah;
4 six were born to him in Hebron, where he reigned for seven years and six months. And he [then] reigned thirty-three years in Jerusalem.
5 These were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea [7], Shobab [8], Nathan [9] and Solomon [10],four by Bath-shua [Bathsheba], thedaughter of Ammiel;
6 then Ibhar [11], Elishama [12], Eliphelet [13], 7 Nogah [14], Nepheg [15], Japhia [16], 8 Elishama [17], Eliada [18], and Eliphelet [19], nine. 9 All these were David’s sons, besides the sons of the concubines, and Tamar was their sister.
Nineteen sons and one daughter at the very least, born to King David and not a good one among them it would seem. None are recorded as righteous. We have addressed King Solomon and his tragic downfall – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and article: Na’amah. While it appears above that Solomon was David’s tenth son, he was actually his seventh – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
We will look at Absalom, who was about as wicked as one could be.
10 ‘The sonof Solomon was Rehoboam [1st king of Judah],
Abijah [2] his son, Asa [3] his son, Jehoshaphat [4] his son, 11 Joram [5] his son, Ahaziah [6] his son, Joash [7] his son, 12 Amaziah [8] his son, Azariah [9] his son, Jotham [10] his son, 13 Ahaz [11] his son, Hezekiah [12] his son, Manasseh [13] his son, 14 Amon [14] his son, Josiah [15] his son.
15 The sons of Josiah: Johanan the firstborn [Jehoahaz, 2 Kings 23:31 (16)], the second Jehoiakim [formerly Eliakim, name changed by Pharaoh Neco (2 Kings 23:34, 36) (17)], the thirdZedekiah*, the fourth Shallum.
16 The descendants of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son [Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:6, 8-9) (18)], Zedekiah [Zedekiah formerly Mattaniah had his name changed by Nebuchadnezzar and was Jehoiachin’s uncle. Jehoiachin surrendered himself to save Jerusalem and was succeeded by Zedekiah, 2 Kings 24:17 (19)] his son;
17 and the sons of Jeconiah, the captive: Shealtiel his son, 18 Malchiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah; 19 and the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel [son of Shealtiel and not Pedaiah – Ezra 3:2, 8; 5:2. Nehemiah 12:1, Haggai 1:1, 12, 14] and Shimei; and the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam and Hananiah, and Shelomith was their sister…’
The descendants of Solomon, were the kings of the Kingdom of Judah until King Zedekiah who was taken into Babylonian captivity in 587 BCE. Zerubbabel returned to rebuild portions of Jerusalem beginning in 539 BCE under the Persian King Cyrus II decree. In contrast with the tribes of Israel having never really been lost, being recognisable for many centuries; it has paradoxically, been the Tribe of Judah who has remained hidden, while in plain sight.
Judah, the really Lost Tribe, Don Robson, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine
‘Recently, I have been reviewing books that I have read in the past and I find that the treatment by many scholars of the exile of Judah correctly defined the details while leaving the readers confused. I feel that this is an important issue because many look to the Jews of Palestine to fulfill the prophecies concerning Judah. The most important point of confusion is the expected union with Israel when Christ returns and His angels gather His people from the ends of the earth into His kingdom to rule with Him for a thousand years.It seems to me rather unlikely that a people who have denied Christ, the King of the Kingdom, for two thousand years will be given such a reprieve when Jesus said that many that call Him Lord will be told, “Depart from me, you that do iniquity; I never knew you.”
A further complication concerning Judah, is that the tribe’s entire history does not occur in Scripture. You will recall from the Bible story that the midwife tied a scarlet thread to Zarah’s hand before it was withdrawn and Pharez was born. His name means “a breach”.
So, undoubtedly there was conflict over who should be the oldest of the twins, since“the scepter would not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes whose right it is.” At that time, Pharez was deemed to be the older which led to Jesse, David, Solomon and Christ.
The breach had a secondary reaction. The Tribe of Zarah left Egypt before the exodus under Moses, branching into two groups under Zarah’s two sons, Calcol and Darda. Calcol led his group to Ireland where he established the line of Irish kings. Darda took his group into Asia Minor naming the Dardanelles and founding Troy.
The Greeks, actually the Tribe of Dan [?], defeated the Trojans and the remnant was led into Britain under their King Brute (or Brutus). The name Brute became Brit and the people became known as Britons. So we have one half of the Tribe of Judah settled in Ireland and Britain. But that is not all!
After the Kingdom of Solomon was divided into two parts under his son Rehoboam, Sennacherib of Assyria launched his campaign of conquest. First he conquered Gad, Reuben and the half tribe of [East] Manasseh, deporting them to the land of the Medes. Then, he attacked Samaria and likewise deported them. Phase three was to attack all the fenced cities of Judah, which included the Tribe of Benjamin, where he was again successful, deporting 200,150 men. Women and children would augment this number by at least five times.
Phase four was to defeat Jerusalem but it never happened. God had other plans! The angel of the Lord in the night destroyed Sennacherib’s army and he returned to Assyria where his sons murdered him. God had to protect a remnant of His people to receive the Lord Jesus Christ at the First Advent. The attacks continued until Nebuchadnezzar defeated and destroyed Jerusalem. They were then deported to Babylon for seventy years, until Darius decreed that they could return home and rebuild Jerusalem and the temple. About 50,000 Jews [Judah] returned and their families are listed in Scripture.
So, the 200,150 men of Judah and Benjamin were united with the ten tribes and migrated westward with their brothers. Those of the tribe of Judah were known as Jutes and made their way through Jutland to Britain where the Zarah tribe had migrated… a major part of the Tribe of Judah, 200,150 men migrated westward with the ten tribes, and Benjamin… although… writers insist on speaking of the migration of the ten tribes, it was in fact all twelve tribes except those who opted to stay in Babylon and the 50,000 who returned to rebuild Jerusalem.
We all know the prophecy of the two sticks, one marked for Israel and one marked for Judah. The Lord used that means, through the prophet, to tell of the reunion that would/did occur in due course in the British Isles. The union is history! It’s the union of Jacob. Its reality is shown in the flag, the Union Jack! That is the reason that James’ epistle begins with the greeting, “James, a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes [not ten, actually thirteen] which are scattered abroad, greeting.”
Robson’s article is unique and the only one found which recognises not just the truth of Israel and Judah’s regathering this side of the millennium, but also its occurrence before the return of Christ; resulting in a pivotal piece of eschatological understanding. It is extremely difficult to deny this regathering of Israel and Judah, once we have discussed all thirteen tribes and their locations, one by one, in this and following chapters.
Ezekiel 37:15-22
English Standard Version
15 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 16 “Son of man, take a stick and write on it, ‘For Judah, and the people of Israel associated with him’; then take another stick and write on it, “For Joseph (the stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with him.’ 17 And join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand. 18 And when your people say to you, ‘Will you not tell us what you mean by these?’
19 say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am about to take the stick of Joseph (that is in the hand of Ephraim) and the tribes of Israel associated with him. And I will join with it the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in my hand. 20 When the sticks on which you write are in your hand before their eyes, 21 then say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold,I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all around, and bring them to their own land [Britain and Ireland; and ultimately a return to ancient Israel in the Millennium].
22 And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. And one king [Judah-England] shall be king over them all, and they shall be no longer two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms.’
The Israelite tribes closely associated with Judah in the past were Benjamin, Levi and in the most part Simeon also. Today, they include: Benjamin, Levi, Simeon and Reuben. The principal tribes associated closely with Joseph (or Ephraim and West Manasseh) today, are the half tribe of East Manasseh, Asher and Naphtali. The tribes of Issachar, Zebulun and Gad are not close to either, though would fall into the Ephraim stick as opposed to Judah’s.
Don Robson writes an insightful article – highlighting two pivotal points in decoding scripture – in that firstly, the Jews of Israel are not the tribe of Judah. While the Zarah and Pharez lines may have competed for the privilege of royal supremacy and intertwined, evidence indicates Zarah has been predominant – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The tribe of Zarah and particularly his three youngest sons, Heman, Calcol and Dara struck out early from Egypt prior to the years of servitude, heading to Greece, Ireland and Britain. The second pivotal point is that the tribe of Judah was split, so that the actual main body of them forged the Parthian Empire, to then migrate following behind the Sacae-Scythians – which contained the Angles and Frisians, later known as Saxons – as the Jutes from Judah.
A number of readers will be aware of the Tea-Tephi tradition regarding how the Pharez line joined the Zarah line from Judah in Ireland. It is a great story, though it has holes in it, that relegate the account to over zealous scholarship, at best. This does not mean the whole story should be dismissed; as with all tales, the kernel of truth is within to extract.
The tribes of Israel and Judah did re-combine in their respective invasions into Britain from 450 to 600 CE, 700 to 800 CE and again in 1066. There was a formal level of union three times, when the union of the crowns between England and Scotland occurred in 1603; when the same two kingdoms unified their parliaments in 1707; and thirdly when England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and (the Republic of) Ireland united in 1800.
An important part of the puzzle to add to Robson’s points and what completes the Judaic panorama of migration, is that the remnant of Judah that returned from captivity to Jerusalem and who then fled Judea (Idumea) after 70 CE and the sacking of Jerusalem by Titus, were considerably behind their brother tribes. They travelled the same migratory paths as their brethren, west and then north. This last vestige of Judah eventually settled in Scandinavia like the tribes before them and in time travelled southwards. They were northmen, norsemen and settled in France, where these people of the north subsequently became known as Normans.
In 1066, some five hundred years after the Jutes, the Normans under William the Bastard – later, the Conqueror – containing a retinue of Israelite stragglers from other tribes and also consisting of a warrior-aristocracy, invaded southern Briton at Hastings in Kent in 1066. The Norman aristocracy – including Robert the Bruce’s family (of Scotland) – travelled throughout England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and became the dominant, ruling noble families of the British Isles.
The understanding of who Judah is, where Judah is and their possession of the royal orb and sceptre of the Messianic throne, is the integral key that unlocks the entire Holy Bible. In the Book of Revelation and the seven separate letters written to seven consecutive church eras of the true body of Christ – a little flock, the elect of God and all the saints – there is a pointed clue to when the revealing of Israel’s true identity would begin. It is now an era passed and we urgently find ourselves in the seventh and final era of the true church of God’s history – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
The letter to the last era is rather condemning; for the people of this age are self-righteous in that they know they are blessed with spiritual knowledge, yet have failed to fully ‘contend for the faith once delivered’ as addressed by Jude; for they arrogantly think they have the sum of all the knowledge they need. Revelation 3:17-18, ESV: ‘For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.’
1 Peter 1:5-7
English Standard Version
‘… who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith – more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire – may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.’
They have forgotten that one is too continually grow in grace (or favour) and knowledge – 2 Peter 3:18.
Revelation 3:7
New Century Version
‘To the Church in Philadelphia [the sixth era of seven] Write this to the angel of the church in Philadelphia:
“This is what the One [the Son of Man] who is holy and true,who holds the key of David, says. When he opens a door, no one can close it. And when he closes it, no one can open it.”
The person who holds this key is the Son of Man. He also holds the ‘keys of Hades and Death’ – Revelation 1:18. The beginning of interest in the identity of Israel as we have discussed, began about five hundred years ago. The central core of its doctrine is valid, the trunk of the tree so-to-speak and a few branches here and there. The endeavour now, is too correct, or prune the other branches, allowing for all the twigs, leaves and flowers to be added and to grow into a fulness of completion.
The open doors, signify a powerful and effective preaching of the word of God by the true church, of the gospel of the Kingdom of God and thereby the knowledge and process of how to enter the kingdom – as was bestowed upon the apostle Peter. The key of David is thus linked with this open door for the true gospel message and in turn the response of those who heed. The key of David is associated with the knowledge of the throne of David and where the modern nations of the houses of Israel and Judah are today.
For Christ said to the twelve disciples: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand” – Matthew 10:5-7, ESV.
A key unlocks a door. A door to a room or a house which invariably contains valuable items, or in this case, knowledge. A key is important and it is not entrusted to just anyone. There are a few passages regarding keys in the Bible. We will look at those which are pertinent.
The first is regarding the returned exiles from Babylon to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the second temple.
1 Chronicles 9:21-27
English Standard Version
21 ‘Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was gatekeeper at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 22 All these, who were chosen as gatekeepers at the thresholds, were 212 [men]. They were enrolled by genealogies in their villages. David and Samuel the seer established them in their office of trust. 23 So they and their sons were in charge of the gates of the house of the Lord, that is, the house of the tent, as guards. 24 The gatekeepers were on the four sides, east, west, north, and south.
25 And their kinsmen who were in their villages were obligated to come in every seven days, in turn, to be with these, 26 for the four chief gatekeepers, who were Levites, were entrusted to be over the chambers and the treasures of the house of God. 27 And they lodged around the house of God, for on them lay the duty of watching, and they had charge of opening it every morning.’
These keys entrusted to the Levites, protected the treasures of the house (or temple) of God.
Matthew 16:18-19
English Standard Version
“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock. I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Peter is given the proverbial keys to the Kingdom. It is he who is entrusted with the authority in heading the way to salvation in the inter-testament era leading to the New Covenant’s future establishment for all – Jeremiah 31:31-33. Yet this authority was not solely reserved for Peter as erroneously taught by the Catholic Church in endeavouring to maintain an unscriptural supreme pontiff – John 20:21-23.
The Key of David is mentioned one other time in the Book of Isaiah.
Isaiah 22:1-25
English Standard Version
1 ‘The oracle concerning the valley of vision.
What do you mean that you have gone up, all of you, to the housetops… Your slain are not slain with the sword or dead in battle. 3 All your leaders have fled together; without the bow they were captured. All of you who were found were captured, though they had fled far away. 5For the Lord God of hosts has a day of tumult and trampling and confusion in the valley of vision…He has taken away the covering of Judah.
In that day you looked to the weapons of the House of the Forest, 9 and you saw that the breaches of the city of David were many… But you did not look to him who did it, or see him who planned it long ago.’
In 1 Kings 7:1-12, it says King Solomon took thirteen years to build his own Palace – circa 970 to 957 BCE. Compared to six years, to construct the Temple from 966 to 960 BCE. There were various rooms in the palace, such as the Hall of Pillars and the Hall of the Throne. All of these were built with ‘cedars from Lebanon’ and costly stones and jewels cut to measure.
2 ‘He built the House of the Forest of Lebanon. Its length was a hundred cubits [about 150 feet] and its breadth fifty cubits and its height thirty cubits, and it was built on four rows of cedar pillars, with cedar beams on the pillars. 3 And it was covered with cedar above the chambers that were on the forty-five pillars, fifteen in each row. 4 There were window frames in three rows, and window opposite window in three tiers. 5 All the doorways and windows had square frames, and window was opposite window in three tiers.’
In 1 Kings 10:17, Solomon put three hundred shields made of gold in to the House of the Forest. The room was designed for weapons, though treasure seems to be included as we learn from the thirteenth king of Judah, Hezekiah.
Isaiah 39:1-3
English Standard Version
1 ‘At that time Merodach-baladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent envoys with letters and a present to Hezekiah, for he heard that he had been sick and had recovered. 2 And Hezekiah welcomed them gladly.
Andhe showed them his treasure house, the silver, the gold, the spices, the precious oil, his whole armory, all that was found in his storehouses. There was nothing in his house or in all his realm that Hezekiah did not show them. 3 Then Isaiah the prophet came to King Hezekiah, and said to him, “What did these men say? And from where did they come to you?” Hezekiah said, “They have come to me from a far country, from Babylon.”
The Kingdom of Judah trusted in its own weapons and not the Creator. King Hezekiah naively shows his riches and weapons in front of envoys from Babylon – blind to the planned attack of the Chaldeans years later.
Isaiah: 12 ‘In that day the Lord God of hosts called for weeping and mourning, for baldness and wearing sackcloth; 13 and behold, joy and gladness, killing oxen and slaughtering sheep, eating flesh and drinking wine. “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” 14 The Lord of hosts has revealed himself in my ears: “Surely this iniquity will not be atoned for you until you die,” says the Lord God of hosts.
15 Thus says the Lord God of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to Shebna, who is over the household, and say to him: 16 What have you to do here, and whom have you here, that you have cut out here a tomb for yourself, you who cut out a tomb on the height and carve a dwelling for yourself in the rock? [much like Edom – Obadiah 1:3]
17 Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you 18 and whirl you around and around, and throw you like a ball into a wide land. There you shall die, and there shall be your glorious chariots, you shame of your master’s house. 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your station.’
Shebna was a historical figure (Isaiah 36:3, 2 Kings 18:37), though as ‘in that day’ is used, this is a future prophecy during the Day of the Lord. The description of Shebna is about a scribe, a steward, an advisor to the throne – or even possibly an evil king himself. It could be someone more sinister – an angelic being (or Nephilim) at the time of the end, who may be a religious figure like the son of perdition – in the spiritual house of God, the Church.
Isaiah: 20 ‘In that day I will call my servant Eliakim [meaning: God will establish, whom God sets up] the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.’
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for ‘key’ is maphteach and defined by Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, as, ‘key opener, opening.’ In the New Testament, the Greek word for ‘key’ as used in Revelation 3:7, is kleis – a feminine word, defined by Young’s as simply, ‘a key.’
Eliakim is either a righteous steward or king after the deposed Shebna, or more likely the Son of Man taking His rightful seat. Eliakim was a historical figure as well, who became the ‘steward or prefect over the palace, as had been foretold by Isaiah (compare 2 Kings 18:18; Isaiah 36:3, 22; 37:2).’ The context of the passage speaks about the rulership of the house of David over Israel. ‘Originally, Shebna had been in a trustworthy position in the king’s rule. The Nelson Study Bible explains “the steward had the key that gave him an audience with the king.” Since Eliakim is given the same key as the Son of Man in Revelation, one could assume Eliakim is the returned Messiah, that the King is the Ancient of Days and that Shebna is the Adversary.
Isaiah: 23 ‘And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house.’
The covenant the Creator made with David, was because he kept God’s Law. Isaiah 55:3, describes the new or ‘everlasting’ covenant as ‘the sure [secure] mercies of David.’
Isaiah: 24 ‘And they will hang on him the whole honor of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 In that day, declares the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way, and it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.’
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, states:
‘key’ – emblem of his office over the house; to ‘open’ or ‘shut’; access rested with him… keys are sometimes carried in the East, hanging from the kerchief on the shoulder. But the phrase is rather figurative for sustaining the government on one’s shoulders. Eliakim, as his name implies, is here plainly a type of… Christ, the Son of ‘David’… he that hath the key of David – the antitype of Eliakim, to whom the ‘key,’ the emblem of authority ‘over the house of David’ was transferred from Shebna, who was removed from the office of chamberlain or treasurer, as unworthy of it.
Christ, the Heir of the throne of David, shall supplant all the less worthy stewards who have abused their trust in God’s spiritual house, and ‘shall reign over the house of Jacob,’ literal and spiritual (Luke 1:32, 33), ‘for ever,’ ‘as a Son over His own house’ (Hebrews 3:2-6). It rests with Christ to open or shut the heavenly palace (the heavenly Jerusalem, verse 12, which will come down to this earth; Revelation 21:9-10), deciding who is, and who is not, to be admitted: as He also opens, or shuts… ‘having the keys of hell (the grave) and death (ch. 1:18).’
The Broadman Bible Commentary states: ‘To say that Christ is the one who has the key of David is to affirm his messianic authority to admit or exclude from the messianic kingdom.’
Christ bears the key to open the door to the kingdom and those who have been chosen to be granted entrance are the people Christ instructed the apostles to go to and whom mirrored his own ministry… He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” – Matthew 15:24, ESV.
2 Samuel 7:10
English Standard Version
‘And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more…’
There can be no doubt that the sifted and transplanted sons of Jacob ended up in either the larger Isle of Albion or the smaller Isle of Erin – Jeremiah 31:10. Planted so far away from their original home in a new wilderness to explore and civilise, any thought of their old homeland and their past life or identity were well and truly forgotten. Fulfilling their appointed destiny by becoming a great people from a multitude of nations, with a resurrection of a mighty royal kingdom, were still a millennia distant in the future – Genesis 48:19; 49:8-10 (Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes).
The sons of Jacob had rejected a Divine Theocracy with their Creator and Protector, insisting on a human king just like all the nations surrounding them. Saul was chosen and while not from a royal line and the tribe of Benjamin, ‘he was permitted to reign, for the [Eternal] determined to give the people the desire of their hearts.’
In easing into the next section on Benjamin, it is worth noting at this point the identity of the tribe – with the exception of Simeon – most closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The youngest tribe of Benjamin with their warlike proficiency, aligned warrior ethos and almost symbiotic attachment with Judah are today, the peoples of Scotland. We will study Scotland’s descent from Benjamin in depth to confirm its proposed identity.
Beginning with Saul, who was born in 1070 BCE and his son Jonathan who was born circa 1050 BCE. Jonathan was ten years older than David who was born in 1040 BCE, some six years after the death of the Danite Judge, Samson – Article: Samson.
1 ‘There was a man of Benjamin whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel, son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, a Benjaminite, a man [H1368 – gibbowr: mighty, strong, valiant] of wealth [H2428 – chayil: power, might, strength].
2 And he had a son whose name was Saul, a handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable] young [H970 – bachuwr: chosen, youthful – not in age (for he was forty-four), rather as in vigour – a warrior] man.There was not a man among the people of Israel more handsome than he. From his shoulders upward he was taller than any of the people.
15 Now the day before Saul came, the Lord had revealed to Samuel: 16 “Tomorrow about this time I will send to you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over my people Israel. He shall save my people from the hand of the Philistines. 21 Saul answered, “Am I not a Benjaminite,from the least of the tribes of Israel? And is not myclan the humblestof all the clans of the tribe of Benjamin? Why then have you spoken to me in this way?”
1 Then Samuel took a flask of oil and poured it on his head and kissed him and said, “Has not the Lord anointed you to be prince over his people Israel? [1026 BCE] And you shall reign over the people of the Lord [1025 to 1010 BCE] and you will save them from the hand of their surrounding enemies. And this shall be the sign to you that the Lord has anointed you to be prince over his heritage.
5 And there, as soon as you come to the city, you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place with harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre before them, prophesying. 6 Then the Spirit of the Lord will rush upon you, and you will prophesy with them and be turned into another man.
7 Now when these signs meet you, do what your hand finds to do, for God is with you… 9 When he turned his back to leave Samuel, God gave him another heart. And all these signs came to pass that day. 10 When they came to Gibeah, behold, a group of prophets met him, and the Spirit of God rushed upon him, and he prophesied among them. 11 And when all who knew him previously saw how he prophesied with the prophets, the people said to one another, “What has come over the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?” 12 And a man of the place answered, “And who is their father?” [Samuel in essence adopts Saul, becoming his spiritual guardian].
17 Now Samuel called the people together to the Lord at Mizpah. 20 Then Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken by lot. 23 Then they ran and took him from there. And when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward. 24 And Samuel said to all the people, “Do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people.” And all the people shouted, “Long live the king!”
14 Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and there renew the kingdom.” 15 So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal[in 1025 BCE]. There they sacrificed peace offerings before the Lord, and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly.’
Saul’s sons born to him were Jonathan, Ishvi and Malchi-shua. His daughters were Merab, who in turn had five sons and Michal. Saul’s wife was called Ahinoam – 1 Samuel 14-49-50. In 1 Chronicles 8:33, Ishvi is not mentioned (perhaps he died?) and two other sons are now included, Abinadab and Eshbaal or Ish-baal. 2 Samuel 21:8 reveals that Saul had a concubine named Rizpah and she bore two sons: Armani and Mephibosheth (or Ish-bosheth).
In approximately 1026 BCE, Israel gathers at Mizpah to witness an historic event; the first anointed Prince of Israel. It had been at Mizpah, that the decision against the tribe of Benjamin was made which nearly had them exterminated – Judges 20:1-48. In 1025 BCE Jabesh Gilead is besieged by the Ammonites. Saul breaks the deadlock with a 330,000 man army and later at Gilgal, Saul is crowned King.
There is academic debate as to the length of Saul’s reign. Both David and Solomon ruled for forty years and one assumption is that Saul ruled for the same length of time. The confusion begins in I Samuel and is compounded in the Book of Acts.
1 Samuel 13:1-4
English Standard Version
‘Saul lived for one year and then became king, and when he had reigned for two years over Israel,
2 Saul chose three thousand men of Israel. Two thousand were with Saul in Michmash and the hill country of Bethel, and a thousand were with Jonathan in Gibeah of Benjamin. The rest of the people he sent home, every man to his tent. 3Jonathan defeated the garrison of the Philistines that was at Geba, and the Philistines heard of it…’
The New English Translation tackles the problem with: ‘Saul was (thirty) [45] years old when he began to reign; he ruled over Israel for (forty) [15] years.’ Curved brackets NET figures, straight brackets proposed revised figures. The verse appears to say Saul only reigned two years. Many think a numeral has been missed from the two, so that the figure should be, if not 2 or 10… 12, 20, 22, 30, 32, 40 or 42. To this writer, the verse seems to say that a year had passed between Saul’s anointing at Mizpah and his crowning at Gilgal. Then two years into his reign in 1023 BCE he staged his Philistine campaign with Jonathan.
Acts 13:21
English Standard Version
‘Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, forforty years.’
Acts 13:21, records a speech by Paul, saying God gave Israel Saul, who ‘ruled’ for forty years. It is possible that Paul’s intention was to say that David – who he goes on to mention immediately afterwards – reigned for forty years, and that the clause has become misplaced from one sentence to the other. If one considers the ages of Saul, Jonathan and David, coupled with their births and life spans, there are incongruities for a very short reign of ten years or less and also for one of twenty years or more. So the balance of probability favours a reign specifically of twelve to fifteen years. This means that the basic points of information and reasonable suppositions about the lives of the individuals concerned can be met, whilst also agreeing with the tradition Josephus knew.
1 Samuel 7:1-2
English Standard Version
‘And the men of Kiriath-jearim came and took up the ark of the Lord and brought it to the house of Abinadab on the hill. And they consecrated his son Eleazar to have charge of the ark of the Lord. From the day that the ark was lodged at Kiriath-jearim, a long time passed, some twenty years, and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.
From the book of first Samuel, we learn the Ark of the Covenant was at Kiriath-jearim for approximately twenty years. It was removed from Abinadab’s house following David’s conquest of Jerusalem. Prior to his moving his capital to Jerusalem, David had reigned in Hebron for seven and a half years from 1010 to 1003 BCE after the death of Saul – II Samuel 5:5. Crucially, the ark was moved to Kirjath Jearim before Saul began to reign in 1025 BCE. Thus the ark was in Kirjath Jearim for about twenty-two years – giving a reign for Saul of close to fifteen years.
Later in 1023 BCE, Jonathan has more success, single-handedly defeating twenty Philistines after scaling cliffs at Michmash (1 Samuel 14:1-52); while his father continues waging a war against Moab, Ammon, Edom and the kings of Zobah. In 1022 BCE, a landmark and eventful year, Saul completes or rather doesn’t complete his ill-fated campaign against the Amalekites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Saul defeats the Amalekites with a 210,000 man army, yet contravenes clear instructions from the Eternal in allowing their King Agag to live and in the process loses his own kingship – I Samuel 15:1-35. It is in the same year by a quirk of fate, that young David enters the service of Saul in the palace and unknown to Saul, is his anointed successor by Samuel and the future king – 1 Samuel 16:1-23.
A new Pharaoh in Egypt began his reign in 1022 BCE: Ahmose I – the 1st king of the XVIII dynasty. He ruled till 998 BCE, during the reigns of Saul and David and was the brother of Kamose, who ruled three, possibly five years, as the last king of the XVII Dynasty. Kamose had embarked on a campaign of driving the Hyksos – aka the Amalekites – from Egypt; which was completed by Ahmose during the same period King Saul defeated King Agag. Gerard Gertoux writes regarding Kamose:
‘Kamose thus acted as representative of the young Ahmose. In the past, until the 5th dynasty, pharaohs were enthroned only with a Horus name. In time, the complete titulature had five names, but only two were actually used, enthronement name and birth name. Birth name aside, which did not change (except for some additional laudatory), other names could be changed to indicate a new political or religious program. For Kamose his first Horus name was “He who appears on his throne”, the second “He who subdues the two Lands” and the third “He who nourishes the two Lands”. These 3 names match his 3 years of reign.’
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 257-271, 281 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… Saul was chosen because of his military record. Saul captured the tablets of the Law back from the famous Goliath, an insult that Goliath would not forget.
Saul was the bravest Israelite, a … hero… He was as strong as a lion… with his tall and handsome appearance. Saul’s original name was Labaya, meaning “great lion of Yaw(weh),” but he was renamed Saul, meaning “asked for,” as the people of Israel asked God for a king so they could be like other nations. Scripture records Saul as… a man without equal, a head taller than any of the others. He was the son of a high-ranking [though small clan] chieftain Kish, son of Abiel… son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, son of Benjamin… butSaul was not Samuel’s choice.’
In 1887, three hundred and eighty clay tablets were discovered at Tell el-Amarna in central Egypt. They were letters written by the foreign rulers of city-states in the cuneiform script of the Akkadian language. The prime name of interest to biblical scholars in the Amarna Tablets was Labayu, the ‘Lion Man’ who held sway over central Canaan, actively fighting against the Philistines. Transposing the Amarna Tablets from the thirteenth century BCE of the conventional chronology to the tenth century BCE of the revised chronology of David Rohl, the life of Labayu is a close match for the biblical record of the first king of the Israelites: Saul.
EA 252, a letter of warning from Labayu to the pharaoh, was studied extensively in the early 1940s by William F Albright, an American archaeologist. He determined that the writer of the tablet knew little of the Akkadian language, the common correspondence between countries in that time period. The language used was Hebrew, it was then translated idiomatically into Akkadian. The letter revealed it was from an ‘untutored or uneducated man from humble beginnings’ who became a powerful ruler, exactly fitting the profile of King Saul of Israel.
Gary Wayne: ‘Saul was chosen by God, sent to Samuel to anoint, and drafted to rescue the Israelites from the oppression of the Philistines… Samuel saw in Saul his capacity to lead; ruthlessness; willingness to murder, lie, extort in the name of policy; and the ability to play off courtiers against each other… Saul was the antithesis of Samuel and everything he stood for… Samuel warned… the king would war regularly, taking their sons; taking the best of the daughters; taking their land and trade to feed, arm, and look after his armies and taxing a tenth of everything to pay for these armies. Additionally, Saul did not have the backing of the nobility, simply because Saul did not possess his own great wealth.
At Saul’s anointing, Samuel recommissioned Israel to obliterate the Amalekites. No one… was to be spared… [neither] livestock… even the possessions of the Amalekites were not to be looted. Everything… to be utterly destroyed. The instructions should not have been a source of confusion for any reason… but God’s judgement was not carried forth to the letter of the edict. Lack of complete obedience resulted in devastating consequences for Saul and his… descendants… Saul only fought the Amalekites because he was forced to… Saul was easily persuaded to keep the spoils of war… [violating] his covenant with God. Saul was never totally committed to slaughter all the Amalekites from the face of the earth. Saul chose to spare some of the Amalekites… in addition to the prized and valued animals.
Saul further spared Agag because Saul admired the tall and handsome king… if Saul found Agag to [be] tall, one wonders just how big Agag actually was. Consequently, Samuel denounced Saul [and slew Agag, himself]…
God removed the right of succession for Saul’s sons to the throne… and therefore the lineage of the Messiah… The Messianic bloodline and the everlasting throne were to be transplanted to the tribe of Judah, just as it had been originally prophesied in Genesis… it was Saul’s vassal army of Amalekites… which was protecting the back of Saul’s army during a later battle against the philistines… [who then] betrayed Saul, permitting the Philistines to encircle and assault the Israelites, wounding Saul… Saul then fell on his own sword, killing himself. Saul’s and his son’s bodies were hung unceremoniously by the Philistines at Beth Shan… stripped… from his armour, cutting off Saul’s head; they then hung Saul’s head and his armour in the temple of Dagon, the father of Baal… David eventually confiscated the bones of Saul and Jonathan, burying them in a tomb of Saul’s father, Kish, at Zela in Benjamin.
… Saul did not totally annihilate the Amalekites, for the book of Samuel records David fought the Amalekites (1 Samuel 8:12), destroying them at Ziklag (1 Samuel 30:1-31)… while the KJV records this victory as a complete “slaughter of the Amalekites” (2 Samuel 1:1).’
Psalm 9:5-6
English Standard Version
‘You have rebuked the nations; you have made the wicked perish; you have blotted out their name forever and ever. The enemy came to an end in everlasting ruins; their cities you rooted out; the very memory of them has perished.’
Wayne: ‘This passage can only be interpreted and attributed to the Amalekites. During the reign of Hezekiah of Judah, the Simeonite sons of Ishi invaded the hill country of Seir, killing the remaining Amalekites who had escaped.One would expect that this final blow finished off whatever remnant of Amalekite culture and society that had somehow survived from David’s genocidal purge… neither history or the Bible ever again records Amalekites as a nation. Secular history has forgotten the Amalekites, as though they never existed; only the bible has maintained their existence as a witness to the world.’
It is worth noting at this point the identity of a tribe closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The Simeonite sons of Ishi who took matters in their own hands – bit of a character trait – are the modern Welsh. We will study Wales as Simeon in depth in the following chapter to confirm their proposed identity.
Wayne: ‘Listed among names of antediluvian Nephilim was the name Amalek. He was noted as the twin brother to Samael [a Giant, not the leader of the fallen Angels]… forAmalek was the forefather of Seir… Amalek was the prominent antediluvian Sumerian king Akalum-Dug, understanding that Akalum was Sumerian for the infamous, evil “Lamech,” which found its true anagram in producing the name Amalek… another variant name of a king to Amalek: Anam’ Melech… Anam’ Melech was worshipped by the [Babylonians]… Melech… is Hebrew for “king,” as in Molech/Malech, the god of the Canaanites, son of Baal, who required the sacrifice of children in his worship… Anam’ Malech also required the sacrifice of children. One of Samael’s [the Giant] wives, [was] Naamah. Naamah was… [the] daughter of Lamech (Amalek)…’ – refer articles: Belphegor; and Na’amah.
Wayne: ‘The Armana Letters recorded a tenth-century BCE strong man and Apiru leader who emerged from Hebron to capture Jerusalem. This then is the probable Gentile record of David’s rise to power… anAramaic inscription,* dating back to the ninth century BCE, discovered in 1993 CE, in the ruins of the ancient city of Dan, clearly recorded the words“House of David.” David was the first of the true dynastic bloodline leading to Christ nearly 1,000 years later, on whom God built his earthly but royal government that Jesus would later inherit. David is also from the dynastic bloodline thatall spurious royal bloodlinesnow desperately strive to align themselves with, in order to further enhance their own perceived pedigree and credibility’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
The House of David was well known in the ninth century BCE. The name of King David appears among toponyms of the south of Palestine on the list of Pharaoh Shoshenq I as, ‘[the heights?] of David.’ We can have confidence that King David was a flesh and blood historical figure. Archaeologists who deny his existence or the extent of the influence of the kingdom of David, are exhibiting bad faith, literally and figuratively in the face of clear evidence.
‘Lines 8-10* of the Tel Dan Stele. Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
8. king of Israel, and I killed [Ahaz]yahu son of [Jehoram kin-]
9. -g [of the] House–of–David. And I set [……………………………..]
10. their land …[……………………………………………………………………….]
Ahazyahu (887-885) [853-852 BCE] and Jehoram (897-886) [852-841] were kings of Israel “House-of-David” (2 Kings 8:28-9:29)
Lines 30-31 of the Mesha Stele. Musée du Louvre, Paris.
30. [the temple of Made]ba and the temple of Diblaten and the temple of Baal-meon; and I established there 31. [……………] the sheep of the land. And the House [of D]avid dwelt in Horonen
32. [……………] and Chemosh said to me: “Go down! Fight against Horonen.” And I went down, and [… Mesha (900-870) was King of Moab (2 Kings 3:4-27) and succeeded his father Chemoshyat (930-900).’
Kings David and Solomon Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gerard Gertoux, 2015 – emphasis mine:
‘The David and Solomon’s kingdoms are no longer considered as historical by minimalist archaeologists. According to Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman, for example, authors of The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, at the time of the kingdoms of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was populated by only a few hundred residents or less, which is insufficient for an empire stretching from the Euphrates to Eilath. They suggest that due to religious prejudice, the authors of the Bible suppressed the achievements of the Omrides. Some Biblical minimalists like Thomas L. Thompson go further, arguing that Jerusalem became a city and capable of being a state capital only in the mid-seventh century.
Likewise, Finkelstein and others consider the claimed size of Solomon’s temple implausible. A review of methods and arguments used by these minimalists shows that they are impostors for writing history. The historical testimonies dated by a chronology anchored on absolute dates (backbone of history) are replaced by archaeological remains dated by carbon-14 (backbone of modern myths). The goal of these unfounded claims is clearly the charring of biblical accounts.
One of the most fiercely debated issues in Biblical Archaeology today involves the historicity of the Bible and biblical chronology in the period of the United Monarchy in Jerusalem. Most of the evidence for this period of David and Solomon is found in the Bible, and there is a decided lack of archaeological evidence to correlate the biblical narrative. Most archaeologists take the view that the Bible is a narrative of mythology interwoven with some historical elements; whereas some historians believe that the Bible, along with archaeological evidence, can be a valid historical source. This dichotomy of viewpoints is further divided into questions of chronology rebuilt from historical synchronisms dated by astronomy for historians, versus archaeological remains dated by Carbon-14 for archaeologists, and above all the reliability of ancient narratives.
When the current conditions for excavation in Jerusalem and the complexity of occupational deposition are considered, it is not so unusual that there is little evidence of Davidic and Solomonic Jerusalem. The area of the citadel of the City of David is currently beneath private homes; therefore very little excavation has been done. Similarly, the Temple Mount covers the site of the Solomonic Temple, where it is impossible for religious and political reasons to conduct even an archaeological survey.
Two factors in occupational deposition are important to consider: first of all, in hilly regions like Jerusalem, it is most practical to remove the earlier construction phases and debris down to bedrock when building new structures. Second, uninterrupted settlement, from the 10th to the early 6th centuries BCE, leaves less of an archaeological footprint than would a period of destruction or invasion, so it is understandable that there would be less data from this period.
The Biblical Minimalist point of view hinges on the belief that the Book of Kings was written in the Persian period. Therefore it is a product of many scribal errors and different authors, which means that any historical value is hidden in layers of confusion. Niels Peter Lemche, one of the main proponents of this school, also makes the case that the concept of “history” is an essentially modern term.
Thus trying to read the Bible as a historical text in the modern sense of the term is a vexed enterprise from the start, because the Bible was written in a tradition of story-telling and religious worship, not with the intention of relating facts in a “history.”
They assert that the United Monarchy and the figures of David and Solomon are legendary, but not historical. The Biblical Maximalist perspective is that enough of the textual and archaeological evidence converges to make the Bible plausible as a historical source. They don’t necessarily say that every element of the Bible can be proven; William Dever goes so far as to say that David and Solomon may not have been historical figures. But there is enough socio-archaeological data to make conclusions about the rise of statehood in the 10th century BCE, which is a centralized power like the United Monarchy.
The main problem with the Biblical Minimalist point of view is that there are too many correlations of the biblical narrative to other Near Eastern sources. For example, the Pharaoh Shishak’s destruction of Megiddo is recorded in the Bible, and his actual victory stele are found at Megiddo and in the temple of Karnak; we also have the later Babylonian lists of Israelite Kings, which correlates with biblical narrative. These correlations fall after the United Monarchy, but both suggest a continuity with institutions of Kingship and the office of the court scribe.
The description of the Solomonic Temple in the Bible is so much like the MB Age Temple and the 8th century Syrian Temple at Tell Tainat (which was also constructed by Phoenician craftsmen),that it is highly unlikely that it could be fictitious.
The only monumental architecture from this time period is the Stepped-Stone structure from the eastern slope of the City of David. It could have functioned as a large supporting structure, for a fortification wall or platform that might be part of the citadel of David. It was built on top of Late Bronze Age II terrace systems, with Israelite houses built into it, and Hellenistic-Roman period wall built on the highest part of the slope.
The original excavations by Kathleen Kenyon concluded that the underlying terraces and Stepped-Stone Structures were contemporaneous and should be dated to LB II. But the ceramic data from a sealed context points to an Iron Age date for the Stepped-Stone Structure, and the stratigraphic data clearly shows it to have been constructed around and deeper than some portions of the terrace system. This would negate the idea that the terrace system was to function as the foundation of the Stepped-Stone structure.
To look beyond Jerusalem itself for archaeological and textual evidence of the Davidic and Solomonic reigns, refer to the Tel Dan inscription and the six-chambered gate. The Tel Dan inscription mentions “Beth David” (BYTDWD) or House of David as a place name; it is a Semitic tradition to name a city after the founder. There has been some questioning of the authenticity of this inscription, namely by epigraphers who take the lack of a word divider as evidence of a forgery. But the Aramaic of the inscription as well as the palaeography and orthography are correct.’
The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:
‘… [David] Rohl points out that a review of ancient documents, using the New Chronology, may have produced letters referring to David as well as letters written to the Egyptian court by King Saul of Israel! The documents, known as “The Amarna Letters”… mainly consist of letters sent to the pharaoh by foreign kings. Now, no one has ever searched these tablets for letters from the United Monarchy of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon)… So, Rohl went to these documents with the expectation of finding correspondence from the new Hebrew kingdom an expectation no one else had ever had.
The first thing he ran across were letters from city-state rulers of Palestine that contained copious references to a group of marauders called the “Habiru.” These references are obviously speaking of Hebrews, and they have always puzzled scholars because the conventional chronology placed these letters a century before the Exodus. But the New Chronology places them during the reign of King Saul when David and his mighty men kept alive by pillaging the countryside. Rohl concludes that these letters relate to David and his soldiers of fortune who hired themselves out as mercenaries.
Rohl’s second discovery was a series of letters written by a King Labayu of the hill country north of Jerusalem. His name means “Great Lion of Yaweh.“ Rohl believes this was the true name of King Saul and that Saul was his hypocoristic name(nickname).’
A clue to Saul’s other name is found in Psalm 57:4 NIV, penned by David while he was hiding from Saul’s men in the cave of En-Gedi [1 Samuel 24:2-3]: “I am in the midst of lions [H3833 – lebaim]; I am forced to dwell among ravenous beasts – men whose teeth are spears and arrows, whose tongues are sharp swords.”
Reagan: ‘Rohl reviews the letters in detail to show that they describe events that parallel incidents during the reign of Saul.’
In EA 252, the rebellious King Saul warns Pharaoh off by saying: “If an ant is struck, does it not fight back and bite the hand of the man who struck it?”
Reagan: ‘These remarkable letters some by Saul and some by his son, Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 2:8) contain references to Ayab (Joab, commander of David’s forces)’
EA 256: “Say to Yanhamu (the official representative of Pharaoh in Palestine), my lord: Message of Mutbaal (Canaanite from of Ishbaal, son of Saul), your servant. I Fall at the feet of my lord. How can it be said in your presence, Mutbaal has fled. He has hidden Ayab? How can the king of Pella (Israelite stronghold across the Jordan River) flee… I swear Ayab is not in Pella. In fact, he has been in the field (on campaign) for 2 months…”
Reagan: ‘and also to Benenima, Dadua, and Yishuya. Rohl concludes from what is said in the letters the Benenima is Baanah, one of Israel’s tribal chieftains who later assassinates Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 4). He concludes that Dadua is David and that Yishuya is David’s father, Jesse (Yishay in Hebrew). The evidence he presents in behalf of these conclusions is fascinating and convincing.’
There may be truth to Saul being a secondary name as in the Hebrew, from the verb sha’al, it means ‘to ask’ or ‘ask for.’ The Habiru were originally considered by academics to be stateless wanderers and later by biblical scholars as the Hebrews themselves. Now, the link is specifically with David’s mercenary army of Hebrews who carried out assaults upon the Philistines. Recall in 1 Samuel 13:1-5, Jonathan defeated the Philistines at Geba. This event was also mentioned by Labayu in letter EA 252. In 1 Samuel 20:30-34, Saul reprimands his son Jonathan for consorting with David; in EA 254, his third letter to Pharaoh, Labayu does the same.
King Saul
1 Samuel 20:30-34
English Standard Version
‘Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman, do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness?’
This terminology does not reveal an intimate relationship between Jonathan and David, but rather that Jonathan was sexually attracted to David.
‘For as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established. Therefore send and bring him to me, for he shall surely die.”
Then Jonathan answered Saul his father, “Why should he be put to death? What has he done?” But Saul hurled his spear at him to strike him. So Jonathan knew that his father was determined to put David to death. And Jonathan rose from the table in fierce anger and ate no food the second day of the month’ – Second day of the New Moon, refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy – ‘for he was grieved for David, because his father had disgraced him.’
Regarding the legendary encounter between David and Goliath, it is recommend reading Chapter thirty-seven, David and Goliath by Gary Wayne, in its entirety. Within the Genesis 6 Conspiracy, it is ten pages of a riveting portrait of David at the least and at best, it is a rewarding and insightful exegesis. Quoting a few key passages as reproducing the complete chapter is regrettably, not practical. David fights Goliath in 1022 BCE at the battle with the Philistines at Sochoh. The word used for youth is the Hebrew word H5288 – na’ar. A similar word is used for Joseph at the same age of seventeen – 1 Samuel 17:33, Genesis 37:2.
Wayne: ‘David was a complex individual, who was strapped with all the weight and pressure for the future of humankind. God selected David for this role because of what was in David’s heart, not for his perfection… the heart that was true and zealous in pursuit of God. The role David was selected to play in Israel’s destiny was not that of a peacemaker. David was a warrior king, selected to subdue the enemies of Israel. It was David who established Jerusalem as the heart and soul of Israel. It was David who battled his entire life, enabling Solomon to become the peaceful king of wisdom. And it was Solomon who was permitted to build the holy temple, not David, because of the blood that was on the warrior hands of David… [for he] became famous for being the great warrior king, not the peace-giving priest king Solomon was. David slew 200 Philistines, delivering their foreskins to Saul as the price to marry Michal, Saul’s daughter… David was the Lion trait, and Solomon was the Lamb aspect, foreshadowing the dual nature of the true Messiah, Jesus.
Surprisingly, Goliath, according to Jewish legends, was related to David, for Goliath was the grandson of one of David’s relatives Orpah, related to Ruth, from whom David received his royal, Messianic bloodline. Ruth married Boaz, who begat Obed, who begat Jesse, the father of David… both Ruth and Orpah… were no ordinary Moabites, for both… were the daughters of the king of Moab, Eglon. Apparently, King Eglon had prudent respect for Israel and permitted the marriages of his princess daughters to Kilion/Chilion and Mahlon [the sons of Naomi and Elimelech]. Orpah then returned [circa 1284 BCE] to the royal household after Naomi went back to Bethlehem with Ruth. This then makes Goliath a third generation cousin to David, as Goliath was the grandson of Orpah… Goliath was born… along with four other giants… from one mother alone… Goliath [the Gittitie] was from Gath and… there were five potentates of Philistia that reigned in Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Philstines recounted these five potentates as Avvites.
The book of 2 Samuel listed four other prominent giants…Ishi-Benob, Saph, Lahmibrother of Goliath, and a six-fingered and six-toed giant named Sippai. Goliath would have simply been the fifth Nephilim/Gibborim reigning in Gath… [a] land where the descendants of Rapha [the Rephaim] lived. The original term utilized was the five [rulers] seranim of the Philistine Pentaplos. Seranim is thought to have been adopted from the Philistines into the Hebrew language…[and is linked] etymologically with theGreek word tyrannos, or “tyrant.” The first ruler who was called Tyrannos in Greek literature was Gyges, the king of Lydia. Greek Titans were known variantly as Gyges… the root word for giant and gigantic.’
1 Samuel 17:40
English Standard Version
‘Then he took his staff in his hand and chose five smooth stones from the brook and put them in his shepherd’s pouch. His sling was in his hand, and he approached the Philistine.’
Wayne makes an enlightening observation on David methodically selecting five stones for his sling, prior to engaging with Goliath. Did David show a lack of confidence in picking five stones, with four as back up, if he missed with the first? Rather, David selected one stone each for the five (giant) potentates from the five principle Philistine cities, who must have all been in attendance with the Philistine army that day, led by Goliath. In case they decided to step forward, David was prepared. Wayne also highlights the fact that the sling shot was not an inferior soldiers weapon of choice but rather, it was an integral item in armies of the day, including the Egyptians and Assyrians. The sling could kill a man up to six hundred feet away. It had a greater range than a bow, was more accurate than an arrow and more deadly when it struck the intended target.
1 Chronicles 12:2
English Standard Version
‘They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’
Judges 20:13-18
English Standard Version
13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.” But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men [elite soldiers].
16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war. 18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”
Wayne: ‘… David is translated from Hebrew as both “beloved” and/or… even “chieftain”… in the Mari Letters or Tablets, references are made to plundering Benjamites and its leader by the title Dawidum, meaning “leader.”… David was never his real name.. in fact, [it] was a title, “the Davidum,” like an emperor or a Caesar,and thistitle stuck in history as his name. All later kings of Judah were then known… as Davidums.Rohl suggests that David’s original given name was “Elhanan,” (who killed Goliath) [meaning: ‘God has been gracious’] the youngest son ofYishuya, Jesse.’
After David’s sensational and unexpected victory over Goliath, a deep and lasting friendship (1 Samuel 18:1-7) ensues with Saul’s son Jonathan, who is ten years older than David. Circa 1020 BCE, David at age twenty marries Saul’s youngest daughter Michal and pays a dowry of two hundred Philistine foreskins. A year later, David defeats the Philistines which initiates the beginning of Saul’s jealousy and hatred towards him. David is driven away from the palace in 1016 BCE after six years of service and now embarks on seven years as a fugitive, wanderer, bandit and mercenary from the age of twenty-three till thirty when he becomes king of Judah.
David and Jonathan’s final parting is movingly heartfelt, as Jonathan makes ‘a covenant of friendship with the house of David, whom he recognised as Saul’s successor.’
Samuel 20:41-42
New English Translation
‘When the servant had left, David got up from beside the mound, knelt with his face to the ground, and bowed three times. Then they kissed each other and they both wept, especially David.*
Jonathan said to David, “Go in peace, for the two of us have sworn together in the name of the Lord saying, ‘The Lord will be between me and you and between my descendants [from Benjamin]and your descendants [from Pharez, Judah] forever.”
2 Samuel 1:26
English Standard Version
“I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was extraordinary, surpassing the love of women.”
David’s words about his deep and rewarding friendship with Jonathan have been viewed by some to intimate a bisexuality on David’s part. There is nothing in the Hebrew wording or phrasing to reach that conclusion. On the other hand, there is nothing to counter it either.* The wording is remarkably flowery and overflowing towards Jonathan. It was perhaps the bromance of the millennia. It is said that when Saul had talked with David, ‘the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.’ Great was Jonathan’s devotion to David, that the two entered ‘a solemn covenant of friendship.’
David had refused to wear king Saul’s armour. He tried it on, but took it off again, for he could not use the heavy gear in accommodating his battle style; though he did not refuse Jonathan’s armour. Wayne: ‘David assumed the garments and weapons of Jonathan, and was thus prepared to be acknowledged, even by Jonathan himself, as the real heir [and the future] king of the land. The two became inseparable friends while David was kept at the court of Saul. It is easy to see why the young prince should become so fond of David, whom he could well regard as an equal in courage, one worthy of love.
Indeed, David, whose… [meaning is] “Beloved,” seems to have inspired both love and hero-worship. Jonathan, in the isolation which his royal station brought with it, was in need of a friend. His father was a moody man with a dangerous temper whose consciousness of weakness made him suspicious and touchy about his dignity, and was not the kind of father to invite confidences. The relations of Jonathan and his father had been strained ever since Saul had nearly put his son to death for inadvertently disobeying one of his thoughtless orders. (I Samuel 14).’
David was a very handsome man who was beloved by all, especially women, for it was they who chanted that ‘Saul has slain his thousands and David his ten thousands!’ David did have a voracious sexual appetite, for he was an insatiable collector of women, particularly other men’s wives. David’s treachery against Uriah for his wife Bathsheba the most notable. It was also a turning point in David’s life and for the nation of Israel, as both were plagued by violence afterwards. For these actions, the Creator promised the sword would not depart from his very own house and evil would arise, as it surely did with the story of Amnon, Tamar and Absalom.
2 Samuel 12:7-15
English Standard Version
7 ‘Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. 8 And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more. 9 Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and… have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites.
10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house,because you have despised [H959 – bazah: disdain, hold in contempt, to be despicable] me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.’ 11 Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. 12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.’
13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die.” 15 Then Nathan went to his house.’
With all this, David was quick to admit his sin and repent. Sparing his own life in consequence, for the Creator said David had despised and scorned Him. David had broken three commandments, in 1. coveting another man’s wife; 2. committing adultery with her; and then 3. conspiring to murder her husband.
David was a complex man, repeatedly showing his spirituality in being a ‘man after God’s own heart’, yet compelled by his physicality to violence and immorality, to the point that the Creator said: ‘…You may not build a house for my name, for you are a man of war and have shed blood’ – 1 Chronicles 28:3, ESV. David left his mark on Israel as his name is mentioned more than a thousand times in the Bible. One Bible scholar remarked that ‘the religion of ancient Israel ought to be called “Davidism” because of the king’s essential role in the history and theology of [the nation].’ This is likely a truism and with Moses; David surely left an indelible mark on all who met him, knew him or were governed by him.
Circa 1012 BCE David cut a piece off the fabric of Saul’s robe while he took a rest in a cave which David happened to be hiding. In 1011 BCE the Philistines invade the land and Saul quits his pursuit of David. David also marries Abigail. Samuel died in 1010 BCE at the age of eighty-seven. In the same year, Saul and Jonathan died in the battle with the Philistines at Mount Gilboa. Saul was sixty years old, Jonathan forty years of age and David was thirty years old – 2 Samuel 5:4.
From 1010 to 1008 BCE Saul’s son Ish-bosheth ruled Israel – 2 Samuel 2:10-11. Meanwhile, David ruled Judah from Hebron from 1010 BCE to 1003 BCE. David ruled both Israel and Judah from 1003 BCE to 970 BCE, making Jerusalem his capital – 2 Samuel 5:5. David was a contemporary of Pharaoh Amenhotep I (or Djeserkare) the 2nd king of the XVIII dynasty, who reigned from 998 to 978 BCE. David’s son by Bathsheba, Solomon, was born in 999 BCE.
After Saul’s downfall and removal, David, a son from the royal line of Pharez, was enthroned and to him were reiterated the promises concerning the royal line, which had been passed to his forebear Judah.
Ruth 4:18-22
English Standard Version
‘Now these are the generations of Perez: Perez fathered Hezron, Hezron fathered Ram, Ram fathered Amminadab, Amminadab fathered Nahshon, Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz, Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse, and JessefatheredDavid.
Exodus 6:23
English Standard Version
‘Aaron took as his wife Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab [Great grandson of Pharez, son of Judah] and the sister of Nahshon, and she bore him Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar.’
David’s ancestry from Pharez, son of Judah; with Nashon’s sister, Elisheba marrying Moses brother, Aaron, setting a precedent for a royal line of Judah marrying not just a family from Levi, but the levitical priesthood.
‘When the Sceptre covenant was confirmed to David, the Lord gave the message through Nathan the prophet in these words: “When thy days be fufilIed, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He [Solomon] shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men. But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: Thy throne shall be established forever,” (2 Samuel 7:12-16).
David was so impressed with the magnitude of this prophecy and with the period of time which it covered that he went in and sat before the Lord, pondering over it, until in wonderment he exclaimed: “Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house that thou hast brought me hitherto? And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God: but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come…” (2 Samuel 7:18,19). “And now, O Lord God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish it forever, and do as thou hast said.”
When the temple was finished, Solomon, standing before the altar of the Lord, in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and with uplifted hands spread toward heaven, in that wonderful prayer at the dedication of the temple, said:
“The Lord hath performed his word that he spake; and I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised, and have built an house for the name of the Lord God of Israel… There is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servant… who hast kept with thy servant David my father that which thou promisest him; thou speakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day. Therefore now, Lord God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying: There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel,” (I Kings 8:20-25).
By this prayer we see that Solomon understood that the throne, the kingdom, and the lineal house of David should stand forever.’
Jeremiah 33:22-26
Common English Bible
‘And just as the stars in the sky can’t be numbered and the sand on the shore can’t be counted, so I will increase the descendants of my servant David and the Levites who minister before me. Then the Lord’s word came to Jeremiah: Aren’t you aware of what people are saying: “The Lord has rejected the two families that he had chosen”? [Aaron’s and David’s] They are insulting my people as if they no longer belong to me. The Lord proclaims: I would no sooner break my covenant with day and night or the laws of heaven and earth than I would reject the descendants of Jacob and my servant David and his descendants as rulers for the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I will restore the captives and have compassion on them.’
David’s descendants were to be numerous. He had at least nineteen sons for a start, though in reality many more – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The population of England is large and so a small but sizeable percentage must descend from King David. Judah had three sons who lived, therefore the majority of English people descend from one of these three lineages. Shelah had five sons as did Zarah, while Pharez had two, with his firstborn Hezron being David’s ancestor. Hezron had one son and David’s line is from Hezron’s son Jerahmeel and his firstborn son Ram.
It is worth noting that David’s royal line would have ruled not just Jacob’s sons but other sons of Abraham, if Solomon and the kings of Judah descended from him had remained faithful. It was a conditional promise and as we will discover, the evidence of the British monarchy, particularly during the reign of Queen Victoria, having related family and ruling monarchs throughout the whole of northwestern Europe and beyond over the last few centuries was not a fulfilment of the Pharez line, but rather from that of Zarah – and a reversal of the original breach in the womb .
From 1025 BCE to 930 BCE, the united Kingdom of Israel became the pre-eminent power of the Mesopotamian, North African, Caucasus and the South, Central and Western Asian world. With a huge standing Army and the naval superiority of the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon as integral allies, they were unchallenged – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. It required considerable economic wealth to maintain an army of a million and a half men, three thousand years ago.
Where was Assyria during this period? Secular history has recorded that Assyria’s Empire went into eclipse or ‘confusion’ as some encyclopaedias describe it, between circa 1100 to 900 BCE. Halley’s Bible Handbook states, that ancient Israel was considerably stronger than Assyria, Babylon or Egypt. The very same period as Israel’s golden age under David and Solomon. It is conveniently glossed over in historical texts, if it is even covered at all. Just as the Parthian Empire is ignored or down played.
What happened to Assyria? – refer Chapter XX Will the real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. It may have been defeated in a war against Israel’s army. Ancient history has remained quiet on this event because Assyria was a bit player in the confrontation. First Chronicles chapters nineteen and twenty describe an Ammonite revolt and their amassing wide support from practically all of Israel’s adversaries – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The participants are listed in Psalm eighty-three. The chapter is dual, in that – though the verses are not ostensibly prophetic – the same group of peoples will unite to attack and defeat the principal Israelite nations, including Judah-England just prior to the Great Tribulation. The nations involved are predominantly from western Europe and will be part of a German led United States of Europe which allies with modern day Asshur (or Assyria), the Russians; who are also the final fulfilment of the biblical King of the North – Articles: Four Kings & OneQueen; and 2050.
In the past confrontation, Ammon created a pretext for war. There were thirty-two thousand chariots arrayed against Israel alone. How many foot soldiers to add to this number? There were an unknown number of men from Mesopotamia and Syria which included a number of unidentified people fighting with Ammon against Israel – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. In verse nine of chapter nineteen, we learn it was a confederacy of sorts with a number of different nations intent on destroying Israel, for it states their kings had come to either watch the battle or take part. The battle was on two fronts, with the Ammonites leading one attack and the Aramaean Syrians, the secondary assault.
One imagines this war was either early in David’s reign, hoping to take out the new king quickly and knock Israel off its feet after Saul’s defeat and death by the Philistines; or alternatively after Israel began flourishing under King David and Israel became a growing concern to her neighbours. This was not mercenary guerrilla warfare but a full scale war of declared national commitment against Israel. David’s army led by Joab won the first battle and then the next.
Many Psalms in the Book of Psalms are credited to David (75), particularly the early ones. Seventy-three are noted in the Psalms; while Psalm 2 is attributed to David in Acts 4:25 and Psalm 95 is attributed to David in Hebrews 4:7. The others written by David include: 3-9; 11-32; 34-41; 51-65; 68-70; 86; 101; 103; 108-110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138-145.
Psalm 83 is credited to Asaph, as are eleven other Psalms to Asaph or his family – 50, 73-83. The Psalms are written typically by Levites or Judah’s descendants.
The sons of Korah (from Levi) wrote (11) – 42, 44-49, 84-85, 87-88. Heman, son of Zarah wrote (1) – 88 and Solomon (2) – 72, 127. Moses wrote (1) – 90; Ethan the Ezrahite son of Zarah (1) – 89; and anonymous authorship account for forty-eight psalms.
Psalm 83:1-12
Common English Bible
1 ‘God, don’t be silent! Don’t be quiet or sit still, God, 2 because – look! – your enemies are growling; those who hate you are acting arrogantly. 3 They concoct crafty plans against your own people; they plot against the people you favor. 4 “Come on,” they say, “let’s wipe them out as a nation! Let the name Israel be remembered no more!” 5 They plot with a single-minded heart; they make a covenant against you.
6 They are the clans of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites, 7 Gebal, Ammon, Amalek, Philistia along with the citizens of Tyre. 8 Assyria too has joined them – they are the strong arm for Lot’s children. Selah
9 Do to them what you did to Midian, to Sisera, and to Jabin at the Kishon River. 10 They were destroyed at Endor; they became fertilizer for the ground. 11 Make their officials like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna – 12 those who said, “Let’s take God’s pastures for ourselves.”
Victory for King David and his army, probably meant the conspiring nations paid tribute and were vassal states, including Assyria. This means the territory controlled by Israel would have stretched from Egypt in the West, deep in the Arabian Peninsula in the South and beyond Assyria in the North. Steven Collins has documented the extent of the Israelite empire at this time. As Israel was closely aligned with the Phoenicians, the name Israel is invariably hidden within their name by historians. The mention of Tyre in the list of nations, would lean to the war being earlier in David’s kingship, before the closeness formed between Hiram of Tyre and King Solomon during his reign.
The Phoenician Empire was not just dominant in the Mediterranean Sea, but they were present in substantial numbers in the British Isles, the West Coast of Europe, Africa and North America; particularly during the period of about 1100 to 800 BCE. The fact that much of this mercantile, commerce rich expansion was coupled with the Kingdom of Israel has been conveniently pushed to the sidelines. It would explain why Assyria was dormant on the world stage during the same period.
First Chronicles chapter twenty-two relates that David accumulated ‘so much bronze and iron’ for the Temple of God, ‘it [couldn’t] be weighed.’ Warrner Keller in his book The Bible is History, states: ‘Israel was using the Bessemer system of smelting, which was not re-discovered until recently in the modern era… Essian Gebar was the Pittsburgh of ancient Palestine.’ No where else in Mesopotamia has a comparable smelting facility been found; showing ancient Israel was more than just a backward agricultural nation, but rather an industrial leader.
Dr. Barry Fells in Bronze Age America, gives evidence that millions of tons of copper ore was taken from mines near Lake Superior in North America between circa 2000 to 1000 BCE. The ore apparently ran out, for there is no evidence it was mined after then; whether it ran out or could not be mined economically. There is no evidence the copper was used in the America’s, yet curiously, there is also no record as to where exactly all this copper came from that was smelted in Palestine.
The list of nations in Psalm eighty-three have invariably been explained as a very compact geographic area today; consisting of a number of inconsequential nations on the world stage militarily, that frankly, just does not make sense. When one understands, that the verses are not speaking just about the diminutive state of Israel, or the many equally small Arab nations which encircle it, then a clearer more accurate, more concerning scenario, presents itself. The passage also does not specify the Kingdoms of Judah or Israel, thus revealing it is either a joint scenario for both in the future or directed at the united Kingdom of Israel in the past. Derek Walker gives a breakdown of possible identities from either an historical or prophetic interpretation. Not to cast the spotlight on Walker detrimentally, only it is a good example for it closely matches other Bible students and commentators.
Walker: ‘The ancient list of nations in Psalm 83:4-8 enumerates almost all the modern Islamic nations that oppose [the state of] Israel’s existence.
Edom – from Esau, the brother of Jacob (Jordan and the ‘Palestinians’)
Ishmaelites – descended from Ishmael, son of Hagar (the Arabs)
Moab – son of Lot (Jordan east of the Dead Sea)
Hagarenes – descendants of Hagar (Egypt)
Gebal – ancient Byblus (north of Beirut, Lebanon)
Ammon – son of Lot (capital of Jordan)
Amalek – descended from Esau (Arabs south of Israel)
Philistines – from Ham (Palestinians on the Gaza strip, Hamas)
Tyre – a Phoenician city (Lebanon. Hezbolah)
Assur – founded Assyria (Syria and Northern Iraq)
Children of Lot – Moab and Ammon (Jordan)’
One can observe the doubling up of Lebanon and the Palestinians. Lebanon cannot be Gebal and Tyre. The Palestinians cannot be Edom and the Philistines. Asshur cannot be Syria and Iraq. When we studied Asshur we discovered the might and strength of ancient Assyria; peoples descended from Shem not Ham and who dwell in the north today. Coincidentally, though Jordan is incorrect, Moab and Ammon do both dwell together and Ammon is the principal people surrounding their capital – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The interpretation for Ishmael as the Arabs is the exception to just small nations, as is the Hagarenes as Egypt.
Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar, provide information dispelling the erroneous teaching about the self-claimed Arab lineage; who are a Hamitic people and do not descend from Ishmael, a descendent of Shem.
The same list with rightful identities, as shown and evidenced in preceding chapters:
Edom: Israel Ishmael: Germany Moab: Central, Southern France Hagarenes (Hagrites): Austria, Southeast Germany Gebal (Byblos): ? Ammon: Northwest France, Paris (possibly including French Quebec) Amalek: Scattered Jews, particularly in the United States Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – principally Mexico, Colombia, Argentina Tyre: Brazil Asshur: Russia Lot: France
This interpretation for Psalm eighty-three may appear as unreasonable to readers, as the first does to this writer. What we first hear or learn becomes ingrained and we perceive it as truth. Though it is our version of truth, influenced by our own perspective, knowledge, thoughts, feelings and motives. The reality is that the state of Israel is not being punished here; it will in fact be orchestrating events, with the help of its allies. It is the nations of modern Israel, descended from Jacob that the Bible reveals will be chastised. This grouping of nations that Lot and Edom take the lead in organising, is a formidable array, including Germany, Mexico, Brazil, Russia and France, which if pooling their future economic and military power against the weakened nations of Israel in the future, including England or what is left of the United Kingdom, then this alliance has the ability to remove their influence from the world stage.
In chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, we addressed the disintegration of King Solomon from a wise and righteous ruler to a foolish evil one, when he allowed his wives to turn him towards worshipping other gods and particularly to practicing child sacrifice – articles: Na’amah; Seventh Son of a Seventh Son; and Thoth. In chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, we also observed Isaac and the dramatic unfolding of a near disastrous event in his and his father’s life with the instruction to be sacrificed. The hope of a resurrection, was the only way the story could begin to have a positive ending – 1 Corinthians 15:12-23.
Possibly not well known, is King David’s association with human sacrifice.
2 Samuel 21:1-9
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year. And David sought the face of the Lord.
And the Lord said, “There is bloodguilt on Saul and on his house, because he put the Gibeonites to death.” 2 So the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel but of the remnant of the Amorites. Although the people of Israel had sworn to spare them, Saul had sought to strike them down in his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah. 3 And David said to the Gibeonites, “What shall I do for you? And how shall I make atonement, that you may bless the heritage of the Lord?”
4 The Gibeonites said to him, “It is not a matter of silver or gold between us and Saul or his house; neither is it for us to put any man to death in Israel”… 5 They said to the king, “The man who consumed us and planned to destroy us, so that we should have no place in all the territory of Israel, 6 let seven of his sons be given to us, so that we may hang them before the Lord at Gibeah of Saul, the chosen of the Lord.” And the king said, “I will give them.”
7 But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Saul’s son Jonathan, because of the oath of the Lord that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul. 8 The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth[not the son of Jonathan];and the five sons of Merab the daughter of Saul,whom she bore to Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite; 9 andhe gave them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them on the mountain before the Lord, and the seven of them perished together. They were put to death in the first days of harvest, at the beginning of barley harvest.’
Recall, the Gibeonites had tricked the Israelites in letting them live and to remain untouched. They are linked to the Amorites and the Elioud giant descended peoples of Canaan – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega*. Saul had broken the promise in his zeal to impress. The famine was not going to lift until retribution was delivered. David shrewdly selected two of Saul’s sons and five grandsons, omitting Jonathan’s son.
The kingdoms of Israel and Judah were guilty of child sacrifice under certain wicked kings – 2 Kings 17:16-18. The most infamous royalty were King Ahab of Israel, monarch from 874 to 853 BCE and his Phoenician wife Jezebel, a Princess and daughter of the King of Tyre – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
1 Kings 16:33-34
English Standard Version
‘And Ahab made an Asherah [the ‘Queen of Heaven’ – Mother Goddess and original consort of the Eternal*]. Ahab did more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel who were before him.In his days Hiel of Bethel built Jericho. He laid its foundation at the cost of Abiram his firstborn, and set up its gates at the cost of his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord, which he spoke by Joshua the son of Nun.’
Ahab practiced ‘foundation sacrifice.’ To protect a structure from evil powers, a person was murdered and buried in the foundation of a city or building – sometimes the victim was walled in alive.
King Ahaz of Judah ‘burned his son as an offering’ – 2 Kings 16:2-3. As did his wicked grandson, King Manasseh, 2 Kings 21:6, ESV: ‘And he burned his son as an offering and used fortune-telling and omens and dealt with mediums and with necromancers. He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger.’ The Prophet Jeremiah wrote concerning Judah, just prior to their fall, punishment and captivity.
Jeremiah 19:4-9
English Standard Version
4 ‘Because the people have forsaken me and have profaned this place by making offerings in it to other gods whom neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah have known; and because they have filled this place with the blood of innocents, 5 and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree… 6 therefore, behold, days are coming, declares the Lord, when this place shall no more be called Topheth, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.
7 And in this place I will make void the plans of Judah and Jerusalem, and will cause their people to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hand of those who seek their life.I will give their dead bodies for food to the birds of the air and to the beasts of the earth… 9 And I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and their daughters, and everyone shall eat the flesh of his neighbor in the siege and in the distress, with which their enemies and those who seek their life afflict them.’
A grim picture which turned into reality, of which both Jeremiah and Ezekiel remark, as well as the Prophet Micah who between 745 and 725 BCE, predicted what their enemies would do to them.
Ezekiel 5:9-10
English Standard Version
‘And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again. Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in your midst, and sons shall eat their fathers. And I will execute judgments on you, and any of you who survive I will scatter to all the winds.
Micah 3:2-3
Revised Standard Version
‘you [Israel’s enemies] who hate the good and love the evil, who tear the skin from off my people, and their flesh from off their bones; who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron.’
The Prophet Ezekiel who lived during and after the Babylonian exile of Judah was also condemning of child sacrifice.
Ezekiel 16:20-21; 20:30-31
English Standard Version
20 ‘And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter 21 that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?’
Ezekiel 20:25-26
Revised Standard Version
25 ‘Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; 26 and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the Lord.’
30 “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: Will you defile yourselves after the manner of your fathers and go whoring after their detestable things? 31 When you present your gifts and offer up your children in fire, you defile yourselves with all your idols to this day…”
The Eternal admits that the intricate and numerous laws in the sacrificial system, were never able to give them eternal life; in fact they infuriated them, so they then were given licence to offer human sacrifices of their first-born, in the hope they would be appalled and actually turn to Him spiritually, not through physical rites. Yet sacrificing their children to other gods was wholly unacceptable, for it broke the first commandment: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.’ As well as the sixth commandment: ‘You shall not murder.’
Psalm 106:35-39
Common English Bible
35 ‘Instead, they got mixed up with the nations, learning what they did 36 and serving those false gods, which became a trap for them. 37 They sacrificed their own sons and daughters to demons! 38 They shed innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters – the ones they sacrificed to Canaan’s false gods – so the land was defiled by the bloodshed. 39 They made themselves unclean by what they did; they prostituted themselves by their actions’ – Article: Belphegor.
In the preceding section (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) and regarding Noah (Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla) we addressed the gene for red hair, its link to Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b and its appearance primarily in the descendants of Esau and Jacob. Revisiting this subject, let’s add the aspect of the sons of Jacob stemming from Shem and thus being a European, western, white people.
As stated earlier, the identity movement – Black Hebrew Israelites – claims African Americans are descendants of the Israelites, specifically the tribe of Judah. Anyone who has had the fortitude in patiently reading preceding chapters will appreciate how off the mark this teaching (theory) is. This question is not about racial superiority; it is simply understanding and identifying the peoples of Noah’s family and who they are today. It is not important what colour a person’s skin is, biblically. Yet it does matter who they actually are; if one wishes to appreciate and understand past history and biblical predictions for the future regarding specific nations and peoples.
1 Samuel 16:12
English Standard Version
‘And he sent and brought him in. Now [David] was ruddy [H132 – ‘admoniy: red, in complexion and hair, like Esau] and had beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: fair, light, bright] eyes [H5869 – ‘ayin: countenance, presence] and was handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable, beautiful]… [interlinear adds: ‘to look to’, H7210 – ro’iy: appearance, to look at, sight]…’
The Message version: ‘…He was brought in, the very picture of health – bright-eyed, good-looking…’ the Tanakh version says: ‘… [David] was ruddy-cheeked, bright-eyed, and handsome…’ and the Good News Translation describes David as ‘… a handsome, healthy young man, and his eyes sparkled…’
David was not just fair complexioned, with piercing eyes; he was easy on the eye as well. The Hebrew word ‘admoniy means to have fair skin and light hair; in that the hair and complexion is red, reddish or ruddy. When Goliath first spies David, he looks in disdain at what he perceives as a pretty boy… not up to the task. 1 Samuel 17:42, ESV: ‘And when the Philistine looked and saw David, he disdained him, for he was but a youth, ruddy and handsome in appearance.’ David’s daughter was also fair, or beautiful – like her ancestors, Sarah and Rebekah and relative Rachel, whom we have discussed previously.
2 Samuel 13:1
King James Version
‘And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair [H3303 – yapheh: beautiful, bright] sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her.’
Amnon was David’s eldest son and Absalom his third son by a different wife. Amnon was Tamar’s half-brother. David’s son Solomon is also described as white and ruddy, that is as very fair skinned; yet his hair is not red but rather jet black.
Song of Solomon 5:10-15
King James Version
‘My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand. His head is as the most fine gold [light coloured], his locks are bushy, and black as a raven. His eyes are as the eyes of doves [grey] by the rivers of waters, washed with milk[white], and fitly set… his belly is as bright ivory [off white] overlaid with sapphires [blue]… his countenance is as Lebanon [white], excellent as the cedars.’
Rachel’s father’s name Laban is a crucial clue. His name means white. Laban is pronounced as lavan. The same root word is in Lebanon, l’vanon, the snowcapped white Lebanese Mountains, including the infamous Mount Hermon. The name Laban hints of skin the colour of white, which is whiter or fairer than usual. A brown skinned people may not call a lighter individual white, but a white coloured people could, if someone was very white or fair and possibly red haired. Only two per cent of the world’s population have red hair and the highest percentage of the world’s redheads live in the United Kingdom, Ireland and Australia.
As the Israelites descend in part from Laban’s sister Rebekah, it follows that they are a white people, not black as some maintain. We have discussed Esau and his being ruddy (or red) like David. Esau though, had very fair skin at birth and his body was covered in a caul-like mass of red hair. Red haired Esau, with white skinned Uncle Laban, indicates that the Israelites are one of a number of white peoples who descend from Abraham.
When Job was struck with painful boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head, he said that his skin grew black and fell from him – Job 2:7-8; 30:30. As we learned in the preceding chapter, Job was related to Laban as he was also descended from Nahor and thus his affliction turned his white skin, black.
The continuation of 1 Samuel chapter thirteen is about Amnon, who was twenty years of age in 990 BCE and was conspiring to ensnare Tamar – about age eighteen – in his private quarters to bake for him while pretending to be ill. He then raped her and his life-long obsession for his half-sister turns to hatred. After defiling his virgin half-sister, he banishes her. Absalom, who was also eighteen years old, learns of the matter and takes her in to his home. David finally hears of the crime and is very angry. Even so, he does not take any action.
Is this because there is no proof of witnesses, or perhaps David’s sin with Bathsheba meant he felt a hypocrite with a son acting in like measure. His hesitancy led to Absalom meting out justice instead, which then led ultimately to a decline in Absalom’s respect towards his father. Two years later the opportunity presented itself for Absalom to have his servants kill Amnon. Absalom then fled the royal court and stayed in Geshur as a guest of King Ammihud, his maternal grandfather – 1 Chronicles 3:2. In the meantime, David misses Absalom. In chapter fourteen, Joab on David’s behalf, facilitates the return of Absalom to Jerusalem, though at David’s request, he is to live in separate quarters. After two years, Absalom requests a meeting with his father, which David agrees.
2 Samuel 14:24-33
English Standard Version
24 ‘And the king said, “Let him dwell apart in his own house; he is not to come into my presence…” 25 Now in all Israel there was no one so much to be praised for his handsome appearance as Absalom. From the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him.
26 And when he cut the hair of his head (for at the end of every year he used to cut it; when it was heavy on him, he cut it), he weighed the hair of his head, two hundred shekels by the king’s weight [the equivalent of five pounds]. 27 There were born to Absalom three sons, and one daughter whose name was Tamar [named after her Aunt]. She was a beautiful woman.
28 So Absalom lived two full years in Jerusalem, without coming into the king’s presence. 29 Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the king… “Now therefore let me go into the presence of the king, and if there is guilt in me, let him put me to death.” 33 Then Joab went to the king and told him, and he summoned Absalom. So he came to the king and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king, and the king kissed Absalom.’
In Chapter fifteen of 2 Samuel, after a further four years, Absalom gains in popularity with the people and instigates a coup, banishing the king, his father David in 979 BCE.
2 Samuel 15:1-6
English Standard Version
‘After this Absalom got himself a chariot and horses, and fifty men to run before him. And Absalom used to rise early and stand beside the way of the gate. And when any man had a dispute to come before the king for judgment, Absalom would call to him and say, “From what city are you?” And when he said, “Your servant is of such and such a tribe in Israel,” Absalom would say to him, “See, your claims are good and right, but there is no man designated by the king to hear you.”
Then Absalom would say, “Oh that I were judge in the land! Then every man with a dispute or cause might come to me, and I would give him justice.” And whenever a man came near to pay homage to him, he would put out his hand and take hold of him and kiss him. Thus Absalom did to all of Israel who came to the king for judgment. So Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel.’
This was no normal banishment as respected biblical scholar Ernest Martin highlights.
Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 130-132 – emphasis mine:
‘It was… at Bethphage where death sentences were validated for rebellious leaders of the nation as in Deuteronomy 17:8-13, and where excommunications of the extremely wicked took place (because excommunications required a person to be legally barred from entering the Camp of Israel in the future… Since Jesus was recognised as an Elder in Israel, he was consistently called “Rabbi” by the people (John 1:49; 6:25), the final judgement to condemn him to death had to be made at Bethphage to satisfy the legal demands that were enforced in the time of Jesus…
Talmudic scholars… state that Jesus was accused and convicted by the Sanhedrin of practising magic and leading Israel astray… Jesus was “put out of the Camp of Israel”… from the point of view of the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem, Jesus died on the tree of crucifixion as a Gentile, not as an Israelite!
We are told that David himself was exiled from his throne, exiled from his capital city Jerusalem, and… even excommunicated from being an Israelite. This happened to David when his own son Absolam betrayed him and took over the kingdom and the hearts of the people of Israel… [and] the Ark of God… was sent to be with Absolam… David was [also] cursed and called a “Son of Belial” (which signified an exceptionally evil person)… Absolam… [then] ordered that his father David be slain. Psalm 22 must have been written at this time… “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me.”
Psalm 22:22-23
Common English Bible
‘I [King David] will declare your name to my brothers and sisters; I will praise you in the very center of the congregation! All of you who revere the Lord – praise him! All of you who are Jacob’s descendants – honor him! All of you who are all Israel’s offspring – stand in awe of him!’
2 Samuel 17:1-4
English Standard Version
‘Moreover, Ahithophel said to Absalom, “Let me choose twelve thousand men, and I will arise and pursue David tonight. I will come upon him while he is weary and discouraged and throw him into a panic, and all the people who are with him will flee. I will strike down only the king, and I will bring all the people back to you as a bride comes home to her husband. You seek the life of only one man, and all the people will be at peace.” 4 And the advice seemed right in the eyes of Absalom and all the elders of Israel.’
In Chapter eighteen, things come to a head as Absalom’s forces meet David’s army.
2 Samuel 18:5-17, 33
English Standard Version
5 ‘And the king ordered Joab and Abishai and Ittai, “Deal gently for my sake with the young man Absalom.” And all the people heard when the king gave orders to all the commanders about Absalom. 6 So the army went out into the field against Israel, and the battle was fought in the forest of Ephraim. 7 And the men of Israel were defeated there by the servants of David, and the loss there was great on that day, twenty thousand men. 8 The battle spread over the face of all the country, and the forest devoured[?] more people that day than the sword.
9 And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David. Absalom was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak, and his head [long hair] caught fast in the oak, and he was suspended between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on… 14 Joab… took three javelins in his hand and thrust them into the heart of Absalom while he was still alive in the oak. 15 And ten young men, Joab’s armor-bearers, surrounded Absalom and struck him and killed him.
16 Then Joab blew the trumpet, and the troops came back from pursuing Israel, for Joab restrained them. 17 And they took Absalom and threw him into a great pit in the forest and raised over him a very great heap of stones. And all Israel fled every one to his own home. 33 And the king was deeply moved and went up to the chamber over the gate and wept. And as he went, he said, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”
Absalom’s demise at age twenty-nine, is not taken well by David, even after all he had done against his father. One can’t help but wonder if David had acted against Amnon, would events have taken a different course. Possibly, the episode with Amnon exacerbated or accelerated thoughts that were already in Absalom’s mind towards King David. The encounter shows how human we all are and how brittle relationships can be when put under pressure. Plus, though David was a man after God’s own heart, he did not always act wisely, or have an easy ride as a consequence.
Acts 13:22
English Standard Version
‘And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king, of whom he testified and said, ‘I have found in David the son of Jesse a man after my heart, who will do all my will.’
David’s name may be a later appellation as claimed, as in the Hebrew it derives from the noun dod, meaning ‘beloved.’ As David’s reign drew to a close, it didn’t become any easier for him with his other sons also conspiring for the right to succeed David as King of Israel. The nation’s leadership and Army were divided on the succession. Solomon was crowned king while his half brother Adonijah was plotting to be king with the cooperation of Joab, the Army’s commander-in-chief and Abiathar the High Priest. Meanwhile, Nathan the prophet, Zadok the priest, and Benaiah, the head of David’s personal retinue of bodyguards remained loyal to Solomon – I Kings 1:5-8.
Bathsheba was instrumental in having Solomon anointed and coronated. Though David had created history’s first recorded ‘hit list’ which he gave to Solomon as one of his final acts as King of Israel. One Bible scholar calling it “a last will and testament worthy of a dying Mafia capo.” Solomon wasted no time in having Adonijah and Joab executed, while banishing Abiathar the High Priest from his office – I Kings 2:26-35. In both cases, the executioner was Benaiah, the captain of David’s bodyguard. King David died soon after Solomon’s coronation in 970 BCE, after saying: “I have appointed [Solomon] to be ruler over Israel and Judah” – 1 Kings 1:35.
David lives on today in the famous song by Leonard Cohen, Hallelujah which celebrates David’s checkered life and sexual exploits with Bathsheba. More than three hundred versions of the song have been recorded, about a man who wrote at least seventy-five songs and poems himself in the Book of Psalms.
It was a far happier or at least peaceful period for the monarchy in Solomon’s reign during 970 to 930 BCE, capped with the completion of the magnificent Temple in 960 BCE – refer article: The Ark of God.
1 Kings 4:20-26
English Standard Version
20 ‘Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. 21 Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. 22 Solomon’s provision for one day was thirty cors of fine flour and sixty cors of meal, 23 ten fat oxen, and twenty pasture-fed cattle, a hundred sheep, besides deer, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened fowl. 24 For he had dominion over all the region west of the Euphrates from Tiphsah to Gaza, over all the kings west of the Euphrates. And he had peace on all sides around him. 25 And Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan [in the far North] even to Beersheba, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon. 26 Solomon also had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots, and 12,000 horsemen.’
Solomon’s name is appropriate, as in Hebrew, it derives from the verb shalem, meaning ‘to be’ and ‘make whole, complete’ or ‘peace.’ It was during the forty years of King Solomon’s reign that the Israelite Kingdom peaked in prosperity and economic power. As it was so short-lived, there is understandably less evidence of its place amongst the great empires that book-end it in history – the Egyptians in the South and the Assyrians to the North. Steven M Collins book, The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! is recommended as a good starting point for those interested in delving deeper.
It was during Solomon’s reign that the events of the Book of Solomon occur. We have studied the Queen of Sheba in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. After the Pharaoh concurrent with David’s reign Amenhotep I, there followed Thutmose I from 978 to 972 BCE and Thutmose II from 972 to 960 BCE. Queen Hatshepsut (or Maatkare) – as the Queen of Sheba and from an Indian-Cushite bloodline – reigned from 960 to 945 BCE, the fifth Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty. The beginning of her reign coincided with the completion of the Temple and ten years into Solomon’s reign. Solomon’s reputation for wisdom, building projects, handsomeness and an all round ladies man would have reached the Queen’s attention.
Her visit to King Solomon would have likely been sometime shortly after 960 BCE. King Solomon would have been about forty years of age. Hatshepsut was the second known female ruler of Egypt. She may have ruled jointly with her nephew Thutmose III during the early part of his reign. The Queen is famous for her expedition to Punt – the land of Israel – documented on her famous Mortuary Temple at Deir el-Bahari. She, like Solomon was a prolific builder and built many temples and monuments, as well as re-establishing trade networks. Hatshepsut ruled during the height of Egypt’s power and was the daughter of Thutmose I and had been the wife of her brother Thutmose II.
After Hatshepsut, the famous Pharaoh Thutmose III ruled from 945 to 912 BCE, being another contemporary of Solomon. He was considered a military genius, creating the largest empire Egypt had ever witnessed. It is believed Thutmose III conquered three hundred and fifty cities; though before the end of his reign, he mysteriously and inexplicably expunged Hatshepsut’s name and image from temples and monuments.
A crucial part of the unconventional chronology is the accurate dating of the Exodus and the 4th year of Solomon’s reign. Not unique to this writer, findings by independent academics, scholars and researchers confirm an Exodus date of 1446 BCE and Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The Bible states that there were four hundred and eighty years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple in Solomon’s fourth year: 1446 – 480 = 966.
1 Kings 6:1
English Standard Version
‘In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month [April/May], he began to build the house of the Lord.’
After the death of Solomon, the nation of Israel became divided. Solomon’s son Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE and he ruled for seventeen years until 913 BCE. Rehoboam refused to ease the burden of taxes, imposed by his father.
As Rehoboam took the other tack and threatened to make life worse for the people… Ten tribes (Ephraim, half tribe of West Manasseh, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Gad, Rueben and the half tribe of East Manasseh) separated in 926 BCE, becoming the northern kingdom of Israel with its capital city in Samaria – 1 Kings 12:12-14. The tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and much of Levi stayed with Rehoboam and became the southern kingdom of Judah, with Jerusalem as its capital.
1 Kings 11:31
Common English Bible
‘He said to Jeroboam, “Take ten pieces, because Israel’s God, the Lord, has said, ‘Look, I am about to tear the kingdom from Solomon’s hand. I will give you ten tribes.’
The northern Kingdom of Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam from the tribe of Ephraim immediately went into idolatry, turning away from worshipping the Creator. Jeroboam died in 910 BCE after ruling for sixteen years. After two hundred years with a succession of some twenty evil kings and none that were righteous, the Israelite tribes went into dispersal or national captivity in stages, at the hands of the Assyrian Empire – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
The southern Kingdom of Judah didn’t fare much better, though they did have six to eight righteous kings out of about twenty, ‘who served the Lord’ and who would institute reforms, lasting over a hundred years after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel. The Eternal sent prophets to warn of their slide into idolatry, but much like today, the people would not listen – Ezekiel 33:30-33. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin were taken into captivity also in several waves of deportations, by the Chaldean Babylonians.
Ezekiel 23:22-25
English Standard Version
22 ‘Therefore, O Oholibah, thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I will stir up against you your lovers from whom you turned in disgust, and I will bring them against you from every side: 23 the Babylonians [descendants located primarily in Central and Southern Italy today] and all the Chaldeans [ancestors of Northern (and a proportion of Central) Italians], Pekod and Shoa and Koa, and all the Assyrians [ancestors of the Russians] with them, desirable young men, governors and commanders all of them, officers and men of renown, all of them riding on horses.
24 And they shall come against you from the north with chariots and wagons and a host of peoples. They shall set themselves against you on every side with buckler, shield, and helmet; and I will commit the judgment to them, and they shall judge you according to their judgments. 25 And I will direct my jealousy against you, that they may deal with you in fury. They shall cut off your nose and your ears, and your survivors shall fall by the sword. They shall seize your sons and your daughters, and your survivors shall be devoured by fire.’
The kings of Judah – the Dynasty of King David – ruled for some three hundred and forty-four years, from 930 to 586 BCE.
Kings of Judah
Good or Bad
Years of Reign
Books of Kings
Book of Chronicles
Rehoboam
Evil
17 years
I Kings 12:1
II Chronicles 10:1
Abijah
Evil
3 years
I Kings 15:1
II Chronicles 13:1
Asa
Righteous
41 years
I Kings 15:9
II Chronicles 14:1
Jehoshaphat
Righteous
25 years
I Kings 22:41
II Chronicles 17:1
Jehoram
Evil
8 years
I Kings 22:50
II Chronicles 21:1
Ahaziah
Evil
1 year
II Kings 8:24
II Chronicles 22:1
Athaliah
Queen
II Kings 11:1
II Chronicles 22:10
Joash
Righteous/Evil
40 years
II Kings 11:4
II Chronicles 23:1
Amaziah
Righteous/Evil
29 years
II Kings 14:1
II Chronicles 25:1
Uzziah
Righteous
52 years
II Kings 15:1
II Chronicles 26:1
Jotham
Righteous
16 years
II Kings 15:32
II Chronicles 27:1
Ahaz
Evil
16 years
II Kings 15:38
II Chronicles 28:1
Hezekiah
Righteous
29 years
II Kings 18:1
II Chronicles 29:1
Manasseh
Evil
55 years
II Kings 21:1
II Chronicles 33:1
Amon
Evil
2 years
II Kings 21:19
II Chronicles 33:21
Josiah
Righteous
31 years
II Kings 22:1
II Chronicles 34:1
Jehoahaz
Evil
3 months
II Kings 23:31
II Chronicles 36:1
Jehoiakim
Evil
11 years
II Kings 23:36
II Chronicles 36:4
Jehoiakin
Evil
3 months
II Kings 24:6
II Chronicles 36:9
Zedekiah
Evil
11 years
II Kings 24:17
II Chronicles 36:11
Joash began as righteous and as with Solomon turned to evil in his old age, as did his son Amaziah. Manasseh was especially evil, building altars to foreign gods like Solomon had done. Manasseh even murdered his own son, in a sacrificial fire – 2 Kings 21:11-16. He also had the longest reign at fifty-five years. King Jehoiakim was also known as Eliakim. Recall an Elikaim son of Hilkiah replaces the evil steward Shebna. The final king, Zedekiah was originally known as Mattaniah.
Nota bene
Since the completion of this chapter, it has come to the attention of its writer that elements from the following extracts are incorrect. Rather than rewrite the entire section – for much of the information addressed contains merit – any points requiring caution or correction have been added in parentheses or italics.
Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, The Sceptre and the Davidic Covenant, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:
‘Jeremiah records the downfall of Zedekiah and his sons, the royal princes, as follows:
“In the ninth year of Zedekiah, king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month [June/July], and the ninth day of the month [day after the Sabbath], the city was broken up. And all the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal-sharezar, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsechim, Rabsaris, Rabmag, with all the residue of the princes of the king of Babylon.”
“And it came to pass, that when Zedekiah, the king of Judah, saw them, and all the men of war, then they fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the king’s garden, by the gate betwixt the two walls; and he went out the way of the plain. But the Chaldeans’ army pursued after them, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and when they had taken him, they brought him up to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, to Riblah, in the land of Hamath, where he gave judgment upon him. Then the king of BabyIon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes; also the king of Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah.Moreover he put out Zedekiah’s eyes, and bound him in chains, to carry him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king’s house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem,” (Jeremiah 39:1-8).
‘In the fifty-second chapter of Jeremiah there is a statement of these events, to which, after recording the fact concerning the king’s being carried to Babylon in chains, there is added the following: “And the king of Babylon…put him in prison till the day of his death,” (Jeremiah 52:11).
When those events occurred which resulted in the overthrow of the Zedekiah branch of the royal house, a climax was reached, not only in the history of all those things which were involved in the Davidic covenant, but also in that predestined work, for the accomplishment of which God sanctified and sent Jeremiah into this world.’
“Then Ishmael carried away captive all the residue of the people that were in Mizpah, even the King’s Daughters, and all the people that remained in Mizpah, whom Nebuzar-adan, the captain of the guard, has committed to Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam; and Ishmael, the son of Nethaniah, carried them away captive and departed to go over to the Ammonites. But Johanan, the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces took all the remnant of Judah that were returned from all the nations whither they had been driven, to dwell in the land of Judah; even men, women and children, and the KING’S DAUGHTERS, and every person that Nebuzaradan, the captain, had left with Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, and JEREMIAH, the prophet, and Baruch, the son of Neriah. So they came into the land of Egypt; for they obeyed not the voice of the Lord. Thus came they even to Tahpanhes,” (Jeremiah 43:5-8).
‘Baruch, the scribe, was the companion of Jeremiah in prison, when the Lord took them out and hid them. He was also his companion in persecution and affliction and accusation. Now, since we find his name mentioned as one of this company which Johanan compelled to go to Egypt against the direct command of God, there is just one prophecy concerning him which we need to mention before we proceed further. It is as follows:
“Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, unto thee, O Baruch: Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up, even this whole land… but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey (booty or reward) in all places whither thou goest,” (Jeremiah 45:2, 4, 5).
We have in this company, which has come down into Egypt from Judea, “the King’s daughters.” Since the plural form of speech is used there are at least two of them – history says there were three [1]. These are the royal seed of the house of David, who are fleeing from the slayers of their father, Zedekiah, the last King of the house of Judah, and the slayers of their brothers, the sons of Zedekiah and princes of Judah.
In company with these princesses isJeremiah, their grandfather [2], whom also the Lord has chosen to do the work of building and planting. In the princesses the prophet has royal material with which to build and plant.
In company with Jeremiah and his royal charge we have Baruch, his faithful scribe, whom expert genealogists prove to have been uncle [3] to the royal seed.
God has promised that the lives of this “small number,” only five or six at most [4], shall be to them a prey (reward) in all lands whither they shall go.
Prior to this, at a time when Jeremiah was greatly troubled, when in his great distress and anguish of heart he cried unto the Lord, saying: “Remember me, visit me, and revenge me of my persecutors”; then the Lord said, “Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction… And I will make thee to pass with thine enemies into a land which thou knowest not,” (Jeremiah 15:11-14).’
The contention amongst a number of biblical identity adherents is that Jeremiah took Zedekiah’s daughters to Ireland, whereby they married into the royal line already established in Ireland from ancient times; when descendants of the family of Zarah, namely Heman, Calcol and Dara (or Darda), migrated to the British Isles. As Zedekiah’s daughters were descended from Pharez, the line of King David, it is maintained that the two royal lines were joined together in the Irish High kings and that the original breach at birth of the twins had been healed.
The five points listed by Allen are all valid in regard to them being based on scripture. The four fascinating, yet uncorroborated pieces of information Allen includes, have been numbered; for they are not substantiated with references or sources.
Allen: ‘By consulting the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis we will find a record of the conception and birth of twin boys, whose conception and birth were both accompanied by such extraordinary circumstances that the question of their parentage is forever settled; for Tamar, the mother, did willingly stoop in order that she might conquer Judah, the father, and compel him to do justice by her. The never-to-be-forgotten manner in which Judah was forced to acknowledge that those children were his offspring and that their mother was more righteous than he, does most certainly place the fact of their royal lineage beyond the possibility of cavil.
When the mother was in travail and after the midwife had been summoned, there was the presentation of a hand. Then, for some reason either human or Divine, the midwife knew that twins were in the womb. So, in order that she might know and be able to testify which was born first, she fastened a scarlet thread on the outstretched hand. Since Judah’s was the royal family in Israel, andthe law of primogeniture prevailed among them, it was essential that this distinction should be made so that at the proper time the first born or eldest son might ascend the throne.
After the scarlet thread had been made secure on the little hand it was drawn back and the brother was born first. Upon seeing this the midwife exclaimed: “How hast thou broken forth?” Then, seemingly, she was filled with the spirit of prophecy and said: “This breach be upon thee,” and because of this prophetic utterance he was given the name of Pharez, i.e., “A Breach.” Afterward his brother, who had the scarlet thread upon his hand, was born, and his name was called Zarah, i.e., “The seed.”
The very fact that Pharez was really born first would exalt him, and it eventually did exalt his heirs, to the throne of Israel, for King David was a son of Judah through the line of Pharez. But just so surely as this son of Judah and father of David, who was the first one of the line to sit upon that throne, was given the name of Pharez, just so surely must we expect – with that little hand of the scarlet thread waving prophetically before them – that a breach should occur somewhere along that family line.
The immediate posterity of this “Prince of the Scarlet Thread” is given as follows: “And the sons of Zarah; Zimri and Ethan and Heman and Calcol and Dara, five of them in all,” (I Chronicles 2:6). Thus the direct posterity of Zarah was five, while that of Pharez was only two. For the reason that our Lord sprang out of Judah, through the line of Pharez, the unbroken genealogy of that family is given in the sacred records; but the genealogy of the Zarah family is given only intermittently.
One thing is made quite clear in the Bible concerning the sons of Zarah, and that is, that they were famous for their intelligence and wisdom, for it was only the great God-given wisdom of Solomon which is declared to have risen above theirs, as is seen by the following: And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding… and Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the East, for he was wiser than all men – than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara,” (I Kings 4:29, 31).Furthermore, we find that two of them, Ethan and Heman, were also noted singers, as we find by consulting the fifteenth chapter of First Kings and the nineteenth verse. By noting the titles of the eighty-eighth and eighty-ninth Psalms we also see that one of them was composed by “Heman the Ezrahite,” and that the other was the song of “Ethan the Ezrahite.”
The celebrated leaders of Zarah’s family were called the ‘sons of Mahol.’ Several commentaries explain that Mahol is not a proper name but an appellation describing skills common to these men. Adam Clarke writes that the term signified dance or music and that a son of Mahol was a person particularly gifted in music. It is worth drawing a comparison with the popular musical output of England which has been far above its population ratio, compared with the other two nations which have in the same regard either dominated or proportionately exceeded above their size: the United States and Scotland respectively.
At a certain point, when there was a Pharaoh – probably Amenemhet II (Nubkhaure), the 3rd King of the 12th Dynasty from 1593 to 1558 BCE – ‘who did not know Joseph’ and the Israelites were no longer welcome in Egypt, it appears that a number of the wealthy and powerful Israelites left Egypt by ship. Danites were already exploring the Aegean sea and islands beyond; with the ruling aristocratic Zarahites leaving Egypt before the situation reached a crisis point, heading in the same direction. The unprivileged masses were left behind to go into slavery.
The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus circa 80 to 20 BCE, speaks of several Israelite flights from Egypt during this period, most notably into Greece under two key Israelite leaders, Danaus of the tribe of Dan and Cadmus. Walsh writes that the Egyptians, claimed a number of colonies were ‘spread from Egypt over all the inhabited world’ and exiles led by Danaus ‘settled… the oldest city of Greece, Argos.’ Ancient sources verify Danaus captured and developed Argos, known as the Danaidae. Ancient Greek literature refer to these ‘Egyptian’ explorers as Danaans (or Danai), who reached as far as Mace-don-ia.
History records that the Greek city of Athens was founded by Cecrops and that colonists arrived from Sais, Egypt, located in the Nile Delta. Walsh notes that “some scholars maintain that Cecrops is none other that Chalcol of the Zarah branch of Judah.” Adding: “Like their Phoenician counterparts, the seafaring Danites and Zarahites spread colonies throughout the Mediterranean. It is even said that Chalcol planted a royal dynasty of Irish kings in Ulster. Indeed, the ancient Greeks spoke highly of the Irish… Diodorus says that the [Irish] ‘are most friendly disposed toward the Greeks, especially towards the Athenians [fellow Israelites].”
Calcol’s brother, Darda (from Dara), as mentioned in Chapter XXVI* The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon and Haran, is said to have founded the city of Troy. British History Traced from Egypt and Palestine, L G A Roberts, page 27:
“Dardanus is said to have built Troy about thirty-four years [circa 1480 BCE] before the Exodus in 1446 BCE.” As Darda was born circa 1675 BCE, the dating is amiss. Some scholars explain that Darda is in fact Dara due to a scribal error of omitting the Hebrew letter Dalet, or the English D, based on the fact a double Resh is not possible in the Hebrew language. The Hebrew letters Dalet and Resh are very similar and easily confused. Capt writes: “the descendants of Darda ruled ancient Troy for some one hundred years.”
Prior to the Moabites and Ammonites who were a. the later Trojans of Troy and b. the Dardanians. These same peoples resurfaced as Greco-Macedonians and ultimately as the Franks*.
The Tojan Origins of European Royalty, John D Keyser – capitalisation and emphasis his:
‘The early migration of Darda is noted in the book How Israel Came to Britain:
“Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body BEFORE THE ISRAEL NATION WAS FORMED – while, as a people, they were STILL IN BONDAGE IN EGYPT.
One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. ANOTHER, under the leadership of DARDANUS, a brother of Calcol, CROSSED TO ASIA MINOR to found the Kingdom later known as TROY.”
‘Author Roberts also reveals that “Mr. W. E. Gladstone says that the Siege of Troy was undertaken by DANAI (the Greeks) against DARDANAI (the Trojans), and THESE WERE ORIGINALLY ONE…”
In Symbols of Our Celto-Saxon Heritage, by W. H. Bennett, we learn more about the migration of DARDANUS from Egypt to the Troad:
“With these things in mind, let us now turn to that other part of ZARA’S DESCENDANTS which FLED OUT OF EGYPT under the leadership… (of) DARDA… the group which he led went NORTHWARD across the Mediterranean Sea to the northwest corner of what we now call ASIA MINOR. There, under the rule of DARDA (DARDANUS) they established a Kingdom, later called TROY, on the southern shore of that narrow body of water which bears his name to this day – DARDANELLES”
Details of DARDA’S voyage to the Troad (as found in the Greek legends) are revealed in the Encyclopedia Britannica:
“DARDANUS, in Greek legend, son of Zeus and the Pleiad Electra, mythical FOUNDER OF DARDANUS on the Hellespont and ANCESTOR OF THE DARDANS of the Troad and, through AENEAS, of THE ROMANS. His original home was supposed to have been Arcadia. Having slain his brother Iasius or Iasion (according to some legends, Iasius was struck by lightning), DARDANUS FLED ACROSS THE SEA. He first stopped at SAMOTHRACE, and, when the island was VISITED BY A FLOOD, CROSSED OVER TO THE TROAD.Being hospitably received by Teucer, he married his daughter Batea and became THE FOUNDER OF THE ROYAL HOUSE OF TROY.”
Actually, the FIRST stopover for Dardanus, on his way to the Troad, was CRETE! Notice what Herman L. Hoeh says in his discussion of the Early Bronze Age: “‘Early Bronze I’ – ends in 1477 [BCE] with VIOLENT DESTRUCTION everywhere in WESTERN ANATOLIA and AT TROY; 1477 [?] marks the conquest of the Troad by DARDANUS AND THE TEUCRIANS FROM CRETE…” (Compendium of World History, Volume I, 1962, page 470).
‘The flood or deluge mentioned by the Encyclopedia Britannica and others is prominent in the Greek legends of Dardanus. At the time of the Exodus [in 1446 BCE] tremendous events of a cataclysmic nature occurred in the Mediterranean area. Caius Julius Solinus, in his work Polyhistor, notes that “following the DELUGE which is reported to have occurred in the days of Ogyges, a heavy night spread over the globe.”
Heavy DELUGES of rain are reported in the works of early Arab historians – all the result of massive upheavals in earth and sky. The great volcanic explosion of the island of Thera in the Aegean Sea occurred around this time and would have caused huge tidal waves or tsunamis throughout the Mediterranean. It seems apparent, therefore, that Dardanus left Egypt before the Exodus, spending some time in CRETE before voyaging on to Samothrace.’
Apparently, Queen Elizabeth I was aware of her Trojan roots and she was in competition with the Scottish Bruce to find the Book of Enoch. She also wanted to visit Troy itself, as the place of her ancestors. It is recorded that she failed to retrieve the Book of Enoch by searching the Nile, but the Bruce it is said, did locate the book.
Raymond Capt continues regarding the Zarahite expansion westwards to Italy and Spain – emphasis mine:
“Historical records tell of the westward migration of the descendants of Chalcol along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea establishing Iberian [Hiberi] trading settlements. One settlement, now called Saragossa, in theEbro [from Hebrew (and Eber)] Valley in Spain, was originally known as Zara-gassa, meaning the “Stronghold of Zarah.”The Italian island known as Sardinia, retains elements of both Dan and Zarah – Zar-din-ia.
“From Spain they continued westward as far as Ireland. The Iberians gave their name to Ireland, calling the islandIberne… which was subsequently Latinised to Hibernia, a name that still adheres to Ireland… [as do the smaller western offshore islands known as the Hebrides]. Many historical records point to Israel’s presence (particularly Dan and Judah) in Ireland at a very early date… Writers such as Petanius and Hecatoeus… speak of the Danai as being Hebrew people, originally from Egypt, who colonized Ireland… the ancient Irish, called the Danai… separated from Israel around the time of the Exodus from Egypt, [and substantially before] crossed to Greece, and then [later] invaded Ireland.”
Ancient Athenians, comprising Zarahites descended from Calcol took the Greek city of Miletus. The Milesians became linked with these descendants from Judah. The line of Calcol after the settling of Miletus, established a Milesian royal dynasty in Ulster. Archives give an account of Milesian conquerors of Ireland belonging to the “scarlet branch of Judah” – a red hand circled with a scarlet cord of the Zarahites – who subjugated the Tuatha de Danann. The Tuatha de Danann and the Milesians were kinsmen, who long ages prior had separated from the main Hebrew stem as Dan and Judah from Zarah and Calcol. These same descendants of Calcol are recorded as specifically being led by a Gathelus Miledh, also known as Gaedal (or Gaidelon), a son or rather a descendant, of Cecrops, none other than Calcol.
It is alleged that prior to the Exodus, he went to Egypt after murdering a man. Gathelus apparently assisted the pharaoh in his fight against the Ethiopians of Cush, Boece states: Gathelus winning “a great victory for Pharo against the Moris,” [derived from Mauri, the same root word in the country named Mauritania in North Africa today] – from The Chronicles of Scotland, 1537. Gathelus was then given the hand of the Pharaoh’s daughter Scota in marriage, where they had two sons.
We will return to this mysterious Pharaoh and unmask his identity; which has alluded scholars for centuries. Keating states Gathelus befriended Moses, for Moses had healed Gathelus from a deadly snakebite. After living seven years in Egypt, Gathelus fled at the outset of the ten plagues, prior to the destruction of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea in 1446 BCE; travelling westward, leading the contingent of Zarahites for a period of forty-two years, while travelling to France and then Iberia. Settling in the northwest – including present day Portu-gal: Portingall = Port-of-the-Gal** – founding the Brigantium kingdom, centred in present day Santiago de Compostela in Gal-icia on the northwest coast of Spain, just north of modern Portugal.
After Gathelus died circa 1404 BCE, his widow Scota, along with their sons, voyaged northwestwards to the Emerald Isle. Five of her eight sons died in a storm related ship wreck upon arrival, with herself being killed in the battle that ensued with the native Irish, the Tuatha de Danann. It was a surviving son Eremon, who founded the Kingdom of Ulster shortly after the Exodus; the first king of the Milesian Scots, son of Gathelus Miledh and Scota – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Historians erroneously include the Milesians with those Celts known as Gaels. We will discover that the Gaels who migrated into Ireland are a different tribe of Israel. The Milesians were in fact forerunners of the Celtic tribes which would wind their various paths either across Europe from central Asia or via the Mediterranean and Iberia, blending in one great Gaelic stream into the isles of Erin and Albion.
J H Allen: ‘It is not at all unlikely and would be but natural that the Zimri who overthrew Baasha, the third King of Israel (not Judah), belonged to the posterity of Zimri, the first-born son of Zarah, son of Judah and twin brother of Pharez. For, as we have shown, the seed of Jacob were at that time divided into two kingdoms, with the posterity of Pharez on the throne ruling over the kingdom of Judah. How natural it would be for the then living members of that family to think, and to say: “This is the long foretold breach for which we have been taught to look. This is the time to assert our royal prerogatives, take the throne, and rule over this the house of Israel.” Culling from a genealogical diagram… we have the following:
There is undoubtedly a dose of poetic licence* in this family tree. The name Tea Tephi is legitimately disputed as to whether it is real or a fictionalised composite name. Like Tea Tephi, the accuracy of the name Heber Scot is questionable. Ethan was a brother of Calcol, not his grandfather.
Allen: ‘In giving this genealogy we have given the direct line from father through only one son, but some of these men were the fathers of more than one son. Sru, for instance, the father of Heber Scot, had two other sons. Tait, who begat Aghenoin, had a son by the name of Heber. The fact that there are three Hebers in this branch of the royal family is most significant, for that is the name from which comes one of the national names of their race, i.e., Hebrews.
… it is generally conceded that there are two distinct phases to the Hebrew story of Ireland. The one is that concerning Jeremiah and the king’s daughters, and the other is that which is told in the Milesian records [?], in which we have the story of the prince who married one of Jeremiah’s wards. The Milesian story takes its rise in Egypt and Palestine amid the scenes of Israel’s infancy. Now we are ready to call your attention to two other names in the genealogy of Zarah’s royal house… Easru and Sru, for in the Milesian records the descendants of these men, and some of their predecessors, were called by a name which to this day means the children of the Red (or scarlet) Branch.
The prince in the Bible story, as given in Ezekiel’s riddle, is called a young twig, and the highest branch of the high cedar, and, after Zedekiah’s sons were slain, it was not possible to find a prince who was eligible to sit on that throne unless he belonged to the line of the scarlet thread, for the other line, from which Christ came… [were] in Babylon. Hence these children of the “Red Branch” must have belonged to the Scarlet-thread branch of the royal family. The Milesian records also call them“Curaithe na Cruabh ruadh,” the “Knights of the Red Branch.”
“The term Milesian is derived from the medieval title of Gall-am**, the conqueror of Ireland, who was called Milesius, or the Milesian, i.e., the soldier, a term derived from the Latin miles, whence we derive our word militia.” – Totten. “Furthermore, these knights of the Red Branch, of whom Gallam, the conquering Milesian, was one, called themselves Craunnogs, or ‘the crowned.’ The true meaning of their name is ‘Tree tops,’ for it comes from words common to all dialects: craun ‘a tree,’ and og ‘a tuft’ or ‘termination.’ We use the same word for a ‘crown,’ as they did, and the very use of it in common language would be enough to verify this identity of race were there not other reasons in their history and legends to establish it conclusively.” – Totten.
‘One hundred years ago Joseph Ben Jacob, a Celt, and a Catholic, in a work called “Precursory Proofs,” said: “Among the five equestrian orders of ancient Ireland was one called Craobh-ruadh (the Red Branch).The origin of this order was so very ancient that all attempts at explanation have hitherto failed. Some suppose that it originated from the Ulster arms, which are ‘luna, a hand sinister, couped at the wrist, Mars.’ But these admit it should in such case be called crobhruadh, or of the bloody hand.”
This man was really proving the Hebrew and Egyptian origin of the Irish Celts, but was applying all the evidence that he found to Joseph, knowing nothing of the story of the breach in the royal family of Judah, and of the exaltation of the Scarlet Branch, who landed in the plantation of Ulster. Else he would have known where to place the meaning of that ensignum of the red, or bloody, hand“couped at the wrist” with a scarlet thread which found its way into the royal arms of Ulster.
The prophet Nahum, while speaking of “the excellency of Israel,” says: “The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet” [Nahum 2:3]. Scarlet is the characteristic color of the English army, and they certainly wore “red coats”during the Revolutionary War.
We were recently in an English city, and we took particular note of the scarlet thread, or stripe which ran up the front, around the neck, down the arms and up the pantaloon legs of the uniform of the post men of the province.
A British consul once told us that every official order he received was tied with a scarlet thread, and showed us one which he had just received. This same thing is true also with all English officials, to whom written orders are sent, and from this custom comes that well-known political and diplomatical metaphor, “Red-tape.”
We have also learned, from sources which we deem authentic, that a scarlet thread is woven into the material from which all ropes are manufactured, which are to be used in the construction of vessels for the British government, or navy. This is done so that under and all circumstances these vessels may be identified as the property of Great Britain, even though they be sunk in many fathoms of water at the bottom of the sea.’
The red (or scarlet) thread is a massive clue to the English identity, yet seekers of true biblical identities have been blinded by the Jews are Judah ‘red herring’ so that this sign for Judah has been seen instead, as just a reflection of a small group or handful of people nestled in a wider body of people called Ephraim. The Jews are Edom (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), while Judah is England and the revealing of the true identity of Ephraim in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes, will leave no doubt.
The Modern Descendantsof Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:
‘… until the coming of the Saxons [Angles, Jutes and Frisians] into South Britain (England)… a RAMPANT RED LION was the emblem of ALL Britain. With the coming of the Saxons its use in England as a national emblem was discontinued, being replaced by the emblems brought in by the Saxons and Normans. Nevertheless, in North Britain (Scotland) it [remained] the chief emblem – as found in the Scottish Standard.’
The temporary dropping of the Judaic Lion as a symbol at this time is due to the fact the Saxons, though containing Jutes from Judah, were also comprised of the main body of Joseph, the Angles. Numerically, they dominated the political landscape of Britain south of Alba. Scotland still retained the rampant Lion as it was predominantly Benjamin, maintaining a close attachment with the royal family line of Zarah (1)^ from Judah. The Jutes and Normans on the other hand, also included the family lines of Judah’s other two sons, Shelah (2)^ and Pharez (3)^, with all three populating England and their subsequent symbol, the royal standard comprising the Three^ Passant Lions.
Bennet & Keyser: ‘Further, it was also the ancestral emblem of the Royal Houses of several of the ancient principalities of Wales for instance Bleddyn ap Cynfyn who died in 1075 A.D.’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
‘A color variant of this emblem appears in the Arms of several of the other ancient Welsh Royal Houses. Even in England it, or a color variant of it, appears in a few municipal Arms and in a much larger number of family Arms.
Important, too, is the fact that the Rampant Red Lion emblem appears in the heraldry of the Netherlands – either on the shield or as a supporter – in the provincial Arms of South Holland, North Holland, Utrecht, Zeeland, Limburgh and Overijssel; and in the municipal Arms of some fifty other places’ – refer Midian, Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
‘… we have presented evidence of the ancient usage of the Red Hand… and… the Rampant Red Lion… for at least 1,500 years before the coming of the Saxons into Britain… emblems of the Zara… branch of the Israelitish Tribe of Judah…’
Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, The Sceptre and the Davidic Covenant, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:
‘About 585 B.C. a “notable man,” an “important personage,” a patriarch, a saint, an essentially important someone [1]… came to Ulster [2], the most northern province of Ireland, accompanied by a princess [3], the daughter of an eastern king, and that in company with them was one Simon Brach, Breck, Brack, Barech, Berach [4], as it is differently spelled… This eastern princess was married [5] to King Herremon [6] on condition, made by this notable patriarch, that he should abandon his former religion, and build a college for the prophets. This Herremon did [7], and the name of the school was Mur-Ollam, which is the name, both in Hebrew and Irish, for school of the prophets. He also changed [8] the name of his capital city, Lothair – sometimes spelled Cothair Croffin – to that of Tara… it is a well-known fact that the royal arms of Ireland is the harp of David, and has been for two thousand and five hundred years.’
Anything open to conjecture or unsubstantiated is numbered above and investigated in the article: The Ark of God.
On the occasion of Queen Victoria’s coronation, June 28th, 1837, an article appeared in the London Sun, which gives a description of the coronation chair and the coronation stone, as follows:
“This chair, commonly called St. Edward’s chair, is an ancient seat of solid hardwood, with back and sides of the same, variously painted, in which the kings of Scotland were in former periods constantly crowned, but, having been brought out of the kingdom by Edward I, in the year 1296, after he had totally overcome John Baliol, king of Scots, it has ever since remained in the Abbey of Westminster, and has been the chair in which the succeeding kings and queens of this realm have been inaugurated.
It is in height six feet and seven inches, in breadth at the bottom thirty-eight inches, and in depth twenty-four inches; from the seat to the bottom is twenty-five inches; the breadth of the seat within the sides is twenty-eight inches, and the depth eighteen inches. At nine inches from the ground is a board, supported at the four corners by as many lions.”
“Between the seat and this board is enclosed a stone, commonly called Jacob’s, or the fatal Marble, Stone, which is an oblong of about twenty-two inches in length, thirteen inches broad and eleven inches deep; of a steel color, mixed with some veins of red.”
Hollingshed’s Chronicles confirms: “When our king [Edward I]… understanding that all was at peace and quiet [in Scotland], he turned to the Abbey of Scone… where he took the stone, called the Regal of Scotland…”
London Sun: “History relates that it is the stone whereon the patriarch Jacob laid his head in the plains of Luz… this stone was conveyed into Ireland [on the Hill of Tara] by way of Spain about 700 years before Christ. From there it was taken into Scotland by King Fergus [with the Royal Milesian Scots], about 370 years later; and in the year 350 B.C., it was placed in the abbey of Scone, by King Kenneth, who caused a prophetical verse to be engraved upon it, of which the following is a translation:
‘Should fate not fail, where’er this stone is found, The Scots shall monarch of that realm be crowned.’
“This antique regal chair, having (together with the golden sceptre and crown of Scotland) been solemnly offered by King Edward I to St. Edward the Confessor, in the year 1297 (from whence it derives the appellation of St. Edward’s chair), has ever since been kept in the chapel called by his name; with a tablet affixed to it, whereon several Latin verses are written, in old English characters… The stone maintains its usual place under the seat of the chair.”
The Fatal Stone (Liag Fail) presently resides in Perth, Scotland.
Prior to the time that King Kenneth had his verse engraved on the Coronation Stone, there was a prophetic verse which had attached itself to it, which Sir Walter Scott has rendered as follows:
“Unless the fates are faithless grown, And prophet’s voice be vain, Where’er is found this sacred stone The Wanderers’ Race shall reign.”
Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996:
‘The British believed that their rulers were coronated (i.e. received the right to rule) on the stone of Jacob: They therefore, it is inferred, thought that the right of their rulers to Empire came from the Promise to Jacob.’
While the original stone Jacob used to lay his head may still exist (Genesis 28:18) – whether it made a journey to Ireland or not from the promised land – testing on the Stone of Scone revealed it is a replacement for the original Israelite coronation stone, hewn out of a quarry in Scotland and did not originate from the Middle East – Article: The Ark of God.
Zedekiah’s Daughter Tamar Tephi of Pharez Married Eochaidh Heremon of Zarah in Ireland, unknown author, 2000 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine.
As with John Harden Allen, anything open to conjecture is numbered for the readers benefit.
‘The THRONE of BRITAIN is the oldest in Europe and it has preserved the same fundamental coronation service as far as records go back from Egferth in 785 A.D. That is for [1240] years. It is identical to the Bible’s coronation service: The anointing with oil (1 Kings 1:34), the crown of pure gold (Psalm 21:3), sitting on or “at his pillar” (stone) (2 Chronicles 23:13), presented with a Bible (Deuteronomy 17:14), given bracelets of St. George (2 Samuel 1:10) [1], the shout, “God save the king” (1 Samuel 10:24) and an oath between king and people to obey [God] (2 Chronicles 23:16). This is proof the British are the HOUSE of ISRAEL [and England, the house of Judah].
The reason St. Edward’s crown has the twelve stones of the high priest’s breastplate on it is because the King [or Queen] of England is also the head of the Church of England, just as Christ is both king (Luke 1:32-33) and high priest (Hebrews 4:14). That is why the King of England is given one SCEPTER and one ROD. Kings have SCEPTERS (Psalm 45:6). Aaron had a ROD that budded (Hebrews 9:4).
Why has the THRONE of BRITAIN lasted so long? Because Genesis 49:10 says, “The SCEPTER shall NOT DEPART from Judah… until Shiloh (“Peace”) come.” Christ is the “Prince of Shiloh” (Peace) (Isaiah 9:6) and hasn’t come back yet so the THRONE of Judah must still exist. Later in 2 Samuel 7:16 God said to David, “thy THRONE shall be established FOREVER” (1 Chronicles 17:14).
Jeremiah 33:17 says, “David shall NEVER LACK a successor (a man or woman) to sit upon the THRONE of the house of ISRAEL” (KJV; NEB; 1 Kings 9:5; 2 Chronicles 13:5). “I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure FOREVER, and his THRONE as the SUN before me. It shall be established FOREVER like the MOON” (Psalm 89:35-37).
Where? “On the THRONE of ISRAEL” (1 Kings 2:4). This promise pertained to the Pharez line of David’s house through Hezron (1 Chronicles 4:1), not Hamul (1 Chronicles 2:5). Jesus Christ was of this Pharez-scepter-kingly line (Luke 1:32) and [from Judah] (John 4:9; Heb.7:14) but refused to accept the rulership of the world at his first coming (Matthew 4:9). Christ will “sit on his (David’s) THRONE” (Isa.9:7; Acts 2:30) at his second coming (Revelation 11:15). So [Judah] must rule today on a THRONE wherever the LOST TEN TRIBES of ISRAEL [rather Judah] are located. Christ can’t come back to a non-existent THRONE (Luke 1:31-32; Jeremiah 33:20-21)… how many nations in the world today even have a THRONE besides BRITAIN?’
Most are located in northwestern Europe and are related to the British throne – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
‘But Zarah wasn’t excluded from the rulership blessing. In fact, the last Davidic king mentioned in succession was Zedekiah of Judah who was dethroned in 585 B.C. Also, “the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah” (Jeremiah 39:6). In Jeremiah 52:11 we also read that Zedekiah was beginning, in 585 B.C., [Israel and Judah’s] seven times of national punishment and Jeremiah was commanded to “root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down” (Jeremiah 1:10) the royalty of the Pharez line in Judah. Why Jeremiah? Because Josiah “married Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah” [2] (Jeremiah 1:1). Their son was Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17). But after this “went Jeremiah … to Mizpeh” (Jeremiah 40:6) where King Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS were (41:10).
Apparently Nebuchadnezzar didn’t know that Hebrew law permitted the PRINCESS to inherit the throne when there were no male descendants (Numbers 27:8). He didn’t harm Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS or take them to Babylon. Now “the king’s DAUGHTERS… and Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch… came into the land of Egypt” (Jeremiah 43:5-7). When they arrived in Tahpanhes (meaning “secret flight”), the Eternal warned Jeremiah that Babylon’s king would soon overrun Egypt also, and destroy the remnant of Judah there so Jeremiah returned “into the land of Judah” (Jeremiah 44:28).
“To this day Tahpanhes or modern Tell Defneh (the [fortress] mound) is called the PALACE of the JEW’S DAUGHTER” (The History of Egypt by Sir Flinders Petrie) – Qasr Bint el Yehudi.
Jeremiah 43:9-10 mentions hiding stones at the entry of Pharaoh Hophra’s house. He had offered protection to these Jews (Jeremiah 44:30) and Jeremiah predicts the conquest of Egypt and the death of this monarch (Ezra 30:10,19). This actually came to pass a few years later when Pharaoh Hophra was murdered by enemies from within his own nation – “them that seek his life.” Sir Flinders Petrie found this very pavement in June 1866. After tearing down the throne of PHAREZ Judah, Jeremiah was commissioned “to build, and to plant” (Jeremiah 1:10) as the prophecy said, “the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward; For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and they that escape out of Mount Zion” (Isaiah 37:31-32).
This remnant was the royal DAUGHTERS (2 Kings 19:30-31). In Ezekiel 21:25 we read that the royalty would CHANGE. The Eternal says, “take off the crown: this (crown) shall not be the same: EXALT him that is LOW, and ABASE him that is HIGH.” So Judah’s son PHAREZ was ABASED and ZARAH was EXALTED. The nation of JUDAH had been HIGH and ISRAEL LOW (Hosea 3:4). Now the positions were REVERSED.’
The unusual circumstance surrounding the twins birth caused controversy as to which child was truly the firstborn. The rights of the firstborn were at stake. The twins were born circa 1705 BCE prior to Jacob relocating his family to Egypt in 1687 BCE. Once in Egypt, it would be another seventeen years before Jacob would proclaim his prophecy in Genesis forty-nine. When the boys were born, it was ordained yet not yet given that Judah’s offspring would inherit the rights of rulership – Genesis 49:10.
Due to this unique inheritance and the privilege of royal lineage, the Pharez and Zarah controversy became supremely significant, for the right of regal rule was paramount. As Pharez was born first literally and second by a technicality, he was blamed for and even named for the breach. A passionate brotherly rivalry was a foregone conclusion. There is no doubt that Zarah and his subsequent line believed that they had been deprived of the firstborn position and the right to rule over Israel.
‘The daughters were planted “In the mountain of the height of ISRAEL” (Ezekiel 17:24).But where wasLOST ISRAEL? We know that Jeremiah was sent to “the kings of the ISLES which are beyond the sea” (Jeremiah 25:15-22; 31:10). Just as the prophecy said, “I will appoint a PLACE for my people Israel, and will plant them” (2 Samuel 7:10). Not only the tribes, but also the royalty.
The parable of Ezekiel 17 (encoded so no Babylonian spy could understand) describes this whole episode. Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh were the two “EAGLES.” The “HIGH CEDAR” is the royal house of David. The “HIGHEST BRANCH” was Zedekiah. The “TENDER ONE” of the “YOUNG TWIGS” was the young crown princess. The Hebrew word here used for “tender” is feminine, in contrast to the masculine form of the same word in Isaiah 53:2. After the transplanting to a “HIGH MOUNTAIN” which was Israel (verse 23) in IRELAND, this feminine twig would “bring forth boughs, bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar” which means that many royal descendants would come from it.
Through his grandmother, Matilda of Scotland, descent is claimed from the daughter of Zedekiah for Henry the Second, Henry Plantagenet of England [3]. His surname means “a twig.” And “under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing” meaning nations of every race… The “TREES of the FIELD” are kings and peoples of the world. The ancient Chronicles of IRELAND (Leabhar Gabhala; Keating’s History of Ireland) inform us [4] that a sage named “Ollam Fodla” (“Wonderful Prophet”) came from Egypt by way of Spain about six centuries B.C., and that he landed on the northeast coast of IRELAND where Carrickfergus is now. He brought with him a princess [4a] called “Tamar Tephi” (“Beautiful Palm”) and a secretary/scribe [4b] named “Simon Brug” or “Bruch.” Also a massive, strongly secured, and mysterious chest which they regarded with utmost reverence and guarded with zealous care (Ark of Covenant) [5] and a large, rough stone [6] and golden banner with a red lion on it [7].
Perhaps the Ark and the two tables of stone lie buried in the Hill of Tara (2 Maccabees 2:7) [8]. Irish poetry and folklore [9] identify Ollam Fodla as JEREMIAH [9a] and Tamar Tephi [9b] as the DAUGHTER of ZEDEKIAH.
Ancient Irish poetry [10] is full of praises for Tamar Tephi and tells of her lofty birth, her stormy life in Jerusalem and at Tahpanhes in Egypt, her voyage to Spain and from there to Ireland. It is also claimed that Tamar Tephi’s younger sister SCOTTA, who was with JEREMIAH on the first lap of the journey, never reached Ireland because she married a Celto-Scythian MILESIAN prince in Spain. Tamar Tephi married the Irish king called Eochaidh Heremon of ZARAH JUDAH [11] after he agreed to give up Baal idolatry and worship Yahweh according to the two tables of law and provide a school for ollamhs.’
Regarding Eochaidh, Walsh writes: “One of Ireland’s rulers was a man named Eochaidh Heremon. Eochaidh is Irish for the Greek name Achaios, and the term Heremon is a title meaning Chief of the Landsmen, a king. He was a Milesian living among the Tuatha de Danann… His genealogy traces back to Chalcol [I Chronicles 2:6; I Kings 4:31], the Zarahite founder of Athens, who is said to have planted a royal dynasty in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. Tephi, heiress to the Pharez Davidic throne, married into an existing Zarah royal line going back hundreds of years. As the newly crowned Queen of Ireland, Tephi contributed the authority of the throne of David to Eochaidh’s kingship. Eochaidh’s coronation is recorded taking place in 580 BCE, six years after the fall of Jerusalem. Through their children the tender twig grew to become a majestic cedar – a new royal dynasty in its own right, through which the Davidic throne would be perpetuated.”
‘This is how the two lines became united. Just as Jeremiah 31:22 prophesied, “a woman shall go about seeking for the husband.” They came on a ship belonging to the Iberian DANAAN [the tribe of Dan].’
Both Danite and Phoenician traders had explored and colonised the Britannic Isles in the time of King Solomon. The Danites had originally arrived in Ireland considerably earlier than 1000 BCE and before the Milesians in circa 1404 BCE. As mentioned, there is evidence they were not only visiting the Isles in the time of Israel’s Judges, for the tribe of Dan is criticised by Deborah who governed Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, for being ‘away at sea’ during a protracted local conflict (Judges 5:17); but also as far back when the Israelites were in Egypt. Danites like the sons of Zarah, had struck out early to explore the Aegean, the Grecian Peninsula, Italy, Iberia and on to the Isle of Erin.
‘When Jeremiah reached Tara Ireland, about 580 B.C., he established the “Mur-ollamain” (Hebrew: “School of the Prophets”). Also the Iodhan Moran was created (Hebrew: “Chief Justice”) and the Rectaire (Hebrew: “the Judge”). On the Four Courts at Dublin (the Supreme Court of Ireland) is a statue of the Prophet JEREMIAH [12]. To this very day, JEREMIAH’S burial place is pointed out on Devenish Island, in Lough Erne, two and a half miles below Enniskillen, Co. Fermanagh. The tomb is hewn out of solid rock. It has been known through the centuries as “JEREMIAH’S TOMB.” He was the real SAINT PATRIARCH – a name later corrupted to “St. Patrick” by Catholics.’
For further information regarding the authenticity of Jeremiah travelling to Ireland and the true identity of Ollamh Fodhla, refer article: The Ark of God.
‘From the union of Heremon and Tea Tephi came a long line of IRISH monarchs extending over a period of more than one thousand years. The SCOTCH monarchs were descended from the Irish kings. The last Scottish king, James VI of Scotland, became James I of ENGLAND, and from him the [former] Queen of Great Britain is descended. King Heremon and Queen Tamar Tephi were crowned at TARA (Hebrew. “TORAH”) upon the Lia Fail [13], (Hebrew: STONE of DESTINY) of Israel, just as the kings of Judah had been for centuries. It was as this time that the “HARP of DAVID” became part of the royal heraldic symbolism on family crests and flags since David was the Pharez line. Nathan told King David that “the sword shall never depart from thine house, because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah, the Hittite, to be thy wife” (2 Samuel 12:10). This is why the royal houses of Europe have suffered so many bloody revolutions and murders.’
There is energetic debate regarding the person of Zedekiah’s daughter. Whether she really existed or is a myth. Her name appears to be a composite, which has aided the weakening of her credentials as a real person. Some call her Tea or Tamar. Tephi appears to be the common denominator in each case – refer article: The Ark of God.
Ezekiel 17:2-24
English Standard Version
2 “Son of man, propound a riddle, and speak a parable to the house of Israel; 3 say, Thus says the Lord God: A great eagle [Nebuchadnezzar II] with great wings and long pinions, rich in plumage of many colors, came to Lebanon and took the top of the cedar [Jeconiah*]. 4 He broke off the topmost of its young twigs [princes] and carried it to a land of trade [Chaldea] and set it in a city of merchants [Babylon]. 5 Then he took of the seed of the land [Zedekiah, the king’s Uncle*] and planted it in fertile soil. He placed it beside abundant waters… 6 and it sprouted and became a low spreading vine, and its branches turned toward him, and its roots remained where it stood… 7 “And there was another great eagle with great wings [Egypt] and much plumage, and behold, this vine bent its roots toward him and shot forth its branches toward him from the bed where it was planted, that he might water it.”
It was the Pharaoh of Egypt, with whom Zedekiah made an alliance. Pharaoh sent an army to raise a siege of Jerusalem in 588 BCE – 2 Chronicles 36:13; Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7. Pharaoh had a great army and Zedekiah leaned on his support and protection. ‘Zedekiah was courting the favour of Egypt while he owed his very position to the bounty of Babylon.’
Ezekiel: 9 “Say, Thus says the Lord God: Will it thrive? Will he not pull up its roots and cut off its fruit, so that it withers, so that all its fresh sprouting leaves wither? It will not take a strong arm or many people to pull it from its roots. 10 Behold, it is planted; will it thrive? Will it not utterly wither when the east wind strikes it – wither away on the bed where it sprouted?”
‘Zedekiah, besides the obligation of an oath, was bound to the king of Babylon by the ties of gratitude, as he owed all he possessed to him.’ Though his sons and nobles were put to the sword.
Ezekiel: … 12 “Say now to the rebellious house, Do you not know what these things mean? Tell them, behold, the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem, and took her king and her princes and brought them to him to Babylon. 13 And he took one of the royal offspring and made a covenant with him, putting him under oath (the chief men of the land he had taken away), 14 that the kingdom might be humble and not lift itself up, and keep his covenant that it might stand.”
‘… Jeconiah and all his princes and officers: see 2 Kings 24:12… Judging them unfit to be trusted any more with any office or power in their own country… taken from among the royal seed Mattaniah, [Jeconiah’s] brother, and advanced him to the throne in Jerusalem, 2 Kings 24:17… A solemn agreement, on terms acceded to and approved by Mattaniah… An oath of fealty: when Nebuchadnezzar caused Mattaniah to enter into this covenant and oath, he changed his name to Zedekiah, which word signifies, the justice of God, to express that God would avenge the crime of this restored captive, if he should break the covenant into which he had entered, and perjure himself… 2 Kings 24:17… Zedekiah being made only a tributary king, consequently was not in as honourable a condition as his predecessors had been in; but yet the keeping of his covenant was the only means, under present circumstances, to support himself and his government.’
Ezekiel: 15 ‘But he rebelled against him by sending his ambassadors to Egypt, that they might give him horses and a large army. Will he thrive? Can one escape who does such things? Can he break the covenant and yet escape? 16 “As I live, declares the Lord God, surely in the place where the king dwells who made him king, whose oath he despised, and whose covenant with him he broke, in Babylon he shall die. 17 Pharaoh [Hophra – Jeremiah 44:30; 37:5] with his mighty army and great company will not help him in war, when mounds are cast up and siege walls built to cut off many lives.
18 He despised the oath in breaking the covenant, and behold, he gave his hand and did all these things; he shall not escape. 19 Therefore thus says the Lord God: As I live, surely it is my oath that he despised, and my covenant that he broke. I will return it upon his head. 20 I will spread my net over him, and he shall be taken in my snare, and I will bring him to Babylon and enter into judgment with him there for the treachery he has committed against me. 21 And all the pick of his troops shall fall by the sword, and the survivors shall be scattered to every wind, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken.’
Many commentators misinterpret the meaning in not applying it to Zedekiah, but rather the prophecy signifying Jeconiah’s descendant Zerubbabel, who later returned to Judea from the Babylonian exile as governor. He was only a governor under the Persians, not ruling in majesty as a king over ‘birds of every sort’ or many other peoples. Nor was he cut out from Judah when the nation and royal family stood as a tall (Lebanon) cedar, but long after the nation had been carried away into captivity.
With the problematic interpretation when using Zerubbabel, other commentators view the prophecy as messianic, for the Messiah would come from the line of David. When Christ lived, neither Judah nor its royal family could be symbolised by a tall cedar, as the area was occupied by the Romans and no Davidic king had ruled there for more than five hundred years. The bringing down of a high tree and exalting the low tree does not fit such an analogy. So the explanation is given that Christ descended, Himself a branch from the replanting in Jerusalem. For the true genealogy of Christ, refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
Ezekiel: 22 Thus says the Lord God: “I myself will take a sprig from the lofty top of the cedar and will set it out. I will break off from the topmost of its young twigs [Zedekiah’s daughters] a tender one [Tephi], and I myself will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain height of Israel will I plant it [Ulster], that it may bear branches and produce fruit and become a noble cedar. And under it will dwell every kind of bird; in the shade of its branches birds of every sort will nest [British Empire]. 24 And all the trees of the field shall know that I am the Lord; I bring low the high tree [line of Pharez – Zedekiah], and make high the low tree [line of Zarah – Eochaidh], dry up the green tree, and make the dry tree flourish. I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it.”
In summary, quoting from The Life & Death of Charles III:
‘The simple fact of the matter is the throne of David came to an end with Jehoiachin. Thus whether one of Zedekiah’s daughters intermarried with a Milesian king in Ireland or not, does not have bearing on a Davidic line of kings. Merely that a line of Pharez may or may not have entered Scotland with the Milesian Scots and their Zarah descended kings.
Thus a reinterpretation or rather a re-explanation is required regarding the account of the birth of Zarah and Pharez in Genesis 38:27-30. While Zarah’s hand appeared first and was tied with a scarlet thread, his hand retracted and his twin Pharez was actually born first. Commentators have read this as Pharez having preeminence over Zarah’s line. With Zarah being secondary to Pharez, probably because David and Christ were descended from Pharez and Zarah was born second, even though technically first. Though it would seem that the Zarah line has always been preeminent as evidenced by the scarlet thread and red hand symbols prevalent in Ireland, Scotland and England.
For all we know, the Pharez line may not have figured in royal lines at all, or seldom at best. Perhaps multiple lines from Zarah’s five sons – Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara – are the true royal lines, with the Hezron line from Pharez giving birth to David and Christ the anomaly and a one time only event. It means pivotal rulers such as Hengist the Jute and the Norman, William the Conqueror were never a line descended from David. Whether they were of Pharez even, may be of little consequence, with a descent from Zarah actually being relevant. With Edward I and James VI/I claiming a Trojan and therefore Zarah descent, adding credence to this line of reasoning.
The question of whether King Charles III is a descendant of King David is comprehensively answered in the article by John D Keyser entitled: Does King Charles III Sit On a Throne of David? Keyser states: ‘The bottom line is, though, that the reign of the Davidic line in Jerusalem is TEMPORARILY INTERRUPTED’ until Christ’s return. He concludes: ‘Nevertheless, the royal line of Judah (through Zarah) DID go to Ireland… thus fulfilling the prophecy in Genesis 49:10: “The scepter shall NOT depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh comes…”
When the Danes (or Dene), peacefully migrated southwards from southern Sweden, they impinged on the Jutes and to the south of them, the Frisians and Angles. The Danes – not to be confused with the tribe of Dan or modern day Denmark – are one and the same as the later Danish Vikings, a distinct and separate tribe – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.
The Danes had been part of a Scandinavian tribal collective which had suffered divisions in the fourth and fifth centuries, thus beginning the splitting of the Israelite Danish Vikings, from the remaining ‘Danes’ (Medan) and Swedes (Shuah) who descend from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Thus they entered Jutland, formerly the Cimbric Peninsula derived from Cymric, in the fifth century, forcing the Saxons tribes west towards Britain. As the Angles were allies of the Danes and their kin, they chose migration rather than warfare.
A Danish kingdom seems to have been established by the late fifth century, but the earliest records of its kings is fragmentary and allusive. It was a distinct state as opposed to Scania still surviving in southern Sweden. Identity adherents subscribe to the tribe of Dan leaving their name, as in, Dans-mark. It would seem the Dan part may have some credence, whereas the mark part is explained in that the march of the Danes – ‘a march, mark, or mierce being a borderland territory’ – was ostensibly the no-man’s land between them and the tribes which lay to the South, following the exodus to Britain by the Angles, Frisians and Jutes. This name became normalised as Denmark.
Similar border states included Mercia in the west of England which bordered Wales, the North March of Eastern Germany, Finnmark in Norway and the Ostmark of what is now Austria.
The Jutes certainly lent their name to Jutland, the mainland peninsula now comprising Denmark. Though most people think of the Saxons or the dominant Saxon tribe the Angles, when they consider the populating of Britain south of the Caledonian Picts and east of the Cymric Britons circa 450 to 650 CE, there were two other notable tribes which entered Britain. One was the Frisians – composed of two separate sons of Jacob, Issachar and Zebulun – and the second was the first wave of the tribe of Judah who entered Britain known as the Jutes. Notice in a moment who was first Saxon tribe into Britain out of the three. As well as those who remained in Scandinavia; the Geats and Wulfings, from whom respectively the modern Danes and Norwegians descend today.
Kingdoms of Europe: An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Ruling Monarchs from Ancient Times to the Present, Gene Gurney, 1982, page 129 – emphasis mine:
‘Most of the country was conquered by these Teutons [Saxons], of whom the principle tribes were the Angles, Saxons [Frisians], and Jutes, who finally fused into one people, under the name of Anglo-Saxons, orAngles or English, while that portion of Britain in which they made their home was called England. Thefirst of these Teutonic kingdoms was founded in Kent. A despairing British chieftain or king, Vortigern… to save his people from their northern foes [the Picts]… invited the Teutons to come to his aid.
Two well-known Jutish Vikings, Hengist and Horsa, accepted the invitation with their followers, and in the year 449 landed on the island of Thanet, the southeastern extremity of… England…’
Fromkin and Rodman explain the etymology of the words Judah and Jute.
An Introduction to Language, Victoria Fromkin & Robert Rodman, 1988, page 315 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The German linguist Jakob Grimm (of fairy-tale fame)… published a four-volume treatise (1819-1822) that specified the regular sound correspondences among Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, and the Germanic languages. It was not only the similarities that intrigued Grimm and other linguists, but thesystematic nature of the differences…Grimm pointed out that certain phonological changes that did not take place in Sanskrit, Greek, or Latin must have occurred early in the history of the Germanic languages. Because the changes were so strikingly regular, they became known as Grimm’s Law’ … (one example of which is) d->t … voiced stops become voiceless.’
The people known as the Jutes and Juten (or Yuten) – for the letter J is pronounced as Y in German and the Scandinavian languages – would originally have been recognised as Juden (or Yuden). Ironically, Juden became the German word used for the Jews.
Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Note carefully the following statements made by Jessel regarding the Jews and Benjamites:
“We find in the Bible many references to the fighting power of the Benjamin, and we find them also always in alliance with Yahuds. Together these white races held in subjection the coloured people, the natives of Canaan. JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the Amurra (“AMORITES”) and the Kheta of the Egyptian monuments (ibid., p. 118).”
‘Jessel thinks that the settlements in the British Isles which had built the cromlechs were the same people as the Palestinian Amorites. He plainly says that “JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the AMURRA” whom the Egyptians had depicted. Also, did you notice that Jessel spoke of the “YAHUDS” and the “BENJAMIN” as “these WHITE races”? He also spoke of the native CANAANITES as “the COLOURED people” – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. ‘Truly, the native Canaanites were dark or colored in comparison with the people of the tribes of Judah (the Yahuds) and the Benjamin (Benjamites).’
A close relationship has existed between the peoples descended from Judah and Benjamin as Jessel points out. Though their identity as Amorites is open to question – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Added to this is that while original Canaanites were dark coloured, the Canaanites at the time of the Israelites were predominately white and or Nephilim (and Elioud giant) descended – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Horsa in 455 CE was killed during the Battle of Aegaelsthrep (Aylesford) along with the British King Vortigern. Vortigern’s son, Catigern was also killed in the fighting. Horsa’s brother Hengist survived and was victorious, declaring himself King of Kent – reigning from 455 to 488 CE. Hengist and Horsa were the Jutish leaders of a population that quickly expanded in southern England, with their Nobles gaining influence and becoming the longest established aristocratic families of the Saxon population.
Some claim that Hengist and Horsa could trace their descent from Woden (or Odin), making them royal descendants of Zarah. The neighbouring kingdom of Sussex was founded by Aelle in 477 CE and in 495 Cerdic and his son Cynric landed in the south of England. By 519, Cerdic had become the first king of Wessex. His son Cynric took Wiltshire in 552 and defeated the Britons in 556. In 575, the Angles founded the Kingdom of East Anglia and later Mercia in 586.
After the reigns of Hengest and his son Aesc (or Oisc), little is known of Kentish history from 512 CE until the reign of Aethelberht from 560 to 616, who by 595 had become overlord of all the kingdoms south of the River Humber. His wife Bertha, daughter of Charibert the Frankish king of Paris, was a Christian and it may have been for that reason that Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine’s mission to Aethelberht’s court in 597. Aethelberht, after his conversion and as the first Christian king in Britain in 601, donated a place of residence in Canterbury for the missionaries and hence this became the first and senior archiepiscopal see for the English church that would later be known as Anglican – refer Appendix VIII When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the latter Days.
Kent waned in power and from 825 CE Kent was a province of Wessex, whose kings became kings of all England by the tenth century – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The social organisation of Kent exhibited many distinctive features, which supports the statement of the Venerable Bede that ‘its inhabitants were a different tribe from the Angles… namely the Jutes. Instead of two classes of nobles, or gesithcund, as in Wessex and Mercia, Kent had only one, the eorlcund; and the Kentish ceorl, or peasant, was [interestingly from a Judah perspective] a person of considerably greater substance than those elsewhere.’
The main area of intrusion by the Jutes into England matches in large part, the area of England historically known as the Home Counties. Generally speaking, the Home Counties are Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Middlesex, Surrey, East Sussex and West Sussex. There is no official designation to these counties as a unified group. The description is more of a social and demographic way to identify the stomping grounds of the traditional English middle and upper classes. Sometimes parts of Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire, Hampshire and even Dorset are included. The Jutes for instance, did settle in Hampshire after their arrival and thus a classification of Saxon or Wessex can be misleading, as the Jutes are and were Saxons.
Aethelred I became king of Wessex and Kent in 866 CE and was the son of Aethelwulf. The Kingdom of Wessex heartland was in the area of the modern county of Hampshire. As it grew, it covered all of the country south of the river Thames from the borders of Kent and Sussex to the Tamar River. By the tenth century, the Kingdom of Dumnonia, west of the Tamar, was under West Saxon rule. Notice the Judah family name of Tamar, the mother of Pharez and Zarah and recall Tamar, a daughter of King David.
Aethelred’s reign was a long struggle against the Danes. In the year of his succession a large Danish force landed in East Anglia and in the year 868, Aethelred and his brother Alfred went to help Burgred of Mercia against this host, but the Mercians soon made peace with their foes.
In 871, the Danes encamped at Reading, where they defeated Aethelred and his brother, but later in the year the English won a great victory at Aescesdun. Two weeks later they were defeated again, this time at Basing but partially revived their fortunes with a further victory at Maeretun (perhaps Marden in Wiltshire).
In Easter of the same year Aethelred died and was buried at Wimborne. His brother Alfred, also spelled Aelfred, was Alfred the Great – born in 849 and dying in 899 – he became the new King of Wessex for twenty-eight years. He prevented England from falling to the Danes and promoted learning and literacy. It was during these events in southern England the heartland of Judah, that Kenneth McAlpine, hundreds of miles to the North, united the Scots and Picts, forming the Kingdom of Scotland and hastening the emergence of Benjamin from the shadows.
The second wave of the tribe of Judah, the Northmen known as Normans arrived from Normandy, France where they and a residue of other tribes had dwelt for some two hundred years. The historic Battle of Hastings in 1066 CE with the killing of King Harold, began the Norman Conquest of England under William the Conqueror – formerly the Bastard and son of Robert I – who was crowned at Westminster Abbey on December 25, 1066. William I was born in 1028 and died in 1087. Arthur kemp states:
‘One of William the Conqueror’s first undertakings was a survey of England. This resulted in the famous Domesday Book which was a full account of all property and wealth in that country at the beginning of the eleventh century… it’s detail is staggering, including even the smallest villages; the number of mills, fisheries, animals; and the sizes of all woodlands and meadows.’
William was succeeded by his son, William II who was known as William Rufus or William the Red, due to his reddish hair. These descendants of Judah acted with authority and used their wealth, power and influence to great effect. Were they aristocratic lines of Pharez? More likely still, they were from Zarah – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Their impact was immediate and it was severe.
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Volume 29, page 33: ‘The major change, was the subordination of England to a Norman aristocracy. William distributed estates to his followers (barons from Normandy) on a piecemeal basis as the lands were conquered.’
In Search of the Dark Ages, Michael Wood, 1987, page 233 – emphasis mine:
‘The redistribution of land after the Norman Conquest has been called a tenurial revolution of the most far-reaching kind and a catastrophe for the higher orders of English society from which they never recovered. The record of Domesday Book, completed only twenty years after Hastings, shows that though some Englishmen still held considerable estates, very few held any position of influence.
It has been estimated that only eight per cent of the land was still held by [existing] English [Nobles] in 1086 [a mere twenty years after the conquest].
There is much evidence for a widespread emigration of Englishmen into other countries, into Denmark, into Scotland and, most remarkably of all, to Greece and the Byzantine empire where there is good contemporary evidence that large numbers of Englishmen took service with the emperor in Constantinople in the generation following Hastings.’
This new order of Norman nobility swiftly took control of not just England, but also Scotland – for instance through Robert the Bruce’s ancestors – and Wales, as well as Ireland’s nobility. These Norsemen or Northmen Vikings who had settled in France, spoke Frankish, a form of French and had already entwined themselves within the ruling class of France, setting up for the future Angevin Monarchs and therefore a controlling influence over Ammon and Moab, not unlike Darda and the Trojans some two and half millennia previously – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran*.
In 911 CE, the Frankish King Charles had ceded land to the Normans in return for their loyalty and protection against other Viking incursions, naming their chief Rollo, a Duke. Time Frame AD 800-1000: Fury of the Northmen, Time Life Books, 1988, page 38: ‘His Vikings melded into the local culture much more rapidly than in England. They took local women as wives and concubines and watched their children grow up speaking the Frankish tongue.’
As discussed, the Sicambrians or Franks were part of the Teutonic invasions of Europe, which had followed on the heels of the Celtic ingress. Royal Genealogies or the Genealogical Tables of Emperors, Kings, and Princes, from Adam to These Times, James Anderson, page 611: ‘The Sicambrian Kings, Antenor, of the House of Troy, King of the Cimmerians, 443 B.C.’ We have learned how the Franks descend from Ammon and Moab, sons of Abraham’s nephew Lot.
Intermarriage between their people and Judah was a union between family, with a pedigree going back all the way to the Triad. Similarly, a number of these Frankish Nobles may well have been from ruling families of Israel already – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
The Frankish nobility had blended with the older Gaulish nobility from Celtic times and the Gauls had intermarried with the noble Romans descended from Ishmael prior to that. Roman nobility claimed to trace its descent from Aeneas of the house of Troy. Whichever the specific lineage, the closeness of the related German, French and British lines is without question, as our studies on Ammon, Moab and Ishmael have shown – refer* Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.
The Angevins were the first three Plantagent kings of England: Henry II from 1154 to 1189 – the husband of Eleanor of Aquitaine – Richard the Lionheart from 1189 to 1199 and John the Bad from 1199 to 1216, the king who infamously signed the Magna Carta. On the 25 November 1120, the White Ship carrying William Adelin sank, killing all three hundred people aboard, bar one. William was the future monarch and eldest son of Henry I. Henry was the youngest son of William the Conqueror. The death of William left one child, Empress Matilda, wife of Holy Roman Emperor, Henry V. Five years later, Henry V died and Matilda returned to Normandy and was named Henry I’s successor.
After 1066, the rise of the Anglo-Norman aristocracy depended on the preeminence of the Duchy of Normandy. It was a jewel of wealth and power, desired by every royal descendant. Henry I had taken it by force from his older brother, William Rufus (William II).
To secure its southern border, William Adelin had married the daughter of the Count of Anjou, who also controlled the adjacent counties of Maine and Touraine. King Henry I now arranged the marriage of his widowed daughter who was twenty-six, to the eldest son of the Count of Anjou, Geoffrey Plantagenet who was fourteen. They hated each other, yet still produced three sons. Though Matilda’s cousin Stephen of Blois – the Nephew of Henry I – had usurped the throne in 1135, Geoffrey worked tirelessly to win it back for her. Following Stephen’s death in 1154, their eldest son ascended the throne as Henry II, King of England. England came to be ruled not by the son of an Anglo-Norman king, but rather, by the son of an Angevin Count and his Norman empress.
Henry possessed a larger proportion of France than the King of France himself – see map above. Hence it led to inevitable conflict, with King John being defeated in the Anglo-French War of 1213 to 1214, by Philip II of France. John lost control of most of the continental possessions apart from Gascony in southern Aquitaine.
This defeat set the scene for further conflict and the Hundred Year’s War lasting between 1337 and 1453. A conflict over the French throne between the English royal House of Plantagenet and the French royal House of Valois. Eventually, the House of Valois retained control of France, ending the intertwined French and English monarchies, so that they remained separate.
This close, yet antagonistic relationship between Judah, Ammon and Moab was mirrored millennias earlier between the Trojans and Greek Athenians.
Of the Kings and Queens of England, it is interesting to note some of the Houses and how many monarchs each have contributed. Working back, the current House of Windsor or rather Saxe-Coburg-Gotha combined with the House of Hanover which preceded it – both being German-Jewish in ancestry, descending from Ishmael and Edom (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – have provided ten Kings and two Queens – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
Twelve monarchs in total from George I in 1714 to the current monarch, Charles III from 2023.
The House preceding were the Stewarts of Scotland. Producing seven Monarchs in total, including two Queens from James I in 1603 to Anne in 1702. The next House was that of the Tudors of Wales. Five Monarchs in total, including two Queens from Henry VII in 1485 to Elizabeth I in 1558. Then we arrive at the Plantagenets deriving from the Angevins of France and their branches, the Houses of York and Lancaster, which provided eleven kings from Henry III in 1216 to Richard III in 1483. Before that as mentioned, the three Angevin Kings of Henry II, Richard I and John.
We finally arrive at the Norman Kings derived from the Norse Vikings, consisting of William I, his son William II from 1087 to 1100 and William I’s grandson, Henry I from 1100 to 1135.
It is these three kings, nearly one thousand years ago that we could possibly perceive as being a genuine line of Judah. All the subsequent lines have had varying degrees of descent from the tribe via Zarah reduced by the foreign royal lines injected from Ammon and Moab of France; in part perhaps from Simeon of Wales and Benjamin of Scotland; and without question the Ishmael-Edomite mix from Germany. The unmistakable fact, is that admixture within these lines again means the percentage of Judaic blood is just that, a minority percentage.
The current royals may have a smidgeon of a Judah bloodline, but the reality is, that the English throne which includes the ancestry of French Angevins, a Dutch William of Orange, William III and two German-Jewish Houses, is not very English and hasn’t been for a very long time.
Does this negate the legitimacy of the British throne being the Davidic throne? No. Does it contradict a descendant of David being available to sit on the throne? No. After an Edomite overturn, does it signify we have entered the end game of foretold events? Yes.
The Duke of York, who became King George VI of England from 11 December 1936 until his death on February 6, 1952, reportedly wrote in 1922: ‘… I am sure the British Israelite business is true. I have read a lot about it lately and everything no matter how large or small points to our being “the chosen race” – Letter, 1922, facsimile printed in The Independent, April 6, 1996.’ The last King of England until the recent ascension of Charles III, believed in Britain’s Israelite past and its modern identity.
Royal Coat of Arms of Elizabeth I – Always the same (Ever the Same)
It is coincidence indeed that the first Queen Elizabeth reigned during the rapid growth of England as a chrysalis empire, with the planting of new Colonies in the Americas; while her namesake Queen Elizabeth II – Elizabeth I of Scotland and daughter of George VI – should witness the rapid dissolution of Britain’s empire and collapse of her once unrivalled power.
Nota Bene
The original section which followed concerning Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘The Shakespeare Shadow’ and is now available there for the interested reader.
The English King Edward I conquered Wales in 1282. In order to appease the Welsh, the king’s eldest son was made the Prince of Wales, a title which still exists today. The two countries became unified in 1536, with the Kingdom of England incorporating Wales. The Kingdom of England ceased being a separate sovereign state on May 1, 1707, when the Acts of Union put into effect, the terms agreed in the Treaty of Union the previous year. The resulting Kingdom of Great Britain born from a political union with the Kingdom of Scotland. To accommodate the union for both, institutions such as the law and national churches remained separate.
It is interesting to note that the unique relationship between England and Wales, as Judah and Simeon is revealed in the Bible and we will address this in the following chapter. Similarly with Scotland as Benjamin, with whom we will study next. Of all the territories, colonies or nations which England acquired during the evolution of its empire; the Kingdom of Scotland was the only country that was not conquered; occupied; seized as a protectorate; purchased; bargained and traded for or acquired by treaty.
Turning points for England were its imperial expansion in the sixteenth century, particularly during Elizabeth I’s reign during 1558 to 1603 and the colonies springing up in North America, leading to a prominent and powerful nation comprising many peoples. Considerable value was attached to these fledgling colonies and the wealth which they provided to Britain and the crown.
Another turning point was the Spanish Armada in 1588, sent by Spain to bring Great Britain into line with Catholic Europe. After the disastrous Spanish navy’s expedition, England eventually rose to become the world’s dominant sea and naval power during the nineteenth century.
A notable decision by Elizabeth I was the expulsion of all Black Africans from England in 1601. From 1555 the first Black slaves were imported into England via the ports of Liverpool and Bristol. By 1601 there were officially twenty thousand Black slaves in London. A significant Black presence, unlike America, was delayed until increased immigration from African colonies occurred in the twentieth century.
Author Paul Johnson describes the awakening of Judah’s lawgiving destiny and calling to fulfil its commission, through the enterprise of building an empire – emphasis mine:
‘However, the fact that England had declared itself an empire invalidated the papal award in official English eyes, a judgment made formal by Queen Elizabeth I’s chief minister, Sir William Cecil, who told the Spanish Ambassador that English settlers were free to claim for the Crown any territory in the Americas not yet settled. The term “the British Empire” came into use at about the same time. It was given a religious underpinning by the widespread belief in England, made explicit in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, the most popular book in Elizabethan and Jacobean England after the Bible, that for historical reasons the English [true Judah] had succeeded the discredited Jews [false Judah] as the Elect Nation, had vindicated their claim by the Reformation, and had a global mission to carry thus-purified Christianity throughout the world’ – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
When James VI of Scotland became James I due to Elizabeth being ‘childless’ – an irony as James was the son of Mary Stuart who had been executed by Elizabeth I in 1567 (for both Elizabeth and James were direct descendants of the first Tudor monarch, Henry VII as Elizabeth was his granddaughter and James his great-great grandson. Henry’s sister Margaret, married the King of Scotland, James IV. They had a son, James V, who married and had a daughter, Mary, who became the Queen of Scots; making her Elizabeth’s second cousin. James VI was the son of Mary, Queen of Scots and therefore a third cousin to Elizabeth) – England expanded under the Stuart House in trade, finance and prosperity; developing Europe’s largest merchant fleet.
The United Kingdom played a major role in the advancement of civilisation, taking a significantly leading role in advocating democracy; in the writing of great literature; and the addition of landmark scientific development. During the nineteenth century, the British Empire covered over one quarter of the surface of the earth and its share of the world’s wealth by GDP, was a similar percentage.
The newly formed Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707 led to the combined output from the Royal Society and other English enterprises – with the Scottish Enlightenment – in creating numerous innovations in science and engineering. Coupled with the enormous growth in overseas trade, which was ably protected by the British Navy, this paved the way for the unabated expansion of the British Empire. It also drove the Industrial Revolution; ‘a period of profound change in the socioeconomic and cultural conditions of England, resulting in industrialised agriculture, manufacture, engineering and mining, as well as new and pioneering road, rail and water networks to facilitate their expansion and development.’
This period also saw the presence and contribution of an intellectual giant and one of the greatest scientists and thinkers the world has ever known: Isaac Newton – who lived from 1642 to 1726. Kemp says: ‘Newton was a prestigious natural philosopher and mathematician who invented the mathematical system known as calculus and was author of the laws of motion and gravitation. Newton’s works… saw England dominate the world’s stage with scientific and intellectual thought – a situation of eminence which contributed to the domination of the physical world by the British.’
The opening of Northwest England’s Bridgewater Canal in 1761 began the canal age in Britain and in 1825 ‘the world’s first permanent steam locomotive-hauled passenger railway, the Stockton and Darlington Railway opened to the public. The Scottish scientist ‘James Watt had perfected the steam engine, enabling mechanisation on a scale never before seen. By 1830, the Industrial Revolution had turned Britain into the foremost industrial power in the world.’
Great Britain’s power was no better displayed than at the Battle of Trafalgar on land by the Duke of Wellington and at sea by Lord Nelson when the naval engagement between the British Royal Navy, comprising twenty-seven battle ships and the combined fleets of the French and Spanish Navies, with thirty-three battle ships during the the Napoleonic Wars resulted in their decisive victories. It was at this time, in the early 1800s during the fight against Napoleon’s France for hegemony of Europe, which ‘fostered a concept of Britishness and a united national British people’ shared by the English, Welsh and Scots.
In 1851, London became the biggest and most populous metropolitan area in the world with two and a half million people, achieving considerable prestige, as the financial hub of the world. During the Victorian era, the occupation of India underscored the historical link between Cush and Judah – Numbers 12:1; 2 Kings 19:9; Jeremiah 39:15; 2 Samuel 18:21, 32 – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Many British officers stationed in India, brought back Indian wives to Britain and Ireland. This admixture is evident in an Indian-origin blood disorder which is now found in Britain.
Power shifts in Europe led to World War I (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar), with hundreds of thousands of English soldiers lost, fighting for the United Kingdom and its Allies. Two decades later in World War II, the United Kingdom stood up to the same European aggressor again, its cousin Ishmael.
Following the war, the British experienced rapid decolonisation and a once powerful Empire of substance dissolving into an impotent Commonwealth of form only. A major contribution was from Frank Whittle’s development of the jet engine which transformed air travel.
March of the Titans, The Isle of Influence – England, Scotland and Wales, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 207 – emphasis mine:
‘Even its most vehement detractors will admit that the nation of Great Britain has been one of the foremost countries of present-day Western civilization. Its achievements are legion – at one stage its empire existed on all the continents of the world except Antarctica. Its language became the second most widely spoken language on earth (after Chinese); its writers, poets, and playwrights are acknowledged as some of the greatest of all time, and its history and culture have become ingrained in the traditions of many people on earth. Britain was also directly responsible for the initial mass settlement of the North American continent that, together with immigrants from the rest of Europe, created the giant that became America. The Industrial Revolution, which it spearheaded, shaped the infrastructure of the current world. Yet it is a small island, slightly more than half the size of France.
The history of this island of kings and queens is a remarkable one… During the twentieth century there has been significant population movement to England, mostly from other parts of the British Isles, as well as from the Commonwealth; primarily from the Indian subcontinent. In the past two decades while a member of the European Union, increased numbers of people from Eastern Europe have also moved to the United Kingdom. Also in recent decades, the administration of the United Kingdom has moved towards devolved governance in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
England and Wales continue to exist as a jurisdiction within the United Kingdom. One result of devolution has stimulated a greater emphasis on a more English specific identity and patriotism that has been subsumed in a British identity for the past two centuries.
The name ‘England’… is derived from the Old English name Englaland, which means ‘land of the Angles.’ The Angles came from the Anglia peninsula in the Bay of Kiel area, the present-day German state of Schleswig-Holstein of the Baltic Sea as opposed to the Jutes, dwelling further north. ‘The earliest recorded use of the term, as “Engla londe”, is in the late-ninth-century translation into Old English of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English people. The term was then used in a different sense to the modern one, meaning “the land inhabited by the English”, and it included English people in what is now south-east Scotland but was then part of the English kingdom of Northumbria.’
A number of the separatist movements in Europe involve the family of Abraham and in large part include the ‘Celtic fringes.’ Brittany has strong links with Cornwall. Both have strong regional identities, with similar looking flags.
The old Brittany flag (above) and the flag of Cornwall (Below)
In the first century work by Tacitus, Germania, the first reference to the Angles is used in the Latin as Anglii. The etymology of the tribal name itself is disputed by scholars. Some suggesting that it derives from the shape of the Angeln peninsula, or an angular shape. ‘How and why a term derived from the name of a tribe that was less significant than others, such as the Saxons, came to be used for the entire country and its people is not known, but it seems this is related to the custom of calling the Germanic people in Britain Angli Saxones or English Saxons to distinguish them from continental Saxons (Eald-Seaxe) of Old Saxony between the Weser and Eider rivers in Northern Germany.’
There is no mystery, for it is worth re-iterating that the Germanic tribes of the Angles – constituting two tribes of Israel, Manasseh and Ephraim – the Jutes and the Frisians, again representing two Israelite tribes, were collectively, the Saxons. The Angles were the dominant tribe in numbers, so their name lingering in Britain their home for centuries, from the name for their previous home is not a surprise. Non-Celtic Britain, is in fact the land of the Jutes of Judah; like Jutland from Jute-land in northern Denmark. Similarly in Scottish Gaelic, the term Saxon is the name given to the English of Sassenach. Alternatively, the Welsh name for the English is Sasseneg.
Loegria is a romantic name for England related to the Welsh word for England, Lloegr in Arthurain legend. Albion is also applied to England in a poetic capacity; though its original meaning is the island of Great Britain as a whole, with its derivative Alba, referring to Scotland in the north.
The St George’s Cross has been the national flag of England since the thirteenth century. Originally the flag was used by the maritime Republic of Genoa and Richard I paid a tribute to the Doge of Genoa from 1190 onwards so that English ships could fly the flag as a means of protection when entering the Mediterranean. The red cross was also a symbol for the Crusaders in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Tudor Rose is England’s national floral emblem and was adopted as a national emblem of England around the time of the War of the Roses as a symbol of peace – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. It is a combined white rose of the Yorkists and the red rose of the Lancastrians – cadet branches of the Plantagenets who went to war over control of the nation (in 1455), just two years after the Hundred Years War ended in 1453.
In a series of civil wars, the first at St Albans on May 22, 1455, with terrible loss of life and almost extinguishing the male lines, it ended on August 22 1485 at the battle of Bosworth Field where usurper Richard III of York died and a total of over one hundred thousand men lay dead. The House of Tudor had allied with the House of Lancaster. It was Henry Tudor who defeated Richard III, assumed the throne as Henry VII and married Elizabeth of York, the eldest daughter and the sole heir of Edward IV, uniting the rival claims.
The oak tree is a symbol of England, representing strength and endurance as is the British bulldog, representing an indomitable tenacity. The Royal Arms of England, with a national coat of arms featuring three lions, originated with its adoption by Richard the Lion Heart in 1198. It provides one of the most prominent symbols of England and unsurprisingly, it is similar to the traditional arms of Normandy.
England does not have an official designated national anthem, as the United Kingdom as a whole uses God Save the Queen. Though the following songs are often considered unofficial English anthems: Jerusalem; Landof Hope and Glory; Rule Britannia; and I vow to Thee, My Country.
One subject that is well rooted in prehistory is that of giants in Britain – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
The Giants of Ancient Albion & the Legendary Founding of Prehistoric Britain, Hugh Newman, 2017 – emphasis mine:
‘Giants are at the heart of national folklore concerning the founding of Britain, and archaic traditions state they have inhabited the country since deep antiquity… a lost legacy of extremely tall and powerful individuals who once ruled this part of the world.
Britain’s oldest acknowledged name is thought to be taken from a prehistoric giant king called ‘Albion’ who made his way to the island after being banished from his homeland of Greece. “He was begotten by the sea-god whom the Greeks called Poseidon, the Romans Neptune.” In Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, by Raphael Holinshed, Albion and the giants were said to have gradually consolidated their position in Britain, ruling the land for hundreds or possibly thousands of years.
After a long reign, Albion went to the south of France… to help his army defeat Hercules. To ensure winning, Hercules summoned his father Zeus and a shower of stones fell from the sky. These were used as weapons against Albion and he was defeated… the giant race of Britain continued for hundreds more years, although their numbers decreased and ended up at [the] southwestern tip of Cornwall, until the arrival of Brutus after the Trojan wars. However, Britain’s original name could also be from a Greek giantess called ‘Albina’:
“The Chronicles of Britain, written by John de Wavrin between 1445 and 1455, relate that in the time of Jahir, the third judge of Israel after Joshua, Lady Albine and her sisters came to, and settled in, an island which they named Albion after her, and which afterwards got the name of Britain.”
Jair was the eighth Judge from 1118 to 1096 BCE. This appears too late, while the third Judge was actually Shamgar who ruled an undisclosed period of time of perhaps twenty years from 1204 to 1184 BCE – falling between the second Judge Ehud (1284-1204 BCE) and the fourth Judge Deborah (1184-1144 BCE). This would be about one hundred years before the arrival of Brutus.
Newman: “While they were living there the devil assumed the shape of a man, and dwelt among the wicked women, and by [them] had issue great and terrible giants and giantesses, who afterwards much increased and multiplied, and occupied the land for a long time, namely, until the arrival of Brutus, who conquered them [circa 1100 BCE].”
‘The story of Albina has variations. Most versions agree that her father had thirty-three wicked daughters, but he managed to find thirty-three husbands to curb their unruly ways. The daughters were displeased and under the leadership of their eldest sister Alba (also Albina, or Albine) they plotted to cut the throats of their husbands as they slept.”
“For this crime they were set adrift in a boat with half a year’s rations, and after a long and dreadful journey they arrived at a great island that came to be named Albion, after the eldest. Here they stayed, and with the assistance of demons… “mated with”… [populating] the wild, windswept islands with a race of giants”
‘… and with their offspring a new ruling giant elite were founded. These giants are evidenced in the story by huge bones that were said to be unearthed in the country during the 1400s’ – Article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants II.
‘Geoffrey of Monmouth’s influential 12th century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain)… [claims] thousands of years after the giants had populated the island, Brutus and other warriors fleeing the Trojan wars landed on the coast of Albion and legend states that the modern name of Britain comes from Brutus. Geoffrey asserts that he translated the Historia into Latin (in about 1136) from “a very ancient book in the British tongue,” that was loaned to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. What this book was, has had scholars debating for centuries, but it could have been the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) from the ninth century, written by Nennius, a monk from Bangor, Wales. This is likely, as he covered many Arthurian myths, including the giants of ancient Albion. An important section of Geoffrey’s text has Brutus and his men realizing that Albion was already partly populated by unexpectedly tall foes: “It was uninhabited except for a few giants… they drove the giants whom they had discovered into the caves in the mountains.” After scaring off the giants and launching attacks on the titans, the land was then divided up and Corineus was given the southwest area of Cornwall to rule, named after the great warrior.’
“Corineus experienced great pleasure from wrestling with the giants, of whom there were far more there than in any of the districts which had been distributed among his comrades. Among the others there was a particularly repulsive one, called Gogmagog, who was twelve feet tall.”
‘Other chroniclers state that he was in fact twelve cubits tall, so this would have made him 18 feet (5.5 meters) tall. Gogmagog was described as being so strong that he could uproot an oak tree and shake it like a hazel wand… the ferocious giant attacked Corineus’ camp with twenty of his kin. This turned into an all-out battle and Corineus and his men called on their local allies and eventually defeated them in a bloody conflict. Brutus chose to keep one of the giants alive, as he wanted to witness a wrestling match between Gogmagog and Corineus. During the tightly fought match, Gogmagog broke three of Corineus’ ribs, and he was so enraged, he hoisted Gogmagog up on his shoulders with superhuman strength and ran to the cliff where he threw him off to his death. His body smashed into many pieces after hitting sharp rocks and stained the water red, that “was so discolored with his blood as to continue tinged with it for a long time.” The cliff from which he was thrown became known as Langnagog or ‘The Giants Leap’.
It was on Plymouth Hoe that became the legendary place that the wrestling occurred because it was recorded in 1486 that a giant turf-cut figure was carved depicting two figures, one of them being Gogmagog.
… the names of Gog and Magog first appear in the Hebrew Bible with reference to Magog, son of Japheth in the Book of Genesis, then Gog, the king of Magog, appears in the Old Testament in Ezekiel (38:2) as the instigator of a terrible battle. Gog was referred to as being a person and Magog was the land he was from’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
‘Similar stories are echoed in the Book of Revelation and the Qur’an. The tradition is sparse and confused as Gog and Magog are presented as men, supernatural beings (giants and demons), national groups or lands, and appear widely in other folklore and mythology. For example, Gogmagog and Gogmaegot are identified with giants in Spencer’s Faerie Queen (1590) and in the medieval legends of [Arthur]. The names even reached Cambridge in Eastern England where the hilly area became known as the ‘Gog Magog Hills’, where interestingly, some taller than average skeletons were unearthed in the 1800s.
After defeating the giants, Brutus travelled all over the country to find a suitable spot to rule from. He decided on the River Thames and founded the city of Troia Nova, or New Troy, which became Trinovantum, we now know as London, with his captured giant in tow. Another, later version of the story describes how the giants Gog and Magog were two people and were taken prisoners and forced to become porters at the Royal Palace, now the London Guildhall. The effigies of Gog and Magog have remained at the Guildhall since the reign of Henry V. In The Gigantick History of the Two Famous Giants of Guildhall (1741) it proclaims that Gogmagog and Corineus were in fact two giants:
“Corineus and Gogmagog were two brave giants who richly valued their honour and exerted their whole strength and force in the defence of their liberty and country; so the City of London, by placing these, their representatives in their Guildhall, emblematically declare, that they will, like mighty giants defend the honour of their country and liberties of this their City; which excels all others, as much as those huge giants exceed in stature the common bulk of mankind.”
‘The defeat of Gogmagog by Corineus was the beginning of the end for the remaining giants, and the few that remained turned up again [in] the tales of Jack-the-Giant-Killer and Cormoran (mainly based in Cornwall), while others were said to have fled to Dartmoor and the mountains of Wales… the stories of Jack-the-Giant-Killer are worthy of a mention. The violent chronicles of Britain’s most famous giant hunter stretch far back into prehistory, to the times when the giants and humans were attempting to co-exist, before the arrival of Brutus. Mainly based in Cornwall, his exploits lingered across the whole of Britain. He was presented as a clever young man who often outwitted his gargantuan foes.
The most famous story is that he defeated the terrible Cormoran on St Michael’s Mount. By blowing a horn loudly, he caused the giant to come rushing out, but it fell into a deep pit that Jack had prepared and covered with twigs. Cormoran was then hacked to death by Jack. The other stories continue in this vein, and it was only when the printing press became widespread in the Victorian age that the story was toned down, and it transformed into the children’s classic Jack and the Beanstalk… there are thousands of legends of giants throughout Britain… Their physical strength and stature became exaggerated as their deeds pass into legend, but in a strange twist, it is often in the same locations that actual giant skeletons and bones were reportedly unearthed. Here are a few intriguing examples:
St. Michael’s Mount: A prehistoric eight-foot (2.4 meter) skeleton was unearthed from a dungeon on the island 250 years ago, that may well be the giant that Jack was said to have slayed.
“The Annual Register for 1761 tells us that in March of that year, as a miner was working at Tregoney, in Cornwall, in a new mine, he accidentally discovered a stone coffin, on which were some inscribed characters. Within it was the skeleton of a man of gigantic size, which, on the admission of the air, mouldered into dust. One tooth, two inches and a half long, and thick in proportion, remained whole. The length of the coffin was eleven feet three inches, and its depth was three feet nine inches.”
Devonshire – This is the area where Gogmagog was thrown off the cliff by Corineus: “A stone coffin in Devonshire contained a thigh-bone belonging to a man eight feet nine inches high.”
‘Later in Histories giants reappear in the stories of the Welsh wizard, Merlin. He tells the King that in a distant epoch, giants transported huge trilithons from North Africa to Killarus in Ireland, where “The Giant’s Dance” was positioned. Later, they were transported to Salisbury Plain by mysterious means. However, huge skeletons have also been discovered in the mounds in the local landscape. In Journey into South Wales (1802) George Lipscomb reported: “a skeleton which measured fourteen feet ten inches in length.” In A Theological, Biblical, and Ecclesiastical Dictionary (1830), it describes a nine foot four inch (284.48 cm) skeleton unearthed near Salisbury in 1719. It also recounts a mound named ‘Giant’s Grave’ next to St Edmunds Church, just a few miles from Stonehenge – Article: Monoliths of theNephilim*.
The authors have collated over 150 accounts of giant bones, skeletons and skulls throughout the British Isles… the founding of Britain is still shrouded in mystery… the stories of the giants seem to go very far back. The Legends and [foundational] myths of Britain are… strongly associated [with] these local titans… [who] could have beenresponsible* for the thousands of megalithic constructions that grace this ancient landscape.’
An article by an identity adherent addresses the debate regarding who the Jews really are; maintaining the inaccurate status quo. As the subject has been addressed in depth in the preceding chapter, the matter will not be laboured, though a few points are worth mentioning in highlighting the inaccuracy of labelling the Jews as the tribe of Judah.
An initial thought was, to whom do they ascribe Edom? After some investigating, it was learned that the author supports the common belief that Edom is Turkey today. We have likewise already discussed Turkey in length – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
One reason given was the ‘fulfilment of Zephaniah’s Prophecy’.
Zephaniah 2:1-15
King James Version
1 ‘Gather yourselves together, yea, gather together, O nation not desired;
2 Before the decree bring forth, before the day pass as the chaff, before the fierce anger of the Lord come upon you, before the day of the Lord’s anger come upon you… 4 For Gaza shall be forsaken, and Ashkelon a desolation: they shall drive out Ashdod at the noon day, and Ekron shall be rooted up. 5 Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the Lord is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant. 6 And the sea coast shall be dwellings and cottages for shepherds, and folds for flocks.
7 And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah; they shall feed thereupon: in the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening: for the Lord their God shall visit them, and turn away their captivity.
8 I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border. 9 Therefore as I live, saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them. 10 This shall they have for their pride, because they have reproached and magnified themselves against the people of the Lord of hosts.
11 The Lord will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen. 12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword. 13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh [the capital of Asshur] a desolation, and dry like a wilderness…
15 This is the rejoicing city [the capital of Edom, Bozrah] that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.’
Zephaniah chapter two is speaking about the future Day of the Lord, which is His divine wrath. A reading of the verses shows that many nations are going to experience His vengeance and destruction, including the mighty Assyrians of Russia – the King of the North – and Cush of India, the Queen of the South – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
The Creator is angry with certain nations due to their involvement in bringing the Israelite peoples into tribulation, such as the French from Moab and Ammon – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The reason this chapter in Zephaniah is not speaking about Palestinian Arabs, Jews and the state of Israel, is because as stated in point number two in the introduction, every nation has migrated. It was only Edom who was prophesied to return and ‘rebuild the ruins’ of the once Promised Land.
Thus, the nations being targeted in this chapter are all in their modern day locations. The Philistine peoples – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – are located along the coastal strips of Central and Southern America. Zephaniah Chapter two is not evidence that the Jews are Judah. Any Biblical references to Jerusalem, including Zion and the Mount of Olives, are always in reference to Judah’s capital, not the city called Jerusalem today in Israel. That city is called Bozrah in the Bible, or the Great city in Revelation, or as Zephaniah describes it, ‘the rejoicing city’ that arrogantly thought it was safe, yet was made ‘desolate’ – which includes the Abomination of Desolation.
One other reason cited is that, ‘the Jews are not a Christian people.’ The author states: ‘Some material sent to me argues that “the Jews can’t be an Israelite tribe because they did not become Christians like the rest of the tribes.”’ We have discussed the fact that the English were the first ‘Christian’ nation in Britain and in ancient Parthia, as well as disseminating both Testaments of the Bible to the world – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
The crux of this argument is held up by the Jews being Judah, hence they are not Christian like all the Israelite nations. Of course, the English as Judah are in fact ‘Christian’ and the Jews not being Christian, is explained by the fact they are rebellious Esau, who have deliberately fought against the Messiah and the Christian tenets in all their forms.
A different article, states the following in their introduction regarding those who believe the Jews are not from the tribe of Judah – emphasis mine:
“[They]… claim that the present-day Jews are not descended from Judah-but rather from Edomites or other people. Some… of these reprobates say the true descendants of Judah are the Germans, others say they are the Africans! Perhaps it was the Germans or the Afro-Americans who really killed Jesus. Maybe it was an African-German Conspiracy? These claims about the Jews not belonging to Judah are stupid but they do have some influence some times” – because the seed of truth is evident, even though the answer promulgated is incorrect.
Their conclusion is thus, though this writer remains wholly unconvinced by their logic:
“As we said the… Biblical Proofs are a sample. It is possible that similar evidence could be adduced from every few verses of the Bible. The Jews are Judah! The Bible says[?] they are… Only the Jews are universally recognized as “Judah” [that does not make it so]. The very name “Jew” is a shortened form of Judah… only the Jews possess all[?] the prophesied characteristics of Judah.”
The Jews are not a sizeable people (1) with a prominent – let alone any – Monarchy (2). Nor have they been rejoined (3) with their brothers in the Isles to the Northwest (4) as prophesied.
‘There is a Biblical Principle that everyone is created in the way that they would want to be if they had been given the choice and known the options. We are each and all most suited to be ourselves.’
The tribe of Benjamin has been partially discussed and a precursory picture of his descendants has been steadily growing. Benjamin is the nation of Scotland… and now we can add the extra details in fully painting an intriguing character, as well as the colourful nation of the Scots. The identification of Scotland was not as straight forward as one might assume, even once England was correctly understood as Judah.
Reasons for this were:
a. There are three tribes aside from Levi, who had a close association with Judah: Benjamin, Simeon and Dan. Yet Scotland and Wales are only two nations.
b. Understanding the special relationship of Scotland as a separate kingdom from England and the unique status of Wales – only officially being recognised a nation in 2011 – only aided in making the identification more difficult.
c. Scotland could have been Benjamin or Dan but not Simeon, for reasons that will be made clear. Wales could have been Benjamin, Simeon or Dan. Going round in circles for many years was the result. The very last nations in the identity jig-saw puzzle, were Benjamin, Simeon and Dan, yet one would have thought once Judah was understood, they would have simply fell into place. The unknown key, was understanding the tribe of Dan and it is because of this, that Dan will be left to be explained in the final chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
d. Identity adherents have identified Benjamin historically with Norway or Iceland and it has also been linked with Belgium and the Normans. Close and warm, not cold but incorrect. This writer’s research considered Canada as a possible answer for Benjamin’s identity. Latterly, there is growing popularity to identify the Scots ironically, with the tribe of Judah.
The Scottish Saltire
Two factors which have distracted researchers in interpreting the sons of Jacob correctly, have been that they were ascribing Abraham and Keturah’s sons identities to the sons of Jacob – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia*.
Secondly, everyone seems to forget Judah and Benjamin are inextricably linked – like ‘a hand and glove.’ Where one is, so will the other be found. Of course, the massive red herring of the Jews being Judah, was also going to make the correct connection next to impossible – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
An online contributor stated: ‘Here are some comments from the late Dr. Hoeh (I left out Ephraim, Manasseh, and Judah as they have more coverage elsewhere).’ From, Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950. Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah are always deemed very obvious; yet believers remain unaware that the pairings respectively with England, the United States and the Jews are all completely incorrect.
“Benjamin constitutes Norway and Iceland. The Icelandic people in reality a colony of Norwegians [1]. Benjamin was given to David because Jerusalem, David’s capital, was in the tribe of Benjamin, not Judah. God said He would give David light in Jerusalem (I Kings 11:36). This verse could not refer to Judah which did not have to be given to the Jewish House of David [2].
Benjamin was told to flee the destruction of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 6:1) which many of them did. Benjamin is compared to “a wolf that raveneth; in the morning he devoureth the prey, and at even he divideth the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). This is certainly an apt description of the Vikings who pillaged Northern Europe, and even Mediterranean regions. Almost all Viking raids came from Norway [3].
It is also significant that Benjamin, the smallest tribe, still is the smallest today [4]. There are fewer Norwegians (plus 148 thousand from Iceland) than any other Israelite nation [5]. (Moses’ blessing in Deuteronomy 33[:12] has particular reference to this fact that Jerusalem was in the tribe of Benjamin.) [6]”
Though this writer is indebted to Dr Hoeh (1928-2004) for his pioneering research as a spring board for investigation, it is for all the wrong reasons. It is a foundation that had to be torn apart and rebuilt. What is regrettable, is that thousands of people have believed these findings at face value and have then never questioned whether they were actually right. How can this writer’s research be the first to question their validity forty years later and to then present them some thirty years further on?
The Icelanders are a nation in their own right (1), not an appendage of Norway*. David’s House and his tribe was (and is) Judah, not Jewish (2). The Vikings as we shall learn were descended from other Israelite tribes (3).
Benjamin is described as‘little’, in that he was the youngest – Psalm 68:27, H6810 – tsa`iyr. When Saul says: “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least [H6996 – qatan] of the tribes of Israel?” – 1 Samuel 9:21, he is saying his tribe was ‘unimportant’ and ‘insignificant.’ (4). The tribe of Reuben was predicted to be the smallest tribe – Deuteronomy 33:6. Beside the fact that Norwegians* are not a son of Jacob, Dr Hoeh has entirely omitted any consideration of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, New Zealand and the British descended peoples living in South Africa (and Zimbabwe), whom all have smaller populations than Norway (5).
The city of Jerusalem, formerly Jebus, was originally in Benjamin’s territory, though no scripture says that in the future a similar configuration would occur (6). Ostensibly, it appears Benjamin would be promised to Judah forever, yet this only applied while the Israelites were in the promised land. In fact, the city eventually transferred location and its inhabitants to Judah – Zechariah 12:7-9, Isaiah 3:1, 8. The city of Jerusalem today is London, firmly planted in the heart of Judah and England (Zechariah 12:2), Far removed from the territory of Benjamin in Scotland. It is in fact the tribe of Simeon which shared a closer relationship with Judah in the past and does presently – Joshua 19:9.
We learned that Benjamin lost his mother Rachel at birth… a character defining, tough break; which made him independent and strong. He was also considerably younger than his eleven brothers.
Benjamin had not even met his elder brother Joseph until his visit to Egypt in 1687, when he was about twelve and Joseph was thirty-nine years old. Joseph had been born twenty-seven years earlier than Benjamin in 1726 BCE. Reuben, the eldest was now sixty-five years of age and Zebulun the third youngest was fifty-three. One can understand Jacob’s heartfelt pain in any possibility of losing Benjamin, after the devastating early losses of Joseph and then Rachel. There is an aura of sadness and vicissitude surrounding Benjamin that continued to envelope his people and is evident in the Scots up and till today. Perhaps it explains their unbridled sense of humour, coupled with their poignant philosophical insight.
In the scriptures, aside from the tribe of Judah, there are more prominent personalities written about from the tribe of Benjamin than any other and interestingly, they heavily favour the righteous rather than the wicked. King Saul is on the incorrect side of the Eternal’s favour as was his New Testament namesake Saul, who became Paul – refer article: The Pauline Paradox. When reading the large body of scripture attributed to Paul, one can’t help but imagine a Scottish accent and vocal mannerisms through his forceful and emotive messages arising from the pages of the Bible.
The righteous Benjaminites include, the beautiful Esther (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey); faithful Mordecai; loyal Jonathan the son of King Saul; and the brave Ehud, second Judge of Israel from 1284 to 1204 BCE.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Benjamin meaning: Son Of The Right Hand, Son Of The South. From (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (yamin), right hand.
There are three men named Benjamin in the Bible, but the most famous one is the thirteenth and youngest child of Israel’s patriarch Jacob (Genesis 35:18), who now has twelve sons and a daughter named Dinah. Benjamin is the second son of Rachel – the first being Joseph – and she dies giving birth to him.
An often neglected curiosity is the disproportionally important role of the tribe of Benjamin in the development of Israel, or even the very pattern of redemption displayed by the Bible: The city of Jerusalem was originally assigned to Benjamin (Joshua 18:28, Judges 1:21). The tribe of Benjamin was decimated after the atrocities committed in Gibeah (Judges 19-21) but still, a generation later Israel’s first king was from the surviving remnant of Benjamin (1 Samuel 9:1). Mordecai, whose adopted daughter Esther helped to avoid Israel’s annihilation, was a Benjaminite (Esther 2:5). And… Paul, who authored half the New Testament, was from the tribe of Benjamin as well (Philippians 3:5).
The other men named Benjamin are: A descendant of the original Benjamin, namely a son of Bilhan, son of Jediael, (1 Chronicles 7:10). A son of Harim, who had married and probably divorced a foreign woman during the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:32).’
Genesis 35:16-19
English Standard Version
16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor.
17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son.” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni [son of my sorrow]; but his father called him Benjamin. 19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem)…’
Benjamin was born circa 1699 BCE in late October, early November. The Book of Jubilees recounts his birth.
Book of Jubilees 32:3-16, 30-34
32:3 ‘And in those days Rachel became pregnant with her son Benjamin. And Jacob counted his sons from him upwards and Levi fell to the portion of Yahweh, and his father clothed him in the garments of the priesthood and filled his hands. 4 And on the fifteenth of this month [the weekly Sabbath and first day of the feast of Tabernacles* – seventh month: September/October], he brought to the altar fourteen oxen from amongst the cattle, and twenty-eight rams, and forty-nine sheep, and seven lambs, and twenty-one kids of the goats as a burnt-offering on the altar of sacrifice, well pleasing for a sweet savor before Yahweh. 11 This ordinance is written that it may be fulfilled from year to year in eating the second tithe* before Yahweh in the place where it has been chosen, and nothing shall remain over from it from this year to the year following.
16 And on the following night, on the twenty-second day of this month [the Sabbath and the Last Great Day of the feast], Jacob resolved to build that place, and to surround the court with a wall, and to sanctify it… 30 And in the night, on the twenty-third of this month, Deborah Rebecca’s nurse died, and they buried her beneath the city under the oak of the river, and he called the name of this place, ‘The river of Deborah,’ and the oak, ‘The oak of the mourning of Deborah.’ 33 And Rachel bare a son in the night, and called his name ‘Son of my sorrow’; for she suffered in giving him birth: but his father called his name Benjamin, on the eleventh of the eighth month [October/November]… 34 And Rachel died there and she was buried in the land of Ephrath, the same is Bethlehem, and Jacob built a pillar on the grave of Rachel, on the road above her grave.’
In Genesis chapter forty-nine we read and studied the blessing given by Jacob to Judah and the uncanny directness of his words in describing the attributes and destiny of Judah and his descendants. The same applies for all of Jacob’s sons. How strange that the words have always been there so-to-speak, yet looking ‘through a glass darkly’ (1 Corinthians 13:12) means the understanding of them has remained allusive.
Genesis 49:1-2, 27
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then Jacob called his sons and said, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what shall happen to you in days to come. 2 “Assemble and listen, O sons of Jacob, listen to Israel your father.
27 “Benjamin is a ravenous [H2963 – taraph] wolf, in the morning [H1242 – boqer: ‘beginning of day’, ‘coming of sunrise’] devouring [H398 – ‘akal: ‘eat, consume, slay’] the prey [H5706 – ad] and at evening [H6153 – ereb: evening, sunset] dividing [H2505 – chalaq] the spoil.“
The Hebrew word for raven or ravenous means: ‘to tear, rend’ and ‘to be torn in pieces’ to ‘provide food’. The KJV translates it as, tear six times; ravening three; catch twice; feed once; and prey once. An act of aggression, violence and taking by force. The Hebrew word for prey means as well as prey, ‘booty.’ Booty as in what is won ‘in the sense of the aim of an attack.’ The Hebrew word for divide means: ‘to share, plunder, apportion’ and ‘distribute.’ In the King James Bible it is translated as, divide forty times; flatter six; part five; distribute four; portion once; and received once.
The Amplified Bible says; ‘The tribe of Benjamin invariably displayed courage and ferocity, particularly in their war with the other tribes.’ A quick perusal of any history of the Scots and the Picts before them for they are the same people with a different name, will quickly affirm their prowess in both war and any situation necessitating survival.
CEB: Benjamin is a wolf who hunts…
NCV: … In the morning he eats what he has caught, and in the evening he divides what he has taken.
NIRV: … In the morning he eats what he has killed. In the evening he shares what he has stolen.
TLB: Benjamin is a wolf that prowls. He devours his enemies in the morning, and in the evening divides the loot.
ISV: Benjamin is vicious like a wolf; what he kills in the morning he devours in the evening.
CEV: Benjamin, you are a fierce wolf, destroying your enemies morning and evening.
This verse reveals two key identifying markers. First, the tribe of Benjamin were fearless survivors – as evidenced in the war with the other twelve tribes – and second, they have had to scrap for survival, sharing the spoil won. Scottish people, unlike the harsh stereotype of being stingy, which is a reflection of the Highlander perhaps, not the Lowland Scot are in fact a generous people and look after their own. This dangerous element of Benjamin’s nature was exhibited by the ancient Pictish nation.
Arthur Kemp in his seminal work, March of the Titans, 1991 & 2016, pages 207-208, states – emphasis mine:
‘… the Celts in the far north of the country – particularly the Picts – continued to be troublesome for the Roman Britons. The emperor Hadrian finally built a wall in 122-123 AD across northern Britain to try and keep them out. After Hadrian’s death, the emperor Antonius built a new wall some one hundred miles north in an attempt to extend Roman control further north. By 164, this new wall – known as the Antonine Wall – had been abandoned and the border reverted to Hadrian’s Wall once again. Scotland never fell under Roman rule, and the Picts continued to be a thorn in the side of the Romans until the very end of Roman rule in Britain.’
The Scots as part of the United Kingdom have also shared in the spoil, in the immense economic benefits of building and maintaining an Empire with England and as their name signifies, Benjamin as the son of the right hand has sat at the right hand of Judah. For wherever Judah grew a ‘choice vine’ – Genesis 49:11 – planting a new colony, it was a Benjaminite who was invariably the Governor or representative for the Crown in the expanding colonies, dominions and territories of the British Empire.
English writer Sir Walter Besant:
“Wherever the pilgrim turns his feet, he finds Scotsmen in the forefront of civilization and letters. They are the premiers in every colony, professors in every university, teachers, editors, lawyers, engineers and merchants – everything, and always at the front.”
This relationship is supported by Moses in his final blessing to the tribes before he passed away.
Deuteronomy 33:1-2, 12
English Standard Version
1 ‘This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the people of Israel before his death. 2 He said…
12 Of Benjamin he said, “The beloved [H3039 – ydiyd: ‘loved, beloved, well loved’] of the Lord dwells in safety [H983 – betach]… [by him]. The High God surrounds [H2653 – chophaph] him all day long [H3117 – yowm], and dwells betweenhis shoulders [in his heart].”
The Hebrew word for safety means: ‘a place of refuge, securely’ and ‘security’, ‘without care’ and with ‘confidence.’ The Hebrew word for surrounds is translated as: cover, enclose, shelter and shield. The Hebrew meaning for all day is: a whole day, ‘from sunrise to sunset.’ It is translated in the KJV as: day 2,008 times; time 64]; ever 18; continually 10; and always 4 times.
The location of Scotland is certainly a relatively safe portion of the globe to reside, though Benjamin is protected also in their close association with Judah and more vitally in the protection that the Creator affords them. Wales understandably, could not contend with the numerical strength of the English. Nor does it make sense on paper that Scotland should have withheld the might of England to remain an independent kingdom without intervention. Yet it is only as the tribe of Benjamin, that Scotland’s relationship with England (Judah) does.
It is worth mentioning that the Hebrew word for beloved is the English word for the name David. While England-Judah has not had a king called David; Scotland-Benjamin has had two: David I (1113-1124) and David II (1329-1371).
CEB: He said to Benjamin: “The Lord’s dearest one rests safely on him. The Lord always shields him; he rests on God’s chest.”
GNT: About the tribe of Benjamin he said: “This is the tribe the Lord loves and protects; He guards them all the day long, And he dwells in their midst.”
NLT: Moses said this about the tribe of Benjamin: “The people of Benjamin are loved by the Lord and live in safety beside him. He surrounds them continuously and preserves them from every harm.”
There can be no denying the affection from the Creator towards Benjamin. He is beloved in the same way the Eternal has extended towards King David and the tribe of Judah. In the Book of Judges, Deborah a married Prophetess and fourth Judge of Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, gives further insight into the sons of Jacob. In this case, with Benjamin we do not learn anything of consequence, apart from their being sandwiched between their nephews, Ephraim and the half tribe of East Manasseh from Machir.
Judges 5:1-3, 14
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day: 2 That the leaders took the lead in Israel, that the people offered themselves willingly, bless the Lord! 3 “Hear, O kings; give ear, O princes;
From Ephraim their root they marched down into the valley, following you, Benjamin, with your kinsmen; from Machir marched down the commanders…”
Deborah ostensibly from the tribe of Ephraim, though more likely from the tribe of Naphtali had followed the Benjamite Judge Ehud who had died in 1204 BCE. In the interim twenty years, the Israelites had gone astray and were being cruelly oppressed by Jabin the King of Canaan. His commander Sisera had nine hundred chariots made with iron. Deborah decided to go on the offensive and enlisted the help of Barak from the tribe of Naphtali. They ultimately defeated Jabin the Canaanite and Sisera, with forty years of peace ensuing.
The Book of Judges also recounts a rather ugly story in the history of Israel which shows two wrongs do not make a right. The tribe of Benjamin showed a mis-directed stubbornness and tenacity, though one has to admire their sheer gaul and solidarity. The remainder of the sons of Jacob exhibited equal stubbornness and unity; and to think a tribe was on the verge of total annihilation is incredible. Reason won over emotion and the tribe of Benjamin barely survived. In time, they became a highly valued component of a United Kingdom of Israel and later the Kingdom of Judah.
Judges 19:1-30
English Standard Version
1 ‘In those days, when there was no king in Israel [and prior to the first Judge, Othniel in 1342 BCE] ,acertain Levite was sojourning [circa 1351 BCE] in the remote parts of the hill country of Ephraim, who took to himself a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. 2 And his concubine was unfaithful* to him, and she went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah, and was there some four months. 3 Then her husband arose and went after her, to speak kindly to her and bring her back… And she brought him into her father’s house. And when the girl’s father saw him, he came with joy to meet him. 4 And his father-in-law, the girl’s father, made him stay… 9 And when the man and his concubine and his servant rose up to depart, his father-in-law, the girl’s father, said to him, “Behold, now the day has waned toward evening. Please, spend the night. Behold, the day draws to its close. Lodge here and let your heart be merry, and tomorrow you shall arise early in the morning for your journey, and go home.”
10 But the man would not spend the night [fateful decision number one].
He rose up and departed and arrived opposite Jebus (that is, Jerusalem). He had with him a couple of saddled donkeys, and his concubine was with him. 11 When they were near Jebus, the day was nearly over, and the servant said to his master, “Come now, let us turn aside to this city of the Jebusites and spend the night in it.”
12 And his master said to him, “We will not turn aside into the city of foreigners, who do not belong to the people of Israel… [fateful decision number two]
And the sun went down on them near Gibeah, which belongs to Benjamin, 15 and they turned aside there, to go in and spend the night at Gibeah [fateful decision number three].
And he went in and sat down in the open square of the city, for no one took them into his house to spend the night.
16 And behold, an old man was coming from his work in the field at evening. The man was from the hill country of Ephraim,and he was sojourning in Gibeah… 20 And the old man said, “Peace be to you; I will care for all your wants. Only, do not spend the night in the square.”
22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.” [a very similar situation to the one we encountered with Lot – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]
23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. 24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.” 25 But the men would not listen to him.
So the man seized his concubine and made her*[retribution?] go out to them [fateful decision number four].
And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. 26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, until it was light.
27 And her master rose up in the morning, and when he opened the doors of the house and went out to go on his way, behold, there was his concubine lying at the door of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up, let us be going.” But there was no answer. Then he put her on the donkey, and the man rose up and went away to his home.
29 And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and taking hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. 30 And all who saw it said, “Such a thing has never happened or been seen from the day that the people of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt until this day; consider it, take counsel, and speak.”
Judges 20:1-48
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then all the people of Israel came out, from Dan to Beersheba, including the land of Gilead, and the congregation assembled as one man to the Lord at Mizpah. 2 And the chiefs of all the people, of all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God, 400,000 men on foot that drew the sword.
3 (Now the people of Benjamin heard that the people of Israel had gone up to Mizpah.) And the people of Israel said, “Tell us, how did this evil happen?” 4 And the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said, “I came to Gibeah that belongs to Benjamin, I and my concubine, to spend the night. 5 And the leaders of Gibeah [meaning hill, high] rose against me and surrounded the house against me by night. They meant to kill me, and they violated my concubine, and she is dead… they have committed abomination and outrage in Israel.
7 Behold, you people of Israel, all of you, give your advice and counsel here”… this is what we will do to Gibeah: we will go up against it by lot, 10 and we will take ten men of a hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, and a hundred of a thousand, and a thousand of ten thousand, to bring provisions for the people, that when they come they may repay Gibeah of Benjamin for all the outrage that they have committed in Israel.” 11 So all the men of Israel gathered against the city, united as one man.
12 And the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, “What evil is this that has taken place among you? 13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.”
But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men. 16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war.
18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”
19 Then the people of Israel rose in the morning and encamped against Gibeah. 20 And the men of Israel went out to fight against Benjamin, and the men of Israel drew up the battle line against them at Gibeah. 21 The people of Benjamin came out of Gibeah and destroyed on that day 22,000 men of the Israelites [from the tribe of Judah]. 22 But the people, the men of Israel, took courage, and again formed the battle line in the same place where they had formed it on the first day. 23 And the people of Israel went up and wept before the Lord until the evening. And they inquired of the Lord, “Shall we again draw near to fight against our brothers, the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Go up against them.”
24 So the people of Israel came near against the people of Benjamin the second day. 25 And Benjamin went against them out of Gibeah the second day, and destroyed 18,000 men of the people of Israel [from the tribe of Judah]. All these were men who drew the sword. 26 Then all the people of Israel, the whole army, went up and came to Bethel and wept. They sat there before the Lord and fasted that day until evening, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 27 And the people of Israel inquired of the Lord (for the ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, 28 and Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron, ministered before it in those days), saying, “Shall we go out once more to battle against our brothers, the people of Benjamin, or shall we cease?” And the Lord said, “Go up, for tomorrow I will give them into your hand.”
29 So Israel set men in ambush around Gibeah. 30 And the people of Israel went up against the people of Benjamin on the third day and set themselves in array against Gibeah, as at other times. 31 And the people of Benjamin went out against the people and were drawn away from the city. And as at other times they began to strike and kill some of the people in the highways, one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah, and in the open country, about thirty men of Israel. 32 And the people of Benjamin said, “They are routed before us, as at the first.” But the people of Israel said, “Let us flee and draw them away from the city to the highways.”
33 And all the men of Israel rose up out of their place and set themselves in array at Baal-tamar, and the men of Israel who were in ambush rushed out of their place from Maareh-geba. 34 And there came against Gibeah 10,000 chosen men out of all Israel, and the battle was hard, but the Benjaminites did not know that disaster was close upon them.35 And the Lord defeated Benjamin before Israel, and the people of Israel destroyed 25,100^ men of Benjamin that day. All these were men who drew the sword. 36 So the people of Benjamin saw that they were defeated.
The men of Israel gave ground to Benjamin, because they trusted the men in ambush whom they had set against Gibeah. 37 Then the men in ambush hurried and rushed against Gibeah; the men in ambush moved out and struck all the city with the edge of the sword… 43 Surrounding the Benjaminites, they pursued them and trod them down from Nohah as far as opposite Gibeah on the east. 44 Eighteen thousand men of Benjamin fell, all of them men of valor. 45 And they turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon. Five thousand men of them were cut down in the highways. And they were pursued hard to Gidom, and 2,000 men of them were struck down. 46 So all who fell that day of Benjamin were 25,000^ men who drew the sword, all of them men of valor.
47 But 600 men turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon and remained at the rock of Rimmon four months.
48 And the men of Israel turned back against the people of Benjamin and struck them with the edge of the sword, the city, men and beasts and all that they found. And all the towns that they found they set on fire.’
Judges 21:1-25
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now the men of Israel had sworn at Mizpah, “No one of us shall give his daughter in marriage to Benjamin.”
2 And the people came to Bethel and sat there till evening before God, and they lifted up their voices and wept bitterly. 3 And they said, “O Lord, the God of Israel, why has this happened in Israel, that today there should be one tribe lacking in Israel?” 4 And the next day the people rose early and built there an altar and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings…
6 And the people of Israel had compassion for Benjamin their brother and said, “One tribe is cut off from Israel this day. 7 What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them any of our daughters for wives?”
8 And they said, “What one is there of the tribes of Israel that did not come up to the Lord to Mizpah?” And behold, no one had come to the camp from Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], to the assembly. 9 For when the people were mustered, behold, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead was there. 10 So the congregation sent 12,000 of their bravest men there and commanded them, “Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones. 11 This is what you shall do: every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction.”
12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins who had not known a man by lying with him, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. 13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the people of Benjamin who were at the rock of Rimmon and proclaimed peace to them.
14 And Benjamin returned at that time. And they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], but they were not enough for them. 15 And the people had compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.
16 Then the elders of the congregation said, “What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?” 17 And they said, “There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe not be blotted out from Israel.
18 Yet we cannot give them wives from our daughters.” For the people of Israel had sworn, “Cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin.” 19 So they said, “Behold, there is the yearly feast [of Tabernacles] of the Lord at Shiloh [in Ephraim], which is north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.”
20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, “Go and lie in ambush in the vineyards 21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.’” 23 And the people of Benjamin did so and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off. Then they went and returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and lived in them.
25 In those days there was no king [or Judge] in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.’
A dramatic and devastating turn of events with Judah leading the charge for Israel against their future ally, Benjamin. The tribes of Israel showed more mercy to Benjamin than Benjamin did for the Levite and his dead concubine. The wives provided for the remaining six hundred Benjamite men, were 400 from East Manasseh and 200 from Ephraim the sons of Joseph, their only full blood brother. The genetic gene pool forever changed in Benjamin, though less than if the wives had come from a half brother. Note the skill and ambidextrousness, of the Benjamite men in warfare and battle, particularly with the bow and sling.
1 Samuel 20:19-20
English Standard Version
‘On the third day go down quickly to the place where you hid yourself when the matter was in hand, and remain beside the stone heap. And I [Jonathan] will shoot three arrows to the side of it, as though I shot at a mark.’
2 Samuel 1:22
English Standard Version
“From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not empty.”
1 Chronicles 12:1-2
English Standard Version
‘Now these are the men who came to David at Ziklag, while he could not move about freely because of Saul the son of Kish. And they were among the mighty men who helped him in war. They were bowmen andcould shoot arrows and sling stones witheither the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’
A 2009 study showed that the Netherlands had the highest percentage for left handedness (to go along with their high average for height), of 13.2%. The average percentage worldwide is approximately 10%. Second was the United States with 13.1%; Belgium 13.1%; Canada fourth, 12.8%; the United Kingdom fifth, 12.2%; and Ireland sixth, 11.7%. A breakdown for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remains allusive at time of writing.
Switzerland is next, 11.6%; France, 11.1%; Denmark 11%; Italy, 10.5%; Sweden 10.4%; Norway 10.2%; Germany, 9.8%; Spain, 9.6% and then well below the world average, Russia with 6%, India, 5.2%, Japan, 4.7%, China 3.5% and Mexico 2.5%. It is interesting to note that the family of Abraham displays this trait in the top six nations represented and ten of the top thirteen; with the other three descended from Abraham’s brothers Haran and Nahor.
As France (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor) is high on the list as well, could there be a link between being left handed and the rhesus negative blood type?
Data does support rh- people being more likely to be left handed. Scotland is interesting when studying frequencies of rh- people because of it strong variation of numbers based on locations. According to ‘Distribution of the ABO and rhesus (D) blood groups in the north of Scotland’ by Elizabeth S Brown, ‘people in the region of Inverness top the list of rh negative people in Scotland with a whopping 30.44%.’
Then, is there a link between left handedness and lactose tolerance, which is also highest amongst northwestern Europeans – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Recent studies have confirmed increased verbal skills in left handed people, plus a higher percentage of left handers excelling in sport; thus likely translating to superior combat skills.
2 Chronicles 17:17
English Standard Version
‘Of Benjamin: Eliada, a mighty man of valor, with 200,000 men armed with bow and shield…’
2 Chronicles 14:8
English Standard Version
‘And Asa had an army of 300,000 from Judah, armed with large* shields and spears, and 280,000 men from Benjamin that carried shields and drew bows. All these were mighty men of valor.’
The Normans used long* shields as was typical of the Vikings, whereas the Britons used round shields.
2 Chronicles 15:7-9
English Standard Version
7 But you, take courage! Do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.” 8 As soon as Asa [King of Judah] heard these words, the prophecy of Azariah the son of Oded, he took courage and put away the detestable idols from all the land of Judah and Benjamin and from the cities that he had taken in the hill country of Ephraim, and he repaired the altar of the Lord that was in front of the vestibule of the house of the Lord. 9 And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and those from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon who were residing with them, for great numbers had deserted to him from Israel when they saw that the Lord his God was with him.’
Ezra 4:1
English Standard Version
‘Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to the Lord…’
The land of Benjamin was a distinct territory yet always attached to Judah.
Jeremiah 1:1; 37:11-13
English Standard Version
1 ‘The words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, one of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin… 11 Now when the Chaldean army had withdrawn from Jerusalem at the approach of Pharaoh’s army, 12 Jeremiah set out from Jerusalem to go to the land of Benjamin to receive his portion there among the people. 13 When he was at the Benjamin Gate, a sentry there named Irijah the son of Shelemiah, son of Hananiah, seized Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “You are deserting to the Chaldeans.”
As mentioned earlier, the Eternal promised David that the tribe of Benjamin would be reserved for his descendants in Canaan, with Judah.
1 Kings 11:29-32
English Standard Version
‘And at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him on the road. Now Ahijah had dressed himself in a new garment, and the two of them were alone in the open country. Then Ahijah laid hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces.
And he said to Jeroboam [first king of Kingdom of Israel], “Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Behold, I am about to tear the kingdom from the hand of Solomon and will give you ten tribes
(but he shall have one tribe [apart from Judah], for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel)…’
2 Chronicles 21:7
English Standard Version
‘Yet the Lord was not willing to destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and since he had promised to give a lamp to him and to his sons [the line of Judaic kings from David until the captivity (1010 to 586 BCE] forever.’
1 Kings 15:4
English Standard Version
‘Nevertheless, for David’s sake the Lord his God gave him a lamp in Jerusalem, setting up his son after him, and establishing Jerusalem…’
There is a prophecy for Benjamin receiving a different and bigger territory in a future re-division of land. Benjamin is the youngest son and tribe, not the smallest as some translations state. The Books of Jasher and Jubilees give Benjamin’s wives names and Benjamin’s sons are listed.
Obadiah 1:19
English Standard Version
‘Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah shall possess the land of the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria, and Benjamin shall possess Gilead [presently the half tribe of East Manasseh].’
Psalm 68:27
Christian Standard Bible
‘There is Benjamin, the youngest, leading them, the rulers of Judah in their assembly, the rulers of Zebulun, the rulers of Naphtali.’
Book of Jubilees 34:20
‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives… andthe name of Benjamin’s wife,‘Ijasaka.
Book of Jasher 45:21-22
21 ‘… Jacob sent to Aram, the son of Zoba, the son of Terah, and he took for his son Benjamin Mechalia the daughter of Aram, and she came to the land of Canaan to the house of Jacob; and Benjamin was ten years old [?] when he took [betrothed?] Mechalia the daughter of Aram for a wife.
22 And Mechalia conceived and bare unto Benjamin
Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera* and Naaman, five sons;
and Benjamin went afterward and took for a wife Aribath, the daughter of Shomron, the son [descendant] of Abraham, in addition to his first wife, and he was eighteen years old; and Aribath bare unto Benjamin
Achi, Vosh, Mupim, Chupim, and Ord; five sons.’
Benjamin’s first wife was possibly arranged for him when he was ten. As he was Jacob’s favourite in the absence of Jospeh, this is plausible. A descent from Terah, Abraham’s father would mean Mechalia was family even if she was not from Abraham’s brothers Nahor or Haran (though Zoba is linked with Nahor) – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. For example, both Isaac’s and Jacob’s wives were from the family of Nahor and Abraham’s wife from Haran.
If accurate, Benjamin taking a second wife (and possibly a third) meant Benjamin’s sons had half brothers; which may explain the divide between Highlander and Lowlander Scot, or even between the west of Scotland and the East. As there is no record of a son called Shomron from Abraham, it may well mean descent from Abraham indirectly for Aribath from either Ishmael (German) or the sons of Abraham with his second wife, Keturah (Scandinavian [Icelandic], Dutch, Flemish, Walloon [Luxembourgish]).
This is interesting regarding Benjamin’s second wife Aribath, in the fact that Scotland and Scandinavia have not only a shared geo-political history but also an ethnic influence in ‘recent’ centuries, which may parallel an earlier one.
Genesis 46:21
English Standard Version
‘And the sons of Benjamin: Bela [swallow], Becher [family name of Ephraim], Ashbel [capture], Gera*, Naaman [grace], Ehi, Rosh [7], Muppim, Huppim, and Ard.’
Numbers 26:38-41
English Standard Version
38 ‘The sons of Benjamin according to their clans: of
Bela, the clan of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the clan of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the clan of the Ahiramites; 39 of Shephupham, the clan of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the clan of the Huphamites.
40 And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the clan of the Ardites; of Naaman, the clan of the Naamites. 41 These are the sons of Benjamin according to their clans, and those listed were 45,600.’
1 Chronicles 7:6-12
English Standard Version
6 ‘The sons of Benjamin:
Bela, Becher, and Jediael, three.
7 The sons of Bela: Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, and Iri, five, heads of fathers’ houses, mighty warriors. And their enrollment by genealogies was 22,034.
8 The sons of Becher: Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Elioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, Abijah [7], Anathoth, and Alemeth.
All these were the sons of Becher. 9 And their enrollment by genealogies, according to their generations, as heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, was 20,200.
10 The son of Jediael: Bilhan. And the sons of Bilhan:
Jeush [family name of Esau], Benjamin, Ehud*, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish [family name of Javan], and Ahishahar [7].
11 All these were the sons of Jediael according to the heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, 17,200, able to go to war.
12 And Shuppim and Huppim were the sons of Ir, Hushim the son of Aher.’
Ehud* was the second Judge of Israel for eighty years from 1284 to 1204 BCE – Judges 3:12-30. His name means strong. Ehud is described as the left handed son of Gera* from Benjamin (Judges 3:15).
1 Chronicles 8:1-5, 33-34
English Standard Version
‘Benjamin fathered Bela his firstborn, Ashbel the second, Aharah the third, 2 Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. 3 And Bela had sons: Addar, Gera*, Abihud, 4 Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah, 5 Gera* [7], Shephuphan, and Huram.
33 Ner was the father of Kish, Kish of Saul, Saul of Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal; 34 and the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal; and Merib-baal was the father of Micah.’
Genesis lists ten sons; Numbers lists five sons; I Chronicles seven lists three sons; and chapter eight which includes Saul’s genealogy, unhelpfully lists five sons. Even if one assumes the change from five to three was due to the Israelite civil war against Benjamin’s tribe – it doesn’t explain the drop from ten to five in the first place – and if the six hundred men remaining were from Bela, Becher and Jediel (apart from Bela the one consistent son, the firstborn in all four references), Becher is missing from the second and fourth references and Jediel is only mentioned once, unless he is Ashbel. Even Muppim seems to have turned into Shuppim.
That said, the Book of Jasher tallies with the Book of Genesis in agreeing there were ten sons of Benjamin. Their alignment is explained in Jasher as two sets of five sons from two different women – Mechalia and Aribath.
Yet the scriptural conflict extends to the judge Ehud; so that his parentage is from either Bilhan or Gera, of which there are more than one Gera listed, being it would seem a popular family name. Perhaps there were two Ehud’s? It is an unusual name, so could there have been two men called the same? Then, why is only one listed?
The answer may begin to lay with Benjamin having more than one wife; or probably later editing for whatever reason in the genealogies listed in Numbers and Chronicles.
A connection between Rosh and the clan Ross is likely, and also Ard-encaple with Benjamin’s tenth son, Ard. Ard means ‘wanderer, fugitive’ from the verb ‘arad, ‘to flee’ or ‘be free.’ Rosh means ‘head, chief’ or ‘top’ – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. Interestingly, the name Ross, means: ‘up-land peninsula’, ‘promontory head-land’ and may also be derived from the Gaelic word for ‘red.’
Speaking of red… we discussed earlier in this chapter the Red Hand of Ulster and its symbolism for the red hand of Zarah. An identification of this symbol with the tribe of Judah’s ‘second’, albeit in reality first royal line – the other being Pharez – continues with a transfer from Northern Ireland into Scotland.
The Modern Descendants of Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:
‘… three of Ulster’s six counties (as well as the towns of Bangor and Dungannon) have the Red Hand as a part of their official emblems… since the division of Ireland in 1920 the official Arms of Northern Ireland show the Red Hand alone without the Scarlet Cord, but this in no way alters the fact that the ancient and traditional emblem of Ulster was – and still is – a Red Hand circled by a Scarlet Cord. The use of the Red Hand as [an]… emblem is not confined to just Ulster – or even to just Ireland.
In Scotland it is found in the Arms of several of the old families and in those of at least fourteen of the Clan Chiefs: Davidson, MacBain, MacDonell, MacIntosh, MacKinnon, MacLean, MacLachlan, MacNeil, MacNaughten, MacPherson, MacGillivray, MacDonald of Sleat, Clanranald, and Shaw of Rothiemurchus… A color variant of this emblem appears in several more: The Earldom of Fife; Abernethy, Lord Saltoun; Dundas; Duff, Farquharson; Guthrie; Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; Leslie; Lindsay; MacBain; MacIntosh; MacLachlan; Clanranald; Maitland, Earl of Lauderdale; Moncreiffe… Shaw of Rothiemurchus; Spens of Lathallan; Stuart, Marquis of Bute; and Wemyss.
It is also important to note that the Rampant Red Lion appears on the Royal Standard and on the shield in the Royal Arms.’
Though Scotland is the tribe of Benjamin, the prevalence of the Red Hand of Zarah is evidence of a royal line of Judah, threaded within the Benjamite nation. It should not be a surprise then, that outside of England-Judah, the strongest symbolism of Judah’s royal pedigree would be exhibited in the other ‘royal nation’: Scotland-Benjamin.
Bennet & Keyser: ‘… how is it that the Scots who later invaded what is now called Scotland in 501 A.D. also have among their emblems the Red Hand that has been associated with Ulster since around 1350 B.C.? … in the Register House in Edinburgh, Scotland there is an ancient document called the Declaration of Arbroath, which consists of an official letter sent to the Pope by the Parliament of Scotland in 1320 A.D. and signed by King Robert the Bruce and some thirty of the Scottish nobles, in which it is clearly stated that this branch of the Scots came… from Scythia after living for a long period of time in Spain.
The Scottish Declaration of Independence was sent to Pope John XXII “by the Scottish Estates in Parliament assembled in the Abbey of Aberbrothock under the Presidency of King Robert the Bruce” and declared:
“We know, Most Holy Father and Lord, and from the chronicles and books of the ancients gather, that among other illustrious nations, ours, to wit the nation of the Scots, has been distinguished by many honors; which passing from the greater Scythia through the Mediterranean Sea and Pillars of Hercules, and sojourning in Spain among the most savage tribes through a long course of time, could nowhere be subjugated by any people however barbarous; and coming thence one thousand two hundred years after the outgoing of the people of Israel, they, by many victories and infinite toil, acquired for themselves the possessions in the west which they now hold..”
‘… it could be argued that this “outgoing of the people of Israel” refers to the fall of Israel and the deportation of the Ten Tribes to Assyria, rather than the exodus of Israel from Egypt. If this refers to the Exodus – which occurred somewhere around the year 1487 B.C. [1446 BCE] – then this means that the Scots, if they came into what is now Scotland 1,200 years later, must have arrived there around the year 287 B.C. – whereas Scottish history shows that they did not arrive until approximately 500 A.D. If the deportation of Israel to Assyria is meant (which was completed in 718 B.C.) then this branch of the Scots arrived in Scotland in 483 A.D. (or a few more years later as indicated in the 1703 translation of the Declaration of Arbroath), which brings us very close to the year 501 A.D. which Scottish history gives as the date the Scots did indeed arrive.’
The authors use reasoning to arrive at a date of circa 500 CE to fit the Scots arrival, though the date for circa 246 BCE just may be actually accurate. For the migration of Milesian Scots into Caledonia-Alba-Pictland were led by the lineage of Zarah kings from Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin. Yet these peoples were preceded centuries before by tribes known as the Cruithne or Pritani from Ulster; who were the very inhabitants the Milesian Scots found in Pictland. It was these peoples, the Picts also from the tribe of Benjamin, whom the Scots intermarried with and amalgamated the royal lines.
Bennet & Keyser” ‘… we should note that the Red Hand, as it appears in Scottish heraldry, is NOT encircled by a Scarlet Cord as was the ancient Ulster emblem. However, despite this slight difference, it is obvious that the Red hand (sometimes pink) as it appears in Scottish heraldry and the Red Hand of Ulster are the same emblem… it becomes evident that the Red Hand must have been an ANCESTRAL EMBLEM which both branches of the Scots brought with them from some ancient homeland. Of even GREATER IMPORTANCE is the fact that theScots dated the arrival of a later branch in Scotland from an event in the history of Israel.This is something they would be very UNLIKELY to do unless they themselves were Israelites.
Further, they say they came from Scythia, which is the place to which the [Israelites]… migrated after their departure from Assyria. In view of the origin of the Red Hand emblem recorded in Genesis 38, and in the fact that a Red Hand thereby became one of the emblems of the descendants of Zara-Judah, we have to conclude that the people who brought the Red Hand to Ulster so long ago, and the Scots who later brought it to Scotland… had a COMMON ORIGIN in the Zara branch of the… Tribe of Judah. Finally, in consideration of the heraldic significance of the Red Hand, we should note that, as descendants of Zara-Judah, the first settlers in Ulster were also entitled to use the Rampant Red Lion.
In the official Arms of Northern Ireland we indeed see that it holds an important place therein. Another point of interest in these Arms is that the Red Hand has as its background a six-pointed star which is reminiscent of the form of the hexagram or Shield of Davidwhose significance is another story.’
We will return to the points raised in the last two sentences – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. As yes, the hexagram star is really the sinister Seal of Solomon, a symbol of Edom – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
Even if one wishes to contend who the Scots and by extension the Picts are, one is left in no doubt that Scotland with England, comprise two of the thirteen tribes of Israel, for Joseph split into two tribes: Ephraim with West Manasseh is one – invariably called Ephraim, Joseph or Samaria – and East Manasseh; otherwise known as Gilead, Machir or Manasseh, is the other.
Counties of England, Wales and Scotland
It is also worth mentioning that the arrival of the Gaelic Scots of Dal Riata and the merging with the Picts and subsequently combining the two royal lines; Scot with Pict and the emergence of the new Kingdom of Alba, did not make the Picts as a people or nation disappear. It did not change the Pictish nation into a Scottish nation. The Picts were and are the predominant peoples of ancient Caledonia or Pictland; otherwise known as Pictavia.
Again, the Dal Riata Scots contained both the residue of the tribe of Benjamin from Ulster and the line of Zarah from the Milesians, who ascended the throne of Pictavia and the governorship of the Pictish people. What changed was the name, so that Scot and Scotland were now the identifiable names of the ‘northern Britons.’ The Irish name Scot inherited from the Zarah-Milesians had been transferred to the Benjamite-Picts; just as the name of the Saxon Anglii’s, became the name of the Judaic-Jutes.
Queen Elizabeth II Royal Coat of Arms of The United Kingdom – God and My Right (to rule)
A sizeable clue and indicator of identity is language, as stated in the Introduction. Celtic languages were divided into two main groups – Continental Celtic and Insular Celtic. The Continental Celtic languages spoken on the continent fell into two main dialects – Gaullish and Celto-Iberian. The Gaulish language covered the ancient Celtic people living in Gaul, that is all of France, Belgium, the Low Countries, parts of Switzerland and Austria, the Alps and the northern parts of Italy. As there were many different Gaulish tribes, it is assumed the Gauls may have had numerous dialects.
Celto-Iberian was spoken on the Iberian Peninsula, in mostly north and central Spain; principally between the Ebero and Tagus rivers. Both Iberia-Spain and Gaul-France were locations where the sons of Jacob dwelt before migrating to Erin-Ireland. The Israelites as mentioned have always been known as Hebrews, after their forebear Eber, descended from Arphaxad, the third son of Shem. Thus the words Iber-ia, Hiber-nia and Hebri-des in Ireland and Scotland are clues to the whereabouts of these Hebrews.
Another major location for the Celts as mentioned, were those who dwelt in Asia Minor from the mid-second century BCE known as the Galatians. The region was called Galatia, a Roman protectorate which Paul visited and wrote letters to the believers dwelling in the region – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. The Celtic Galatians originated from the ancient Cimmerians. They travelled overland from the Middle East via the Danube valley and throughout Gaul.
They in turn invaded Spain and merged with the Hebrew elements already residing there – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘Circa 700 to 500 BCE Ireland was settled by a people who employed concentrated hill forts which usage is often associated with Celtic, Halstatt culture. They produced many varied bronze and gold products and had connections as far afield as Scandinavia, the Greek Isles and the Syrian coast. From 200 BCE to 300 CE a new group introduced into Ireland ring forts similar to those known in northern Portugal and Spanish Galicia.’
Scottish men
All Continental Celtic languages are extinct, with next to nothing known about them. Insular Celtic is well documented. Insular Celtic refers to the languages spoken in the British Isles and Brittany in north-western France. Insular Celtic was divided into two broad groups, in which modern Celtic languages have derived: Brythonic (British) and Goidelic (Irish/Scottish). Brythonic is also called P-Celtic and includes Welsh, Cornish and Breton spoken in France.
After the Romans departed and with the Saxons settling in Britain, the Celtic Britons were pressed into the regions where they are still living today. The Cornish people, replete with their own language remained in Cornwall, south-west England. Welsh had been spoken throughout England and southern Scotland. Some of the Welsh speaking Britons fled across the channel to the Armorican Peninsula, now known as Brittany. However, Bretons language evolution made it unintelligible with Welsh.
The Goidelic languages are referred to as Q-Celtic languages, comprising of Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic and Manx in the Isle of Man. It is not certain if Ireland had ever spoken P-Celtic languages before the arrival of the Gaelic Celts. As the Simeon Welsh are linked to Ireland anciently, it may well be possible.
The ruling lineage of the Scotti in Ireland was from Zarah of Judah and Ireland was likewise known as Scotia. When the Milesian Scots comprising the royal line of Zarah with the remainder of the tribe of Benjamin, invaded and colonised Argyll in the western reaches of Caledonia, they established the Dal Riada kingdom.
The Scots warred and then intermingled with the Picts, and that is the reason why Scotland speaks a Gaelic language, sharing strong cultural, historical, ethnic, mythological and folkloric ties to Ireland. People from Ireland settled on the Isle of Man, in about the fifth century, displacing the P-Celtic language spoken there. Irish invaders also established the Dyfed kingdom in southwestern Wales. Dyfed is not far removed from Dafydd, which is Welsh for David and David is the patron saint of Wales.
Scottish women
Archaeology reveals that there were people living in both Ireland and Britain before the arrival of the P and Q Celtic people. These pre-Celtic people are incorrectly thought to be involved in the megalithic cultures; erecting large standing stones and megalithic tombs. Examples are Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England and the Giants causeway between Ulster and Alba – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. The presence of giants has been touched upon and they were a common theme in Britain and Ireland to contend with, as they had been opponents in Canaan for the sons of Jacob.
There are a number of routes which early peoples may have sailed in entering the British Isles, thus identifying where certain peoples came ashore is difficult. Many just suddenly turn up in records. Migrating people could have travelled to Ireland’s eastern shore, directly from Britain via the Continent. Simeon may have entered from this direction. It is documented that the Gaels migrated into Ireland from the south having come from Spain. Whereas the Vikings landed upon the northern shores of Ireland and Scotland from Norway via the Hebrides Islands and the Orkney Islands.
Scottish man and woman
It is not clear to historians where the Picts originated, whether they arrived from Scandinavia or Ireland; as the Picts left no records. It is not known what the Picts even called themselves. The Romans called them Picti or ‘painted ones.’ The Picts were renowned for painting themselves blue and tattooing much of their bodies. A frightening sight in Battle. Many Scottish rugby union supporters also paint their faces blue on match days. The tartan kilts are a cloth of colours and one wonders if these are a throwback to their brother Joseph’s coat of many colours which Jacob had given him.
The Picts are descendants of the Celtic Caledonii tribe. In the Q-Celtic language of Irish Gaelic, the Picts were called Cruthini, Cruithni, Cruithini, Cruthin and Cruthni. While in P-Celtic, the Picts were called Preteni or Pretani. We will endeavour to answer this question about their route, by tracking the Cruithni.
The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE:
‘The Epidian Cruthin or Epidii (Greek Επίδιοι) were an ancient British people, known from a mention of them by Ptolemy the geographer c. 150. The name Epidii includes the Gallo-Brittonic root epos, meaning horse (Compare with Old Gaelic ech). It may, perhaps, be related to the Horse-goddess Epona. They inhabited the modern-day regions of Argyll and Kintyre, as well as the islands of Islay and Jura…’
There is a link between the Pict, the Cruthin, the Epidii (horse)andthe prominent Scottish heraldic symbol, the Unicorn.
Notice the head of a horse at the top of the map of Scotland. To the left (west) behind the back of its head are the Outer Hebrides and above its nose (north) are situated the Orkney Islands.
Ireland was called Ierna by the second century geographer Ptolemy and Hiberia by the Romans. An early people of Ierna were known as the Iverni, which has been identified with the Erainn (or Erin). The Belgae, a tribe who lived in Gaul, between the Seine and Marne, established a southern kingdom in Britain, before Caesar’s campaign in Gaul. They then migrated to Ireland with one scholar arguing that the Erainn could identify with the Belgae. This view has been discredited by most other scholars, though this writer would not be so quick to dismiss it.
Biblical writer Yair Davidy proposes a link between Benjamin, Belgium, the Belgae and Benjamin’s eldest son, Bela; saying that in ancient Hebrew it was pronounced ‘Belagh.’ We will discover that the Bela-Belgae link is not necessarily associated with Benjamin directly or solely, but also with the tribe of Reuben – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
Another Irish people were the Lagin who followed the Erainn, settling mostly in Leinster and in Connacht and according to their own legends, they had migrated from Armorica – Brittany. The Gaels (or Goidels) cited as the last invaders and known as the Feni, are incorrectly equated with the Milesians in the Lebor Gabala – Book of Invasions. The Feni (or Gaels) migrated to Ireland directly from Iberia. Irish and Scottish Celtic legends state that their ancestors, the Hiberi, came from the Middle East via Gallaecia in Spain.
La Tour d’Auvergne, 1801 quotes Dionysus who spoke of Bretons in ancient times living near the Pillars of Hercules (the Straits of Gibraltar), close to Gades – derived from the tribe of Gad – and close to Tartessos (etymologically linked with the son of Javan – refer Chapter IX Tarshish& Japan). Dionysus states the Gauls had once occupied a province of Lusitania (in Portugal) which was called Britonia. Ephoros of Thyme, circa 350 BCE said the Hebraic Celts had ruled Gades, eventually leaving Spain moving to Gaul, Britain and Ireland.
Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Thomas F. O’Rahilly (“Early Irish History And Mythology”, Dublin, 1971, Eire) compared traditional accounts of peoples who invaded Ireland with the results of research in his own time and came to the conclusion that the invaders of Ireland could be divided into four [streams]:
The Cruthin and Picts: The Cruthin were mainly in [Northern] Ireland but clans believing they were descended from them were also to be found in Connaught (the West) and Leinster (southeast). They struggled with the Ulaid for control of Ulster until both were subdued by the People of Neal. The Picts of Northern Scotland were also known as Cruthen. Scottish tradition said that the Picts came from Scythia, went to [Northern] Ireland, and from there moved to Scotland…
The Erainor Builg referred to as the Fer Bolg. They equal the Belgae of the Continent and Britain. Included with them were the Osraige, Iar andUlaid.
The Laginian invaders also known as Gabair. They included the Lagin, Domain, and Galioin. They came from Armorica (Brittany) in Gaul and conquered much of Leinster (southeast) and Connacht (west). There may be a link between the Domnain and the Dana [the tribe of Dan*].
The Goidels [or Gaels]. These are identical with the Hiberi, Scotti, and Milesians… Amongst the Milesians were The Ue Ne’ll (Irish for descendants of Niall; Ue pronounced ‘Ee’). Niel was a High King of Ireland who died about 405. The Ue Ne’ll ruled* over all Ireland and parts of Scotland. Their descendants are concentrated in the Northwest of Ireland though also numerous throughout Ulster. They are marked by a unique Y haplogroup DNA marker* of their own a sub-section of R1b.’
The name Gael is synonymous with Goidel, while Hiberi is with Scotti; and all four with Milesian. The Milesians are a separate and distinct tribe of Israel, as opposed to the partially misleading appellations which include the Zarah clan from the tribe of Judah: Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.
We will discuss the Goidels (Hibernians) in the next chapter. Similarly, the Belgae (Fir Bolg) are the same as the Ulaid and a specific tribe, one that had an historic association previously with the Gaels in the distant past in Canaan and still does today in modern Ireland. The Laginians are more mysterious and a link with the tribe of Dan is worth considering, as are the Ue Ne’ll.
The Cruithni were living first in Ireland, prior to Scotland. The direction of the Benjamites migration path appears to mirror most other tribes in sailing from the continent directly to Ireland, before moving to Britain. With the Fir Bolg, the Tuatha de Danann and the Hiberi; Erin became a crowded Isle for all these peoples and hence why the Cruithne after dwelling in Ulster, eventually completed their migration from Ireland to join their Pictish brethren in Caledonia-Alba, with the Milesians as the Dalriada Scots.
The Picts are thought to have first arrived in Britain circa 1100 BCE. We will return to the Cruithne Picts and their arrival in Britain in the following chapter. It was the arrival of the Romans much later, which roused the Caledonian tribes of Alba to insurrection. The savageness of their hostility resulted in the Romans erecting Hadrian’s Wall. The eventual withdrawal of the Romans, led to the Picts raiding northern and middle England. Hence the British King Vortigern inviting the Jutes to counter these Pictish excursions in 449 CE. The coincidental irony not lost with the Simeonite British king inviting the tribe of Judah to counter the threat from the tribe of Benjamin.
The Angles of Bernicia over ran British kingdoms including Deira, which combined with Bernicia and was called Northumbria. The Picts were a tributary to Northumbria until the reign of Brideimac (or Bridei III) son of Beli I [Bela?] from 672 to 693 CE. The Angles under their king Ecgfrith, suffered a severe defeat at the battle of Dun Nectain in 685, which halted the Angles northward expansion. The Picts resolutely sent the Angles back to southern Britain. The first recorded Pictish king was Vipoig who reigned from 311 to 341 CE.
By the mid-ninth century the Danish Vikings had destroyed the kingdoms of Dal Riata and Northumbria and greatly diminished the power of the Kingdoms of Strathclyde; founding the Kingdom of York. During a major battle in 839 CE, the Vikings killed the King of Fortriu, Eogan man Oengusa. After this, Cinaed mac Alpin otherwise known as Kenneth I MacAlpin a Milesian Scot with a Pictish mother, became king of the Picts from 848 to 858 CE. He united the Picts and the Scots and together these tribes formed the new Kingdom of Scotland. They then defeated the Danish Vikings. In 1018 at the Battle of Carham, the Scots defeated Northumbria with their southernmost borders established under the reign of Duncan I from 1034 to 1040 CE. Internal turmoil and civil wars led to Duncan’s assassination by Macbeth of Shakespeare fame (Article: The Shakespeare Shadow), steward of Ross and Moray, ruling from 1040 to 1057 CE.
A series of border conflicts between 1138 and 1237 ensued between the Scots and the English for they incorporated a number of Israelite tribes by this stage. Represented by the Jutes, Angles, Frisians, Danes and Normans. The Scots were defeated and Northumbria was incorporated into English territory. Fifty years of peace was followed by the death of Alexander III in 1286. With the infant Margaret as the closest relative and thirteen other distant relatives all laying claim to the throne, a melee broke out, plunging the nation into chaos. In 1292, Edward I of England interceded, placing John de Baliol on the throne. Unrest resulted from his intervention and choice of ruler with the Battle of Dunbar in 1296. The Scots were defeated by the English and Baliol deposed. Scotland was placed under English military occupation – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
In 1297, Scottish Nobleman and rebel freedom fighter William Wallace, recruited a Scottish army, defeating the English at the Battle of Stirling. The English struck back in 1298, winning the Battle of Falkirk. Guerrilla warfare ensued, with Wallace declared a treasonous outlaw in 1304. In 1305, Wallace was betrayed and handed over to the English who hung, drew and quartered him in London.
The most well known king of Scotland between Kenneth I and James VI is Robert the Bruce from 1306 to 1329. A descendant of the Norman conquest and famous for taking up the mantle of Scottish resistance and his part in halting England’s designs in subduing the Scottish kingdom to their rule. It was a tussle between Judah and Benjamin, for Benjamin’s right to be a distinct nation, a separate kingdom. The battle of Bannockburn and the defeat of Edward II’s army, was the pivotal highlight of Robert’s reign in 1314. Conflict between the two kingdoms endured until 1328, when the Treaty of Northampton eventually recognised Scottish independence.
Robert the Bruce
The Picts spoke Insular Celtic languages; with the Pict dialects being related to the southern Brythonic languages. Place names prove the existence of historic Pictish settlements in Scotland. The Brythonic prefixes, Aber; Llan; and Pit in modern place names indicate regions inhabited by Picts from the past. For instance: Aberdeen, Lhanbryde and Pitmedden. Medieval Welsh traditions credited the founding of the Royal dynasty of Gwynedd as well as their principal royal families, the Houses of Aber-ffraw and Din-efur to the Pictish chieftain Cunedda Wledig ap Edern. He was a ‘sub-King… who ruled Manau Gododdin on the Firth of Forth around Clackmannan’ and who lived circa 386 to 460 CE. His grandfather’s name was Padern Beisrudd, meaning Paternus of the ‘red tunic’ or the scarlet cloak.
During the fifth century, Pictish came under increasing pressure and influence from the Gaelic language of Dal Riata until its eventual replacement. Pictish influenced the development of modern Scottish Gaelic by influencing the syntax of Scottish Gaelic and therefore, bears greater similarity to the Brythonic language than does Irish Gaelic. Toponymist William Watson, conducted research of Scottish place names and concluded that the Pictish language was a northern extension of British and that Gaelic was later introduced from Ireland. Today, Scottish Gaelic unlike Irish, maintains a substantial closeness to Brythonic loan words and uses a verbal system modelled on the same pattern as Welsh.
What this highlights is the fact that the Picts and Cymry were earlier and original inhabitants of Ireland (with Dan and Reuben) and later Britain; with the Gaels – though fellow Israelites – not from either of the tribes of Benjamin and Simeon, arriving considerably later and speaking an Irish Gaelic that was demonstrably different from the Brythonic related Pictish and Welsh tongues.
Edinburgh
The history of the modern Scot is one of invention and influence far beyond the size of its population. They are credited in shaping modern capitalism and democracy. Victorian historian, John Anthony Froude:
“No people so few in number have scored so deep a mark in the world’s history as the Scots have done.”
How the Scots invented the Modern World. The True Story of how Western Europe’s Poorest Nation Created our Modern World and Everything in it, by Arthur Herman is a landmark work.
Notice in the title the reference to the poorest nation on one hand and the creation of a modern world on the other reflecting the ravening wolf who would share the spoil – Genesis 49:27.
“… This is the story of how the Scots created the basic idea of modernity. It will show how that idea transformed their own culture and society in the eighteenth century, and how they carried it with them wherever they went. Obviously, the Scots did not do everything by themselves: other nations – Germans, French, English, Italians, Russians, and many others – have their place in the making of the modern world.But it is the Scots more than anyone else who have created the lens through which we see the final product.
When we gaze out on a contemporary world shaped by technology, capitalism, and modern democracy, and struggle to find our place as individuals in it, we are in effect viewing the world as the Scots did… The story of Scotland in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of hard-earned triumph and heart-rending tragedy, spilled blood and ruined lives, as well as of great achievement.”
Another work detailing the Scots creative genius; their massive influence on the world stage; and capacity for effective administration is When Scotland Ruled the World by Stewart Lamont. The last chapter includes observations on the Scottish psyche – emphasis mine:
‘Scots are fighters. Their belligerence may or may not take a violent or military form. It might simply be the wish to fight for rights or a principle. Scots are proud of being fighters, but they are also sentimental. Scots have a reputation for being quarrelsome over religion. The motto ‘Who dares meddle with me?’ is more than an echo… in the motto ‘Who Dares, Wins’ adopted by the crack troops of the Special Air Service (SAS), founded by a Scot, David Stirling. Their fighting instincts are defensive rather than provocative, and he is at his best when fighting to defend a principle than to enlarge his power or dominion. We do not like money to be wasted, nor do we admire those who have it in abundance.’
To list every Scottish invention would be too long. Some interesting and landmark accomplishments include:
Colour Photography Television Breach-loading rifle
Hypodermic Syringe
Lawnmower
Steam Engine
Oil Refinery
Refrigerator
Electric Clock Penicillin
Insulin Discovery Chloroform Anaesthetic
Radiation Therapy
Genetic Cloning
Finger Printing Grand piano First British War Memorial
SAS
Radar Logarithms and decimal point
Encyclopaedia Britannica Modern Capitalism
Bank of England First Savings Bank
Cash Machine Co-op principle of distributing dividends
Edinburgh
Scotland’s top export products for 2025:
1 Whisky
2 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals
3 Electrical machinery
4 Chemical products
5 Food and beverages
6 Machinery and mechanical appliances
7 Aluminum and aluminum products
8 Iron and steel
9 Organic chemicals
10 Pharmaceuticals
The top ten export items represented 98.9% of Scotland’s total export value for 2025. The fastest-growing export categories were Whisky, $10.5 billion (28.6%); Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals, $7.2 billion (19.4%); and Electrical machinery, $4.5 billion (12.1%).
Two important points concerning the genetic inheritance and homogeneity of the British people need to be understood. One may be difficult to agree with and for most perhaps, one will be near impossible to assimilate. Firstly, though the twelve tribes, plus the half tribe of East Manasseh were taken into captivity; deported and transplanted; migrated different routes in tribal packs or separately; as well as journeying of their own accord prior to captivity; they did not become ‘watered down’ enough to lose their family relatedness and commonality of genetic lineage. In other words, the prime Haplogroup variants reveal that all the Celts, Saxons and Vikings who entered Britain in their numerous waves and collectively became known as Britons, are all the same stock of people. Not a mongrel nation as some proclaim. They once included the thirteen tribes who amalgamated as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and then later as Great Britain and Northern Ireland. This homogeneity was noted anciently.
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 114-115 – emphasis mine:
The Roman historian Tacitus, writing… the first century… on the racial nature of the Germans [Saxons]:
“I concur in opinion with those who deem the Germans never [rather less than other nations] to have intermarried with other nations but to be apureand unmixed race, stamped with a distinct character. Hence a family likeness pervades the whole, though their numbers are great. Their eyes are stern and blue, their hair ruddy, and their bodies large.”
The map above creates the impression that Scotland is a mish mash of peoples. Yet the reality is that the Scottish nation descends predominantly from the tribe of Benjamin, composed of Picts and Scots, whom in essence were two waves of the same peoples. Angles and Britons were pressed southwards into England. So much so that the Geordies of Newcastle (and Tyneside) are probably a mix of Benjamin and Judah at the least or predominantly Benjamin at the most. Granted, Scotland has been partially influenced genetically with Norse migration and we will discover the presence of another Israelite tribe in Scotland’s borders – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Scientists in an Oxford University study learned that Britain can be divided into seventeen distinct genetic clans. There was a surprise in that the Cornish for instance are genetically more similar to other English groups than they are to the Welsh. This is due to the fact that the early Britons in Cornwall – in the main – migrated to Brittany, France. Therefore the Cornish majority today are the same people as the Saxon ancestors of the Jutes and thus related to the rest of England populated principally by Jutes and Normans.
People whose grandparents had all been born near each other and were white European in origin had been examined. A further surprise for the scientists was remarkably, many of these modern day clans found in the same parts of the country as the tribes and kingdoms that were established from the sixth century, confirmed that little had changed on the genetic landscape for almost fifteen hundred years.
Which leads to the second matter. As there are five nations located in the islands constituting the British Isles – Britain and Ireland – how does that mathematically square with a total of thirteen tribes. Where are the other eight? These other tribes migrated to the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – including Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.
The opposite is true of what all identity experts, teachers and adherents have believed. The Celtic-Saxon-Viking descended peoples in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are not the same people as the English in England; or the Scots of Scotland, the Irish of Ireland and the Welsh in Wales. They are all individual tribes and peoples in their own right with their own unique nations. This has not been understood before and is pivotal in locating the sons of Jacob and identifying them correctly. Up until now, the Israelite tribes not linked to Joseph have been incorrectly labelled as living in northwestern Europe or conversely, that they are all living in the United States of America.
The map above highlights the predominance of lighter eyes, whether blue, grey or green in not just northwestern Europe but also stretching into central and eastern Europe. It is clear to see, that the highest percentages (80%+) are not based on ethnicity alone, but on latitude. Whereas 50% to 79% exhibits more flexibility and extends further south in Europe regardless of latitude. The lower figure (20-40%) in the south of England (and Wales) may well reflect increased admixture with immigrants from the Indian sub-continent, Africa, the Caribbean and southeastern Europe.
Within those nations broadly termed Celtic, scientists have viewed them as one race with two deviations of language. In fact, this study confirmed that the Celts share language, history and culture but not the exact DNA.
The Celtic Myth Exposed: ‘Despite their claims to a cultural kinship, the Celtic peoples do not form a single group… Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Cornwall have a very different genetic make-up. The Cornish have DNA that is much more similar to that of other English groups than to the Welsh or the Scots. Oxford University geneticist Professor Peter Donnelly said: “One might have expected those groups to be quite similar genetically because they were Celtic. But while[we] see distinct groupsin those regions they are amongst the most different.” Archaeologist Professor Mark Robinson said: “I had assumed that there was going to be thisuniform Celtic fringe extending from Cornwall through to Wales into Scotland. Andthis hasverydefinitely not been the case.”
Light (blond) hair relative percentages mirror lighter eyes. Though this time 50% to 100% of people with light hair covers a far more concentrated area than that for light eyes. The rarity of red hair in Europe generally, with the highest proportions in the North west may have a bearing. Again, the south of England with Wales exhibit less fair haired people than Ireland, Scotland and Northern England. An aspect aside from immigration admixture is that both Judah and Simeon took Canaanite wives – Genesis 38:2; 46:10. This may have affected the English and Welsh gene pool towards darker hair and swarthier skin.
As we have learned the nations of northwestern Europe are in fact descended from Abraham and Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia – and though we are now going to identify all the remaining tribes in subsequent chapters, it leaves one open ended question. Studies (aside from the United States in part) have not been conducted for Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders and the British in South Africa that this writer is aware – because they are possibly not recognised as distinct peoples. They are understandably though incorrectly, perceived as being either English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh. Thus, studies on the peoples of the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations of the New World are waiting to be conducted as no priority has been attached to them.
Of course, we are still two tribes short for those performing mental arithmetic. In fact, we are actually three tribes short. There are five nations in the British Isles and five nations in the New World, yet there are in fact fourteen tribal divisions to account for. Jacob had twelve sons, therefore we are looking for twelve nations who all speak English; having given allegiance to the Monarchy of England in the past, or continue to do so today.
Joseph was divided into two, Manasseh and Ephraim, making thirteen. Manasseh then split into two, the half tribes of East and West Manasseh, resulting in fourteen. The East remained separate and the West joined with Ephraim to form one entity, Joseph – with fourteen returning to thirteen.
Simeon and Levi were punished for their cruelty and prophesied they would be scattered within Israel, therefore thirteen goes back down to eleven. Later, when lots were being apportioned in the promised land, the tribe of Judah said to Simeon: their allotment was generous and that Simeon could share with them. Eleven tribe allotments became twelve. A careful reading of Bible verses reveal that the two full brothers, Issachar and Zebulun would primarily share an inheritance. The hunt for twelve nations becomes eleven. Finally, we arrive at the enigmatic tribe of Dan. His inheritance is shrouded in mystery – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. For now, eleven becomes ten.
Therefore, ten nations must exist in the world; who speak a common tongue; share a similar ancestral heritage; and have an existing or past relationship with the monarchy of England.
Those ten countries include: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. These ten nations are comprised of twelve identifiable tribes for two nations contain two tribes each; plus two scattered tribes within them, totalling fourteen tribes or tribal divisions. It is worth stating that though the peoples of Britain are different one from another as brothers and half brothers would be expected to be, they are more similar to each other compared to their kith and kin on the continent.
Briefly, for new readers, the principle paternal (Y-DNA) Haplogroup for northwestern European men is R1b. It is the Y sex chromosome passed only from fathers to sons. The main mutations we are concerned with are the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21), found in Germany, Scandinavia, Benelux and England; and the Atlantic-Celtic M529 (L21), found in Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Other primary R1b Haplogroup lineages include the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28), found in France, Italy and Switzerland; and the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 found in Iberia.
The people of Orkney are the most distinct in the United Kingdom, a result of six hundred years of Norwegian rule. Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 is essentially nonexistent in the British Isles compared to Scandinavia and other Nordic nations in the Artic circle, such as Finland, as the British share closer genetic commonalities with Belgium and the Netherlands than they do with Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
Y-DNA Haplogroup I1 is the most common type of Haplogroup I in northern European men and its highest levels are found in Scandinavia and Finland, where it can represent over 35% of the Y chromosomes. I1 is Associated with Norse ethnicity and is found in all the regions invaded by ancient Germanic tribes as well as the Vikings. After Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in nations such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands; which all exhibit between ten and twenty percent I1 lineages. Recall that I1 and I2a2 are both northern European identifying Haplogroups as opposed to I2a1, which is associated with south-eastern Europe.
In other words, Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 have higher concentrations in the nations who descend from the Patriarch Abraham. But, this does not mean that males with these Haplogroups are direct descendants of Abraham. For we would expect his descendants to carry R1b and specifically the U106 sub-clade. Haplogroup I is an older ‘European’ Haplogroup which both predates and originates Haplogroup R. Thus, male Haplogroup I carriers are exhibiting an older and separate ancestor lineage which predates Abraham though is still descended from Abraham’s ancestor, Arphaxad.
Eupedia: ‘Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes forblueeyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I. The genes for blondhair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Europe before the Bronze Age, and appear to have been spread primarily byR1bpeople.’
Scots are ol’ blue eyes, says study, The Herald, David Leask, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘A major new study of the DNA of the British Isles has found the highest level of the gene that causes the light iris colour in Edinburgh, the Lothians and Borders. Fifty-seven percent in the south-east of Scotland have the OCA2 gene, compared with 48 percent in the rest of the country – a figure that also happens to be the average for the UK and Republic of Ireland. The blue-eye gene was just 35 per cent in south-west England, 41 per cent in east England and 45 per cent in Wales… places where blue eyes are more common than not are in a swathe of territory running across northern Germany [Ishmael], northern Poland [Joktan], all three Baltic states [Joktan], Finland [Arphaxad], central Sweden [Abraham and Keturah] and much of northern Russia [Asshur]. Overall across Britain, the eye colour breakdown is 48 percent blue, 30 percent green and 22 percent brown.’
A study conducted by Bryan Sykes broke mtDNA mitochondrial results into twelve haplogroups for various regions of the isles: H, J, T, I, V, W, X and U and within U: U2, U3, U4 and U5.
Sykes discovered that the maternal Haplogroup pattern was similar throughout England but there was a distinct trend from east and north to west and south. Minor Haplogroups, were primarily found in the east of England. Sykes found Haplogroup H to be dominant in Ireland and Wales. In fact, studies of ancient DNA have corroborated ‘that ancient Britons and Anglo-Saxon settlers carried a variety of mtDNA haplogroups, though type H was common in both.’ Also highlighted were a few differences between north, mid and south Wales. There was a clear closer link between north and mid Wales than either had with the south. If the people of South Wales are descended from Simeon, it poses the question of who are the people to the north. The same as Judah and the English, or someone else altogether?
Sykes designated five main Y-DNA Haplogroups for various regions of Britain and Ireland: R1b, R1a, I, E1b1b and J. According to Bryan Sykes: “… although the Romans ruled from AD 43 until 410, they left a tiny genetic footprint.” Two reasons for this. First any intermarriage would have been minimal and a very long time ago.
Secondly, as the Romans were descended from Ishmael or modern Germany, the family similarity would not reveal any surprises in DNA and Haplogroup sequencing. Only R1b is indicative of the Abrahamic peoples. Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have been addressed; R1a is a reflection of admixture with peoples of Eastern Europe in the distant past, whether Slavic (Joktan) or Russian (Asshur); and E1b1b (North Africa, Canaan), J2 and J1 are evidence of intermixing with Arab and related peoples, whether including Southern European variants from admixture or mutations originating with Middle Eastern (J1) and West Asian (J2) males.
Haplogroup R1b is dominant throughout Western Europe. The most common R1b sub-clade in Britain, particularly England is R1b-U106 (or S21), which reaches its highest frequencies in the North Sea areas such as southern and eastern England, the Netherlands and Denmark. Due to its distribution, this sub-clade is often associated with the Saxon migrations. Ancient DNA has shown that it was also unsurprisingly, present in Roman Britain. For the Romans as Ishmael, also carried the U106 sub-clade as the Germans do today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.
In contrast, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France, the North coast of Spain and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.
If such is the case, then is L21 (M529) older or more recent than U106? This writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.
Of the nine royal dynasties since the first king of all Britain, Athelstan from 924 to 939 CE, who defeated the Danes, Vikings, Scots and Britons at the bloody battle of Brunanburh, only two dynasties paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup is known for certain.
Comprehensive studies are required for the Houses of Knytlinga, with Patriarch Harthacnut I King of Denmark from 880 to 936; Wessex, with Patriarch Egbert from 770 to 839; Norman, with William I and Patriarch Robert I (Rollo father of William) Duke of Normandy from 846 to 931 (refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo spaiens); Plantagenet, with Edward I and Patriarch Geoffrey Ferole II of Gastinois from 1000 to 1046; Tudor, with Elizabeth I and Patriarch Ednyfed Fychan from 1170 to 1246; and Hannover, with Victoria and Patriarch George of Brunswick from 1582 to 1641.
Whereas, Mountbatten, with Patriarch John II of Oldenburg from 1272 to 1301 is listed as R1b, and Windsor, with Elizabeth II and Patriarch Dietrich I of Wettin from 916 to 976, as specifically the Germanic R1b-U106 (Z305) and the Stuarts, with James I and Patriarch Alan FitzFlaad from 1070 to 1114, as the Celtic R1b-L21 (L745).
Haplogroup I is a grouping of several distinct and distantly related lineages. Within Britain, the most common sub-clade as mentioned is I1, which also occurs frequently in northwestern continental Europe and southern Scandinavia. It has been associated with the settlement of the Saxons and Vikings, as an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ male from northern England who died between the seventh and tenth centuries was determined to have belonged to Haplogroup I1. The truth is that I1 is a far earlier Haplogroup which predates the Saxons, but still would have been carried by certain males migrating into Britain during and after the Saxon and Viking invasions.
Haplogroup R1a, as the cousin (or more accurately the sibling) of R1b, is most common in Eastern Europe – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Approximately nine percent of Scottish men belong to the Norwegian R1a sub-clade Z284, which peaks at over 30% in Shetland and Orkney. If attributable to the Viking incursions, then this would be a result of admixture – originally deriving from a male ancestor of an eastern European. For the true Israelite Norsemen would have been a lineage dominant in R1b.
Haplogroups E1b1b, J1 and J2 are more frequent throughout Southern Europe through admixture with peoples found in North Africa and the Middle East. Each are rare in Northern Europe. E1b1b for instance – found in high levels amongst Arab males and in Sub-Saharan East Africa – is found in 1.5% of Scots, 2% of English, 3.5% of Dutch, 5% of Flemish and 5.5% of Germans. In contrast, It reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovo at 47.5% and in Greece at 30%.
The constant reader will recall that Haplogroups J1 (Middle Eastern and Arabian) and J2 (Near East and West Asia) are indicative of a lineage from Ham (Mizra and Phut); whereas E1b1b is a lineage from Canaan. Y-DNA Haplogroup E1b1b is a result of intermixing with men of an African descent (E1b1a and E1b1b). Thus any man – whether a Berber from North Africa or a Slav from southern Europe – if he possesses E1b1b, it reveals he had a paternal ancestor at one point who was African (Black).
Scottish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Contrary to amateurish speculations and misinterpretations of genetic data, Scots do not descend from the Israelites in any amount.’
A confident and dogmatic statement aimed at those who are perceived as academically stretched and intellectually challenged… to even think the Scots could be a tribe of Israel – the audacity and ignorance of such a conjecture. The full irony being that they actually are a tribe of Israel, with evidence overwhelmingly pointing to the tribe of Benjamin. Unless of course, one is basing data on the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish Haplogroup clusters from admixture discussed in the previous chapter – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Brook: ‘R1b-M269, which originated in western Europe, is an important Y-DNA haplogroup found among Scottish men who participate in Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish Y-DNA Project”. Other members of that project who have unbroken Scottish patrilineal ancestry carry other Y-DNA haplogroups, including E-M2, E1b1b1-M35, E1b1b1a1b-V13, G-M201, I-M170, I1d-L22, I1d-P109, I1-M253, I2a-L160, I2a-M423, I2a-P37.2, and J2-M172, among others.’
Yet none of these are indicative of a true male Scot. For Haplogroups E and J are a result of admixture with Canaan and Ham and Haplogroups G and I, while indicative of the line of Shem and related, are older Haplogroups predating Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Brook: ‘Members of Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish mtDNA Project” whose matrilines are Scottish carry a wide variety of mtDNA haplogroups, including H (38.38%), I, J (8.64%), K, T (7.63%), U4, U5, V (4.26%), W, X…
About 13 percent of Scots have red hair, and 40 percent of Scots carry at least one red hair mutation. Their red hair is determined by allele settings on their melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene in combination with 8 additional genes that determine whether the MC1R gene is turned on…
… Bryan Sykes “mtDNA andthe Islands of the North Atlantic: Estimating the Proportions of Norse and Gaelic Ancestry.” American Journal of Human Genetics 68:3 (March 2001): pages 723-737. First published online on February 1, 2001.
“This study of mitochondrial DNA compares mainland Scots with Scottish islanders (including Western Islands and the Isle of Skye, plus Orcadians from the Orkney Islands), Icelanders, Norwegians, and many other European ethnicities. Figure 5 [not shown] shows Scots [Benjamin] clustering close to the English [Judah] and the Welsh [Simeon].”
The Scots, English and Welsh all share the same father, Jacob; while the English and Welsh, share the same mother, Leah.
You might be a Pict If… 2013 – emphasis & bold mine :
‘… a new SNP, S530… It’s also called SNP L1335… [a Y-DNA R1b-L21 sub-clade] has been discovered and it is a Pict marker… [the] marker is evidence that the Picts are living among us today and can be identified genetically… 10% of the 1000 Scottish men tested carry this marker, while it is found in only [0.8%] of English men and about 3% of the men in Northern Ireland… [but it is only seen once in more than two hundred men from the Republic of Ireland]… this marker is 10 times more prevalent in men with Scottish grandfathers than men with English grandfathers… What was surprising… was the really huge difference between Scotland and England.’
Benjamin and Judah share the same father, though their mothers are Rachel and Leah respectively and so as half brothers, possess more lee way for genetic differences. Coupled with this was the six hundred Benjamite men bottleneck and their subsequent taking of wives initially from the half tribe of East Manasseh and then regularly from Ephraim until their numbers swelled.
The top ten mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and a comparison with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot respectively.
England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] –
T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]
Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] –
T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%]
Flanders: H [46.9%] – K [12.1%] – T2 [ 9.4%] –
J [6%] – U [5.4% ] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%] – HV0+V [2.7%]
Netherlands: H [45%] – T2 [12%] – J [11%] – K [10%] –
HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%] – I [2.5%] – W [2.5%]
France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] –
T2 [6.2%] – HV0+V [5%] – U4 [2.5%] – I [2%]
England: H – J – U5 – K – T2
Scotland: H – J – U5 – K – T2
Germany: H – J – U5 – T2 – K
France: H – K – U5 – J – T2
Flemish: H – K – T2 – J – U
Netherlands: H – T2 – J – K – HV0+V
The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall are H, J, U5, K and T2 across these six countries – much like the rest of Europe. Specific sub-clades for Haplogroup H found in England or otherwise Britain include: H3b, H3k, H5a6, H5c, H5d, H5e, H5p, H17c, H23, H24, H34, H35, H39, H47, H48, H52, H56, H58, H59, H66, H76, H80, H83 and H87; and in Scotland: H1i, H3i, H27c and H67. The other common maternal groups in Britain in lesser percentages compared with Haplogroup H, include: J1, J2, K1a, U5a1, T1a and T2b.
The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups shows that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to similar frequency. It is Germany which mirrors their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian.
Recall that Abraham’s wife Sarah was his niece from his brother Haran, the grandfather of Moab and Ammon. The German similarity reveals that Hagar was not just Pharaohs’s daughter but descended from stock similar to Abraham and Sarah – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. The lesser similarity with Sheba and Midian indicates that Keturah was not as closely related and lends itself to the theory that she may have been descended from another line of Peleg or more likely via Arphaxad’s other sons, Anar or Ashcol – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture is portrayed, where the English and Scottish are most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.
H HV0+V J K T2 U4 U5 T1
France 44 5 8 9 6 3 8 2
Scotland 44 3 13 7 6 3 8 2
England 45 3 12 8 6 2 9 2
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8 3
Germany 45 4 9 7 8 3 9 3
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11 2
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12 3
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6 2
Flanders 47 3 6 12 9 3 3 2
Sephardim 56 9 5 8
The pairings show the gradual mtDNA distancing from England and Scotland by their related neighbours. England and Scotland are very similar, for they have mothers who are sisters. Their percentage variation is minimal as expected. Frequency wise, the Netherlands, Germany and France are not only similar with each other, but also with their cousins across the channel. The addition of family from Abraham and Keturah in Scandinavia highlights their closeness with their brothers in the Benelux nations as well as with cousins Ishmael, Benjamin and Judah.
The Sephardic Jew who is a truer representation and purer line of Esau, is the other main family member who does not seem out of place with their twin and uncles, even with higher Haplogroup H levels. The Welsh who have experienced less admixture, also carry a higher percentage for Haplogroup H, with the highest concentration in Europe at 59.8%. The only other percentage higher than the Sephardim is found amongst the Spanish in Galicia with 58.5%.
The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin.
Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.
H J T2 K HV U5 HV0+V
Sephardim 56 5 8 8 9
Switzerland 48 12 9 5 0.4 7 5
Bel-Lux 47 6 9 12 0.7 3 3
Denmark 47 13 6 9 6 4
Norway 46 11 8 5 0.2 11 4
Sweden 46 8 4 6 0.5 12 5
Netherlands 45 11 12 10 8 8
Germany 45 9 8 7 0.5 9 4
Austria 45 9 8 9 0.8 9 2
England 45 13 6 8 9 3
Scotland 44 13 6 7 0.2 8 3
France 44 8 6 9 3 8 5
Brazil 44 11 2 11
Portugal 44 7 6 6 0.1 7 5
Spain 44 7 6 6 0.7 8 8
Poland 44 8 7 4 1 10 5
Russia 41 8 7 4 2 10 4
Greece 41 10 7 5 3 5 1.8
Italy 40 8 8 8 3 5 3
Ukraine 39 8 8 5 4 10 4
Iceland 38 14 10 10 4 8 2
Romania 37 11 5 8 2 7 4
Finland 36 6 2 5 21 7
Turkey 31 9 4 6 5 3 0.7
Ashkenazim 23 7 5 32 5 2 4
Iran 17 14 5 7 7 3 0.6
A pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of two of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin shows that Scotland and England go against type as their westerly position in Europe is not mirrored by the level of mtDNA Haplogroup H. The Sephardim remain the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 56%. Both England and Scotland have higher frequencies of Haplogroup J at 13%, similar with Denmark (13%) and Switzerland (12%) with only Iceland and Iran (14%) exhibiting higher. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%, followed by Iceland (10%).
The English and Scots as shown in the PCA or principal component analysis graph above are at once on the periphery of other European countries on one hand, reflected in their isolated geographic location, yet remain sandwiched between near relatives, the Scandinavians and Germans as well as the Benelux and French.
Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.
Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Turkey R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
Netherlands R-M269 54% – R-U106 35%
Denmark R-M269 34% – R-U106 17%
Austria R-M269 27% – R-U106 23%
Germany R-M269 43% – R-U106 19%
England R-M269 57% – R-U106 20%
With the addition of England (a) we see that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the more specific Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to: Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively – all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree.
Overall, England has a higher percentage of both M269 and its sub-Haplogroup U106, compared to its related near neighbours, aside from the Dutch. In Cornwall, R-M269 is as high as 78% and in the Midlands, Leicestershire’s frequency is 62%.
Downstream from M269, sub-Haplogroup L165 equates to northern England; L11 to central England; L1 to southern and eastern England; M529 is found in England and principally the Celtic nations including Scotland; and L1335 is deemed Pictish.
The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in England.
Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry.
The sequencing is almost a mirror image, though the variations in R1b sub-clades are what make England, English and Scotland, Scottish. Two separate, distinct, identities, tribes, peoples, nations and kingdoms. A breakdown of the Haplogroups for the major regions of England and Scotland and the percentages for the defining marker paternal Haplogroup R1b; key Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 and to a lesser extent R1a (from admixture) – compared with the national average above.
A comparison of England and Scotland, reveals that though different they are similar. Most commentators regard the English and Lowland Scot as being the same. As if, geography, accent and culture divides them rather than ethnicity.
Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s descendants as well as that of his two brothers. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Scotland and England. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2.
Comparing the English regions, highlights that R1b and I1 are the two dominant Haplogroups in each case and similarly for mainland Scotland, apart from the Orkney and Shetland Islands. Shetland and Orkney reveal Norse influence with the higher levels of R1a (only through previous admixture) and a truer reflection by the older I1 Haplogroup.
The high population regions comprising the Home Counties, West Midlands and the Northeast are all comparable and match England’s overall percentages. East Anglia stands out as different from the rest of England. It is this area which has experienced the biggest depletion of male population due to migration, particularly to America and also bore the brunt of the successive invasions by the Saxon tribes from the Continent. Southern Scotland mirrors East Anglia in England regarding Haplogroup percentages in R1b and I1. With less invaders who introduced Haplogroup R1b remaining, while exhibiting higher levels of I1 and I2a2, as probable evidence of the original male population prior to the Scottish tribes arrival.
Comparing the English and Scottish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German cousins and Jewish twin brother.
Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 J1
Sweden 22 16 37 2 4 3 3
Sephardim 30 4 9 23 20
Norway 32 26 32 5 1 0.5
Denmark 33 15 34 2 6 3 3
Iceland 42 23 29 4
Germany 45 16 16 2 5 6 5
Netherlands 49 4 17 1 7 4 4 0.5
Frisians 55 7 [34] 2 [1]
Wallonia 60 7 11 2 5 6 2
Luxembourg 61 3 3 3 6 5 8 3
Flanders 61 4 12 3 5 5 4 1
England 67 5 14 3 5 2 4
Scotland 73 9 9 1 4 2 2
A difference displayed in the similarity of Y-DNA to mtDNA is that the Flemish are more similar with England and Scotland, whereas it was Germany, then the Flemish and Dutch least in the mtDNA Haplogroup sequence percentages. This time regarding the male Y chromosome, it is the Flemish who are closest, then the Dutch and Germany last.
Whereas the other sons of Abraham dwelling in Scandinavia are more akin with the Sephardim with lower R1b percentages. The Nordic nations have far higher levels of I1 and R1a, revealing different paternal bloodlines resulting from even more extensive admixture than the Germanic peoples to the South in Germany and which includes the English and Scottish.
Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Judah and Benjamin.
Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Sephardim 43 20 23 9 [8] 4 30 34
Ashkenazim 38 19 19 21 [10] 10 12 22
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 2 56 58
Luxembourg 11 3 8 5 6 3 61 64
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 2 8 7 3 2 69 71
Austria 10 1 9 8 8 19 32 51
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 1 5 7 3 44 8 52
Germany 5 5 6 5 16 45 61
Flanders 5 1 4 5 4 4 61 65
Netherlands 4 1 3 4 5 4 49 53
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
England 4 4 2 2 5 67 72
Denmark 3 3 3 3 15 33 48
Sweden 3 3 3 1 16 22 38
Wallonia 2 2 6 6 7 60 67
Scotland 2 2 2 0.5 9 73 82
Frisians 1.4 2 7 55 62
Norway 0.5 0.5 1 1 26 32 58
Iceland 23 42 65
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.
Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. Both England and Scotland carry a higher percentage of combined R1 than Poland and Spain and Scotland replaces Spain with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe.
It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Scotland is an additional example supporting this fact.
Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Luxembourg 3 61 3 3 6
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Netherlands 4 49 17 1 7
Flanders 4 61 12 3 5
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Sephardim 4 30 [1]
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
England 5 67 14 3 5
Frisians 7 55 [34]
Wallonia 7 60 11 2 5
Scotland 9 73 9 1 4
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Ashkenazim 10 12 [4] 0.2
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Denmark 15 33 34 2 6 1
Sweden 16 22 37 2 4 7
Germany 16 45 16 2 5 1
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Austria 19 32 12 7 3 0.5
Iceland 23 42 29 4 1
Norway 26 32 32 5 3
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.
Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Scotland now becomes the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b and Finland at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.
Thank you constant reader for staying the course. It has been and remains a roller coaster ride of surprises and shocks to challenge even the most open minded of individuals. Of all the thirty-four chapters comprising The Noachian Legacy, none more than the present one contains permutations of such far reaching prophetic profundity and necessary historical revision, as the truth regarding the biblical identity of the tribe of Judah.
It is the most vital key there is in completely explaining the entire biblical narrative.
Many will deny and scorn the material laid before you and the majority (perhaps) will not be ready to embrace the power and plain speaking of the points presented. Yet in time – prior to the return of the Messiah – it is prayerfully and faithfully hoped that a growing proportion of the English people will learn about their true identity. In so doing, unlocking vast portions of the Word written expressly to them; encouraging, exhorting and edifying those who now understand they are the tribe the Eternal loves in England’s green and pleasant land.
It is fittingly, Scotland’s historic bard and England’s greatest playwright who ably provide the final words:
“My dear, my native soil! For whom my warmest wish to Heav’n is sent, Long may thy hardy sons of rustic toil Be blest with health, and peace, and sweet content!”
Rabbie Burns
“This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle… This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”
William Shakespeare(Richard II, Act 2, Scene 1)
… anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.
Revelation 3:18-20 New King James Version
Call to Me, and I will answer you. I will tell you of great things, things beyond what you can imagine, things you could never have known.
Jeremiah 33:3 The Voice
“When a man who is honestly mistaken hears or sees the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.”
Richard Humpal
“People say they love truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true.”
Robert Ringer
“Cowardice asks the question: Is it safe?
Expediency asks the question: Is it politic?
Vanity asks the question: Is it popular?
But conscience asks the question: Is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it simply because it is right.”
As well intentioned as the map below portrays the modern descendants of Jacob’s sons, it is entirely incorrect.
Constant readers will recognise how the nations of Northwest Europe are the offspring of Abraham, whether by his wife Keturah (Benelux, Scandinavia and Iceland) or Sarah’s handmaid, Hagar (Germany and Austria) – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; Chapter XXVIII The TrueIdentity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.
While the French descend from Abraham’s nephew, Lot and the Swiss from Abraham’s brother, Haran – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
The chapters which follow will elucidate on the exact locations for Judah and Benjamin’s brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Gad, Zebulun, Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim and Dan – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; Chapter XXXII Zebulun, Issachar, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes; Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes; Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
The identity of Ishmael became complicated by the subterfuge of an incorrect ancestral claim addressed previously (refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia) where it was explained the Arabs descend from Ham and his son, Mizra – definitely not from Abraham. When Mohammed captured Arabia in 620 CE, he used passages from the Book of Genesis to falsely claim the Arabs were ‘God’s people’ Ishmael… while establishing the Islamic religion. Added to this, Ishmael’s position as firstborn son to Abraham, yet to his wife’s handmaiden – for Hagar was not a concubine – meant that he would not be the recipient of the firstborn blessings. But that is not the end of the story.
We can make a strong assumption that Hagar and Keturah were from similar, albeit different stock, though probably not from Nahor’s line; possibly from Haran; probably from a line of Peleg; or most likely, from another son of Arphaxad, such as Anar or Ashcol – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The evidence for this, is that Ishmael not only lived to the east in the Arabian wilderness, between Keturah’s sons and Joktan’s sons; but crucially, is more closely related to Keturah’s than Isaac’s children, as supported by Y-DNA (and mtDNA) Haplogroups and autosomal DNA.
Today, the true descendants of Ishmael comprise the modern nation of Germany. Just as in the ancient past, Germany is sandwiched between the countries in the West descended from Keturah and to the East by the nations descended from Joktan – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. The close geographic relationship between the Dutch of the Netherlands and the Germans of Deutsch-land was evident anciently when they were known as Hivites and Hittites – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
The original people of Hatti were in the main, descendants of Nahor – living principally in Northern and Central Italy today – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. The Hatti migrated from Anatolia southeastwards when Ishmael’s people grew larger and pressed into their land. The Ishmaelites appropriated their territory and name and it is they, who are the later Hittites, which people are most familiar. The mighty kingdom and formidable military machine which dwelt to the west of the other historic imperialist state of the time: Assyria – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
The geographic, cultural and ethnic closeness shared between the two – Germany and the Netherlands – explains the interplay between the names Midianite and Ishmaelite; sharing the family name of Midian. Today, both peoples can be called Germanic, as can a number of other nations – ranging from Austria in the East to England in the West, all part of the same Teutonic family tree.
The peoples of Ishmael and Keturah dwelt together in the wilderness – or on the Arabian Peninsula – and are the original Arabians in the Bible. They did not become Arabs as we have investigated – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Continuing with Herman Hoeh’s article, he addresses Ishmael and parrots the prevalent view which has so stubbornly and yet erroneously taken hold amongst biblical identity believers.
The Origin of the Nations, 1957 – emphasis mine:
‘Abraham’s firstborn son was Ishmael (Genesis 16:15). His descendants are called Arabs today. They still remember that they are descended from Abram’s son Ishmael. Ask any Arab. He’ll tell you so! Whenever you see the name “Ishmael,” or any name of Ishmael’s sons (Genesis 25:12-18), you will know that the prophecy is referring to the Arabs today. The Arabs have spread from Arabia throughout North Africa and eastward into the Far East. There is trouble in the Near East between Jordan and the Jews. Here is why.’
The Book of Jubilees describes the geographic proximity of the Ishmaelites and the Sons of Keturah in chapter 20:12-13: “And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert [wilderness]. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs [Arabians], and Ishmaelites.”
Later, the mighty entity we call Rome, evolved and slowly enveloped the Etruscan state as it outgrew its boundaries – as it had done with the Hatti in Asia Minor. In modern times, the German states which formed the modern German nation in 1871 were also a sprawling borderless geographic area. The German concept of greater living space or lebensraum, particularly from 1871 to 1940 meant German boundaries were continually expanding and changing.
Adolf Hitler: “It is eastwards, only and always eastwards, that the veins of our race must expand. It is the direction which Nature herself has decreed for the expansion of the German peoples.”
Our study of Haran and his descendants, which include the Swiss, means they are not as German as many may assume – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The Swiss resolutely do not identify with a ‘German’ tag.
The Austrians on the other hand, are a different proposition from the Swiss. A survey revealed that sixty percent of Austrians viewed themselves as German – in other words, the same as Germans living in Germany.
This is revealing, for the Austrians share Hagar as a mother with the Germans. The two peoples are half brothers by their mother; as Germany-Ishmael is a half brother by his father Abraham with Keturah’s descendants, which include Denmark, the Netherlands and the other northwestern European nations comprising Scandinavia and the Low countries – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
We first read of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis chapter Sixteen. We will concentrate on Hagar initially. It is alleged by Arab tradition that a Pharaoh – actually Djer, the 3rd King of the 1st Dynasty, ruling from 1922 to 1875 BCE according to an unconventional chronology – had given Hagar to Sarai from his royal household in recompense for his transgression. There is reason to consider that Hagar had not always been a mere servant (a handmaid) but rather, a daughter of the Pharaoh and a royal princess.
Genesis 16:1-15
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years [from 1902 to 1892 BCE] in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife[not literally, but sexually as a wife, for Abraham did not marry Hagar].’
Sarah
4 And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.’
Sarah blames Abraham for Hagar’s attitude and so Abraham absolves himself of responsibility and passes the problem back to Sarah. It seems Sarah is heavy handed with Hagar and so the Eternal becomes involved in the matter.
7‘The angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from my mistress Sarai.” 9 The angel of the Lord said to her,“Return to your mistress and submit to her.”
It is clear that there is no love lost between Sarai and Hagar. Why the animosity, one can only speculate. It certainly intensified after Hagar conceived. The Angel of the Lord did not speak with anyone whom the Creator was not working with or had regard for. Hagar was wrong to be joyful over conceiving by gloating, thinking she had one over Sarai. Though we do not know what she had gone through to display that reaction.
Hagar
Hagar was younger (and likely fair and beautiful as Sarai had once been) and probably thought it would obtain her favour with Abram and lead to her and their son achieving a greater status in Abram’s family. One does not have to read long though, to appreciate that Abram only had eyes for Sarai. Later, when Hagar and Ishmael are cast out, the Creator again intervenes to spare their lives and ensure that their futures are safe and prosperous. The Book of Jasher contains a parallel account of Hagar’s first banishment:
Jasher 16:25-36
25 ‘For Hagar learned all the ways of Sarai as Sarai taught her, she was not in any way deficient in following her good ways. 26 And Sarai said to Abram, Behold here is my handmaid Hagar, go to her that she may bring forth upon my knees, that I may also obtain children through her… 29 And when Hagar saw that she had conceived she rejoiced greatly, and her mistress was despised in her eyes, and she said within herself, This can only be that I am better before God than Sarai my mistress, for all the days that my mistress has been with my lord, she did not conceive, but me the Lord has caused in so short a time to conceive by him.
30 And when Sarai saw that Hagar had conceived by Abram, Sarai was jealous of her handmaid, and Sarai said within herself, This is surely nothing else but that she must be better than I am.33… and Sarai afflicted her,and Hagar fled from her to the wilderness. 34 And an angel of the Lord found her in the place where she had fled, by a well, and he said to her, Do not fear… now then return to Sarai thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands. 35 And Hagar called the place of that well Beer-lahai-roi, it is between Kadesh and the wilderness of Bered. 36 And Hagar at that time returned to her master’s house…’
Genesis 21:14
English Standard Version
‘So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.’
This incident came under the umbrella of, ‘it seemed a good idea at the time.’ What was Abraham thinking? The ultimate sending of Hagar and Ishmael away, left them in a story state, ‘wandering in the wilderness.’
As mentioned previously in our discourse, if a people are mentioned more than once in the Bible, they are more than a territory or region, they have become an identifiable people or nation in their own right. This is what happened to Hagar. Reading between the lines, she obviously continued raising Ishmael who was a young teen. At a certain point she would have met a man who took her as a wife and had at least one child, a son with her. This son’s name is not given, though his descendants are named in the Bible as Hagrites or Hagarenes. The only nation today that is smaller than Ishmael, yet easily identifiable as related to Hagar, is the nation of Austria.
Christian Churches of God in their article No. 212C, 2007 state: ‘The question as to whether Hagar remarried and had other children is considered by some to be a matter of conjecture. The question as to whether the Hagarites are the descendants of Ishmael, Hagar’s first-born or only son, or the sons of another tribe altogether is still to be solved. Perhaps the advances in DNA will tell us the definite solution once the tribes are properly identified and tested.’
Well, we can know now, not just from scripture but by studying Austrian and German autosomal DNA and Haplogroups.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Hagar meaning: ‘flight, to be dragged off, pressed into service’ from a verb (hagar), to flee… the verb (garar), ‘sojourner, to drag out or away.’ From the Persian/ Greek verb (aggareuo), ‘to press into service…’ meaning mounted messenger (a royal courier who could requisite or press into service whatever he needed to deliver his message faster), which in turn is thought to be the source of the familiar noun (aggelos), meaning ‘messenger’ or ‘angel.’
Hagar travels south, possibly to go home to Egypt, but loses her way. The verb used to describe her “wandering” about in the wilderness of Beersheba is (ta’a), to err, go astray. A derivation of this verb is (to’a), error. Hagar wanders the desert until her supplies run out. Desponded and exhausted, Hagar abandons her son so that she won’t have to watch him die, and sits down a bow shot away from the boy to cry. Curiously, not her cries but the cries of the boy reach heaven, and God shows up. For the second timethe Angel of YHWH speaks to Hagar,and promises her that Ishmael will be a great nation.
God opens her eyes and she sees the well of Beersheba. This is fortunate for two reasons. First of all she and Ishmael now have water, but they also know again where they are. Quickened Hagar and Ishmael resume their journey.
Ishmael becomes anarcherandlives in the wilderness of Paran(in the Sinai desert between the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqaba) with his Egyptian wife whom Hagar has obtained for him. Hagar becomes the grandmother of twelve princes, who form the great nation that God promised. That nation is not really named in Scriptures… Ishmael’s sons do not become the rivals of Israel as one may expect.’
Ishmael’s descendants took a back seat to Moab, Ammon, the Midianites and Edom because geographically they were once separated from the Israelites. But not so later, when the respective families of Ishmael and Israel were the greatest of rivals and dramatically again in the modern age. In the Bible, the Ishmaelites are revealed cryptically under the guise of Hittites, ‘Midianites’ and Arabians.
Abarim: ‘His son Kedar gets mentioned for their signature black tents, once positive in the Song of Solomon (1:5), and once negative by king David in Psalm 120:5. The prophet Isaiah mentions Ishmael’s first born son Nebaioth and his brother Kedar among the nations that will be gathered up into the Kingdom of God (Isaiah 60:7).
Although Hagar is an Egyptian, her name appears to be Semetic[correct, as descended from Arphaxad (the ruling class of Egypt) not Mizra (the actual Egyptian populace)]. If indeed so… the verb… is not used in the Bible and its meaning is subsequently unknown. NOBSE Study Bible… insist that the verb means to flee. BDB Theological Dictionary refers to the Arabic equivalent, meaning forsake or retire. An Arabic noun derived of this root serves as the name for Mohammed’s famous flight, the Hegira.’
1 Chronicles 5:18-20
English Standard Version
‘The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war, 44,760, able to go to war. They waged war against the Hagrites,Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried out to God in the battle, and he granted their urgent plea because they trusted in him.
1 Chronicles 5:10
English Standard Version
‘And in the days of Saul they waged war against the Hagrites, who fell into their hand. And they lived in their tents throughout all the region east of Gilead.’
1 Chronicles 27:30-31
English Standard Version
‘Over the camels was Obil the Ishmaelite [Ishmael-German]; and over the donkeys was Jehdeiah the Meronothite[?]. Over the flocks was Jazizthe Hagrite [Hagar-Austrian]. All these were stewards of King David’s property.’
Psalm 83:6-8
English Standard Version
‘… the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites [Germany], Moab [France] and the Hagrites [Austria], Gebal and Ammon [French Quebec] and Amalek, Philistia [Latino-Hispano America] with the inhabitants of Tyre [Brazil]; Asshur [Russia] also has joined them; they [Russia] are the strong arm of the children of Lot [Moab and Ammon].’
Psalm 83:6
Young’s Literal Translation
‘… Tents of Edom, and Ishmaelites, Moab, and theHagarenes…’
The Hagrites are mentioned as separate people distinct from Ishmael. Jetur and Naphish are sons of Ishmael. Jaziz the Hagrite oversaw the flocks – goats, sheep and cattle – of King David. Though Psalm 83:6-8 is non-prophetical and a listing of the chief enemies of Israel at the time of David, they are indicative of the future global alliance against the sons of Jacob; including the Europeans as represented by Eber in Numbers 24:24 – Articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen.
Austria is a landlocked mountainous country and with Switzerland, forms what has been characterised as the neutral core of Europe, gaining permanent neutrality in 1955. Austria has a population of 9,113,578 people; less than Sweden and more than Switzerland. Part of Austria’s prominence can be attributed to its geographic position at the centre of European traffic between east and west along the Danubian trade route, as well as north and south, through the Alpine passes. The capital of Austria is the historic Vienna (or Wien), the former seat of the Holy Roman Empire.
Austria was first a prefecture, a margraviate formed from former territory in Bavaria; developing into a duchy and then an archduchy. In the sixteenth century, Austria rose to prominence via the Hapsburg or Habsbur Monarchy – the House of Hapsburg being one of the most influential royal dynasties in history. ‘Not only did the house occupy the throne of the Holy Roman Empire continuously between 1438 and 1740, it also occupied the thrones of the Kingdoms of Bohemia, England and Ireland (as a result of the marriage between King Philippe II of Spain and Mary I of England), Germany, Croatia, Hungary, Portugal, Spain as well as the second Mexican Empire and several Dutch and Italian principalities.’
Early in the nineteenth century, Austria established its own empire, becoming a great power and the driving force of the German Confederation. After its defeat in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 for hegemony of the German states, it sought its own course. In 1867, Austria formed an Austria-Hungarian Dual Monarchy. Following WWI, a Republic of German-Austria was proclaimed. A union with Germany, but the victorious allied powers did not recognise the new state. In 1938, the Austrian-born Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the Third German Reich, annexed Austria by the Anschluss – union.
The German name for Austria, Osterreich, derives from the Old High German Ostarrichi, which means ‘eastern realm.’ The word Austria is a Latinisation of the German name; first recorded in the twelfth century. At the time, Upper and Lower Austria was the easternmost extent of Bavaria. German is the country’s official language, though many Austrians also speak a variety of Bavarian dialects.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Austrian global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$33.9 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $21.5 billion
Vehicles: $18.8 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $14.4 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $9.9 billion
Iron, steel: $8.5 billion
Wood: $7.5 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $6.8 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $5.6 billion
Paper, paper items: $5.3 billion
Wood was the fastest grower among the top 10 Austrian export categories, up by 54.5% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the metals iron and steel via a 46.3% advance.’
Austrian man and woman
Continuing with the Book of Genesis and the story of Ishmael.
Genesis 16:1-15
English Standard Version
10 ‘The angel of the Lord also said to [Hagar], “I will surely multiply your offspring so that they cannot be numbered for multitude.” 11 And the angel of the Lord said to her, “Behold, you are pregnant and shall bear a son.You shall call his name Ishmael, because theLord has listened to your affliction.
12 He shall be a wild [H6501* – pere: running wild, wild ass] donkeyof a man,his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he shalldwell over against [H6440 – paniym: before, amongst, toward, in the presence of] all his kinsmen.”
13 So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, “You are a God of seeing,” for she said, “Truly here I have seen him who looks after me.” 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered. 15 And Hagar bore Abram a son [in 1891 BCE], and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael.’
Ishmael
We learn of Ishmael’s key traits in identifying him. His posterity were to become large in number – twelve princes in fact. We are not looking for a small nation in western Europe; yet related to the Dutch from Midian; the French from Lot; and the North-Central Italians from Nahor. The interlinear does not include the word ‘donkey’. It is added because the Hebrew word for wild* is used elsewhere in connection with a wild ass or donkey. In this context it is mis-leading as Ishmael is not an individual out-of-control.
He is energetic, forceful, his own man, with a ‘fiercely independent spirit’ in opposition to his family; a hunter and predatory – and yet, he is fiercely stubborn… just like a donkey no less.
With that in mind it is quite remarkable that a misidentification for the tribe of Issachar (a son of Jacob), should have led this writer to the following symbols and heraldry.
Notice the frequency of use of a donkey in Germany, spilling over into parts of Poland and the Czech Republic, where non-coincidently their western borders were once former German territory.
Issachar is invariably interpreted incorrectly as either Finland or Switzerland – Chapter XXXII Issachar,Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. In like manner, Germany is misidentified as Asshur, Gomer or Gad (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar). And in so doing, researchers have missed the link between the ass and Ishmael (Germany), crediting it instead to Issachar.
Alternative translations assist in the meaning of these verses.
New English Translation
‘… He will be hostile to everyone, and everyone will be hostile to him…’
New Century Version
“Ishmael… will be against everyone, and everyone will be against him. He will attack allhis brothers.”
Common English Bible
“… he will fight everyone, and they will fight him. He will live at odds with all his relatives.”
The Message
“He‘ll be a… real fighter, fighting and being fought, Always stirring up trouble, always at odds with his family.”
The Germans have fought wars against all the major powers in Europe, past and present: Russia, Austria, France and England, in evidence of their hostility. Germany has also invaded or attacked: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria – all pf them his half-brothers. The more distant cousins from Poland, Czechoslovakia and so forth have not escaped Ishmael’s aggression. Germany dwells in the presence or amongst his brethren and borders: Denmark, the Netherlands, Flanders, Wallonia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, the Czech Republic and Poland.
Verse twelve of Genesis chapter sixteen has been used by commentators to describe the Arab nations and on the surface it is a convincing fit. There are two sizeable flaws in this argument. Firstly, Ishmael was not predicted to be more than one nation in the past or the future – East and West Germany not withstanding. The twelve sons of Ishmael are similar to Nahor’s twelve sons, in that Germany like Italy was a region, then a confederation of multiple states for centuries before forming one distinct nation in 1871, following Italy in 1861 – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Secondly, the constant reader who has resisted skimming or skipping ahead, will know with a good measure of surety, that we are searching for a nation which is kith and kin to those in western Europe and cannot, repeat cannot, be those people dwelling in northern Africa or the Middle East – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.
Spot the difference. Compared with France and England, Germany has been at war with just about everyone.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ishmael Meaning: God Hearsfrom (1) the verb (shama’), to hear, and (2) the word (‘el), God.
There are a surprising six men named Ishmael in the Bible:
The most famous Ishmael is the son of Abraham with Hagar.
A descendant of Jonathan (1 Chronicles 8:38).
The father of Zebadiah (2 Chronicles 19:11).
An officer under Joash (2 Chronicles 23:3).
The murderer of Gedaliah the Babylonian governor over the remnant in Judah (2 Kings 25:25).
A priest who divorced his foreign wife (Ezra 10:22).
Note that the proper ethnonym (Ishmaelite) occurs only once (1 Chronicles 2:17), and comes with a shorter version, which occurs just once… (1 Chronicles 27:30). The collective plural occurs six times (Genesis 37:25, 37:27, 37:28, 39:1, Judges 8:24 and Psalm 83:6). The name Ishmael consists of two elements. The first part comes from the verb (shama’), meaning to hear: The verb (shama’) means to hear and may also mean to understand or obey. The second part of the name Ishmael is (El)… that is Elohim, or God… The name Ishmael meansHe Will Hear God...’
Genesis 17:15-25
English Standard Version
15 ‘And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”
18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!” 19 God said, “No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac [named by the Eternal]. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him.
20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and multiply him greatly. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: in ‘magnitude, extent’ and ‘importance’] nation.
21 But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this time next year.” 22 When he had finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham. 23 Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 AndIshmael his son [in 1878 BCE] was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.’
Abraham laughed an incredulous laugh. He did not have a disrespectful or disbelieving laugh; otherwise the Creator would have hauled him up for it. We learn that Abraham not only believed Ishmael had been provided as the son of promise, we also learn that his relationship with Ishmael was a special bond, so much so that Abraham was not desperate for another son and would have gladly had the birthright promises given to Ishmael. This is important to understand, as it impacts the events which follow.
Abraham
As Abraham’s intimate relationship with the Creator as his very friend was remarkable, it lent itself to the Creator listening to Abraham and granting his wish as best as could be fulfilled, without impinging on the promises too Isaac.
The Creator says He will make Ishmael fruitful, multiply him greatly and make him a great nation. The word ‘fruitful’ means materially blessed. True to His word, the Creator has kept his promise to Abraham. The German nation is the third biggest economy in the world. ‘Multiply greatly’ is reflected in that Germany has the second highest population in Europe behind Russia and the third highest European descended population after the United States and Russia. Germany’s status as a great nation is beyond question. Germany’s scientific, industrial, commercial and cultural impact on western civilisation has been considerable.
There are currently three ‘superpower’ regions in the world: North America; China; and a German driven European Union. What is interesting in this equation, is that we have read the verse in the Book of Numbers revealing the ships from Kittim-Indonesia going against Asshur and Eber. Eber primarily represents western Europe. A German led United States of Europe in league with Russia, will for a time, be the preeminent superpower of our not so distant future.
Ishmael was included as part of Abraham’s household in the requisite to be circumcised. He was included in the covenant blessing to all those who chose to follow ‘the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.’ Should Ishmael have chosen to follow a path closer to the one intended for Isaac – in which Isaac’s descendants have been disastrously unsuccessful in walking – Ishmael’s descendants would have been the recipients of yet even greater blessings.
German men
Indeed, it could be a startling coincidence or perhaps a sign of a deeply embedded psychological scar, that as Ishmael was passed over as the recipient of the firstborn birthright, a related tradition existed in parts of Germany. This concept first came to this writer’s attention via a question on Quora and its subsequent answers. The question regarding inheritances being passed ‘to the youngest son… thus forcing the eldest one to be an unmarried servant of his youngest brother…’
Answers included:
a. “Ultimogeniture, also known as postremogeniture or junior right, is the tradition of inheritance by the last-born of a privileged position in a parent’s wealth or office. The tradition has been far rarer historically than primogeniture (sole inheritance by the first-born) or partible inheritance (division of the estate among the children).
In the German Duchy of Saxe-Altenburg, land holdings were traditionally passed to the youngest son, who might then employ his older brothers as farm workers. Patrilineal ultimogeniture was traditionally the predominant custom among German peasants.
Practicality played an important part in this system. People didn’t live as long in the past, largely due to war and the spread of diseases. As a result, a family patriarch often died while he still had one or more minor sons. Bequeathing land to the youngest son encouraged the older minor children to remain on the farm, at least until they became old enough to marry. This kept a captive workforce and provided enough labor to support the patriarch’s widow.
While ultimogentiure kept sons on the farm, merchant families and nobility didn’t have the same need for physical labor. Instead, they tended to use primogeniture, which grants the right of succession to the firstborn son. Primogeniture was also the primary method for establishing royal lineages and naming new kings.”
b. “What you describe existed in [the] 19th century but was given up around 1930.”
c. “In Germany there were areas of Ultimogeniture (inheritance of the youngest), Primogeniture (inheritance of the oldest), equal division (the inheritance is divided by the number of the children) or tiered division (everybody gets some inheritance but one heir gets more).
Under the law today each child is owed a “Pflichtteil”, a mandatory part of the inheritance that is half of the “legal” part (if there is no testament equal division inheritance… mandatory in Germany), i.e. if you are… three children your Pflichtteil is 16.66% of the inheritance. That means that the maximum parents can give to one child is the inheritance minus the Pflichtteile of their siblings.”
Genesis 21:1-21
English Standard Version
1 ‘The Lord visited Sarah as he had said, and theLord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old [the blood coagulates the most effectively on this day, as it the peak of vitamin K production], as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old [in 1877 BCE] when his son Isaac was born to him. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.”
8 And the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned. 9 But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing. 10 So she said to Abraham, “Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.”
11 And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. 12 But God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. 13 And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.”
The Book of Jubilees also records the account:
17:4 ‘And Sarah saw Ishmael playing and dancing, and Abraham rejoicing with great joy, and she became jealous of Ishmael and said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman will not be heir with my son, Isaac.’
14 So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the [boy], and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 When the water in the skin was gone, she put the [boy] under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went and sat down opposite him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot, for she said, “Let me not look on the death of the child.” And as she sat opposite him, she lifted up her voice and wept.
17 And God heard the voice of the boy [just as the name Ishmael means], and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. 18 Up! Lift up the boy, and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make him into a great nation.” 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. 20 And God was with the boy,and he grew up. He lived in the wilderness and became an expert with the bow. 21He lived in the wilderness ofParan, and his mother took a [royal] wife for him from the land of Egypt.’
We learn much from this chapter but are left scratching our head a little too. The word laughing can be more correctly translated as scoffing (or mocking). Ishmael was about sixteen (or seventeen), if Isaac was about two (or three). For whatever reason, Sarah sensed it as sinister and a perceived threat towards Isaac. Possibly, it went beyond a one time joke and may have shown a reoccurring pattern that had become a concern to her. Either Ishmael was bullying Isaac, unfairly using his age as an advantage; or he was merely playing with Isaac as if on an equal footing and it was mis-understood by Sarah because of her attitude towards Hagar.
Paul mentions the incident, expanding it further in Galatians 4:28-31, ESV: “Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time [Ishmael] who was born according to the flesh persecuted [Isaac] who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.” The Greek word persecuted can mean ‘to put to flight; to chase away; to pursue.’ An ironic definition as this is what exactly happened to Ishmael and his mother Hagar when Abraham cast them out from his presence.
Abraham’s fondness for Ishmael meant he did not take the news well. The Creator explains to Abraham that Sarah is reading the situation correctly and to send Hagar and Ishmael away. Not just Hagar, but Ishmael also had a relationship with the Creator, for his prayers are heard and answered and ‘God was with the boy.’ Ishmael became an expert hunter-soldier, though not in the vein of Nimrod. His wife from Egypt was probably similarly related to Hagar and her pedigree in standing with Abraham’s royal ancestry – refer Chapter XXVI Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
Galatians 4:22-26
English Standard Version
‘For it is written that Abraham had two sons, [Ishmael] by a slave woman and [Isaac] by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.’
Genesis 28:8-9
English Standard Version
‘So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, the sister of Nebaioth.’
Genesis 36:3
English Standard Version
‘ … and Basemath, Ishmael’s daughter, the sister of Nebaioth.
Esau, eldest son of Isaac and elder twin brother of Jacob, married Canaanite women and so to appease his father and mother, married a daughter of Ishmael, to keep it in the family so-to-speak. She has two different names in two separate records in Genesis which we will address when studying Esau – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Ishmael’s twelve sons are listed in Genesis and the prominent ones are mentioned within the Old Testament. Those in italics are mentioned once outside of this listing; those in bold, more than once.
Genesis 25:12-18
English Standard Version
‘These are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s servant, bore to Abraham.
These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth:
Nebaioth [1], the firstborn of Ishmael;
and Kedar [2],
Adbeel [grief of God], Mibsam [sweet smell], Mishma [rumour], Dumah [6], Massa [7], Hadad [thunder],
Tema [9],
Jetur [10], Naphish [11], and Kedemah [eastward].
These are the sons of Ishmael and these are their names, by their villages and by their encampments, twelve princes according to their tribes. (These are the years of the life of Ishmael: 137 years. He breathed his last and died [in 1754 BCE], and was gathered to his people.) They settled from Havilah [Poland] to Shur [the area between Mizra and Shem, Mediterranean Sea today], which is opposite Egypt [North Africa] in the direction of Assyria [Russia]. He settled over against all his kinsmen[Keturah: Scandinavia and the Low countries].’
Germany has sixteen states or federated Lander, though three of them are city-states. Berlin the Capital included within Brandenburg; Hamburg and Bremen, which are included within Lower Saxony or Niedersachsen. As Saarland is the smallest state and has a lower population density, it is included with Rhineland-Palatinate or Rheinland-Pfalz. This leaves an accommodating twelve states. There are three dominant sons and four quite prominent sons who match well with the current German States; plus the remaining five which are more open to conjecture.
1 Chronicles 5:18-20
English Standard Version
‘The Reubenites, the Gadites… waged war against the Hagrites [Austria], Jetur [tenth son], Naphish [eleventh son], and Nodab. And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands…’
Jetur’s name means, ‘defence, to border, succession’ and ‘mountainous*.’ Naphish means ‘revival, expansion’ from the noun nepesh, ‘breath of life.’ It can also mean ‘numerous, increase’ and ‘refreshment.’
Two states fit the profile for Jetur and Naphish, as they have relative economic wealth, higher populations and are linguistically and culturally similar with Austria-Hagar – with much in common and a high probability of ethnic admixture.
Firstly, the strongest candidate is Bavaria or Bayern and its principal cities of Munich and Nuremberg. Bavaria has the second highest population, with nearly thirteen million people coupled with being the second wealthiest state in Germany. Bavaria is the largest state by area and is also mountainous* in the South. Secondly, Baden-Wurttemberg and its principal city, Stuttgart is a high population state of nearly eleven million people – the third highest – and is also the third wealthiest state in Germany.
Isaiah 21:11
English Standard Version
The oracle concerning Dumah [sixth son]. One is calling to me from Seir [Edom], “Watchman, what time of the night? Watchman, what time of the night?”
Dumah means ‘[deadly] silence’ derived from the noun duma, ‘silence of death’.
Proverbs 31:1
English Standard Version
‘The words of King Lemuel. An oracle that his mother taught him…’
As with Agur in Proverbs chapter thirty, we do not know who King Lemuel is as he is not recorded in the list of the kings of Judah or Israel. He is a king though who put his trust in the Creator, the Covenant God of Israel and through the fear of the Lord learned wisdom. The name Lemuel means ‘belonging to God.’ With a minor punctuation change, it can be translated (CEB) as: “The words of King Lemuel of Massa, which his mother taught him…”
Massa is the seventh son of Ishmael and his name means ‘to lift up’ from the verb, nasa – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. It can also mean ‘load’ and in this translation ‘burden’ or ‘oracle.’ King Lemuel is believed by some commentators to have been a king of Massa descended from Ishmael.
Two states which may fit Dumah and Massa include Hesse or Hessen – the fifth richest state and containing the wealthiest city in Germany, the financial hub of Frankfurt am Main (the German equivalent of England’s capital, London) – and the Rhineland-Palatinate (with Saarland).
Frankfurt
As an aside regarding Dumah, the current monarch of the United Kingdom is Charles III. He is ostensibly a Windsor from his mother’s side, from the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha in Thuringia; though in reality from his father’s side, he is the House of Mountbatten from the German name Battenberg in Hesse – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
Thus the Edomite link with Dumah-Hesse is not a coincidence – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? As is the association of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha of Thuringia and the Windsors with Dumah-Hesse-Mountbatten and the Edomite Jews.
Andrew Curry – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Archaeologists have uncovered evidence of Jewish communities in Germanic provinces of the Roman Empire as early as the 300s C.E., particularly in what is today the city of Cologne [in North Rhine-Westphalia]. During the medieval period, a trio of German cities – Worms, Mainz, and Speyer [in Rhineland-Palatinate (Massa)] – was known as thecradleof Ashkenazi culture, with records of Jewish life going back to about 900 C.E. Were the Jews of Erfurt [in Thuringia, a later Ashkenazi heartland] and other medieval cities tenacious holdovers from the Roman era, as some have proposed? Or were they the descendants of more recent pioneers who crossed the Alps around 800 C.E. to found tight-knit communities along the Rhine, near modern-day Frankfurt [in Hesse]…’
Tema, the ninth born son is mentioned three times in the Bible. Tema means ‘south country’ from the root ymn, meaning; ‘the right hand side, the southern direction’ also ‘admiration, perfection’ and ‘consummation.’
Job 6:19
English Standard Version
The caravans of Tema [ninth son] look, the travellers of Sheba [Flanders] hope.
Jeremiah 25:23-24
English Standard Version
‘Dedan [Wallonia, Brussels, Luxembourg], Tema, Buz [Northern Italy], and all who cut the corners of their hair; all thekings of Arabia [northwestern Europe] and all the kings of the mixed tribes [Joktan] who dwell in the desert [Eastern Europe]…’
These verses link Tema with Belgium and northern Italy in trade and wealth. Coincidently, it was Roman soldiers who had their hair cut short, in contrast to other warring ‘barbaric’ nations, where men all had longer hair.
Tema equates with North Rhine-Westphalia or Nordrhein-Westfalen; which is the richest state in Germany and has the highest population with nearly eighteen million people. Bonn was the capital of the old West Germany and four of the biggest cities in Germany are located there: Cologne, Dusseldorf, Dortmund and Essen.
Isaiah 21:13-17
English Standard Version
‘The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia [northwestern Europe] you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites [Walloons]. To thethirsty bring water; meet the fugitive with bread, O inhabitants of the land of Tema.’
‘For they have fled from the swords, from the drawn sword, from the bent bow, and from the press of battle. For thus the Lord said to me, “Within a year, according to the years of a hired worker,all the glory of Kedar [second son] will come to an end. And the remainder of the archers of the mighty men of the sons of Kedar will be few, for the Lord, the God of Israel, has spoken.”
Kedar means ‘dark, turbid’ from the verb qadar, ‘to become dark’ also ‘blackness, sorrow.’ Turbid means, ‘cloudy, murky, opaque.’ Kedar is the second son of Ishmael and is mentioned the most frequently. He was a leader, warlike, militarily proficient, practiced and driven. It is a hint of and a precursor to, the militaristic capabilities of the Prussians – and the colour black favoured on their flags. Kedar and Tema are linked in these verses as the two most dominant families and we find that Kedar and Tema are in fact neighbouring states.
Isaiah 60:6-7
English Standard Version
A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands] and Ephah [Holland];all those from Sheba [Flanders] shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you; the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on my altar, and I will beautify my beautiful house.’
The wealth of second born son Kedar and his influence, is expressed with the firstborn son Nebaioth. Nebaioth is linked with Kedar – as Kedar is with Tema – and each are located in northern Germany today – yet Tema’s central position could be classed as northern or southern as its name implies – as speakers of Low German and the descendants of the Prussians. Nebaioth equates with the Capital Berlin (the modern incarnation of ancient Rome); coupled with the state of Brandenburg.
Berlin
Abarim Publications on the meaning of the name Nabaioth: ‘high places, seen, regarded’ and ‘having prophesied.’ It’s etymology from the ‘verb (nabah), to be high or prominent [appropriately for the capital, Berlin]. From the verb (nabat), to look, regard. From the verb (naba’), to prophesy or to be a spokesman.’ Brandenburg has 2.5 million people, is the tenth most populous state and the fifth largest in size. Berlin is the capital, as well as the biggest city in Germany with 3,576,873 people.
Ishmael has historically maintained a geographic and military closeness with Asshur, and so it is no coincidence that they lived adjacent to each other in the Baltic region, respectively becoming known as Prussians and Russians.
Ezekiel 27:20-21
English Standard Version
‘Dedan [Wallonia] traded with you in saddlecloths for riding. Arabia and all theprincesof Kedar were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you.’
Kedar equates with Lower Saxony and the principal city states of Hamburg, Bremen and the (capital) city of Hanover. Lower Saxony is the second largest state by area and has the fourth highest population, with approximately eight million people.
Hamburg has 1,787,408 people and Bremen has 557,464 people. Lower Saxony borders the Netherlands – Midian (Isaiah 60:6). The biggest farms are located in this state (Ezekiel 27:21) and Hamburg is the second biggest city in Germany after Berlin. Hamburg is the biggest port in Germany and the third busiest in all of Europe. Bremen is the fourth busiest port behind Hamburg; with Antwerp in Belgium second and Rotterdam in the Netherlands, the busiest. These cities represent the ancestor traders oft mentioned in the Bible; descending from Ishmael, Midian, Sheba and Dedan.
The Hanover family who became the monarchs of Great Britain with George I in 1714 originated from Lower Saxony.
The total population of Germany is 84,074,219 people, the second highest in Europe and nineteenth highest in the world.
Psalm 120:5-6
English Standard Version
‘Woe to me, that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tentsof Kedar! Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.’
Kedar in the past is compared with Meshech, as peoples of war and not for the faint-hearted traveller or immigrant – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
Song of Solomon 1:5
English Standard Version
‘I am very dark, but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, like the tents of Kedar, like the curtains of Solomon.’
Kedar means dark and the history of modern Germany has been dark. The state flags of Germany have a theme of the colour black running through six of them, the current national flag contains black, as did the older flags of Imperial Germany and Prussia.
State flags of Germany with coats of arms
Isaiah 42:10-12
English Standard Version
‘Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise from the end of the earth… Let the desert [eastern Europe] and its cities lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar inhabits; let the habitants of Sela sing for joy, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory to the Lord…’
A future, peaceful and happier time for the peoples of Kedar is predicted.
Jeremiah 2:10
English Standard Version
‘For cross to the coasts of Cyprus [Kittim-Indonesia] and see, or send to Kedar and examine with care; see if there has been such a thing.’
Kedar is again associated with war, as ships will come from the Kittim in Indonesia against Asshur of Russia and Eber of Western Europe, led by Ishmael-Germany.
Jeremiah 49:28-33
English Standard Version
‘Concerning Kedar and the kingdomsofHazor that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon struck down. Thus says the Lord: “Rise up, advance against Kedar! Destroy the people of the east! Their tents andtheir flocks shall be taken, their curtains and all their goods; their camels shall be led away from them, and men shall cry to them: ‘Terror on every side!’
Flee, wander far away,dwell in the depths, O inhabitants of Hazor! declares the Lord. For Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has made a plan against you and formed a purpose against you. “Rise up, advance against a nation at ease, that dwells securely, declares the Lord, that has no gates or bars, that dwells alone [H910 – badad: securely, in safety, in ‘freedom from attack’].
Their camels shall become plunder, their herds of livestock a spoil. I will scatter to every wind those who cut the corners of their hair, and I will bring their calamity from every side of them, declares the Lord. Hazor shall become a haunt of jackals, an everlasting waste; no man shall dwell there; no man shall sojourn in her.”
It is not clear where Hazor is though they are undeniably associated with Kedar. The name Hazor means ‘Village, Trumpet, Enclosure’ from the verb hasar, ‘to begin to cluster’ or ‘gather.’ The word can also mean ‘fence’ or ‘castle.’ The verses indicate that they are adjacent to the sea, with the nearest being the Wadden Sea (or North Sea) which borders none other than the entire coastline of Lower Saxony.
German women
The idea that the modern nation of Germany descend from ancient Assyria can be traced to Edward Hine in 1870, an early proponent of British Israelism. Edward Hine compared ancient Assyria and Israel to nineteenth century Britain and Germany. John Wilson in 1840, ‘the intellectual founder of British Israelism’ considered that all Germanic people – including the Dutch and Scandinavians – descended from the tribes of Israel.
British Israelites did not necessarily welcome Hine’s solution – instead of maintaining that other northwestern European nations were also descended from Israel – for he believed all the tribes of Israel were located in Britain, with Manasseh migrating to America. ‘Hine had identified the Ten Tribes as being together in Britain in that Ephraim were the drunkards and ritualists, Reuben the farmers, Dan the mariners, [Zebulun] the lawyers and writers, Asher the soldiers’ and so forth and ‘that these tribes were regional or local people in Britain.’
The theories have merit in that Wilson recognised the familial similarities between the northwestern European nations as did British Israelites, even though they mis-identified the continental people. Hine as it turns out was the most correct regarding Israel; then he went out on a tangent in identifying Germany as Assyria. Hine rightly believed that the ancient peoples recorded in the Bible must also be identifiable in our modern age – if the Bible is true and prophecy is to be fulfilled. Hine postulated that if a people were ‘lost’ then it meant that they had migrated to new regions, relevant exonyms and autonyms had evolved or changed and their histories long forgotten.
Unfortunately, as with Anglo-Israelism itself, any proposed German-Assyrian connections do not gain any support amongst mainstream historians, anthropologists, ethnologists, archaeologists or linguists. This writer would have to agree with the mainstream experts, as the theories presented are all wrong to some degree and have not done the discipline any favours. The hope is that a gradual sea-change can occur. The ever increasing fascination developing amongst the public regarding their individual genetic identity and Haplogroup ancestry is hopefully just the tip, of a very big ice-berg of people beginning to understand and appreciate the compelling data now available. A new generation can learn in detail about the incredible diversity and similarity amongst ethnicities; not only specific to them but on a national scale, as addressed in this work.
Apart from Assyria, a growing teaching amongst knowledgeable identity adherents, is that Germany – or at least in part – is descended from either Jacob’s fourth son, Judah or his seventh son Gad – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Though these teachings are still inaccurate, it is encouraging to see that people are beginning to shake off the longstanding, mis-leading German-Asshur paradigm – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
On one author’s internet site – who still teaches Germany is Assyria – there is a list provided of postulated ancestors for the Germans of which all apart from Judah and Gad, was not aware and of course the one listed at number seven, caught the eye immediately.
Asher: a son of Jacob
Ashkenaz: a son of Gomer
Canaan: a son of Ham
Edom: Esau, a son of Isaac
Gad: a son of Jacob
Gomer: a son of Japheth
Ishmael: a son of Abraham
Judah: a son of Jacob
Simeon: a son of Jacob
We have already addressed Ashkenaz, Canaan and Gomer in previous chapters. The four sons of Jacob we will study in depth and identify as not being viable ancestors for Germany. We will also investigate Esau and his grandson Amalek – convincingly ruling them out of contention, which leaves only… Ishmael. It is intriguing that this author has heard Ishmael offered as an identity for modern Germany. Regrettably, the author has chosen to concentrate on providing evidence only about Assyria for his research. It would have been extremely interesting to learn his views on Ishmael. Particularly as he has devoted over thirty years to the subject, publishing a three hundred page work on the German identity.
An example of the damage caused by a mis-identification of a biblical nation is highlighted by Greg Doudna. This author came to understand a profound truth in his early twenties – during the early 1970s – regarding who the United States of America really was in the Bible. Identity believers and British-Israelites have unanimously and incorrectly deduced that the United States is descended from Manasseh, the eldest son of Joseph. His precious gift of insight, has since been rejected by said author and he has tragically gone even further, to dis-believe the identity teaching in its entirety.
His insight was a major part of this writer’s research beginning in the 1990s, confirming increasingly evolving conclusions. It is a great sadness to learn that Greg Doudna has rejected so clear a plain truth. It would be invaluable to understand how he now perceives the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament; for it is swept away almost wholesale if one does not believe the past, present and future application of the historical and prophetic texts. We will return to his comments on the United States in a later chapter, though for now, his deduction regarding Germany clearly shows the pickle which identity adherents find themselves and why credibility with anyone outside of their small bubble-like community is next to zero – Article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator.
Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989 & 2006, pages 242-243 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘… [supposedly] the Anglo-Saxons and most other major peoples in Europe are Israelites – with one gigantic exception. One people right in the heart of Europe which were not claimed to be Israel were the Germanic tribes of Germany which produced the Anglo-Saxon tribes. In this… universe Germany today is Assyria, not symbolically or metaphorically but through genetic descent, in the same way that the Germanic tribes who settled elsewhere than Germany are Israelites through genetic descent.
(Is that clear?)… Anglo-Saxons and Germans are of the same origins. They are the same peoples. The Saxons came from Germany. In the Finnish and Estonian languages the very word for “Germany” is Saksa, “Saxon.” Therefore if Germans came from Assyrians, it follows that the predominant ethnic components of Britain and the United States also are Assyrian. By this reasoning the United States would be Assyrians, not Israel.’
First, the author hits upon the problem with thinking that northwestern Europeans are descended from Jacob, rather than being from Abraham. Regardless of which, observing Germany – so obviously related to these other countries – but saying they are from a different son of Shem is glaringly contradictory as he rightly points out.
Second, ‘Anglo-Saxons’ and Germans are of a similar origin, but not of the same origin. Remember the early points in the introduction; people migrate and their name is appropriated but this does not mean the new peoples are the same bloodline as the ones who have departed. The Saxon tribes, comprising Angles, Jutes and Frisians left their eponym behind and imprinted in Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany, but these three nations are not ‘Anglo-Saxon’ peoples. The British Saxons were not the same as the German Saxons. Albeit they are related… each descending from Abraham.
The author showing Anglo-Saxon equals Assyria, equals America is accidentally showing the inaccuracy of Germany actually being Asshur. Alternatively, we will learn that the peoples who migrated to America from Britain, though similar kindred stock, are not the exact same tribe or extended family. We will also discover, that the ‘Germans’ who did migrate to the United States are not the same people as the Germans who remained behind and presently live in Germany – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim –the Birthright Tribes.
Germany in Prophecy, Herman Hoeh, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Now what does the word “Hatti” or “Chatti” mean in the Hebrew language? Its closest derivation is the root “chathath” (Strongs – 2865). It means “to terrorize, or break down, as in war, hence a warrior or MAN OF WAR.”
It is a stretch by Herman Hoeh to say the Hebrew word chathath is connected with the Hatti. Nearly all the uses of this word in the Old Testament have no connection to a particular people. Granted, it is used in describing the affliction of the Assyrians (Isaiah 30:31) but also for Cush (Isaiah 20:5) and Mizra (Egypt) as well.
Hoeh: ‘The Chatti were therefore Men of War… the ancient Chatti were… migrants who early settled in Asia Minor. Did these Chatti or Hatti later also migrate into Western Europe… Indeed! The Chatti were the chief people who settled in… [ancient] Germany. Their descendants [left] the [HESSIAN name]… In fact, the Old High German spellingofHesse was Hatti! THE ANCIENT KINGS OF [western Anatolia] called themselvesKhatti-sars – meaning the “Kaisers of Hatti, “or “Kings of Hatti.”
It is true that there was an ancient tribe of Chatti in this region of ‘Germany’. Though they are long gone, leaving their name behind. Rather, the modern day descendants of the Chatti dwell to the south of the present day location of Hesse, in northern Italy – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Hoeh: ‘The Empire of Hatti and the Empire of Assyria were… not two empires existing five centuries apart as historians assume. Excavated records from Bible times PROVE that the great rulers of the land of Hatti were not only contemporary with the famous kings of Assyria, but were also federated with them. All ancient Greek writers agreed that Assyria and Anatolia (the land of Hatti) were allies. All historians recognize that there were at least two distinct peoples in Asia Minor who came to be known by the same name – Chatti or Hittite.’
In this regard, Hoeh is correct though the two peoples were not concurrent, but chronological in that one followed the other, inheriting the previous name. Yet neither were identical with the Assyrians, who were never known as the Hatti or the Hittites.
Hoeh: ‘The… Hatti claimed to be “the Master Race.” So have the modern Germans! The Hatti lorded it over other peoples who lived in Asia Minor. They were the inventors of the DOUBLE-HEADED EAGLE which has always been A SYMBOL OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE!’
The double headed eagle is in fact an Assyrian symbol, perpetuated by the Byzantines, the Russians and the Holy Roman Empire, as well as admittedly the Austrians. The Hittites, Romans and Germans have all used a single headed eagle – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
Hoeh: ‘Ritual [standards of the Hatti have been] recovered through excavation in ancient Anatolia… [notice] swastikas… [a] Hattic ritual standard in disk form… the Iron Cross… The descendants of the ancient Hatti – the modern Hessians of Germany – perpetuate these same symbols.’
Three Hittite artefacts highlighting…
… the iron cross (above)…
… and swastika emblems also used in Germany’s recent past.
The symbol below, is a third century Roman swastika
It is apparent from Hoeh’s article that he believes the Hatti and Assyrians are one and the same, or that the Hessian Assyrians as he calls them, are a branch of Asshur. We have studied the original Hatti (or Chatti) when discussing Nahor and his descendants who were later called Chaldees after the Chatti – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
The descendants of Ishmael became known as both Hatti and Hittites. We have discussed the confusing scenario of the original Hittites being from the son of Canaan, Heth – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The addition of the Nephilim as ‘Hittites’ too (Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega) with the original Heth-ites and now, Ishmael as a completely different, separate and second group of Hittites.
Thus, not only were there two Hittite peoples – descended from Canaan and Ishmael – as scholars have begrudgingly recognised; there were also two peoples of Hatti – descended from Nahor and Ishmael – as well. Which has not been recognised, and so the Hatti and Hittites have been viewed as either the same civilisation or more recently as two peoples when technically, there are in fact three involved. Only Ishmael has been known by both names.
The close political ties of the later Hatti or Hittites, with Asshur is correct and was repeated again at the end of Rome’s supremacy, when it split in two and Asshur was the eastern arm and Ishmael the western. In recent times, when Germany was split into West Germany and East Germany, Russia based its control of the eastern block of nations and its head quarters operations in East Germany; within its ‘half of Berlin.’ We have touched upon the future alliance between Russia and Germany which will see them take the political and economic lead in the world, shaking up the world order, while depriving the United States in particular as well as China, of the leadership they currently take for granted – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; 2050 and Is America Babylon?
Hoeh raises a fascinating point on the Hittite kings being known as Khatti-sars. As the Prussians did later have Kai-sers and the Russians had C-zars (or Tzars) as titles for their kings and of course to tie up the compelling correlation, these two words have derived from the original title of Cae-sar, used by both capitols of Rome and Constantinople.
Following are a selection of verses in the Bible which speak of the Ishmaelite (3) Hittitesand not the Canaanite (1) or Nephilim (2) Hittites.
1 Kings 11:1-2
English Standard Version
‘Now King Solomon loved many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love.’
Judges 1:23-26
English Standard Version
‘And the house of Joseph scouted out Bethel. (Now the name of the city was formerly Luz.) And the spies saw a man coming out of the city, and they said to him, “Please show us the way into the city, and we will deal kindly with you.” And he showed them the way into the city. And they struck the city with the edge of the sword, but they let the man and all his family go. Andthe man went tothe ‘land of the Hittites‘ and built a city and called its name Luz. That is its name to this day’ – Joshua 16:1-3.
Ishmael died in 1754 BCE and the period of the Judges began circa 1342 BCE with the first Judge, Othniel until 1015 BCE and the death of Samuel, the fifteenth Judge. During this lengthy period, the Ishmaelites migrated from Arabia via Canaan to Central Anatolia. We have discussed how the descendants of Lot and Jacob had travelled to the Aegean Sea and mainland Greece establishing city states – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The descendants of Nahor had migrated from northern Mesopotamia to Western Anatolia. The reason for all this movement is usually attributable to the onward pressure of migrating peoples. For instance in northern Africa and southern Arabia, Cush and Phut were on the move as they would eventually dwell in south Asia, with Mizra filling the vacuum and expanding their territory from North Africa to dwelling in Arabia and the Middle East.
2 Chronicles 1:17
English Standard Version
‘They imported a chariot from Egypt for 600 shekels of silver, and a horse for 150. Likewise through them these were exportedto all the kings of the Hittites and the kings ofSyria’ – 1 Kings 10:29, 2 Kings 7:6.
1 Kings 15:5
English Standard Version
‘… because David did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and did not turn aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriah theHittite.’
The Hittite women who King Solomon loved were the same as the Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite and Sidonian women, that is, they were descended from Shem and not through Ham’s lineage.
Notice the man from the original Canaanite city of Luz, went to the land inhabited by the Hittites in Anatolia and built a new city called Luz. The Hittites dwelt further north than the Aramaean Syrians, who lived just to the south of eastern Asia Minor. In the conquest of Canaan, the Hittites were said to dwell ‘in the mountains’ and ‘towards the north’ of Canaan – a description that matches the general direction and geography of the Anatolian Hittite empire. Uriah the Hittite was the husband of Bathsheba, whom King David conspired to kill so that he could take his wife for himself. Uriah was a high ranking soldier in David’s army; a commanding officer, perhaps a General.
Uriah is of note, as the Ishmaelites were and are, proficient military leaders and soldiers as evidenced by the legacies of the Hittite Kingdom; the Roman Empire; Imperial Prussia; and in our time, Nazi Germany. Hittite kings as royal princes, were trained from childhood in the art of war and combat; they possessed a wealth of experience from being on the battlefield, where they were expected to lead from the front.
The New World Encyclopaedia addresses the pertinent points we have raised about the Hittities, with additional facts which are interesting in light of their identity as Ishmael, the ancestors of Rome and as modern Germans. Other supporting quotes follow with emphasis and bold mine throughout.
‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa… The Hittite kingdom, which at its height controlled central Anatolia, north-western Syria down to Ugarit, and Mesopotamia down to Babylon, lasted from roughly 1680 B.C.E. to about 1180 B.C.E. After 1180 B.C.E., the Hittite polity disintegrated into several independent city-states, some of which survived until as late as around 700 B.C.E.
The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language. However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the “Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-Indo-European language conventionally called Hattic. Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people… who are also called Children of Heth… These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.
The Hittites were famous for their skill in building and using chariots [as were the Romans and as are the Germans]. Some consider the Hittites to be the first civilization to have discovered how to work iron, and thus the first to enter the Iron Age. The Hittite rulers enjoyed diplomatic relations with Ancient Egypt but also fought them. The Battle of Kadesh (1275 B.C.E.) is said to have been the greatest chariot battle of all time. Rameses II claimed victory but the result was really a draw and 16 years later the two empires signed a peace treaty. The tablet concluding the treaty hangs in the United Nations headquarters.’
The Hittite king, Muwatallis II had at his disposal 3,000 chariots and 40,000 foot soldiers. It was certainly the biggest chariot battle known to history. The Hittites ambushed their enemy; had a greater force of men; and their chariots were made of iron; had lighter wheels; and carried three men instead of the standard two – an extra man as a shield bearer and to weight the chariot during tight turn manoeuvres.
New World: ‘Hittite kings and queens shared power, and gender equality is clearly evident in records of marriage, property and probate transactions and also of criminal law. At one time, a matrilineal system may have been practiced… certain “queens involved themselves in the kingdom’s political and judicial activities, as well as in external political affairs”… The mother goddess was venerated. After their husband’s death, several Queens ruled in their own rights. Correspondence survives between Rameses II of Egypt and Queen Puduhepa of the Hittites as early as the thirteenth century B.C.E. He addressed her as the “great queen,”as his sister and as “beloved of the God Amon.” She co-signed treaties with her husband, King Hattusilis III, including the famous treaty with Egypt. Some correspondence was signed with her own seal, indicating that she had “full authority” to make decisions on her husband’s behalf… This ancient civilization appears to have evolved over the centuries from a harsher into a more humane, life-affirming culture, evidenced by tablets of two hundred laws from different periods that have survived. Earlier punishments required mutilation; later ones demanded fines or some form of compensation except for serious crimes, such as rape and murder – which were punishable by death.
The Hittite civilization was one of the cradles of human culture… [their culture was among the first to have codified laws, literature and libraries]. Their development of trade links did much to generate awareness of living in the same world as other peoples, and of inter-dependence between peoples and had “a profound influence on the course of Anatolian history for the next two millennia”… They often used treaties to secure safe trade and to establish its terms. These terms ensured fairness and profit on both sides. The Hittites were aware that they belonged to a common humanity [for example the European Union], something that sometimes seems forgotten in the modern world. They also made efforts to integrate conquered people by adapting some of their religious customs.
During sporadic excavations at Bogazkoy (Hattusa) that began in 1905, the archaeologist Hugo Winckler found a royal archive with ten thousand tablets, inscribed in cuneiform Akkadian… He also proved that the ruins at Bogazkoy were the remains of the capital of a mighty empire that at one point controlled northern Syria. [The Hittite capital city Hattusha was the most advanced and powerful city of the ancient world].
The language of the Hattusa tablets was eventually deciphered by a Czech linguist, Bedrich Hrozny (1879–1952), who on November 24, 1915, announced his results in a lecture at the Near Eastern Society ofBerlin[no less]. His book about his discovery was printed in Leipzig in 1917 with the title ‘The Language of the Hittites: Its Structure and Its Membership in the Indo-European Linguistic Family.’ The preface of the book begins with: The present work undertakes to establish the nature and structure of the hitherto mysterious language of the Hittites, and to decipher this language […] It will be shown that Hittite is in the main an Indo-European language.
For this reason, the language came to be known as the Hittite language, even though that was not what its speakers had called it… Under the direction of the GermanArchaeological Institute, excavations at Hattusa have been underway since 1932, with wartime interruptions. Bryce (2006)describes the capital as one of the most impressive of its time, comprising “165 hectares”…
The history of the Hittite civilization is known mostly from cuneiform texts found in the area of their empire, and from diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in various archives in Egypt and the Middle East. Around 2000 B.C.E., the region centered in Hattusa that would later become the core of the Hittite kingdom was inhabited by people with a distinct culture who spoke a non-Indo-European language. The name“Hattic” is used by Anatolianists to distinguish this language from the Indo-European Hittite language, that appeared on the scene at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E. and became the administrative language of the Hittite kingdom over the next six or seven centuries.
As noted above, “Hittite”is a modern convention for referring to this language. The native term [for their language] was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa” [and for themselves, Neshites or Nessites]. The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes, and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite, were absorbed by them, or just adopted their language.
The kingdom developed into the greatest and richest power at the time in the region. Bryce (2006) argues that early use of tin to make bronze helped to stimulate a stable political system and also to develop trade-links with surrounding peoples. The earliest known Hittite king, Pithana, was based at Kussara. In the eighteenth century B.C.E., Anitta conquered Nesa, where the Hittite kings had their capital for about a century, until [Labarnas II] conquered Hattusa and took the throne name of [Hattusilis I c. 1650-1620 BCE] “man of Hattusa.” The Old Kingdom, centered at Hattusa, peaked during the sixteenth century and even managed to sack Babylon at one point [ending the Amorite Dynasty], but made no attempt to govern there, choosing instead to turn it over to the domination of their Kassite allies who were to rule it for over four hundred years. Bryce describes the conquest of Babylon under King [Mursilis I Hattusilis’ grandson] (1620-1590) as the “peak of Hittite military achievement” that also marked the “end of the illustrious era of Babylonian history”…’
The Hittite kingdom finally dissolved after defeats and loss of territory to the strengthening Assyrians. The Hittite legacy was influential on both the legendary city-state of Troy descended in the main from Lot, the French today and the Etruscan civilisation of Midian – the Dutch people today – who in turn, ironically, were a foundation for the later Roman Republic… the very reincarnation of the Hittite peoples who had migrated from western Anatolia to central Italy.
New World: ‘The success of the Hittite economy was based on fair trade. In return for tin, they sold gold, silver, and copper, as well as wool and woolen clothes. A banking system made credit available. This, however, was run humanely, so that if for example a farmer, due to a bad harvest, could not repay the loan, it was sometimes canceled by the king… Macqueen (1975) argues that what made Anatolia much more than a “land-bridge” between Europe and Asia was itsabundant mineral resources. It was no more or no less fertile than other regions, but its resources… “made it a land of rich possibilities (that made it) a primary center rather than a backwater which served only to link more favored areas”…’
The Lion Gate at the entrance of the former city Hattusa
Amazing Bible Timeline – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Hittite Empire is mentioned… in the Bible as one of the most powerful empires in… ancient times. Scholars used to question the accuracy of the Bible saying that such [an impressive] Hittite Empire was only hearsay since it was nowhere to be found. They considered the Hittites a small group of people living in the hills of Canaan together with Abraham. This was until the discovery… [of] important proofs… [including] tablets, documents, and successful excavations… [revealing] the truth about the existence of this great empire.
It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of: 1) the original Hattites of Hatti
[no, two different people];
2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name “Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites”
[yes, retained the name for a period]… or
3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities
[yes, related and yes identical].’
Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:
‘The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time. Consequently the history of Hittites is complex…’
We read the majority of the quote by writer D H Lawrence regarding the Etruscan civilisation in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. The additional information is of note, now we know the identity of the Roman people who were steadily rising in power next to their Etruscan neighbours:
‘… Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him. The Prussian in him was enthralled by the Prussian in the all-conquering Romans.’
An interesting coincidence of comparison, for who were the original Romans but none other than the Ishmaelite Hittites who had migrated to the Italian Peninsula as had the Midianite Grecians before them becoming known as Etruscans. These ‘western’ Romans when Rome fell, migrated through central eastern Europe to the Scandinavian-Baltic region and after being part of the ‘Swedish Viking’ wave of traders and raiders, came to be known as Prussians. The Prussians eventually led the drive for unification of all the German States and principalities and were synonymous with militarism and authoritarianism.
According to legend, Rome was founded as a city state by Romulus II and his brother Remus on April 21, 753 BCE. After completing the construction of his city, Romulus divided ‘his warriors into regiments numbering three thousand infantry and three hundred cavalry’ which he called legions. Romulus proceeded to form the city’s system of government in selecting a hundred of the most noble and richest elders, the patricians and these men became the first senators; who ruled the complex republican government when the last king was expelled.
Romulus was the city’s first king, though after his death in 716 BCE, the city was in reality under Etruscan rule even as the Kingdom of Rome. The Etruscans governed great swathes of Italy north of Rome; including Rome which was the southern tip of a chain of semi-independent city states. By 509 BCE the power of the Etruscans had weakened sufficiently for the Romans to eject them and establish the Roman Republic, ending a period of Monarchy comprising seven kings, including Romulus – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
The grandeur of ancient Rome
The most famous ruler of the Republic was Julius Caesar who became the first dictator of Rome in 45 BCE after defeating Pompey in a civil war and thereby igniting the ending of the Republic. It was Julius Caesar who hired Sosigenes an Egyptian astronomer, to calculate a new twelve month calendar – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy. In 44 BCE he was assassinated on the Ides of March by Marcus Brutus. Hopes of a return to a Republic were dashed by civil war breaking out again. In 27 BCE, Octavius appointed himself Augustus, the first emperor. The Roman Empire steadily grew in power and influence; becoming the greatest empire the world had ever known up and till that time. In 64 CE, Emperor Nero set fire to Rome, blaming the Christians. Yet, in 306 CE Rome became a ‘Christian’ empire, made official by Theodosius I in 380 CE confirming Christianity the sole religion of the empire.
The Roman Empire contributed major achievements and left many legacies. The most notable being arches, grid based cities, sewers, sanitation, roads and highways – note Germany’s autobahns of the 1930s and much of the major road systems in Britain, are based on those originally built by the Romans – aqueducts (considered engineering marvels), central heating (hypocaust: circulation of hot air), surgery tools and techniques, medical corps on the battlefield, the Julian calendar, newspapers (Acta Diurna: ‘daily acts’), concrete, construction and architecture (The Colosseum built in 80 CE, the Pantheon and Hadrian’s Wall in 122 CE), Latin from which the Romance languages sprung and Roman numerals. Their numbering system is still used today, as well as Latin in science and academia.
Arguably, the greatest achievement of the Roman Empire, was its system of government. Though tainted with intrigue and political violence which a modern democratic political system could not survive today, the Romans established a legal code that served as a future model for political systems, including importantly the United States. The emperor Justinian from 492 to 565 CE, was integral in the development of the Corpus Juris Civilis, undoubtedly the earliest modern expression of civil law in history and it provided the foundation for the legal systems that define democracy in our era. The relevance of the Roman Empire to the future of western civilisation, cannot be overstated.
In 117 CE with the death of Trajan, the empire covered territory of up to five million square kilometres; comparable to the Greco-Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great of some 5.2 million square km and the Achaemenid Empire of Darius I comprising 5.5 to 5.8 million square km. The Roman Empire grew so large that it was an unwieldy task governing from the city of Rome. Emperor Diocletician divided the administrative rule into a western and eastern tetrarchy (‘the rule of two’) in 285 CE. By 330 CE, Emperor Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople, formally known as Byzantium. This decision plus his favouring the east by building new infrastructure only there, yet raising taxes in the west, led to the considerable weakening of the western empire; leaving it vulnerable to invaders.
In 395 CE, the Roman empire splitting was reinforced upon the death of Theodosius I, emperor of Constantinople. The provinces were divided between his two sons Arcadius and Honorius. Fifteen years later the Visigoths sacked Rome; the first time in eight hundred years. Finally, in 476 CE the Western Roman Empire ended and ancient Rome fell with the defeat of the final emperor, Romulus Augustus at the hands of the Goth ruler Odoacer. Heralding the beginning of the Dark Ages in Europe. The eastern Empire of Byzantium lasted until 1453 CE when it fell to the Ottoman Turks – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
This transference of power from west to east was a switch from Ishmael to Asshur. This relationship had occurred previously in Anatolia as the neighbouring Hittites and Assyrians. As Rome faded, Byzantium (Constantinople) rose to prominence.
We have studied Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in the Book of Daniel chapter two, with a. the head of Gold symbolising the Chaldeans; b. the chest and arms of silver the Medo-Persians; c. the torso and thighs of bronze, Greco-Macedonia; and d. the one lower leg of iron representing Byzantium.
The other lower leg… is Rome.
The statue from a past perspective, is now complete.
The major European nations (or powers) have all been represented in Nebuchadnezzar’s statue respectively. Comprising: a. Italy; b. Turkey; c. France; d. Russia and now… Germany. Quite an amazing coincidence or set by a predetermined purpose?
The Roman Empire powerful like the Byzantine Empire, were both constituted of iron. We have previously discussed the feet and toes of iron and clay and the possible physical-spiritual intent, at the time of the end. We also now know, that this sixth future empire – whether it includes a human-angel admixture or not – does arise from the ashes of the Roman and Byzantine empires. The uneasy mix of iron and clay might just as easily be a reference to the short and difficult amalgamation of the Russian and German political, economic and military apparatuses. This future relationship between Ishmael and Asshur – Germany and Russia – will one final time, in a cycle of three, be instrumental in ushering in the time of the end, the very period of Jacob’s Trouble, the Great Tribulation, the Day of the Lord and the return of the Son of Man – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.
Daniel 2:33-35
English Standard Version
‘… its legsofiron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone [the returning Messiah] that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the wholeearth [the millennial rule of the Kingdom of God].’
This seventh kingdom is the Son of Man’s rule on earth; for a thousand years. Many Bible scholars, Christians and ad infinitum seem to have difficulty accepting a millennial one thousand year period after Christ’s return. Yet the Roman and Byzantine empires were each over a thousand years long. Rome from its foundation in 753 BCE to either its fall in 476 BCE, or the divisions of 285 and 395 CE are all over a thousand years. The fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453 is again over a thousand years, from the official division in 395 CE. It is a curious coincidence that both ‘lower leg’ empires founded by Ishmael and Asshur should have each lasted a thousand years or longer.
Added to this curiosity, is the fact that the Holy Roman Empire began with Charlemagne’s crowning on Christmas Day in 800, and which incorporated much of Central Europe (or East Francia) and particularly the lands that would ultimately encompass present day Germany.
By 936, Otto I was crowned King of Germany and the Holy Roman Empire was for the first time fully centred in Germany. By the end of the fifteenth century the Empire was still composed of three major regions comprising Italy, Germany and Burgundy; though really, only the Kingdom of Germany counted as the Burgundian territories were lost to France and the Italian territories splintered into independent territories. The dissolution of the Empire occurred a thousand years later at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815. At this time most of the Holy Roman Empire was included in the German Confederation, with the exception of the Italian states.
A decree in 1512, changed the name to the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, though this term was hardly ever applied. The political philosopher Voltaire remarked: “This body which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.” The Empire was often called the German Empire, Deutsches Reich or the Roman-German Empire: Romisch-Deutsches Reich. After its dissolution, it was simply called ‘the old Empire’ – das alte Reich.
Beginning in 1923, Nazi propaganda would identify the Holy Roman Empire as the First Reich – Reich meaning realm or hegemony, loosely, ’empire’ – with the German Empire as the Second Reich from 1871 to 1918 and either a future German nationalist state or as it turned out, Nazi Germany as the Third Reich.
It is a further curiosity that Adolf Hitler should wish to impose a thousand year German rule. It cannot be coincidence and very possibly demonically inspired to remark on in essence, an ante-Christ and anti-Christ millennial rule.
Adolf Hitler in 1931:
“I intend to set up a thousand-year Reich and anyone who supports me in this battle is a fellow-fighter for a unique spiritual – I would say divine – creation… Rudolf Hess, my assistant of many years standing, would tell you: If we have such a leader, God is with us.”
Quoted by Richard Breiting in Secret Conversations with Hitler, 1970.
The similarities between the Roman Empire and Germany are numerous and palpable; replicated by the Nazi regime, whether from design or coincidence. The Nazi salute and greeting, Sieg Heil meaning Hail to Victory and Heil Hitler, resonates with the original Hail Caesar.
The Nuremberg rallies with their layout, flags, standards and military precision were deliberately reminiscent of the Roman army legions which prefigured them.
The eastern third of the Frankish empire eventually evolved into modern Germany, after Louis the Pious, the only one remaining of Charlemagne’s three sons died in 840 CE, leaving East Francia to his son, Louis the German as discussed in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. His territory included Alemannia, Bavaria, Khorushka, Saxony, Franconia and Thuringia.
Interestingly, a province or Gau of East Francia, is first mentioned in the Treaty of Meerssen in 870. Known as the Hattuarian Gau, on the west bank of the Rhine. Some think this was a surviving relic of the Germanic tribe, the Chattuarii. Note the striking resemblance to Hattusa the capital of the Hittite Empire and before them, the Chatti.
Louis the German died in 876 and he in turn left East Francia to his three sons: Carloman, king of Bavaria and lower Pannonia from 876 to 880; Louis III, the younger of Franconia, Hesse, Saxony and Thuringia from 876 to 882; and Charles II, the Fat from 876 to 887, of Rhaetia and Alemannia or Swabia, with the addition of Italy in 879 and France in 884. In 882, East Francia was re-united after its division in 876 with the death of Charles’ brother Louis III.
Between 1648 and 1815 Prussia or Preussen in German, rose remarkably in stature. The margraves, or marcher lords of Brandenburg became Electors of the Holy Roman Empire. Brandenburg and East Prussia fell under the control of the Hohenzollern family, who mastered the Brandenburg hereditary nobility the Junkers and ignited the centuries long march to power, which ended with the First World War and the abdication of the Kaiser in 1918. In 1640, Frederick William or Wilhelm of Brandenburg, also called the Great Elector, became ruler of Brandenburg-Prussia; throwing off vassalage under the Kingdom of Poland and re-organising his loosely knit and scattered territories. By the time he died in 1688, Frederick William had made Brandenburg-Prussia the strongest of the northern German states; created an efficient army; and had fortified Berlin.
The Kingdom of Prussia is Founded, Richard Cavendish, History Today, Volume 51, Issue January 1, 2001 – emphasis mine:
‘His son, the Elector Frederick III (1657-1713), was not a chip off the old block. Known in Berlin as ‘crooked Fritz’, because a childhood accident had left him with a twisted spine and a humped back, he was besotted with all things French and looked for a crown as a reward for aiding the Emperor Leopold I. There could not be a king of Brandenburg, which was part of the Empire, and there could not be aking of Prussia, because part of it was in Poland. By an ingenious formula, however, Frederick was permitted to call himself king in Poland. He put the crown on his head with great ceremony at Königsberg as Frederick I and so created the Prussian kingdom, with its capital at Berlin. Brandenburg from then on, though still theoretically part of Germany owing allegiance to the Emperor, was treated in practice as part of the Prussian kingdom.’
Prussia became a European power from 1763 and in turn, Austria’s greatest rival for hegemony of Germany. Instrumental in this growth was Frederick II the Great, who reigned from 1740 to 1786. In 1857, the Prussian king was Frederick William IV. He suffered a stroke and while incapacitated, his brother served as regent until 1861 when he then officially became King William I.
From an early age he received private tuition and as the second son of the King, was not expected to take the throne. According to Royal traditions, he was initially destined to a military life. He was an officer in the Prussian Army when he was only twelve and later on in his adolescence was commissioned as a Captain; joining the Allied monarchs fight against France and Napoleon I when he was sixteen years of age. Wilhelm I was devoted to military service and was determined to perfect the capabilities of the Prussian Army. Wilhelm helped quench several uprisings and hence consolidated the power of his brother, King Frederick William IV. He took part in setting up the Vereinigter Landtag, the Prussian Parliament with a seat for himself in the Herrenhaus or upper chamber.
Wilhelm’s most significant accomplishment was naming Otto von Bismarck as Prussian Foreign Minister in 1862; who became known as the ‘blood and iron chancellor.’ Bismarck was born in 1815 in a noble family estate west of Berlin in Prussian Saxony. He was a Prince, Count and Duke all-in-one. He died at the age of eighty-three in 1898. With the formidable assistance of Bismarck, King Wilhelm impressively modernised Germany, accelerating its journey into one of the dominant military and economic powers of Europe. ‘Wilhelm centralised power, built a strong military, and improved Germany’s international status. It was also under his reign that Germany became one of the first modern welfare states.’
There had been growing disputes between Prussia and Denmark over the territory of Schleswig and these escalated in 1863. It was not part of the German Confederation, while Danish nationalists wanted to incorporate Schleswig into the Danish kingdom. By astutely placing Denmark in the aggressors role, Bismarck was able to spark the Second war of Schleswig in 1864. Prussia, cleverly getting Austria involved, easily defeated Denmark and occupied Jutland. The Danes were forced to cede both the Duchy of Schleswig and the Duchy of Holstein to Austria and Prussia.
The subsequent governing of the two duchies, inevitably led to tensions between Austria and Prussia. Austria wanted the duchies to become independent within the German Confederation; Prussia planned to annex them. This disagreement served as the intended and perfect pretext for the Seven Weeks War between Austria-Hagar and Prussia-Ishmael, breaking out in June 1866.
The two powerful armies clashed at Sadowa-Koniggratz in Bohemia, in an enormous battle in July, involving half a million soldiers. Superior Prussian troop manoeuvres, with the modern breech-loading needle guns over the slow muzzle loading rifles of the Austrians were decisive in giving Prussia victory. The battle importantly, had decided the question of hegemony in Germany. Bismarck was deliberately lenient with the spent force that was Austria; who after their defeat, played a subordinate role in German affairs.
The world-renowned Neuschwanstein castle was built for King Ludwig II of Bavaria, and served as his private refuge. Construction began in 1869 and was finished in 1892, though it was not technically completed.
The Castle became the dream world where the Bavarian king escaped, after he ceded his power to the Prussians in 1866.
Following the War with Austria, the German Confederation was dissolved and the North German Federation or Norddeutscher Bund, was established under the leadership of Prussia. Austria was excluded and its longstanding immense influence over Germany abruptly came to an end. The North German Federation was a temporary organisation, existing between 1867 and 1871. Due to revolution in Spain, the exile of Queen Isabella II to France began a fortuitous and remarkable chain of events on the surface, yet cleverly contrived behind the scenes. Her abdication in June 1870 lead to the Franco-Prussian war when France refused the possibility of the Prussian Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen taking the vacant Spanish throne.
French troops were humiliated by Prussia’s ‘ultra-modern’ army and being driven back to the gates of Paris, quickly swept away the exposed myth of French military prowess, bringing about its downfall. In the process, Prussia had not only displaced Austria as the preeminent German power it was now the dominant state of central Europe. In 1871 Wilhelm was proclaimed Emperor or Kaiser, of a united German State, with Bismarck its first Chancellor.
On 18 January 1871, the German Empire was proclaimed in the Hall of Mirrors of the Palace of Versailles – Bismarck is in the centre, dressed in white with a gold sash
The Prussian led German Empire’s massive military build up, coupled with phenomenal economic growth, meant war with Great Britain was inevitable, as it it sought to be the principal power of all Western Europe.
The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World before the War, 1890-1914, Barbara Tuchman – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Germans knew themselves to be the strongest military power on earth, the most efficient merchants, the busiest bankers, penetrating every continent, financing the Turks, flinging out a railway from Berlin to Baghdad, gaining the trade of Latin America, challenging the sea power of Great Britain, and in the realm of the intellect systematically organising… every branch of human knowledge. They were deserving and capable of mastery of the world. Rule by the best must be fulfilled… What they lacked and hungered for was the world’s acknowledgement of their mastery. So long as it was denied, frustration grew and with it the desire to compel acknowledgement by the sword.’
Flag of the North German Confederation from 1866 to 1871 (above) and of the German Empire from 1871 to 1918 (below).
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 175-177 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… in 1890… Germany and Prussia were the richest and most powerful nations in the world at that time, even greater than the United States and on a par with England…Tuchman says that in… [1905, Kaiser Wilhelm II] astounded everyone by “publicly ascribing the genesis of his Navy to his childhood admiration of the British Fleet”… He was the oldest grandchild of Queen Victoriaand the son of Princess Victoria, the oldest daughter of the queen and Prince Albert’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
‘His father was Prince Frederick William of Prussia, the heir to the Prussian crown who eventually became King Frederick III. [Wilhelm] wasclosely related to all the royalty of Europe and Russia. He was a first cousin to King George V of England; Queen Marie of Romania; Queen Maud of Norway; Victoria Eugenie, the queen consort of Spain; and Empress Alexandra of Russia, the wife of Czar [Nicholas II].’
Once Germany was unified, an effective system of alliances designed and managed by Bismarck, had maintained peace and good relations across Europe. This was necessary because the recently unified Germany in its central location in Europe bordering a host of nations was brilliantly situated for trade, yet in the case of war, extremely vulnerable to attack on a variety of fronts. In 1888, the ‘Year of Three German Emperors’ Wilhelm I died at the age of 90 in March, followed shortly by his son – Wilhelm II’s father – Frederick III, who died of cancer in June.
The new Kaiser (or King), Wilhelm II was eager to be seen as the one who could competently manage foreign relations, without the need of someone else and thus Bismarck was unceremoniously and unwisely, fired. Bismarck’s clever diplomatic ‘system of complex alliances, with their give-and-take features, encouraging moderation, were deliberately’ severed. Kaiser Wilhelm II ignored renewing a treaty of friendship with Russia, rather seeking ‘alliances with the traditional opponents of German expansionism, Great Britain and France, with momentous consequences.’
The following quote is not intended to single out Germany, Germans or the Japanese. Tragically, it is indicative of all waring aggressor nations, when under the influence of dark forces. Humankind all too readily falls under the spell of depravity at times like these; thus taking leave of their otherwise moral code of decency, to replace it with evil insanity.
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 182-183 – emphasis mine:
‘Germany attacked Belgium on August 2, 1914, as part of their plan to quickly encircle the French forces. They needed to go through Belgium, using it as a corridor. In doing this, they were violating Belgian neutrality, which had been declared in the Treaty of 1839. The brutality with which the German Army treated the defenceless Belgian citizenry was not equaled again until 1937, by the Japanese in their infamous invasion… of Nanking. The German soldiers looted, pillaged, raped and murdered civilians with cold, drunken abandon…. crimes… were brutally cruel and sadistic… but were committed with a detached lack of restraint, sometimes while singing! All of the acts were meticulously catalogued in the impartial report of the British Bryce Committee… in May 1915… the German atrocities were in violation of the Hague Convention of 1907, which dealt with the conduct of war on land, to which Germany was a signatory. The offences enumerated… are divided into the following categories:
The Killing of noncombatants
The treatment of women and children
The use of noncombatants as shields during military operations
Looting, burning, and wanton destruction of property
Killing the wounded and prisoners
Firing on hospitals, Red Cross ambulances, and stretcher bearers
Abuses of the Red Cross and the White [surrender] Flag
About one hundred thousand Belgians were killed, of which sixty thousand were civilians, six thousand by execution. About 1.5 million Belgians were displaced by the invasion… An estimated 120,000 Belgian civilians of both genders were used as forced labor, roughly half of which were deported to Germany. They toiled in prison factories and camps, some just behind the front lines, digging trenches while artillery shells burst all around them. In this can be seen the same [cold-blooded] indifference to human suffering that became even more pronounced in World War II. It is clear evidence of themassive mind control… and the violent dispositions… programmed into the young German males.’
As if once wasn’t enough, the same dark, controlling influence polluted the leadership of Germany again a short twenty years later in World War II. Adolf Hitler’s last name is a possible variation of Hiedler, a surname applied to those who reside near a Hiedl or ‘subterranean river.’ Other theories derive the surname from Huttler, also spelled Huettler meaning ‘one who lives in a hut’ from Hutte, or from huten, meaning to ‘guard, look after.’ Adolf derives from Adal, which means noble or majestic and Wulf, meaning wolf. A ‘majestic wolf guarding, looking after’ Germany. Hitler certainly lived up to his name, as the predatory ruler who hijacked control by dictatorship. Notice the similarity between the name Hit-ler and the word Hit-tite. The irony, is Hitler’s ancestors were not German; that is, descended from Ishmael, yet it was he who lead the German-Ishmaelite nation down its darkest path; for Hitler was three quarters Austrian and purportedly one quarter Jewish.
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, 2017, Page 196 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘In his book, The Biggest Secret, David Icke has made a persuasive case for the theory that Adolf Hitler was the grandson of a Rothschild, and that the Rothschild family was responsible for his rise to power’ – refer article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?
‘Icke informs us that according to the book The Mind of Hitler, psychoanalyst/author Walter Langer says that Hitler’s grandmother, Maria Anna Schicklgruber became pregnant with the child of Salomon Mayer Rothschild while working as a domestic servant at his mansion in Vienna. Her illegitimate son Alois later became Hitler’s father. Icke says, “The Rothschilds and the Illuminati produce many offspring out of wedlock… and these children are brought up under other names with other parents.”
After World War II in 1949, Germany was divided into two countries: East Germany and West Germany. East Germany was a communist state under control of the Soviet Union. The Berlin Wall was built between the two states and ideologies to prevent people from escaping from East Germany to the West. It became a central point and focus of the Cold War. Inaugurating the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism, the wall fell November 9, 1989.
Nearly a year later on October 3, 1990, East Germany and West Germany were reunited into one country.
Notable dates in German history include: 1455 when Johannes Gutenberg first printed the Gutenberg Bible. His printing press incomparably influenced the future of the written word. In 1517, Martin Luther published his Thesis which marked the beginning of the Protestant Reformation and the huge schism from the Universal Church – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in theLatter Days. In 1756, famous composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born in present day Austria. In 1806, the French Empire under Napoleon I conquered many of the German states. In 1808, Ludwig van Beethoven’s famous Fifth Symphony was first performed. In 1812, German writers the Brothers Grimm, published their first collection of tales.
Prussian flag (above) and German flag during World war I (below) – notice the Prussian one headed eagle, the Hittite iron cross, the Nordic cross and the pan-German colours of red, white and especially, black.
After the United States, Germany is the second most popular immigration destination in the world, with the majority of migrants living in the western regions of Germany. Germany’s power and prestige has grown all over the globe. In a May 2013 poll, Germany emerged as ‘the most popular country in the world’ – BBC poll: ‘Germany most popular country in the world’, BBC.com, May 23, 2013. In the January 2016 U.S. News & World Report, a poll analysed countries according to 75 criteria, with Germany again taking the top spot, being named, ‘the best country in the world’ – Jonathan Chew, ‘This Country Was Named the Best in the World’, Fortune.com, January 20, 2016.
The English word Germany derives from the Latin Germania, used by Julius Caesar ironically, to describe the peoples east of the Rhine River. The German term Deutschland, originally diutisciu land or the ‘German lands’, was derived from the word deutsch and is similar to the word Dutch, descending from the Old High German diutisc, meaning ‘of the people’ from diot (or diota) – ‘people.’
Bob Thiel: ‘While many claim that the term German come from the Medieval Latin term Germanus and essentially means “brother,” another explanation is that it is made up of the Latin words Guerra manus, which basically means “war gang” (… [and] “war man” or “war men”)’ – refer Genesis 16:12.
The Nazi flag from 1933 till 1945 (above) and the flag of the Holy Roman Empire (below)
Western Germany received considerable support from the United States – as did Japan – in rebuilding its economy after WWII. For decades, Germany was the third biggest economy in the world. Though with China’s ascent, Germany slipped to the fourth largest world economy behind Japan. In 2023 Germany passed Japan – as has India – and so with a GDP of $4.47 trillion in 2025 has regained third position.
Germany is Europe’s largest economy and is a top exporter of vehicles, machinery, chemicals and other manufactured goods, with a highly skilled workforce. Germany is well known for its pharmaceuticals and is the home of one of the world’s top drug makers, Bayer. Germany also has a low fertility rate, with an ageing population and workforce. Coupled with this is its high levels of net immigration, both of which are putting a strain on Germany’s social welfare system.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in German global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$268.6 billion
Vehicles: $246 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $176.4 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $118 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $83.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $76.3 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $43.3 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $33.9 billion
Other chemical goods: $32.9 billion
Iron, steel: $32.7 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 65.4% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the materials iron and steel via a 48.3% gain. Germany’s shipments of plastics plus articles made from plastic posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 27%.’
The German flag during the Weimar Republic between WWI and Nazi Germany and since reunification in 1989 (above) and the German Coat of Arms (below)
Germany is in the top ten nations in the world for technological innovation, at number five, one ahead of Russia at six. Germany has always found its name in this list and is consistently regarded as one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. German research scientists contribute to numerous fields of endeavour including space exploration and biotechnology. The German automotive industry produces some of the most high-tech engines and automobiles, with pioneering brands like Mercedes Benz, BMW, Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche.
On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, Germany was ranked eighth in the world, between the Netherlands at seven and Denmark at ninth. Recall, Switzerland was ranked number one and Sweden number two in the world.
Germany has the second largest gold reserves in the world, ahead of Italy, France and Russia at 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Germany has 3,362.4 tonnes of gold which represents 74.5% of its foreign reserves. In 2017 Germany completed a four year repatriation operation to move back a total of 674 tonnes of gold from the Banque de France and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to its own vaults.
Germany is included in the influential G7 group of nations, where apart from Japan, two of the remaining six nations descend from Abraham’s two brothers, Nahor and Haran, corresponding with Italy and France respectively. Abraham’s children within the G7 include Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States of America.
Some global analysts predict a weakening of China’s economy over the next decade, regardless of this, a strong Germany aligning itself with a mending Russia – after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 – would have enormous repercussions on the future of global foreign policy, world trade, arms development, military expansion and political influence – refer article: Is America Babylon?
Geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan in an article on Russia (Assyria), comments on Germany’s pivotal role in central Europe – emphasis mine:
‘European history is a chronicle of the rise and fall of its geographic center. As Germany rises, the powers on its periphery buckle under its strength and are forced to pool resources in order to beat back Berlin. As Germany falters, the power vacuum at the middle of the Continent allows the countries on Germany’s borders to rise in strength and become major powers themselves. Since the formation of the first “Germany” in 800, this cycle has set the tempo and tenor of European affairs. A strong Germany means consolidation followed by a catastrophic war; a weak Germany creates a multilateral concert of powers and [multi-state] competition (often involving war, but not on nearly as large a scale). For Europe this cycle of German rise and fall has run its course three times – the Holy Roman Empire, Imperial Germany, Nazi Germany – and is only now entering its fourth iteration with the reunified Germany’ and the European Union.
The destinies of Germany and Russia remain entwined.
The warlike and empire driven peoples from Germany and Russia were each thwarted in their aims during the 20th Century. Germany by the might of the United states and its allies and Russia by time, political ideology and economic mis-management.
Germany and Russia remain restless and… patient.
Imperialistic Russia will not rest until its possessions are restored and it has recaptured the preeminence it once enjoyed as the USSR. Ukraine was and is Russia’s most vital economic and geographic buffer state. It is number one on its long list and just the beginning.
An expansionist Germany has seemingly been contained and seemingly (safely) cocooned in the European Union, yet in reality, a ready made empire has been constructed for Germany to lead. And so what Germany failed to win through warfare, it will attain through political and economic stealth within a United States of Europe. The European Union, might just be one of the worst decisions in history.
Former Chancellor Angela Merkel (2005-2021) was called Europe’s most impressive politician and the most powerful woman in the world at the time. She was described as a political mastermind, who used “the European Union as her vehicle… and succeeded where Bismarck, Kaiser Wilhelm II and Hitler failed – turning an entire continent into a greater German Empire” – Dominic Sandbrook, ‘Angela Merkel has made Germany master of Europe in a way Hitler and Kaiser Wilhelm only dreamt of. The implications are frightening’, DailyMail.co.uk, April 19, 2013.
Focusing on the genetic inheritance of the Germans, the top eight main mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany are:
Austria: H [44.9%] – J [8.8%] – U5 [8.6%] – K [8.6%] –
The almost exact similitude between the two German nations in their mitochondrial DNA percentage sequence is instantly recognisable. The maternal Haplogroups leave little doubt as to the shared lineage and mutual ancestry from their mother Hagar; as evidenced in the key Haplogroups H, J, T2 and U5.
H HVO+V J K T2 U4 U5
Germany 45 4 9 7 8 3 9
Austria 45 2 9 9 8 5 9
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6
Bel-Lux 47 3 6 12 9 3 3
Adding Austria and Germany to the table from Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia and comparing the key mtDNA Haplogroups, highlights the unquestionable family link between Abraham and Keturah’s children with the two sons born from Hagar; Ishmael, with Abraham and the Hagarites with her second, unnamed husband.
H J T2 U5 K HVO+V HV U4
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3
Germany 45 9 8 9 7 4 0.5 3
Austria 45 9 8 9 9 2 0.8 5
Comparing Ishmael and the Hagarites with Abraham’s brother Haran’s children, highlights the re-occurring genetic relationship amongst cousins, which can sometimes be as close as those shared between siblings. The Germans and Austrians are closely aligned in mtDNA with the French from Moab and Ammon. The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Hagar’s descendants.
H HV HVO+V J T2 U U5 K
Switzerland 48 0.4 5 12 9 0.4 7 5
Bel-Lux 47 0.7 3 6 9 5 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 6 1 6 9
Norway 46 0.2 4 11 8 2 11 5
Sweden 46 0.5 5 8 4 3 12 6
Netherlands 45 8 11 12 0.5 8 10
Austria 45 0.8 2 9 8 1 .4 9 9
Germany 45 0.5 4 9 8 0.8 9 7
France 44 2 5 8 6 1 8 9
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Iceland 38 4 2 14 10 0.2 8 10
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the Austrians and Germans, sees them unsurprisingly, nestled amongst near relatives and neighbours, the Scandinavian, Benelux and French descended peoples. Recall from previous chapters that a pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe in the main exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.
Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula.
R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.
It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Turkey R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
Netherlands R-M269 54% – R-U106 35%
Denmark R-M269 34% – R-U106 17%
Austria R-M269 27% – R-U106 23%
Germany R-M269 43% – R-U106 19%
With the addition of Austria and Germany, we see that Germany has similar percentages as their neighbouring cousins in Denmark; while Austria possess levels similar to their neighbours the Czechs. Though the mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany were very similar, we find more variance with the Y-DNA Haplogroups and a marked difference in the percentage of the key R1b group R-M269. The lower R-M269 level immediately stands out for Austria. A realistic explanation is that though Hagar was the mother of Ishmael and the mother of the Austrian Germans, her husband, who gave her a child (or children), could likely have been from Peleg’s great grandfather Arphaxad, rather than a direct lineal descendant of Peleg. As Austria has a similar percentage of R-M269 as its eastern European neighbours, coupled with its close geographic, cultural, political and historical ties with Hungary, this lends support for the proposition.
Principal component analysis graphs show that some Austrians are genetically related with Slovenians and Hungarians, while most are closer to Germans, particularly from Southern and Eastern Germany.
As heading west highlights an increase in R1b, travelling eastwards shows the decreasing percentages for both R1b groups.
Pakistan R-M269 3% – R-U106 0%
Palestine R-M269 0% – R-U106 0%
Middle East R-M269 0% – R-U106 0%
The absence of both of the R1b sub-Haplogroups in the Arab peoples shows how they are not European, western, ‘white’ or descended from Shem. Pakistan also proves that like India, they are not the same as Europeans and are incorrectly classified as Aryan.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups found in Germany and Austria.
Unlike the striking similarity with mtDNA Haplogroups, reflecting shared ancestry from the same mother, the difference in Y-DNA Haplogroups shows a different paternal ancestor for the Germans and Austrians. The higher level of Haplogroup I and especially I1 in Germany is similar to the Nordic and Germanic nations on or near its borders. Haplogroup I1 indicates an older lineage from Shem than the more recent, yet defining marker Haplogroup of R1b for German men descended from Ishmael.
While it could be debated what Abraham’s paternal Haplogroup was, there is no doubting that his male descendants predominantly exhibit the Germanic R1b-U106 mutation. Whereas the Latin men descended from Abraham’s brothers Nahor (northern Italy) and Haran (Switzerland and France) exhibit R1b-U152, with the men of Iberia (Aram) possessing R1b-DF27.
The family connection, yet distinctiveness of the German peoples was discussed by Raymond McNair in a thesis entitled:
Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Here are some interesting excerpts from an article entitled Are We Cousin to the German? by Sir Arthur Keith.
In the standard Atlases and school geographies the Germans colour Great Britain, Holland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden with the same tint as their own empire, to indicate that all those lands are inhabited by branches of the great Teutonic family… It is an historical fact that the Anglo-Saxons came into lands lying on the western shores of the present German Empire. In the same issue of The Graphic, Sir Arthur Keith illustrated prevalent British and German forms of skulls. He pointed out the marked difference between the typical British skulls when contrasted with that of the average German. Speaking of the typical British and German skull form, he says:
“The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye. In the majority of BRITON – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects predominately backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width (ibid., page 720).”
Sir Arthur Keith says that “in the vast majority of Germans” the hinder part of the head is “flattened.” He mentions, however, that this “peculiarity of the German skull” is not due to “artificial means.”
We know that the prominent occiput and flattened occiput are characters that breed true over thousands of years, and that they are characters which indicate a profound racial difference. Even in the sixteenth century, Vesalius, who is universally regarded as the ‘father of Anatomy,’ regarded the flat occiput as a German characteristic… He came, rather unwillingly, to the conclusion that thevast majority of modern German people differed from the British, Dutch, Dane and Scandinavian in head form (ibid., p. 720).
Some of the North Germans are closely allied to the Danes, Dutch and other Northwestern Europeans. The exact racial affinity of the northern Germanic type to certain other Nordics of North-west Europe yet remains to be clearly demonstrated. But many North Germans have mixed to some extent with their neighbors, thus producing a people closely related to the racial type of Scandinavia, the British Isles, and the Low Countries.’
We will progress further with this subject when we investigate the German immigrants to the United States of America – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.
Germany having a large and varied population, means it is helpful to break down their Y-DNA Haplogroups into four quadrants – not far removed from the four divisions created after World War II, which were administered by the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, the United States and France.
What is immediately noticeable is the strong similarity between northern and eastern Germany and the same similarity between western and southern Germany.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 N1C1
East 36 24 17 2 5 8 2 1
North 36 22 19 0.5 8 3 4 2
West 47 9 13 3 7 8 5 2
South 49 10 11 5 3 8 5 0.5
Germany 45 16 16 2 5 6 5 1
Notice the strong east to west divide between R1a and R1b; as we have encountered in previous chapters on our journey across Europe. The higher levels of R1a in East German men is indicative of intermixing with the peoples descended from Joktan such as the Poles and Czechs – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Haplogroup I1 is associated with north western Europe and the figures for Germany reflect this gradient. The higher overall percentage for Germany’s R1b at 45% is influenced by the higher population of the southern and western German states with 49% and 47% respectively.
Comparing Germany and Austria’s Y-DNA R1b led Haplogroups, with their Nordic and Benelux cousins, places them interestingly between the two.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 J1 G2a
Iceland 42 23 29 4
Norway 32 26 32 5 1 0.5 1
Sweden 22 16 37 2 4 3 3 1
Denmark 33 15 34 2 6 3 3 3
Austria 32 19 12 7 3 8 9 1 8
Germany 45 16 16 2 5 6 5 5
Frisians 55 7 [34] 2 [1]
Netherlands 49 4 17 1 7 4 4 0.5 5
Flanders 61 4 12 3 5 5 4 1 4
Wallonia 60 7 11 2 5 6 2 6
Luxembourg 61 3 3 3 6 5 8 3 6
Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham’s son Ishmael and Hagar’s unnamed ‘son’.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 2 56 58
Luxembourg 11 3 8 5 6 3 61 64
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 2 8 7 3 2 69 71
Austria 10 1 9 8 8 19 32 51
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 1 5 7 3 44 8 52
Germany 5 5 6 5 16 45 61
Flanders 5 1 4 5 4 4 61 65
Netherlands 4 1 3 4 5 4 49 53
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Denmark 3 3 3 3 15 33 48
Sweden 3 3 3 1 16 22 38
Wallonia 2 2 6 6 7 60 67
Frisians 1.4 2 7 55 62
Norway 0.5 0.5 1 1 26 32 58
Iceland 23 42 65
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Adding Austria and Germany to the continuing table of main Y-DNA Haplogroups for European nations, places them both centrally as indicative of their respective R1b percentages.
Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.
Neither Germany or Austria are remarkable or particularly stand out with any of their Haplogroups; confirming their location in central Europe. It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups.
Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Luxembourg 3 61 3 3 6
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Netherlands 4 49 17 1 7
Flanders 4 61 12 3 5
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Frisians 7 55 [34]
Wallonia 7 60 11 2 5
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Denmark 15 33 34 2 6 1
Sweden 16 22 37 2 4 7
Germany 16 45 16 2 5 1
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Austria 19 32 12 7 3 0.5
Iceland 23 42 29 4 1
Norway 26 32 32 5 3
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.
Finland possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Germany and Austria have R1a percentages similar to Denmark and Sweden, while the I1 percentages for the Germans and Austrians resemble those of the Swiss, Dutch and the Flemish.
This completes the descendants of Abraham from his six sons with second wife Keturah and his one son Ishmael, by Sarah’s handmaid Hagar – with their combined descendants comprising the peoples of Scandinavia, Benelux and Germany.
We now turn our attention to the two sons from Abraham’s second son of eight and only child with Sarah, Isaac.
The constant reader will need to hold on to more than just their hats, for if the true identity of Ishmael was not astonishing enough, the following chapter’s revelations concerning the real identity of Esau’s offspring are even more shocking and controversial.
From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.
Luke 12:48 Amplified Bible
“True scholarship involves the sincere wish to weed out the errors that we are all plagued with and to accept new understandings with humility of thankfulness. In this spirit I am submitting this research to those who are interested. My best critics will be those who show me, and the rest of the world, just where the truth lies.”
Ernest L Martin 1932-2002
“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
Winston Churchill
“The surest barrier to advancing truth is the conviction one already has it.”
Abraham is a dominant figure on the genetic landscape with Noah and his sons, for his descendants loom large on the pages of history. Abraham is likened to Abel before the Flood, in similarly being the first person after the deluge to stand out as a towering presence in obedience to the true Creator. As Noah projects a large shadow on the antediluvian world, with Abel and Enoch, who though giant pillars themselves, never-the-less caught in the shadow cast by Noah and his genetic role in the line of Seth; so, Abraham is the pivot of the genetic evolution of the line of Shem, the principal continuation from Seth. All those who followed him such as Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah and Daniel, are enveloped not just by his genetic inheritance but also through Abraham’s faith. For Abraham is the Father of the faithful.
David A Snyder aptly states: “We will follow the life of this Abram whom God will later name Abraham. We will discover that he may have been as great a secular figure as he was a Biblical one.” He continues in his book.
Abraham of Ur – A Critical Analysis of the Life and Times of the Patriarch, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘At first I was not sure that Abraham even existed. After I investigated the secular history of the day and considered the Ugaritic literature… and the Tell el-Amarna tablets… I came to realize that the geopolitical climate at the time Abraham entered Canaan was perfectly conducive to support the stories of his travels into the Promised Land… Abraham’s family was well-educated, literate and wealthy. And if we are to believe Josephus, Abraham was possibly an astronomer and military leader.This is contradictory to the image most people have of Abraham as a nomadic shepherd leading a flock of sheep; however, I believe that only a well-educated and worldly man such as Abraham would be able to achieve the goal that God gave to him – to establish the Hebrew nation[s].’
An image of a young Abram and Sarai, whom very few would entertain. For Abram was of noble pedigree and warrior stock. Abraham was once young yet invariably depictions of him picture an unflattering rugged old man sporting a long beard and white hair. Albeit – as their descendants demonstrate – Abraham was likely blonde or fair as was Sarah.
Gerard Gertoux, The Pharaoh of the Exodus Fairy tale or real history – emphasis mine:
‘Very few Bible scholars believe now (2016) in the historicity of the book of Genesis, especially the narrative of Abraham and Sarah’s life, but what is really incomprehensible is that their conclusion is based only on the following prejudice: the lack of archaeological evidence implies an absence of historicity of these biblical narratives!’
Yes, a small matter of a lack of archaeological evidence hinders the likelihood of a biblical figure being genuine; but doesn’t stand in the way at all, of scientists espousing a belief in an untenable theory to explain mankind’s existence – Article: Chance Chaos or Designated Design?
A greater evidence of Abraham’s existence… is the fact that he has become a father of many nations as we shall learn.
Gertoux: ‘Today, according to mainstream Egyptologists as well as prominent archaeologists there would never have been: 1) any biblical writing in the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 31:24), 2) neither domesticated camels in the time of Abraham (Genesis 12:6), 3) nor Philistines (Genesis 21:34), 4) nor Hittites (Genesis 23:10), 5) nor Arameans (Deuteronomy 26:5), 6) nor Chaldeans (Genesis 11:28), etc. All these criticisms are paradoxical because despite the absence of reliable chronologies these academics and Bible experts say in a dogmatic manner having found numerous anachronisms in the narrative of Abraham and Sarah.’
Egyptologists and Archaeologists should be aware that the Bible has been edited after events have transpired. Thus, terms for various peoples who are more recent than Abraham are still valid in referring to a people of an earlier time during his life. The Philistines already existed as they descend principally from Aram, a son of Shem and in part from Mizra-im, a son of Ham. Whether they were known as Philistines, Caphtorim, Minoans, Mycaeneans even or yet an entirely different name does not invalidate their existence or their kings’ interaction with Sarah and Abraham. Same for the Hittites descended from Heth of Canaan – not the later Hittites – and the Aramaeans who were Syrians. Granted, the Chaldeans are descended principally from Abraham’s brother, Nahor though they existed as proto-Chaldeans via the descendants of Peleg and the early Babylonians – refer Hatti and Mitanni: Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Gertoux: ‘Regarding biblical chronology, the Vatican’s biblical scholars made Abraham enter into Canaan in 2138 BCE (Vigouroux: 1899, 737), while nowadays they say 1850 BCE (De Vaux: 1986, 1805). How can one explain such discrepancies in dates [of 288 years]?’
It is a step in the right direction, as the latter dating is fifty-two years out from 1902 BCE based on an unconventional chronology, compared with two hundred and thirty-six years for the former date.
James 2:22-24
Common English Bible
‘See, his faith was at work along with his actions. In fact, his faith was made complete by his faithful actions. So the scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed God, and God regarded him as righteous [like Daniel, Job, Noah and Abel]. What is more, Abraham was called God‘s friend. So you see that a person is shown to be righteous through faithful actions and not through faith alone’ – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.
The word friend in Greek is philos. It signifies a deep friendship, where each knows the other and can fully count on them. A close friend of long-standing and one that has been through everything of consequence with you.
A quite profound reflection of the Creator’s relationship with Abraham, for this was no ordinary friendship – it had transcended to an intimate, special bond between Abraham and the Eternal.
Isaiah 41:8
Darby Translation
‘But thou, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend…’
There are two other people in scripture who are referred to in the context, of being a friend of God; though not specifically as: ‘God’s friend’ or ‘my friend’ as described of Abraham. The resurrected Lazarus is described by Christ as ‘our friend’ (John 11:11) and Moses spoke face to face with God ‘as one speaks unto his friend’ – Exodus 33:11. There is a further link between Abraham and Moses not just the family connection, which we will explore when we study Moses.
2 Chronicles 20:5-7
New English Translation
‘Jehoshaphat [the fourth king of Judah] stood before the assembly of Judah and Jerusalem at the Lord’s temple, in front of the new courtyard. He prayed: “O Lord God of our ancestors, you are the God who lives in heaven and rules over all the kingdoms of the nations. You possess strength and power; no one can stand against you. Our God, you drove out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel and gave it as a permanent possession to the descendants of your friend Abraham.’
The Hebrew word for friend in both verses is ahab. This word implies a deep love and respect for another. There is encouragement in knowing that we too (like Lazarus), can be counted as the Son of Man’s friend.
John 15:14-15
New English Translation
‘You are myfriends if you do what I command you. I no longer call you slaves, because the slave does not understand what his master is doing. But I have called you friends, because I have revealed toyou everything I heard from my Father.’
‘Friend of God’ is the meaning of the name Theophilus. In 2 Samuel chapter twelve, David comforts Bathsheba after the death of their first baby. The second child and David’s seventh son, is named Solomon – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
Verses 24-25 ESV: ‘And the Lord loved him and sent a message by Nathan the prophet. So he called his name Jedidiah [H3041 – beloved of the Lord], because of the Lord.’ Solomon was blessed with a special name, which can also mean friend of God.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Abram [means:] Exalted Father, Their Shield, Their Protection From (1) (‘ab), father, and (2) (rum), to be elevated. From (1) the verb (abar), to be strong or toprotect, and (2) the 3rd person plural pronominal suffix (am), their.
There’s only one man named Abram in the Bible, namely the famous son of Terah who left Ur of the Chaldeans and headed for a land which YHWH would show him (Genesis 11:31). Since Abram is the first complex character in the Bible, a lot of the Bible’s primeurs are his. However, Abram is typically not the first to call upon the name of YHWH, because that went on as far back as the generation of Enosh, the grandson of Adam and Eve (4:26). He was also not the first to worship the one and only God, because when he arrived in Canaan he found Melchizedek well engaged as priest of El Elyon (14:18). He was also not the first to be called righteous (15:6), because that was Noah (6:9) and in retrospect Abel (Matthew 23:25).
Abram is nevertheless the first on record to be approached by… the Lord (15:1), the first to be called Hebrew (14:13) and the first to engage in international commerce. He‘s the first to itinerate and circulate…the first to be rich (in cattle and precious metals; Genesis 13:2), the first to compete and to establish a peaceful economic pact (with Lot; 13:6-12), the first to view the entire world as his oyster (13:14-15) and to whom the sky was the limit (15:5).
Abram was the first to pay property tax, namely 10 percent (to Melchizedek; 14:20), and this was adopted into Israel’s national policy (Genesis 28:22, Numbers 18:26, Hebrews 7:5). The first time the Bible speaks of a commercial purchase is in Genesis 17, where circumcision is instituted as sign of the great covenant… and the Lord renames Abram as Abraham and orders the inclusion into the covenant of all the men Abram had acquired via purchase (miqna, which is related to the name Cain). The first monetary transaction occurs as restitution for Sarah’s disgrace by Abimelech (Genesis 20:16; because Abram was also the first to [loan] his wife… Genesis 20 and 12:11-20).
The first actual purchase with money described in the Bible is Abraham’s flamboyantly negotiated acquisition of the cave of Machpelah from Ephron, son of Zohar of Heth. Abraham wanted that cave and wanted to pay for it in order to properly bury Sarah (Genesis 23). He paid 400 shekels for it (23:16), according to the “passing of trade”…
A somewhat more hairy unit of wealth was the camel, but where the English word “camel” is solely reserved for that humped beast of burden, the Hebrew cognate (gamal), meaning camel, comes from the identical verb (gamal), which means to trade or invest. In other words: the Hebrew noun (gamal) does not denote a specific biological genus, it describes a particular economic function, namely that of investing and long-distance trading… The camel too gets its Biblical introduction in the Abram cycle, namely when the Egyptian Pharaoh reimburses Abram for the Sarai incident with sheep, cattle, donkeys, servants and camels (12:16).
The next time Abraham’s proverbial camels are mentioned is when Abraham sends his chief of staff (probably Eliezer) north to his family’s land with “ten” camels and the whole of Abraham’s wealth in his hand (24:10), in order to obtain a wife for Isaac…’
Abraham
‘There are two ways to go about the name Abram. Traditionally this name is interpreted to consist of two elements, the first of which would be (‘ab), meaning father: The noun (‘ab) means father, but describes primarily a social relationship rather than a biological one. That social fatherhood was the defining quality of the community’s alpha male, the one around whom all economy revolved and from whom emanated all instructions by which the ‘sons’ (ben) operated. It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.
The second part of our name is traditionally considered to be part of the great (rum)-cluster of names: The verb (rum) means to be high or high up in either a physical, social or even attitudinal sense, and may also refer to the apex in a natural process: the being ripe and ready-for-harvest of fruits. Derived nouns, such as (rum) and related forms, describe height or pride. Noun (ramut) describes some high thing. The noun (‘armon) refers to a society’s apex: a citadel or palace. The noun (re’em) describes the wild ox, which was named possibly for the same reason why we moderns call a rising market a “bull” market. The similar verb (ra’am) means to rise.
The name Abram relates to Abraham the way Sarai relates to Sarah; the latter two names are basically variations of the same word… The core of both names comes from the root (‘br), meaning to be strong or to protect: The name Abraham is often reported to mean Father Of Many Nations but that’s rather obviously incorrect. In Genesis 17:5, the Lord promises Abram that he would be the father of many nations – in Hebrew: ‘ab hamon goyim – but that does not mean that Abram’s new name, namely Abraham, means Father Of Many Nations.
God changes Abram’s name to Abraham. Likewise, the Lord promises that Abraham’s… wife Sarai would “become nations” or rather: “become international” (heyata le’goyim) and changed her name to Sarah (17:16). As with our name Abraham, the phrase does not relate to the name. The name Abraham follows from the name Abram by inserting the letter (he) in front of the final (mem), and the name Sarah follows from Sarai by replacing the final (yod) with the same letter (he). This letter (he) is one of a few Hebrew letters that may represent both a consonant and a vowel… and it’s probably no coincidence that the name of the Lord, or YHWH consists of only those vowel-consonant symbols, and contains twice this potent letter (he).
The names Sarai and Sarah both stem from the root (sarar), which possibly means to rule or to be strong. The final (yod) of the original name Sarai suggests a possessive form: my strength or strength(s) of, whereas the new name Sarah reflects the general idea of ruling or being strong. The names Sarai and Sarah reflect the same core idea, buttheform Sarai reflects locality and the form Sarah reflects universality.
Sarah
The same transition between locality and universality is reflected in the names Abram and Abraham, which are both based on the root (‘abar), meaning to be strong (or to be able to protect)… Like Sarai, the name Abram seems to denote a nation’s private strength, whereas the name Abraham, like Sarah, reflects the strength that arises from synchronicity among states.
The core of the name Abraham comes from the exquisite root (‘br): The verb (‘br) means to be strong or firm, particularly in a defensive way (rather than offensive). The derived nouns (‘eber) and (‘ebra) refer to the pinion(s) that make up a bird’s wings, which in turn means that the ancients sawavian wings as means to protect rather than to fly with (the signature trait of angels, hence, is not an ability to fly but a tendency to protect). The verb (‘abar) describes activities done with pinions, which is to fly or to protect.
Another detail worthy of note is that the first and last letters of the name (Abraham) are often used as formatives that do not change the meaning of the core word. These two letters obviously aren’t inconsequential formative letters in our name, but if we remove them anyway, what remains is (bara), the assumed root of the noun (berit), meaning covenant.The Lord told Abraham that he would be the father of many nations (‘ab hamon goyim; Genesis 17:4-5) – not simply the father of many people…
The word (hamon), in turn, does not express simply a large number, but the rain-like noise that emerges from a unified but seething throng, and the throng, in this case, consists of autonomous nations. The Bible indicates that a multitude of goyim, or “nations” is the ultimate form of human society, which is remarkable because since time immemorial people have believed that they could somehow form a global empire that would unite all the nations, dissolve all borders and reign the entire world from one throne. But despite the efforts of many an emperor, it appears that humanity is designed to operate by means of nations…
It should be emphasized that despite the claims of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike,neither Jesus nor Abraham has anything to do with any formal religion. Abraham is not a border-maker; he is a border-breaker… His patriarchy is one of consilience; in him are summed up the peacemakers of which Jesus said they would be called Sons Of God (Matthew 5:9).
The table of nations of Genesis 10 denotes the world’s various states of the first stage, and the members of the family of Abraham denote the states of the second stage. Most of these very early states have long gone (or went by other names than modern ones; very early states probably changed names much more often than states do today and were doubtlessly known to their contemporaries by multiple names)…’
The constant reader will have noted that we can actually decipher the early states and nations and who they are today, even though their names have continuously altered and evolved, their core, original identities have remained and have only to be unlocked. Abraham’s family, including his two brothers were a second wave of nations which arrived on the world stage relatively recently – some nine thousand years after those originating from off the Ark.
We have covered part of Abraham’s early life as well as his wife Sarah, whilst studying Nahor and Haran in the preceding two chapters. Further insight can be gleaned into Abram’s early life from the Book of Jubilees. Abram’s mother is named as Edna, though another source says Terah’s wife’s name was Amathlai. Refreshing our mind regarding Abraham in the Book of Jubilees; Jubilees 11:16-23 explains that Abram as a child “began to understand the errors of the earth that all went astray after graven images and after uncleanness… and he separated himself from his father, that he might not worship idols with him.”
‘And he began to pray to the Creator of all things that He might save him from the errors of the children of men, and that his portion should not fall into error after uncleanness and vileness. And the seed time came for the sowing of seed upon the land, and they all went forth together to protect their seed against the ravens, and Abram went forth with those that went, and thechild was a lad of fourteen years. And a cloud of ravens came to devour the seed, and Abram ran to meet them before they settled on the ground, and cried to them before they settled on the ground to devour the seed… [saying], ‘Descend not: return to the place whence ye came,’ and they proceeded to turn back… his name became great in all the land of the Chaldees… they sowed their land, and that year they brought enough grain home and eat and were satisfied… Abram taught those who made implements for oxen, the artificers in wood, and they made a vessel above the ground, facing the frame of the plough, in order to put the seed thereon, and the seed fell down there from upon the share of the plough, and was hidden in the earth, and they no longer feared the ravens.’
Following this, Abram confronts his father in Jubilees 12:1-7, on the always heated topic of religion. Why are discussions on anything deeper than the weather subject to confrontation and aggression? As with any difference of opinion which turns into an argument, it only becomes hostile, because people uphold an idea that is only just an intangible thought in their own mind, as if it is something of great significance or immense value, because it is part of them; to be defended vigorously at all costs, spurred on by one’s own ego. If a person sees all beliefs (or thoughts) as opinions, whether they be correct or false and that one can always build on them or if necessary tear them down and start again; then all arguments are pointless and merely based on an individual’s own pride and not truly on a premise of seeking knowledge, understanding, wisdom or… the truth.
Jubilees: ‘… it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son’… he said,
‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. For they are the work of (men’s) hands… on your shoulders do ye bear them… ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them… a misleading of the heart to those who worship them:
And his father said unto him, I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them? … if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee’ … these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’
Book of Jubilees 12:12-21
‘… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols,and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it… they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire… Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father, and they buried him in Ur of the Chaldees.And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran…
Abram sat up throughout the night on the new moon of the seventh month [1st of Tishri, Feast of Trumpets] to observe the stars from the evening to the morning, inorder to see what would be the character of the year with regard to the rains, and he was alone as he sat and observed. And a word came into his heart and he said: All the signs of the stars, and the signs of the moon and of the sun are all in the hand of the Lord. Why do I search (them) out? If He desires, He causes it to rain, morning and evening; And if He desires, He withholds it, And all things are in his hand.
And he prayed that night and said, ‘My God, God Most High, Thou alone art my God, And Thee and Thy dominion have I chosen. And Thou hast created all things, And all things that are the work of thy hands. Deliver me from the hands of evil spirits who have dominion over the thoughts of men’s hearts… let them not lead me astray from Thee, my God… establish Thou me and my seed for ever that we go not astray from henceforth and for evermore.’ And he said, ‘Shall I return unto Ur of the Chaldees who seek my face that I may return to them, am I to remain here in this place? The right path before Thee prosper it in the hands of Thy servant that he may fulfil (it) and that I may not walk in the deceitfulness of my heart, O my God.’
Jeremiah 17:9
Amplified Bible
“The heart is deceitful above all things And it isextremely sick;Who can understand it fully and know its secret motives?’
As discussed previously, the likelihood of Terah fleeing Ur due to Nimrod’s wrath seems decidedly remote and even more so to accept Nimrod was even still alive… alive, as in a corporeal human body. Haran dying in a furnace appears less likely than dying tragically in a house fire, set by Abraham or not. Josephus remarks that when Haran died, he was memorialized by the city where ‘… his monument is shown to this day.’ He also conjectured that Terah left Ur on account of the death of his son Haran and says: ‘Now hating Chaldea on account of his mourning for Haran, they all removed to Haran [in] Mesopotamia, where Terah died.’
Apart from these explanations it may simply be, that Terah also recognised the decline of the Ur III civilisation and prudently departed. A relative time of peace during King Shulgi’s reign could have been the time when Terah’s family left one city which had the Moon god Sin as its chief deity, for the only other city which coincidently worshipped the same god, Sin… Haran. Whichever scenario, it appears Nahor lingered in Ur, possibly to tie up property and family affairs as they were a family of substance. Ironically, it would be many centuries later when descendants of Nahor would return as the ruling Chaldean dynasty – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. Whereas, Abraham’s descendants would never return – aside from the captive tribes of Judah and Benjamin some thirteen centuries later.
Joshua 24:2
New Century Version
‘Then Joshua said to all the people, “Here’s what the Lord, the God of Israel, says to you: ‘A long time ago your ancestors lived on the other side of the Euphrates River. Terah, the father of Abraham and Nahor, worshiped other gods.’
Regarding the Moon god Sin, David A Snyder comments – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 1994, archaeologists found an ancient civilization at Gobekli Tepe in southwest Turkey, just 40 km north of ancient Haran’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘It consisted of several temples with large stone-carved monoliths in a circular pattern much like those found at Stonehenge in England… Archeologists werestunned to discover that the site was twelve thousand years old [circa 10,000 BCE – shortly after the Flood]. The intricacy of the carvings on the monuments indicated a far more advanced civilization than historians thought existed at this early time in history.
James Q. Jacobs, an anthropologist and part time astronomer, was investigating the Gobekli Tepe site on Google Earth.He knew of the moon god Sin’s temple at Haran and the Ziggurat at Ur and wondered if there was a relation to the temples at Gobekli Tepe. Google Earth revealed that the latitude at Haran equals Three-fourths atan and the Ziggurat at Ur Three-fifths atan (atan = arc tangent) and that the latitude number at the Ur Ziggurat is an accurate value for pi. The only thing I know for sure about Jacob’s statements is that both pi andatan are significant in higher mathematics.It is incredible that these mathematical calculations are from a society four thousand years old. He opines that Ur and Haran were therefore:
“Astronomical observatories and geodetically positioned where the math is easiest. Their local level planes and the rotation axis form triangles with low integer proportions.” Further, the temple at Haran is exactly 40 km from the monolith circles at Gobekli Tepe, which is exactly 1/1000th of the circumference of the earth. This meant that whoever located these three temples may have known the distance to the equator and poles of the earth from mathematical calculations alone, which he found amazing. Jacobs continues: “Gobekli Tepe features the oldest known room aligned north-south which is evidence of astronomy in practice”.
The Ur and Haran moon temples evidence a relationship to astronomy and precise knowledge of geodesy – what we call exact sciences. This knowledge would require an extremely high level of math.”
Josephus comments on this subject… he explains that Abraham claimed that the movement of the sun, moon, and all the heavenly bodies are the result of the actions of the God who created them, not the other way around. He was chastised by the local authorities… If God had already spoken to Abraham while still in Ur, it is likely that Abraham would make such an argument against astrology using astronomy, and in doing so, he would have upset the local priesthood. This then became another reason for Terah to move from Ur. Josephus concludes this episode when he states: “… the Chaldeans and the other peoples of Mesopotamia raised a tumult against him, he thought fit to leave that country; and by the assistance of God, he came and lived in the land of Canaan.”
In the 1930s, more than Twenty thousand plus ancient tablets were found in the Palace at Mari, south of Haran. The tablets were dated approximately 1800 BCE – Abraham lived between 1977 to 1802 BCE. The tablets greatly aided Assyriologists understanding of the geography of the region. Names included were linked to Abraham’s family such as Serug and Nahor. As Terah’s family were an aristocratic lineage from Ur, they would have been welcomed and known within the palace at Mari. Tablets refer to the Hebrews or Hapiru, from Terah’s ancestor Eber, his Great, great, great grandfather. Hebrews did remain in Haran and Padan-Aram for some time, as both Isaac and Jacob took wives from family living there, as did some of Jacob’s sons – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. If these records refer to Terah’s clan, then he was an important figure in his day, and we are provided an extra-Biblical record of Abraham’s family – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Book of Jubilees 12:28-31
‘… it came to pass… that [Abram] spoke to his father and informed him, that he would leave Haran to go into the land of Canaan to see it and return to him. And Terah his father said unto him; Go in peace: May the eternal God make thy path straight. And the Lord be with thee, and protect thee from all evil, And grant unto thee grace, mercy and favour before those who see thee, And may none of the children of men have power over thee to harm thee; Go in peace. And if thou seest a land pleasant to thy eyes to dwell in, then arise and take me to thee and take* Lot with thee [Abraham’s nephew], the son of Haran thy brother as thine own son:the Lord be with thee. And Nahor thy brother [will live] with me till thou returnest in peace, and we go with thee all together.’
Abraham departed Ur while he was fifty in 1927 BCE. When he was seventy-five years of age in 1902 BCE, the Creator told him to leave Haran and depart for Canaan. From this time onwards, Abraham left city life and became a sojourning nomad, living in temporary dwellings in the countryside for the remaining one hundred years of his life.
Genesis 12:1-5
Amplified Bible
‘Now (in Haran) the Lord had said to Abram, “Go away from your country, And from your relatives And from your father’s house, To the land which I will show you… I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you (abundantly),Andmake your name great(exalted, distinguished); And you shall be a blessing (a source of great good to others); And I will bless (do good for, benefit) those who bless you, And I will curse (that is, subject to My wrath and judgment) the one who curses (despises, dishonors, has contempt for) you. And in you all the families (nations)of the earth will be blessed.” So Abram departed (in faithful obedience) as the Lord had directed him; and Lot (his nephew) left with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he left Haran [and Lot was sixty-eight]. Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his nephew, and all their possessions which they had acquired, and the people (servants) which they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan.’
Book of Jubilees 12:22-27
‘… and behold the word of the Lord was sent to him… saying: ‘Get thee up from thy country, and from thy kindred and from the house of thy father unto a land which I will show thee, and I shall make thee a great and numerous nation. And I will bless thee And I will make thy name great, And thou shalt be blessed in the earth, And in Thee shall all families of the earth be blessed, And I will bless them that bless thee, And curse them that curse thee. And I will be a God to thee and thy son [Isaac], and to thy son’s son [Jacob], and to all thy seed: fear not, from henceforth and unto all generations of the earth I am thy God.’
Much is said to Abram in a short passage. Notice the Creator said He would show Canaan to Abram. Abram was constantly on the move throughout Canaan, as if on a guided tour of the land that would one day fall to his descendants, but not to him directly or in its entirety.
Genesis 13:17
English Standard Version
‘Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land [of Canaan], forI will give it to you.”
Abram is told he will father a great nation – yet Sarai was barren and he had no son or heir. Even though all the nations on the earth had been in existence for many thousands of years since the Flood, new nations would come from his loins. This also happened for his brother Nahor – the modern peoples of Northern and Central Italy – and Haran, including the peoples of Switzerland, France and Quebec in Canada. The ‘great good to others’, encompasses the fulfilment of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 and the promised Messiah, Immanuel – Isaiah 7:14.
Mary, pregnant with the Saviour, ‘in the fullness of time (Galatians 4:4) would undoubtedly recall the divine promise in Luke 1:54-55, CEB: “He has come to the aid of his servant Israel or Jacob, remembering his mercy, just as he promised to our ancestors, to Abraham and to Abraham’s descendants forever.” The profound association between Abraham’s promises for materially blessed posterity and the inextricably entwined link with the spiritual blessing of the Messiah, who would share the same ancestral heritage, is summarised by J H Allen.
Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Throughout the world it is most generally known, and throughout Christendom it is universally known, that “the seed to whom the promise was made,” did come; but it is not universally known, nor acknowledged throughout Christendom, that the many peoples are included in that same covenant with this one seed, without whom the entire structure of Christianity must fall, and that every argument for the Christ, from the covenant standpoint, must stand the crucial test of a numerous posterity from the loins of Abraham, or go down.
True, the covenant with the people failed… the people sinned, and violated their obligations… the law was added, because of their transgressions, to bridge over, “till the (one) seed should come to whom the promise was made… in favor of the Messianic covenant against all this is, that “the covenant which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law… cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” How could it? We… believe that it could not. All Christendom believes that it could not. Andif it could not, neither can the promise concerning a multiplicity of children for Abraham be annulled.’
Abram did not obey in all though, as the command to leave his kindred behind was not adhered to when he allowed Lot to accompany him. How much did Terah* influence Abraham. We have discussed the close relationship between Abraham and Lot, due to their similar age, the death of Lot’s father Haran, and the fact Abraham was childless. But by taking Lot with him, it led to repercussions which caused Abraham considerable trouble – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
David A Snyder:
‘[The Abrahamic Covenant]… was given to Abraham in three separate revelations in exchange for Abraham’s righteousness (faith) and his acceptance of the revealing God as the God of the Hebrews… The covenants in Chapter 12 and 15 seem to have been written by the “J” (Yahweh) and “E” (Elohist) sources respectively. The last covenant in Chapter 17 seems to be from the “P” (Priestly) source.’
This highlights the important matters discussed previously with regard to first, the different sources of material and writer-editors of the Bible and second; the significance of a shadowy god in the scriptural background. Who at the worst does not always seem to have the best interests of the person or people in question and in the least, interacts with humankind in an abrupt and dismissive manner.
We have learned that the Ancient of Days has not and does not interact with mankind directly and does so indirectly via His Son – Habakkuk 1:13; John 6:46, 14:6; 1 Timothy 2:5. We have learnt that there is a personage who is not His son, another angel of the Lord – very possibly an entity named Azrael or unknown. Added to this, there is more than one angel of the Lord – refer article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New Beginning?
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, page 85 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… there are two traditions which make up the books of the Old Testament, the older or Elohist tradition which refers to the deity in generic terms, and the Priestly tradition where the deity is called Yahweh,often called Jehovah, somewhaterroneously, due to [a] mistranslation from the Greek Septuagint. The two main streams are intertwined throughout the Old Testament and sometimes exists side-by-side as, for example, in Genesis where there are two versions of the Creation’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. ‘The god of the Old Testament has manyhuman attributes – he is jealous, and vindictive; he does not seem omnipotent for at times he allows evil to exist and often gets into debate with the devil. There are many gaps in the narrative; it is disjointed: jumps abruptly from one subject to another without explanation or resolution. It leaves more questions unanswered than it resolves.
In the scriptures, the deity is called El (plural Elohim) some of the time and Yahweh the rest of the time. Biblical scholars agree that the usage of Yahweh [the true name of the Creator] appears to be an anachronism and may have been inserted at later times… Elohim is… a plural form… translated as “God”… [and] “Gods” or “divine beings”… because the text is often ambiguous. Generally, the name for the deity is El… when the serpent is tempting Eve he says: “You are not going to die. No, the gods (Elohim) will know… you will be the same as the gods (Elohim)…’
Another example is during the Tower of Babel incident, we read of the ‘gods’ saying: ‘Let Us go down.’
‘According to Exodus 6:3 the appellation Yahweh did not come into use until the time of Moses, for Moses is told by the deity that “I am Yahweh [‘the One who is’ – Exodus 3:14], I appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as El-Shaddai [God ‘Almighty’], but I did not make myself known to them by my name Yahweh.”
The Hebrew root shaded… means “to overpower,” “to treat with violence,” or “to lay waste”… [giving]thedeity a fearful character, that of devastator or destroyer…the god of the Hebrews is known as an uncompromising and vindictive god… Shaddai [refer Shaddai, article: Asherah] may be connected linguistically with the Hittite shadu, or mountain…the God of Lightening andThunder of the Hittites [the storm god – its symbol a Bull]. He was the Anatolian god of the twin mountain^ often depicted with thunderbolts in his hand.’
The god Enlil, lord of the Air*, is also associated with a storm god. Researchers have rightly or wrongly linked El with Enlil and Enki with Yahweh. Baal is typically seen as another name for Satan, though the truth is more subtle. For Baal serves Satan and is a tempter and deceiver described as the prince of the power of the air* in Ephesians 2:2 – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
David A Snyder – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Ba‘al Hadad was thestorm god, a god of rain, thunder, fertility, agriculture, and the lord of heaven’ – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. ‘We see him called the “Rider of the Clouds” in the Ba’al Cycle. The Hurrians… had a storm god named Teshub; and the Hittites, from what is now Turkey, had a storm god named Tarhunt… A Christian who knows his Bible will recognize a God who “Rides the Clouds”. After all, Jesus ascended into heaven on a cloud and will return the same way. There are also the following scriptural passages that refer to a Yahweh who rides the heavens or the clouds:
There is no god like the God of the darling, who rides the heavens in his power, and rides the skies in his majesty. (Deuteronomy 34:26)
See the Lord is riding on swift cloud on his way to Egypt. (Isaiah 19:1)
Who rides the heights of the ancient heavens, whose voice is thunder, mighty thunder (Psalm 68:34)
You raised your palace upon the waters. You make the clouds your chariot. (Psalm 104:3)
Dr. Michael S. Heiser in his excellent article, What’s Ugaritic Got to do with anything analyzes the similarities of the Ugarit Ba’al Cycle with Daniel 7. Here is a paraphrase of his analysis:
1. El, the aged high god, is the obvious leader of the assembly in council, while in Daniel 7, The court was convened, and the books were opened and The Ancient One (Yahweh) is seatedon the fiery, wheeled throne. Both the Ugaritic text and Daniel depict God as white haired and aged and both show an assembly in heaven.
2. El bestows “eternal kingship and dominion” on Ba’al, “Rider on the Clouds” after Ba’al defeats Yam, while in Daniel 7, the Ancient One bestows dominion, glory and kingship upon the son of Man [or the Word, who is not the same being as Ba’al (Lucifer)], who is coming on the clouds of heaven after the beast was slain and its body was thrown into fire to be burnt up (which also occurred in the Ba’al Cycle).
3. El is the father of the pantheon at the same time that Ba’al is “king of the gods”, implying two thrones.Daniel 7 says: Thrones were set up and later the Ancient one took His throne (singular). The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations. He and God have dominion much like El and Ba’al in the Ugaritic text. This part of Daniel clearly refers to…** the Son as [a] second person… but is an anathema to Jews and Muslims who have a difficult time explaining the use of the plural thrones.’
This does not contradict the central edict of monotheism and a unitarian Godhead. The writer is correct regarding the plural thrones (Colossians 3:1), as the Son of Man is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) and has received His authority and rulership from the Ancient of Days, his Father. In fact, Christ will share his throne with those who overcome – Ephesians 2:6; Revelation 3:21.
A massive assumption has been made by the writer – because of his Trinitarian bias – to call the Son of God, God** the Son, as this is not biblical or supported by scripture – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. The plural thrones of the Ancient of Days and the separate person of the Son of Man is an anathema not just to the Jewish and Islamic faiths but also to orthodox Catholic and Protestant Christians. Some do not believe the Nicene Creed and they are applauded for not swallowing the Universal Church’s agenda inspired, dogma – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
Those who do, would do well in searching the scriptures, as the commended Bereans did (Acts 17:10-11) as well as taking to heart what Christ’s half-brother, says in Jude 1:3. It is incomprehensible that any faith believing, Christ affirming Christian, would claim to worship a Father and Son, that they do not even know. They run the risk of being ensnared in the words of the Messiah.
Matthew 25:12
Amplified Bible
But [Christ] replied, “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, I do not know you[we have no relationship].”
Snyder continues:
‘Some will have difficulty accepting that Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, had any relationship to the pagan gods El or Ba’al. There are dozens of books by highly qualified Biblical scholars arguing this point; and by no means, do any of their opinions agree. Some say Yahweh and El are the same God, and [others] say they are not. Some say that Yahweh, like El, had a consort (the Asherah); and others vehemently deny this claim’ – refer article: Asherah. ‘There is much discussion of the perspective of the authors of the four sources having a lot to do with these divergent theories. In some, El is the God of the Hebrews in early Genesis while Yahweh is the God of the Hebrews by other sources.’
From what we have studied thus far, El the singular of Elohim, is the same being as Yahweh as stated in Exodus 3:5-6, 14; 6:3. El (H410 – ‘el: God, mighty, strong, powerful, great) is an adjective or descriptive word for the Creator, describing Him as the God as opposed to one of the gods (or Elohim). Asherah was the consort (or wife) of the Ancient of days – the one and only Creator and life giver – who is otherwise known by his true and once secret, proper name, YHWH (H3068 – Yahweh: lord, the existing one, eternal). Therefore, the Lord God is Yahweh El or the ‘eternally powerful’ one.
Ba’al on the other hand is not to be confused with Yahweh (El). Baal is none other than the being called in scripture by a number of titles and descriptions, including: Beelzebub, Lucifer (Heylel) and the Serpent in Eden. His personal name is not included in the Bible, though other sources reveal it to be Samael.
There is a verse in the Psalms, which is repeated by the the Messiah in Matthew 22:44, which clearly shows the impossibility of the Trinity and that the Son of Man is a distinct entity apart from the one true Yahweh, or Eternal.
Psalm 110:1
English Standard Version
The Lord [H3068 – Yahweh] says to my Lord [H113 – Adonai]: “Sit [on a throne] at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”
Notice the second Lord is different from the first Lord, who is Yahweh. The Hebrew word adonai means ‘to rule.’ It also infers a ‘master or king’ and runs parallel with Yahweh, revealing the special relationship the Son of Man has with the Ancient of Days. Though in no circumstance are they one entity, but rather two separate and distinct beings who are one in mind and purpose; yet also in no manner, is the Son of Man, God as the Eternal One is, but rather he is the Son of God. King David – ‘a man after God’s own heart’ – understood this relationship and the unique sovereignty of the Ancient of Days as with certainty, so did Abraham the friend of the (Adonai) Lord.
Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… by the 14th century BC the god El had become a primary god controlling the actions of the other gods in the pantheon. The pantheon of Canaan, found in the Ugaritic texts, is called Elohim, which means the children of El or the children of god.
El is referred in Ugaritic literature as “Bull El” or thebull god, “creator of creatures and mankind”, and “creator eternal” which would indicate that by this time in history, the concept of a creating god, was beginning to enter Canaanite polytheism. There is a single tablet found at Ugarit titled “El’s Drinking Party” which displays he was quite promiscuous in his early days, which will become an issue when he is compared to Yahweh in many scholarly studies.
It is interesting to note that in the Ba’al Cycle, El is sometimes mentioned with the assembly in council which would seem to indicate a bi-cameral [bilateral] ruling authority^ within the pantheon as we see here: “Do not fall at El’s feet, do not prostrate yourself before the assembly in council; still standing speak your speech, repeat your message; and address the bull, my father El, repeat to the assembly in council.”
Bicameral: ‘having two branches, chambers, or houses, as a legislative body’.
Snyder: ‘An Assembly of gods would be nothing new to Abraham since the epic stories of Sumer and Akkad frequently referred to gods conspiring together. One superior god [Yahweh*] within the pantheon established a new dynamic in polytheism, creating a four-tier hierarchy within the assembly.
The first place was held by the supreme god [El*] and his consort [Asherah] such as Ea in Akkad and El in Canaan. The second place is held by the royal children [archangels], the third place is held by gods who serve the royal family[Cherubim and Seraphim], and the fourth place is held by minor deities who assist all the gods such as messenger-gods [angels].
This pantheon was anthropomorphic since it was arranged along the same lines as their society. There are signs that the Israelis, who lived among the Canaanites, also placed their God within an assembly of gods.
In Psalm 82:1 and 6-7 we see Elohim within the divine council when he tells the other gods they will all die: God (Elohim) rises in the divine council; gives judgment in the midst of the gods. I declare, “Gods [literally, mighty ones, similar to Nephilim] though you be, offspring of the most high[the Ancient of Days]all of you, yet like any mortal you shall die; like any prince you shall fall.”
‘Note that the gods are offspring of the most high, and are arranged… similar to the pantheon of El. The early reference to a hierarchy of gods in the Hebrew Scripture [makes] me believe that when Abraham entered Canaan (a thousand years prior to the authors of the Psalms and Deuteronomy), a hierarchy of gods [angelic beings] was part of his understanding of deity.
While the epic stories of Canaan identified El as a supreme god,this deity was still not a transcendent, boundless God above human understanding as he was still created in man’s image [rather Adam was created in His image].
El and the other supreme gods of Mesopotamia were usually depicted as old, retired and very wise as we observed in Sumer when Enki assumed this role and Ea became the father of the gods in Akkad. When Abraham entered Canaan, El had assumed this role. Ba’al seems to become the primary god in later Ugaritic literature, pushing El to the side as a grandfather figure.The gods El and Ba’al were important deities in Canaan not only when Abraham entered in 1900 BC, but also when his descendants returned from Egypt five hundred years later.’
Though the author is promoting El as less than than who He is; nevertheless, El remains the Creator and Baal His nemesis, Samael the principal tool of the Adversary – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Asherah.
Abraham in Greek Mythology, Abraham and the Minyan Athamas, John R Salverda – emphasis mine:
‘The Athamas of Greek Mythology, as the King of Orchomenus a city founded by Minyas, was a well known Minyan. Abraham and his family were said to have been from Ur of the Chaldees. These two statements fit together because the Minyans were the Armenians (Ur-Manneans indicating those from the mountains [ur] of Minni), and the Armenians of Urartu were famously known as the Chaldians of Urartu… there are fairly convincing connections between the Greek, Minyas, and the Armenians’ – refer Urartu: Chapter XVII Lud & Iran; and Chadeans: Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
‘Historians know well these People and call them the Manneans, or the kingdom of Van. This group lived in the mountains*, (alternately known as, the Gordyan or Cordyaean mountains by Berosus, and as, the Chaldean mountains by Xenophon)’ – refer Haran*: Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
‘… the Manneans, are known to have been largely composed of Hurrians* it seems reasonable to assume that the Hurrians were so called after Ur, the homeland of Abraham (The pre-Canaan home of Abraham, the city of Haran, named for Abrahams brother, and the surrounding quod-city area, including the cities of Nahor, named for either Abrahams brother or his grandfather, Pethor the home of Balaam, and Carchemish were also settled, according to modern archaeologists, by the Hurrians).’
Genesis 13:2
Amplified Bible
‘Now Abram wasextremely rich in livestock and in silver andingold’ – Article: The Ark of God.
This is the first time we are told in the scriptures of the economic status of an individual. Abraham was not just well off or rich, he was wealthy… the equivalent of a billionaire today. Abraham inherited influence and power. Abraham had at his command a large retinue of people who were either part of his armed forces, his animal husbandry for his flocks, or servants in his household.
We have learnt – in the previous chapter – that Abraham was a magnetic personality and a good speaker and how local people in Haran and its environs were drawn to him and sojourned with his family when they travelled to Egypt and then returned later to both Haran and Canaan. A wanderer’s life appeals to some people and a life with Abraham would have been an interesting adventure. The fact that Abraham had the wherewithal to meet with other kings and go to battle against them, lends credibility to the understanding that Abraham was more than merely aristocratic and was in fact royal himself and perhaps a king in his own right.
David Snyder:
‘According to Josephus, Abraham stopped in Damascus on his way to Canaan and became a person of great importance there. Josephus quotes a contemporary historian, Nicolaus of Damascus: “Abram reigned at Damascus, being a foreigner, who came with an army out of the land [of] Babylon, called the land of the Chaldeans. Now the name of Abram is even still famous in the country of Damascus: and there is shown a village named for him, The Habitat of Abram.”
We discussed previously the Battle of Siddim from Lot’s perspective (Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran) and we shall look at it again when we study Amalek, a grandson of Esau – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Now, the aspects surrounding this event from Abraham’s experience – also refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.
Nephilim Giants – Enemies of God in the Bible, Beginning and End, 2017:
‘What is amazing about this very brief passage in Genesis 14 is that Cherdolaomers’s 4-king coalition is able to vanquish the Nephilim in combat. They slaughtered the giants on the way to conquering the vassal states and specifically the king of Sodom. In this latter battle, Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was kidnapped. With a late-night raid, Abraham divided his forces and was able to rout Cherdolaomers’s armies. Not only did his small band defeat the 4 kings, they chased them far north to the area of Dan, passing through a fortified gate [see below] that is now named after Abraham (this gate still exists and was uncovered by archaeologists in 1966 – yet another stunning discovery that confirms the Bible’s accounts).’
Genesis 6 Giants – emphasis mine:
‘Following their victory in the field, Chedorlaomer’s warriors plundered Sodom and Gomorrah and the other cities and took some of their principal inhabitants away captive. Among these were Lot and his family. To the king of Elam’s great misfortune, however, one who had managed to escape from Sodom came and reported this news to Abraham. Lot’s uncle at this time still lived in tents pitched near the great trees of Mamre the Amorite. Mamre was a brother of Eshcol and Aner. All three were Abraham’s allies. When Abraham heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the three hundred and eighteen “trained men born in his household,” and, being joined by the forces of Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan.’
The last two men’s names are remarkably similar to the names given in the Book of Jasher 7:16, for two of Arphaxad’s three sons: Shelach (or Shelah), Anar and Ashcol – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
‘When the right opportunity presented itself, Abraham and his men came upon Chedorlaomer’s camp in the dead of night, took the confused, frightened foe by surprise, put them to a rout, rescued Lot and his fellow captives, and recovered all Chedorlaomer’s plundered goods.’
Battle of Siddim, Andy, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The fact that this is one of the greatest battle areas to be mentioned in scripture is also notable. Indeed, the path of the invading armies foreshadows the destiny of the promised land (and of Abraham) as they practically circumvent almost the entire borders of modern Israel. Although the practical objective was to free the Cities of the Jordan plain from the Mesopotamian rule, God’s agenda was for Abraham to rescue Lot’s family. So the fact that the kings of the Jordan plain were victorious, this was so because Abraham was fighting on their side(even though he and his 318 men were not under their command). Abraham made a point that he was not under them when he refused to take plunder from the battle. This action is salient for two reasons, one worldly and one spiritual.
He refused the plunder so that: (a) He could keep his reputation of independence and neutrality (as no one would say that one of the kings made him rich) and (b) he was giving this tithe to God via the priest of God most high Melchizedek King of Salem. The episode was the first instance where Scripture mentions tithing and the elements of communion; long before Jesus and even before the Law of Moses.
God had an unspoken covenant with Adam and Eve and a symbolic one with Noah.The covenant with Abraham was the first one actively initiated by both parties, as in a contract. Abraham had to walk between the halves of animals to make the covenant with God. A Hittite text from Anatolia, dated after the mid-2nd millennium BC, also records this ritual. The main differences between the Abrahamic covenant and that of other eastern cultures were: (a) In the other nations, the focus was on what the vassal state (here a parallel to Abraham) was promising their master. In Abraham’s covenant, the focus was on what God promised Him. (b) For the other cultures, the animals cut in half represented what would happen when failing to keep a covenant. For the Hebrews, with the passing of the torch between the animals, it meant God would rather die before He broke the covenant.’
Genesis 14:17-24
English Standard Version
17 ‘After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley). 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine’– Matthew 26:26-28. ‘(He was priest of God Most High.) 19 And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth;20 and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!” And Abram gave him a tenth of everything.
21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the persons, but take the goods for yourself.” 22 But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth, 23 that I would not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, lest you should say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’ 24 I will take nothing but what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me. Let Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre take their share.’
There are differing views regarding the mysterious Melchizedek. Some teach the name is not a personal name, but rather a title. The word is comprised of two parts: melek, meaning ‘king of’ and sadeq, meaning ‘to be just’ or ‘righteous.’ Melchizedek is also known as the Prince of Peace or of Salem, an early name for Jerusalem. Others teach that Melchizedek can be none other than the Messiah. There are scriptures referring to Immanuel – the true name of the Son of Man – with similar epithets.
Isaiah 9:6
English Standard Version
For to us a child is born [Immanuel], to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Jeremiah 23:5-6
English Standard Version
Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch,and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called:‘The Lord is our righteousness.’
Psalm 110:4
English Standard Version
The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, “You [the Son of Man] are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”
Hebrews 5:5-10
English Standard Version
5 ‘So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by [the Eternal] who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; 6 as he says also in another place, “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears,to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.
8Although he was a son,he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source [the author] of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated [called] by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.’
As the Son of Man is inadvertently, though incorrectly equated with the Archangel Michael, so He is mistakenly equated with Melchizedek. The similar descriptions are because both are in the same Order, as Priests of the Most High. Theologians call it a Christophany if the pre-incarnate Christ appears in the Old Testament. The giving of bread and wine is a reason why some think it was the Word, yet this ceremony was a precursor to the Passover that was instituted for physical Israel under the Mosaic Law and then reverted to bread and wine for spiritual Israel, as re-instituted by the Messiah at the last supper – which preceded the Passover the following day (refer articles: Chronology of Christ; and TheSabbath Secrecy).
Hebrews 7:1-16
Common English Bible
1 ‘This Melchizedek, who was king of Salem and priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he returned from the defeat of the kings, and Melchizedek blessed him. 2 Abraham gave a tenth of everything to him. His name means first “king of righteousness,” and then “king of Salem,” that is, “king of peace.” 3 He is without father or mother or any family. He has no beginning or end of life, but he’s likeGod’s Son and remains a priest for all time.
4 See how great Melchizedek was! Abraham, the father of the people, gave him a tenth of everything he captured. 5 The descendants of Levi who receive the office of priest have a commandment under the Law to collect a tenth of everything from the people who are their brothers and sisters, though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 But Melchizedek, who isn’t related to them, received a tenth of everything from Abraham and blessed the one who had received the promises. 7 Without question, the less important person is blessed by the more important person. 8 In addition, in one case a tenth is received by people who die, and in the other case, the tenth is received by someone who continues to live, according to the record. 9 It could be said that Levi, who received a tenth, paid a tenth through Abraham.
13 The person we are talking about belongs to another tribe, and no one ever served at the altar from that tribe. 14 It’s clear that our Lord came from the tribe of Judah, but Moses never said anything about priests from that tribe. 15 And it’s even clearer if another priest [Christ] appears who is like Melchizedek. 16 He has become a priest by the power of a life that can’t be destroyed, rather than a legal requirement about physical descent [from Levi].’
The author of Hebrews, very likely Apollos – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Pauline Paradox – explains that Melchizedek has apparently just appeared post-flood, with no discernible genealogy and that he is like the Son of God, not that he is the Son of God.
The author then explains the irony of Abraham, who fathers by descent, Jacob’s son Levi who was the progenitor of Israel’s priesthood; is at the same time paying a tithe to a person who is not descended from Levi, or part of the Levitical priesthood, yet prefigures that priesthood. Rather, Melchizedek is a Priest of a different order. Similarly, the Word was from the tribe of Judah, not Levi, yet is another priest like Melchizedek, forever in the same priestly Order. The true identity of Melchizedek may have to remain a mystery much like the life of Melchizedek himself. There is an account in the Book of Enoch – if reliable – which is an explanation as to why his presence on the Earth was seemingly from nowhere.
Noah had a younger brother, called Nir and Nir had a wife called Sopanim, who was sterile. Even so, Sopanim became pregnant in old age, claiming no one had impregnated her, much like Lamech’s wife who claimed no one but Noah’s father had been near her. Nir in his fury and jealousy due to the scandal, decided to banish Sopanim, and though he eventually relents, she suddenly dies at his feet. Nir and Noah prepared her burial garments – a black shroud, in a secret grave. Nir and Noah are more than shocked when they later see a fully formed child – a toddler of about three – sitting next to his dead mother. Noah was alarmed and Nir was afraid. The child spoke and blessed the Lord. They recognised his ‘glorious appearance’ and the ‘badge’ of the ‘priesthood on his chest.’ They thus named him Melchizidek and dressed him in priestly clothes.
The brothers hid the child, so that others would not kill him. Like Noah when he was born, Melchizedek had an ethereal appearance. Prior to the flood, Nir was told that his son would not perish. A messenger angel – purportedly Michael – came and took Melchizedek from the Earth after forty days; possibly to the same plane and existence, as Enoch – Genesis 5:24. Nir, losing both his child and wife in quick succession, died soon after from a ‘broken heart.’ Mysteriously, Melchizedek was prophesied to reappear in the twelfth generation after the flood – Abraham was the eleventh counting Noah – becoming King of Salem.
Melchizedek and his Uncle Noah, may have had the same similarity, in sharing very fair, white skin, red or blond hair and blue eyes. It was Methusalah who had chosen to skip his son Lamech and his eldest grandson Noah, to pass the priestly line of Seth to his other grandson Nir. Noah was a prophet – as well as of royal pedigree – but was he a priest? Genesis 8:20 would perhaps indicate otherwise, in addition with the example of King David being a king and priest – 2 Samual 6:17-19. Regardless, it transpired that the priestly line was kept alive and continued from antediluvian to postdiluvian epochs via Melchizedek.
As an aside… not only is there a link with Abraham being an ancestor of Levi and thus the priesthood, as well as Judah – and the sceptre promise of kings – from whence the Son of Man descended; but Abraham himself, is descended from Noah and is also thus related to Melchizedek the possible nephew of Noah. Therefore, Abraham served one greater than he, yet of the same family; while Melchizedek ministered to one of his own family’s descendants.
Zechariah 4:1-14
English Standard Version
‘And the angel… said to me, “What do you see?” I said, “I see, and behold, a lampstand all of gold, with a bowl on the top of it, and seven lamps on it, with seven lips on each of the lamps that are on the top of it. 3 And there are two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left”…6 Then he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts. 7 Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain. And he shall bring forward the top stone [the Son of Man] amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace to it!’
9 “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plumb line in the hand of Zerubbabel. “These seven are the eyes of the Lord [Messenger angels], which range through the whole earth” – refer article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 11 ‘Then I said to him, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?” 12 And… the two golden pipes from which the golden oil is poured out?” 13 He said to me, “Do you not know what these are?” I said, “No, my lord.” 14 Then he said, “These are the two anointed ones [the two witnesses] who stand by the Lord of the whole earth” – Revelation 11:1-12.’
It is reasonable and plausible that the two Witnesses at the end of the age and during the final three and one half years of tribulation and the time of Jacob’s Trouble, would be the two individuals who were translated and did not see the first death: righteous Enoch and the prophet, Elijah. Yet, in Mark 9:1-5, it is Elijah and Moses who are speaking with Christ in the transfiguration. Both Elijah and Moses were prophets – not priests.
The two witnesses prophesy and appear to fulfil the role of prophets. As they are specially anointed, could they be priests or both? – Exodus 29:6; Leviticus 8:12; Psalm 133:2. Enoch is not mentioned in scripture as a priest, yet his interaction with the Nephilim hints at a priestly role, particularly as he is mentioned as the seventh from Adam, via the priestly line of Seth by Jude – the half-brother of Christ. The pairing of Enoch with Melchizedek is worth considering. The fact that both Enoch and Melchizedek were alive to witness and interact with the Watchers and their Nephilim offspring in their respective epochs is especially significant; as the two witnesses go up against Nephilim, in the guise of Nimrod – the False Prophet – and a fallen dark Angel, in the guise of Azazel, the Beast – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Revelation 11:1-13
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple [the people] of God and the altar [originally in the Garden of Eden (Article: The Eden Enigma)] and those who worship there [true believers], 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple [originally in Eden]; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations [originally the land of Nod], and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months [beginning with the abomination of desolation]. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days [3 1/2 years], clothed in sackcloth [symbol of mourning].”
4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth.5 And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. 6 They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire.’
Recall Moses and Aaron worked together when confronting the Pharaoh and his magicians Jannes [‘he vexed’] and Jambres [‘ebullient healer’ or ‘contentious, rebellious’] – Exodus 7:11; 2 Timothy 3:8. Moses was a prophet and his brother Aaron was a priest, a High Priest no less. In fact it was Aaron who threw down the staff to turn it into a snake (Exodus 7:10) and again struck the Nile River to turn it into blood – Exodus 7:20. There is support for one witness then being a prophet and the other a priest, or for them to fulfil both roles. It must also be considered, that as they will be opposing supernatural beings that they may be angelic themselves and not human, as scholars unanimously assume – because they die and are then resurrected. The Bible reveals angels do not die, not that they cannot be killed.
Revelation: 7 And when they have finished their testimony [the word of the Lord], the beast [Apollyon] that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them, 8 and their dead bodies will lie in thestreet of the great city* that symbolically is called Sodom [symbolising evil and an indirect link with Melchizedek] and Egypt [symbol of sin], where their Lord was crucified [in Jerusalem*].
9 For three anda half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, 10 and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents [the month of December and Christmas – the tenth month of the sacred calendar], because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth. 11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them [and they are resurrected], and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. 13 And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.’
Genesis 15:1-19
Common English Bible
‘After these events, the Lord’s word came to Abram in a vision, “Don’t be afraid, Abram. I am your protector. Your reward will be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “Lord God, what can you possibly give me, since I still have no children? The head of my household is Eliezer, a man from Damascus [an Aramaean].” 3 He continued, “Since you haven’t given me any children, the head of my household will be my heir.” 4 The Lord’s word came immediately to him: This man will not be your heir. Your heir will definitely be your very own biological child.” 5 Then he brought Abram outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars if you think you can count them.” He continued, “This is how many children you will have.”
6 Abram trusted the Lord, and the Lord recognized Abram’s high moral character.’
Abraham toys with the Lord in saying that He still hasn’t given him an heir and that he can give his inheritance to Eliezer. Is that a good idea Lord? Pushing the Lord God to promptly re-confirm His promise; which the Eternal emphatically does. The Lord seems content to play along with Abraham, as a friend would and does not rebuke him for his impertinence, as would be the likely outcome for most in testing the Lord’s response this way. Abraham continues the little dance, when the Lord states the land of Canaan is his inheritance.
Genesis: 7 ‘He said to Abram, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land as your possession.” 8 But Abram said, “Lord God, how do I know that I will actually possess it?” 9 He said, “Bring me a three-year-old female calf [1], a three-year-old female goat [2], a three-year-old ram [3], a dove [4], and a young pigeon [5].” 10 He took all of these animals, split them in half, and laid the halves facing each other, but he didn’t split the birds. 11 When vultures swooped down on the carcasses, Abram waved them off. 12 After the sun set, Abram slept deeply. A terrifying and deep darkness settled over him.
13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Have no doubt that your descendants [seed] will live as immigrants [strangers] in a land that isn’t their own, where they will be oppressed slaves [in Egypt] for four hundred years. 14 But after I punish the nation they serve, they will leave it with great wealth. 15 As for you, you will join your ancestors in peace and beburied after a good long life.16 The fourth generation will return here since the Amorites’ [Nephilim and Elioud giants] wrong doing won’t have reached its peak until then.” 17 After the sun had set and darkness had deepened, a smoking vessel with a fiery flame passed between the split-open animals. 18 That day the Lord cut a covenant with Abram: “To your descendants I give this land, from Egypt’s river to the great Euphrates, 19 together with the Ken-ites [possibly descended, from the line of Cain], the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites… [Nephilim infiltrators, trying to thwart Abraham and his descendants from their inheritance].’
The reference to four hundred years, includes living as immigrants and being oppressed as slaves (Acts 7:6-7) and can be computed a number of ways. For instance, from the Exodus in 1446 BCE, back to when Abraham plans to offer Isaac as a sacrifice in 1847 BCE is four hundred years. As the verses in question state the peak of the Amorites evil, one needs to count with this in mind. We will look at the fourth generation part of the verse later.
The 400 years is linked to the 430 stated elsewhere in Exodus 12:40-41. If we add 430 years to Abraham’s year 100 when Isaac is born, the total is 530 years from Abraham’s birth to the Exodus: 1977 BCE to 1446 BCE. Adding 45 years to the time Joshua divided the land of the Amorites (Joshua 14:7-10, Joshua is 20 years younger than Caleb), the number is 575 years from Abraham’s birth. Abraham did live a good long life as the Lord said, for one hundred and seventy-five years. Subtracting 175 from 575, gives 400 years from Abraham’s death in 1802 BCE, to the year the sins of the Amorite’s reached maturity in 1402 BCE, while the sons of Jacob were conquering and possessing the land between 1407 to 1400 BCE.
Genesis 16:1-16
English Standard Version
‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai.
3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan [from 1902 BCE to 1892 BCE], Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram… 4 And he went into Hagar, and she conceived. And when [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress [Sarai]. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.’
We shall continue with this story when we study Ishmael and his mother Hagar in the next chapter. Sarai recognised her age at seventy-five and thought, pregnancy isn’t happening, I need to take matters into my own hands. To be fair, it wasn’t the best idea and revealed impatience as well as possibly a lack of faith in the Lord’s promises. It didn’t go well and Sarai certainly regretted her decision, judging by her inclusion, as only one of two women mentioned in the chapter of faith in the Bible – the other, was Rahab the harlot.
Hebrews 11:11
English Standard Version
‘By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.’
Hagar did not do herself or Ishmael any favours, looking down on Abraham’s wife, as we will learn. Possibly, Hagar was a gift from Pharaoh in Egypt when Abram and Sarai visited. It is thought that she may have even been the Pharoah’s daughter. The Bible renders Hagar as Egyptian, though this is more likely to be where she was from, rather than her ethnicity as a descendant of Mizra from Ham. Joseph married a woman from Egypt, provided by the Pharaoh, though she was from a priestly family, much the same way Moses’ second wife was the daughter of Jethro the Priest of Midian. Midian being a son of Abraham. Also, Sarai may have suggested the idea to Abram, but she did not make a habit of riding roughshod over the man she allegedly called lord.
The author of 1 Peter (not the Apostle Peter, refer article: The Pauline Paradox), states: ‘For example, Sarah accepted Abraham’s authority when she called him master. You have become her children when you do good and don’t respond to threats with fear’ – 1 Peter 3:6, CEB.
Genesis 17:1-26
English Standard Version
1 ‘When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2 that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.”
3 Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude [H1995 – hamown: ‘company, many, great number, abundance’] of nations.5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.
6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful [especially the tribe of Ephraim], and I will make you into nations [plural], and kings [from the tribe of Judah] shall come from you. 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. 8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.”
Abraham of Ur, David A Snyder, 2014:
‘Now there was to be a God of the Hebrews, a God that Abraham would hear from again when he was being prepared to be the father of a great nation. It is interesting to note that none of the three covenants demand that Abraham accept God as the creator – only that he will be the God of the Hebrews. As we shall see, because of Abraham’s pagan culture, his concept of God would be something he was familiar with – the practice of worshiping one deity among many (monolatry) rather than the monotheistic faith that we know today.’
Genesis: 9 And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Everymale among you shall be circumcised. 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised.’
Just before the eighth day after a male babies birth, the amount of blood clotting material increases rapidly, until on the eighth day itself, it is 110% from the norm. This is due to the levels of vitamin K being at its highest. Vitamin K plays a key role in regulating the coagulation mechanism that controls bleeding.
Genesis: ‘Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised [every male]. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant [until the new Covenant, Romans 2:29, Matthew 26:28]. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.’
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, pages 127-128:
‘As part of the covenant between the deity and Abraham, and later reinforced by being repeated many more times to his descendants, he is told: You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the mark of the [old] covenant between me and you. Just as the serpent achieves long life through sacrificing and [shedding its skin] leaving off part of himself, so may man also be saved by ritually sacrificing part of himself… a perpetual reminder… [of] his true origins…’
Genesis: 15 ‘And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”… 19 God said, “No, but Sarah [presently 89 years old] your wife shall bear you a son [a miracle, an intervention] by the Creator, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him…’
David A Snyder, 2014:
‘Abram is the Akkadian Abu-ramu which is of west Semitic origin and means exalted father. Sarai, Abraham’s wife… whom God will later call Sarah, is an epithet of the consort of the moon god Sin of Haran. Milcah, Abraham’s sister-in-law, is derived from Malkatu, the consort of the sun god Shamash’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘The relation of the moon-god of Ur and Haran to Abraham and his family might be troubling to some Bible fundamentalists; however, it might also explain why God changed Abram’s name to Abraham and Sarai’s name to Sarah.’
Genesis: 23 ‘Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old [in 1878 BCE] when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 That very day Abraham and his son Ishmael were circumcised.’
Snyder – emphasis mine:
‘… one will notice that before these covenants are made, man is required to sever one or more animals in two parts. In ancient times this symbolizes what will happen to the party that breaks the covenant. In Hebrew, the verb to seal a covenant literally means:”to cut”… scholars believe that the removal of the foreskin in circumcision is a symbol of the sealing of the covenant with God.’
Genesis 18:1-33
English Standard Version
1 ‘And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. 2 He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men [angels] were standing in front of him.
When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth 3 and said, “O Lord [H136 – Adonay: lord, as in the Son of Man (Psalm 110:1)], if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant.4 Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet [indicative of the foot washing at the last supper, John 13:1-13], and rest yourselves under the tree, 5 while I bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on – since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.”
6 And Abraham went quickly into the tent to Sarah and said, “Quick! Three seahs [measures] of fine flour! Knead it, and make cakes.” 7 And Abraham ran to the herd and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to a young man, who prepared it quickly. 8 Then he took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before them. And he stood by them under the tree while they [the three angels] ate.
9 They said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “She is in the tent.” 10 The Lord said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in years. The way of women had ceased to be with Sarah. 12 So Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I am worn out, and my lord is old, shall I have pleasure?” 13 The Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh and say, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?’ 14 Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” 15 But Sarah denied it, saying, “I did not laugh,” [not outwardly] for she was afraid. He said, “No, but you did laugh” [Sarah did inwardly].
16 Then the men set out from there, and they looked down toward Sodom. And Abraham went with them to set them on their way. 17 The Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” 20 Then the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran] 21 I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.”
22 So the men [two angels] turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord [the Son of Man… who was not Melchizedek]. 23 Then Abraham drew near and said, “Will you indeed sweep away the righteous [Lot and his family] with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” [Acts 10:42] 26 And the Lord said, “If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”
27 Abraham answered and said, “Behold, I have undertaken to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes… 32 … “Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there.” He answered, “For the sake of ten I will not destroy it.” 33 And the Lord went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place.’
The Lord was certainly patient with Abraham, especially as Abraham really drew out the conversation. As the word Adonay is used for Lord, we know it is the Son of Man, the Word and not an angel of the Lord or someone else entirely. As it is the pre-incarnate Christ, it is odd it doesn’t use the name Melchizidek in the text if they are one and the same as many propose. The two messenger angels may have been Michael and Gabriel, who left before the Lord and were the same angels whom Lot welcomed and looked after and who then in turn, protected him and his family – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Genesis 21:1-7, 34
English Standard Version
1 ‘The Lord visited Sarah as he had said [a year later], and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.” 34 And Abraham sojourned many days in the land of the Philistines.’
The promised son and heir-proper to Abraham, Isaac, was finally born to Sarah and Abraham in 1877 BCE, one hundred years after Abraham’s birth. In Genesis chapter twenty, Abraham moves to the Negeb in the southwestern region of Canaan or the northeastern limits of Egypt depending on your interpretation. Abimelech ruled the area and it was located where the Philistines* officially settled from Crete nearly one thousand years later.
The view of Bible detractors is that this anachronism* of term proves the Bible is fantasy, rather than understanding that the passages have been written and edited later, with the term Philistine added for clarity on the location. It is possible that the children of Caphtor from Casluh (and Pathros), as well as from Aram originally dwelt here before their migration to the Aegean Sea and that these were a residue of their people. Alternatively, early migrations of Minoans may have already begun. It would explain why the main body of them migrated from Minoan Crete to this exact same location – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
As the location is near to the Delta region of Lower Egypt, could Abimelech be the same person as Pharaoh Narmer, also known as Menes, who united Egypt as the first Pharaoh of the 1st Dynasty and who had met with Abraham and Sarah in Genesis chapter twelve. A case for this is made by Damien F Mackey.
From Genesis to Hernán CortésVolume Four: Era of Abraham – emphasis mine:
‘But who was the ruler of Egypt at the time, anachronistically called “Pharaoh” (which was a much later, New Kingdom, designation for Egyptian rulers)? The era of Abram also closely approximated to – as determined by Dr. John Osgood – the time of a great and mysterious potentate named Narmer. Now, whilst some consider this Narmer to have been the father of Egypt’s first pharaoh, Menes, my preference is for Narmer as the invasive Akkadian king, Naram-Sin… What makes most intriguing a possible collision of Menes of Egypt with a Shinarian potentate is the emphatic view of (then) Dr. W. F. Albright that Naram-Sin had conquered Egypt, and that the“Manium” whom Naram-Sin boasts he had vanquished was in fact Menes himself (“Menes and Naram-Sin”, JEA, Volume 6, No. 2, April 1920, pp. 89-98).
Tradition does seem to favour Abram as a contemporary of the first dynastic ruler of Egypt, Menes. Certainly, Emmet Sweeney has provided a strong argument for a close convergence in time of Abram and Menes: I am also inclined to accept the view that the classical name “Menes” arose from the nomen, Min, of pharaoh Hor-Aha (“Horus the Fighter”). Most importantly, according to Manetho, Hor (“Menes”) ruled for more than 60 years: Sixty years was the approximate span of time from Abram’s famine to the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah. Why is this length of time significant? It is because… [Abimelech is the] “Pharaoh”, with the addition… of this Abimelech figuring again later in the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah.
Critics may not be correct in claiming that the lack of an Egyptian name for the ruler in the case of the Abram and Joseph narratives of Genesis (cf. 12:15 and 39:1) is a further testimony, as they think, to these texts being unhistorical. Since these texts refer to the ruler of Egypt only as “Pharaoh” it is argued that we ought not to take them as being serious histories. From the now well-known theory of toledot (a Hebrew feminine plural), we might be surprised to learn that so great a Patriarch as Abram (later Abraham), did not sign off the record of his own history (as did e.g. Adam, Noah, and Jacob). No, Abram’s story was recorded instead by his two chief sons, Ishmael and Isaac. “These are the generations of Ishmael …” (Genesis 25:12). “These are the generations of Isaac …” (Genesis 25:19).
So, there were two hands at work in this particular narrative, and this fact explains the otherwise strange repetition of several famous incidents recorded in the narrative. And it is in the second telling of the incident of the abduction of Abram’s wife, Sarai (later Sarah), that we get the name of the ruler who, in the first telling of it is called simply “Pharaoh”. He is “Abimelech” (20:2).
Admittedly, there are such seeming differences between the two accounts, as regards names, geography and chronology, as perhaps to discourage one from considering them to be referring to the very same incident; and that despite such obvious similarities as:
– the Patriarch claiming that his beautiful wife was his “sister”;
– the ruler of the land taking her for his own;
– he then discovering that she was already married (underlined by plagues);
– and asking the Patriarch why he had deceived him by saying that the woman was his sister;
– the return of the woman to her husband, whose possessions are now augmented.
The seeming contradictions between the two accounts are that, whereas the first narrated incident occurs in Egypt, and the covetous ruler is a “Pharaoh”, the second seems to be located in southern Palestine, with the ruler being “King Abimelech of Gerar”, and who (according to a somewhat similar incident again after Isaac had married) was “King Abimelech of the Philistines” (26:1).
Again, in the first narrated account, the Patriarch and his wife have their old names, Abram and Sarai, whereas in the second account they are referred to asAbraham and Sarah,presumably indicating a later time.In the first narrated account, the “Pharaoh” is “afflicted with great plagues because of Sarai”, whereas, in the second, “God healed Abimelech, and also healed his wife and female slaves so that they bore children” (20:17). The differences can be explained fairly easily…
Ishmael understandably wrote his father’s history from an Egyptian perspective, because his mother, Hagar, was “an Egyptian slave-girl” in Abram’s household, and she later “got a wife for [Ishmael] from the land of Egypt” (cf. 16:1 and 21:21). Ishmael names his father “Abram” because that is how he was known to Ishmael. Moreover, the incident with “Pharaoh” had occurred while the Patriarch was still called Abram. Isaac was not even born until some 25 years after this incident. His parents were re-named as Abraham and Sarah just prior to his birth. So, naturally, Isaac refers to them as such in the abduction incident, even though they were then Abram and Sarai.
Again, there is no contradiction geographically between Egypt and Gerar because we are distinctly told in Ishmael’s account that it was just before the family went to Egypt (12:11) that Abram had told his wife that she was to be known as his sister. Gerar is on the way to Egypt, and in a later Volume we shall encounter an Egyptian king who also had control over Gerar (or southern Geshur). Finally, whether the one whom Isaac calls “Abimelech” was still, in Isaac’s day, “Pharaoh” of Egypt – as he had been in former times – he most definitely was, at least, ruler over the Philistines at Gerar. Perhaps he ruled both lands, Egypt and Philistia.
In Hebrew [Abimelech] means “Father is King”, or “Father of the King”. Since Abimelech is not an Egyptian name (though the Egyptian name, Raneb, is of similar meaning), and since the other designation that we have for him is simply “Pharaoh”, that data, in itself, will not take us to the next step of being able to identify this ruler in the Egyptian historical (or dynastic) records. But that our Abimelech may have – according to the progression of Ishmael’s and Isaac’s toledot histories – ruled Egypt and then gone on to rule Philistia, could well enable us to locate this ruler archaeologically.
Dr. John Osgood has already done much of the ‘spade work’ for us here, firstly by nailing the archaeology of En-geddi at the time of Abram (in the context of Genesis 14) to the Late Chalcolithic period, corresponding to Ghassul IV in Palestine’s southern Jordan Valley; Stratum V at Arad; and the Gerzean period in Egypt (“The Times of Abraham”, Ex Nihilo TJ, Volume 2, 1986, pp. 77-87); and secondly by showing that, immediately following this period, there was a migration out of Egypt into Philistia, bringing an entirely new culture (= Early Bronze I, Stratum IV at Arad).
P. 86: “In all likelihood Egypt used northern Sinai as a springboard for forcing her way into Canaan with the result that all of southern Canaan became an Egyptian domain”. Then there is the all-important structural (chiasmus) guide (thanks to reader, Ken Griffith), admittedly, not well-formatted, but note how B. 1 and B’. 1′ merge beautifully with “Pharaoh” in B. 1 reflecting “Abimelech in B’. 1′: My tentative estimation would be that Abram came to Egypt at the approximate time of Narmer, the Akkadian Naram-Sin {the name Narmer (N-R-M) equates rather well phonetically with Naram- (N-R-M)}, and right near the beginning of the long reign of Hor-Aha (Menes)… It can also be thought in favour of Middle Bronze I [MBI]’s being the suitable period for Abraham that king Hammurabi of Babylon,a possible candidate forAbraham’s contemporary, Amraphel king of Shinar [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings] (Genesis 14:1), has been dated… within range of the Middle Bronze I Age (2000-1750 BC).’
In the preceding quote, John Osgood confirms an extension of Egypt into the southern Canaan region. The chances of these people descending from Caphtor (Casluh and Pathros), rather than any other son of Mizra is more than probable. There is a measure of confidence in Mackey’s conclusions, as he has highlighted Hammurabi’s link with Amraphel, which we have already ascertained when studying Chedorlaomer in Genesis chapter fourteen and the Battle of Siddim. According to an unconventional chronology, Hammurabi was born in 1912 BCE and ruled as King of Babylon from 1894 to 1852 BCE, well within the Middle Bronze Age period.
If Pharaoh Narmer is Naram-Sin – notice the Sin suffix as pertaining to the Moon god (refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) – then Abraham may have already known Naram-Sin while living in Shinar, or if not, then probably his family. It would also explain how Egypt was united into one kingdom and the beginning of the First Dynasty. Where there is disagreement, is on which Pharaoh met with Sarah and Abraham; since an unconventional chronology points to Hor-Aha’s son and third ruler of the 1st Dynasty, Pharaoh Djer instead.
Coupled with this, this writer would disagree with the linkage of the names or titles of ‘Manium’ and ‘Min’ with Menes and thus concluding Menes was a different person. Evidence leans towards Narmer and Menes being the same person where, Narmer meaning ‘painful, stinging, harsh’ or ‘fierce’ (as well as raging catfish), is a Horus name… and Menes, a birth name.
Genesis 22:1-19
English Standard Version
1 ‘After these things God [H430 – ‘elohiym: ‘one’ of the gods] tested [H5254 – nacah: did tempt or try] Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.“ [1] 2 He said,“Take your son, your only son [of promise] Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah[Mount of Olives in Jerusalem], and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you” – refer article: The Eden Enigma.
3 ‘So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5 Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy [H5288 – na’ar: young male] will go over there and worship and come again to you.”
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, page 88:
‘[An] example of the conflict between [El and Yahweh] was the sacrifice of Isaac… a close reading of this verse shows that it was El who requested the sacrifice from Abraham and that he was stopped at the last moment by the intervention of the angel of Yahweh.’
Boulay raises the seeming complex point regarding Yahweh and El, which we have discussed earlier. The real issue is the difference between Yahweh and the Elohim as investigated in Genesis chapters one and two – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The evidence for different Elohim or sons of God, compared with the one God, El is repeated in verse one of Genesis chapter twenty-two. The Creator chooses to not look upon sin, rather the Word was appointed to put away sin and intercede on our behalf, making a relationship with the Father possible.
Habakkuk 1:12-13
New King James Version
‘Are You not from everlasting, O Lord my God, my Holy One… You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, And cannot look on wickedness…’
Hebrews 9:24-28
English Standard Version
‘For Christ has entered… into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf… he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many…‘
We also know that the Creator tests (or tries) mankind, though indirectly, as it is actually the Serpent Samael who tempts mankind with the aim of making us sin.
Psalm 11:5
New King James Version
‘The Lord tests the righteous…’
Job 2:6
English Standard Version
And the Lord said to Satan, “Behold, he isin your hand; only spare his life.”
The Creator allows this to test our hearts to see if we will choose righteousness. The Creator does not desire for us to slip and fall (or sin) and hence He is not the tempter, the Devil and its minions bear that role.
Matthew 4:1, 7
English Standard Version
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil… Jesus said… Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test [or tempt God].’
Thus, verse one could easily read: ‘After these things the god of this world, (2 Corinthians 4:4) did tempt Abraham…’ Further evidence that this was not the Creator speaking is that the Eternal would not ask any of his servants to sacrifice a human being. The sacrificial system of God – until His Son put an end to it – only required animals. The Israelites prior to their captivity had fallen to hideously sacrificing their own children, in imitation of the nations surrounding them – Articles: Belphegor; and Na’amah.
Psalm 106:34-39
English Standard Version
‘They did not destroy the peoples, as the Lord commanded them, but they mixed with the nations and learned to do as they did. They served their idols, which became a snare to them.They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood. Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the whore in their deeds.’
Isaac is described as a boy or a lad and this has been misleading, as it has inferred that it was sprung upon him by Abraham and that he may not have been a willing participant once he understood that he was in fact the sacrificial lamb – a type of the promised Messiah (Genesis 22:4, Isaiah 53:7). The Hebrew word na’ar can be translated as ‘child, youth, young’ or even ‘babe.’ In this context with Isaac being male it could be boy or lad. The translators have assumed Issac must have been a child or teenager at most.
The King James version translates this word different ways, though its most common translation is actually young man, seventy-six times; and then servant fifty-four times; with child forty-four times and so forth. Young man is correct, as Isaac was thirty years old at the time in 1847 BCE; the same age the Messiah began his ministry – Article: The Christ Chronology. As Isaac lived to one hundred and eighty years of age, he was still a young man at thirty and could not be identified as either a child or a middle aged man.
Genesis: 6 ‘And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together.
7 And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am [2], my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” 8 Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.”
So they went both of them together. 9 When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid [H7760 – siym] him on the altar, on top of the wood.’
The Hebrew word for laid has various meanings. The English word laid suggests Abraham cradled a boy in his arms. Yet in different contexts it can mean the following: ‘to put, place, set, appoint, make, direct, determine, plant.’ In reference too Isaac a young man, it can mean to fix, extend and to put upon. While a struggle with Isaac is not inferred at all in the scripture, it can also mean: ‘lay violent hands on.’
Genesis: 10 ‘Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son.’
While this image is inaccurate in its depiction of Isaac, it realistically portrays the dramatic unfolding of events.
11 ‘But the angel [Messenger – Mal’ak] of the Lord [Yahweh] called to him from heavenandsaid, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am” [3].
12He said,“Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”
13 ‘And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”
Notice, it is not El-Shaddai (or Yahweh) who calls out to Abraham. Not even the shadowy figure of the original tempting Elohim, but rather the Angel of the Lord (the Messenger of Yahweh) who intercedes on the Eternal’s behalf.
Genesis: 15 ‘And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said, “By myself I [the Lord] have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, [NCV: ‘and they will capture the cities of their enemies’] 18 and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.” 19 So Abraham returned to his young men, and they arose and went together to Beersheba. And Abraham lived at Beersheba.’
The Angel of the Lord is not speaking of himself or swearing by himself but declaring the testimony of the Lord – of Yahweh Himself. Notice in the promised blessing, that the addition of possessing the gates of their enemies is included. This promise is stated more specifically later and is a key piece of information in identifying certain peoples descending from Abraham. A crucial element which has been missed, even by those within the identity movement who have thought they understood it correctly.
Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 158-159:
‘… when one compares the history of Isaac with that of Jesus, the similarities are very profound.
The birth of Isaac was miraculous (Genesis 18), so was the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:18)
In Abraham’s attempt to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac even assisted Abraham in carrying the wood to the altar (Genesis 22:6). In like manner Jesus also helped to carry his own crosspiece to his crucifixion.
Isaac did not dispute Abraham’s will in the matter of his own sacrifice, nor did Jesus with God the Father.
Jesus and Isaac were both “offered” on the Mount of Olives
Isaac was willing to lay down his life of his own free will, just as Jesus did.
Abraham also was willing to sacrifice his only son who was his legal son (or legitimate son for inheritance) while God the Father did in fact give up his only begotten Son. As God provided a ram caught in a thicket as a substitute sacrifice for Isaac so that Isaac could live… the Father provided Jesus as a substitute sacrifice for Israel and the world so that they may live forever.
Abraham came down from the mountain sacrifice… with Isaac still alive… tantamount to Isaac having been resurrected from the dead (Hebrews 11:17-19)… Jesus was also resurrected… at the same site and on the same mountain… Isaac had a three day journey to the spot to be “offered”… and resurrected… while… the resurrection of Jesus also took place after a period of three days.’
Abraham is the father of the faithful and he is a type of God the Father, as Isaac prefigures the coming of Christ. In turn, physically and spiritually they are the head of the family, of those who are loved by the Creator, who love the Creator and are obedient to Him.
Hebrews 11:8-18
Common English Bible
8 ‘By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was going to receive as an inheritance. He went out without knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he lived in the land he had been promised as a stranger. He lived in tents along with Isaac and Jacob, who were coheirs of the same promise. 10 He was looking forward to a city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God… these people died in faith without receiving the promises, but they saw the promises from a distance and welcomed them. They confessed that they were strangers and immigrants on earth. 14 People who say this kind of thing make it clear that they are looking for a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking about the country that they had left, they would have had the opportunity to return to it. 16 But at this point in time, they are longing for a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God isn’t ashamed to be called their God – he has prepared a city for them [Revelation 21:1-3].
17 By faith Abraham offered Isaac when he was tested. The one who received the promises was offering his only son. 18 He had been told concerning him, Your legitimate descendants will come from Isaac.’
It was a monumental request to sacrifice his one and only son born from his wife Sarah, who had been specified as the heir for all the promises and blessings to derive from him. With Sarah well past child bearing age – it would require an additional miracle conception – yet Abraham’s faith, meant he knew the Creator could replace Isaac if that was His intention. For instance, Seth replaced Abel who was also a type of the future Saviour. Further, Abraham would have also believed in the Eternal’s power to resurrect Isaac, if that had been His purpose.
In Abraham, we have one of the prime examples of what is desired and acceptable to the Creator in all of the history of humankind. In Genesis 26:5 ESV, the promise is repeated to Isaac, with the Creator saying: “because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.”
God doesn’t leave much out and nor does obedience get much better than Abraham’s example. Abraham was the consummate believer in the Eternal. He set the bar immeasurably high. Abraham being a truly difficult act to follow, is a grand understatement. Abraham the true friend of God, well may be the most honourable human follower of the Creator who has ever lived, next to His very own Son and John the Baptist – Matthew 11:11.
Genesis 25:7-11
English Standard Version
‘These are the days of the years of Abraham’s life, 175 years. Abraham breathed his last and died in agoodold age [in 1802 BCE], an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. Isaac[75 years of age] andIshmael [89 years old]his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar* the Hittite, east of Mamre, the field that Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried,with Sarah his wife.After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. And Isaac settled at Beer-lahai-roi.’
The death of Abraham is poignantly described in the Book of Jubilees.
Chapter 23:1-7
1 ‘And he placed two fingers of Jacob on his eyes, and he blessed the Almighty of gods, and he covered his face and stretched out his feet and slept the sleep of eternity [a long sleep until the resurrection, Job 14:14], and was gathered to his fathers. 2 And notwithstanding all this Jacob [15 years of age] was lying in his bosom, and knew not that Abraham, his father’s father, was dead. 3 And Jacob awoke from his sleep, and behold Abraham was cold as ice, and he said ‘Father, father’; but there was none that spoke, and he knew that he was dead.
4 And he arose from his bosom and ran and told Rebecca, his mother; and Rebecca went to Isaac in the night, and told him; and they went together, and Jacob with them, and a lamp was in his hand, and when they had gone in they found Abraham lying dead. 5 And Isaac fell on the face of his father and wept and kissed him. 6 And the voices were heard in the house of Abraham, and Ishmael his son arose, and went to Abraham his father, and wept over Abraham his father, he and all the house of Abraham, and they wept with a great weeping. 7 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the double cave, near Sarah his wife, and they wept for him forty days, all the men of his house, and Isaac and Ishmael, and all their sons, and all the sons of Keturah [six sons, aged about 21 to 31 years of age] in their places; and the days of weeping for Abraham were ended.’
Due to the time frame, Zohar* the Hittite was descended from the son of Canaan, Heth and not those people living later, called the Hittite empire in Anatolia. This would have been the last of the Black people living in Canaan as nearly all would have already migrated to northwestern Africa, southwest of Phut, who in turn were westwards of Egypt. The land of Canaan had been steadily swamped with Nephilim as evidenced by the cities of the plain – Sodom and the others – and the Battle of Siddim. Later, some of Abraham’s other children returned into the region. We have closed with the ending of Abraham’s life in Genesis chapter twenty-five with his sons Isaac and Ishmael – both to be discussed further in subsequent chapters – and now turn our attention to his subsequent six sons which he sired with his second wife, Keturah.
Keturah
Genesis 25:1-6
English Standard Version
‘Abraham took another wife, whose name wasKeturah.
2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian*, Ishbak, and Shuah.
3 Jokshan fathered Sheba* and Dedan*. The sons of DedanwereAsshurim,Letushim, and Leummim.
4 The sons ofMidianwereEphah*, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, andEldaah.
All these were the children of Keturah. 5 Abraham gave all he had to Isaac. 6 But to the sons of his ‘concubines’ [Hagar and Keturah] Abraham gave gifts and while he was still living he sent them away from his son Isaac, eastward to the east country.’
We learn a couple of salient points from this passage. The sons who are mentioned directly or indirectly, more than once in the Bible have an asterisk. Abraham took Keturah as his wife unlike Hagar – and after Sarah died – though she may have been a concubine prior to this, as she is listed as a concubine in 1 Chronicles 1:32 ESV: “The sons of Keturah, Abraham’s concubine: she bore… All these were the descendants of Keturah.”
The other notable matter is the sending away of the six sons of Keturah, though not quite as harshly as the banishment of Ishmael and his mother. Ishmael had been given a separate blessing; different from Isaac as we shall learn. There is no recording of individual blessings in the Bible for Keturah’s sons, though we read that they did not leave without each receiving a portion of Abraham’s wealth. They also like Ishmael, travelled eastward away from Isaac. It infers a more easterly locale, or that they had already left. Josephus states: “Accordingly Isaac married Rebekah, the inheritance being now come to him; for the children by Keturah were gone to their own remote habitations.” (Antiquities of the Jews, Book. I, 16, iii).
Book of Jubilees 20:1-2, 11-13:
1 ‘… Abraham called Ishmael, 2 and his twelve sons, and Isaac and his two sons [Esau and Jacob], and the six sons of Keturah, and their sons. 2
And he commanded them that they should observe the way of Yahweh; that they should work righteousness, and love each his neighbour, and act on this manner amongst all men; that they should each so walk with regard to them as to do just judgment and righteousness on the earth.
11 And he gave to Ishmael and to his sons, and to the sons of Keturah, gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, and he gave everything to Isaac his son.
12 And Ishmael and his [twelve] sons, and the [six] sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylonin all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. 13. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs[Arabians], andIshmaelites.‘
As addressed in part already, concerning Mizra and the Arab related peoples: the Arabs have taken their name from the Arabian Peninsula. When the sons of Keturah and Ishmael migrated east to the wilderness – the ‘desert’ which is Arabia – they collectively became known as Arabians, but this does not make them modern day Arabs.
One could say, they were the original Arabs and that the sons of Mizra have appropriated that name. Similar to sons of Shem and the Nephilim each being known as Canaanites, where the original sons of Canaan had first dwelt in ‘Palestine’ and their name had been appropriated. It is hoped the constant reader now cognisant of this repeating pattern, does not require elaboration.
It is not provided when Keturah or her sons were born, thus some conjecture is required. Ishmael was born in 1891 BCE when Abraham was eighty-six; and Ishmael was fourteen when Isaac was born in 1877 BCE. Sarah died in 1840 BCE at the age of 126 years. Isaac married Rebekah in 1839 BCE and with a little time to pass before marrying Keturah, it could have been approximately 1835 BCE. Abraham would have been 142 years old. If the boys were born a couple of years apart and there were six of them, then circa 1833 BCE for the firstborn Zimran, till 1823 BCE for the sixth and youngest son, Shuah.
As Abraham had these additional sons late in life, they were born in the same generation as and just prior to, the birth of the twins Esau and Jacob to Isaac in 1817 BCE. Even so, they were actually half-brothers to Ishmael and Isaac. Thus, Jokshan’s sons and Midian’s sons listed in the Bible, were cousins of Esau and Jacob; while Dedan’s sons were cousins to Esau and Jacob’s children.
We are not told who Keturah was or where she was from. One source claims she was from Japheth, though this does not fit the paradigm of Abraham’s descendants – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. Images online invariably render Keturah as a black woman. This is as equally misleading. The Book of Jubilees hints that they she may have descended from Abraham’s family from either his brother Nahor or likely Haran; but judging by the close, yet distinct Haplogroups (and autosomal; DNA) for Keturah’s descendants it would appear that she may have been from another line of Arphaxad – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Book of Jubilees 19:11
‘And Abraham took to himself a third [second] wife, and her name was Keturah,from among the daughters of his household servants, for Hagar had died before Sarah. And she bare him six sons, Zimram, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah…’
We are therefore looking for a cluster of smaller nations which have shared the blessings promised to Abraham and his kindred. We would expect them to be dwelling near or next to Nahor in (northern) Italy; Haran in Switzerland; and Moab and Ammon in France – as well as Ishmael as we shall discover – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Keturah, meaning: Incense[or perfumed from SHD 6989].
We know surprisingly little about Keturah. We don’t know from what nation she came, who her parents were or whether she outlived Abraham or not.
Some Jewish sages have proposed that Keturah and Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, are the same person, but there’s no evidence in the text to support this, and this proposition is ultimately fantastic [agreed].
What we do know is that Keturah became the mother of six Abrahamic sons, one of whom, Midian, became a nation that both rivaled Israel and became one of the most dominant tributaries to its theology and social structure. After all, Moses met YHWH in Midian… and Moses’ priestly father-in-law Jethro [taught] Moses all about the great benefits of delegated governance… It’s rarely noticed that Abraham complained that he was too old to have Isaac (Genesis 17:17), but when Isaac was 36 years old (compare 17:17 to 23:1) Sarah died, and some undisclosed time after, Abraham married Keturah and sired another six sons.
The name Keturah comes from the verb(qatar) meaningto producepleasant smoke: The verb (qatar) probably originally meant to rise up but came to denote the rising up of sacrificial smoke, which in turn commonly marked celebrations and surplus, and smelled pleasant after roasts or incense. What may not be immediately obvious to the modern reader is that the name Keturah demonstrates a very high level of governance and social sophistication… the government endows all elements with enough safety that none needs to be scared, enough food that none needs to be hungry, and enough wealth that none needs to feel stifled, stunted or duped.’
This is a startling accurate depiction of the forward thinking, progressive and liberal societies which typify the modern nations of Keturah’s sons.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… Abraham had a concubine, Keturah, who was his wife after Sarah died. She bore him a number of children whose wanderings are often lost sight of… Abraham sent them northeast [southeast] toward Mesopotamia [Arabia]. There they formed the powerful Kingdom of Mitanni, named after Midian or Medan. They lived mainly along the Euphrates River. The [Assyrians] destroyed their kingdom, sending some east and others north. In the east, evidence is that they became known as the Persians or Parthians (two names for the same people) and, in India, as the Brahmins – the sons of Abram! In India one branch of Keturah’s children form the highest caste and call themselves Brahmins after their father’s original name, Abram.Among the sons [of] Keturah who later went north were the “Letushim” (Genesis 25:3). And where are the Letushim today? Along the shores of the Baltic Sea in Russia. We call them the “Lettish” people today. Many Letts have fled to this country from Russian oppression. The Letts are closely related to the other peoples living along the southeastern shores of the Baltic Sea [descended rather from Joktan]… [and] the Asshurim of North Germany…’
Keturah’s children travelled in a south easterly direction into Arabia. We have studied the Mitanni in Mesopotamia and their descent from Nahor and possibly in part from Shem’s son Aram; though not from Abraham – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
The Parthians we will learn are linked to Abraham, but an alternative line of his family and not from Keturah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. We have also studied the connection between Moses and King Solomon with the castes of India and thus any association with Abraham’s name is both possible and plausible – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
Rather than along the shores of the Baltic Sea and the descendants of Joktan from Arphaxad, the offspring of Keturah are in fact dwelling on the other side of the Baltic Sea; along the shores of the North Sea and Norwegian Sea. Comprising the liberal democratic northwestern European nations of Scandinavia and the Low countries. Historically, by most within the identity movement, these nations have been incorrectly espoused as the descendants of Jacob and therefore identified as part of the so called lost tribes of Israel.
The first born son of Keturah is Zimran. He is not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Four out of the six sons may have some interplay regarding their exact identity and any advanced understanding or definitive information is welcomed. Putting what pieces there are together, Zimran is the nation of Norway. Norway has a population of 5,622,516 people. Abarim Publications defines Zimran as meaning: ‘One Who Makes Music’ (H2175) or ‘One Who Prunes’ based on the the verb zamar, to ‘prune or praise.’ Specifically, to ‘prune trees in an orchard or vineyard’ or ‘to hone a crowd into a choir.’
Norwegian man and Icelandic woman
Norway’s kingdoms were united by Haraldr Harfagri during wars of the 860s and early 870s, though Norway at this time only comprised the southern third of the modern country. From 1450 the kings of Denmark ruled Norway. Norway insisted on an election process to confirm the king, usually after they were proclaimed in Denmark. From 1536, governors were appointed to manage the country’s interests. Following the Napoleonic Wars, Sweden became the senior partner.
Norway gained full independence from Sweden on June 7, 1905, when Sweden withdrew from the Union to avert war. The Norwegian government asked Prince Carl of Denmark to become the country’s new king. He arrived during a blizzard on 25 November, with his wife Maud – the daughter of King Edward VII of England – and his son Alexander – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Carl changed his name to the more agreeable Haakon VII and was welcomed as the first Norwegian king for six hundred years. The royal anthem is sung to the same melody as that of England’s God Save the Queen, which is also Liechtenstein’s anthem, though understandably with different lyrics.
Recall, the Eternal promised Abraham and Sarah, that kings would descend from them. It is therefore interesting to note that barring one son today, all of Abraham’s children with Keturah retain constitutional monarchies. There are only twenty-nine states out of about two hundred in the world with monarchies. Norway’s monarch is King Harald V, crowned in 1991. He married Sonja Haraldsen in 1968.
Norwegian flag and Iceland’s Coat of Arms, with flag
The fifth son of Abraham and Keturah is Ishbak. He is not mentioned outside of the genealogical record either, though it appears that Ishbak is the nation of Iceland. Iceland has a population of 398,212 people. Abarim Publications gives the following meaning: Leaving, He will forsake from the verb shabaq. Also offered are: ‘He will abandon’ or ‘He will set free.’ An additional meaning includes: ‘He releases’ (H3435).
The Norwegian-Norse chieftain Ingolfr Arnarson built a homestead in the present day capital Reykjavik, in 874 CE. Other emigrant settlers followed from Scandinavia* – primarily Norwegian seafarers and adventurers – and their Celtic thralls (serfs and slaves) coming from Irish or Scottish stock. It is recorded that monks – the Papar – lived in Iceland before the Scandinavian settlers arrived, again Hiberian in origin.
As part of the Kalmar Union, Iceland had been under the control of the Crown of Denmark from 1380 -though formally a Norwegian possession – until 1814. In 1874 – a thousand years after the first settlement – Denmark granted Iceland home rule and in 1918, agreed its status as an independent, constitutional and hereditary monarchy, through a Union with Denmark. In 1944, a national referendum led to Iceland leaving the Union and becoming a republic.
The term Nordic refers to Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland principally, though it can also include Scotland, Northern Germany, the Netherlands and with a stretch, Russia. Whereas Scandinavia* – originating from Scania a small region on the peninsula, the southern tip of modern Sweden from which the three peoples sprang – strictly refers to the three kingdoms of Norway, Sweden and Denmark, as these three are bound intrinsically in their shared ethno-cultural Germanic heritage and related languages. More broadly, it can include Iceland and the Faeroe Islands on related languages and ancestry – as borne out by DNA and Haplogroup identity – and Finland on geographic, economic and political grounds.
The Finns, unlike Icelanders are descended from a different Arphaxad lineage and are separated from Scandinavia genetically; by their Finno-Ugric language; and proximity to Russia, geographically and historically – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The third born son, who is only listed in the Biblical family tree in Genesis chapter twenty-five and in 1 Chronicles One, is Medan, the modern nation of Denmark.
The identification includes the Faeroe Islands, with 55,993 people and Greenland, with 55,571 people. Denmark has a population comparable with Norway of 6,002,212 people. The meaning of Medan according to Abarim Publications is: Strife or Judgment from the noun madon, meaning strife and from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’ It can also mean: ‘contention’ (H409) or ‘discord’ (H4091).
A very important aspect to comprehend, is that the early Danes who were located in what is now southern Sweden were different people from the Danes living in Denmark today. Population pressures in the fourth and fifth centuries CE forced them to begin a migration into Denmark, once the Saxon tribes comprising Angles, Jutes and Frisians departed for Britain en masse. It wasn’t until after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, that Denmark as we know it was free of the original Danes and their migration into Britain as the Danish Vikings. The latter Danes also settled in Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland, which they retained after the dissolution of the Dano-Norwegian Union under the terms of the 1814 Treaty of Kiel.
In 1380 Queen Margaret’s husband, Haakon VI of Norway died. Margaret of Denmark, then ensured that their son Olaf, was proclaimed king there, thus adding Norway to his territories and thereby, creating the Union of Denmark and Norway, with Denmark gaining Greenland and Iceland. Margaret was the de facto ruler, for Olaf was a minor. In 1387, Olaf’s sudden and unexpected death at the age of seventeen, gave Margaret firm control as queen regent of Denmark and Norway; with Norway ruled as an appendage of Denmark. The nobility of Sweden unhappy with their own King Albert, invited Margaret to invade and take the throne. In 1388 she is accepted, at her own insistence, as SovereignLady and Ruler of Sweden; forming the Kalmar Union.
Danish man and Swedish woman
A later monarch, Christian I (1448-1481 CE) had a daughter named Margaret, who married King James III of Scotland. Her dowry included the islands of Orkney and Shetland, which were passed by the Danish crown to Scotland. The current Danish monarch is Queen Margrethe II and she was crowned in 1972. Margrethe married Prince Henri de Laborde de Monpezat in 1967, who died in 2018.
On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, where 132 countries are ranked, Denmark is the ninth most innovative country in the world. Recall Finland was placed at number six and Switzerland was ranked number one in the world.
The sixth and youngest son of Keturah is Shuah. Shuah is the nation of Sweden. Sweden has a population of 10,656,041 people. Abarim Publications give the meaning of Shuah as: ‘brought low, to sink, be bowed down’ or ‘humbled, prostration; a cry’ and ‘prosperity’ from the verbs shuah, which ‘denotes a motion towards a low position’ and from shawa, ‘to cry out for salvation.’
Abarim – emphasis mine:
‘There are four different Hebrew names that transliterated into English form the name Shuah, or variations thereof depending on the translation. The name Shoa (or variations thereof) is spelled the same as one of the Shuahs but pronounced slightly different. The first Shuah (pronounced shuach) is a son of Abraham with Keturah (Genesis 25:2). A feminine variation of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 4:11 (Shuhah; pronounced shuachah), which is assigned to a (female?) descendant of Judah. A completely different name occurs in Genesis 38:2 and 38:12 (pronounced shua’), where it is the name of the father of a wife of Judah (perhaps also known as Bath-shua – Genesis 38:12). A variant of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 7:32 (pronounced shua’a), where it is assigned to a daughter of Heber, a granddaughter of Asher, son of Jacob. The name Shoa occurs in Ezekiel 23:23, where it is the name of a Chaldean[?] tribe.
The name of this son of Abraham and the name of this… female descendant of Judah mean Brought Low or Put In A Pit. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Prostration. BDB Theological Dictionary refers both versions of this form of Shuah to the verb (yasha’), meaning to be saved. The names of the father of Judah’s wife and the Asherite woman may therefore mean Noble… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Rich for Shoa and Prosperity for all variations of Shuah. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Wealth [H7744] for Shua.’
Shuah is not directly mentioned, though one of his descendants is included in the Book of Job, as one of his three friends who attends to him while he is undergoing sore trials – refer Shuah, Chapter XXIX Esau:The Thirteenth Tribe. Shuah’s descendants may have been known to the Assyrians who referred to a people as the Suhu; though describing their land as being on the right bank of the Euphrates River, south of Carchemish is probably not the same Shuah.
Job 2:11
English Standard Version
‘Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that had come upon him, they came each from his own place, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildadthe Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite. They made an appointment together to come to show him sympathy and comfort him.’
Bildad is also mentioned in Job 8:1-22; 18:1-21 and 25:1-6. We will discuss Bildad again in a later chapter – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Job 42:7-9
English Standard Version
‘After the Lord had spoken these words to Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and offer up a burnt offering for yourselves. And my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer not to deal with you according to your folly. For you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did what the Lord had told them, and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.’
It was from the eighth century that the Scandinavian Vikings expanded outwards, building an extensive trading network across Europe and beyond. The Norwegians and Danes travelled west into Britain and Ireland, while the Swedes ventured eastwards. The eastern bound Vikings were different from the western in that they were descendants of Keturah. They penetrated deeply into the vast lands of modern Russia, following the navigable rivers, creating trading connections as far south as the Byzantine empire. By the ninth century they had trading settlements in the eastern Baltic and in the lands of the Rus – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
The Swedish Vikings founded their own states, where a Viking nobility ruled Slavic populations, such as that of Polotsk. In 970 CE, Eric the Victorious became the first King of Sweden. In 1249, Finland became part of Sweden after the Second Swedish Crusade led by Birger Jarl. The year 1252 saw the city of Stockholm established and in 1319, Sweden and Norway were united under the rule of Magnus IV. Danish forces invaded Sweden and executed rebellious nobility in the Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520. Three years later, Sweden declared independence from the Kalmar Union when Gustav Vasa was hailed as the new King of Sweden.
Flag of Sweden
During the 1550s many Finns migrated westwards across Scandinavia to settle. Thousands of farmers made the journey as far as eastern Norway and into central Sweden; known as the Forest Finns. They turned forests to farmlands using slash-and-burn agriculture and in return they were given land. In 1563 the Northern Seven Years War with Denmark began, ending in 1570 with the Treaty of Stettin and Sweden giving up claims on Norway. Sweden entered the Thirty Years War on the side of France and England. In 1648, when it came to an end, Sweden gained territory, giving rise to the Swedish Empire.
By 1700 Sweden had reached the peak of its power – controlling areas of Denmark, Russia, Finland and northern Germany – and the Great Northern War began. It was fought against Russia – led by Tsar Peter the Great – Denmark and Poland. The Swedes defeated the Russians at the Battle of Narva. In 1707, Sweden emboldened, invaded Russia, though bad weather weakened the army as they marched further east and the young Swedish King Karl XII fell in battle. By 1709, the Russians defeated the Swedes at the Battle of Poltava and in 1721, the Great Northern War ended with Sweden’s defeat and its Empire significantly reduced.
In 1809, Finland was lost to Russia. In 1813, Sweden fought against the French, who were led by Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig. From the victory, Sweden gained control of Norway from Denmark. In the late 1800s about one million Swedes immigrated to the United States due to poor economic conditions. In 1867, scientist Alfred Nobel obtained a patent for the explosive invention of dynamite. In 1875, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, ahead of their time, established a single currency called the Kroner. In 1927, the famous car marque Volvo, produced their first vehicle, nicknamed interestingly enough, Jakob. Sweden diplomatically remained neutral in both World Wars.
It was tragically in 1947 that Prince Gustaf Adolf, heir to the throne, was killed in an airplane crash on January 26 at Kastrup Airport in Copenhagen, Denmark. He and two companions were returning from a combined hunting trip and a visit to Princess Juliana of the Netherlands – shortly before she acceded to the Dutch throne. Gustaf’s son, Karl – aka Charles XVI Gustav – then became heir to the Swedish throne and he was crowned in 1973. He married Silvia Sommerlath in 1976.
Sweden joined the European Union in 1995, but did not join the Monetary Union and therefore, still uses the Swedish Krona as currency rather than the Euro; as does Iceland, Norway and Denmark, whereas Finland adopted the Euro in 2002. Just this fact alone, is interesting in interpreting Scandinavian versus Nordic definitions – or sons of Keturah and Abraham compared with other sons from Arphaxad.
Sweden punches above its weight with a GDP of $620308 billion in 2025, making it the 25th largest economy in the world. Sweden has a competitive economy and a high standard of living, with a mix of free-enterprise in tandem with a generous social welfare state. ‘Sweden’s manufacturing economy relies heavily on foreign exports, including machinery, motor vehicles, and telecommunications.’
On the 2023 Global Innovation Index, where Denmark ranked ninth, Sweden was ranked an impressive 2nd in the world behind Switzerland in first place.
The three Scandinavian countries comprising Sweden, Denmark and Norway are all constitutional monarchies but Finland has never been a kingdom or had a monarchy. The histories of Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland are closely intwined and highlight their close family relationship as four of the six siblings. The two remaining brothers, also share a close relationship and are spread across three kingdoms, with five separate territories and four distinct ethnic groups.
The second son of Keturah is Jokshan. Jokshan is the ancestor of the peoples comprising the nations of Belgium and Luxembourg. The population of Belgium is 11,758,406 people and Luxembourg has 680,377 people.
The Belgium Flag and Coat of Arms – Unity Makes Strength
Abarim Publications gives the meaning of Jokshan as: ‘one who sets a snare’ or ‘fowler’ from the verb yaqosh or qush, ‘to lay a snare’ and figuratively “snaring” a person using ‘alluring enticements.’ Jokshan is not mentioned outside of the genealogies, though his two sons, Sheba and Dedan are. The constant reader will recall, we have already met a Sheba and Dedan, the sons of Raamah of India, the son of Cush – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. We have also encountered Sheba, a son of Joktan in Romania – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Genesis Twenty-five provides the added detail of Dedan’s sons. Yet they are not mentioned directly, though Letush* is possibly an indirect reference.
It would appear to be a clue in identifying Dedan and highlighting a unique tripartite relationship, which is only replicated one other time with Haran, Canneh and Eden in Switzerland – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The only other similar occurrence in the world today, is in part reflected in England, Wales and Scotland – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
Isaiah 15:5
English Standard Version
‘My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar… For at the ascent [H4608 – ma’aleh: incline, elevation, going up (hill)] of Luhith* [H3872 – luwchiyth: tablets, anciently a town of Moab south of the Arnon River (possible link with a grandson of Abraham and Keturah and the Ardennes)] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction…’ – Jeremiah 48:5.
We have covered the definitions of Sheba and Dedan’s names previously, though a brief recap. Sheba can mean, ‘man, drunk, captive, splinter, seven’ and ‘oath.’ Dedan means: ‘leading gently’ or ‘to move slowly.’ Abarim states the ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low.’ The Benelux nations comprising the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg are also called the Low countries as they are either close to the sea, or below sea level. Dedan’s three sons names according to Abarim mean the following.
Asshur-im: ‘happy people, upright people, to be level, straight up’ or ‘just.’ The word can means ‘steps’, as in taking steps to go somewhere.
Letush-im: ‘metal workers’ from the verb latash, to hammer or sharpen. ‘[The] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Sharpened. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Artificers, or Hammerers’ [of weaponry].’ Letush can also mean ‘oppressed’ or ‘strong.’
Leumm-im: ‘peoples’ from the noun le’com, nation, people.’ It refers to ‘communities’ from the root word ‘to gather.’
Job 1:15
English Standard Version
“… and the Sabeans fell upon them and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”
Job’s children while celebrating and feasting were attacked by Sabeans. It is not clear which Sabeans; though from a geographic view, they are very likely Sheba from Abraham’s son Jokshan. It could also be referring to Sheba from Joktan; while unlikely to be Sheba from Cush.
Ezekiel 27:23
English Standard Version
‘Haran, Canneh, Eden,traders of Sheba, Asshur, and Chilmad traded with you.’
This verse could possibly apply to Sheba from Joktan and be referring to Romania, as they are linked with Asshur (Russia) in eastern Europe. The first part of the verse mentions Haran, Canneh and Eden of Switzerland and so if this Sheba is meant, it would be Belgium – or more specifically the Flemish people of Flanders in northern Belgium.
Job 6:19
English Standard Version
‘The caravans of Tema look, the travelers of Sheba hope.’
Isaiah 60:6
English Standard Version
‘A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.’
Tema is a son of Ishmael and Midian a son of Keturah; as both of these peoples are neighbours with Sheba, this is undoubtedly speaking of Sheba, descended from Abraham and Keturah. These verses confirm the economic prosperity of Sheba.
Isaiah 21:13
English Standard Version
‘The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites.’
Jeremiah 25:23-24
Young’s Literal Translation
‘Dedan, and Tema, and Buz, [all that are (in the) utmost (or farthest) corners] And all cutting the corners (of the beard), And all the kings of Arabia [Western Europe], And all the kings of the mixed [mingled] people, Who are dwelling in the wilderness… [Eastern Europe]’
Arabia was the region where Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah migrated to be apart from Isaac’s descendants. Arabia today, equates with northern and western Europe, where the peoples descended from Keturah and Ishmael live. Dedan – southern Belgium – is associated with Tema, a leading clan of Ishmael; and Buz, a leading family of Nahor in northern Italy.
Jeremiah 49:8
Complete Jewish Bible
‘Flee! Turn back! Hide yourselves well, you who live in D’dan [Dedan]; for I am bringing calamity on [Esau], when the time for me to punish him comes.’
Ezekiel 25:13
Amplified Bible
‘… therefore thus says the Lord God, “I will also stretch out My hand against Edom and I will cut off and destroy man and beast. I will make it desolate; fromTeman[leading tribe of Edom]even to Dedan they will fall by the sword.’
The calamity of Esau will be so severe, that they will flee even as far as Dedan to try and escape. Dedan or southern Belgium, is warned to either hide or head in the opposite direction themselves. Definitely not to travel towards Edom.
Ezekiel 27:19-21
Common English Bible
‘Vedan [Dedan (or ‘even Dan’)] and Javan [Archipelago Southeast Asia] from the region of Uzal [Greece] traded with you. They exchanged wrought iron, cinnamon, and spices for your wares. Dedan was your agent for saddle blankets [military products]. Arabia [Western Europe] and all theprincesofKedar [leading tribe of Ishmael] traded for you. They procured lambs, rams, and goats for you.’
Dedan is associated with a leading son (or clan) from Ishmael, Kedar and both are spoken of as trading with the mighty Tyre, which is a near future Brazilian led South American alliance. Dedan’s three sons reveal three components in southern Belgium’s composition. Dedan’s sons include the Walloons of Wallonia, the separate Brussels-Capital region and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.
Leumm represents the people of Brussels; Letush is Wallonia; and the Asshur–im, Luxembourg – possibly incorporating the Province of Luxembourg in southeast Wallonia. Their names are remarkably clear clues, as Leumm signifies the unique gathering ofpeople in Brussels; Letush the artificer of weapons; and Luxembourg is one of the happiest states in the world – being the second wealthiest ‘country’ in the world after Qatar – with regard to individual prosperity per person.
Wallonia produce a number of weapons in quantity, including the M4 assault rifle made by FN Herstal and owned by the Wallonia government. Wallonia is also home to the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. A 2021 survey listed the top Ten Happiest countries to live in and Luxembourg was placed at number ten. It is interesting to note, that apart from Belgium, all the sons of Keturah make the top ten. Number 9 is Austria; 8 New Zealand; 7 Sweden; 6 Netherlands; 5 Norway; 4 Iceland; 3 Switzerland; 2 Denmark; and number 1, is Finland. Maybe they have a case to be included as Scandinavian after all.
The Lion, state symbol of Flanders – indicating its Dutch heritage, language and cultural ties – and the Cockerel or Rooster, state symbol of Wallonia – reflecting its French heritage, language and cultural ties.
Over two thousand years ago, the Celtic tribe of the Belgae occupied the region – before they migrated to Britain, leaving only their name behind. In time, the area was ruled by the Romans, then the Merovingian Franks and incorporated into West Francia, remaining under French influence until the Belgian lands were first dominated by the Spanish Hapsburgs from 1555 – who split the Netherland region in two, known as the Spanish Netherlands – and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs from 1713. From 1815 to 1830, it was again the southern part of the newly formed United Kingdom of the Netherlands, created as a buffer state against France. Though, being predominantly French speaking, Catholic and industrialised, meant a rift ensued with the Dutch speaking, Protestant and commercialised north – present day Netherlands. Wallonia pressed for independence with a reluctant Flanders following suit due to military pressure.
Belgian men
The fact that the Bible makes a distinction between Sheba and Dedan and speaks of them separately would indicate that the union of Flanders and Wallonia into one Kingdom in 1830 will ultimately dissolve. An historian of the Belgian revolution observed: “In Belgium, there are parties and provinces, but no nation.” Of the eleven and a half million plus people, 58% live in Flanders, 32% in Wallonia – yet Wallonia accounts for 55% of Belgium’s territory – and 10% in Brussels.
Unlike the Flemish – who are economically more prosperous – the Walloons do not consider themselves a nation or necessarily desire an independent state. Polls reveal that only a minority of Walloons want Belgium to break up and if secession was forced on them by Flanders, about half would want to be attached to France. A 2020 poll found that 28% of the Flemish were in favour of a partition, compared to 18% of Walloons and 17% of Brussels residents. With that said, 56% of the same respondents ‘said it would be impossible to keep the country together in [the] future [58% in Wallonia, 46% in Flanders and 47% in Brussels].’
A Liege resident foresees a split, saying: “In Flanders they live differently, see things differently and envisage the future differently.” Remembering that the Flemish are descended from Sheba and the Walloons coupled with the predominately French speaking Brussels are Dedan, makes the differences understandable and an eventual split likely.
Belgian women
‘The Brussels-Capital Region has the same status as Flanders and Wallonia within the federal structure… though it measures only 161 [square km] (barely 0.5% of the national territory) its population of one million [plus] represents 10% of the national total. An enclave within Flanders, it is primarily French-speaking – around 85% of inhabitants speak French… [though] officially the region is bilingual… Brussels is not only the capital of Belgium and of the European Union, but also of the “French” [speaking communities]… of [both] Brussels and Wallonia, [as well as] the Flemish community and region.’
Many people incorrectly assume that the term Walloon applies to all Belgian French speakers; including those born and living in the Brussels-Capital Region. The mixing of the population over preceding centuries means that most families can trace their ancestors from ‘both sides of the linguistic divide’ in Brussels. The local dialect – Brussels Vloms – is a Brabantic dialect that reflects ‘the Dutch heritage of the city.’ The status of Brussels in a partitioned Belgium is uncertain and a source of considerable debate, with a variety of options that are all complex. Forming a city-state as a European capital district, similar to Washington DC or the Australian Capital Territory are suggestions; as is an extended Brussels region, so that its borders reach Wallonia.
Belgium’s 2025 GDP is $684.86 billion making it the 23rd largest world economy, two ahead of Sweden. Belgium, a trade and transport hub, has a diversified economy with a mix of services, manufacturing and high tech industry. Its heavy integration with the rest of the European economy, means Belgium is highly sensitive to swings in the overall economic performance of its neighbours.
The Belgium monarch is King Philippe Leopold Louis Marie, who was crowned in 2013. He married Queen Matilda, born Jonkvrouw Mathilde d’Udekem c’Acoz. The monarch of Luxembourg is Henri Albert Gabriel Felix Marie Guillaume, who was crowned in 2000. He married Maria Teresa Mestre y Batista in 1981. Finally, the monarch of the Netherlands is King Willem Alexander, crowned in 2013. He married Princess Maxima in 2002.
The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg began as a stronghold known as Lucilinburhuc, after the break-up of the Frankish empire. A town grew up around the stronghold, which today is Luxembourg Castle. The territory quickly grew in stature becoming a full county in the eleventh century and a duchy in the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century it was acquired by the Duchy of Burgundy and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs in 1482. Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris in 1815, it was passed to the new king of the Netherlands, William I, but in 1890 it gained full independence.
The fourth and most prominent son of Keturah is Midian. Midian comprises the Dutch people of the Netherlands. The country has a population of 18,345,692 people – the 10th highest in Europe. Abarim give the meaning of Midian, similar to Medan as: ‘strife’ and ‘place Of Judgment’ from the noun madon, strife, which derives from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’
Midian is mentioned in the Bible numerous times and had five sons of his own, though only one is mentioned once in scripture. The Midianites are the dominant descendants from Keturah. They have had a close association with Ishmael, with the name ‘Midianite’ being interchangeable and they have also had a close link with Moab and Ammon when seeking to fight their adversaries, the sons of Jacob. The Midianites were a successful trading people, building economic wealth like their cousins Sheba and Dedan.
Midian’s eldest son is Ephah, his name meaning: ‘gloom[y], covering’ from the noun ‘epa, gloom, from the verb ‘up, to use wings or cover.
It can also mean ‘volant’ [moving lightly, nimble] and ‘darkling.’ The ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List translates this name with Dark One; Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names readsDarkness.‘ Ephah is also a word used for a dry measurement of grain and is approximately twenty litres. Another Ephah is mentioned as a second wife of Caleb, as well as part of Jahdai’s family in Judah – 1 Chronicles 2:46-47.
The second son of Midian is Epher: meaning, ‘Dust, Ore, Malleable, Young [Deer or Hart].’ It can also mean a calf [H6081]. There is an Epher, the son of Ezra in the genealogies of Judah and also the half-tribe of East Manasseh – eldest son of Joseph (1 Chronicles 4:17; 5:24).
Hanoch or ‘Enoch’ is the third son of Midian. His name means: ‘inaugurated, trained’. ‘Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… proposes initiated… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads dedicated [or (God’s) follower H2585] for the ‘name Hanoch is also a name of one of Reuben’s sons [Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob].
Midian’s fourth son is Abida[h]: ‘father of knowledge, the [or my] father knows [H28], my father took knowledge’ from the noun ‘ab, father, and the verb yada’, to know.
Midian’s fifth and youngest son is Eldaah: ‘God has called, knowledge of God’ or ‘God is knowledge.’ The name can also mean: ‘God has known’ [H420] or ‘called of God.’
Dutch men
Genesis 37:25-28, 36
English Standard Version
‘Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites [H3459 – Yishma’e’liy: God will hear] comingfrom Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother [Joseph] and conceal his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites [H3459], and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. Then Midianite [H4084 – Midyaniy: strife (Midian)] traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites [H3459] for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt. Meanwhile the Midianites [H4092 Mdaniy: (Midianite) a variation of H4084] had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.’
Some claim that there is a contradiction in this passage or alternatively, that the Ishmaelites and Midianites are one and the same, as some researchers incorrectly try to make their mothers, Hagar and Keturah the same person. There are two different Hebrew words used for Midianite in the text. The first term used for these merchants is Midyaniy, an adjective signifying a member of the tribe of Midian or an inhabitant of Midian. This word H4084, is used for the Midianites throughout the Bible, for instance when describing Moses’ father-in-law Jethro in Numbers 10:29. For Midian himself, Strongs H4080 Midyan, is used. The second term Mdaniy is a variation of H4084 and has the exact same meaning. What is interesting, is that it is only used once in the scriptures, here in this account about Joseph.
This is clue number one, that we are not dealing with literal Midianites, but ‘Midianites’ from the region of Midian. Clue two, is the fact that Ishmaelites are mentioned three times to the two used for Midian and clue three is in Genesis 39:1 ESV: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.” The traders were Ishmaelites from Midian who purchased Joesph and then sold him.
Once we uncover the identities of Ishmael and Joseph, there is symbolic national significance in this act by Ishmael – as there is also with the true identity of Judah – in the weighty ramifications of selling Joseph in the first place. Anciently and again in modern times, Ishmael and Midian have been immediate adjacent neighbours. The use of the term Midianite for Ishmael will become readily apparent when we study Ishmael in the succeeding chapter – Chapter XXVIII – The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.
Frisian woman (above) and Dutch woman (below)
Exodus 2:11-25
English Standard Version
11 ‘One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people. 12 He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. 13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?” 14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.”
15 When Pharaoh heard of it,he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the landof Midian.’
Moses fled Egypt in 1486 BCE at the age of forty. The Pharaoh in question and the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus forty years later, has received an enormous amount of scholarly debate. We will study the chronology of the Exodus and the respective identities of Moses’ adoptive Egyptian mother and father in depth when we study the tribe of Levi and Moses’ life – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? For now, the Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ personal exodus from Egypt was the sixth king of the Twelfth Dynasty: Amenemhet III.
Exodus: ‘And he sat down by a well. 16 Now the priest of Midian [H4080 – Midyan] had seven [H7651 from H7650 – Sheba] daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock’ – refer article: Seventh Son of A Seventh Son. 17 ‘The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock. 18 When they came hometo their father Reuel[*1], he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?” 19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and watered the flock.” 20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread.”
21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man,andhe gave Moses his daughter Zipporah [H6855 – Tsipporah: ‘bird’ Acts 7:29]. 22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom [H1647 ‘foreigner’],for he said,“I have been a sojourner in a foreign land” [like Abraham]. 23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, andthe people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel – and God knew.’
Exodus 3:1
English Standard Version
‘Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro[*2], the priest ofMidian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God’ – Exodus 4.18-19; 18.1.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, Pages 196, 198 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Jewish legends suggest Jethro had seven names, all conveying his transformation from an idolatrous priest to a priest of God… along with, Heber[*3], Putiel[*4], and Keni[*5 – Kenite?]… legends recorded that a Pharaoh immediately before the Exodus maintained three famous high Priests during the latter part of the Israelite enslavement in Egypt: Job, Balaam, and Jethro. Jethro was regarded as the High Priest of a Library of Stone Tablets [precursor perhaps of the Ten Commandments, Exodus 32:15-16] in some versions.
Pharaoh did not welcome the pre-Exodus advice provided by Jethro about the growing Israelite problem, banning the priest Jethro-Reuel in disgrace… which was ample motive for Jethro to have helped Moses prepare for his return to Egypt.’
Moses’ father-in-law was also called Hobab(*6), who was the son of Raguel (or Reuel)[*7] – LXX Septuagint, Numbers 10:29. There is much confusion caused by all these names, especially as Reuel was also known as Jethro, meaning ‘his excellence’ from H3502, Yithrah. The name Hobab (H2246) means ‘cherished’ or ‘loved fervently.’
According to Josephus, Hobab had ‘Iothor [or Jethro] for a surname.’ Jethro’s descent is given as: son of Nawil, son of Rawail, son of Mour, son of Anka, son of Midian, son of Abraham. Josephus claims that Raguel (or Reuel), was Moses’ father-in-law and Judges 4:11 clearly states that he was known as Hobab. ESV: ‘Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh.’ Some commentators claim that Jethro was an honorary title, while Reuel was his personal name. Reuel [H7467, Re’uw’el] means, ‘one who is intimate with God’ or Friend of God – the very title given to Abraham. Raguel is another version of this name – refer Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary.
Putting it all together, it seems to this writer that Hobab was his personal (or first) name. As Hobab was the son of Reuel, he could have been known by his father’s (or family) name and thus Reuel would fit as his last name (or surname). Jethro then, it would appear, is a title, relating to his official position as a Priest of Midian. Therefore, all three names would be correct and thus all are used to identify the same man. There is also a Reuel mentioned in the Bible who is a son of Esau by his wife Basemath, herself a daughter of Ishmael – Genesis 36:4, 13, 17.
The Gold-Mines of Midian, Richard Burton, 1878 – emphasis mine:
‘Jethro’s Moslem title is “Khatib el-Anbiya,” or Preacher to the Prophets, on account of the words of wisdom which he bestowed upon his son-in-law [Moses]… El-Kesai states that his original name was Boyun; that he was comely of person, but spare and lean; very thoughtful, and of few words… Other commentators add that he was old and blind… [Jethro] and Rahab are Gentiles, or strangers, affiliated to Israel [Ephesians 2:12-13; Romans 11:13, 17, 22] on account of their good deeds.’
The Desert of the Exodus, E H Palmer, 1871 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Sho’eib, as the Arabs call Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, is said to have been blind, notwithstanding which infirmity he was divinely commissioned to preach the true religionlately revealed unto Abraham, and to convert the people of his native city Midian. They rejected his doctrine and mocked the blind prophet, for which sin they were destroyed by fire from heaven, while Midian was laid waste by an earthquake, Jethro alone escaping alive. He fled to Palestine, and is said to be buried near Safed.’
The Quran says: “The chiefs of his people, who were elated with pride, answered, We will surely cast thee, O Shuaib, and those who believe with thee, out of our city: or else thou shalt certainly return unto our religion. He said, What! though we be averse thereto?” Jewish tradition states similarly: “We will surely cast thee . . out of our city.” Shuaib was a true believer and a priest of the Most High. Shuaib responds: “My support is from God alone: on him do I trust… O my people, let not your opposing of me draw on you a vengeance like unto that which fell on the people of Noah… neither was the people of Lot far distant from you. Ask pardon, therefore, of your Lord; and be turned unto him: for my Lord is merciful and loving.”
“They answered, O Shuaib, we understand not much of what thou sayest, and we see thee to be a man of no power among us: if it had not been for the sake of thy family, we had surely stoned thee, neither couldst thou have prevailed against us. Shuaib said, O my people, is my family more worthy in your opinion than God? and do ye cast him behind you with neglect?” Regarding a man of no power, one commentator quotes: “The Arabic word dhaif, weak, signifying also, in the Himyaritic dialect, blind, some suppose that Shuaib was so, and that the Midianites objected that to him, as a defect which disqualified him for the prophetic office.”
Muslim writers identify Shuaib with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses. Baidhawi states Shuaib was the son of Mikail, the son of Yashjar, the son of Midian; whereas, the Tafsir-i-Raufi adds that Jethro was descended from Lot through Midian having married a daughter of Lot. Shuaib is not recorded as performing any miracles in the Quran or Islamic traditions, though they do repeat as the Jews do, that Jethro gave his son-in-law the ‘wonder-working rod’ with which he performed – with Aaron – all his mighty miracles in Egypt and the wilderness – refer article: The Ark of God.
Exodus 18:1-27
English Standard Version
‘Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2 Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, had taken Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her home, 3 along with her two sons.The name of the one was Gershom (for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”), 4 andthe name of the other, Eliezer [H461 ‘God is help’] (for he said, “The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”). 5 Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God.
6 And when he sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you with your wife and her two sons with her,” 7 Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. Andthey asked each other of theirwelfare andwent into the tent.
8 Then Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had come upon them in the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. 9 And Jethro rejoiced for all the good that the Lord had done to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians.
10 Jethro said, “Blessed be the Lord, who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of Pharaoh and has delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. 11 Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, because in this affair they dealt arrogantly with the people.” 12 And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.
13 The next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law saw [not blind at this point in time] all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?” 15 And Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.”
17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do.
21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22 And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you.
23 If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.” 24 So Moses listened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25 Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people… 26 And they judged the people at all times. Any hard case they brought to Moses, but any small matter they decided themselves. 27 Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went away to his own country [of Midian].’
In Exodus chapter Eighteen there are some interesting similarities in the meeting between Moses and Jethro and the one between Abraham and Melchisedek some four centuries earlier. Abraham had recently rescued Lot, defeating Chedorlaomer, King of Elam in the process. Moses had witnessed the defeat of Pharaoh king of Egypt, while delivering the descendants of Jacob. Both events had a miraculous outcome provided by the Creator.
Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God and Jethro was the Priest of Midian. Melchizedek and Jethro blessed and praised the Creator for their deliverance using very similar language. Melchizedek brought out ceremonial bread and wine with Abraham. Jethro also prepared bread with a sacrificial meal to be eaten with Moses, Aaron and all the elders of Israel. There is a theme of peace and friendship in the two respective encounters. The king of Salem (Peace H8004, H7999) blessed Abraham, and Jethro and Moses likewise would have exchanged Shaloms (H7965, H7999) as evidenced in Exodus 18:7 and Exodus 4:18.
Numbers 10:1-2, 29-32
English Standard Version
‘The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Make two silver trumpets. Of hammered work you shall make them, and you shall use them for summoning the congregation and for breaking camp. And Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite [H4084], Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’
Come with us, and we will do good to you, for the Lord has promised good to Israel.” But he said to him, “I will not go. I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.” And he said, “Please do not leave us, for you know where we should camp in the wilderness, and you will serve as eyes for us [Jethro not blind]. And if you do go with us, whatever good the Lord will do to us, the same will we do to you.”
It is through Jethro that we are introduced to the mysterious Kenites [H7017 – Qeyniy: smiths]. Some commentators link the Kenites with the contrived word Kainite based on the name of Cain, as the Hebrew word Qeyniy derives from H7014 – Qayin and Qain (or Kain), meaning, ‘possession’ or ‘purchase’. Though linked etymologically, it is ideologically a stretch to arrive at this conclusion and would mean if true, that a. the line of Cain survived the Flood (excepting that which passed through Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator) and b. that Jethro was descended in part from a corrupted line. One that would be hard to imagine was his real ancestry and or acceptable to the Eternal, as a priest and true believer.
Judges 1:16
Common English Bible
‘The descendants of Moses’ father-in-lawtheKenite [H7017] went up with the people of Judah from Palm City into the Judean desert, which was in the southern plain near Arad. They went and lived with the Amalekites.’
We have learned that Jethro may have been descended in part from related ancestor Lot (the French), that he was a priest of ‘Midian’ and that his father Reuel was a ‘Midianite’. Though the Hebrew word used is not the one used for the name of the original Midian. Does this mean he was a Midianite as in ethnology or just in a geographic context? Similarly, if Jethro is a Kenite, are they separate from the Midianite proper – living with them – or a distinct tribe originating from the land of Midian?
Plus, a branch of the Kenites – those descended from Jethro – may have attached themselves to the tribe of Judah and or then, the Amalekites who are affiliated with Edom – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Judges 4:11
Common English Bible
‘Now Heber [1] the Kenite [H7017]had moved away from the other Kenites [H7017],the descendants of Hobab [2], Moses’ father-in-law, and had settled as far away [far removed] as Elon-bezaanannim [‘removing, wandering’], which is near Kedesh [northern part of the tribes land in Israel equating to those of Zebulun or Naphtali].
Remember well the association with Zebulun – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. It appears that part of the Kenite people were either associated with the tribe of Judah, or actually were from the tribe of Judah. The most plausible answer is that they had intermarried. The Rechabites were a clan of the Kenites and their progenitor was Hammath [3]; though not Hammath the son of Canaan (Genesis 10:18) – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
The following verse is from the end of one genealogical record of the House of Judah. 1 Chronicles 2:55, RSV: “The families also of the scribes [H5608 – caphar: learned men] that dwelt at Jabez: the Ti’rathites, the Shim’e-athites, and the Su’cathites. These are the Ken’ites [H7017] who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.” The Rechabites as scribes would have been given respect for their standing, as we read in in 2 Kings chapter Ten, when Jehu – an adversary to wicked King Ahab of Israel, who ruled from 874 to 853 BCE – invites Jehonadab the son of Rechab to assist in slaughtering every last soul in a Temple of Baal worshippers.
Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite (H7017) – Judges 4:17. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel blessed Jael in her victory song because of her resolute courage in killing Sisera, the enemy of Israel – beginning a period of forty years of peace, lasting from 1184 to 1144 BCE. When King Saul was commanded to destroy the Amalekites, he honourably advised the Kenites to move away from their neighbours and allies, the Amalekites in order not to be slaughtered along with them.
1 Samuel 15:6
English Standard Version
‘Then Saul said to the Kenites [H7017], “Go, depart; go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them. For you showed kindness to all the people of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.” So the Kenites [H7017] departed from among the Amalekites.’
The Kenites acted as guides in the wilderness – just as Moses had requested Jethro to act as a guide for the Israelites – even so, the prophesied fate of the Amalekites and the Kenites was apparently tied together. We will study Amalek separately in a later chapter – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Numbers 24:21-22
Common English Bible
‘He looked at the Kenites [H7017] and raised his voice and gave his address: “Your dwelling is secure [H386 – ‘ethan: strong, hard, rough, permanent]; your nest [H7064 – qen: nest of a bird, high] is set in the rock [H5553 – bassela: crag, cliff, stronghold, protected]. Yet Kain [H7014 Kenite]will burn when Asshur [Assyria] takes you away captive.”
The Kenites were to be taken captive by the Assyrians, at the same time that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered, which occured between 721 and 718 BCE. Though there may be a future application of Balaam’s prophesy as indicated in verses twenty-three and twenty-four. The mention of nest in the rock is a play on the word for nest: Qen or ken, which is pronounced “kaine” and thus the tribal name Ken-ite. The use of the Hebrew word Qayin in verse twenty-two does on the surface, appear to support a lineage from Cain, but in the context of the preceding verse where the Kenites dwell securely and on elevated ground, the use of this word meaning ‘possession’ is more applicable than Qeyniy, meaning ‘smiths’. Remember well again, the dwelling on elevated ground as we will discover the specific significance of this description.
Jeremiah 35:2, 6-10, 16-18
English Standard Version
2 “Go to the house [family] of the Rechabites and speak with them and bring them to the house [temple] of the Lord, into one of the chambers; then offer them wine to drink.” 6… “We will drink no wine, for Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, commanded us, ‘You shall not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever. 7 You shall not build a house; you shall not sow seed; you shall not plant or have a vineyard; but you shall live in tents all your days, that you may live many days in the land where you sojourn.’
8 We have obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, to drink no wine all our days, ourselves, our wives, our sons, or our daughters, 9 and not to build houses to dwell in. We have no vineyard or field or seed, 10 but we have lived in tents and have obeyed and done all that Jonadab our father commanded us. 16 The sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have kept the command that their father gave them, but this people [Judah] has not obeyed me.
17 Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them, because I have spoken to them and they have not listened, I have called to them and they have not answered.”
18 But to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said, “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Because you have obeyed the command of Jonadab your father and kept all his precepts and done all that he commanded you, 19 therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never lack a man to stand before me.”
The Rechabites fled to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar the Chaldean began subjugating the Kingdom of Judah. The Rechabites were spared – and their line continued – because of their faithful adherence to the commands of their forefather Jonadab. Whereas Judah who had not heeded the Creator’s warnings suffered punishment at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
In verse two, the Lord calls for the Rechabites to be brought into His House, where figuratively there are many chambers or rooms. John 14:2, ESV: “In my Father’s house are many rooms…” The obedience of the Rechabites was in contrast with the disobedience of the Kingdom of Judah – principally comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin – who, for all their outward piety and devotion in performing the required animal sacrifices, were not wholly obedient to the Creator in their worship. Rather than the Rechabite Kenites being a line of Cain, they are in fact the exact opposite and were an extraordinarily obedient people, who did not own property or farm land. A line of Cain, would not be summoned by the Eternal to His temple.
Isaiah 1:13-14, ESV: “Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations – I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.” The Creator prefers obedience rather than sacrifice. 1 Samuel 15:22, ESV: ‘And Samuel said, “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.”
It was an honour for Jonadab and his descendants to stand before the Lord. The Tribe of Levi were selected to stand before the Lord in Deuteronomy 10:8, in special service. Moses and Samuel (Jeremiah 15:1) and Elijah all stood before the Lord – 1 Kings 18:15. As did King David who even danced before the lord – 2 Samuel 6:14.
We have spent time on Jethro’s Kenite lineage and the offshoot branch of the Rechabites, yet there is another famous and righteous person with a similar yet distinct descent. The question remains: were the Kenites descended from Midian; Judah; someone else entirely; or a mixture?
Joshua 14:6-14
Common English Bible
‘In Gilgal,the people of Judah approached Joshua. Caleb son of Jephunnehthe Kenizzite [H7074 – Qnizziy: descendant of Kenaz] said to [Joshua], “You know what the Lord said to Moses, man of God,about youand me when we were in Kadesh-barnea. I was 40 years old when Moses the Lord’s servant sent me from Kadesh-barnea to scout out the land [in 1444 BCE]. I brought back a report to him of what I really thought. My companions who had gone up with me made the people’s heart melt.But I remained loyal to the Lord my God. So Moses pledged on that day, ‘The land on which you have walked will forever be a legacy for you and your children. This is because you remained loyal to the Lord my God.’
Now look. The Lord has kept me alive, exactly as he promised. It is forty-five years since the Lord spoke about this to Moses. It was while Israel was journeying in the desert. Now look. Today I’m 85 years old [in 1400 BCE].
I’m just as strong today as I was the day Moses sent me out. My strength then was as my strength is now, whether for war or for everyday activities.
So now, give me this highland that the Lord promised me that day. True, the Anakim [Elioud giants] are there with large fortified cities, as you yourself heard that day. But if the Lord is with me, I should be able to remove them, exactly as the Lord promised.” So Joshua blessed him. He gave Hebron to Caleb, Jephunneh’s son, as a legacy. So Hebron still belongs to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite as a legacy today. This was because he remained loyal to the Lord God of Israel.’
The passage says the people of Judah approached Joshua. This does not prove that the Kenizzites or Kenezites are from Judah, as the Kenites from Jethro travelled with Judah – yet perhaps confusingly appear to be listed in a genealogy of Judah. Similarly, Caleb the Kenizzite was given the city of Hebron which was within Judah’s territory. As an aside, both the patriarch Issac and King David lived in Hebron. If the Kenizzites are descendants of Kenaz, then which Kenaz are they descended from? The name Kenaz derives from the verb qanaz, ‘to hunt or snare’ and thus means a ‘hunter’ or ‘hunting.’
In Genesis chapter thirty-six we read of the sons of Esau. Esau had five sons with ostensibly, three women – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. One son already mentioned was Reuel – the family (surname) name of Jethro. Another son was Eliphaz and Esau had a grandson by Eliphaz called, Kenaz; who was also a chief of Edom – Genesis 36: 11, 15, 42.
It is interesting to note that Caleb had a grandson called Kenaz – 1 Chronicles 4:15. And to underscore the family name further, Caleb also had a younger brother called Kenaz (Joshua 15:17, Judges 1:13; 3:9-11) and it was his son Othniel, who was the first Judge of Israel from 1342 to 1302 BCE and had ‘the Spirit of the Lord… upon him…’ As with the Kenites, it is difficult to equate the Kenizzites with an evil pedigree, when each example constitute men displaying obedience and righteousness.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 198-199 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Kenizzites were skilled in the arts of metal-working, like Cain and Tubal-Cain (Article: Na’amah), and were related somehow to Kenites [also skilled in metallurgy]. Caleb, then though eighty-five years old, fought like he was forty-five, driving the Anakim [giants] from Hebron, and was thus rewarded as the head of the tribe of Judah, receiving the land of Kiriath Arba, Hebron, the homeland of the Anakim. It is astounding to me that a Kenizzite, a person from a tribe with no genealogy linking back to Noah, and a tribe that mysteriously descended back to Cain and Nephilim, inherited Hebron, the home and capital city of the Anak! Both the Kenizzite and Kenite tribes are generally believed descended from Kenaz the descendant of Esau, but this cannot be. They like the Amalekites, existed before the birth of Esau and before the time of Abraham.’
Genesis 15:18-21
English Standard Version
On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim [Nephilim], the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.”
Gary Wayne raises a number of points. First, he makes the assumption that a similar skill in metallurgy links Tubal-Cain and the Kenizzites biologically? Second that the Kenizzites descend from Cain and Nephilim without argument? Third, his only valid point, which Genesis chapter fifteen corroborates is that the Kenizzites and Kenites, like the Amalekites, existed before Esau and even prior to Abraham. It can be agreed that Kenaz, the son of Eliphaz, Esau’s son inherited his name from the Kenizzites, as did Eliphaz’s other son Amalek, from the Amalekites. This anomaly is discussed in depth in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Whereas the Amalekites are clearly linked with the Nephilim as discussed elsewhere, the same evidence is lacking for the Kenites and Kenizzites.
Putting the pieces together, the Kenites and Kenizzites appear to have an ancient origin which prefigures Abraham and his family. The link between Jethro being a Kenite and living in Midian favours the Kenite people having become associated with the Midianites. We will explore this further in this chapter. The Kenizzites are different in that they do not have the Midianite association though like the Kenites, they do have a relationship with the tribe of Judah. Just to make it interesting, there is the overall connection the Kenites and Kenizzites share with the Amalekites, who themselves include a peoples prior to Esau’s grandson Amalek – Genesis 14:7. Later, they are included with an amalgamation of peoples descended from Esau’s grandson Amalek – Genesis 36:12. And remember, Esau is Jacob’s twin brother and thus family links between all four – Esau, Judah, Kenites and Kenizzites – are plausible and likely.
This does raise the important question, regarding whether anyone apart from Noah and his seven other family members survived the flood – 2 Peter 2:5. A careful reading of Genesis 7:21-23, reveals that all physical birdlife, animal life on the land – not the oceans – and humankind, that is, both Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens which were composed of flesh and breathed, died. It does not state or include hybrid creatures such as Nephilim and Elioud giants.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 200-201 – emphasis mine:
‘Even Gnostic gospels record Noah denying that he or his kin created the postdiluvian giants, even though his apostate descendants evidently intermarried with postdiluvian Nephilim… Nephilim are not listed in the Table of Nations that is limited to only Noah’s posterity… the Genesis flood account [is] a general accounting of events kept by saints descended from Noah for only the faithful, not a global, forensic accounting for cynical seculars and revisionist mystics.’
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 169:
‘The Incorruptible* Race of giants is the mysterious race that… Cain [and his posterity] have all allegedly and eagerly connected themselves to in legend. Cain… claimed a more royal and divine legacy, void of Adamite impurity, which the posterity of Cain, in turn, pollinated into the people of day six [the Neanderthal]. The Gnostic gospels record that not only Noah survived the deluge but also many people from the Immoveable* Race did and that they were guided to a certain place within a luminous cloud to ensure they survived the flood. The Nephilim and the Immoveable Race survived because of the intercession of fallen angels saving them and their illicit legacy from utter destruction, all to poison the postdiluvian world…’
The ancient land of Canaan and its many peoples is a complex issue. It has perplexed biblical scholars and secular historians alike. We have studied the first inhabitants of the land, the literal sons of Canaan who left their imprint in the region before fully migrating to northern and central Africa – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. There was a residue of these true Canaanites in the land, as humans and Nephilim were mixing and living in ancient cities such as Sodom, Hebron and Jericho. Ephron the descendant of Heth, son of Canaan, lived in the region and sold his field at Machpelah to Abraham.
The Nephilim and Elioud had been roaming the earth for thousands of years after the flood – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. They were instrumental in all the titanic building structures and otherworldly architectural feats around the globe; from Stonehenge in England to the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, Machu Pichu in Peru and the Statues (Moai) on Easter Island.
Pyramids of Giza
At a certain point – at least by the time of Abraham for they were there then and possibly arrived much earlier – most Nephilim and their Elioud descendants converged on the land of Canaan; for these were the second wave of inhabitants in Canaan. Why Canaan? Because they were aware of the promises of the Creator; that His chosen people would descend from Abraham and ultimately dwell in Canaan. The Nephilim and Elioud were ready and waiting. This is why the Creator’s instructions were brief yet uncompromising – kill them all.
Machu Pichu
The Creator did not instruct the sons of Jacob – the fledgling Israelite nation – to murder Black people, or even White people, it was a plain and clear instruction to exterminate the giants who were there to do the exact same thing to Israel, if the sons of Jacob didn’t pre-emptively strike first. The young Israelite nation failed these simple instructions and allowed many to live amongst them. It was only some four hundred years later that King David finally eradicated the problem of the Elioud giants from the land of Canaan.
Easter Island
The land of Canaan had numerous clans of Nephilim as we have already studied – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. The principal seven nations the Israelites were instructed to exterminate were the Canaanites – a specific tribe by that name, not the broad definition of the term – Perizzites, Jebusites, Girgashites, Amorites, Hivites and Hittites. Notice the last five are inherited names from sons of the original Canaan. To add to the complex mix of inhabitants, there was a third wave of people.
These were different descendants from Shem and they were a spill over from Mesopotamia; including: Aramaeans (Syrians) and Arphaxad (Akkadia and Sumer) to the North; the Arabian Peninsula, including Keturah and Ishmael to the East; and from Egypt, Caphtor (Casluh and Pathros) to the South. We have looked at the Aramaean and Amorite connection previously – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. There was also the Phoenician migration to the northwestern coast and the Minoan (Philistine) immigrations to the southwestern coast – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Some of the descendants of Abraham and Keturah as well as Ishmael, had ventured into the land of Canaan, though they also continued northwards to Anatolia and the Aegean Sea.
Finally Moab, Ammon and Esau with Amalek his grandson, also moved into the south western portion of the land of Canaan. In time, at least one son of Keturah was known by sons of Canaan’s names – possibly others – and also Ishmael, just as some of the Nephilim tribes. Two prominent examples of this name transference, are the Hivites from the name Hiv and the Hittites called after Heth – Genesis 10:15, 17.
To summarise a complicated scenario, using Hiv as an example. Hiv was a son of Canaan. The original Hivites in the land would have been Black people descended from Hiv. In time, most of these Hivites migrated southward, though not all, because the Nephilim arrived en masse. They integrated with the remaining Hivite people. Those Nephilim living in the Hivite region, became known as… Hivites. Later still, a son of Abraham and Keturah also dwelt, in the northern Palestine region, now known as Lebanon. In this case, some of the children of Midian… and these Midianites became known as: Hivites.
The Canaanites and Perizzites are almost always mentioned together though the Perizzites are the odd one out, in that they are not an original son of Canaan. Perizzite according to one source means: ‘to drag away violently, hate’, which resounds with a description applicable to the giants.
Joshua 24:11 and Judges 1:4
English Standard Version
‘And you went over the Jordan and came to Jericho, and the leaders of Jericho fought against you, and also the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And I gave them into your hand… Then Judah went up and the Lord gave the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand, and they defeated 10,000 of them at Bezek.’
The warlike Jebusites were associated with the environs of the ancient city of Salem which became the capital Jerusalem of the southern Kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem frequently changed hands and it was captured by Joshua – Joshua 18:28. In Judges 19:9-12, it was occupied by foreigners – Judges 1:8. The tribe of Benjamin inherited the surrounding land of Jerusalem. Judges 1:21, ESV: “But the people of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who lived in Jerusalem, so the Jebusites have lived with the people of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day [time of writing].”
Four hundred years after Joshua lived, King David retook the city. 1 Chronicles 11:4-8, ESV: “And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, that is, Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants of the land. The inhabitants of Jebus said to David, “You will not come in here.”
Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, that is, the city of David. David said, “Whoever strikes the Jebusites first shall be chief and commander.” And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up first [reportedly building an underground water shaft or tunnel to enter], so he became chief. And David lived in the stronghold; therefore it was called the city of David. And he built the city all around from the Millo in complete circuit, and Joab repaired the rest of the city.”
David bought the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite and later built the Temple on that location – 2 Samuel 24:16-25. Archaeologists have confirmed that the original inhabitants of Jerusalem were Jebusites.
The later Amorite name was applicable to Gether’s descendants from Aram.
Ezekiel 16:45-46
English Standard Version
‘You are the daughter of your mother, who loathed her husband and her children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. And your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters.’
These verses are interpreted by some to prove that the Israelites were a bastard or mixed nation. This chapter is actually addressed to Judah about her sinful ways. The identities here are types or euphemisms and not literal lines of descent. Samaria is a sister as it refers to the Kingdom of Israel.
The Hittites here are a people descended from Shem who had influence on Judah – and were related to them – as did the Aramaean-Amorites. The Amorites included Nephilim in their midst and had two famous Giants as their kings – one being King Og, the other King Sihon.
Deuteronomy 4:47
English Standard Version
‘And they took possession of his land and the land of Og, the king of Bashan, the twokings of the Amorites, who lived to the east beyond the Jordan.’
1 Kings 21:25-26
English Standard Version
‘(There was none who sold himself to do what was evil in the sight of the Lord like Ahab, whom Jezebel his wife incited. He acted very abominably in going after idols, as the Amorites had done, whom the Lord cast out before the people of Israel.)’
2 Kings 21:11-13
English Standard Version
“Because Manasseh king of Judah has committed these abominations and has done things more evil than all that the Amorites did, who were before him, and has made Judah also to sin with his idols, therefore thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Jerusalem and Judah such disaster that the ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle. And I will stretch over Jerusalem the measuring line of Samaria, and the plumb line of the house of Ahab, and I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down.”
The most evil king in Israelite history was King Ahab and for Judah, it was King Manasseh – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Both are compared to the Amorites in setting a standard of corruption like no other before them or afterward. Baal was the Amorite’s chief god and Baal’s wife (consort) was Ashtoreth, their chief goddess – the same goddess as Ishtar in Chaldea, Astarte in Greece and Venus in Rome (Article: Lilith).
Their worship involved human sacrifice, temple prostitution and orgies. There have been many temples, high places, stone pillars and altars excavated in the land of Israel. Some of the sites contained large numbers of containers with the remains of young children who had been sacrificed to Baal – refer articles: Na’amah; Belphegor; Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
The Girgashites, named after Girgash son of Canaan were the fifth nation. Their name means: ‘to draw away; to entice’. As with the Amorites, they made many of their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Moloch – the Bull cult which permeates and dominates false god worship and is purportedly at the centre of the infamous Bohemian Grove (refer article: Lilith).
The two nations known as Hivites and Hittites are not only linked but also, while classed as Canaanites, as in the oft-repeated lists of the seven nations, the Hivites and Hittites (with the Amorites) should also be considered separately from the rest because each had dual origins, histories, ethnic characters and national identities.
Exodus 23:28
English Standard Version
‘And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites from before you.’
The Hivites were unique in that by using the subterfuge of claiming they lived afar, fooled Joshua into a treaty of peace and non-interference; in that the Hivites dwelt ‘forever’ in the land of Israel, though they did have to serve as woodcutters and water carriers – Joshua 9:1-27.
Joshua 11:19
English Standard Version
‘There was not a city that made peace with the people of Israel except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. They took them all in battle.’
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 238 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Gibeonites were Hivites/giants conscripted as woodcutters and water carriers for Israel by Joshua, after Israel had been deceived into a treaty with [the] Gibeonites not to destroy them, as the Gibeonites said they did not live in the Covenant Land. Gibeonites survived in the Covenant Land well past the time ofDavid because of this treaty, as a portion separate to Israel, within Israel. Gibeonites were clearly identified as surviving Amorites [2 Samuel 21:2], spared in this treaty from the Exodus, which Saul later violated in his zeal, endeavoring to annihilate the Gibeonites, which cost Saul seven of his [grand]sons as punishment.’
The Hivites as well as the Hittites, at the time they appear in the Scriptures, were each divided into a smaller southern and a larger northern branch, inhabiting widely distant territories. This made them different from the other five Canaanite nations. The Hivite’s – Hebrew chivim meaning ‘wicked’ – main cities at the time of Joshua were in the South and included Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kirjath-jearim. The Hivite territory in the north was adjacent to the Sidonians in Mount Lebanon. The very same area which Heber the Kenite had moved to live – away from the other Kenites who had descended from Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro – Judges 4:11.
Judges 3:3, ESV: “These are the nations: the five lords of the Philistines and all the Canaanites and the Sidonians andthe Hivites who lived on Mount Lebanon, from Mount Baal-hermon as far as Lebo-hamath.”
The southern Hivites were the residue of Canaan’s children and Nephilim descended Elioud giants.
It is the northern Hivites which are of more interest, as there is a connecting ethnic link between these Hivites, Midian, the Kenites, the later Phoenicians from Sidon and the Dutch – German and French – Afrikaner settlers in South Africa. There could be a connection between Midian and the Hivites of Nephilim extraction, or likely an unusual coincidence, as the Dutch for example have the tallest male average height in the world and the second tallest women average height in the world according to a 2016 survey.
Previously, we have discussed the early Phoenician link between Tyre, the Portuguese and descended peoples of Brazil – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Strabo wrote that the Phoenicians originated ‘from the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula.’ The later Phoenicians of Sidon were different from those at Tyre and today equate to the Dutch of the Netherlands. As part of the children of Keturah, they migrated from Arabia and settled in the Sidon coastal area.
They were master traders, explorers, ship builders and sailors; similar to Tyre in the past. In recent centuries, it has been the Portuguese and Dutch – non-coincidently – who have exhibited the Phoenician legacy with the exact same traits. The African beginnings of Sidon’s heritage have been represented in the nation of South Africa – refer Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa.
The southern Hittites in the time of Abraham made their headquarters at Kiriath-Arba; driving out the Anakim and re-naming the city, Hebron. In this region they controlled another city, Kiriath-Sepher – the city ofBooks – which was another name for Kiriath-Sannah, a city of Instruction. Names suggesting the existence of a repository of ancient knowledge. By Joshua’s time, these southern Hittites had been crowded out of Hebron by the Anakim and had withdrawn to more mountainous country further north. In Numbers 13:29, ESV: “The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. And the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.”
The northern Hittites on the other hand, constituted a great kingdom of confederated states, occupying the whole of northern Syria between the Mediterranean Sea and the Euphrates; extending also as we shall learn, over much of Asia Minor from Armenia to the Aegean Sea. This is why in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Reverend T K Cheyne says: “The Hittites seem to have been included among the Canaanites by a mistake.”
One could include the Hivites and the blond Amorites in this context. The southern Hittites with the Hivites and Amorites, were part of the seven Canaanite nations – a blend of the minority Black descended Canaanites and majority Nephilim infiltration. The northern Hivites and Amorites – Aramaeans descended from Gether – like the Hittites, were descended from Shem and it is these Hittites that Cheyne is referring to. Once this is understood, any apparent secular-biblical crossover contradictions, regarding who, when and where for these peoples, dissolve.
Numbers 22:4, 7
English Standard Version
‘And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “This horde [the sons of Jacob] will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field”… Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time… So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message.’
When King Balak of Moab felt threatened by the Israelites arriving en masse into Canaan and planned to employ Balaam to pronounce a curse, he enlisted the Midianites – an unwise agreement – as co-conspirators. This is why Midian brought condemnation upon themselves with the Moabites and so began a perpetual strife between Midian and Israel. In modern times, we have witnessed the same relationship as the nations of France and the Netherlands built impressive navies, mercantile enterprises and colonial empires.
Those who even have a passing knowledge of European history during the decades encompassing 1600 to 1820 will recognise which country France in particular (and Holland) displayed antagonism towards; were in competition with; continually in conflict either militarily, politically or via trade routes; and in colonial territorial disputes.
Numbers 25:1-18
English Standard Version
1 ‘While Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to whore with the daughters of Moab. 2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods – Revelation 2:14. 3 So Israel yoked himself to Baal of Peor – Psalm 106:28, Hosea 9:10. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. 4 And the Lord said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people and hang them in the sun before the Lord, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you kill those of his men who have yoked themselves to Baal of Peor.”
6 And behold, one of the people of Israel came and brought a Midianite woman to his family, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the whole congregation of the people of Israel, while they were weeping in the entrance of the tent of meeting. 7 When Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose and left the congregation and took a spear in his hand 8 and went after the man of Israel into the chamber and pierced both of them, the man of Israel and the woman through her belly. Thus the plague on the people of Israel was stopped.
9 Nevertheless, those who died by the plague were twenty-four thousand – Deuteronomy 4:3, 1 Corinthians 10:8. 10 And the Lord said to Moses, 11 “Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy. 12 Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace, 13 and it shall be to him and to his descendants after him the covenant of a perpetual priesthood [until replaced by Christ], because he was jealous for his God and made atonement for the people of Israel.”
14 The name of the slain man of Israel, who was killed with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father’s house belonging to the Simeonites.’
Notice the name of the Simeonite, Zimri bears resemblance to the name of Keturah’s first son, Zimran – Geneses 25:2.
15 ‘And the name of the Midianite woman who was killed was Cozbi the daughter of Zur, who was the tribal head of a father’s house in Midian. 16 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 17 “Harass the Midianites and strike them down, 18 for they have harassed you with their wiles, with which they beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the chief of Midian, their sister, who was killed on the day of the plague on account of Peor.”
The Israelite who blatantly brought a Midianite woman into the camp was from the tribe of Simeon. We will return to this story when we study Simeon and Levi, the priestly tribe to which Phinehas belonged – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
It would appear that the sons of Jacob were very easily influenced by the religions and false gods of their neighbouring nations; who were in reality, extended family. As they followed the gods of Moab and Ammon (French), they also worshipped the same gods of Midian (Dutch). A case in point, is the false god outlined in Numbers chapter twenty-five, prominent amongst the Moabites and Midianites, Baal of Peor – refer article: Belphegor.
Peor was a mountain located on the Abarim range in Moab: Beth-peor – Numbers 23:28, Deuteronomy 3:29. This god was known as Peor (Numbers 31:16, Joshua 22:17), with the title Baal meaning, lord. It is sometimes associated with the national Moabite deity, Chemosh – 2 Kings 23:13, Jeremiah 48:46.
All Baal worship was synonymous with licentious sin, though Baal Peor ‘especially called for sensual indulgence.’ According to Rabbinical literature, ‘the worship of this idol consisted in exposing that part of the body which [people] usually take the utmost care to conceal’ with the idol’s symbol being a giant phallus. Baal Peor was also known as Ba’al Phegor, or more commonly today as the latinised, Belphegor – pronounced as bell-fih-gore. Its name meaning: ‘Master of the Opening’ or ‘Gap’. The Hebrew word peor derives from the root word pa’ar, meaning: ‘open, gap, wide’ or ‘hole.’
According to Professor Geller on Mythology:
‘He is a shape shifter, delighting in using this ability to deceive mortals. His most common forms are polarized in their appearances. He will take the form of a beautiful woman, naked in all her glory, to seduce those who would fall for his wiles. He also appears as a terrible demon, with leathery flesh, huge horns, long sharp teeth [a beard] and fingernails… a gaping mouth [wings and a tapered tail]. He was a phallic deity, associated with sex, orgies, and all forms of debauchery… Belphegor is one of the many demons [and one of the seven princes of hell] with the attribute “Baal,”… [though] As one of the fallen angels, Belphegor was originally a member of the order of principalities…’
Belphegor allegedly presides over twenty-six legions of demons and is referred to as the Lord of Sloth, one of the seven cardinal sins. Belphegor is invoked by persons today who wish to find fame, fortune or power through invention; often with as little effort as possible. Most demonic invocations fail. Likewise with Belphegor, whose ‘true mission is to draw the lazy into the sin of Sloth.’
Acceptable offerings to Belphegor, though somewhat puzzling, are farting and excrement. Yet, as Belphegor is the lord of openings or holes, Talmudic tradition asserts Belphegor’s association with exposure, defecation and faeces. Thus, Belphegor is linked to the god Pet and wind (or gas); Crepitus, a Roman god of flatulence; as well as Priapus, a fertility god with an oversized and permanent erection.
Notice in Numbers twenty-five, verse one it states Israel lived in Shittim. Though the Hebrew word means ‘acacia wood’, the similarity of Shit-tim with the slang word for faeces is undeniable. It was at Peor, where worship included eating ‘beets, drinking strong drink’ and exposing oneself in front of the idol. Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki, otherwise known as Rashi, comments that the people would uncover their anus and relieve themselves; incorporating the act into deviant sexual practices.
What is especially of eldritch interest, is the fact that first Belphegor was a deity of the ancient Moabites, whose descendants comprise much of the French nation – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. To which country is Belphegor an ambassador of Hell? It is France no less and especially the capital, Paris. As a deity of debauchery, Belphegor apparently became ‘enamoured with the seedier side of the nation… and the [capital] in particular.’
Belphegor is considered an adversary of Mary Magdalene, the patron saint of France – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.
Numbers 31:1-18, 32-34
English Standard Version
1 ‘The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Avenge the people of Israel on the Midianites… 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. 4 You shall send a thousand from each of the tribes of Israel to the war.” 5 So there were provided, out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand from each tribe, together with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand. 7 They warred against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every male [adult].’
The Midianites exist today, so we presume it was the soldiers who died and not the whole male population.
8‘They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of their slain, Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings [representing the five sons/clans] of Midian. And they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword. 9 And the people of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones, and they took as plunder all their cattle, their flocks, and all their goods. 10 All their cities in the places where they lived, and all their encampments, they burned with fire, 11 and took all the spoil and all the plunder, both of man and of beast…
13 Moses and Eleazar the priest and all the chiefs of the congregation went to meet them outside the camp. 14 And Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 15 Moses said to them, “Have you let all the women live? 16 Behold, these, on Balaam’s advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the Lord… 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves… Now the plunder remaining of the spoil that the army took was 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, 61,000 donkeys, and 32,000 persons in all, [virgin] women who had not known man by lying with him.’
Thirty-two thousand Midianite girls is a large amount to be integrated into the tribes of Israel. Some of the tribes barely had a total census of men, women and children of this number. It shows the close family connection, meaning similar autosomal DNA, which did not significantly alter Israel’s identity. Remember, the six sons of Keturah are half-brothers of Isaac, the father of Jacob – sharing Abraham as their paternal ancestor.
While we will learn that the Dutch are closely related to their near neighbours (and brothers) in Scandinavia as well as the related peoples of Germany; they unsurprisingly bear a strikingly close genetic kinship with the British and Irish as well.
Keturah may have been from the family of Nahor (1) – northern Italian – and therefore much younger as Isaac’s wife Rebecca and Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel were and with the gene pool continuing to remain similar on both parent’s sides. It is also possible that Keturah was from Haran’s family (2) – Swiss – like Sarah. Or the third option, the one considered the most probable, is that Keturah like Hagar who was Ishmael’s mother, was – from either a different though still inherently similar line from Peleg (3a) – Western Europe – or perhaps more likely still, from another son of Arphaxad (3b), possibly equating today to the peoples of Finland for example – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Judges 6:1-6, 11-16, 20-23, 25-27, 32- 40
English Standard Version
1 ‘The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord gave them into the hand of Midian seven years [from 1191 to 1184 BCE].2 And the hand of Midian overpowered Israel, and because of Midian the people of Israel made for themselves the dens that are in the mountains and the caves and the strongholds. 3 For whenever the Israelites planted crops, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Joktan] would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and devour the produce of the land, as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they would come up with their livestock and their tents; they would come like locusts in number – both they and their camels could not be counted – so that they laid waste the land as they came in. 6 And Israel was brought very low because of Midian. And the people of Israel cried out for help to the Lord.
11 Now the angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him, “The Lord is with you, O mighty man of valor.”
13 And Gideon said to him, “Please, my lord, if the Lord is with us, why then has… the Lord… forsaken us and given us into the hand of Midian.” 14 And the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?” 15 And he said to him, “Please, Lord, how can I save Israel? Behold, my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.” 16 And the Lord said to him, “But I will be with you, and you shall strike the Midianites as one man” – Isaiah 66:2.
These same words were echoed nearly one hundred and twenty years later by Saul who would be the first king of Israel. 1 Samuel 9:21 NET: ‘Saul replied, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the smallest of Israel’s tribes, and is not my family clan the smallest of all the clans in the tribe of Benjamin? Why do you speak to me in this way?” Later Samuel referred to this humility which made Saul and Gideon prime candidates for service, in 1 Samuel 15:17 ESV: ‘And Samuel said, “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you [Saul as] king over Israel.’
Gideon – who was the fifth Judge of Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE – then asks the Angel of the Lord for a sign. He prepares a goat and unleavened bread (the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread – March/April).
20 ‘And the angel of God said to him, “Take the meat and the unleavened cakes, and put them on this rock, and pour the broth over them.” And he did so. 21 Then the angel of the Lord reached out the tip of the staff that was in his hand and touched the meat and the unleavened cakes. And fire sprang up from the rock and consumed the meat and the unleavened cakes. And the angel of the Lord vanished from his sight. 22 Then Gideon perceived that he was the angel of the Lord. And Gideon said, “Alas, O Lord God! For now I have seen the angel of the Lord face to face.” 23 But the Lord said to him, “Peace be to you. Do not fear; you shall not die.”
25 That night the Lord said to him, “Take your father’s bull, and the second bull seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal that your father has, and cut down the Asherah [tree, pole] that is beside it [refer article: Asherah] 26 and build an altar to the Lord your God on the top of the stronghold here, with stones laid in due order. Then take the second bull and offer it as a burnt offering with the wood of the Asherah that you shall cut down.” 27 So Gideon took ten men of his servants and did as the Lord had told him. But because he was too afraid of his family and the men of the town to do it by day, he did it by night.’
The Lord described Gideon as a ‘mighty man of valour.’ Was He being sarcastic, or was the Eternal seeing the man he would become. Gideon doesn’t quite seem the right man for the job. He appears to be hard to convince and faith and fortitude don’t seem to be his first two attributes; but as the Creator looks on the heart, we know Gideon was special to Him. As Gideon rightly supposed, the men of the town once they saw what had happened in the morning sought Gideon out so they could kill him. Gideon’s father Joash, challenges the townsmen to let their god, Baal contend with Gideon directly or die themselves for their false worship.
32 ‘Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, “Let Baal contend against him,” because he broke down his altar. 33 Now all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Joktan] came together, and they crossed the Jordan and encamped in the Valley of Jezreel. 34 But the Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon, and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him. 35 And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh [his own tribe], and they too were called out to follow him. And he sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali [all in northern Israel], and they went up to meet them.’
Gideon, not about to alter his path of reticence in being the Creator’s instrument, asks a second and third time, for additional signs. There is an impression of the Old Testament God being one of impatience and wrath. Yet, as we saw with the discussion with Abraham about how many righteous souls in Sodom it would take to save the whole city, we observe a very patient Deity in the face of Gideon’s stubbornness and procrastination.
36 ‘Then Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said, 37 behold, I am laying a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said.” 38 And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water.
39 Then Gideon said to God, “Let not your anger burn against me; let me speak just once more. Please let me test just once more with the fleece. Please let it be dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground let there be dew.” 40 And God did so that night; and it was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew.’
The Book of Judges chapter seven relates how Gideon whittled down thirty-two thousand men [the same number of Midianite girls saved from slaughter] to just three hundred as the Lord decreed, so that Israel’s strength of numbers wasn’t given credit instead. As with the taking of Jericho, trumpets were blared and these led to the Midianites panicking and beginning to mistakenly kill each other before fleeing – refer Jericho/trumpets, article: The Ark of God.
One of the Princes of Midian was named Zeeb and reminds of the Netherland Province called Zee-land. In like manner the name and word elon (Hebrew for oak, strong) appears a number of times in the Old Testament in relation to the tribe of Zebulun. We shall discover a connection between the descendants of Zebulun and Midian in none other than South Africa.
It is a compelling coincidence then that businessman and inventor extraordinaire Elon Musk (the ‘wealthiest’ man in the world) should have – while a varied ethnic background – one which is dominated on his mother’s side by Canadian (English); it is on his father’s side English and Afrikaner (Dutch, French Huguenot, German) which is of even more interest.
A correlation that will bear relevance for the constant reader as we progress.
Judges 7:23-25
English Standard Version
‘And the men of Israel were called out from Naphtali and from Asher and from all Manasseh [but ironically not Zebulun], and they pursued after Midian. Gideon sent messengers throughout all the hill country of Ephraim, saying, “Come down against the Midianites and capture the waters against them, as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan.” So all the men of Ephraim were called out, and they captured the waters as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan. And they captured the two princes of Midian, Oreb [meaning: raven] and Zeeb [meaning: wolf]. They killed Oreb at the rock of Oreb, and Zeeb they killed at the winepress of Zeeb. Then they pursued Midian, and they brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon across the Jordan.’
Isaiah 10:26
English Standard Version
‘And the Lord of hosts will wield against them a whip, as when he struck Midian at the rock of Oreb. And his staff will be over the sea, and he will lift it as he did in Egypt.’
Judges 8:1-34 recounts the Ephraimites being upset that they hadn’t been included in the ‘fight against Midian.’ Nor were they willing to help with food and supplies for Gideon’s exhausted three hundred men. Gideon, said that once he had captured the two Midianite kings, he would return to flail their flesh in Succoth and break down their tower in Penuel. Once he captured the Midianite kings Zebah and Zalmunna, Gideon returned and flailed the flesh of the elders of the first city with thorns and broke adown the tower and killed all the men of the second city.
Judges 8:10-12, 22-34
English Standard Version
10 ‘Now Zebah [meaning: sacrificial victim] and Zalmunna [meaning: protection denied] were in Karkor with their army, about 15,000 men, all who were left of all the army of the people of the East, for there had fallen 120,000 men who drew the sword. 11 And Gideon went up by the way of the tent dwellers east of Nobah and Jogbehah and attacked the army, for the army felt secure. 12 And Zebah and Zalmunna fled, and he pursued them and captured the two kings of Midian, Zebah and Zalmunna, and he threw all the army into a panic… And Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and he took the crescent [moon] ornaments [with astrological significance] that were on the necks of their camels.
22 Then the men of Israel said to Gideon, “Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also, for you have saved us from the hand of Midian.” 23 Gideon said to them, “I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you.” 24 And Gideon said to them, “Let me make a request of you: every one of you give me the earrings from his spoil.” (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.) 25 And they answered, “We will willingly give them.” And they spread a cloak, and every man threw in it the earrings of his spoil.
26 And the weight of the golden earrings that he requested was 1,700 shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments and the pendants and thepurple[a colour of Phoenicia]garments worn by the kings of Midian, and besides the collars that were around the necks of their camels.27 And Gideon made an ephod of it and put it in his city, in Ophrah. And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family. 28 So Midian was subdued before the people of Israel, and they raised their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years [from 1184 to 1144 BCE] in the days of Gideon.’
An Ephod in the Old Testament refers to two different things. One, it can refer to the garment or breastplate worn by the high priest. Two and incredibly, it can refer to a transportable idol.
29 ‘Jerubbaal the son of Joash went and lived in his own house. 30 Now Gideon had seventy sons, his own offspring, for he had many wives. 31 And his concubine who was in Shechem also bore him a son, and he called his name Abimelech [the sixth Judge of Israel, Judges 9:17]. 32 And Gideon the son of Joash died in a good old age and was buried in the tomb of Joash his father, at Ophrah of the Abiezrites. 33 As soon as Gideon died, the people of Israel turned again and whored after the Baals and made Baal-berith [‘Lord of the Covenant’] their god. 34 And the people of Israel did not remember the Lord their God, who had delivered them from the hand of all their enemies on every side…’
Isaiah 60:6
English Standard Version
‘A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands and the Dutch] and Ephah [Holland or Hollanders]; all those from Sheba [Flanders and the Flemish] shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.’
This is the one instance where a son of Midian is mentioned outside the genealogical lists. Camels are a bit of a re-occurring theme in the Old Testament, particularly for Abraham’s descendants. A multitude of camels, is a reference to the abundance of wealth and treasure that is able to be carried upon camels. The camel was used for the carriage of gold and spice and other valuables – Judges 6:5. Job 1:3 mentions camels when describing Job’s vast wealth and riches – 1 Chronicles 5:21.
The word Ephah is a unit of measure. One of the trading Midianite business tricks was utilising two different kinds of weights and measures – buying by one and selling by the other according to Baidhawi, Tafsir-i-Raufi.
Leviticus 19:36
New English Translation
‘You must have honest balances, honest weights, an honest ephah, and an honest hin. I am the Lord your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt.’
Proverbs 20:10
New English Translation
‘Diverse weights and diverse measures – the Lord abhors both of them.’
As Ephah is the first born son of Midian and inferred as the most prominent; so too have the people of the two provinces of North Holland and South Holland on the western coast, been dominant during Dutch history – with the Netherlands widely known as, or called: Holland.
This usage of the name Holland, is accepted by other countries and is also employed by the Dutch; though those from regions outside Holland, may find it misrepresentative to use the term for the whole nation. Netherlands means ‘low-lying country’ and the name Holland is from Houtland, or ‘Wooded Land.’
From the 900s to the 1500s, Holland was a unified political region within the Holy Roman Empire and ruled by the counts of Holland. By the 1600s, the province of Holland had grown to become a maritime and economic power; dominating the other provinces of the Dutch Republic. The area of the former County of Holland broadly covers the modern provinces of North Holland and South Holland. These provinces include the Netherlands’ three biggest cities: Amsterdam, the capital, Europes largest port; Rotterdam, the third busiest port in the world behind 1. Shanghai, China and 2. Singapore; and The Hague, the seat of government. The two provinces of Holland have a population of 6,583,534 people as of 2019.
Habakkuk 3:6-7
New English Translation
‘He took his battle position and shook the earth; with a mere look he frightened the nations. The ancient mountains disintegrated; the primeval hills were flattened. His are ancient roads. I saw the tents of Cushan overwhelmed by trouble; the tent curtains of the land of Midian were shaking.’
Some have interpreted this verse to prove a link between Cush and Midian, in that Keturah was from Cush like Moses’ third wife. This verse is merely showing the distance of the parameters of the Creator’s wrath; from the Netherlands in the West, right across to India in the East. Other notable scriptures pertaining to Midian include: Joshua 13:21, 1 Kings 11:18, Psalm 83:9 and Isaiah 9:4.
The Etruscan civilisation has long held a strong fascination for many people. For instance, the renowned author D H Lawrence, fell in love with the Etruscans in his closing years and explained his infatuation:
“Myself, the first time I consciously saw Etruscan things, in the museum at Perugia, I was instinctively attracted to them. And it seems to be that way. Either there is instant sympathy, or instant contempt and indifference. Most people despise everything B.C. that isn’t Greek, for the good reason that it ought to be Greek if it isn’t. So Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him… So being a great scientific historian, he almost denies the very existence of the Etruscan people. He didn’t like the idea of them. That was enough for a great scientific historian.”
If the Etruscans weren’t Greeks – equating in the main, to the modern French – who were they? We have read the quote from Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins from Italians and Race and his comment on the ancient Greeks being blond and blue-eyed. Here is his comment about the Etruscans: “Some scholars suggest they were thought to have been a blond, blue-eyed people. On a mural in an Etruscan tomb, a banquet scene portrays the women with blond hair.”
It is an enduring and highly controversial mystery as well as a subject of much debate for historians and scholars alike regarding the subject of where the Etruscans originated from; let alone where they went or who they were. Regardless, we will learn that their geographic proximity to the growing Roman civilisation was not a fluke and this relationship has been repeated in our times as well as extending all the way back to ancient Israel.
Mehmet Kurtkaya in his article Etruscan Origins states: “… finding Near Eastern Anatolian DNA from the period of the migration, from around 1000 BC, in local Tuscans and local cattle proves beyond any doubt that the Etruscans had migrated from Turkey to Italy with their cattle, probably on [ships] out of Troy, and/or [Smyrna] or anywhere in the Aegean coast of Turkey. It is also probable that some Etruscan migration waves took place by land, via the Balkans.”
Etruscan Origins – emphasis mine:
‘Etruscans were famed for their naval prowess! [and possibly as one of the sea peoples of the 14th-13th centuries BCE]. People with [Iranian – Turkish/Anatolian (geographic)] ancestry arrived in Sicily in around 1900 BC! Ancient genome samples were similar to Mycenaean Greece and Minoan Greece samples. Etruscans arrived in Italy during the Mycenaean period. In 1894, Paul Kretschmer… suggested an Etruscan substrate in Indo-European languages, and since then Etruscan/Tursenoi/Tyrrhennian was considered by a handful of European scholars as the pre-Greek substrate which [constitutes] a large part of the Greek vocabulary.
Congratulations to all European scholars in the last 140 years, including Italian linguists and scholars, who have offered evidence for the migration of the Etruscans from the Near East [also]… Minoans [Philistines] and Mycenaeans [Greeks] were genetically similar… however, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry… another research paper… suggests the arrival of people to Anatolia from the Caucasus and/or Iran around 3800 BC.
Considering this genetic study together with… Etruscan genetic studies, we can decisively conclude that the founders of Minoan and Mycenaean Greek and the Etruscan civilizations migrated from Turkey! [Further], DNA analysis in 2016 and 2017… identified a massive expansion, or a series of expansions, from Mesopotamia and/or [the] surrounding area.’
According to tradition, Tarchun and his brother Tyrrhenus, were the Lydian founders of Etruria, circa 1100 BCE. They were called Etrusci (or Tusci) by the Romans – whom they were closely related to – and Tyrrhenoi (or Tyrseni); that is, Tuscans by the Greeks. Herodotus wrote that Tyr-senians – note the similarity with the word Tyre – were descended from Lydian colonists who landed in Etruria in the thirteenth century BCE following a great famine in Lydia in Eastern Anatolia. It was decided to split the population in half, with those who drew the short straw being sent off to settle in the west and so ending up in northern Italy. The Etruscans called themselves Rasenna, which was shortened to Rasna. Hellicanus of Lesbos ascribes their existence to a settlement of Pelasgian refugees, who had fled from the Hellenic domination of Thessaly.
Interestingly, the island of Lemnos appears to bear close links with the Etruscans; as the Lemnos Stele, dated to about 600 BCE is written in a language which is remarkably similar to that of the Etruscans. It was found in a warrior’s tomb on the island along with artefacts that were similar to Etruscan items. The inference is that a community on the island was related to the Etruscans. Possibly the Pelasgians and so this would indicate a shared origin for all Etruscans, including the Lemnian pirates.
Some postulate that Rome was founded before the arrival of the Etruscans. Though dates reveal which was first and who influenced who. In this case the majority, if not all of the cities of Etruria have been found to pre-date Rome. In fact, the name of Rome itself is Etruscan in origin, as are the names of its legendary founders, Romulus and Remus. Early Rome was heavily influenced by Etruscan culture and so it is more than likely that Rome was founded by the Etruscans. The Etruscan alphabet though inherited from the Greeks, was in turn passed on to the Romans.
This is significant, as we will learn that the relationship shared between Midian and the ‘Midianites’ of Ishmael, comprises not only a geographic proximity and similar culture but also a parallel linguistic origin and language group as shown in blue above, which includes Dutch and German.
The Etruscan religion included human sacrifice, just as ancient Midian had practiced. Prisoners of war could end up on the altars of the Etruscan gods. As a part of these sacrifices, prisoners were sometimes set to fight one another. The Romans later adopted this practice and it grew into the huge gladiatorial entertainment of the Roman amphitheatres. Like the Romans, the Etruscans used bronze bars as a form of money with their value stamped on them. The Etruscans had a more affluent economy than the early Romans, yet it was not a free market economy built on money.
The Lion of the Netherlands
The Etruscans introduced lions onto the Italian peninsula. Both Belgium and particularly the Netherlands, use lions on their state heraldry. Beginning circa 800 BCE until 400 BCE, Etruscan civilisation and culture flourished in Etruria located in central Italy and the northern Italian Po Valley, eventually achieving regional dominance. Etruscan tribes established a series of independent city states which sometimes acknowledged the authority of a form of high king. The Etruscans of the eighth and seventh centuries were significantly influenced by eastern Greek culture.
The territorial reach of the Etruscan civilisation attained its maximum area circa 750 BCE, during the foundational period of the Roman Kingdom. Its culture flourished in three confederacies of cities; Etruria – comprising Tuscany, Latium and Umbria – the Po Valley and Campania. According to legend, there was a period between 600 to 500 BCE in which an alliance of the Dodecapolis, or the Etruscan League was formed among twelve Etruscan settlements. The Etruscans dominated northern Italy until their influence over the burgeoning Roman Republic on their southern border, gradually declined and with it their territory.
After 529 BCE, the balance of political power shifted away from the Etruscans in favour of Rome. The Romans grew to perceive the Etruscans as ‘former colonial masters’ thus colouring the relationship between the two peoples. It led to a series of long running wars beginning in 477 BCE. Rome and the powerful Etruscan city of Veii – which Rome saw as a rival and threat – went to war. A year later in 474 BCE, Veii’s navy was destroyed by Hieron of Syracuse at Cumae and the city was forced to agree a treaty with Rome.
The Greek colonies in Sicily who are labelled ‘Greeks’ but were rather kin of the Romans, attained their height at this time and for the Greeks in Sicily, the prime enemy were the Carthaginians, who were also seeking to expand in the Mediterranean. The Carthaginians – who were Phoenicians from Tyre and today include the Portuguese descended peoples (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil) – and the Etruscans of Midianite origin and today are the Dutch, were often allied, but once defeated by the Greeks from Syracuse, the Etruscans ceased to be a major maritime power, militarily and politically.
Meanwhile the Etruscans, who had been migrating northwards to the River Po from central Italy, had been clashing increasingly with the Celts for regional domination. A pivotal showdown took place at the Battle of Ticinum in 474 BCE. The Etruscan force, which was little more than a well-armed militia, was butchered by the Celts in a ferociously fought battle.
The Etruscans flourished for a couple of centuries prior to their collapse; which was not entirely due to Roman aggression. The Etruscans had stablished city states – similar to Greece – but as they didn’t use money, they did not have the essential economic underpinning to endure like the Greek states. Nor did they establish a powerful unified state under one ruling emperor. For there are no signs of any palaces and the burials reflect a very wealthy upper class, but no sign of one individual elevated above the rest.
Thus they were engulfed by Rome’s rising consolidation of power. Many cities became Roman municipia – chartered towns. In Imperial Rome, stemming from envy, ‘the fat Etruscan became a figure of fun’. Eventually the rich land of Etruria flourished again, but as part of the growing Roman Empire. The Etruscans, predominately descended from Midian may have quite possibly included Sheba and Dedan, as the Flemings and Walloons have been unified within the Low Countries in modern times.
We Are Not Our Ancestors: Evidence for Discontinuity between Prehistoric and Modern Europeans, Journal of Genetic Genealogy, Ellen Levy-Coffman, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Like the ancient Basque, theoriginof the Etruscan people remains obscure. The Etruscans lived in central Italy from the 8th-2nd centuries BCE. Like the Basque, they spoke a non-Indo-European language, but unrelated to the Basque language. After the Romans rose to [dominate] Italy in the 2nd century BCE, the Etruscan language disappeared from the records.It was therefore assumed that the Etruscan population had been culturally and genetically assimilated by the Romans. But the aDNA evidence tells a different story.
Two separate aDNA studies on the Etruscans reached similar conclusions, finding essentially no genetic relationship between the ancient Etruscans and the modern-day inhabitants of Tuscany (ie, “Tuscans”) (Belle 2006; Vernesi 2004). Specifically, out of twenty-eight mtDNA sequences, only six occur in any modern-day groups. The remaining twenty-one haplotypes, identified as belonging to the JT haplogroup, do not occur in any contemporary European populations, including the common Etruscan haplotypes 16126-16193 and 16126-16193-16278. These sequences, while occurring among modern-day haplogroups J2 and T, are not accompanied by substitutions at 16069 and 16294, respectively, which are inevitably present among the contemporary motifs (Vernesi 2004).
The researchers attributed this lack of genetic relationship between Etruscans and Tuscans to two possible processes – the extinction of Etruscan mtDNA lineages among modern-day Europeans [incorrect], or demographic and evolutionary processes occurring in the last 2,500 years [correct]. These processes, if they occurred, were severe enough to disrupt the genetic continuity between the modern and ancient inhabitants of Tuscany.
Researchers performed a number of simulations to investigate whether certain phenomenon, such as genetic drift, migration or a higher than average mtDNA mutation rates, could have impacted the genetic continuity between Etruscans and Tuscans. (Belle 2006) None of their simulations were compatible with the DNA results. The genetic evidence did not support the conclusion that Tuscans were the modern-day descendants of the Etruscans, although the researchers notedthat the skeletal remainsused for their aDNA samples may not have been representative of the entire Etruscan population, but of a more elite sub-strata. Even so, they seemed to have contributed very little to the mtDNA background of modern Tuscans.
However, the researchers also found that genetic continuity could be generated if the mtDNA mutation rate was set very high (0.5 mutations per million years as opposed to commonly used lower rate of approx. 0.05 mutations per million years per nucleotide) or if gene flow from other areas was so extensive that Etruscan descendants became underrepresented in the modern Tuscan samples. They concluded, however, that the very high mtDNA mutation rates needed to reproduce genetic continuity were “implausible” and, furthermore, the only way to determine if descendants were underrepresented in the study was to collect more modern samples over time. Thus, thestudy concluded that modern-day Tuscans largely descend from non-Etruscan ancestors [correct]. Regarding the fate of the Etruscans, the suspicion voiced by the researchers was that theEtruscan lineages simply went extinct’ [incorrect].
This article tells us two things. First, the modern people of Tuscany have inherited the Etruscan name; but as the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor, they are not the Etruscans of two thousand to two thousand, five hundred years ago – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Second, just because a people have seemingly vanished into the mists of time, it does not mean that they have disappeared without a trace. They had to go somewhere, be somewhere and be someone today.
An Etruscan helmet in the British Museum
A portion of the future land of the Netherlands, became a Roman province which was conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century BCE. The Saxon peoples, including the original Frisians, followed by the Angles and Jutes settled in the area before migrating to Britain. Later, the land became part of the empire of the Franks under Charlemagne; the House of Burgundy from 1384 to 1482 (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran), and then the Habsburg Empire from 1482 to 1567.
From 800 to 1000 CE, the Vikings raided towns and cities along the coast, settling in some areas. In 1083, the name Holland first appears in a legal document. In 1568 the land was under Spanish King Philip II, when the Dutch revolted. Their leader was Willem I, the Prince of Orange and in 1581 the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was formed. The Netherlands has one of the oldest standing armies in Europe; established by Maurice of Nassau in the late 1500s.
During the seventeenth century, the Netherlands became an international power known for its strong navy – much like their forebears the Etruscans. The Dutch empire expanded throughout the world through its colonies on nearly every continent. The Dutch were among the earliest empire-builders of Europe, following the Portuguese, the Phoenician descendants of Tyre; and the Spanish, descended from the ancient Aramaeans (Syrians). During this time, the arts in the Netherlands were at their peak with notable artists such at Rembrandt and Vermeer. Wars with Spain, France and England in 1652 weakened the country and heralded its decline; with the fourth Anglo-Dutch War from 1780 to 1784, resulting in the Dutch Republic losing a number of its colonial possessions and trade monopolies to the rising British Empire.
In 1688, King William of Orange and Queen Mary of England became the rulers of the Netherlands – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. In 1795, the French army invaded the Netherlands and took control; declaring the Batavian Republic. Then in 1806, French emperor, Napoleon, appointed his brother Louis, King of the Netherlands. In 1813, Napoleon and the French were defeated and the United Kingdomof theNetherlands was formed. It included Belgium and possessed two capitals: Brussels and Amsterdam. In 1830, Belgium rebelled and broke away, forming its own independent nation.
The Netherlands endeavoured to stay neutral during both World Wars. In World War II they were occupied by Germany. The Dutch Jews were heavily targeted by the Germans. Over seventy-five percent of the one hundred and forty thousand Jewish people who lived in the Netherlands, were killed by the Germans as part of the Holocaust atrocities. A Jewish girl called Anne Frank became famous through her writing about hiding from the Nazis in Amsterdam; before being captured, taken to a concentration camp and her death. After World War II, most of the Netherland’s remaining colonies were granted independence. In 1948, the International Court of Justice was established at The Hague.
The Netherlands has a highly developed economy; playing a significant role in the European economy for centuries. Since the sixteenth century, shipping, fishing, agriculture, trade and banking have been leading sectors in the Netherlands. The Netherlands was ranked the fifth most competitive economy in the world by the Swiss International Institute for Management Development in 2017. Additionally, the country was ranked the second most innovative nation in the world in the 2018 Global Innovation Index – slipping to seventh in 2023.
The Netherlands stands as the 18th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $1,272.01 trillion in 2025. The Netherlands is a major commercial transportation hub with industrial manufacturing as well as petroleum extraction and processing. It has a highly developed agricultural sector and is the second largest agricultural exporter in the world. The Netherlands has a large financial services sector, with assets four times the size of the Dutch GDP.
Amongst the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, the Netherlands is number ten in the world; with 612.5 tonnes, comprising 67.4% of its foreign reserves. When the Dutch Central Bank repatriated a large amount of its gold from the United States, it also oddly announced that it would move ‘its gold vaults from Amsterdam to Camp New Amsterdam, about an hour outside the city, citing burdensome security measures.’
The original flag of the Netherlands (above) and the current flag from circa 1650 (below). The main explanation for the change, is that the orange variant was used by the Prince and a distinction between the Prince’s flag and the National flag was required.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Dutch global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$89.9 billion (13% of total exports)
Mineral fuels including oil: $84.3 billion (12.2%)
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $41.6 billion (6%)
Pharmaceuticals: $37 billion (5.4%)
Plastics, plastic articles: $32.3 billion (4.7%)
Vehicles: $26.1 billion (3.8%)
Organic chemicals: $22.4 billion (3.2%)
Other chemical goods: $19.6 billion (2.8%)
Iron, steel: $16.3 billion (2.4%)
Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 66.1% from 2020 to 2021. That percentage increase was propelled by higher international sales of refined petroleum oils, petroleum gas and coal shipped from the Netherlands. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 55.9% gain.’
I will Maintain
Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama arrived at Calicut in 1498 and opened a gateway from Western Europe to Asia via the Cape of Good Hope on Africa’s southern tip. By 1510, the Portuguese had started making raids inland and not long after this, the Dutch Republic began sending merchant vessels to India. In 1602 – two years after England – the Dutch founded the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie – the Dutch East India Company, or VOC.
Dutch settlement in South Africa began in March 1647, with the Dutch ship Nieuwe Haarlem, wrecked at the Cape. The shipwreck victims built a small fort named Sand Fort. They stayed for nearly one year and were later rescued by a fleet of twelve ships. Jan van Riebeeck was aboard one of these ships. A few years later, persuaded by some of those who had been wrecked in 1647, the VOC established a supplies station at the Cape of Good Hope under the command of Jan van Riebeeck for ten years until 1662. The party was made up of ninety Calvinist settlers and they arrived in the bay of today’s Cape Town, on April 6, 1652, on board five ships.
The objective was not to develop a colony but to establish a port of call to service the Dutch ships travelling between the Netherlands and its trading posts in the east – supplying meat, vegetables, fruit, wine and wheat. The VOC were surprisingly dismayed in the popularity of the port and its growth into a settler colony. As the only permanent settlement option and not solely serving as a trading post, the Cape Colony proved an ideal retirement destination for employees; for after several years of service in the company, an employee could lease a piece of land in the colony as a ‘free citizen’ – a Vryburgher or Vrijburger – on which he had to cultivate crops, which he then was required to sell to the United East India Company for a fixed price. As these farms were labour-intensive, Vryburghers imported slaves from Madagascar, Mozambique and Asia.
After King Louis XIV of France revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685 – which had protected the right of Huguenots in France to practise Protestant worship without persecution from the state – the colony attracted many Huguenot settlers, who eventually mixed with the general Vryburgher population. The authoritarian rule of the Company – telling farmers what to grow, for what price, controlling immigration and trade – influenced some farmers to escape the company rules, by moving far inland.
There were two distinct subgroups in the Vrijburger population and the first group were the itinerant farmerswho began to settle further inland, seeking better pastures for their livestock as well as freedom from the VOC’s regulations. This settler community identified themselves as Boers in describing their agricultural way of life. Their farms were enormous by European standards for the land was free and underpopulated. A few Boers adopted a semi-nomadic lifestyle; known as trekboers. The Boers were suspicious of the centralised government and the increasing complexities of administration at the Cape. They continually migrated inland from the reaches of the colonial officialdom, every time it attempted to regulate their activities.
By the mid-eighteenth century the Boers had penetrated a thousand kilometres into South Africa’s interior beyond the Cape of Good Hope, at which point they encountered the Xhosa people migrating southwards. Competition between the two communities over resources on the frontier sparked the Xhosa Wars. ‘Harsh Boer attitudes towards black Africans were permanently shaped by their contact with the Xhosa, which bred insecurity and fear on the frontier.’
The second subgroup of the Vrijburger population were known as the Cape Dutchand remained in the southwestern Cape and especially in the growing settlement of Cape Town. They were urban dwellers and more educated, maintaining greater cultural ties with the Netherlands than the Boers did. The Cape Dutch became the backbone of the colony’s economic growth. They purposely did not venture inland so as to maintain close contact with a viable market. This was in sharp contrast with the Boers on the frontier, who lived on the margins of the market economy.
It was not viable for the Cape Dutch to participate in migrations to escape the colonial system like ‘the Boer strategy of social and economic withdrawal… Their response to grievances with the Cape government was to demand political reform and greater representation, a practice that became commonplace under Dutch and subsequently British rule.’ In 1779, hundreds of Cape burghers smuggled a petition to Amsterdam, demanding an end to the VOC corruption and its contradictory laws. Unlike the Boers, the contact most Cape Dutch had with black Africans were mainly peaceful and so ‘their racial attitudes were more paternal than outright hostile.’
In 1752, French astronomer Nicholas-Louis de Lacaille when visiting the Cape, observed that the third-generation descendants of the original Huguenot – French and German – settlers spoke Dutch as their first language. While Afrikaans had developed from the Dutch vernacular of South Holland.
In 1795, after the battle of Muizenberg in present day Cape Town, the British occupied the colony. Then under the terms of the Peace of Amiens in 1802, Britain acceded the colony to the Dutch in March 1803. As the Batavian Republic had nationalised the United East India Company in 1796, the colony now came under the direct rule of The Hague. The outbreak of the Napoleonic wars in May 1803, then invalidated the Peace agreement. In January 1806, the British re-occupied the colony. The Anglo-Dutch Treaty in 1814 cemented the transfer of sovereignty finally and completely to Great Britain.
Nearly one hundred years later, dissatisfaction with British rule led to bloodshed in the Anglo-Boer Wars during 1880 to 1881 and again from 1889 to 1902, with the loss of many innocent Boer lives in British Concentrations camps. The Union of South Africa occurred in 1910 when the four British colonies combined: the Cape, Natal, Transvaal and the Orange River (Orange Free State).
In the twentieth century Afrikaner nationalism took the form of political parties and secret societies, like the Broederbond. In 1914, the National Party formed to promote Afrikaner economic interests and finally sever South Africa’s ties to the United Kingdom. It rose to prominence in winning the 1948 general election; thereby enforcing a harsh policy of racial segregation known as apartheid and declared South Africa a republic, withdrawing from the British Commonwealth. The National Party eventually left power in 1994 following negotiations to end apartheid and losing South Africa’s first multiracial elections.
Thousands of Flemish along with the Dutch, migrated to South Africa for many years between the 1600s and the twentieth century. Immigration slowed eventually, but there remains a considerable Flemish population in Southern Africa. Judging by the 2011 census figures and South Africa’s population of 64,743,417 people, some 8.2% are of white European extraction. Within that percentage the Afrikaners make up approximately 60% in the nine provinces and 5.2% of the total population: 3,366,657 people. The British descended peoples comprise about 40% and 3% of the total population: 1,942,302 people. A total white population of approximately 5,308,959 people.
Afrikaners are descended mainly from Dutch, German and French immigrants, coupled with small percentages of other Europeans and also indigenous African peoples. By 1691 over a quarter of the white Afrikaner population of South Africa was not ethnically Dutch. The number of permanent settlers – just prior to the end of the Dutch administration in 1795 – numbered 26,720, of whom 50% were Dutch, 27% German, 17% French and 5.5% Scandinavian, Belgian and others. This demographic breakdown has been used in many studies to represent the ethnic makeup of modern Afrikaners, which has been criticised by academics such as Dr. Johannes Heese.
‘Based on Heese’s genealogical research of the period from 1657 to 1867, his study Die Herkoms van die Afrikaners (“The Origins of the Afrikaners”) estimated an average ethnic admixture for Afrikaners of 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% non-European [Chinese, India, Madagascar], 2.6% British, 2.8% other European [Danish, Norwegian, Portuguese] and 3.6% unknown.
Heese argued that previous studies wrongly classified some German progenitors as Dutch, although for the purposes of his own study he also reclassified a number of Scandinavian (especially Danish) progenitors as German… British historian George McCall Theal estimated an admixture of 67% Dutch, with a nearly equal contribution of roughly 17% from the Huguenots and Germans. Theal argued that most studies suggesting a higher percentage of German ancestry among Afrikaners wrongly counted as “German” all those who came from German-speaking Swiss cantons and ignored the VOC’s policy of recruiting settlers among the Dutch diaspora living in the border regions of several German states.’
The degree of intermixing among Afrikaners can be attributed to the unbalanced sex ratio when under Dutch governance. Most VOC employees who sailed from the Netherlands were not allowed to bring their families with them. Between 1657 and 1806 only 454 women arrived at the Cape, compared to the 1,590 male colonists. Thus, white South African women, like their counterparts in colonial North America began to marry much younger and so also bear more children than Western Europeans. Afrikaner families were much larger in size, more interconnected and also became more clannish than those of other colonial settlements in the world.
Some of the more common Afrikaner surnames include Botha (deriving from the East Frisian word bota, meaning ‘to do’ or ‘to perform’), Joubert (originating from central France), Pienaar (derived from the French word Pinard), Pretorius (from the Latin word for leader) and Van der Merwe (meaning someone from the banks of the Merwede River in South Holland).
Similar to other large population groups which have been propagated by a smaller gene pool of progenitors (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran), Afrikaners have experienced an increase in the frequency of some rare ailments, including skin disorders such as variegate porphyria and higher levels of cholesterol type familial hypercholesterolaemia. Afrikaners have some peculiarities genetically, which has made them of interest to scientists. They seem to exhibit high frequencies of classical Mendelian diseases – an inherited single mutated gene – a hallmark of inbreeding or of population bottlenecks.
Whether the percentage proportions are exactly correct for the Dutch, German and French components of the Afrikaners may not be as important as the fact there are undoubtedly multiple strains which constitute the genetic composition of the Afrikaner. It is proposed that they are not the exact same people as the Dutch – the descendants of Midian – but perhaps the later Kenite lineages; which appear to have a genetic affiliation with Midian. We have ascertained that the northern Hivites lived in the northern regions of Israel (modern Lebanon) and constituted the white population who lived with the residue of black peoples descended from Hiv the son of Canaan – living together in Sidon and known as Phoenicians, yet distinct from the Aramaean Phoenicians of Tyre (Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil).
We noted that Heber the Kenite and his family departed from the Kenites descended from Jethro and dwelt in the north of Israel’s territory in Zebulun’s and Naphtali’s allotments. The significance of this will be borne out when we study Jacob’s sons – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. We have also deduced that Jethro was likely a Kenite on one side of his family and either Midianite on the other, or possibly a shared Midian and Lot lineage; the equivalent of Dutch and French ancestry combined.
Finally, we learned of a branch of the Kenites, called the Rechabites, who were a god-fearing people; which runs a striking parallel with the Huguenots. Strictly, the Huguenots were French Protestants from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries living primarily in southern and western France. They were followers of the teachings of John Calvin, known as Calvinists; who emphasised the sovereignty of God and the authority of the Bible. The Huguenots were invariably ‘skilled artisans, craftsmen… and professional people’ – which included: ‘doctors, schoolmasters, merchants, mariners, shipwrights’ and aristocrats. They were not pastoralists or farmers.
As they gained influence in society and openly displayed their faith, this attracted Catholic hostility; particularly when they declared their intention to create a ‘state within the state.’ A series of religious conflicts ensued known as the French Wars of Religion between 1562 to 1598. Persecution by the French Catholic government headed by king Louis XIV led to some three hundred thousand Huguenots fleeing France for England, Holland, Switzerland, Prussia and the Dutch and English colonies in the Americas. Interestingly, the Huguenot Society of London was formed in 1885 and it decided to not only define a Huguenot as a French Protestant but also, to include religious refugees from Belgium and the Netherlands.
In South Africa’s settlement apart from the British, the three main contributions represented by the Dutch (and Flemish), Germans and the French underline the interconnectedness of the Dutch and German contributions as the white descendants of the ancient Hivites and Hittites respectively.
The Dutch imposed their language upon the French Huguenots and imposed their religion upon the northern Germans who were predominantly Lutheran. The Reformed Calvinist religion and Afrikaans language have both had a unique impact on South Africa’s evolution. The strong connection of the Afrikaners with the Netherlands has been significant. The Prime Minister of South Africa from 1958 to 1966, Hendrik Verwoerd for instance, was born in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Another fact hard to ignore, is that the Huguenot French component seems to have persevered to a greater extent culturally than the German. The last Afrikaner President for example was named F W de Klerk; his surname actually being a form of Le Clerc. Another prominent South African head of state was Daniel Francois Malan.
One Afrikaner author, J M Greeff, 2007, states regarding his own ancestry: “It is not clear if my higher estimate of French contribution is because of a systematic mistake in Heese’s (1970) estimate, or if it is because of a quirkiness in my own ancestry. It seemed to be the case that when a lineage hit the French Huguenots it stayed in this group. It will be interesting to compare the degree of inbreeding of the early generations of Huguenots to the other early immigrants. In the light of the calculations of Heyer et al. (2005) there is an interesting possibility that the cultural inheritance of fitness may have led to a systematic bias in Afrikaners, since Huguenots tended to be more educated and trained than German emigrants who tended to be soldiers. We are currently investigating this hypothesis.”
This is pertinent when viewed with our study of the French; the French Quebecers; the Basque; and the Catalonians. Both the Dutch and Germans had less pressure to emigrate than the French Huguenots, who having been vigorously persecuted while fleeing for their lives in vacating France, had a far stronger incentive in moving to the Cape to be completely clear of any further maltreatment. Likely, the genetic contribution of the French and those who fled to Holland, has had a greater proportional impact on the whole Afrikaner composition.
The rural male population surplus from northern Germany died abroad, not returning home. These men contributed greatly to the census figures of the Afrikaner population during much of its history, though it seems plausible that their fitness was lower than the Dutch and Huguenot groups, as they lacked the resources to prosper in a world which was much closer to the Malthusian (exponential growth based on a constant rate) edge than today. Not everyone leaves descendants and it is plausible that these Germans were fated not to do so to a greater extent than the Dutch and Huguenots, whom they were employed to protect and serve.
This would explain why the German contribution has been a shadow of the Dutch rather than the other way around. Additionally, the genetic closeness of the north German and Dutch populations may simply be the reason for the blurring of the two. It is thought by many that the Dutch are an example of ‘simply another group of north Germans who transformed their regional identity into a national one for various reasons.’
If this were true, then every small nation next to a larger one, would just be an offshoot. Biblical and secular histories, plus autosomal and Haplogroup DNA prove this line of reasoning incorrect.
Before we delve deeper, a few interesting Haplogroup facts affecting Abraham’s and Keturah’s sons. According to Eupedia, Iceland has the fewest number of Haplogroups in all of Europe. Y-DNA Haplogroup I1a is far more distributed in Nordic countries, like Norway and Sweden, while only faint traces of it can be found in Southern European countries. A genetic study of Iceland’s population revealed that the majority of their male ancestors are Nordic, while the majority of their female ancestors are Celtic. A similar DNA study of the people of the Faroe Islands showed that 87% of their male ancestors are Scandinavian and 84% of their female ancestors are either Scottish or Irish.
Ninety-nine percent of European R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 (M417, with an origin circa 3400 BCE from a bottleneck lineage purportedly originating in Ukraine), which itself derives from R-M198, R1a1a and it in turn stems from R-M459, R1a1. A few pertinent subclades are: R1a-L664, which is essentially Northwest European and found chiefly in Western Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles and R1a-Z284, which is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway; found also in parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. There is a central European clade R-M458, which peaks in the Czechs and an eastern clade, R-M558 peaking in Russia.
What is important to note at this point, is that R1a in Scandinavian men is a result of intermixing and intermarriage; whereas I1 is an older, related lineage from a different line of Arphaxad’s male descendants. It is actually Haplogroup R1b which is the defining marker Haplogroup for all of Abraham’s male descendants, including: Scandinavia, Iceland and the Low countries.
Khazaria, Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook: emphasis & bold mine:
‘In “The Norway Project”… I1 is Scandinavia‘s most common Y-DNA haplogroup and it probably originated in Denmark.
R1a, common in eastern Europe, is also found in this project in subclades like R1a1a and R1a1a1. R1b, common in western Europe, is also found… and… N1c1 is a subclade found… especially common among Finns, Estonians,and Saami [Madai-Japheth] so it’s believed to have come from intermarriage with Saami men.
Less common haplogroups that members have include, among others, E1b1b, G2a, I2, J1, J2b, Q1a3, and Q1a3a. E and J haplogroups have Middle Eastern origins, while Q may originate in Central Asia or Siberia, and G2a subclades probably originate in either Iran or the Caucasus region… in terms of Y-DNA, “The presence of Eu14 in Norway suggests that some admixture between Norwegians and the Finno-Ugric Uralic speakers of Scandinavia (Saami, Finns) has occurred.” (Eu14 is very common in Finland.)
Haplogroup N3 [N1c1] was found at an elevated 11% of Norwegians from northern Norway (especially Finnmark where 18.6% of the Norwegians have it) whereas none of the Norwegians in southern Norway had it.Scientists believe N3 came to Norwegians through intermarriage with Saami and Finnish men, as based on data from all populations N3 “has been interpreted as a signature of Uralic Finno-Ugric speaking males migrating to northern Scandinavia about 4000-5000 years ago”.
Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.
The project’s most common mtDNA (maternal) lineages are H, J, K, T2, U5, and V. Other mtDNA haplogroups include I1a, I4, T1, T1a, U1b, U2, U2e, U4a1, X, and Z1a. H is the most common mtDNA haplogroup in Norwegians according to published studies, at a frequency of about 40%.
Research by B. Berger, S. Willuweit, et al. confirmed that pre-modern Norwegian men also possessed I1, R1a, R1b, and Q.’
These ‘pre-Norwegian’ men were the true Vikings – and though related, are different peoples – who migrated to the British Isles and Ireland.
Brook: ‘Among 23andMe’s customers, 8-10%** of Norwegians carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene, 8-10% carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene.
“Different genetic components in the Norwegian population revealed by the analysis of mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisisms.” European Journal of Human Genetics 10:9 (September 2002), multiple authors: pages 521-529.
‘The scientists studied Norwegians’ maternal and paternal lineages using DNA technology. Overall, Norwegians are genetically similar to Germans. They concluded, for instance, that the mtDNA haplogroup J, found among 10% of Norwegians, was probably “brought by the Germanic migrations to Norway.” They also showed that 75% of Norwegian men have one of the Y-DNA haplotypes Eu7 and Eu18, which are both common in Germany. They found that the non-Germanic Saami people contributed “mtDNAs with the 16144,16189, 16270 motif” to Norwegians.’
Excerpts from the Abstract:
“… Both mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms showed a noticeable genetic affinity between Norwegians and central Europeans, especially Germans…Although Y chromosome binary and microsatellite data indicate that 80% of the haplotypes are closely related to Central and western Europeans, the remainder share a unique binary marker (M17) common in eastern Europeans with informative microsatellite haplotypes suggesting a different demographic history. Other minor genetic influences on the Norwegian population from Uralic speakers and Mediterranean populations were also highlighted.”
‘The breakdown of the 4 top [Norwegian] haplogroups was:
This breakdown reveals 30.1% of Norwegian men have a Haplogroup indicating admixture from either an eastern European origin (R1a) or an East Eurasian lineage (N1c1). The 31.3% of Norwegian men with Haplogroup R1b are the closest to an unadulterated lineage descending from Abraham; while the 37.3% of men with Haplogroup I1 while related to those with R1b, are an older line of descent of a related ancestor from Arphaxad predating Abraham.
Brook: ‘Haplogroup R1a, which is common in East European populations, is most frequently encountered among Norwegians in eastern-central areas of Norway, reaching its peak (31% frequency) among those living in the Trøndelag region in central Norway. Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.’
The History and Geography of Human Genes, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi, and Alberto Piazza, 1994.
‘Their research shows that Norwegians are nearest to Germansand Dutch by genetic distance, followed closely behind by Danes, then Swedes, thenEnglish. These data are reportedly on page 270 in the table “Occidental/European genetic distances for reference purposes”. Icelanders are largely descended from male Norwegian migrants to medieval Iceland. Many people living in northern Scotland and the islands of Orkney and Shetland have partial descent from Norwegian settlers as well.’
While common geographic, cultural and historical aspects strongly link the three Scandinavian nations, it is fascinating to learn Norwegians are not closest to Swedes and Danes ethnically, but actually with their cousin, Germany and their sibling the Dutch.
Brook: ‘Especially common Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroups in the “Danish Demes Regional DNA Project” include I1, I1d and I1d1, I2, R1a, and R1b (and subhaplogroups like R1b1a2a1a1a4 which is also known as R-L48), and less common haplogroups include ones within the broad letter groups E, F, G, J, N, Q. In the “Denmark DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups in Denmark-origin lineages include E1b1b1a1b, I2b1, I1, I1d1, J2a4b3, Q1a3, R1a1a, R1b1a2, R1b1a2a1a1, R1b1a2a1a1b4, and certain others.Y-DNA I1… is typically found among the Nordic peoples of Scandinavia… and in northern Germany.It is also very common in western Finland.’
‘According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 10.8%* of… [Danish] people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. “… Associations between SNP alleles and dark versus light hair colour in 378 Danes” reveals that 9 percent of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805007 (R151C) and 8 percent** of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805008 (R160W), both on the MC1R gene. These alleles are frequently associated with red hair in various populations. The correlation of red hair alleles in MC1R with actual red hair was found to be stronger among the Scottish participants than among the Danish participants.
… 23andMe and other population distance and admixture tools… [studied] the autosomal DNA of about 600 Danish high school students who documented their ancestry… “chromosome painting revealed strong genetic influence from neighboringNordic(Sweden and Norway) and Germanic (Germany and Holland) countries and negligible influence from Finland,France and Portugal.”
‘In “The Swedish DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups… show about 35-40% of Swedish males carry I1 or its subclades. In the project are participants with I1 (L22-) itself as well as I1b, I1d, I1d1, and I1d4. Among 23andMe’s customers, 10-12%** of Swedes carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene (one of the highest frequencies in the world), 6-8%* carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene.’
Swedish population Substructure Revealed by Genome-Wide Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Data, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 6(2) (February 9, 2011):
‘… 350,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped from 1,525 Swedes. The researchers compared the Swedish samples to 3,212 samples from populations worldwide, “includingFinns, northern Germans, British and Russians”. Excerpts from the Abstract: … The Swedes – especially southern Swedes – were genetically close to the Germans and British, while their genetic distance to Finns was substantially longer.
An excerpt from the body of [a] paper:
“Genetically the Swedes have appeared relatively similar to their neighboring populations – for example the Norwegians, Danish, Germans, Dutch and British… In contrast, the Finns… do not appear genetically very close to the Swedes although they are geographically nearby.”
‘3,112 European people (including among others Swedes, Estonians, Finns, Russians, Poles) were genetically tested. The Swedish samples came from the capital city of Sweden, Stockholm. The study describes a genetic barrier “between the Baltic region [Arphaxad] and Poland [Joktan] on the one hand,and Sweden on the other”.Further down it refers to the “barrier [that] emerged between the Eastern Baltic region and Sweden, but not between the Eastern Baltic region and Poland”. The study’s data comparing Swedes with Finns is consistent with how Swedes are descended mainly from Germanic people but came to mix somewhat with Finns… especially in the case of northern Swedes…’
We have learned that the Baltic people are related to the Poles from Joktan as both descend from Arphaxad a son of Shem. The Finns are more closely related to the Baltic peoples of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and hence their difference with the Scandinavians and particularly their neighbours, Sweden. The percentage of I1a and N1c1 in Norwegian males and specifically the Swedes reflects their intermarrying with the Finns and or the Sammi regarding Haplogroup N1c1. While I1 could be indicative of Keturah’s male relatives likely ancestry and descent from possibly one of Arphaxad’s other sons such as Anar or Ashcol and hence the strong similarity between the Scandinavian nations (and northern Germans) regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup I1.
For I1 is an older yet still related lineage to the more recent Haplogroup R1b mutation. Even though R1b is reflective of the true lineage for Scandinavian and Dutch men from Abraham for example; I1 men amongst the population are merely an older ancestral line of descent from Abraham’s ancestor Arphaxad and possibly also via Peleg.
This scenario would mirror the line of descent from Arphaxad through Peleg’s brother, Joktan; where his male descendants in eastern Europe possess the defining marker Haplogroup R1a, yet related older descendants in southeastern Europe carry I2a1.
Eupedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘What about modern Belgium, this small country divided by unending linguistic quarrels? Do Flemings and Walloons really have different origins? It is easy to claim that the Flemings are of Germanic descent just because they speak a Germanic language. This type of reasoning has already proved false in the case of… South Germany, where the Neolithic, Celtic and even Roman inhabitants remained slightly dominant genetically compared to the later Germanic invaders. Are Flemings and Walloons really genetically divided across linguistic lines, or could there be unexpected unity among them… For the first time in history, these issues are going to have a scientifically provable answer, thanks to DNA.
The dominant haplogroup in the Benelux is R1b, almost equally divided between the Germanic R1b-U106 and Italo-Celtic R1b-P312subclades. Both are present in all the Benelux, but with a very different distribution. R1b-U106 (S21) reaches its maximum frequencyin Frisia (42%) and the central Netherlands (35%), then decreases progressively in the southern Netherlands (30%), Flanders (25%) andWallonia (22%), to increase again in Luxembourg (32%).
Not all subclades of U106 may be of Germanic origin. Some subclades appear to have expanded from Scandinavia and North Germany… These include L48, the largest branch of U106, and Z18, another major branch. These also happen to be the two dominant subclades in the Benelux. Within L48, Scandinavians belong almost exclusively to the Z9 branch, while the L47 branch appears to be found mostly in the Benelux and Britain. The other major branch, Z156 is subdivided in DF96 and DF98. DF98 is also found in Scandinavia and could be considered Germanic.
However the vast majority of Z156 in Flanders is DF96, a subclade that is very rare in Scandinavia. DF96 might be more Proto-Celto-Germanic and would have dispersed around Germany and the Benelux without passing by Scandinavia… 100% of the Luxembourg samples were Germanic. The sample size may to too small to judge, but it appears that Wallonia has a higher percentage of true Germanic/Nordic U106 (67%) than Flanders (56%), despite Flanders having a slightly higher percentage of U106 in total.’
The largest branch of R-U106 is L48 and the split between the Scandinavians with Z9 and the L47 of the Benelux peoples, highlights that four sons from Keturah are similar: the Nordic-Scandinavian nations. While the remaining two brothers are similar to each other: the Benelux-Germanic nations. Just as we would expect similarity and diversity within a family of six sons. We will also learn that the Nordic sons from Keturah are genetically aligned with their German-Teuton cousin; while the Low Countries are as aligned with their English Saxon-Viking cousins.
Eupedia:
‘Dutch R1b-U106 has a particularly large swath of Z18 (25% of U106) like Scandinavia, but with more diversity of subclades. The dominant branch is L48 (about 40%), which has about three quarters of Z9 for one quarter of L47. In contrast with Belgium, the Dutch also have a considerable amount of S1688(about 15%, including U198), a subclade that reaches its maximum frequency in England, but is rare in Germany and mostly absent from Scandinavia, central and eastern Europe, Italy or Iberia.
So far, S1688 has not been found in Wallonia or Luxembourg and only makes up 4% of Flemish R1b-U106. U198 might be native to the Netherlands and would have been brought to England by the Anglo-Saxons from Frisia.***
In contrast with Flanders and England this time, the Dutch have hardly any Z156, and the little there is is DF96, perhaps of Flemish or Saxon origin. Interestingly the high percentage of Z18 and L48>Z9 in the Netherlands resembles more the pattern observed in Wallonia than in Flanders. The main difference is that the Walloons have more Z156 (from Germany) and the Dutch more S1688 (native to the region).
The other main R1b subclade in the Benelux is R1b-P312 (S116), which is found in equal proportions in Flanders [Sheba] and Wallonia [Dedan] (33%), but decreases as one moves north to reach 20% in the southern Netherlands, 15% in the central Netherlands and 10% in Frisia.’
The strong link between the Dutch and English via S1688 may have its origin from primarily, the taking of 32,000 Midianite virgin girls and inserting them into the Israelite gene pool. For while their sons would have been R1b from their Israellite fathers, it could have mutated differently with each subsequent generation of males. Secondarily, Zipporah’s two sons with Moses, may have chosen to ultimately dwell in Midian and marry Midianite wives. The various R1b sub-clade differences we have just read between the Flemish, and Walloons of Belgium, compared with the Dutch, highlights the fact that Belgium is a different brother, stemming from Jokshan and his sons Sheba and Dedan; while the Netherlands is the separate and distinct^^ brother, Midian.
Eupedia: ‘Here is breakdown of R1b subclades in Belgium from the Brabant Y-DNA Project.
About half of Belgian R1b-P312 belong to the U152 (S28) subclade [associated with France, Switzerland and Italy]… with a slightly higher frequency in Wallonia (16%) and Luxembourg (14%) [Dedan] than in Flanders (10%) [Sheba], and it keeps decreasing as one moves north to the southern Netherlands (6%) [Midian], the central Netherlands (3.5%) [Midian], and is almost absent from Frisia (1%) [Midian].
A bit over half of U152 in Wallonia and over 80% of U152 in Flanders belong to the L2 subclade. Wallonia seems to have more diversity, with a higher presence of typically Italic/Roman subclades like Z56 and Z192, but also of… Z36. Autosomal ancestry analysis of Belgian individuals who tested with 23andMe shows that Walloons are much more likely than the Flemings to have a small percentage of Italian DNA (typically 2 to 4% + a few more percents of ‘broadly southern European’)…’
‘The Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21(S145) [M529] lineage, most commonly found in the British Isles [Ireland, Scotland, Wales], reaches its maximum in the western half of Belgium (10%), including Flemish and Walloon Brabant, then decreases to 7-8% to the east of the country. Its frequency falls to 3-5% in the Netherlands, with little difference nationwide. Most of these lineages are probably of Gaulish [Celtic] origin, although some could have been brought by the Vikings from the British Isles, especially in coastal areas.
The Vikings are well known to have taken slaves among the British and Irish populations, which they brought with them to their colonies (e.g. Iceland, Normandy) and back to Scandinavia. Nowadays, over one quarter of Icelandic paternal lineages and half of the maternal lineages descend from those slaves [Scottish and Irish] brought by the Vikings. In Norway the proportion is about 15% and 30% respectively. It would not be surprising if the Vikings also brought slaves to places they founded on the continent, like Bruges, explaining how some typically Scottish or Irish subclades of L21 ended up there.
R1a was the other main Indo-European lineage… the (southern)Dutch and theBelgianshave considerablylower levels of haplogroup R1a than all the Germans.Over half of the R1a in the Benelux belongs to the West Germanic L664 subclade. Other lineages include the Scandinavian Z284 subclade [see map below] and the Central/Eastern European lineages M417 and Z280. Only a few R1a samples (from Luxembourg, Utrecht) belonged to the Z2123 subclade of R1a-Z93…One R1a sample from Amsterdam belonged to CTS6, the Jewish subclade of R1a, also under Z93.^’
‘Haplogroup I1, one of the most reliably Germanic lineages, has nearly identical frequencies in Flanders (12%) and Wallonia (10.5%), but is slightly higher in the Netherlands (16.5%), although that is still a far cry from the 35% observed in Scandinavia. Only Luxembourg has [a] surprisingly low frequency of I1 (2.5%)… The Nordic CTS6364 clade (including L22) was found in 18.5% of Dutch and 33% of Belgian I1 samples. The West Germanic Z58 branch accounted for 20% of Belgian samples (Z60>L573, Z138 and Z382 clades), and 63% of Dutch samples.’
A further divide between the Midianite Dutch and the Belgians descended from Jokshan. Dutch men with I1 having a stronger influence from and similarity with the Germanic Z58; whereas conversely Belgian men with I1 showing a stronger tie with the Nordic L22.
Eupedia:
‘Half of the Dutch Z58 belonged to the Z140 clade, which so far hasn’t been found in Belgium [Jokshan]. Z140 is found chiefly in Denmark [Medan], the Netherlands [Midian] and Britain, and to a lower extent Germany. It seems that it is mostly a Frisian and Anglo-Saxon clade***. The rest of Dutch Z58 belonged mostly to Z138 and Z382. The more East Germanic Z63 branch made up 13% and 12% of Belgian and Dutch samples, respectively.
Overall, Belgians appear to carry a considerably higher percentage of Nordic/Scandinavian subclades of I1, while the Dutch possess mostly West Germanic clades.^^ This could be explained by the higher percentage of Frankish ancestry in Belgium, since the Franks originated in Denmark. The majority of the Dutch I1 might be native to the Netherlands itself or neighbouring Saxony.’
‘Haplogroup J1 is one of the most common Jewish lineages, alongside E-M34 andJ2a1.In the Benelux, J1 was found almost exclusively around Amsterdam and Antwerp, two cities known for welcoming Jewish immigrants in past centuries, while J2 was also higher in both… Holland and in the province of Antwerp. It is therefore likely that the differential of 2% for these lineages in Holland and Antwerp are of Jewish origin.^’
Khazaria, Dutch & Frisian Genetics, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Dutch people live in the northwestern European country called the Netherlands. Traditionally Protestant by religion, they differ from the traditionally Catholic Dutch-speaking Flemings of the Flanders region of Belgium, a neighboring country.
From 1815 until 1830, however, both countries were part of a United Kingdom of the Netherlands, and until 1581 the lands were also united.
The Dutch language, with many similarities to English, is part of a linguistic continuum that stretches into northern Germany, as varieties of Low German are distinct from the High German dialects/languages of southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and Luxembourg. The Dutch people are linguistically and culturally distinct from the Frisian people who also inhabit the Netherlands. (Many centuries ago, the Frisians*** had their own independent country.)’
We will return and address the subject of the divide between northern and southern Germany in the following chapter. The Frisians are interesting in that they are a legacy of the Frisians who with the Angles and Jutes, constituted the wave of (British) Saxons migrating (invading) Britain. Thus some Frisians in the Netherlands though not all, may have a closer genetic affinity with the British (English) than with the Dutch. We will discover that more truth to this idea may be attached than meets the eye, for many of the descendants of the (English) Frisians ended up in… wait for it, South Africa – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.
Eupedia:
‘The Dutch people themselves are split into multiple autosomal DNA clusters, with a notable difference [? observe PCA plot below] between North Dutch and South Dutch people [Recall, Midian has five* sons].’
Relatively speaking as the North Dutch and South Dutch each cluster closer to the Germans and English than any other European country.
Eupedia:
‘North Dutch people autosomally cluster close to Frisians, English, and Danes, whereas South Dutch and the Flemish autosomally cluster close to Walloons and West Germans. According to Piotr Kapuscinski, this is caused by the ancient division between North Sea Germanic (Ingvaeonic) peoples and Wesser-Rhine Germanic (Istvaeonic) peoples, and he notes that North Dutch descend from Frisians, Angles, Saxons, and Norse (all Germanic peoples) whereas South Dutch descend from Celts and Germanic Franks.
Therefore, North Dutch and South Dutch don’t cluster close to one another* on autosomal plots of population averages [? refer PCA graph below].’
‘Genetically, R1b haplogroups are very commonly found in the Y chromosomes of Frisian males just as in the males of other ethnic groups in this geographic region (Atlantic-bordering Europe). As one would expect, participants in the Frisian Waddenproject often have R1b. The “Frisian Modal Haplotype” (FMH), called R1b-8, was discovered by Kenneth Nordtvedt and is tested by looking at only 6 markers.
BelowR1b-8 on the genetic tree is R-U106, and a level below R-U106 on the tree are subclades including R-L47, R-L48, R-L48x, and R-L148. The primary Frisian Y-DNA haplogroup is the R1b subclade called U106/S21, defined by its mutations U106 (and L48) and negative for P312. It’s coded by Family Tree DNA as haplogroup R1b1b2a1a. U106 is also found among partial descendants of Frisians like English people, as well as in parts of Benelux, Germany, and Denmark. Some other Frisian men have the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 which is most common in Scandinavia.
“Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration.” Molecular Biology and Evolution 19:7, multiple authors, (2002): pages 1008-1021.
English and Welsh people are among those studied and compared to each other. They also collected samples from Norwegians and Frisians. The Frisian samples came from 94 males who live in Friesland in the northern part of the Netherlands. Excerpt from the Abstract:
“When we compared our data with an additional 177 samples collected in Friesland and Norway, we found that the Central English and Frisian*** samples were statistically indistinguishable.”
Excerpt from the Discussion section: “The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent.
Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity andthe low Central English-North Welsh affinity.”
We will return in subsequent chapters to address the red hair alleles of the Scots; the J1 and J2 paternal Haplogroups of the Jews; the English-Frisian link; as well as the English-North Welsh relationship – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
As at time of writing, any substantial material on the Haplogroups for the Afrikaners in South Africa have not been found, or for the indigenous inhabitants of Brussels, possible descendants of the Leummim. One interpretation for the name Leumm is ‘countries without water.’ Which is ironic in view of Belgium’s low level coastline, yet interesting when considered with a landlocked territory such as Brussels.
Daniel Boffey: “… the unloved [River] Senne running through Brussels… [viewed] as a constant flood risk and source of cholera… was vaulted in… buried away under concrete, built over and hidden from sight for the last 150 years… condemned by locals as little more than a sewer and cause of disease and unhappiness.”
The graph below represents the regional genetic variation in Belgium and at once reveals both the closeness of Brussels, Flanders and Wallonia and the subtle distinctiveness of all three.
With regard to South Africa we have investigated its black citizens and so can compare with the Y-DNA Haplogroups for its white citizens; which include those of British descent – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. We will endeavour to obtain a partial picture at least, by isolating the Black and British elements and including what we learn from the Dutch in the Netherlands.
The top seven most common mtDNA Haplogroups for Iceland, Scandinavia, Bel-Lux and the Netherlands.
Iceland: H [37.7%] – J [13.7%] – T2 [10.1%] – K [9.8%] –
Sweden: H [45.8%] – U5 [12.1%] – J [7.7%] – K [6.4%] –
HV0+V [5%] – T2 [4%] – U4 [3%]
Denmark: H [47.3%] – J [13.4%] – K [8.9%] – T2 [5.8%] –
U5 [5.8%] – HV0+V [3.6%] – U2 [2.7%]
Belgium & Luxembourg: H [46.9%] – K [12.1] – T2 [9.4%] – J [6%] –
U [5.4%] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%]
Netherlands: H [45%] – T2 [12%] – J [11%] – K [10%] –
HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%]
H HV0+V J K T2 U4 U5
Finland 36 7 6 5 2 1 21
Iceland 38 2 14 10 10 3 8
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6
The six sons of Keturah bear a close resemblance in their maternal Haplogroups. Iceland-Ishbak, is the only one which deviates slightly, which we have addressed with their ancestry of Scandinavian fathers and markedly high percentage from Celtic mothers. The addition of Keturah’s possible family’s descendants (from either Anar or Ashcol) – akin to modern Finland’s mtDNA Haplogroups – shows both the plausibility of the previously speculated line of reasoning and at the same time, the variable difference which highlights Finland in not being a mutual descendant with the other seven countries but rather, their possible progenitor with their father Abraham.
H J T2 U5 K HVO+V HV U4 T1
Italy 40 8 8 5 8 3 3 2 3
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3 2
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3 2
Benelux 47 6 9 3 12 3 0.7 3 2
Netherlands 45 11 12 8 10 8 7 2
Denmark 47 13 6 6 9 4 2 1
Sweden 46 8 4 12 6 5 0.5 3 3
Norway 46 11 8 11 5 4 0.2 3 1
Iceland 38 14 10 8 10 2 2 3 0.5
The table above compares Abraham and Keturah’s descendants with the main mtDNA Haplogroups of Abraham’s brothers, Nahor and Haran. The table below a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Keturah’s descendants.
H HV HV0+V J T2 U U5 K
Switzerland 48 0.4 5 12 9 0.4 7 5
Bel-Lux 47 0.7 3 6 9 5 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 6 1 6 9
Norway 46 0.2 4 11 8 2 11 5
Sweden 46 0.5 5 8 4 3 12 6
Netherlands 45 8 11 12 0.5 8 10
France 44 2 5 8 6 1 8 9
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Iceland 38 4 2 14 10 0.2 8 10
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the Benelux and Scandinavian nations sees them clustered together, as well as with those peoples of western Europe with which they are more closely related – the exception being Icelanders.
A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe in the main exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact. The addition of Keturah’s sons supports this correlation, as they now bookend with Switzerland.
Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.
It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Turkey R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
Netherlands R-M269 54% – R-U106 35%
Denmark R-M269 34% – R-U106 17%
The Dutch possess a similar percentage of R1b-M269 as their near relatives the French, Italians and the Swiss. The Germanic sub-clade of R-U106 is especially high in the Netherlands, partially due to the Frisian element of the population. In fact it is a far higher percentage even than in Germany, which we will find is similar to Denmark.
Denmark exhibits a higher level of R-U106 in keeping with their position in both northern and western Europe. Unexpectedly, the Danish percentage of R-M269 is lower than 50%. The reason is partially due to the fact that Denmark has a higher percentage of R1a at 15%, compared to say the Netherlands with 4%; though mainly due to the high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup I1, indicative of northern Europe at 34%; compared to the Netherlands with 16.5% and France at 9%.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the six sons of Abraham and his second wife, Keturah. Belgium’s Haplogroups are near identical to the Flemish percentages; therefore figures are included for both Flanders and Wallonia.
A comparison of the main Y-DNA Haplogroups reveals and supports a number of points. Finland is obviously an outlier; even more apparent than as already shown by its mtDNA Haplogroups. Recall its percentage of Haplogroup N is extraordinarily high and indicative of a very northerly location in Europe such as the Baltic nations and Russia who border Finland. Finland shares a similarly high percentage of Haplogroup I1 shared by all the Nordic nations. The three Scandinavian countries, with Iceland are all uniquely I1 driven, thus explaining the lesser percentages for R1b. Haplogroup I1 is a far older line of descent from Shem, yet still related to those men who carry the more recent R1b mutation. Even so, Haplogroup R1b is the defining marker Haplogroup for Abraham’s male descendants.
Even the Netherlands has a relatively high percentage of I1. Sweden shows the impact of mixing and intermarriage with the Finns and Sammi; whereas, the Norwegians less so. In the past, Swedish men probably had a R1b Haplogroup percentage near identical with Norway and Denmark. And prior to that, the Scandinavian males would have possessed primarily R1b as still somewhat reflective in Icelandic men today.
The R1b percentages support the premise that Belgium and Luxembourg comprise the descendants of Jokshan; as their levels are all comparable yet distinct from their other five siblings. Jokshan had two sons; Sheba and Dedan, who in turn had three sons. Thus providing four lines of people and with the other five sons, making a total of nine. Sheba equating to the Flemish, Letush to the Walloons, Leumm to the Brussels Capital region and the Asshurim to Luxembourg.
Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham and Keturah’s sons Midian, Medan, Jokshan, Ishbak, Zimran and Shuah.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 2 56 58
Luxembourg 11 3 8 5 6 3 61 64
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 2 8 7 3 2 69 71
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 1 5 7 3 44 8 52
Flanders 5 1 4 5 4 4 61 65
Netherlands 4 1 3 4 5 4 49 53
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Denmark 3 3 3 3 15 33 48
Sweden 3 3 3 1 16 22 38
Wallonia 2 2 6 6 7 60 67
Frisians 1.4 2 7 55 62
Norway 0.5 0.5 1 1 26 32 58
Iceland 23 42 65
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. The Walloons move into third place for combined R1 Haplogroups. Both Luxembourgers and the Flemish pass the French for possessing the second highest levels of R1b after Spain.
Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Luxembourg 3 61 3 3 6
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Netherlands 4 49 17 1 7
Flanders 4 61 12 3 5
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Frisians 7 55 [34]
Wallonia 7 60 11 2 5
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Denmark 15 33 34 2 6 1
Sweden 16 22 37 2 4 7
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Iceland 23 42 29 4 1
Norway 26 32 32 5 3
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups (with the exception of N1c) from Shem, comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 are included.
From a Y-DNA Haplogroup perspective it is interesting that the males descended from Abraham and Keturah form into pairs aside from Luxembourg. Rather than the defining marker Haplogroup R1b-U106, it is Haplogroups R1a and I1 which show the pairing similarity. For instance, Denmark and Sweden; Norway and Iceland; and the Dutch and Flemish stand out. Correspondingly, the four Nordic nations possess less R1b and more I1 and R1a, in contrast with the five Benelux peoples who contrastingly possess more R1b and less I1 and R1a.
Similarly, it is only the four northern nations which possess Haplogroup N1c1 amplified from admixture with near northern neighbours. Sweden possessing the third highest levels after Finland and Russia. Finland had the highest level of I1 previously, though is now surpassed by Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. Switzerland still retains the highest levels of I2a2, with the Netherlands in second place.
The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for South Africa are: E1b1a, R1b, E2, A1, B2, E1b1b and J. The Haplogroups E, B and A are reflective of the Black male population; R1b for White men; with E1b1b and J Haplogroups stemming from admixture. There is diversity just within the Black population of South Africa as it contains the Bantu, Zulu, Xhosa and Khoisan peoples.
Disregarding the British factor in South Africa for a moment and using the predominant element of the Dutch for White South Africans, we can observe the close percentage similarity between the R1b Haplogroup. Haplogroup I is missing from the data available though it would be safe to assume it is included amongst the White population as the British descended males also possess I1 and I2. What is of interest, is the higher percentage of E1b1b and is probably attributable to admixture with the indigenous population.
Inside the ancestry of South Africa’s Afrikaners, The Conversation, May 21, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘By comparing the Afrikaners in our study to 1,670 individuals from 32 populations across the world we found that 4.7% of Afrikaner DNA has a non-European origin. That may seem like a small percentage, but 98.7% of the Afrikaners were admixed.
The admixture between European and Khoe-San was more common than church records suggest. In our study, though only 1.3% of Afrikaner genes came from the Khoe-San, most Afrikaners contained some Khoe-San genes.
The highest non-European contribution (1.7%) came from South Asia, or India. This reflects colonial men’s stated preference for marrying freed Indian slaves during the founding years. A little less than 1% of Afrikaner genes have an East Asian (Chinese or Japanese) origin.
The contribution of West and East Africa is the lowest, at 0.8%. This is likely to stem from the almost 18,000 slaves imported from Africa’s west and east coasts. The fraction of genes from West Africa is slightly higher than from East Africa, reflecting the fact that while West African slaves were few, they arrived four generations before slaves from East Africa.
A common perception about Afrikaners is that they stem from very few ancestors, which would have resulted in inbreeding. Inbreeding results in long stretches of the paternal and maternal chromosomes being identical to each other. By looking at the lengths of identical stretches, it is clear that Afrikaners are as variable as the average European.This is in part due to admixture between non-Europeans and Europeans, but also because Europeans came from all over Europe.
The strongest European genetic contribution is from northwestern Europe, with the most similar population being the Swiss German population. This signal could also be interpreted as a mixture between German, Dutch and French populations – as genealogical records indicate.
In conclusion, despite laws prohibiting mixed marriages from as early as 1658, and discrimination that culminated in the apartheid system, these genetic analyses confirm that most Afrikaners have admixed ancestry. Genealogical information has indicated as much, but these genetic findings are irrefutable.’
For now – until an exhaustive study of the Afrikaner in conjunction with the Dutch is available – the true identity of the Dutch Afrikaner remains a tantalising mystery. Are the Afrikaners Midianites, or a slightly different composition compared with the native Dutch? If so, the question arises whether the Kenite factor is hidden there.
It has been said, ‘the people in Europe the most like the English, are the Dutch.’ The close tie between England and the Netherlands is one that will become clearer when we study the United Kingdom – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Another saying – and one the Dutch may not be particularly fond, though it is not intended as a slight – is ‘the Dutch are Germans with clogs.’ As we progress, the close relationship between the Dutch and the Deutsch will become apparent – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria –Ishmael & Hagar.
The ancient link between the Hivites and Hittites will be clarified; the inter-changing terms, Midianites and Ishmaelites – and of Arabia and the wilderness – will be explained; the neighbouring states of the wealthy Etruscans and formidable, militaristic Romans will leap alive; and the true identity of Ishmael, will fascinate like no other.
Hold on to your hats constant reader… for there is more than one dramatic surprise ahead as we explore the remaining descendants of Abraham from his wife Sarah (and their son Isaac), as well as Sarah’s remarkable handmaiden, Hagar.
Turn your ear toward wisdom, and stretch your mind toward understanding. Call out for insight, and cry aloud for understanding. Seek it like silver; search for it like hidden treasure. Then you will understand… and discover the knowledge of God.
Proverbs 2:2-5 Common English Bible
“Let me say to you that truth has always lived with the minority; what the majority says at a given moment is usually wrong.”
The elder brother of Nahor is Haran. Haran died prematurely – compared with his two brothers – at eighty-two years of age, either at the hands of his younger brother Abraham in an accident by fire* or highly unlikely, murdered by Nimrod, though more probably at the hands of King Shulgi of Ur – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. His father Terah, with the families of Lot and Abraham then moved in 1927 BCE, northwest six hundred miles and settled in Haran, a city-region associated with Nahor’s family in Padan-Aram.
We will learn that Haran had other children apart from those named in the scriptures: Lot, Milcah and Sarah. We do not know the name of Haran’s wife, though it is likely that Haran married a descendent of Arphaxad through Peleg’s line. It is not clear if descendants of Haran already lived in Haran; or if they arrived later after Abraham. The term Haran for the region, may have been added to the biblical account retrospectively, if they followed.
The geographic relationship of Haran adjacent to Padan-Aram with Aram-Nahor, which in turn was next to Aram is significant as this alignment is replicated in our modern world – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. Today, Aram (in this context) principally includes Spain and Portugal, while Padan-Aram signifies an association with Italy – also refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Regarding identities in the Bible; if there is more than one verse – even if it is only two – it is specifying a distinct people. Haran had a son called Lot and he in turn had two sons, Moab and Ammon. Aside from these peoples, we read about a people described as Haran twice in the Bible. We are therefore seeking a people not only related to Nahor and Haran, but also dwelling next to Nahor, Moab and Ammon in Western Europe.
2 Kings 19:12
English Standard Version
‘Have the gods of the nations delivered them, the nations that my fathers destroyed, Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, and the people of Eden…’
Ezekiel 27:21-24
English Standard Version
‘Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [son of Ishmael] were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you… Haran,Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you. In your market these traded with [Tyre, Brazil] in choice garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound with cords and made secure.’
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘There are two completely different Hebrew names that have ended up as the similar name Haran in English. We’ll call them Haran I and Haran II, and note that both versions occur in Genesis 11:31: The name Haran I: Summary meaning Mountainous, Mountaineer. From the noun (har), hill or mountain. The name Haran I is assigned two times in the Bible: A son of Terah and brother of Abraham… This Haran is the father of Lot. [The other is] a Levite of the family of Gershon (1 Chronicles 23:9).
The noun (har) is the Bible’s common word for mountain or hill. The obviously related verb (hera) means to be or become pregnant. An association with the previous noun is obvious, although not because the stomach of a pregnant woman resembles a mountain. The Bible depicts nations as individual women even more than as mountains; the words, (‘umma) meaning people and (’em), meaning mother are closely related. A pregnant woman is to her husband what a conceiving nation is to its deity.
The name Haran II: Summary Meaning Freedom, Central Fire.* From the root (harar), to be a central hub of heat. The name Haran II is assigned two times in the Bible: The city where Abram’s family settled (Genesis 11:31)… A son of Caleb and Epaha (1 Chronicles 2:46). The name Haran II probably comes from the verb (hara), to burn*, or (harar), to be hot or even to be free: The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so a being hot and ultimately being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom). The unused verb (harar II) means to be free in cognate languages, which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman.
The nouns (hor) mean hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Nouns (hur) and (huray) refer to any white stuff, including garments and linen, and noun (hori) describes white bread or cake. For a meaning of the name Haran II… BDB Theological Dictionary sees a connection with an Assyrian word that means Road or Path, and suggests the name stems from Haran’s location on atrade route.’
Canneh means favoured and Eden means pleasure, delight, finery, luxury and paradise. The descendants of Haran dwell in the nation of Switzerland. The verse in Ezekiel twenty-seven is revealing Haran’s economic strength as well as its ethnic split as evidenced by its principle languages comprising German, French, and Italian – plus Romany. The Swiss themselves – regardless of language divide – are homogenous, as their Haplogroups reveal. Whereas in Austria, an Austrian majority of sixty percent perceive themselves as German, the Swiss when asked the same question, resoundingly answered No. The meanings of the name Haran are remarkably specific about the Swiss.
Switzerland is mountainous, free, protected with a wall of strong military tradition, is white with snow and known for its bread, cake, pastry and deserts, including chocolate. It is favoured in wealth via trade – its central location, route through Europe – and in scenery; a veritable paradise of luxury.
The ancient Hurrians and Mitanni were separate yet synonymous – also known as Hanigalbat – with the Hurrians having a lesser role due to a smaller population, with the height of their kingdom longevity shorter – circa 905 to 886 BCE – compared to the Mitanni; but as the warrior nobility within the Kingdom of Mitanni their impact was extensive and protracted – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Recall we mentioned the Mitanni in Chapters XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil and XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. The Mitanni of upper Mesopotamia were the descendants of the dispossessed Hatti; who had been migrating in the direction of Babylon due to the Hittite expansion in Anatolia encroaching into the former lands of the Hatti. The apogee of the Mitanni kingdom era circa 1150 to 900 BCE is the connecting link between the peak of the Hatti empire during 1900 to 1500 BCE and the later Chaldean rule of Babylon from 626 to 539 BCE.
The Hurrian army was built around an elite chariot corps, like an honour guard, commanded by the king. The relationship between the Hurrians and Mitanni is replicated between Switzerland and Italy in the form of the Papal (or Pontifical) Swiss Guard. It is a combined armed forces and honour guard maintained by the Holy See. It protects the Pope and the Apostolic Palace, serving as the military of the Vatican City.
Established in 1506 by Pope Julius II, it is one of the oldest military units used in ‘continuous operation.’ The dress uniform is blue, red and yellow – the family colours of the House of Medici of Florence.
The Swiss Guard are equipped with traditional weapons, like the halberd, as well as with modern firearms. ‘Recruits to the guards must be unmarried Swiss Catholic males between 19 and 30 years of age who have completed basic training with the Swiss Armed Forces.’ The corp also receive enhanced training, in unarmed combat and small arms.
Burgundy is a region in France, made famous by its red wine. It is a little smaller than Switzerland and lies to the west, with only one hundred miles separating them. Though the name lives on in France, the original Burgundians are the ancestors of the Swiss. The Burgundians are considered a Scandinavian people whose original homeland lay on the southern shores of the Baltic Sea; where the island of Bornholm – Burgundarholm in the Middle Ages – still bears their name. In the first century CE they migrated into the lower valley of the Vistula River, but, unable to defend themselves against the Gepidae, they traveled westward. Serving as foederati – meaning auxiliaries – in the Roman army, they formed a powerful kingdom, around Sapaudia – modern day Savoy – near Lake Geneva, from 450 CE.
Christian king Gundobad ruling from 474 to 516 CE, allowed Burgundy to remain independent. Though in 534 the Franks occupied the kingdom, extinguishing the royal dynasty. The area was controlled initially by Neustrian Franks, then Middle Franks and finally German Franks until the year 888. It was then under Frankish Burgundian control until 1032. It was in 888 that Rudolf I – who died in 912 – of the German Welf family was recognised as king of Jurane, Burgundy, including much of what is now Switzerland. His son and successor Rudolf II, was able to conclude a treaty circa 931 with Hugh of Provence, extending ‘his rule over the entire regnum Burgundiae.’
The union of Upper and Lower Burgundy was bequeathed in 1032 – lasting until 1648 – to the German king and Holy Roman emperor Conrad II, which became known from the thirteenth century as the Kingdom of Arles. The name Burgundy was being increasingly applied to the county of Burgundy, as well as for the Duchy of Burgundy – both located in modern France. There were four Burgundies in total: the duchy, the county, and the kingdoms of Upper Burgundy and Lower Burgundy. Upper Burgundy larger than lower Burgundy was located in present day western Italy. Lower Burgundy was located in current French speaking western Switzerland.
The Historicity of the Bible, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis mine:
‘German Nibelungen,Old Norse Niflungar denote the Burgundian royal family which take its name from the people which initially owned the gold hoard.Siegfried slew Nibelung and twelve giants before he took the hoard. In the Norse mythology, Niflheimr (‘mist home’) is the world of frost. The similar world is Niflhel, the lowest level of Norse underworld Hel. The Indo-European root ne-bh means ‘not light (sky)’ (ne – ‘not’ and bh – ‘light’ like in Greek phos) initially and gave several related meanings: ‘sky’ (Russian nebo), ‘cloud, mist’ (Latin nebula), ‘dark’ (Anglo-Saxon nifol) etc.’
Britannica – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 1291, when Rudolf I of Habsburg died, the elites of the Waldstatte (“forest cantons”) Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden renewed anolder treaty confirming that they would maintain public peace and efficient jurisdiction without interference from outside [namely the Austrian Hapsburgs], thus securing their privileged position [Confoederatio Helvetica]. Such pacts were common at that time, but this one was to be considered much later as the foundation of the Swiss Confederation (only since 1891 has August 1, 1291, been celebrated as the birth of the nation).’
The prime Swiss communities of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden, mirror Haran, Canneh and Eden in the Bible. The word Schwyz is where the name Switzerland has derived. The Swiss are famously known for their neutrality from 1815 following the Napoleonic wars against France. The Congress of Vienna guaranteed the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland. The present nation of Switzerland was formed in 1848 with the adoption of a new constitution, as there had been internal conflict prior to this date.
Switzerland is a federated country of 26 Cantons and its administrative capital is Bern; with Lausanne serving as its judicial centre. Switzerland’s small size – its total area is about half that of Scotland and its population of 8,965,466 people, the 20th largest in Europe – gives little indication of its international significance and economic clout. Geneva is home to numerous international organisations and the Swiss economy is the 21st largest in the world – just behind Poland (19) and ahead of Taiwan (22).
The Heraldry for the three original Cantons – the Key similar to the Vatican Keys of Heaven (or Saint Peter)
The Bull, stems from veneration lasting millennium – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Apart from the capital Bern, Zurich is the country’s largest and most cosmopolitan city; its famed Bahnhofstrasse rivalling shopping districts found in other leading cities in the world. Basel and Lucerne are major German speaking cities, with Geneva and Lausanne the centres of the country’s French speaking cantons.
Geneva
In 1992 Swiss voters narrowly turned down membership in a European Economic Area comprising the EU and EFTA. Switzerland is politically isolated within Europe, though maintains strong economic ties with the EU – its largest trading partner. In the 1990s there were growing doubts about Switzerland’s past. ‘Many Swiss questioned the country’s traditional “bunker mentality” in Europe at peace and with open borders.’
Troubling for Switzerland was an international debate concerning dormant accounts of assets left by Jews in Swiss banks during the Nazi era, but never returned. ‘A controversy that challenged Switzerland’s image of itself and resulted in a settlement between two large commercial banks and Jewish plaintiffs in which the banks agreed to pay international Jewish organizations two billion Swiss francs (about $1.25 billion). Financial officials estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars in dormant assets remained unclaimed in Swiss banks in the early 21st century.’
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Swiss global shipments during 2021.
Gems, precious metals: US$106.3 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $101.5 billion
Organic chemicals: $29.7 billion
Clocks, watches including parts: $24.4 billion
Machinery including computers: $24 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $19.1 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $13.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $4.03 billion
Perfumes, cosmetics: $3.98 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.2% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was… clocks and watches including parts category which rose 34.7%. Switzerland’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 23.3% year over year, propelled by higher international sales of gold and silver.’
The Alpine nation of Switzerland has a GDP of $947 billion in 2025. Switzerland possesses a large service sector, including financial services and a high-tech manufacturing sector served by a highly skilled labor force. Excellent quality legal, political and economic institutions with a solid physical infrastructure have set the stage for a productive economy with one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world.
Switzerland is in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves at number seven, ahead of Japan and India and one place behind China. Its total tonnage of gold is 1,040.0 tonnes and represents 5.4% of its foreign reserves. Switzerland maintains the world’s largest reserves of gold per capita. ‘During World War II, the neutral country became the center of the gold trade in Europe, making transactions with both the Allies and Axis powers. Today, much of its gold trading is done with Hong Kong and China.’
In 2023, Switzerland was number one in the world on the Global Innovation Index; ahead of Singapore (5), Finland (6) and South Korea (10).
Haran had a specific son named in the Bible, called Lot. Though he was Abraham’s nephew, Lot was born only seven years after Abraham in 1970 BCE – when Haran was thirty-nine. They had a close relationship and instead of being as an uncle and nephew that they were, acted more like brothers, due to the closeness of their ages. With the premature death of Haran, Abraham was protective of his nephew in more than one instance. The fact that Abraham did not have his own son for many years, meant Lot was logically in line to be Abraham’s heir. This is telling and may have significant bearing in how circumstances eventuated between the descendants of Lot and those from Abraham.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Lot [means] Covering. From the verb (lut), to wrap closely, to envelop
Noun (lat) or (la’t) means secrecy. The verb (malat) means to deliver from confinement or dangerouspredicament.For a meaning of the name Lot, both NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names read Covering. Jones adds Veil.’
Lot
In Genesis chapter eleven we read of Terah’s departure from Ur to Haran, with Abraham and Lot’s families in 1927 BCE. Twenty-five years later when Abraham was seventy-five, the Creator told him to leave Haran to dwell in Canaan further south.
Genesis 12:4-9
English Standard Version
‘So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, andthe people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem [future location of Simeon and Levi’s revenge for their sister Dinah], to the oak of Moreh.
At that time the Canaanites [dark skinned sons of Canaan] were in the land. Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the Lord and called upon the name of the Lord. And Abram journeyed on, still going toward the Negeb.’
Genesis 13:1-18
English Standard Version
1 ‘So Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negeb. 2 Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold. 3 And he journeyed on from the Negeb as far as Bethel to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, 4 to the place where he had made an altar at the first. And there Abram called upon the name of the Lord. 5 And Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents, 6 so that the land could not support both of them dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they could not dwell together, 7 and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land.
8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.” 10 And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the Lord [Eden], like the land of Egypt, in the direction of Zoar. (This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) 11 So Lot chose for himself all the Jordan Valley, and Lot journeyed east. Thus they separated from each other. 12 Abram settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot settled among the cities of the valley and moved his tent as far as Sodom.’
Recall in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega, the location of physical Eden was investigated. We learned that the area of Eden encompassed the region of southern Lebanon and the Sea of Galilee, stretching southwards to Jerusalem and the garden’s location – refer article: The Eden Enigma. We will soon discover that Zoar was situated north of the Dead or Salt Sea and so the fertile Jordan River Valley was a corridor running from Galilee through the Dead Sea – which wasn’t ‘dead’ yet – and all the way south to where the river exits into the Red Sea. Lot saw that this land between Galilee and Zoar was ‘like the garden of the Lord’ or Eden and understandably chose it for his family. Thus he lived to the east of Abraham who dwelt westwards towards the Mediterranean Sea in the land of Canaan. It also explains how Lot ended up living in Sodom – where he became prominent in the City’s governance – as it was one of the five main cities with Zoar, on the plains north of the Salt Sea.
Genesis: 13 ‘Now the men of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the Lord [like Nimrod]. 14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, 15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever [for a long time]. 16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted. 17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” 18 So Abram moved his tent and came and settled by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron, and there he built an altar to the Lord.’
It is worth noting that Abraham’s son Issac, chose Hebron to live the last years of his life in peace. The city was later taken by Joshua and given to Caleb and his descendants, becoming a Levitical City and a place of refuge. When David became king, his royal residence was in Hebron, he was anointed king there and he ruled from Hebron for seven and a half years.
Lot chose the fertile lower ground, the plains in the valley bordered between the hills towards the west and the River Jordan to the east. We read a parallel account in the Book of Jasher 15:35-47:
35 ‘And Lot the son of Haran, Abram’s brother, had a heavy stock of cattle, flocks and herds and tents, for the Lord was bountiful to them on account of Abram. 36 And when Abram was dwelling in the land the herdsmen of Lot quarrelled with the herdsmen of Abram, for their property was too great for them to remain together in the land, and the land could not bear them on account of their cattle. 37 And when Abram’s herdsmen went to feed their flock they would not go into the fields of the people of the land, but the cattle of Lot’s herdsmen did otherwise, for they were suffered to feed in the fields of the people of the land.
38 And the people of the land saw this occurrence daily, and they came to Abram and quarrelled with him on account of Lot’s herdsmen. 39 And Abram said to Lot, What is this thou art doing to me, to make me despicable to the inhabitants of the land, that thou orderest thy herdsman to feed thy cattle in the fields ofother people? Dost thou not know that I am a stranger in this land amongst the children of Canaan, and why wilt thou do this unto me? 40 And Abram quarrelled daily with Lot on account of this, but Lot would not listen to Abram, and he continued to do the same and the inhabitants of the land came and told Abram.’
This display of mercurial stubbornness is indicative of Lot’s descendants.
Jasher: 41 ‘And Abram said unto Lot, How long wilt thou be to me for a stumbling block with the inhabitants of the land? Now I beseech thee let there be no more quarrelling between us, for we are kinsmen. 42 But I pray thee separate from me, go and choose a place where thou mayest dwell with thy cattle and all belonging to thee, but Keep thyself at a distance from me, thou and thy household. 43 And be not afraid in going from me, for if any one do an injury to thee, let me know and I will avenge thy cause from him, only remove from me. 44 And when Abram had spoken all these words to Lot, then Lot arose and lifted up his eyes toward the plain of Jordan. 45 And he saw that the whole of this place was well watered, and good for man as well as affording pasture for the cattle. 46 And Lot went from Abram to that place, and he there pitched his tent and he dwelt in Sodom, and they were separated from each other. 47 And Abram dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and he pitched his tent there, and Abram remained in that place many years.’
The selfishness of Lot in using other peoples property and not caring how that made Abraham look was the beginning of a rift circa 1902 to 1900 BCE between both families, which ultimately led to mistrust, hatred and a perpetual rivalry, based on jealousy between their peoples lasting to the present day. The seeds of the fissure between them, even after Lot had been continually at Abraham’s side were undoubtedly the same that causes nearly all parting of the ways between people – the same reason Asherah left the Ancient of Day’s side – pride or envy, turning to disdain – Article: Asherah. In the section on Chedorlaomer of Elam, we touched on Lot being taken hostage in 1894 BCE after the Battle of the Kings at Siddim. We will return to this battle again when we study Abraham – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
Genesis 14:11-16
English Standard Version
‘So the enemy took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. They also took Lot, the son of Abram’s brother, who was dwelling in Sodom, and his possessions, and went their way. Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, who was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and of Aner. These were allies of Abram. When Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men [soldiers], born in his house, 318 of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. And he divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and defeated them and pursued them to Hobah, north of Damascus [capital of Gether-Aram]. Then he brought back all the possessions, and also brought back his kinsman Lot with his possessions, and the women and the people.’
Jasher 16:6-8
‘And they plundered all the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and they also took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, and his property, and they seized all the goods of the cities of Sodom, and they went away; and Unic, Abram’s servant, who was in the battle, saw this, and told Abram all that the kings had done to the cities of Sodom, and that Lot was taken captive by them. And Abram heard this, and he rose up with about three hundred and eighteen men that were with him, and he that night pursued these kings and smote them, and they all fell before Abram and his men, and there was none remaining but the four kings who fled, and they went each his own road. And Abram recovered all the property of Sodom, and he also recovered Lot and his property, his wives and little ones and all belonging to him, so that Lot lacked nothing.’
Abraham risked his life to rescue Lot, who had somewhat deserved what had befallen him, after treating Abraham with disrespect; ensuring he had all his family – including more than one wife – and belongings returned to him safely. Proverbs 25:21-22 CJB: “If someone who hates you is hungry, give him food to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. For you will heap fiery coals (of shame) on his head, and Adonai [the Lord] will reward you.” Abraham was offered a reward by the King of Sodom, but refused to take anything for what he had done. We next read of Lot in Genesis chapter Nineteen.
Genesis 19:1-38
English Standard Version
‘The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth 2 and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash* your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.” 3 But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened** bread [March-April, the time of the Passover* and Feast** of unleavened Bread], and they ate.’
Hebrews 13:2
Complete Jewish Bible
‘… but don’t forget to be friendly to outsiders; for in so doing, some people, without knowing it, have entertained angels.’
Lot had gained a position of responsibility in Sodom when he had moved to the city circa 1900 BCE. Lot was rescued by Abraham in 1894 BCE in the aftermath of the Battle of Siddim. The destruction of Sodom took place in Abraham’s 99th year, in 1878 BCE. For twenty-two years, Lot and his family had resided in Sodom. Sitting in the gate, means Lot was a member of Sodom’s ruling council and involved in the discussion and prosecution of legal matters. Lot may have been an actual Judge.
Genesis: 4 ‘But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know [H3045 – yada: ‘to know a person carnally’] them.” 6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”
9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge!Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. 10 But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door. 11 And they [the angels created a blinding light] struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door.’
Judging by the name of the city of Sodom and the fact the crowd of men were wanting the two men who were angels; homosexuality is clearly what was intended. In a broader sense, the city was involved in adult activity with Nephilim and Eliouds, who lived there; for as stated earlier in the Book of Genesis, a second irruption of angelic infiltration with humans had occurred. Hence the requirement for the judgement of utter destruction to be decreed. It may have involved more than sexual relations.
A continuation of the ante-diluvian and post-flood (Tower of Babel) scientific and technological endeavour to completely tamper with mankind’s genetic code and seek profane immortality, would certainly attract punishment – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. For it has been reserved for the time of the end for these events to reoccur; thus requiring the Creator to re-intervene at that time. Christ’s half-brother Jude, connects the activities before the flood with those taking place in the five cities of the Plain.
The Greek word heteros translated as ‘strange’ flesh, is referring to sexual congress with either Nephilim or perverted sex with fallen angels not strictly just homosexuality.
Jude 6-7 ESV: ‘And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling… just as Sodomand Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, whichlikewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural [G2087 – heteros: another, one not of the same nature, form, kind]desire[G4561 – sarx: carnal cravings that incite sin], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.’
Lot offered his two youngest daughters who were around 15 to 20 years old, to the mob, rather than the angels. What the rationale behind this is conjecture. Maybe Lot was buying time, for he knew the angels could and would resolve the issue without his daughters having to go out – a bluff. Or possibly, he weighed their lives versus those of the messengers sent by the Creator and made a judgement call.
Genesis: 12 ‘Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone [friends] you have in the city, bring them out of the place.13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”
14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, “Up! Get out of this place, for the Lord is about to destroy the city.” But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting. 15 As morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Up! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be swept away in the punishment of the city.”
Verse 14 is misleading, as it appears the two younger daughters were bequeathed but not yet married. The interlinear reads: And Lot went out, spake unto his sons law, which married his daughters. From the account, we learn that Lot has at least two other daughters, aside from the two virgins already mentioned. The Book of Jasher introduces a fifth daughter.
Book of Jasher 19:11, 23-35
‘And in the course of time Sarah sent Eliezer to Sodom, to see Lot and inquire after his welfare. 23 … and when it was told to Abraham he went and made war with the kings of Elam, and he recovered from their hands all the property of Lot as well as the property of Sodom. 24 At that time the wife of Lot barehim a daughter [circa 1894 BCE], and he called her namePaltith, saying, Because God had delivered him and his whole household from the kings of Elam; and Paltith daughter of Lot grew up, and one of the men of Sodom took her for a wife [circa 1882-1879 BCE].
25 And a poor man came into the city to seek a maintenance, and he remained in the city some days, and all the people of Sodom caused a proclamation of their custom** not to give this man a morsel of bread to eat, until he dropped dead upon the earth, and they did so. 26 And Paltith the daughter of Lot saw this man lying in the streets starved with hunger, and no one would give him any thing to keep him alive, and he was just upon the point of death. 27 And her soul was filled with pity on account of the man, and she fed him secretly with bread for many days… and three men concealed themselves in a place where the poor man was stationed, to know who it was that brought him bread to eat… 32 And the three men saw what Paltith did to the poor man… 34 And they took Paltith and brought her before their judges… now therefore declare to us the punishment due to this woman for having transgressed our law. 35 Andthe people of Sodom and Gomorrah assembled and kindled a fire in the street of the city, and they took the woman and cast her into the fire and she was burned to ashes.’
Paltith would have been about fifteen or sixteen, when she was put to death, which was not long before Sodom was destroyed. Anciently, daughters were given in marriage as soon as they were deemed a woman and able to serve a husband and bear his children.
Genesis: 16 ‘But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the Lord being merciful to him, and theybrought him out and set him outside the city.’
Lot’s angelic visitors and protectors had already taken an aerial reconnoissance. According to the Haggadah, they were then able to fly him and his family inside their craft out of Sodom’s City wall boundaries. It was then that they instructed Lot to flee to further safety.
Genesis: 17 ‘And as they brought them out, one said, “Escape for your life. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, lest you be swept away.” 18 And Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords. 19 Behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life. But I cannot escape to the hills, lest the disaster overtake me and I die.
20 Behold, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there – is it not a little one? – and my life will be saved!” 21 He said to him, “Behold, I grant you this favor also, that I will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Escape there quickly, for I can do nothing till you arrive there.” Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.’
Contrary Lot, might be a fitting name and at a moment when time was of the essence. We will find that his descendants are in fact an impulsive and unpredictable people. Granted, Lot was ninety-two years old – just ten years older than when his father, Haran died. It is ironic, for Lot did not linger in Zoar, but rather fled from Zoar and retreated to a cave.
Lot’s entreating was in fact a far bigger favour even granted by the angels than sparing his life. When asking to be able to go to Zoar, he was actually asking for one of the five cities marked for destruction to be spared. The five cities in question were Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebo[im] and Bela – afterwards known as Zoar. According to Lot, it would seem it was the smallest of the five cites on the plain.
In contrast to what is commonly taught, the condemnation of Sodom and the other cities was not just because of sexual transgressions. Another reason is given in Ezekiel 16:49-50 ESV: “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid** the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.”
Genesis: 23 ‘The sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar. 24 Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven. 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.’
Book of Jasher 19:52-54
‘And he overthrew these cities, all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground; and Ado the wife of Lot looked back to see the destruction of the cities, for her compassion was moved on account of her daughters who remained in Sodom, for they did not go with her.53 And when she looked back she became a pillar of salt, and it is yet in that place unto this day. 54 And the oxen which stood in that place daily licked up the salt to the extremities of their feet, and in the morning it would spring forth afresh, and they again licked it up unto this day.’
The Book of Jasher gives Lot’s wife’s name as Ado. Certain Rabbis refer to her as Idit. One vowel lacking from Idiot, it would unfortunately seem. The Midrash calls her Edith, which may have derived from Idit. The Book of Jasher supports other married daughters still in Sodom, when Lot, his wife and two unmarried daughters fled for their lives. It helps to explain, why Idit disobeyed the Angel’s instruction. It may have been more than the intensity of the detonation and Idit doing more than just looking back. She must have lingered too close to the blast zone. The interlinear infers this: ‘But his wife looked back from behind him…’
Luke 17:28-32
English Standard Version
‘Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot – they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all – so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back.
Remember Lot’s wife.’
Genesis: 27 ‘And Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 And he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward [the east] all the land of the valley, and he looked and, behold, the smoke of the land went up like the smoke of a furnace. 29 So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived.’
Wisdom of Solomon 10.7 GNT:
‘You can still see the evidence of their wickedness. The land there is barren and smoking. The plants bear fruit that never ripens, and a pillar of salt stands as a monument to one who did not believe.’
Evidence found supporting the Biblical description of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction? Dean Smith, 2018 – emphasis mine:
‘In an article published in Science News, archaeologists working at Tall el-Hammam located in Jordan… have found evidence corroborating its massive destruction recorded in the Biblethat spoke of brimstone and fire falling from the sky… Archaeologists have found evidence of the area being hit with a massive explosion that turned glaze on potsherds into glass. They also found stone fragments stuck in the glaze that supports the idea that something poured down upon cities from the sky. According to lead archaeologist Philip J. Silvia, the heat was “perhaps as hot as the surface of the sun.” They also discovered that the bricks used in the buildings were totally obliterated leaving only the stone foundations.
The Bible records that not only were the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah [destroyed] but much of the valley as well and Silva confirmed this adding they found evidence the blast covered an area of 15.5 miles and killing upwards of 65,000 people. The site on the north end of the Dead Sea was so devastated that it took 600 years for the soil to recover sufficiently to allow crops…
Writing on behalf of the Tall el-Hamman Excavation Project, co-director Dr. Steven Collins said: “The violent conflagration that ended occupation at Tall el-Hammam produced melted potters, scorched foundation stones and several feet of ash and destruction debris churned into a dark gray matrix ‘as if in a Cuisinart’ [food processor].”
Archaeological evidence confirms that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by intense fire, Dean Smith, 2020- emphasis mine:
‘According to archaeologists working on the site believed to include the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, they found evidence confirming the Biblical record that the two cities were destroyed by sulphur and fire… The archaeologists, who have been working on the site for 13 years, reported discovering evidence of intense heat. This included clay and rock that had been turned into glass.
This would require a brief burst of heat of between 8,000 to 12,000 degree Celsius. The archaeologists also noted that the destruction took place “in an instant,” and resulted in the stripping of the topsoil. The archaeologists added that “a super-heated brine of Dead Sea anhydride salts pushed over the [landscape] by the Event’s frontal shock wave.”
It is interesting that even the Biblical account noted the appearance of salt as it described Lot’s wife being turned into a pillar of salt and as well, noted the destruction of vegetation. They wrote, “the physical evidence from Tall el-Hamman and neighboring sites exhibit signs of a highly destructive concussive and thermal event that one might expect from what is described in Genesis 19.”
Secular history is silent concerning Lot, ‘save for the fact that the Dead Sea has always been called by the Arabs, the Sea of Lot.’ The Battle of Siddim, including the Plain with the five cities – four of them destroyed – is located in the area of the Dead Sea or Sea of Death. The Dead Sea and its composition is an anomaly that can be explained only by the biblical destruction of the region as recorded in Genesis chapter nineteen. Archaeological digs have confirmed the northern end, southeast of Jericho, of the Dead Sea – rather than the traditional southern end – as the original site of the Valley of Siddim.
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1997 & 1999, Pages 195, 197-198, 206-207 – emphasis mine:
‘There is no scriptural or other evidence to support… Sodom and Gormorrah [being]… located… in the shallow or southern part of the Dead Sea, the body of water the Jews call… the Salt Sea…To the contrary, all indications are that the [five] cities were located in the northern part of the Dead Sea… [nor] the age of the Dead Sea [being] hundreds of thousands of years old… this sea dates… [according to Velikovsky to] less than 5000 years [ago]… [or] no further back than the days of Abraham [1878 BCE]. In the Biblical story… it specifically states that the area now occupied by the Dead Sea used to be called the Valley or vale of Siddim [Genesis 14:3]…’
‘Some catastrophic event must have caused the [rupture of the] geological fault (which runs through and underlies the area) to displace, the ground sinking in the process, and forming a seal to allow the accumulation of water [creating a large inland sea] from the inflow of the Jordan River. Josephus adds… that the Lord “cast a thunderbolt upon the city and set it on fire with its inhabitants.” In the Haggadah, this thunderbolt comes from the Shekinah, the aerial chariot of the Lord: “When the angels had brought forth Lot and his family and set them outside the city, he bade them run for their lives, and not look behind, lest they behold the Shekinah, which had descended to work the destruction of the cities…”
The Dead Sea contains twenty-one minerals including Sodium, Magnesium, Calcium, Bromine, Bitumen and Potassium. Twelve of these are found in no other sea or ocean. The Dead Sea contains ten times more salts and minerals than the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea has a 33% concentration of salt compared to only 3% in the world’s oceans. There are other bodies of water in the world with similar salt content ratios – one wonders if they are victims of a similar fate as the Dead Sea?
Genesis: 30 ‘Now Lot went up out of Zoar and lived in thehills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to live in Zoar. So he lived in a cave with his two daughters. 31 And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve offspring [seed] from our father.” 33 So they made their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and lay with her father. He did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.’
The incident with an intoxicated Noah and his daughter-in-law Na’eltama’uk, did not end well – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. This is another situation in being taken advantage of while inebriated. The cave location was very remote and the eldest daughter – the only sister recorded speaking – was concerned that their father Lot is old and may die (without a son and heir) and that any chance of a man visiting for them wasn’t presenting itself anytime soon. Their sisters and brothers-in-law in Sodom were dead and would not be leaving any children. This is more likely perhaps, than their thinking the world had ended and there were no men left to continue humankind. The three of them had left Zoar and knew there were other survivors. Either way, the daughters do not take their father into their confidence.
The biblical account presents the daughters as the ‘initiators and perpetrators of the incestuous rape’ of Lot over two separate nights, according to Esther Fuchs. The verb used by the older daughter about eighteen to twenty years old for giving Lot wine also means to irrigate the ground. Thus, the daughters intentions are not to just give their father a glass or two, but to fully saturate him and get Lot very drunk; before having sexual intercourse with him. The next night, the younger sister about fifteen to seventeen years old, repeats the course of action. The fact that the sisters get their father very drunk, suggests their actions were more altruistic than driven by desire.
One feels for Lot after the second night of binge drinking and not only the hangover he must have endured but coming to the realisation of what he had been party too.
The Hebrew word used for offspring is zera, meaning seed or offspring in a general sense, rather than for a specific ‘son.’ The intent is ultimately related to the eventual Messiah and fulfilment of Genesis 3:15. From a historical perspective, these acts were essential for the future birth of the Son of Man. The Creator would judge the daughters by their thoughts and not necessarily their deeds; as this is a recurrent theme in the Bible for those the Creator is working with. The daughters true intent was not to lay with their father for sexual gratification, but rather to ensure their family line continued.
Support that Lot’s daughters were vindicated rather than Lot himself is the fact that the prohibition in Deuteronomy 23:2-4, 6 ESV, applies to males not females: “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord. No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, because they did not meet you – the sons of Jacob – with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you. You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever.”
The angels who rescued Lot would have been cognisant of the fact that Ruth the Moabite would trace her lineage to the eldest sister, and her marriage to Boaz from the tribe of Judah would result in descendants, including King David and the Messianic Saviour. They would also have known that Naamah the Ammonite, would trace her lineage to the youngest sister and her marriage to King Solomon – the only wife of Solomon stated by name in the Bible – would result in the birth of Rehoboam, King of Judah after Solomon – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
The goodness of Lot’s daughters intentions displayed, in that they lay with their father only once and like Ruth – acted for an ideal – when she lay at the foot of Boaz’s bed in the threshing floor.
Genesis: 34 ‘The next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father. Let us make him drink wine tonight also. Then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve offspring from our father.” 35 So they made their father drink wine that night also. And the younger arose and lay with him, and he did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.’
Scholars, such as Robert Alter have postulated that Lot’s daughters in sleeping with their father “suggests measure-for-measure justice meted out for his rash offer” to the mob outside their home. ‘Rabbis have observed that a man usually allows himself to be killed in order to save his wife and children… Lot was willing to allow the townspeople to abuse his daughters.’ In Sodom, Lot was ready to offer his daughters – possibly against their will – to engage in sexual relations with the people outside. Later, Lot’s daughters have relations with their unwitting father. These acts of incest are Lot’s punishment for his indecorous behaviour, according to some scholars.
There are two Rabbinic views issued against the patriarch Lot. Firstly, that Lot ‘from the outset, decided to dwell in Sodom because he wanted to engage in the licentious [behaviour] of its inhabitants.’ Lot thought he could engage secretly in depravity. He is then later, humiliated through his daughters seducing him. R Nahman bar Hanan said to the effect: “Whoever is driven by his lust for fornication, will eventually be fed from his own flesh.” Lot was so eager to engage in promiscuity, that in the end, his daughters played the harlot with him.
Secondly, Lot insidiously desired his daughters; for he was inebriated when the elder sister lay with him, though he was sober enough to know when she rose.
This is indicated in the Old Testament ‘by the supralinear dot over the word u-ve-komah (“when she rose”).’ Though Lot was not aware of what was going to happen when he drunk the wine, he was aware of having sex with his eldest daughter by the time she left his bed. Therefore, his willingness to drink wine the next night – means to some – that he was complicit in repeating incest with his younger daughter. On the basis of what is said in Proverbs 18:1 CJB: “He who separates himself indulges his desires and shows contempt for sound advice of any kind”, some Rabbis conclude that Lot did lust after his daughters. Particularly, as Lot sought out a remote cave which allowed the facilitation of the incestuous events to occur.
Even so, other Rabbis have reinterpreted the incest accounts of Lot and his daughters in the Bible in a more positive light due to the royal and messianic lineages it produced. Ironically, the other half of David’s lineage is similarly problematic for the Rabbis; as Tamar secures a son, by surreptitiously seducing her father-in-law Judah. The son Pharez, in turn becomes an ancestor to Boaz and thus also, to King David.
Genesis: 36 ‘Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 37The firstborn bore a son andcalled his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day. 38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.
Book of Jasher 19:55, 57-60
‘And Lot and two of his daughters that remained with him fled and escaped to the cave of Adullam, and they remained there for some time… And they both lay with their father, and they conceived and bare sons… And after this Lot and his two daughters went away from there, and he dwelt on the other side of the Jordan with his two daughters and their sons, and the sons of Lot grew up, and they went and took themselves wives from the land of Canaan, and they begat children and they were fruitful and multiplied.’
The eldest daughter names her son Moab, which means ‘from my father.’ She has been rather brazen and immodest in openly naming her son being born of her father. This now leaves no doubt as to the union being an incestuous one. The younger daughter names her son Ben-Ammi, which means ‘son of my clan,’ a more veiled euphemistic reference to her son’s origin. While the names of the sons are descriptive of their conception, they serve a negative etiological (cause or origin of something, invariably a disease) function for Israel’s neighbours – and frequent enemies – as the Moabites and the Ammonites. The definitions, puzzlingly humiliate Lot – as if revengeful retribution was a motive – while at the same time demeaning also his daughters who named the babies.
Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis mine:
‘It is a remarkable fact that the children of Lot should have commemorated their infamous origin in their very names.Moab means literally “water of a father,” while Ammon or Ben-ammi means “son of my mother.” These names, so horribly suggestive, were proudly retained by two whole nations throughout their history. The Old Testament is silent as to the personal story of the two sons of Lot, but they evidently repeated the story of the founders of the other Hebrew nations, becoming chieftains… and founding royal dynasties…
The descendants of Moab within a few generations took possession of the country formerly inhabited by the Emim, (“terrible ones”), a branch of the aboriginal Nephilim, even as their cousins, the descendants of Ammon, took possession of the country formerly occupied by the Zuzim and Zamzummim.
The [partial] slaughter of these ancient giant races by Chedorlaomer and his allies no doubt cleared the way for the children of Lot. The Moabites found homes in the rich and well protected plateau to the east of the Dead Sea, extending from the land of Edom in the south to the land of Gilead in the north, while the Ammonites established themselves in the land of Gilead… and they dwelt here until they were driven into the eastern desert by the tribes of Gad and Reuben… their descendants recovered the land of Gilead after the Assyrians had carried away the tribe of Gad.’
The significance of the Ammonites dwelling in Gilead will become apparent as we progress.
2 Peter 2:6-8 ESV: ‘… if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if herescued righteous [1] Lot,greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous [2] man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous [3] soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)…’
The author of 2 Peter really wishes to convey the righteousness of Lot, yet was he really righteous? His actions do not convey the deeds of a converted mind. For Lot a. knowingly insulted the local land owners; b. fell out with ‘righteous’ Abraham (Romans 4:22); c. ignored the specific instructions of the angels when fleeing Sodom and argued for his own way – and then preceded to change his mind about living in Zoar and fled to a cave in the hills as the angels and stipulated in the first place; d. was willing to sacrifice his youngest daughters’ virginity to rape; and e. then slept with both of them himself. As the Book of 2 Peter was not authored by the Apostle Peter, one wonders as to the inspiration and veracity of its claims regarding Lot – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.
In fact, Lot is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as one of the faithful, with Abraham and Sarah. His omission is more glaring than King Solomon for example, who deliberately turned away from the Lord – 1 Kings 11:9. The author of 2 Peter calls Lot a righteous soul in the Greek Interlinear. And so by extension, he has perhaps unduly included Lot with the righteous giants, Noah, Daniel and Job – Ezekiel 14:14.
Even so, Lot has a lot in common with Job in the dramatic and sudden loss of most of his family. Lot lost his wife, and at least two daughters and two sons-in-law. Job 1:1-2, 18-19 ESV: ‘There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil. There were born to him seven sons and three daughters… “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you” – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Perhaps the Eternal was working with Lot in humbling him.
Ammon, the younger brother of Moab, is invariably described as the ‘children or sons of Ammon’ in the Bible, a clue to their status not being quite the same as Moab or other identities investigated thus far. The Hebrew definition of H5983 from H5971, for Ammon is tribal or inbred as one born from incest.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ben-ammi meaning: Son Of My Kinsman, Son Of My People from (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (‘am), people or kinsman [kindred].
The only Ben-ammi in the Bible is the incestuous son of Lot and his younger daughter, who becomes the patriarch of the “sons” of Ammon, also known as the Ammonites (Genesis 19:38)… it‘s curious that both the daughters… of this prominent figure remain nameless, also since Lot‘s daughters are matriarchs of enormous nations.
The noun (ben) means son, or more general: a member of one particular social or economic node – called a “house”, which is built upon the instructions of one (‘ab), or “father”… within… a larger economy… This noun obviously resembles the verb (bana), to build, and the noun (‘eben), stone. Our noun’s feminine version, namely (bat), means daughter, which resembles the noun (bayit), meaning house. The word for mother, (’em), is highly similar to that of tribe or people, (‘umma). The verb (‘mm) probably expressed to be inclusive or comprehensive. Its rare uses in the Bible relate to making secrets or making info available to an in-crowd.
For a meaning of the name Ammon, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads A People.Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes Great People, taking the extension as an intensitive.’
The children of Ammon today are in part, the French Canadians of Quebec. They also comprise the northwesterly section of the nation of France (and the capital, Paris); with the main body of French being descended from the eldest son Moab.
French Canadian men
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:
‘Abraham also had a nephew named Lot. Lot had two sons, Moab and Ammon. They were born to him after the calamity that hit Sodom (Genesis 19:37-38). They lived by the Arabs east of the Dead Sea next to Palestine. They are still in the same region today! Their nation today is called Jordan, after the Jordan River. Jordan has been much in the news lately, Amman is the capital of Jordan now.’
The Arabs once lived in north Africa and then migrated to the Arabian Peninsula. They never lived north of this area or next to Moab and Ammon. The peoples of present day Jordan as discussed, are descendants of Mizra, son of Ham – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Moab and Ammon migrated from Palestine a very long time ago; with some two thousand years elapsing between there and their present location.
Hoeh: ‘Isaiah 11:14 points out that these two sons of Lot live near Palestine today. Since the days of Isaiah, the children of Moab have been “very small and without strength” (Isaiah 16:13-14). They have not been taken “into captivity” to another nation (Jeremiah 48:11), In these latter days boastful Moab lives “together with the children of Ammon” (Ezekiel 25:9-10). The Kingdom of Jordan occupies part of present-day Palestine and keeps the Jews from dwelling in Old Jerusalem. Jeremiah 49:1-2 prophesied this over 2500 years ago! But Arabs and Jordanians are not the only Hebrews!’
Isaiah chapter sixteen is a future reference to Moab. Moab and Ammon are anything but a ‘very few and feeble’ people (English Standard version). The Arabic peoples descended from Ham are not Hebrews. This appellation refers broadly to the descendants of Peleg through his grandson, Eber. It would include Moab and Ammon. In time it was applied primarily to the sons of Jacob. The chief city or capital of the Ammonites was Rabbah and has a modern day equivalent – to be discussed. Hoeh’s comment regarding Moab and Ammon today living together is an insightful one and biblically and historically supported.
French Canadian women
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Rabbah meaning: Great from the verb (rabab), to be great or many.
There are two cities named Rabbah in the Bible, the lesser known one is a city in the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:60). The most famous Rabbah was also known as Rabbath-bene-ammon or “Rabbath of the sons of Ammon” (Rabbath is really the same as Rabbah, just of an older spelling), which was the major city of Ammon (modern Amman, the capital of Jordan).
It’s first mentioned in the Bible as the final resting place of the huge iron bed of king Og of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11). What Og’s bunk was doing in an Ammonite metropolis is a bit of a mystery. Bashan was a kingdom located to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and Ammon country was to the east of the Salt Sea. But Og was the last of the Rephaim… and they were expelled by the Ammonites (Deuteronomy 2:20). It appears that the Ammonites had hoisted Og’s huge bedstead to their capital as a trophy.
Even though YHWH had ordered not to meddle with Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19), the tribes of Gad and Reuben [plus the half tribe of East Manasseh] settled in their land anyway. Rabbah is listed as just over the border of Gad, which puts it in or near Reuben, although that’s not explicitly mentioned (Joshua 15:25). The reason for this is probably that the Ammonites held out in Rabbah until the time of king David.
While the author of 2 Samuel focuses mainly on David’s seduction of Bathsheba, her husband Uriah was engaged with the siege of Rabbah. The author casually reports that the Ammonites were destroyed and Rabbah captured by general Joab (2 Samuel 11:1, 12:26). The gold crown of the Ammonite king weighed a talent and was placed on David’s head, and the Ammonites were massacred in the most creative ways (2 Samuel 12:31)… Nahash is also the name of the cruel Ammonite king whom Saul defeated (1 Samuel 11:1). The son of this Nahash, Hanun, provoked David into the siege that ended in Rabbah’s ultimate defeat (2 Samuel 10:1).
… the identical noun (rab) means chief or captain. Noun (rob) means multitude or abundance. Possibly a second yet identical verb (rabab) means to shoot, particularly of arrows. This may very well be a specified usage of our verb since arrows are customarily shot en masse by many archers. Noun (rab) means archer, and is identical to the adjective meaning many. Fittingly, noun (arbeh) denotes a kind of locust.
For a meaning of the name Rabbah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Great, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Great City, and BDB Theological Dictionary proposes Great or Populous.’
There are hundreds of references to Ammon and Moab in the Bible as they were an arch nemesis of the sons of Jacob. The reason for this was heightened by the fact they were great nations with large populations living next to each other. The fact that the sons of Jacob had returned to the land centuries after leaving had only exacerbated their natural enmity as two closely related family members who just didn’t get along.
Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis mine:
‘Both became great and powerful clans or nations, but theAmmonites always preferred the roving life of… marauders, while Moab… [developed] into a settled, well organized and prosperous nation, the chief characteristics of which were wealth and moral corruption.
The prosperity and riches of Moab are vividly portrayed in the Word. In the cities of this land there was “a great multitude of people,” living on the “glory” and “fat of the land,” possessing “great treasure,” and crowding the temples of Chemosh and Baal Peor, where infants were sacrificed, and virgins prostituted in the name of religion’ – refer article: Belphegor. ‘Outside of the towns were the “plentiful fields,” the vineyards and gardens of “summer fruit,” the meadows where hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle were browsing. Peace and prosperity reign everywhere; the people are fat and self-satisfied, but of the worship of the true God there is not a trace.
Small wonder that such a nation should view with alarm the approach of a great horde of desert wanderers, asking permission to pass through the land on their way to Canaan. They came as Hebrew kinsmen, worshipping an ancient but generally forsaken deity named Jehovah. Balak, the king of the Moabites, now bethought himself of a Syrian wizard, Balaam, who was [known]: to prophecy in the name of Jehovah and who was wont to dispense his blessings or cursings for filthy lucre. If a prophet of Jehovah were to curse the children of Israel, the latter would surely be put to confusion. He, therefore, sent for the complaisant prophet, but great was his disgust when the magician was forced by his God to turn the intended curse into a blessing, the power and beauty of which are almost without equal in Hebrew literature. Dismayed, Balak now allied himself with the Midianites in an effort to destroy Israel by the seductions of harlots in the lascivious rites of Baal Peor, but again his scheme was frustrated, and he was glad to escape the frightful punishment meted out to the Midianites, who had been the most active in the plot.
The subsequent relations of Moab with Israel were of a somewhat mixed character, sometimes friendly, as is evident from the story of Ruth, the Moabitish ancestress of David, but more generally hostile.Not long after the Israelitish conquest, Eglon, king of Moab, by the assistance of Ammon and Amalek, “smote Israel and possessed himself of the city of palm trees,” (Jericho), The children of Israel now “served Eglon for eighteen years” (Judges 3:13), until they were delivered by Ehud [2nd Judge of Israel, from the tribe of Benjamin – from 1284 to 1204 BCE]. The Moabites, however, continued to harass the chosen people on various occasions, and were not subdued until David put to the sword two-thirds of the population, the remainder becoming bondsmen and subjected to a regular tribute, (2 Samuel 8:2; 23:20), thus literally fulfilling Balaam’s prophecy: “Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion and shall destroy him that remaineth of Ar,” (i.e., Moab). After the division of Solomon’s kingdom, Moab seems to have remained tributary to the kingdom of Israel, and in the time of Ahab paid an annual tribute of [100,000 rams] – an indication of the almost fabulous wealth of so small a nation.
After the death of Ahab the Moabites revolted and joined the Ammonites in an attack upon the kingdom of Judah. The allies, however, fell to fighting one another; and Judah, Israel and Edom now joined in a war against Moab; the latter fell into an ambush and were slaughtered; the land of Moab was swept clean by the besom of destruction; the cities were beaten down and their stones scattered over the fields…thewells of water were filled up, and all the trees of the land were cut down. The king of Moab, with his family and a small remnant of the army, took refuge in Kir-haraseth where, in the extremity of despair, and in full sight of the besiegers, “he took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall.” (2 Kings 3:27.)
The besieging army, struck with horror at this sight, now withdrew to their own lands. After this awful event, nothing further is known of the history of Moab for a long period, but it appears that Moab gradually recovered all of its former prosperity, and in addition took possession of the territory of Reuben, after this tribe had been carried away by the Assyrians. At the time of the Babylonian invasion, Moab submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, and after the return of the Jews from the captivity the Moabites took the lead in annoying those who were rebuilding Jerusalem. Even at the time of the last Jewish war the Moabites, according to Josephus, was still “a very great nation,” but two hundred years afterwards they were exterminated or absorbed by a great invasion of “the children of the East.”
The Moabites were neither ‘exterminated or absorbed’ but rather, they were forced to migrate westwards. The Ammonites were a more diverse or fragmented people compared to their elder brother Moab. In Canaan the Ammonites had their own territory north of Moab, with their own capital – Rabbah. Ultimately they joined with Moab and migrated with them. Though these were not all the descendants of Ammon and Moab as we shall discover. In modern times, most have unified with Moab in France, while the remainder migrated to New France in North America, eventually becoming the modern province of Quebec in Canada.
Today, the term Rabbah – as in those Ammonites not dwelling with Moab – broadly means the province of Quebec and Rabbah as in specifically the capital, is fulfilled by Quebec City.
When the Israelites entered Canaan, they were instructed to leave Ammon alone.
Deuteronomy 2:16-22, 37
English Standard Version
16 “So as soon as all the men of war had perished and were dead from among the people, 17 the Lord said to me, 18 ‘Today you are to cross the border of Moab at Ar. 19 And when you approach the territory of the people of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the people of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession.’ 20 (It is also counted as a land of Rephaim. Rephaim formerly lived there – but the Ammonites call them Zamzummim – 21 a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim; but the Lord destroyed them before the Ammonites, and they dispossessed them and settled in their place, 22 as he did for the people of Esau, who live in Seir, when he destroyed the Horites before them and they dispossessed them and settled in their place even to this day. 37 Only to the land of the sons of Ammon you did not draw near, that is, to all the banks of the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, whatever the Lord our God had forbidden us.”
The Israelites and Ammonites repeatedly disputed territory and borders. The rift between Lot and Abraham didn’t heal or improve with time and aggravation continually worsened the relationship. The instruction was clear: do not engage negatively with Ammon in any way or take their land.
Joshua 13:8-13
English Standard Version
‘With the other half of the tribe of Manasseh [half tribe of East Manasseh (or Gilead)] the Reubenites and the Gadites received their inheritance, which Moses gave them, beyond the Jordan eastward, as Moses the servant of the Lord gave them: from Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and the city that is in the middle of the valley, and all the tableland of Medeba as far as Dibon; and all the cities of Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon, asfar as the boundary of the Ammonites; and Gilead, and the region of the Geshurites and Maacathites, and all Mount Hermon, and all Bashan to Salecah; all the kingdom of Og in Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei (he alone was left of the remnant of the Rephaim); these Moses had struck and driven out. Yet the people of Israel did not drive out the Geshurites or the Maacathites, but Geshur and Maacath dwell in the midst of Israel to this day.’
After the sons of Jacob fought the existing Canaanite inhabitants and had either killed or subjugated them, the land was divided amongst the tribes on the eastern side of the River Jordan. The tribe of Manasseh had split in two. The half tribe of West Manasseh stayed with their brother Ephraim, while the half tribe of East Manasseh struck out on their own. With the tribes of Reuben and Gad, they requested to live on the east side of the River Jordan. These two and a half tribes believed the land was spacious and suitable to live. It did not come without difficulties; namely, Ammonites, Amorites, various tribes of Elioud giants – such as king Og of the Rephaim – and Mount Herman, the once headquarters so-to-speak, of the Watcher fallen angels.
Judges 10:17-18
English Standard Version
‘Then the Ammonites were called to arms, and they encamped in Gilead. And the people of Israel came together, and they encamped at Mizpah. And the people, the leaders of Gilead, said one to another, “Who is the man who will begin to fight against the Ammonites? He shall be head over all the inhabitants of Gilead.”
Gilead – a name brought to the wider public’s attention by the Canadian author Margaret Atwood and her insightful novel, The Handmaid’s Tale in 1985 (and 1990 film) – was the broad area east of the River Jordan and bordering north of Ammon which had been settled by the two and a half tribes of Israel. In time, the word Gilead became more synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh than with Reuben or Gad.
Judges 11:11-33
English Standard Version
11 ‘So Jephthah [ninth Judge of Israel for 6 years beginning in 1106 BCE from the half tribe of East Manasseh (or Gilead)] went with the elders of Gilead, andthe people made him head and leader over them. And Jephthah spoke all his words before the Lord at Mizpah.
12 Then Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites and said, “What do you have against me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?” 13 And the king of the Ammonites answered the messengers of Jephthah, “Because Israel on coming up from Egypt took away my land,from the Arnon to the Jabbok and to the Jordan; now therefore restore it peaceably.” 14 Jephthah again sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites 15 and said to him, “Thus says Jephthah: Israel did not take away the land of Moab or the land of the Ammonites, 16 but when they came up from Egypt, Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh. 17 Israel then sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let us pass through your land,’ but the king of Edom would not listen. And they sent also to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh.
18 “Then they journeyed through the wilderness and went around the land of Edom and the land of Moab and arrived on the east side of the land of Moab and camped on the other side of the Arnon. But they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the boundary of Moab. 19 Israel then sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, ‘Please let us pass through your land to our country,’ 20 but Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory, so Sihon gathered all his people together and encamped at Jahaz and fought with Israel. 21 And the Lord, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them. So Israel took possession of all the land of the Amorites, who inhabited that country…
23 So then the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess. 25 Now are you any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? Did he ever contend against Israel, or did he ever go to war with them? 26 While Israel lived in Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities that are on the banks of the Arnon, 300 years [1406 – 1106 BCE], why did you not deliver them within that time? 27 I therefore have not sinned against you, and you do me wrong by making war on me. The Lord, the Judge, decide this day between the people of Israel and the people of Ammon.” 28 But the king of the Ammonites did not listen to the words of Jephthah that he sent to him.
29 Then the Spirit of the Lord was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead and Manasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the Lord gave them into his hand. 33 And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim, with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.’
The king of the Ammonites raised an issue three hundred years old. The Moabites hadn’t made an issue of it, so why Ammon and why now was Jephthah’s reasoning. The Israelites had defeated the Amorites – after being refused passage through Edom and Moab – and probably some of their land, had once been Ammonite land. It was too late to dispute it now. The king of Ammon remained stubborn and proud, but did not win it back.
2 Samuel 12:26-31
English Standard Version
26 ‘Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and took the royal city. 27 And Joab sent messengers to David and said, “I have fought against Rabbah; moreover, I have taken the city of waters.* 28 Now then gather the rest of the people together and encamp against the city and take it, lest I take the city and it be called by my name.” 29 So David gathered all the people together and went to Rabbah and fought against it and took it. 30 And he took the crown of their king from his head. The weight of it was a talent of gold, and in it was a precious stone, and it was placed on David’s head. And he brought out the spoil of the city, a very great amount. 31 And he brought out the people who were in it and set them to labor with saws and iron picks and iron axes and made them toil at the brick kilns. And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.’
David exacted harsh measures on the Ammonites, which didn’t improve relations, but showed the strength of negative feeling between the two peoples. His actions did contravene the instruction of not to contend, to struggle in opposition or strive in rivalry with Ammon.
Quebec is Kebec in Algonquin, meaning ‘where the river narrows.’ The Province of Quebec has a vast coastline. The motto of Quebec City is Don de Dieu feray valoir: “I shall put God’s gift to good use.” The Don de Dieu was one of three ships which set sail from France under captain Henry Couillard and on July 3, 1608 explorer Samuel de Champlain – established a fort at Cape Diamond and – founded Quebec City, the oldest city in Canada. The Montmorency Falls are located on the Montmorency River and are about 270 feet tall – one hundred feet taller than Niagara Falls. One of Quebec’s most important resources is water,* harnessed for hydroelectric power.
Notice the two interlocked keys, reminiscent of the keys of Unterwalden, Switzerland (and the Papal Keys).
1 Chronicles 19:19
English Standard Version
‘And when the servants of Hadadezer saw that they had been defeated by Israel, they made peace with David and became subject to him. So the Syrians [Gether-Aram-Spain] were not willing to save the Ammonites anymore.’
1 Kings 11:7
English Standard Version
‘Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh theabomination of Moab, and for Molech theabomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.’
Nehemiah 4:1-9
English Standard Version
1 ‘Now when Sanballat heard that we were building the wall, he was angry and greatly enraged, and he jeered at the [Judeans]. 2 And he said in the presence of his brothers and of the army of Samaria, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they restore it for themselves? Will they sacrifice? Will they finish up in a day? Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, and burned ones at that?” 3 Tobiah theAmmonite was beside him, and he said, “Yes, what they are building – if a fox goes up on it he will break down their stone wall!”
4 Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders. 6 So we built the wall. And all the wall was joined together to half its height, for the people had a mind to work.
7 But when Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabs [not Arabs from Mizra. Arabians meaning, in the eastern peninsula of Arabia – probably Joktan] and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites [Philistines] heard that the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem was going forward and that the breaches were beginning to be closed, they were very angry. 8 And they all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it. 9 And we prayed to our God and set a guard as a protection against them day and night.’
The Medes and Persians had allowed captives from Judah and Benjamin to return to Jerusalem and rebuild its walls and Temple compound. Tobiah the Ammonite was one who mocked their efforts.
Jeremiah 40:11-16
English Standard Version
11 ‘Likewise, when all the Judeans who were in Moaband among the Ammonites and in Edom and in other lands heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant in Judah and had appointed Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, as governor over them, 12 then all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been driven and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah at Mizpah. And they gathered wine and summer fruits in great abundance. 13 Now Johanan the son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces in the open country came to Gedaliah at Mizpah
14 and said to him, “Do you know that Baalis the king of the Ammonites has sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take your life?” But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam would not believe them. 15 Then Johanan the son of Kareah spoke secretly to Gedaliah at Mizpah, “Please let me go and strike down Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and no one will know it. Why should he take your life, so that all the Judeans who are gathered about you would be scattered, and the remnant of Judah would perish?” 16 But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said to Johanan the son of Kareah, “You shall not do this thing, for you are speaking falsely of Ishmael.” [Ishmael (not Abraham’s son) did assassinate Gedaliah]’
Jeremiah 49:1-6
English Standard Version
‘Concerning the Ammonites. Thus says the Lord: “Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Why then has Milcom [a prominent god of Ammon, with Molech] dispossessed Gad and his people settled in its cities? 2 Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will cause the battle cry to be heard against Rabbah of the Ammonites; it shall become a desolate mound, and its villages shall be burned with fire; then Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, says the Lord.
3 “Wail, O Heshbon, for Ai is laid waste! Cry out, O daughters of Rabbah! [the descendants of Lot’s youngest daughter] Put on sackcloth, lament, and run to and fro among the hedges! For Milcom shall go into exile, with his priests and his officials. 4 Why do you boast of your valleys, O faithless daughter, who trusted in her treasures, saying, ‘Who will come against me?’
5 Behold, I will bring terror upon you, declares the Lord God of hosts, from all who are around you, and you shall be driven out, every man straight before him, with none to gather the fugitives. 6 “But afterward I will restore the fortunes of the Ammonites, declares the Lord.”
In modern times, France and Quebec have been blessed with wealth and abundance.
Ezekiel 21:28-32
English Standard Version
“And you, son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God concerning theAmmonitesandconcerning theirreproach; say, A sword, a sword is drawn for the slaughter. It is polished to consume and to flash like lightning – while they see for you false visions, while they divine lies for you – to place you on the necks of the profane wicked, whose day has come, the time of their final punishment. Return it to its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. And I will pour out my indignation upon you; I will blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, [similar to the fire inflicted on Sodom] and I will deliver you into the hands of brutish men, skillful to destroy. You shall be fuel for the fire. Your blood shall be in the midst of the land. You shall be no more remembered, for I the Lord have spoken.”
The punishment decreed at the end of the latter days when the Son of Man returns. Many nations will suffer similar fates and some because of their attitude and treatment towards the sons of Jacob.
Ezekiel 25:1-11
English Standard Version
1 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face toward the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to the Ammonites, Hear the word of the Lord God: Thus says the Lord God, Because you said, ‘Aha!’ over my sanctuary when it was profaned, and over the land of Israel when it was made desolate, and over the house of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore behold, I am handing you over to the people of the East for a possession, and they shall set their encampments among you and make their dwellings in your midst. They shall eat your fruit, and they shall drink your milk. 5 I will make Rabbah a pasture for camels and Ammon a fold for flocks.
Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For thus says the Lord God: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the malice within your soul against the land of Israel, 7 therefore, behold, I have stretched out my hand against you, and will hand you over as plunder to the nations. And I will cut you off from the peoples and will make you perish out of the countries; I will destroy you. Then you will know that I am the Lord.
8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab [France] from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.’
Whether this prophecy is dual, with a future fulfilment involving France, time will tell. The people of the east in the past as well as today includes a number of alternatives. It could mean a dominant near neighbour and relative as in Ishmael, who originally dwelt in the east, known as Arabia or alternatively the wilderness. Secondly and unlikely, Assyria (or Russia) – the king of the North – as they spared Moab and the Ammonites in the past as well as predicted for the future – Daniel 11.41. As it appears to be the far future, possibly further distant than the King of the North timeframe, it could mean the far East and descendants of Japheth – such as Magog, Tubal and Meschech (Revelation 16:12) – in partial ironic fulfilment of the sons of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem – Genesis 9:27.
Daniel 11:40-41
English Standard Version
“At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his [Assyria’s] hand: Edom and Moab [France] and the main part of the Ammonites [northwestern France and the capital].”
The French Canadians heralded from principally the north and western regions of France (over 90%), particularly Normandy and Poitou. Every region with direct access to the Ocean (water) and with a tradition of long-term fishing expeditions, attracted migrants to New France. Apparently, French Canadian soldiers were surprised when they landed in Normandy, discovering how much Norman French was like their own dialect.
The Tribe of Benjamin are the Normans, Peter Salemi – emphasis & bold mine:
‘A review of census records for the year 1700 reveals that of New France’s French-speaking colonists, 29% came from the provinces of Poitou, Aunis, Saintonge, and Angoumois in the mother country; 22% from Normandyand Perche;15% from Paris and Ile-de-France; 13% from Anjou, Touraine, Beauce, and Maine;9%from Brittany, Picardy, and Champagne; 5% from Limousin, Périgord, and Guyenne; 7% from other regions.
Thus over 50% of immigrants to Quebec, and possibly much more, came from north of the Loire river in France, i.e.,areas ofNorman, Breton, andFrankishsettlement. In addition, many of the Seigneurs (Lords) of Quebec, e.g., the families of de Lotbinière, Panet, Montizambert, etc., were Norman, who left Normandy in 1686.’
Amos 1:13-15
English Standard Version
‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead, that they might enlarge their border. So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind; and their king shall go into exile, he and his princes together,” says the Lord.’
This passage is of note because the Ammonites dwelt both within and adjacent to the territory of Giliead, which in time was synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh. Therefore, the fact that a proportion of the descendants of Ammon (in Quebec) dwell amongst the descendants of East Manasseh (Gilead) in Canada is of no small coincidence.
The map above is a fair representation of the Ammon (northwest) and Moab (northeast and south) geographic divide (or split) between the brothers. Not so much the dotted line, but the twelve regions (provinces) highlighted.
Zephaniah 2:8-10
Amplified Bible
“I have heard the taunting of Moab [and] the revilings of the sons of Ammon, With which they have taunted My people And become arrogant against their territory [by violently and cruelly violating Israel’s boundary and trying to seize its land]. “Therefore, as I live,” declares the Lord of hosts, The God of Israel, “Moab will in fact become like Sodom [and] the sons of Ammon like Gomorrah, [a] land possessed by nettles and salt pits, And a perpetual desolation. The remnant of My people will plunder them And what is left of My nation will inherit them [as their own].” This they shall have in return for their pride, because they have taunted and become arrogant against the people of the Lord of hosts.’
Ammon had no authority to try to possess Gilead or take it from Israel. The sitting on the sidelines and relishing Judah’s downfall and subsequent captivity at the hands of the Chaldeans, has also been a cause of Ammon and particularly Moab, receiving retribution – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
We will discover that Ammon and particularly Moab are described frequently in the Bible as being proud, with it rather being a national trait (fault). It is ironic that in the way Sodom was criticised (and Punished) for withholding acts of kindness towards those in need, the descendants of Lot similarly – Lot who had dwelt in Sodom – were (and will be) punished in the same way by fire, for their withholding passage and supplies to the Israelites when they returned from captivity in Egypt.
An important person mentioned earlier from the line of Ammon was Naamah, a royal princess of Ammon – not to be confused with the daughter of evil Lamech prior to the Flood (refer article: Na’amah). An additional reason for the sons of Jacob not to wage war and destroy Ammon and Moab. Her name means ‘sweet, lovely’ or ‘pleasant’ from the verb naem. Naamah married Solomon before he became king in 970 BCE. Their son, Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE. Naamah provided the heir to the throne of Judah and she is the only wife of Solomon, mentioned by name in the Bible. Naamah is also only one of two foreign Queen Mothers of Israel or Judah, with Jezebel – a Princess of Tyre and the daughter of the Phoenician King Ethbaal. Naamah, may well have been an influence on Solomon who later turned away from the Eternal, to worship Ammonite and Moabite gods – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.
1 Kings 14:21-23
English Standard Version
‘Now Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city that the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. His mother’s name was Naamah the Ammonite. And [the House of] Judah did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins that they committed, more than all that their fathers had done. For they also built for themselves high places and pillars and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree…’– refer article: Asherah.
15 Fun Quebec City Facts, Nadeen White, 2018 – capitalisation hers, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Quebec City is also known simply as Quebec [similar to Rabbah of the Ammonites]. It is located in the Canadian province of Quebec… [and] is the capital city… [as well as] the second largest city… Montreal is the largest city in the province of Quebec.
Quebec is a French speaking province [and] is the official language… Approximately 80% of the residents speak French as their native language… It is the oldest French speaking [region] in North America. However, English is [also widely] spoken by most residents… Old Quebec is surrounded by fortified city walls [it is the only remaining walled city in North America north of Mexico] that were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1985…
Quebec produces a LOT of maple syrup… I had no idea thatCanada produces about 70% of the world‘s pure maple syrup. Out of that 70% about 90% is from the province of Quebec. Most of the maple syrup produced in the U.S. comes from Vermont.
In 2010 the Province of Quebec produced roughly 7,989,000 gallons of maple syrup while Vermont produced roughly 890,000 gallons. Quebec isn’t just French… there are many Irish people here too! There is actually a large Irish community in Quebec. During the 17th century, Irish inhabitants of France were sent to Quebec to help populate the area. Historians estimate that about 40% of the population in Quebec is of Irish descent.’
This is a startling fact and the Irish component in Quebec is more than interesting, it is of great significance. When we study the Irish (Gad) and the British – Northern Irish (Reuben) – descended peoples of Canada (half tribe of East Manasseh), their relationship with the French Ammonites of Quebec (within the land of Gilead) will be fascinatingly evident – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. Quebec is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic and during the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s and 1850s a large number of Irish Catholics, migrated to Canada and Quebec.
The Province of Quebec comprises nearly one-sixth of Canada’s total land area; is the largest of Canada’s ten provinces; and possesses an abundance of mineral wealth. The site of Quebec City, originally occupied by an Indian village named Stadacona, was discovered by Jacques Cartier in 1535. Quebec Province and city were formally French until ceded to Great Britain in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris. This was the result of the famous Battle of Quebec on the Plains of Abraham – interesting name coincidence – adjacent to the city in 1759, where the French were defeated. Later, Great Britain reinforced its military defences of the city in time to repel an attack during the American Revolution in the second Battle of Quebec in 1775.
The arrival of displaced Loyalists following American independence, increased Quebec’s population and so did trade with Britain, much of it through the port of Quebec. Up until the mid-nineteenth century, Quebec’s economy was centred on French and then British mercantilism. The British Parliament passed the Constitutional Act of 1791, which split the large colony of Quebec into two provinces: Upper Canada – now the province of Ontario – and Lower Canada, now the province of Quebec. Quebec city, formerly the capital of the colony, remained the capital of Lower Canada.
After the British takeover of New France, Montreal – founded in 1642 and the second largest Canadian city after Toronto – gained the dominant economic position in the province, whereas Quebec remained an important port. Quebec is the second most populous province of Canada after Ontario with 8,604,500 people. ‘On November 27, 2006, the House of Commons passed a symbolic motion moved by Prime Minister Stephen Harper declaring “that this House recognize that the Quebecois [Francophones] form a nation within a united Canada.” However, there is considerable debate and uncertainty over what this means. The debate over the status of Quebec is a highly animated one to this day.’
Quebec Flag
Nearly half of the total population of Quebec are descendants of the ten thousand original French settlers. When the Dominion of Canada was established in 1867, French Canadians accounted for one-third of the newly formed country’s population. In 1974, French was made the official language in Quebec province. Between 1897 and 1936, Quebec competed with Ontario for domestic and foreign investment. Montreal was the headquarters of the national banks, the insurance corporations and the railway companies. Even so, Ontario, because of its proximity to the United States, its shared language and the vast amounts of hydroelectric power at Niagara Falls, was more attractive for United States investment. An ensuing struggle developed between Montreal and Toronto, with Toronto eventually gaining the upper hand.
The colony of New France included Acadia, with its first capital in Port-Royal in 1605. ‘The term Acadia today refers to regions of North America that are historically associated with the lands, descendants, or culture of the former region [in north eastern Canada]. It particularly refers to regions of The Maritimes with Acadian roots, language, and culture, primarily in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands, and Prince Edward Island, as well as in Maine. It can also refer to the Acadian diaspora in southern Louisiana, a region also referred to as Acadiana. In the abstract, Acadia refers to the existence of an Acadian culture in any of these regions. People living in Acadia are called Acadians which changed to Cajuns in Louisiana, the American pronunciation of Acadians.’
The word Acadia is similar to Akkad(ia) of Babylon and Acadian parallels the name, Akkadian. The original peoples of Akkad were descendants of Arphaxad and his great grandson Peleg. They were related to and ancestors of the peoples from Haran and Nahor. As Haran’s children include the modern French it is a notable association. Explorer Giovanni de Verrazzano is credited in originating the designation Acadia on his 16th century map, where he applied the ancient Greek name Arcadia to the entire Atlantic coast north of Virginia.
‘Arcadia’ is derived from the district in ancient Greece, ‘which had the extended meanings of ‘refuge’ or ‘idyllic place.’ By the time of de Champlain, it was La Cadie without the r. In the Mi’ kmaq language, Cadie means ‘fertile land.’ We will revisit the link between the French and the ancient Greeks. A fascinating side note of history and all the more interesting once it is understood that the French Canadians are descended from Ammon; as well as the indirect parallel with Lot’s daughters, are the eight hundred women that most French Canadians are literally descended from.
CBC, Filles du Roi, 2017 – emphasis mine:
‘It’s 1663. New France has a population problem. To dominate the fur trade along the St. Lawrence River, New France needs people. Britain’s colonies to the south have 18 times as many settlers as New France. Britain has a wide-open policy on who can come to the colonies, meaning Brits from all walks of life are risking the perilous ocean voyage. France, on the other hand, has banned Protestants from going to New France. The British colonies have a farming-based economy, meaning men bring their wives over and have families, whereas the French settlers are mostly fur trappers and missionaries. That population gap is only getting wider. Britain’s colonies are growing, but in New France, which has only one woman for every six men, the population is stuck.
To help fix New France’s gender imbalance, two men come up with an innovative idea: Jean Talon (Intendant of the colony) and King Louis XIV decide to import young women to the colony to marry male settlers. The women would be known as theFilles du Roi or “Daughters of the King.” Almost all the women are poor. Many are orphans.
[Between the years 1663 to 1673, these women of marriageable age came from Rouen in the province of Normandy, La Rochelle in Aunis and included beggars and orphans from the streets of Paris]. One in 10 doesn’t survive the voyage from France. For the 800 women who make it, France pays for the women’s passage and provides a dowry… from the royal treasury.
The women are also given a hope chest containing, among other things, a pair of hose, a pair of shoes, a bonnet, gloves, a comb, a belt and various sewing supplies. The Filles du Roi step off their boats into a foreign landscape. It is a sparsely populated, heavily wooded wilderness. Many of them are from France’s cities and are about to get a harsh introduction to the backbreaking world of 17th century farm labour. Canadian winter will be unlike anything they’ve ever experienced. And in the coming years, many of them are going to be pregnant more often than not.
As daunting as that sounds, all of the Filles du Roi come to New France voluntarily. Even with the cold climate and hard toil, life in New France has advantages over the lives they left behind. Unlike many women at the time, the Filles du Roi are allowed to choose their husbands. Admittedly, they’re choosing from a very small pool – the population of New France is just over 3,000 and includes a disproportionately high number of priests. The women meet potential suitors in a series of chaperoned, interview-like “dates.”
The meetings are presided over by Jean Talon himself, along with Ursuline nun Marie Guyart… The women sail down the St. Lawrence, stopping first at Quebec City, then Trois-Rivieres, and eventually making their way to Montreal. At every stop, they have to make a choice; go with one of the men there, or see if there’s a better husband waiting down river.The women are given 50 livres – the equivalent of roughly $1,000 today – as a dowry. As poor women without dowries, finding a husband (let alone one they liked), would have been nearly impossible in France. There are other advantages, too. Abundant food means that women in New France live longer than their peers in Europe.
Families with more than 10 children get an additional annual pension of 300 livres ($6,000) from the crown. The program leads to a population explosion unlike anything Canada has seen since. The average family has five children – almost twice as many as the “Baby Boom” that follows WWII. The population of New France more than doubles in a decade. Two-thirds of today’s French-Canadians can trace their ancestry back to one of these 800 women. Their influence was felt outside Quebec, as well.
Some famous Americans also claim a Fille du Roi as an ancestor, including Hiliary Clinton, Madonna and Angelina Jolie. There are very few first-hand accounts of the lives of the Filles du Roi. Few of them could read or write.Their histories have largely been told by subsequent generations. That said, one thing we know with absolute certainty: the Quebec we know today owes a lot to the fortitude of these incredibly tough women.’
Moab is Ammon’s elder brother and comprises the bulk of the French people. In the past, his peoples were also more numerous and they interacted with the sons of Jacob constantly through conventional warfare – unlike the guerrilla tactics of the Ammonites. The name Abarim – which has been an invaluable biblical word definition and concordance website – was actually a mountain range in the land of Moab.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Moab meaning: Who Is Your Father? Water Of A Fatherfrom (1) (mi), who, or (may), “water of …”, and (2) the noun (‘ab), father
The etymology and original meaning of the name Moab is unknown. The word moab is foreign to Hebrew… However, to a creative Hebrew audience, the name may have sounded like a compilation of two elements: the interrogative particle (me), what or (mi), who… The noun (‘ab) means father… It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu meansto decide.
Thus the name Moab would carry the meaning of Who’s… or What’s Your Father? a rhetorical question to which the story may easily give rise. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names takes a different approach and goes with the word (may), meaning water… Water represents the great unknown from which the dry land of the known emerges. Thus Jones reads Water Of A Father, and explains this to meanseed or progeny. The problem here is that semen is never referred to as a father’s waters.
The name Ar meaning: City from the noun (‘ir), city
The name Ar (or more complete: Ar of Moab – see Numbers 21:28) was a city on the southern shore of the river Arnon (Numbers 21:15). When YHWH delivers his famous “do not harass Moab” sermon, he declares that he gave Ar to the sons of Lot (which would be the Ammonites and the Moabites – Deuteronomy 2:9). Much later, the prophet Isaiah declares his blood curdling prophecies against Moab, and foretells its utter destruction, along with Kir of Moab (Isaiah 15:1).
Adjectives (‘ariri) and (‘ar’ar) mean stripped, childless or destitute. Noun (me’ara) literally means “place of being stripped” and is the Bible’s common word for cave. Verb (‘ur I) means to rouse oneself – literally to collect and bundle one’s feelings. Noun (‘ir) means excitement. Identical verb (‘ur II) means to be exposed or laid bare. Noun (ma’or) means nakedness and noun (ma’arom) means naked one. Adjectives (‘erom), (‘erom), (‘arom) and (‘arom) mean naked. Noun (‘or) means skin or hide. Verb (‘ara) also means to be naked or bare. Nouns (‘ara), (ma’ara) and (ma’ar) refer to bare or exposed places. Nouns (‘erwa) and (‘erya) mean nakedness or exposure. Noun (ta’ar) denotes a thing that makes bare: a razor or sheath of a sword.
The name Kir meaning: Wall from the noun (qir), wall
The noun (qarqa’) means floor; earth trampled into a compact state. The verb (qarqar) means to forcibly compact, to pound down. Verb (qara), and its by-form (qara’), mean to near, to meet or to happen upon. Noun (qora) describes a rafter or beam; the things that come together to form a roof, and which obviously relate to bricks pieced into a wall. Nouns (qareh) and (miqreh) mean chance or accident, fortune or fate. Noun (qeri) means opposition, contrariness.
For this same reason, the nouns (qiryah) and (qeret) are the words for city and federation of cities. Adjective (qari’) means called or summoned… And noun (miqra’) means convocation or called assembly. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has A Wall, AFortress, but this word for wall typically doesn’t refer to amilitary wall.’
Numbers 21:28-29
English Standard Version
28 ‘For fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the city of Sihon. It devouredAr of Moab, and swallowed the heights of the [River] Arnon. 29 Woe to you, O Moab! You are undone, O people of Chemosh! He has made his sons fugitives, and his daughters captives, to an Amorite king, Sihon.’
Ar and Kir of Moab appear to be the most prominent settlements in ancient Moab. Today, they could equate to the capital Paris and possibly the principal port – and the second biggest city – Marseille. The numbers of the Israelites and their series of military victories became a serious concern to Moab; though Moab was unaware of the Eternal’s edict to the sons of Jacob: to not attack Moab and Ammon. In a preemptive strike, King Balak of Moab, summoned a Seer and Prophet to pronounce a curse on the sons of Jacob. Though the best laid plan did not eventuate as the Moabites would have hoped.
Numbers 22:1-41
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then the people of Israel set out and camped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho.
2 And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3 And Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were many.Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel.4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian [descendants from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah], “This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.” So Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, 5 sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor at Pethor, which is near the River in the land of the people of Amaw, to call him, saying,
“Behold, a people has come out of Egypt. They cover the face of the earth [estimates account for three million plus people, including 600,000 fighting men able to take up arms], and they are dwelling opposite me. 6 Come now, curse this people for me, since they are too mighty for me. Perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land, for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed.”
7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message… 9 And God came to Balaam and said, “Who are these men with you?” 10 And Balaam said to God, “Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me…
12 God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” 13 So Balaam rose in the morning and said to the princes of Balak, “Go to your own land, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you.” 14 So the princes of Moab rose and went to Balak and said, “Balaam refuses to come with us.” 15 Once again Balak sent princes, more in number and more honorable than these.
16 And they came to Balaam and said to him, “Thus says Balak the son of Zippor: ‘Let nothing hinder you from coming to me, 17 for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come, curse this people for me’.” 18 But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more. 19 So you, too, please stay here tonight, that I may know what more the Lord will say to me.” 20 AndGod came to Balaam at night and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise, go with them;but only do what I tell you.” 21 So Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab.
22 But God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the Lord took his standin the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road, with a drawn sword in his hand [like a Cherub – Genesis 3:24]. And the donkey turned aside out of the road and went into the field. And Balaam struck the donkey, to turn her into the road… 28 Then the Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?” 29 And Balaam said to the donkey, “Because you have made a fool of me. I wish I had a sword in my hand, for then I would kill you.” … 31 Then the Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the way, with his drawn sword in his hand. And he bowed down and fell on his face.
32 And the angel of the Lord said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to oppose you because your way is perverse before me. 33 The donkey saw me and turned aside before me these three times. If she had not turned aside from me, surely just now I would have killed you and let her live.” 34 Then Balaam said to the angel of the Lord, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you stood in the road against me. Now therefore, if it is evil in your sight, I will turn back.” 35 And the angel of the Lord said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but speak only the word that I tell you.” So Balaam went on with the princes of Balak.
36 When Balak heard that Balaam had come, he went out to meet him at the city of Moab [Ar], on the border formed by the [River] Arnon, at the extremity of the border… 38 Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” 39 Then Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth. 40 And Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep, and sent for Balaam and for the princes who were with him. 41 And in the morning Balak took Balaam and brought him up to Bamoth-baal…’
In Numbers Twenty-three, Balaam does not curse Israel but speaks of the blessings given them by the Creator. In Numbers Twenty-four, Balaam then precedes to curse the enemies of the sons of Jacob after adding a blessing to the Israelites.
Numbers 24:10-14, 17
English Standard Version
10 ‘And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together. And Balak said to Balaam, “I called you to curse my enemies, and behold, you have blessed them these three times. 11 Therefore now flee to your own place. I said, ‘I will certainly honor you,’ but the Lord has held you back from honor.” 12 And Balaam said to Balak, “Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, 13 ‘If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the Lord, to do either good or bad of my own will. What the Lord speaks, that will I speak?’
14 And now, behold, I am going to my people. Come, I will let you know what this people will do to your people in the latter days.” 17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near [the promised Messiah]: a star [blessing of Ephraim] shall come out of Jacob, and ascepter [blessing of Judah] shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moaband break down all the sons of Sheth.’
Balaam is an intriguing character, for was he a prophet of God or a sorcerer for the devil? Readers interested in a more detailed discussion regarding Balaam’s relationship with the Eternal and the way of Balaam (Revelation 2:14), may refer to the following articles: Belphegor; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.
As with the descendants of Ammon, the Israelites were not to provoke the Moabites or engage them in battle.
Deuteronomy 2:9-11
English Standard Version
‘And the Lord said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab or contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land for a possession, because I have given Ar [the capital] to the people of Lot for a possession.’ The Emim formerly lived there, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim. Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.’
Deuteronomy 34:1-8
English Standard Version
1 ‘Then Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, which is opposite Jericho. And the Lord showed him all the land, Gilead as far as Dan [the far north east], 2 all Naphtali [the north], the land of Ephraim and Manasseh [central Canaan], all the land of Judah as far as the western sea [the far south west], 3 the Negeb, and the Plain, that is, the Valley of Jericho the city of palm trees, as far as Zoar. 4 And the Lord said to him, “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you shall not go over there.”
5 So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, 6 and he [the Eternal] buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. 7 Moses was 120 years old when he died. His eye was undimmed, and his vigor unabated. 8 And the people of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days…’
Judges 3:12-14, 26-30
English Standard Version
12 ‘And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done what was evil in the sight of the Lord.
13 He gathered to himself the Ammonites and the Amalekites [grandson of Esau], and went and defeated Israel. And they took possession of the city of palms. 14 And the people of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years’ – 1302 to 1284 BCE.
26 ‘Ehud escaped while they delayed, and he passed beyond the idols and escaped to Seirah. 27 When he arrived, he sounded the trumpet in the hill country of Ephraim. Then the people of Israel went down with him from the hill country, and he was their leader. 28 And he said to them, “Follow after me, for the Lord has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand.” So they went down after him and seized the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites and did not allow anyone to pass over. 29 And they killed at that time about 10,000 of the Moabites, all strong, able-bodied men; not a man escaped. 30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest for eighty years.’
Ehud was the second Judge of Israel for the same period from 1284 to 1204 BCE.
A famous descendant of Moab and ancestor of King David, as mentioned previously, is Ruth.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ruth means: Friend, Associate, Vision, View from the noun (rea’), friend or companion and from the noun (re’ut), a looking or understanding.
Ruth was the Moabite wife of Mahlon, son of Elimelech and Naomi of Bethlehem. Their other son, Chilion, married Orphah also of Moab. When the men die [in battle with Israel], Ruth and Naomi move back to Bethlehem, where Ruth marries Boaz. In order to do so, Boaz appeals to the Leviratic Law, which dictates that when a man dies childless, his brother is to marry his widow and sire children in the name of the deceased man (Ruth 4:10, Deuteronomy 25:5). Ruth and Boaz become the parents of Obed, the grandparents of Jesse and the great-grandparents of David, the great king of Israel, and finally the ancestors of Jesus…
Verb (ra’a I) means to pasture or feed and the participle (ra’a) means shepherd… Verb (ra’a II) means to associate with. Nouns (rea’), (re’eh) and (merea’) mean friend, associate or “neighbor”. Nouns (ra’ya), (re’a) and (re’ut) describe a female attendant, mate or friend. Scholars who follow this root group see the name Ruth as a feminine derivation of the root (ra’a II), meaning to associate with, or be a friend of. And thus, they say, the name Ruth means (Lady-) Friend or (Lady-) Companion.
The… NOBSE Study Bible Name List agrees and reads Female Companion for a meaning of the name Ruth. The… Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) proposes a different etymology and goes after the root (ra’a), meaning to see… The verb (ra’a) means to see, and by extension to understand. It may mean to become visible (of, say, an angel) or to become understandable (of, say, a theory). Noun (ro’eh) means either seer, or prophetic vision, and noun (mar’a) means either vision as means of revelation, or mirror.
Specifically, Jones sees the name Ruth as a contraction of the noun (re’ut), meaning look. Hence, for a meaning of the name Ruth, Jones reads Beauty but perhaps better would be Vision. There’s no telling whether to an ancient Hebrew audience the name Ruth sounded like Female Friend or Beauty, but all-in-all Ruth is quite a name.’
Ruth 1:15-18, 22
English Standard Version
‘And she said, “See, your sister-in-law [Orphah] has gone back to her people and to her gods [Chemosh]; return after your sister-in-law.” But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, andyour God my God.Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” And when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more. So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem [in Judah] at the beginning of barley harvest.’
Ruth 2:1-20
English Standard Version
‘Now Naomi had a relative of her husband’s, a worthy* man of the clan of Elimelech, whose name was Boaz. And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after him in whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.” … Then Boaz said to Ruth… “All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. The Lord repay you for what you have done… Then she said, “I have found favor in your eyes, my lord, for you have comforted me and spoken kindly to your servant, though I am not one of your servants.” “The man’s name with whom I worked today is Boaz.” And Naomi said… “The man is a close relative of ours…‘
Ruth 3:1-14
English Standard Version
‘Then Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should I not seek rest for you, that it may be well with you? Is not Boaz our relative, with whose young women you were? See, he is winnowing barley tonight at the threshing floor. 3 Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak and go down to the threshing floor… when he lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do.”
At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet!
‘He said, “Who are you?” And she answered, “I am Ruth, your servant. Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” And he said, “May you be blessed by the Lord… in that you have not gone after young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, do not fear. I will do for you all that you ask, for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a worthy* woman [described the same way as Boaz]. So she lay at his feet until the morning, but arose before one could recognize another.’
Comparable with, yet in contrast with the scenario involving Lot and his daughters.
Some scholars maintain that Ruth and Boaz had an intimate relationship before they married. In contradistinction to her ancestor – the elder daughter of Lot – Ruth did not entice Boaz into temptation. The terms used in verse four do have sexual connotations, as Ruth was showing that she wanted to be married. The word uncover, means to make visible, to be naked. In this case, Boaz’s feet were exposed. They then became cold and hence Boaz naturally woke up. Some commentators state that feet here, are a euphemism for sexual organs. This is very tenuous at best.
‘And lie down…’ This can also have sexual connotations, though only when paired with the Hebrew terms eṯ and ‘im [with] as in passages such as Genesis 19:32-35; Exodus 22:15; Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 22:22; 1 Samuel 2:22 and 2 Samuel 11:4. The text says that she ‘lay at his feet until morning.’ Ruth slept there until morning, not that she slept with Boaz until morning. Though it could be interpreted as morally questionable to have a woman spend the night with a single man; Boaz kept Ruth with him until morning, because of the dangers of her going home alone in the middle of the night. It was more honourable to protect her until just before dawn, so that she could slip away before first light.
‘Spread your wings over your servant…’ means Ruth asked Boaz to spread his covering over her – a Hebrew idiom for marriage – Ezekiel 16:8; Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20 and Malachi 2:16. Ruth probably visited at night to maintain privacy, so that Boaz wouldn’t feel pressured into making a public decision to marry her. Boaz was asleep and when he awoke, the text says he was ‘startled.’ If Boaz had just engaged in sex with Ruth, he obviously wouldn’t have been startled. Boaz also refers to Ruth as a ‘worthy woman.’ This is the same phrase used for a godly wife in Proverbs 31:10. He would hardly say these words after just engaging in fornication. Boaz was careful to keep and follow the kinsman-redeemer laws, even though he clearly loved Ruth and wanted to marry her; this highlights his integrity towards Ruth, not sexual permissiveness.
Ruth 4:9-17
English Standard Version
‘Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, “You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon. 10 Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon, I have bought to be my wife…”
Then all the people who were at the gate [Boaz had local prestige and held civic responsibility like Lot] and the elders said, “We are witnesses. May the Lord make the woman, who is coming into your house, like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you act worthily in Ephrathah and be renowned in Bethlehem, and may your house be like the house of Perez[Pharez, a royal line of Judah and ancestor of David], whom Tamar bore to Judah, because of the offspring that the Lord will give you by this young woman.”
So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her [the first time], and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son… Then Naomi took the child and laid him on her lap and became his nurse. And the women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David.’
Boaz and Ruth
2 Samuel 8:2
English Standard Version
‘And he [King David] defeated Moab and he measured them with a line, making them lie down on the ground. Two lines he measured to be put to death, [!] and one full line to be spared [1/3]. And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.’
2 Kings 3:4-27
English Standard Version
4 ‘Now Mesha king of Moab was a sheep breeder, and he had to deliver to the king of Israel 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams. 5 But when Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6 So King Jehoram marched out of Samaria at that time and mustered all Israel. 7 And he went and sent word to Jehoshaphat king of Judah: “The king of Moab has rebelled against me. Will you go with me to battle against Moab?” And he said, “I will go. I am as you are, my people [Houses of Judah and Benjamin, (Simeon and Levi)] as your people [Kingdom of remaining Ten Tribes of Israel], my horses as your horses.” 8 Then he said, “By which way shall we march?” Jehoram answered, “By the way of the wilderness of Edom.”
9 So the king of Israel went with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. And when they had made a circuitous march of seven days, there was no water for the army or for the animals that followed them. 10 Then the king of Israel said, “Alas! The Lord has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 11 And Jehoshaphat said, “Is there no prophet of the Lord here, through whom we may inquire of the Lord?” Then one of the king of Israel’s servants answered, “Elisha the son of Shaphat is here, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” 12 And Jehoshaphat said, “The word of the Lord is with him.” So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him.
13 And Elisha said to the king of Israel, “What have I to do with you? Go to the prophets of your father and to the prophets of your mother.” But the king of Israel said to him, “No; it is the Lord who has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.”
14 And Elisha said, “As the Lord of hosts lives, before whom I stand, were it not that I have regard for Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would neither look at you nor see you. 15 But now bring me a musician.” And when the musician played, the hand of the Lord came upon him. 16 And he said, “Thus says the Lord, ‘I will make this dry streambed full of pools.’ 17 For thus says the Lord, ‘You shall not see wind or rain, but that streambed shall be filled with water, so that you shall drink, you, your livestock, and your animals.’
18 This is a light thing in the sight of the Lord. He will also give the Moabites into your hand,19 and you shall attack every fortified cityand every choice city, and shall fell every good tree and stop up all springs of water and ruin every good piece of land with stones.”[!] 20 The next morning, about the time of offering the sacrifice, behold, water came from the direction of Edom, till the country was filled with water.’
Recall, a definition of Moab is ‘water of a father’, as well as the connection of water with Rabbah of the Ammonites.
21 ‘When all the Moabites heard that the kings had come up to fight against them, all who were able to put on armor, from the youngest to the oldest, were called out and were drawn up at the border. 22 And when they rose early in the morning and the sun shone on the water, the Moabites saw the water opposite them as red as blood. 23 And they said, “This is blood; the kings have surely fought together and struck one another down. Now then, Moab, to the spoil!” 24 But when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose and struck the Moabites, till they fled before them. And they went forward, striking the Moabites as they went. 25 And they overthrew the cities, and on every good piece of land every man threw a stone until it was covered. They stopped every spring of water and felled all the good trees, till only its stones were left in Kir-hareseth [not the Kir of Moab], and the slingers surrounded and attacked it. 26 When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to break through, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not.
27 Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land.’
These were severely harsh measures and vicious war atrocities perpetrated by the Israelites against the Moabites. Not a big surprise when hatred brewed and raged within Moab everafter. The sons of Jacob were disobeying the command in not harassing or contending with Moab and going to war with them. Then compounded the issue by adding undue cruelty to make it immensely worse.
2 Kings 16:9
English Standard Version
‘… The king of Assyria marched up against Damascus [Gether-Aram] and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir [of Moab], and he killed Rezin [the king of Damascus].’
Psalm 60:7-8
English Standard Version
“Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is myscepter. Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”
Isaiah 15:1-9
English Standard Version
‘… Because Ar ofMoab [the capital]is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone; because Kir ofMoab [the second city] islaid waste in a night, Moab is undone. 2 He has gone up to the temple, and to Dibon, to the high places to weep; over Nebo and over Medeba Moab wails. On every head is baldness; every beard is shorn; 3 in the streets they wear sackcloth; on the housetops and in the squares everyone wails and melts in tears. 4… the armed men of Moab cry aloud; his soul trembles.
5 My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar [as Lot had done]… For at the ascent ofLuhith [possibly neighbouring great grandson of Abraham and Keturah – Genesis 25:3] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… 8 For a cry has gone around the land of Moab; her wailing reaches to Eglaim; her wailing reaches to Beer-elim. 9 For the waters of Dibon are full of blood; for I will bring upon Dibon even more, a lion for those of Moab who escape, for the remnant of the land.’
Isaiah 16:1-13
English Standard Version
‘Send the lamb to the ruler of the land, from Sela, by way of the desert, to the mount of the daughter of Zion. 2 Like fleeing birds, like a scattered nest, so are the daughters of Moab at the fords of the Arnon… 4 let the outcasts of Moab sojourn among you; be a shelter to them from the destroyer. When the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased, and he who tramples underfoot has vanished from the land, 5 then a throne will be established in steadfast love, and on it will sit in faithfulness in the tent of David one who judges and seeks justice and is swift to do righteousness.”
6 We have heard of the pride of Moab – how proud he is! – of his arrogance, his pride, and his insolence; in his idle boasting he is not right.’
Moab’s pride is their biggest stumbling block.
Job 41:34 RSV:
“[They behold]everything that is high; [they (the Adversary) are a ruler] over all the [children] of pride.”
Isaiah: 7 ‘Therefore let Moab wail for Moab, let everyone wail. Mourn, utterly stricken, for the raisin cakes of Kir-hareseth. 8 For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah; the lords of the nations have struck down its branches… And joy and gladness are taken away from the fruitful field, and in the vineyards no songs are sung, no cheers are raised; no treader treads out wine in the presses; I have put an end to the shouting. 11 Therefore my inner parts moan like a lyre for Moab, and my inmost self for Kir-hareseth.
12 And when Moab presents himself, when he wearies himself on the high place, when he comes to his sanctuary to pray, he will not prevail. 13 This is the word that the Lord spoke concerning Moab in the past. 14 But now the Lord has spoken, saying, “In three years, like the years of a hired worker, the glory of Moab will be brought into contempt, in spite of all his great multitude, and those who remain will be very few and feeble.” This proclamation is yet future, for the Moabites have never been ‘few and feeble’.
Germany has an eagle; the United Kingdom has a lion; Spain (and Italy) often sport a bull; while France have a rooster as a mascot symbol. The origin of this emblem dates back to the Gallic origins of the French nation when the Romans laughed at Gauls because of a linguistic pun. In Latin, the word gallus means Gaul, but also cockerel. The supposed stubbornness and brazen pride of the people was to be turned on its head as the French took the bird to their hearts as an icon of their nation.
The French kings adopted the rooster as a symbol of courage and bravery. During the French Revolution, the cockerel became a symbol of the people and the State and was engraved on coins. Napoleon preferred the eagle – the symbol of imperial Rome – but the rooster won out over the raptor, as an apt symbol for French pride. The rooster is visible throughout France: on French stamps, at the entrance of the Élysée Palace, on jerseys of French football, rugby and handball teams and on the shirts of Olympic athletes. Mercury was often portrayed with the cockerel (Article: Thoth); a sacred animal among the Continental Celts.
Jeremiah 48:2-30, 38-47
English Standard Version
2… the renown of Moab is no more.In Heshbon they planned disaster against her: ‘Come, let us cut her off from being a nation!’ You also, O Madmen, shall be brought to silence; the sword shall pursue you. 3 … ‘Desolation and great destruction!’ 4 Moab is destroyed; her little ones have made a cry… 6 Flee! Save yourselves! You will be like a juniper in the desert! 7 For, because you trusted in your works and your treasures, you also shall be taken; and Chemosh shall go into exile with his priests and his officials… 9 “Give wings to Moab, for she would fly away; her cities shall become a desolation, with no inhabitant in them.
11 “Moab has been at ease from his youth and has settled on his dregs; he has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, nor has he gone into exile; so his taste remains in him, and his scent is not changed. 12 “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I shall send to him pourers who will pour him, and empty his vessels and break his jars in pieces. 13 Then Moab shall be ashamed of Chemosh, as the house of Israel was ashamed of Bethel, their confidence [Article: Belphegor]. 14 “How do you say, ‘We are heroes and mighty men of war’? 15 The destroyer of Moab and his cities has come up, and the choicest of his young men have gone down to slaughter, declares the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts. 16 The calamity of Moab is near at hand, and his affliction hastens swiftly. 17 Grieve for him, all you who are around him, and all who know his name; say, ‘How the mighty scepter is broken, the glorious staff.’
18 “Come down from your glory, and sit on the parched ground, O inhabitant of Dibon [H1769 – diybon: ‘wasting’]!For the destroyer of Moab has come up against you; he has destroyed your strongholds… 20 Moab is put to shame, for it is broken; wail and cry! Tell it beside the Arnon, that Moab is laid waste. 21 “Judgment has come upon the tableland… and all the cities of the land of Moab, far and near. 25 The horn [symbol of power] of Moab is cut off, and his arm is broken, declares the Lord. 26“Make him drunk, because he magnified himself against the Lord, so that Moab shall wallow in his vomit, and he too shall be held in derision. 27 Was not Israel a derision to you? Was he found among thieves, that whenever you spoke of him you wagged your head? 28 “Leave the cities, and dwell in the rock, O inhabitants of Moab!
29 … We have heard of the pride of Moab – he is very proud – of his loftiness, his pride, and his arrogance, and the haughtiness of his heart. 30 I know his insolence, declares the Lord; his boasts are false, his deeds are false.
… 38 On all the housetops of Moab and in the squares there is nothing but lamentation, for I have broken Moab like a vessel for which no one cares, declares the Lord. 39 How it is broken! How they wail! How Moab has turned his back in shame! So Moab has become a derision and a horror to all that are around him.”
40 For thus says the Lord: “Behold, one shall fly swiftly like an eagle and spread his wings against Moab; 41 the cities shall be taken and the strongholds seized. The heart of the warriors of Moab shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her birth pains; 42 Moab shall be destroyed and be no longer a people, because he magnified himself against the Lord… For I will bring these things upon Moab, the year of their punishment, declares the Lord. 45 “In the shadow of Heshbon fugitives stop without strength, for fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the house of Sihon; it has destroyed the forehead of Moab, the crown of the sons of tumult. 46 Woe to you, O Moab! The people of Chemosh are undone, for your sons have been taken captive, and your daughters into captivity. 47 Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in the latter days, declares the Lord.” Thus far is the judgment on Moab.
Ezekiel 25:8-11
English Standard Version
8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations [a scattered people within Moab and Gilead], 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.”
Amos 2:1-3
English Standard Version
‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom.
2 So I will send a fire upon Moab [reminiscent of Sodom’s fate], and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amid uproar, amid shouting and the sound of the trumpet; 3 I will cut off the ruler from its midst, and will kill all its princes with him,” says the Lord.
Daniel 2:32-39
English Standard Version
‘The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, thebronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.’
Daniel 7:6
English Standard Version
‘After this I looked, and behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. Andthe beast had four heads*, and dominion was given to it.’
Daniel 8:20-22
English Standard Version
‘As for the ram that you saw with the two horns, these are the kings of Media and Persia. And the goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the firstking [Alexander the Great]. As for the horn that was broken, in place of which four others arose, four kingdoms* shall arise from his nation, but not with his power.’
Previously, we learned that the head of gold was the Chaldean Empire – the ancestors of the Northern and in part the Central Italians (refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) – of Babylon, represented by a lion with wings.
Also, one leg of iron was the Byzantine, Eastern Roman Empire – comprising the ancestors of the Russians (Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia) – represented as one half of a monstrous beast.
The chest and arms of silverwas the Medo-Persian empire – the ancestors of the Turko-Mongol and Turkish peoples (Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) – represented by a bear, as well as a ram.
The torso and thighs are representative of the Greco-Macedonian empire – the ancestors of the French – who toppled the Medes and Persians.
Alexander III of Macedon or the Great, defeated Persia in 331 BCE and the power of Greece lasted until 146 BCE, when it became a protectorate of the burgeoning Roman empire. After Alexander, who reigned briefly yet emphatically from 336 to 323 BCE and the subsequent seven short-lived emperor reigns from 323 to 288 BCE, four divisions* of the Greek empire arose, each led by one of Alexander’s generals. Ptolemy from 281 to 279 BCE, administered Egypt and North Africa; Seleucus in 281 BCE governed Syria, Asia Minor and the East. Lysimachus during 288 to 285 BCE, took control of Thrace – until it united with Greece and Macedonia – and Cassander from 315 to 297 BCE, ruled over Macedonia and Greece.
The two thighs of Nebuchadnezzar’s statute represent the distinct Macedonian and Greek components of the Empire – in other words, Ammon and Moab. The Greco-Macedonian empire was more robust and stronger than the two preceding empires, as evidenced by being likened to bronze as opposed to gold or silver. Militarily, it defeated its enemies with raw power and speed unlike any before it, as evidenced by the agile goat compared to the ram of Persia and the lighter leopard in contrast to the heavier and slower bear of Persia and the former lion of Chaldea.
Alexander, with the agility of a goat crossed the Hellespont after conquering neighbouring, yet related Grecia and began his march to revenge the humiliation inflicted upon Greece by Xerxes a century before. Alexander Conquered Troy, then met Persian opposition at Granicus. After subjugating all of Asia Minor, he battled a host of supposedly half a million Persians, whom Darius III – king from 336 to 330 BCE – had assembled. They met in the plain of Issus on November 5, 333 BCE and Alexander slaughtered the greatly superior Persian force – outnumbered two to one – breaking the back of Persian opposition. Proceeding southward, city after city fell without a real fight except for Tyre in 332 BCE and Gaza, which were both subdued after sieges.
Marching southwards to Egypt, Alexander conquered the entire country with little effort and founded the world renowned capital city of Alexandria. It became the largest city of the Hellenic world. Continuing east, he fought a third momentous battle with Persia on October 1, 331 BCE, against Darius at Gaugamela and again defeated a greatly superior force. Alexander’s armies reached right to India, but his troops, weary with battle, refused to go further. Returning to Babylon, Alexander intended to make this the capital of his entire empire. Yet he died a victim of his profligate eating, drinking and whoring, coupled with an attack of malaria at the age of thirty-three on June 11, 323 BCE.
As brief as his rule was, his indelible mark on the world was permanent. The description of the leopard – one of the swiftest of animals and greatest, of predatory carnivores – portrays the lightning speed of attack of Alexander’s armies which was unprecedented. Alexander never lost a siege or battle – despite typically being outnumbered – during the years 338 to 325 BCE. His record is an incredibly impressive, fought twenty, won twenty.
The four wings on the back of the leopard not only represent agility and speed, but with the four heads, symbolise the fulfilled historic fact, that Alexander’s empire was eventually controlled by four principal generals.
As John F Walvoord remarks: “The accuracy of this prophecy is so evident that liberal scholars who consider detailed prophecy an impossibility are forced to postulate that the entire book of Daniel is in fact a forgery written by a pseudo-Daniel who lived after these events of Alexander’s conquest had already taken place. This unwilling confession of the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is in itself most significant and a testimony to the accuracy of prophecy as a whole.”
Alexander the Great, thought, acted and fought on his gut instinct. The gut located in the lower torso as evidenced on Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. He was also influenced by his lower groin, in his private life. Some may say, ‘how very French.’ Cyrus the Great, as pictured by the chest, let his heart influence him when he fell for Esther from the tribe of Benjamin; allowing the tribe of Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the city and Temple. Nebuchadnezzar certainly depicted a more cerebral approach in his reign with his methodical deconstruction of his enemies and impressive building projects, as represented by the head of gold.
Alexander was born in Pella, the capital of Macedon and from age thirteen, was tutored by Aristotle until he was sixteen. His mother was Olympias, the fourth of eight wives and principal wife of Philip II of Macedon. Alexander was raised to read, play the lyre, ride, fight and hunt. His mother had huge ambitions and encouraged Alexander to believe it was his destiny to conquer the Persian Empire. He had a great desire for knowledge, a love for philosophy and was an avid reader. Though Alexander was impulsive, with a violent temper his intelligent and rational side was also demonstrated by his ability and success as a general and military strategist. It would seem he had an equal appreciation of men as he had for women, though both were lesser than his dependance on alcohol.
There have been a succession of Greek ages. The ones dominated by Moab and Ammon were the later Classical age of Greece from 500 to 323 BCE and the Hellenistic era of 323 to 146 BCE. The sons of Lot were the ancestors of peoples living in Greece before these epochs, as were the sons of Jacob; stretching back to Archaic Greece during the centuries from 800 to 500 BCE and beyond to Ancient Greece, including the Mycenaean period of 1600 to 1200 BCE and the Dark age of Greece lasting from 1200 to 800 BCE.
University of Oxford, Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Simon Hornblower – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… about 1200 BCE, to the death of Alexander… in 323 BCE. It was a period of political, philosophical,artistic, and scientific achievements that formed a legacy with unparalleled influence on Western civilization.’
By the time frame comprising Classical Greece, the peoples of the region had begun to change in composition from those who had constituted Greece from 1600 BCE. The city-states up to approximately 1000 to 800 BCE had been reflective of different peoples. The rise of Macedon and its control of greater Greece saw the transition to the descendants of Ammon and Moab. The people of Troy and the greater Troad, were colonial descendants of Ammon and Moab and both the Trojans and the Macedonians were ancestors of the Frankish peoples who form modern day France.
We will investigate the original founding of Troy, which is credited not to the sons of Lot but rather descendants of the tribe of Judah. The original peoples who had grouped primarily around Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Arcadia and Olympia were primarily colonies of the descendants of the sons of Jacob. In time, they were transplanted by the peoples of Moab and Ammon. The Spartans are similarly related, though they are not descendants of either Lot or Jacob – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
Italians and Race, Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins – emphasis & bold mine:
‘From pre-Roman times, it appears there was already a clear distinction of short, darker-skinned, dark-haired peoples from pre-history being [overlaid] and mixed with taller, sometimes larger built, blond and blue-eyed groups. It is now generally believed that the Greeks also were larger, blond and blue–eyed people, which was the case when Alexander the Great spread his forces and opened up colonies all over the Middle East and Egypt. This is also attested in frescos from the era, as well as in various references to their looks.’
Both the earlier Greeks, the sons of Jacob and later Greeks from Ammon and Moab would today be broadly classed as Germanic (or Teutonic). The French are a Germanic-Celtic, rather pseudo Latin mix. This inclusion of fairer skin, blond hair and blue eyes was attributable to both ‘sets’ of Greeks. Alexander the Great himself, no different, as various reports reveal.
The Greek biographer Plutarch lived circa 45 to 120 CE, describes Alexander’s appearance as: ‘… for those peculiarities which many of his successors and friends afterwards tried to imitate, namely, the poise of the neck, which was bent slightly to the left, and the melting glance of his eyes, this artist has accurately observed… he was of a fair colour, as they say, and his fairness passed into ruddiness on his breast particularly, and in his face. Moreover, that a very pleasant odour exhaled from his skin and that there was a fragrance about his mouth and all his flesh, so that his garments were filled with it, this we have read in the Memoirs of Aristoxenus.’
Alexander Romance suggested that Alexander III possessed heterochromia iridium: that one eye was dark and the other light. British historian Peter Green compiled a description of Alexander’s appearance, based on his review of statues and ancient documents: ‘Physically, Alexander was not prepossessing. Even by Macedonian standards he was very short, though stocky and tough. His beard was scanty, and he stood out against his hirsute Macedonian barons by going clean-shaven. His neck was in some way twisted, so that he appeared to be gazing upward at an angle. His eyes (one blue, one brown) revealed a dewy, feminine quality. He had a high complexion and a harsh voice.’ Egyptian Historian Joann Fletcher has also said that Alexander exhibited blond hair.
French men
Many people are intrigued by the amazing story of Troy. Three Hollywood feature films have been produced on the fantastic events, yet much of the scholarly community view it entirely as myth. Yet with all legends truth is within the tale, though admittedly it is difficult in this case to separate fact from fiction.
Regardless, the Trojan war continues to stand out during the Dark age of Ancient Greece. The siege of Troy is said to have lasted some nine to ten years and its eventual fall, through the ruse of the Trojan Horse, occurred approximately, according to an unconventional chronology, between 1186 and 1184 BCE.
Those historians who believe the story of the Trojan War is derived from a real historical conflict, often use the dates given by Eratosthenes of 1194 to 1184 BCE; which roughly corresponds to the archaeological evidence of the catastrophic burning of Troy VII and a late Bronze Age collapse. Other researchers more recently, have dated the events somewhere between 1260 to 1180 BCE.
French women
The Trojan War Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely sceptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires:
Mycenaean [circa 1100 BCE] on one hand and [the] Hittite [circa 1180 BCE] with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III’s [who reigned from 1184 to 1153 BCE during his] year 8 [in 1177 BCE] describe a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the “Sea Peoples”, but without giving any reason.
A precise chronological reconstruction, based on a few absolute dates, shows that the annexation of the kingdom of Cyprus (Alasia), closely linked to the Mycenaean world, by Hittite King Tudhaliya IV played a role of detonator in the confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates and privateers on one side and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, such as Troy and Ugarit, on the other. This struggle to control a vital sea path, from Crete to Egypt, via Cyprus, which ended with a complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the famous Trojan War, had begun 10 years earlier. Surprisingly, this conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes (276-193). Historical and epigraphic context shows that Homer wrote his epic shortly after Queen Elissa founded Carthage (c. 870 BCE).’
The supposed mythic events surrounding the collapse of Troy begin when Paris – same name as future capital of France – a Prince of Troy and son of Priam who reigned from circa 1200 to 1185 BCE and the King of Troy, is visiting King Melenaus of Sparta and staying in the Spartan Palace. Paris knew of Melenaus’s wife Helen and had fallen in love with her – refer article: Thoth. Paris hid Helen on his ship for the return voyage to Troy. Paris’ older brother Prince Hector did not agree with Paris, yet sailed home regardless. King Priam welcomed Helen and took her into the family as one of his own. Priam was reputed to have had fifty sons and twelve daughters. The city of Troy was splendidly wealthy and impregnable. Recall the prominent city of Kir of Moab, meaning wall.
Raging with revenge, King Melenaus of Sparta calls for the assistance and a favour from his brother King Agamemnon II who ruled Argos, circa 1202 to 1185 BCE. Though all closely related, the Trojans, Spartans (or Dorians) and the Achaean Greeks were different peoples. Agamemnon called in the services of Achilles, a killing machine and a fabled warrior of demi-god stature. King Agamemnon had at his disposal a realistic number of approximately one hundred ships and ten thousand men, including allies from Athens.
According to Thucydides, Agamemnon raised an enormous fleet utilising other Greek cities of close to twelve hundred Boeotian [100+ men] and Philoctetes [50 men] ships – with a force of some 60,000 to 130,000 troops. To end the decade long stalemate, Odysseus – an ally of Menelaus – devised the ruse of a giant hollow wooden horse, an animal that was sacred to the Trojans.
Once inside Troy’s walls and the Trojans defeated, the Greeks burned the city and divided the spoils. Cassandra – Priam’s daughter who had warned not to accept the horse inside the city – was apparently awarded to Agamemnon. Neoptolemus, a son of Achilles obtained Andromache, the wife of Hector – the son of Priam, who had been killed by Achilles – and Odysseus was given Hecuba, Priam’s wife.
That most Achaean heroes did not return to their homes and instead founded colonies elsewhere was ‘interpreted by Thucydides as being due to their long absence. Nowadays the interpretation followed by most scholars is that the Achaean leaders driven out of their lands by the turmoil at the end of the Mycenaean era preferred to claim descent from exiles of the Trojan War.’
Simply, these Greeks migrated as all ancient peoples continually moved due to the search for better opportunities, usually prodded by other peoples pressing against their territory, due to either population expansion, food shortages, famine or war. There was a continuous domino effect throughout the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe maintaining the movement of Shem’s descendants until peoples finally settled in their current geographical and political positions beginning from approximately 800 to 1000 CE.
The Greeks and Romans took for a fact the historicity of the Trojan War and the identity of Homeric Troy with a site in Anatolia on a peninsula called the Troad or now known as the Biga Peninsula, which forms the basis of Homer’s Iliad. Ironically, Alexander the Great later conquered the Troad and Troy, when it was part of the Persian Empire. He visited the site in 334 BCE and offered sacrifices at tombs associated with the Homeric heroes of Achilles and Patroclus hiscousin, killed by Hector. Alexander was reputed to be related to Achilles via his mother who was apparently descended from a royal house. Troy is known in Greek as Troia; also by association with the region to the east, as Ilios (or Ilion). In Latin, Troja (or Ilium), as it was known during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus.
A large mound known locally as Hisarlik, had long been understood to hold the ruins of a city named Ilion (or Ilium) which had flourished in Hellenistic and Roman times. In 1822 Charles Maclaren, a Scottish journalist, posited that this was the site of Homeric Troy; though for the next fifty years, his idea received little attention from Classical scholars, most of whom regarded the Trojan legend as a fictional creation based on myth and not history. ‘Those who did believe in the existence of a real Troy thought it to be at Bunarbashi (Pinarbasi), a short distance south of Hisarlik. It took Frank Calvert an English Levantine emigrant and scholarly amateur archaeologist, until 1860 to begin exploratory work on Hisarlik. It was he who persuaded the German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann to work at Hisarlik, though Schliemann soon took full credit for adopting Maclaren’s identification and demonstrating to the world that it was correct.’
There are nine major periods of ancient Troy designated by archaeologists, which are labeled I to IX, starting from the bottom with the oldest settlement, Troy I. ‘In periods I to VII Troy was a fortified stronghold that served as the capital of the Troad and the residence of a king, his family, officials, advisers, retinue, and slaves. Troy VI and VII [are] assigned to the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, circa 1900 to 1100 BCE. Based on the evidence of imported Mycenaean pottery, the end of Troy VIIa is dated to between 1260 and 1240 BCE. The Cincinnati expedition under Blengen concluded that Troy VIIa was very likely the capital of King Priam described in Homer’s Iliad, which was destroyed by the Greek armies of Agamemnon.
The partly rebuilt Troy VIIb shows evidence of new settlers with a lower level of material culture, who vanished altogether by 1100 BCE. For about the next four centuries the site was virtually abandoned. The glorious and rich city Homer describes was believed to be Troy VI by many twentieth century authors, and destroyed about 1275 BC, probably by an earthquake. Its successor, Troy VIIa, was destroyed around 1180 BC; it was long considered a poorer city, and dismissed as a candidate for Homeric Troy, but since the excavation campaign of 1988, it has come to be regarded as the most likely candidate.’
This writer is not convinced with the VIIa and VIIb archaeological split. It is proposed that VI is the same Troy as described by Homer and the same Troy which Priam was king of when it was destroyed. Troy VI included the height of its splendour from circa 1400 to 1180 BCE. What has been labeled VIIb, should perhaps be renamed Troy VII. It is agreed that Troy VIIb was an attempt to rebuild, maintain and sustain a Troy that was now a shadow of its former grandeur and ultimately given up as a viable project by 1100 BCE.
Is there an agenda to lessen Troy’s prestige during 1194 and 1184 BCE and thus discredit the whole saga’s validity? Parallel propaganda include accounts which assert there were very few survivors from Troy.
Homeric Troy is described as a wealthy and populous city, yet the idea of a lesser Troy: ‘a relatively minor settlement, perhaps [just] a princely seat’ is advanced by scholars. In 1988, Korfmann’s team searched the terrain surrounding the citadel site at Hisarlik, investigating the wider settlement. Korfmann’s findings from ‘geomagnetic surveying and isolated excavations, led him to conclude in favour of a greater Troy – that is, a settlement of some size and prosperity.’
The question of what language was spoken by the Trojans has been a burning question. No evidence of a Trojan language seems to have survived. It was thought that the Trojans were Greek, though they were not in the Achaean domain and actually opposed to the Achaeans. Both remain a mystery, until we understand the Trojans were descended from Moab and Ammon and the Greeks at this time were principally sons of Jacob. It would be like comparing French with English and wondering why they are not the same. The animosity between the two peoples still alive and strong. Their differences not just due to culture but family lineage. Passages from the Iliad also allude that the Trojans were not Greek.
Who were the Trojans and where did they come from? Luciana Cavallaro, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘Many scholars, including Carl Blengen American archaeologist who worked at the site in the 1930s, believed the Trojans were of Greek origin. This conjecture was attributed to the Greek names given to the characters in the Iliad but that isn’t the case. Homer mentioned a close relationship between the Trojan allies and in particular with the Dardanians. Excavations at the site of Troy/Ilios/Troya/Troia have found artefacts that showed the Trojans were in fact indigenous to the region and related to the Indo-European people who migrated to the area.
Archaeological investigations have surmised the people from Dardania and Troy shared a kinship, their ancestry a mixture of Anatolian and Luwians.’
The Luwians proper were the original Hatti. If these Dardanians are Luwians, then they could be related, just as the French (from Haran) are related to the Italians (from Nahor) – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Cavallaro: ‘The latter came from south eastern Anatolia [Asia-minor], a province the Romans later called Cilicia.The Greeks and RomansthoughtDardania was a subset [satellite] of Troy however it was theother way around.Troy was a state of [the region of] Dardania [though Dardania was also the name of a city].
There are also the names of the Trojans, given in Greek as the audience was Hellenistic and more recognisable. Alexander/Alaksandu, better known asPariswas first noted in Hittite text and [a] ruler who established trading links with the Hittites. Wilusa, [a] Hittite word for the Greek interpretation Ilios. Priam/Piyama-Radu and Hektorare considered indigenous names though the spelling of the former changed. The Greeks did migrate to the west coast of Asia Minor and there is evidence they settled in the famous city.This was identified as Troy VIII.’
As stated in the preceding article, one proposal is that the Indo-European Luwians who arrived in the western coastal region of Anatolia are the West-Luwian speakers of Arzawa, who migrated westward. Another theory is that the Dardanians were Thracians who crossed the Dardanelles, named after the Dardans. The remains of their material culture reveal close ties with Thracians and Anatolian groups, as well as some Greek contact. Added to this is that later, a Thraco-Illyrian tribal state, the Dar-dan-i, dwelt to the north of Mace-don.
There are historical clues sustaining the fact Trojans and Greeks, were offshoot colonies descended from Lot and Jacob respectively. Like all colonial origins, they begin with migrants on board ships; in this case, from Canaan. The descendants of Lot and Jacob would have been well aware of the Aegean-Grecian world via the Phoenician’s trade routes and the Mycenaean/Minoan – later Philistine – civilisation already established there.
Dardania, the city purportedly founded by Dardanus, as well as the name also given to the region, was located in the northwestern corner of Anatolia and to the immediate north of Troy – facing modern Gallipoli across the Dardanelles. It is included as part of the Troad, the peninsula region at the far north-western corner of Asia-minor, now modern Turkey. Dardania historically has been defined as ‘a district of the Troad, lying along the Hellespont, southwest of Abydos, and adjacent to the territory of Ilium. Its people (Dardani) appear in the Trojan War under Aeneas, in close alliance with the Trojans, with whose name their own is often interchanged…’ Aeneas is referred to in Virgil’s Aeneid interchangeably as a Dardan or as a Trojan, but strictly speaking Aeneas was of the Dardanian branch.
Thus some consider the Dardanians (or Dardans) as being the same stock as the Trojans – Dardanian and Trojan being synonymous – while others like Homer distinguish the two as clearly identifiable people – not two branches of a single group. The answer includes both propositions, in that a. Moab and Ammon are the same stock, both having Lot as their father; yet b. they are also two separate lines from two different brothers. Therefore, two different though related peoples, combined through marriage. The twist is that the original Dardanus was not descended from Lot but rather from Jacob. The Dardanians and the Teucri (or Teukroi) are credited as collaborating in building Troy as a state. As information is scant and legend and history are fused, it is a challenge in constructing a reliable chronology regarding the original founders.
Teucer’s father is recorded as the mythical Scamandrus born circa 1627 BCE; ruling his people from 1603 to 1581 BCE. It was at that time his territory was allegedly absorbed by the Dardanians. In Greek mythology the daughter of Teucer was Bataea. Bataea married Dardanus who subsequently inherits rulership from Teucer of the Teucri in 1581, lasting until 1550 BCE, under the name of the Dardanians. Probably, the Teucri represent the relatively indigenous northwestern Anatolians of the second millennium BCE, while the Indo-European Dardanians, the migratory arrivals integrated into Teucri society, but who very quickly dominated it. Dardanus was born circa 1675 BCE in the land of Goshen, while the sons of Jacob were living in Egypt; for Dardanus was from a royal line of Judah, the son of Jacob.
Dardanus had a son Ilus (or Ilos), who ruled from 1550 to 1514 BCE; a king who died young and childless. Ilus’ younger brother, Erecthonius (or Erictanus) was born circa 1540 BCE and became king after Ilus. Erichthonius married Astyoche, daughter of the ‘river-god’ Simoeis, and she bore him a son, who was named Tros and he lived approximately between 1474 to 1415 BCE. Erichthonius was said to be the richest ruler in the world at that time, because he owned three thousand mares.
According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dardanus had another son named Zacynthus by Bataea and Zacynthus was the first settler on the island afterwards called Zacynthus. Dionysius also said that Dardanus’ son Idaeus, gave his name to the Idaean Mountains, that is Mount Ida, where Idaeus built a temple to the Mother of the Gods, Cybele and instituted mysteries and ceremonies still observed in Phrygia in Dionysius’ time. There are operas on the subject of Dardanus by Jean-Philippe Rameau (1739). Interesting coincidence that the operas are composed by a Frenchman.
Tros is the family member credited as the ruler of the Trojans, whereby the origin of the name Troad, as well as its inhabitants, the Trojans derive. Tros married Callirrhoe and had three sons with her, including the youngest son, Ganymede. Tros bequeathed the rulership of the Trojans to Ilos his eldest son – (not Ilos the son of Dardanus), who chose to be near the sea and strengthened Troy on the plain – and the rulership of Dardania, near Mount Ida, to his second son, Assaracus in 1415 BCE. Ilos founded the royal line of Ilium (or Ilios) which may equate to the Hittite (Hatti) Wilusa from (W)ilios. Assaracus and his Dardanian descendants maintained close links with their Trojan cousins.
To give a context for the period circa 1600 BCE with the approximate founding of Troy and the birth of Dardanus circa 1675 BCE, through to 1415 BCE and the death of his grandson Tros… Moab and Ammon were born circa 1878 or 1877 BCE after the destruction of Sodom, when Abraham was ninety-nine years old. Similarly, Abraham’s son Isaac was born in 1877 BCE, when Abraham was one hundred years old. Jacob’s son Joseph died in 1616 BCE at the age of one hundred and ten in Egypt, but by the birth of Moses some ninety years later in 1527 BCE, the sons of Jacob were in bondage to a ruling Dynasty who did not remember Joseph – Exodus 1:8 (refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?)
The exodus of the sons of Jacob from Egypt occurred in 1446 BCE, 430 years after Abraham’s 99th year – Exodus 12:40-41, Galatians 3:17. The three hundred and seventy-five years during 1400 to 1025 BCE was the period of the Judges in Israel until Saul became king. The early period and then height of Troy encompassed the approximate period of four hundred and twenty years from 1600 to 1180 BCE. From 1400 BCE onwards, the Moabites and children of Ammon were at continual loggerheads with Israel. Moving to Dardania and Troy was an attractive proposition for those who had the financial means. It may explain the wealth of Troy, if many inhabitants were rich immigrants.
The two families remained intertwined. Ilos married Eurydice, and became the father of Laomedon. Ilos’ daughter Themiste, married his nephew, Capys of the Dardanian line. Ilos’ son Laomedon succeeded him as king of Troy. Assaracus’ son, Capys and his wife Themiste had a son called Anchises. Of the two royal lines, those of Troy (or Ilium) became more powerful than the older Dardanian line, particularly under the rule of Laomedon; even though there was only three generations of kings in Troy, compared to the line of eight successive kings in Dardania. King Laomedon was known for his arrogance, his impiety and his refusal to honour his promises.
Then enters Priam (or Priamos), the only son to survive in a war against Heracles. Priam had been ransomed by his sister Hesione and became the new king in 1200 BCE. He had formally been known as Podacres. Priam’s first wife was Arisbe, daughter of Merops king of Percote. They had a son Aesacus, who was a gifted seer. Priam soon married Hecuba, daughter of Dymas and gave Arisbe to Hyrtacos. With Hecuba, Priam became the father of Hector, Paris, Cassandra, Helenus, Deiphobus and countless others as mentioned. Apollodorus recorded that Hecuba was the mother of ten sons and four daughters.
Before Paris was born, Hecuba had a vision and a seer interpreted her vision, saying that Paris would one day cause the destruction of Troy. So Paris was sent to live in the wilderness. Years later, Paris returned to Troy and was recognised. Their parents had apparently forgotten the warning by the seer and welcomed him home – refer article: Thoth. Priam would have returned Helen when the Greek embassy demanded the return of Helen to her husband King Menelaus the Spartan; but Paris prevailed upon his father to refuse. As a result, the war lasted for ten years and all but one son Helenus, would die in the war. Neoptolemus, son of Achilles allegedly killed King Priam on the last day of the war.
Who is Dardanus, the founder of Dardania, the city and subsequent region? A persistent secular legend from Greece and Rome, identifies a man called Dara as Dardanus, founder of ancient Troy, or rather Dardan. One translation of the Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, mentions King Solomon as being wiser than two men named as Calcol and Dara (or Darda) and gives Dara’s name as Dardanos. In 1 Chronicles 2:6 we read of Zarah, who had five sons and his fourth and fifth sons were Calcol and Dara (or Darda). Zarah was a son of Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob. We will return to Calcol when we study Judah, as he is credited with founding the city of Athens – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
The Greek poet Homer recorded that Dardanus was a son of Zeus, the chief of the Greek gods. The Roman and Greek legends support that Zeus called Jupiter in Latin, was a son of Saturn who was also called Kronus – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Writing about the Greek gods, Sanchuniathon a Phoenician historian said that ‘Kronus’ was whom the Phoenicians called Israel, that is Jacob and he had a son called Jehud – who is, Judah. What is important is not the Greek mythology but rather the family relationship between Jacob, Judah and Zarah’s son Darda, the great grandson of Jacob as real historic figures.
Critics focus on the Greek mythology and say every Greek city cited Zeus as their founder god and thus dismiss Darda as a founder of Troy. Critics also say the Bible does not give ‘direct evidence’ that any Israelites ‘abandoned the forty-year march… and travelled to the Aegean Sea or Black Sea… to found their own kingdoms.’ This is ironic as the rest of the time, the Bible is just a collection of fanciful fables, yet in this instance it is valued for not giving evidence, as if this evidence would be believed. We will look in detail into the sons of Jacob and the historical data that family members actually departed the congregation of Israel not just during the exodus sojourn for forty years from 1446 to 1407 BCE, but prior to their departure from Egypt.
The early migration of Darda is mentioned in How Israel Came to Britain, Canadian British Israel Association – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body before the Israel nation was formed – while, as a people, they were still in bondage in Egypt. One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster (Ireland). Another, under the leadershipof Dardanus, a brother of Calcol, crossed to Asia Minor to found the Kingdom later known as Troy. E Raymond Capt in his work, Jacob’s Pillar, 1977, writes that Darda was ‘Egyptian’ in that he lived there during the bondage and was the son of Zarah. This Darda according to Capt, was one and the same with ‘Dardanus’, the ‘Egyptian founder of Troy.’
Hecataeus of Abdera, a fourth century BCE Greek historian, stated that “Now the Egyptians say that also after these events [the plagues of the Exodus] a great number of colonies were spread from Egypt all over the inhabited world… They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city of Greece, Argos, and that the nations of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews (remnant of Judah), which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country [Egypt]; and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these peoples to circumcise their male children, the custom having been brought over from Egypt. Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt.” Quoted from Diodorus of Sicily. G H Oldfather, 1933. Volume I, books I-II, 1-34, page 91. We will return to both Calcol and his brother Darda in subsequent chapters.
Depending on which interpretation of history one receives, the fallout from Troy’s defeat is as follows. If the ten year war was one against the Mycenae, then the lone royal survivor was Aeneas a member of the Dardanian branch of the Trojan royal family. His father was Anchises. Aeneas fought on behalf of Troy against the Mycenae. Datings for the ten year war – or siege for the Helenus version – range from as early as 1196 to as late 1183 BCE. Thus, 1194 to 1184 BCE is a good median.
Aeneas is said to have lead the two sons of Antenor, Archelochus and Acamas as well as the Dardanians, allies of Troy during the Trojan War. After the sack of Troy, Aeneas and his followers were allowed to leave with their lives. His descendants according to Virgil in the Aenid, continued to rule the Trojans. They travelled for seven years, settling in Latium – central Italy, corresponding with Lazio. Opposed by Latinus, ruler of the Latins, Aeneas bests him in battle and is then accepted, marrying his daughter, Lavinia. Many subsequent rulers of Rome claimed descent from Aeneas and the Houses of Troy and Dardania. This raises an integral point. The rulers or the royal line of Troy – splitting into two houses, the Trojan and Dardanian – were originally from Dara, the son of Zarah. Zarah was a twin of Pharez. We will study each in detail. Both twins were to be ancestors of royal lines. We will learn that nearly every royal line in Europe has descended from or included the descendants of Zarah – article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
The Romans, may well have some legitimacy to the claim of Trojan blood, as many royal houses probably could.
The pivotal issue though is not this, but that the sons of Dara ruled the peoples from Anatolia, the western Luwians. These people became known as Trojans and Dardanians after their rulers – Darda and Tros. The western Luwians were Moabite and Ammonite colonists, descended from Abraham’s brother Haran. Similarly, the eastern Luwians were related to Abraham’s other brother Nahor – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. These peoples were known as the Hatti, who later incorporated the Chaldeans and then many centuries later were the Lombardi and intermingled with the Ostrogoths, settling in northern and central Italy. The original royal houses of Troy and Darda were from the tribe of Judah. A portion of Ammon and Moab comprised the main body of Trojans and Dardanians, who in time migrated to the area of Macedonia and ultimately comprised the later Greeks of the Classical and Hellenistic periods.
The alternative Trojan history is where Helenus is the lone royal survivor from the Trojan line. Trojan king lists follow Helenus with Genger and then a Francus (or, poetic licence perhaps, a Franco). Many centuries later there is another Francus, a king of the West Franks. Historians say Franc-us is a fabrication of history and inserted into the Trojan line by the Merovingian kings of France.
What is fascinating, is not whether this is true or not, but rather that the Merovingians in part, with the Franks and the Trojans are actually all one and the same, regardless of whether a Francus was the great grandson of King Priam or not.
Other kings included in the Trojan king list are Pepin of France, Louis I of France and sandwiched between the two, one of the most influential and important kings in history, Charles I or the Great, better known as Charlemagne. The following works on Troy are all written by French men. This writer wonders if any understood that they themselves were the living descendants of the very people they were writing about; or whether their attachment is a strong subconscious ardour and inclination they have not rationalised or quite put their finger on.
Britannica:
‘The key work in the medieval exploitation of the Trojan theme was a French romance, the Roman de Troie (1154–60), by Benoit de Sainte-Maure. Later medieval writers used the Roman de Troie until it was superseded by a Latin prose account, the Historia destructionis Troiae (c. 1287; “History of the Destruction of Troy”), by Guido delle Colonne. The French author Raoul Le Fèvre’s Recueil des histoires de Troye (1464), an account based on Guido, was translated into English by William Caxton and became the first book to be printed in English as The Recuyell of the Histories of Troye (c. 1474).’
Regarding the rise of city-states or Poleis in Greece, Britannica states – emphasis theirs:
‘A related factor is Phoenician influence (related, because the early Phoenicians were great colonizers, who must often have met trading Greeks). The Phoenician coast was settled by communities similar in many respects to the early Greek poleis. It is arguable that Phoenician influence, and Semitic influence generally, on early Greece has been seriously underrated’ – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
The first significant date in Greek history, in the Archaic age was 776 BCE, the year of the first Olympic Games in Olympia, which was located west of Arcadia – recall Acadia, Canada – and northwest of Sparta in the west of Greece. This was the highlight of the Archaic age which culminated with the Persian wars. This era included Homer and his epics The Iliad and The Odyssey.
In the period from Dark to Archaic Greece there were two powerful interrelationships which influenced Greek society, the colonizing mother city and its daughter city and the shared membership of an amphictyony. The most common link was that between two cities with the emphasis of shared ancestry. This diplomatic kinship was taken seriously right until the Hellenistic period and was the basis of key alliances; developing into the proxenia. Proxenoi were citizens of one state who looked after the interests of citizens of their related, neighbour state. This was evident in type between Sparta and Athens against Troy and was really exploited by Athens in the fifth century.
In Archaic Greece an amphictyony – literally, ‘dwellers around’ – comprised a ‘league of neighbors’ called an Amphictyonic League, which was an ancient religious association of Greek tribes and states formed in the dim past, between the Trojan war and the rise of the various Greek poleis. The most important was the Delphic Amphictyony. Originally composed of twelve tribes dwelling around Thermopylae, this league was centred first on the shrine of Demeter and later became associated with the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. The founder is said to be Amphictyon, brother of Hellen – the purported male ancestor of all Hellenes. The twelve founders were the Oetaeans, Boeotians of Thebes, Dolopes, Dorians of Sparta, the Ionians of Athens, Phthian Achaeans, Locrians, Magnesians, Malians, Perrhaebians, Phocians, Pythians of Delphi and the Thessalians. The League doctrine required that no member would be entirely wiped out in war and no water supply of any member would be cut even in wartime. It did not prevent members from the numerous clashes with each other, about dominance over temples.
Oxford University Press states: ‘[Amphictyony] a word borrowed from institutions in classical Greece and applied by some historians of Israel to its supposed organization before the monarchy [time of the Judges] as a confederation of twelve clans. It was suggested that there was a central shrine at which a cultic object was a shared responsibility among the twelve. But the amphictyony theory has now been generally abandoned.’
The number of twelve tribes is too coincidental to ignore. The premise of not destroying a family clan, is reminiscent of the war of the eleven tribes against the tribe of Benjamin, which would have wiped them out if six hundred men had not fled and hidden, so that the remaining tribes relented – Judges 20:1-48 (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes). The early Greeks as mentioned, included the related sons of Jacob. The idea of the amphictyony sounds completely plausible from an Israelite, as well as a Moabite, Ammonite perspective. As a lot of blood had been spilt between the two families.
The region of Canaan, Palestine or the Levantine, as discussed previously, was a prized parcel of real estate and so became a very crowded part of the world – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. The draw to move away to lands partially established, yet with space and opportunities beckoned to the sons of Jacob and Lot. Just as the New World was attractive a few hundred years ago, ancient Greece and the Aegean was the destination of choice. This explains the flowering of cities, rather than countries or empires in the region as they were colonies of a number of differing tribes and peoples. The influx of migrating peoples also explains why the Myceaneans – formerly Minoans and latterly Philistines – left mainland Greece, for the myriad islands and particularly Crete – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Another way of reinforcing this relationship between citizens from different city-states was through epigamia. This was enacted through an arrangement by which the husband’s family by marriage were treated as citizens of the wife’s poleis if the husband settled there. In contrast, Plutarch mentions that there was no intermarriage between members of two of the villages of Attica – Pallene and Hagnous. Not because they were dissimilar, rather they were too closely related and thus there was a ban on endogamy. This situation remarkably parallels the peoples of French Ammonite stock in Canada and Louisiana.
The Endogamy Files: What Is Endogamy? The DNA Geek, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Endogamy is a word that gets bandied around a lot in genetic genealogy circles, but what it means and how it affects our work is less clear. This post is the first in a series about what endogamy is, why it matters, how to detect it, and how to work with it. Endogamy is the practice of mating within a specific group.All human populations have practiced endogamy to one extent or another. Some still do.
Endogamy can occur because the group is geographically isolated from other people, like Native Hawaiians were; because they prefer to marry within their religion, ethnicity, language, and/or social caste, as most cultures do; or for other reasons, likeconsolidating power among royalty. Key to endogamy is that the group is small enough that, over time, marriages occur between cousins.Not necessarily first or even second cousins (although that can occur), but between third, fourth, and more distant cousins. Over and over. And over.
It’s important to remember that endogamy is not incest, which is sexual relations between close relatives, like a father and daughter or uncle and niece. Incest is associated with a substantial risk of early death or genetic disorders in the child, while marriages between even first cousins are much safer.
Endogamy causes something called pedigree collapse, but not all pedigree collapse rises to the level of endogamy. The home person… is the child of parents who were third cousins to one another. That is, the parents shared a pair of great-great grandparents. As a result, their child… has 30 unique great-great-great grandparents instead of the expected 32. One set of 3-great grandparents shows up twice in the child’s tree. We say the pedigree is “collapsing” rather than doubling in number with each generation back, as we’d expect. But pedigree collapse is not endogamy. Pedigree collapse is one or a few isolated incidents of cousin marriage, while endogamy occurs repeatedly over many, many generations.
This is my mother’s tree. She’s Cajun [a Louisianian descended of French Canadian immigrants from Acadia, speaking an archaic form of French], a culture that was geographically and culturally isolated in southern Louisiana and, before that, in what is now Nova Scotia. Cajuns have been marrying mainly within their own population since the 1600s… [like the expression “All Cajuns are cousins”!] My mother’s parents were fourth cousins. I don’t think they knew, because my grandmother’s father was born out of wedlock. My grandfather’s parents were third cousins; they definitely knew. There’s no known incest in this tree, but the cousin marriages go on and on, back to the earliest settlers in Port-Royal, Acadia (now Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia) in the early 1600s, because there simply weren’t a lot of options for marriage partners.
The closest cousin marriages I’ve identified in this tree are between first cousins. Consider Isaure Marie Guidry (1863–1933), my mother’s great grandmother… Her parents, Alexis Onésime Guidry and Palmire Dupré, were first cousins through their shared grandparents Louis–David Guidry and Marie Modeste Borda. To complicate matters even more, Onésime had been widowed before marrying Palmire. His previous wife, Celestine, was Palmire’s older sister, and Celestine had a daughter named Marie. So Marie and Isaure were half sisters their father Onésime, and first cousins through their mothers Celestine and Palmire. (This combination is often termed three-quarter siblings.) But they were also second cousins through Onésime and their mothers. Technically, Marie and Isaure were second cousins twice over, once through Onésime and Celestine and once through Onésime and Palmire, but you get the picture. It’s enough to make your head spin!
Isaure and Marie died more than 75 years before the advent of genetic genealogy using autosomal DNA, but what would their match to one another look like if we could analyze their genomes today? As half sisters, we’d expect them to share about 1750 cM, as first cousins another 850 cM or so, and as double second cousins roughly 200 cM twice over. In many parts of their genomes, they’d match on both copies of their two chromosomes, much like full siblings do.In fact, they might well be indistinguishable from full sisters using the methods we use for genealogy. While Isaure and Marie are an extreme case, DNA matching is affected to some degree in all endogamous populations. People who are no closer than fourth cousins might share enough DNA to be predicted as third cousins, because they’re picking up “extra” shared DNA through their other relationships.’
‘For example, my mother shares 184 cM with D.M. If you were to plug that number into the DNA Painter SCP tool, you’d see a combined probability of 89.1% that they were either in the second cousin group (38.8% chance) or the second cousin once removed group (50.3%). In fact, their closest relationship is third cousins, who average only about 50 cM. On the other hand, Mom and D.M. are also third cousins once removed twice over, fourth cousins once removed, and fifth cousins… that we know of. All those distant relationships add to the shared centimorgan tally. Thus, the overall effect of endogamy is to make many of our DNA matches appear to be more closely related than they really are. This complicates everything, from basic relationship prediction to more advanced and powerful techniques, like the… What are the Odds? tool.
Is the entire human population endogamous?After all,we only mate (well, mate successfully) with other humans and have been doing so for ten thousand years or more, since the last archaic humans, like Denisovans and Neanderthals, died out. Technically, we’re all (very distant) cousins, and all of our pedigrees collapse eventually. What do you think?’
By the sixth century BCE, the dominant cities in Grecia were Athens, Sparta, Corinth and Thebes. They had all increased their influence to include surrounding smaller towns and rural areas. Athens and Corinth had become major maritime and mercantile powers. Herodotus described one such trader from the later Archaic period, Sostratus of Aegina, a man of fabulous wealth.
Then in the early 1970s a remarkable inscription was found in Etruria, Italy – a dedication to Apollo, in the name of Sostratus of Aegina. This discovery revealed that the source of his wealth was trade with Etruria and other parts of Italy. A rapidly increasing population in the preceding centuries had resulted in emigration of many Greeks to form colonies in Southern Italy and Sicily. The Greek colonies of Sicily, especially Syracuse were drawn into conflicts with the Carthaginians – ancestors of the Portuguese-Brazilian descended peoples (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil). The conflict lasted from 600 to 265 BCE until the Romans intervened. A year later, the Punic wars began.
Beginning about 500 BCE, the Athenians and Spartans tussled for hegemony over Greece, though the Athenians were no longer the Israelites – of six hundred years before – but Moab – with Ammon located in Macedonia to the north. For these were the children of Lot, whose migrations southward had pushed the other (earlier) Greeks to leave.
The Spartans who were distinct and not descended from Moab, Ammon or Jacob, were never defeated by Philip II (or Alexander III) and remained outside of the Greek Empire – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Around the same time, in 499 BCE, the Ionian city states under Persian rule rebelled against their Persian-backed, tyrannical rulers. Supported by troops predominantly from Athens, they advanced as far as Sardis burning the city before being driven back by a Persian counterattack. The revolt continued for five years until finally the rebel Ionians were defeated.
Darius I, king from 522 to 486 BCE, did not forget that Athens had assisted the Ionian revolt and he assembled an armada to exact retribution. Though heavily outnumbered, the plucky Athenians and allies, defeated the Persians at the Battle of Marathon in 490. The Athenians and Persians continued to wage war until about 450, with the Athenians driving the Persians out of the Aegean. They then turned on the Spartans during the Peloponnesian War beginning in 431 BCE and lasting to 404 BCE. Eventually, Sparta brought an end to Athens’ empire though was ultimately left severely weakened itself.
By 360 BCE, the Greek states had worn themselves out and ‘the exhaustion of the Greek heartland coincided with the rise of Macedon, led by Philip II.’ In 359, two strong leaders came to the thrones of both Persia and Macedon, ruling for nearly the exact same periods: Artaxerses III, from 359 to 338 BCE; and Philip II from 359 to 336 BCE.
The Parthenon situated on the Acropolis of Athens was built between 447 and 438 BCE. A temple dedicated to the goddess Athena. Parthenos meant a ‘maiden, girl, virgin’ or an ‘unmarried woman.’ Construction began at the height of the Athenian Empire. The Parthenon replaced an older temple of Athena which was destroyed in the Persian invasion of 480 BCE. It also served a practical purpose as the city treasury.
Philip took twenty years in not just unifying his kingdom, but also expanding north and westwards, conquering Thrace as well as Thessaly to the south. His reforms to the Macedonian army were pivotal in his success. In 338 BCE he invaded the southern city-states of Thebes and Athens, defeating them at the Battle of Chaeronea. Now king of all but Sparta; Philip then entered into war against the Achaemenid Empire but was assassinated by one of his bodyguards Pausanias of Orestis, early in the conflict … and so entered, Alexander the Great onto the world stage, aged just twenty, born July 20, 356 BCE.
‘Modern belief in the Greek-ness of the Macedonian language was strengthened by the publication in 1994 of an important curse tablet from Pella that appears provisionally to indicate that the Macedonian language was a form of northwest Greek. Macedonian religion looks Greek; there are local variations, but that is equally true of incontestably Greek places in, for instance, the Peloponnese. Many Macedonian personal names resemble Greek ones… The Classical Age was resplendent with most of the cultural wonders associated with Ancient Greece. It corresponds with the period of the height of democracy, the flowering of Greek tragedy in the hands of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, and the architectural marvels, like the Parthenon, at Athens.’
The Greek word for philosophy, philosophia, translates as the ‘love for wisdom.’ The discipline dates back to ancient times with some of the greatest philosophers, including Pythagoras circa 570 to 495 BCE; Parmenides circa 540-? BCE; Socrates circa 469 to 399 BCE; Plato circa 428 to 348 BCE; Aristotle 384 to 322 BCE; and Epicurus 341 to 270 BCE.
There are famous modern day philosophical thinkers who have had their contributions recognised as well. The same people descended from Lot, known as the Greeks, are now known as the French and are still producing the majority of the finest thinkers in the world. Examples include: John Calvin, 1509 to 1564; Rene Descartes, 1596 to 1650; Blaise Pascal, 1623 to 1662; Voltaire, 1694 to 1778, Auguste Comte, 1798 to 1857, Jean Paul Sartre, 1905 to 1980; Simone de Beauvoir, 1908 to 1986; Albert Camus, 1913 to 1960; and Michael Foucault, 1926 to 1984. Some of the major Greek contributors to science, lived during the Hellenistic era, including Euclid and Archimedes.
In 600 BCE, a portion of the Greek Empire – an early enclave of Moabites – settled in Southern France and founded the colony of Massalia; now the city that is called Marseille and the oldest city in France – Kir ofMoab. The primary link between the Classical Greeks and the French are not the Gauls, but the Franks. The original Gauls are not the ancestors of Moab and Ammon. We will study these Gauls in detail in a later chapter – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.
As the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes believe they are Vikings and identify with that culture and past history, the truth, is that the original Vikings left Scandinavia and settled in Britain and Ireland – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. Likewise the French identify with a Gallic past, yet they are not Gauls, for the true Gauls vacated France for the shores of Britain and Ireland. The Gauls were a Celtic race who left their name in northwestern Italy as Gallia, in Belgium as Belgica and in France as Celtica. The nation of France emerged from this Gallic region of the Celtic culture and peoples. Gallia remains a name for France in the Latin, with Francogallia.
The Merovingian dynasty of the Franks attracts considerable interest from researchers and the public alike, in a similar vein to the Trojan kings. We will discuss them further in a subsequent chapter as they are perhaps not all that they seem – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The Merovingian kings were ostensibly a Frankish, Salian dynasty lasting some three hundred years – 476 to 750 CE – and are traditionally reckoned as the first race of the ‘kings of France.’ They importantly for the French identity, ended the hegemony of the Visigoths in Gaul. Merovingian derives from the name Merovech meaning Sea-Bull – the father of Childeric I, who ruled a tribe of Salian Franks from his capital at Tournai.
Childeric was succeeded by his son Clovis I in 481/482 CE. Many regard Clovis as the beginning point for the history of France. Clovis I extended his rule over all the Salian Franks by conquering or annexing the territories of the Ripuarian Franks and the Alemanni; uniting nearly all of Gaul except for Burgundy – the seeds of modern Switzerland – and what is now Provence. Important choices by Clovis included making Paris his new capital and converting to Christianity sometime during 496 to 506 CE.
At Clovis’ death in 511 – and in a situation similar to Alexander at the time of his death – his realm was divided among his four sons, Theuderic I, Chlodomir, Childebert I and Chlotar I. Despite the frequently bloody competition between them, the brothers managed to extend Frankish rule over Thuringia in 531 and Burgundy in 534; as well as gaining control over Septimania on the Mediterranean coast; Bavaria; and the lands of the Saxons to the north. By 558 CE, Chlotar I was the only surviving son of Clovis.
The Merovingians grew their hair long (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe) which distinguished them among the Franks who cut their hair short. Contemporaries referred to them as the ‘long-haired kings’, in Latin reges criniti. A Merovingian whose hair was cut could not rule. The Merovingians used a distinct stock of names. Clovis, evolved into Louis and remained common among French royalty to the 19th century – with claimant for the throne Louis XIX in 1830, allegedly king for twenty minutes.
The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals and emphasis his, bold mine:
‘The old Trojan Royal House – of the line of DARDANUS – was restored to power after the Greek defeat at Troy in 1149. As noted by Herman L. Hoeh:
“A complete list of TROJAN RULERS after the fall of Troy in 1181 may be found in the original Spanish work by Bartholome Gutierrez entitled: Historia del estado presente y antiguo, de la mui noble y mui leal ciudad de Xerez de la Frontera. It was published in Xerez, Spain in 1886″ (Compendium of World History, Volume II).
‘… HELENUS, the son of Priam and Hecuba, fled Troy after the first Trojan War and settled in Illyria or Epirus. There Helenus and his followers founded the cities of Buthrotum and Chaonia. During the Second Trojan War in 1149, the descendants of Helenus REGAINED CONTROL of Troy from the Greeks and restored the Royal House of DARDANUS to the city.
The Spanish history by Gutierrez records the names of Helenus’ descendants who controlled Troy and the surrounding region until the Third Trojan War in 677… At the fall of Troy in 677, members of the Trojan Royal Family, and most of the population of the city, fled to the NORTHERN SHORES OF THE BLACK SEA in eastern Europe. For the next 234 years, in this region, the… TROJAN HOUSE provided eleven rulers over the people who fled Troy…
In 442 B.C. MARCOMIR, Antenor’s son, ascended the throne; and in 441 he migrated out of Scythia and settled the people on the DANUBE. In 431 the Goths forced him, along with over 175,000 men, out of the area and into the country now called West Friesland, Gelders and Holland. Then, nine years later, Marcomir crossed the Rhine and conquered part of Gaul – MODERN FRANCE! He made his brother governor, and continued the gradual conquest of the entirety of Gaul.
Eventually this people became known as FRANKS or Franconians after a king called FRANCUS who reigned from 39 – 11 B.C. The last King of the Franks – Marcomir V – won a great victory over the Romans at Cologne in 382 A. D. and recovered all the lands in the possession of the Romans, except Armoria or Little Brittany, in 390. However, he was slain in battle three years later and the Romans conquered the FRANKS – commanding them to refrain from electing kings over themselves. Instead, the Franks elected Dukes to reign over them, starting with Genebald I in 328 A.D.
The fifth duke of the East Franks, Pharamund (404-419) is recognized by early historians as being the FIRST TRUE KING OF FRANCE. In 427 the succession passed to Clodion who founded the MEROVINGIAN DYNASTY. There is something VERY INTERESTING about this dynasty that bears explanation:
“Its kings all wore LONG HAIR. They kept their kingly office until the Pope suggested to the East Franks (Germans) that they could gain the power over the Merovingians by cutting the king’s hair. The last Merovingian was accordingly tonsured. The government thereafter passed to Pippin, father of the German king Charlemagne, who RESTORED the Roman Empire to the west in 800.
The history of the Merovingians, WHO DESCENDED [perhaps] FROM THE [early] TROJAN LINE AND THE HOUSE OF JUDAH [Zarah], is made especially interesting in a book entitled The Long-haired Kings, by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill. (See especially chapter 7.) The Merovingians recognized that… THEY WERE NOT OF THE THRONE OF DAVID [Pharez] andwould hold their power only so long as they kept a NAZARITE TRADITION – long hair – symbolizing their subjection to a Higher Power – God – who rules supreme among men. (See Numbers 6)” (Compendium of World History, Volume II, page 183).’
The first consideration by this writer was that the Merovingian kings were descended from Moab (or Ammon) via the later ruling Trojans. Subsequent research lent credence to considering the explanation that the Merovingians were from a tribe of Israel which differed from that of Judah, the tribe of Dan -Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
Further consideration yet and evidence of a DNA lineage via the specific paternal Haplogroup R1b (Z381 > Z331) for the Merovingian kings, led to acknowledging a descent from the tribe of Judah. As Darda (Dara) the fifth and youngest son of Zarah founded Troy, the link between this branch of Zarah and the Merovingians is not beyond realistic foundation – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. It is then of note that by their own admission, the Merovingians were not descendants of David’s line from Pharaz.
Thus as a branch of Zarah initially ruled Troy prior to Moab and Ammon in the Troad, so too a branch of Zarah (Merovingians) ruled the fledgling Frankish (Salian) kingdom lands prior to the Carolingian rulers of non-Judah (Israelite) descent and with a high degree of probability, were actually of Moabite lineage.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 445 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘Even the name Lancelot, according to Ried, derived from L’Alan de Lot, Alan from the Lot Valley of southwest France. The Lot Valley is the same region that the Essenes, Templars, Rex Deus, Cathars, and Merovingians settled in. Lot derives from Lot, the nephew of Abraham, recorded in the Nephilim-infested Sodom and Gomorrrah narrative. Lot also inexplicably shows up in the original Camu-lot. One wonders, were Camulot and the Lot region of France thus considered by Gnostics as the new Sodom and Gomorrah cities of light?’ – Paris is the “City of Light”.
The Franks like other Germanic peoples had resided in Scandinavia before their migration southwards and prior to that, they are linked to the Black Sea area. The Franks from the beginning, were divided into two distinct political yet related groups. The Salian Franks of very probable Moabite descent, dwelt in the west of France. This Frankish kingdom became known as Neustria and encompassed northern France, Burgundy, Orleans – upper central France – and Provence.
The Ripuarian Franks, most likely descended from Ammon, dwelt in the Rhineland region of northwestern Germany; which in turn became known as Austrasia and later encompassed Austria, the Netherlands and northern Germany. The name Ripuarian is thought to mean river people or river dwellers. One is reminded of Ammon’s capital Rabbah, the city of water and Quebec with its strong association with the sea. The name Franci, from Frank is linked with the english word frank, to be ‘free.’ Other accepted meanings include the Germanic words for ‘javelin, fierce, bold’ and ‘insolent.’
The author of the Chronicle of Fredegar in the seventh century, claimed the Franks came originally from Troy, citing the works of Virgil and Hieronymous: ‘Blessed Jerome has written about the ancient kings of the Franks, whose story was first told by the poet Virgil: their first king was Priam and, after Troy was captured by trickery, they departed. Afterwards they had as king Friga, then they split into two parts, the first going into Macedonia, the second group, which left Asia with Friga were called the Frigii, settled on the banks of the Danube and the Ocean Sea – Black Sea. Again splitting into two groups, half of them entered Europe with their king Francio. After crossing Europe with their wives and children they occupied the banks of the Rhine and not far from the Rhine began to build the city of “Troy.”
The Liber Historiae Francorum (or Gesta regum Francoru) describes how 12,000 Trojans, alledgely led by Priam and Antenor (or rather descendants) sailed from Troy to the River Don and on to Pannonia which is on the River Danube settling near the Sea of Azov. There they founded a city called Sicambria. The Sicambri circa 55 BCE are linked to the area occupied by the Salian Franks in northwestern France. The Trojans joined the Roman army in accomplishing the task of driving enemies into the marshes of Mæotis, for which it is claimed they received the name of Franks, meaning ‘savage.’
There are many kings called great and within that group, there are only a select few who cast a long shadow over the other rulers labelled great. The great of the great, if you will. For instance, Alexander the Great of Macedon. Another is Charles I or Charlemagne, who lived from 742 to 814 CE. He was the son of Pepin III, king from 751 to 768 and Bertrada of Laon.
Charlemagne co-ruled with his brother Carloman I from 768 until his death in 771. Pepin had peacefully wrenched the monarchy away from Chileric III, by beseeching Pope Zachary (741-752 CE) for the need of a strong ruler such as himself: the Mayor of the Palace, effectively wielding the true power over the Frankish kingdom. Charlemagne is considered a founder of both the French and German monarchies. The French monarchy would continue to be a great power in Europe for the following thousand years.
It is thought that Charlemagne was born in either Liege in Belgium, or Aachen in Germany, where he died. He displayed a talent for languages and could speak Latin and understood Greek, amongst others. Charlemagne expanded the Frankish kingdom; establishing the Carolingian Empire. As a zealous defender of ‘Christianity’, Charlemagne gave money and land to the Catholic church and protected successive popes.
To acknowledge Charlemagne’s power and reinforce his support of the church, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans on December 25, 800, at St Peter’s Basilica in Rome – thus uniting Western Europe and the Holy Roman Empire for the first time since the fall of Rome. ‘Charlemagne ruled from the start by force of his personality which embodied the warrior-king ethos combined with Christian vision.’
Charlemagne maintained a violent and protracted thirty year series of battles from 772 to 804 CE – called the Saxon Wars – against the German Saxons, a ‘pagan’ worshipping Germanic tribe who had earned a reputation for ruthlessness.
Bust of Charlemagne – note the symbols of the German Eagle and the French Fleur-de-lis
In 782 at the Massacre of Verden, Charlemagne ordered the slaughter of some four and a half thousand Saxons and tried to force them to convert to Christianity; declaring that anyone who did not get baptised or follow the Catholic faith, would be put to death. The aim was to break the Saxon’s will to fight, but they still would not surrender their autonomy or repudiate their religion. In 804, Charlemagne deported over ten thousand Saxons to his kingdom in Neustria and replaced them in Saxony with his own people. This effectively won the conflict, while earning the enmity of the Scandinavian kings; who bid their time until Charlemagne’s death and who then unleashed Viking raids on Francia during 820 to 840.
Charlemagne’s son Louis was born in 778 to his second wife, Hildegard of the Vinzgau, who had nine children by the time she died at the age of 26 in 783. When King Louis I, the Pious died in 840, the empire was divided among his three sons who fought each other for supremacy. Their conflict was concluded by the Treaty of Verdun in 843 which divided the empire between Louis’ sons. Louis II, the German (843-876) received East Francia; Lothair I (843-855), Middle Francia; and Charles II, the Bald (843-877) gained West Francia. None of the kings were interested in working with their brothers and the empire’s infrastructure, as well as most of the reforms advanced by Charlemagne, deteriorated. His notable reforms included the first public schoolsand a monetary standard.
Hollister describes the king: ‘Charlemagne towered over his contemporaries both figuratively and literally. He was 6 feet 3 ½ inches tall [ironic as his father was very short], thick-necked, and pot bellied yet imposing in appearance for all that. He could be warm and talkative, but he could also be hard, cruel, and violent, and his subjects came to regard him with both admiration and fear… Above all else, Charlemagne was a warrior-king. He led his armies on yearly campaigns as a matter of course. Only gradually did he develop a notion of Christian mission and a program of unifying and systematically expanding the Christian West.’
Notable events in French history include, the Hundred Years War with the English, beginning in 1337. Then in 1348, the plague of Black Death spread through France killing a large percentage of the population. In 1415, the English defeated the French at the Battle of Agincourt. In 1453, the Hundred Years’ War finally drew to a close when the French defeated the English at the Battle of Castillon. The year 1643 saw Louis XIV become King of France. He ruled for seventy-two years and was known as Louis the Great and the Sun King. In 1778, France became involved in the American War of Independence, siding with the colonies in their drive for independent governance from Great Britain. The most popular French king names have been Louis with eighteen kings; Charles with ten; and Philip with five – the name of Alexander the Great’s father.
In 1789, the French Revolution began with the storming of the Bastille. In 1792, the French Republic was proclaimed and the following year, King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were executed by guillotine. In 1799, Napoleon seized power, overthrowing the French Directory; making himself Emperor. Conquering most of Europe by 1811, he had been officially crowned Emperor of France in 1804. By 1815, Napoleon was defeated by a coalition, led by England’s the Duke of Wellington.
Much could be said regarding Napoleon I, who like a reincarnated Alexander, embodied more than a passing similarity. The following, is a brief synopsis from Britannia – emphasis mine:
‘Napoleon I, French in full Napoléon Bonaparte… byname the Corsican or the Little Corporal, French byname Le Corse or Le Petit Caporal, (born August 15, 1769, Ajaccio, Corsica – died May 5, 1821, St. Helena Island), French general, first consul (1799-1804), and emperor of the French (1804-1814/15), one of the most celebrated personages in the history of the West. He revolutionized military organization and training; sponsored the Naploeonic Code, the prototype of later civil-law codes; reorganized education; and established the long-lived Concordat with the papacy. Napoleon’smany reforms left a lasting mark on the institutions of Franceand of much ofwestern Europe.But his driving passion was the military expansion of French dominion, and, though at his fall he left France little larger than it had been at the outbreak of the revolution in 1789, he was almost unanimously revered during his lifetime and until the end of the Second Empire under his nephew Napoleon III as one of history’s great heroes.’
There is an air of the Germanic or perhaps Flemish-Dutch about Charlemagne, not so with Napoleon Bonaparte who is wholly French like his spiritual antecedent, Alexander the Great. Both of which shared one major attribute and that was superior military innovation. It gave them the edge over their opponents. Sandwiched between Charlemagne and Napoleon was another formidable French leader and warrior, Joan of Arc. It was vital that England did not gain a stranglehold on France and Joan was the difference.
Britannia – emphasis mine:
‘St. Joan of Arc, byname the Maid of Orléans… (born circa 1412, Domrémy, Bar, France – died May 30, 1431, Rouen; canonized May 16, 1920… national heroine of France, a peasant girl who, believing that she was acting under divine guidance, led the French army in a momentous victory at Orleans [in 1429] that repulsed an English attempt to conquer France during the Hundred Years’ War.
Captured a year afterward,Joan was burned to death by the English and their French collaborators as a heretic. She became the greatest national heroine of her compatriots, and her achievement was a decisive factor in the later awakening of French national consciousness. Joan was the daughter of a tenant farmer… In her mission of expelling the English and their Burgundian allies… she felt herself to be guided by the voices of St. Michael [and others]… Joan was endowed with remarkable mental and physical courage, as well as a robust common sense, and she possessed many attributes characteristic of the female visionaries who were a noted feature of her time. These qualities included extreme personal piety, a claim to direct communication with the saints, and a consequent reliance upon individual experience of God’s presence beyond the ministrations of the priesthood and the confines of the institutional church.’
The 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Notice the similarity with the customary tablets used for the Ten commandments; with the United States Declaration of Independence; and with the Eye of Providence – the all-seeing eye of a god (Article: Thoth). This Eye is a symbol that has an eye enclosed in a pyramid, surrounded by rays of light from the Sun to represent superficially, the divine providence of God watching over humanity – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. In reality, the god who watches, is the one who holds this world captive – Articles: 33; and Asherah.
The Eye of Providence appears on the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, depicted on the one dollar bill. The Eye of Providence was adopted in 1782, but was first proposed as an element of the Great Seal in 1776. Coincidentally, it is thought to be the suggestion of the artistic consultant, Pierre Eugene du Simitiere – of French ancestry born in Geneva, Switzerland.
In 1889, the iconic Eiffel Tower was built in Paris for the World’s Fair
France suffered greatly in both World War I and World War II, with considerable loss of life and spilt blood on its soil. In 1940 During World War II, France was occupied by the Germans and under their direct control. German officials oversaw all aspects of government, supported by the military. Any infraction of the rules could be dealt with by the Nazis bureaucrats or by the military. Vichy France was a puppet government. It was governed by French officials, with the Germans maintaining only a small oversight group to ensure that Vichy France did not contravene the interests of the Germans. The Vichy government generally cooperated with the Germans; rounding up and deporting Jews and anyone else the Nazis declared as their enemies.
Most Resistance activity was fought in the occupied territories, as there was little incentive to take action against the Germans in Vichy France. It would have impacted the measure of self-governance the French already had and run the risk of inciting severe penalties against the civilian population. Relatively few French actually took an active part in the Resistance. Many offered passive support by not reporting Resistance movements, but the vast majority of French citizens in both occupied and Vichy France simply avoided doing anything to attract the attention of the gestapo or of collaborating Frenchmen. Allied forces liberated the country in 1944.
An additional interesting coincidence is France’s close association with the Modern Olympic Games. It was the Greeks who staged the first Olympic Games in Olympia during 776 BCE and it was a modern ‘Greek’, a French aristocrat, Baron Pierre de Coubertin who spoke of the Games’ revival. Athens was understandably, awarded the first re-instituted Games in 1896 in homage to the Olympics’ Greek origins. Though Paris hosting the second games in 1900, was truer to its returning to its spiritual and physical origin. Paris was the first home of the International Olympic Committee, before it moved to Lausanne, Switzerland. France also hosted the Summer Olympics in 1924 and has hosted the Winter Games three times. Paris is hosted the Olympic Games exactly one hundred years later, in 2024. It will join Athens and London in hosting the games a record three times; while Los Angeles is set to host for a third time in 2028.
Britannica: ‘France has long provided a geographic, economic, and linguistic bridge joining northern and southern Europe. It is Europe’s most important agricultural producer and one of the world’s leading industrial powers.’ A long standing and well known theme of the French nation, is the insistence on the supremacy of the individual. Historian Jules Michelet remarked…
“England is an empire, Germany is a nation, a race, France is a person.”
‘This is surely reflective of the French national character; one that was born from a familial origin more intimate than the beginning of other nations. Writer Gustave Flaubert philosophically deduced: ‘I am no more modern than I am ancient, no more French than Chinese; and the idea of la patrie, the fatherland – that is, the obligation to live on a bit of earth coloured red or blue on a map, and to detest the other bits coloured green or black – has always seemed to me narrow, restricted, and ferociously stupid.’
France is a major world power as evidenced in being one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council with the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and China. In 2015 France was listed as being ‘the best networked state in the world’ as a country that ‘is [a] member of more multi-lateral organisations than any other country.’ Reminds of Lot and his participation and position in Sodom. France is a leading member of the International Francophone Organisation (OIF) of eighty-four fully or partly French speaking nations. In 2017 France was the fourth largest donor of development aid in the world, after the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. A 2018 study by Credit Suisse ranked the French Armed Forces as the world’s sixth largest military and most powerful in Europe, behind Russia.
France is an integral member of the intergovernmental organisation comprising the seven most powerful economies – not including China and India – in the world, the G7. France’s second biggest export is automobiles. French automobile brands include renowned Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Alpine and Bugatti. France is famous for the most prestigious wines in the world; as well as for champagne – from the region of the same name – and cognac exports. Many cosmetic brands originate from France, including Vichy, Nuxe, Yves-Rocher and Bioderma.
France has a GDP of $3.21 trillion in 2025, ranking as the seventh largest economy in the world. Tourism is a very important industry and France receives the most visitors of any country each year with Paris the most visited capital in the world and voted the most romantic city destination. France is a mixed economy, with many private and semi-private businesses across a diverse range of industries. There is heavy government involvement in certain key sectors such as defence and electrical power generation. The French government’s commitment to economic intervention in favour of social equality, creates challenges for the economy such as a rigid labor market with high unemployment and a large public debt relative to other advanced economies.
‘The following product groups represent the highest dollar value in France’s import purchases during 2021
Machinery including computers: US$84.2 billion
Vehicles: $75.9 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $70.8 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $64.1 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $33.9 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $29.2 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $23.3 billion
Organic chemicals: $16.5 billion
Iron, steel: $15.2 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $14.3 billion
The fastest growers among the top product categories from 2020 to 2021 were mineral fuels including oil (up 80.4%), iron or steel as materials (up 57.1%), items made from iron or steel (up 37.2%), plastics as a material and items made from plastic (up 31.4%) and electrical machinery or equipment (up 19.5%).’
The French Tricolore
France ranks highly in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, one behind Italy at number three. France in fourth position is ahead of those nations we have investigated so far, such as Russia (5), China (6), Switzerland (7), Japan (8) and India (9). France has 2,436.0 tonnes of gold which represents 64.5 percent of its foreign reserves. The French central bank has sold little of its gold reserves in recent years. ‘The Banque de France vaults in Paris are one of the four designated depositories of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).’
France was the most populous nation in Europe in 1801, containing about one sixth of the continent’s inhabitants. By 1936, the French population had increased by fifty percent; though in the same period the number of people in Italy and Germany had nearly trebled and in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands the population had nearly quadrupled. The population of France today is 66,647,930 people, the fourth highest in Europe between the United Kingdom and Italy. France has never been a major source of international migrants like the other prominent nations surrounding it.
In the seventeenth century due to religious persecution, France lost more than four hundred thousand Huguenot refugees – usually highly skilled – mainly to Prussia in northeast Germany, to England, the Netherlands and the United States. In the same century, relatively small numbers of emigrants first settled in North America, particularly eastern Canada and Quebec and in the southern state of Louisiana. Small numbers of French, especially from Brittany and Normandy continue to relocate to Canada.
An online encyclopaedia states, that ‘most French people are of Celtic (Gauls) origin, with an admixture of Italic (Roman) and Germanic (Franks) groups.’ As touched upon, the Gauls were in fact early British and Irish peoples and it is the Salian and Ripuarian Franks who are the nucleus of the French nation. The Latin and Celtic component reveals their familial resemblance to the Italians and Swiss respectively; whom represent their cousins from both Nahor and Haran respectively. We will discover when we investigate Haran’s brother Abraham and his descendants the why and where of the Germanic component in the French people. The fact that France is composed of two brothers is the key piece of the French puzzle and explains their approximate north western to south eastern population demographic divide.
The major differences between the North and South of France, Santa Fe Relocation, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The two regions of France are heavily influenced by the surrounding countries and the weather. While many aspects of Northern France are reminiscent of Germany and Belgium,such as the architecture [industry and commerce], Southern France feels more Mediterranean, sharing many features [such as cuisine and pace of life] with Spain and Italy. The lifestyle and culture varies between the two regions… In Northern France most people tend to be quite honest and blunt, but they also tend to form much deeper relationships with people… The easiest way to make friends in Southern France is to speak the language.’
Encyclopaedia: ‘Large-scale immigration over the last century and a half has led to a more multicultural society. In 2004, the Institute Montaigne estimated that within Metropolitan France, 51 million people were White (85% of the population), 6 million were Northwest African (10%), 2 million were Black (3.3%), and 1 million were Asian (1.7%). In 2005, it was Western Europe’s leading recipient of asylum seekers… In 2010, France… [was] among the top five asylum recipients in the world… [even though] France established controls to curb Eastern European migration. Immigration remains a contentious political issue.’
Recall Ezekiel 25:10 ESV: ‘I will give [Moab] along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations…’
The region of Catalonia though within Spain, also includes Catalan speakers in the historical French region of Roussillon. For some four hundred years this Catalan territory has been united with France, called Catalunya nord and today known as Pyrenees Orientales with the city of Perpignan. The autonomous community of Catalonia is the richest and most highly industrialised region of Spain; reflecting its difference from the rest of the Spanish. For instance, the Catalan textile industry achieved prominence between 1283 and 1313; long remaining the premier industry of Spain until the 1950s.
Britannia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Catalonia was formerly a principality of the crown of Aragon, and it has played an important role in the history of the Iberian Peninsula. From the 17th century it was the centre of a separatist movement that sometimes dominated Spanish affairs. In 2006 Catalonia was granted “nation”status and given the same level of taxation responsibility as the Spanish central government. Spain’s Constitutional Court struck down portions of this autonomy statute in 2010, ruling that Catalans constituted a “nationality” but that Catalonia was not, itself, a “nation.”
This is strikingly similar to the ruling accorded to Quebec in Canada.
‘Scotland’s referendum on independence from the United Kingdom in… 2014, although ultimately unsuccessful, [galvanised] the independence movement in Catalonia. Convergence and Union leader Artur Mas called for the long-promised, albeit nonbinding, independence referendum to be held… The move was immediately challenged by Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, and the independence campaign was suspended while the Constitutional Court considered the legality of the vote. Ultimately, Mas proceeded with the referendum but framed it as an informal poll of Catalan opinion. With more than one-third of registered voters participating in the balloting, over 80 percent expressed a desire for independence.’
This sentiment survives till this day, though there has been a power struggle between the central government in Madrid and that of the Catalonian capital, Barcelona; which is currently stalled and in Madrid’s favour. The Catalan government surveys regularly its people regarding its “sentiment of belonging.” In July 2019, the results indicated that 46.7% of Catalans would favour independence from Spain. This has dropped markedly after the heavy handed response from Madrid in 2018. With the stronger centralist tendencies in France however, French Catalans display a much less open sense of uniqueness, having been integrated more seamlessly ‘into the unitary French national identity.’
There are 7,596,131 people in Catalonia and in France 423,112 Catalonians. It is not surprising that the French Catalonians feel more at home in France than their Spanish counter parts if they are from similar stock. We only learn of Spanish Catalonian and Basque discontent not French Catalonian and Basque grievances.
The etymology of Basque according to some scholars is based on bhar-s-, meaning ‘summit, point’ or ‘leaves.’ Barscunes may have meant ‘the mountain people, the tall ones’ orthe proud ones. The last definition is interesting considering the pride of Moab. Euskal Herria is the oldest documented Basque name for the area they inhabit, dating from the sixteenth century. The Spanish Basque Country, is the largest and most populated part of the Basque territories. It includes two main regions, the Basque Autonomous Community – capital city, Vitoria-Gasteiz – and the Chartered Community of Navarre – capital city, Pamplona. The Spanish Constitution of 1978 states ‘that Navarre may become a part of the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country if it is so decided by its people and institutions… To date, there has been no implementation of this law.’
For many French Basques, their identity is mixed with a sense of being Basque and French. Whereas in the Spanish Basque Country, there are many Basques who don’t have a sense of Spanish identity at all. Former Basque rugby union player and French international, Imanol Harinordoquy, said about his national identity: ‘I am French and Basque. There is no conflict, I am proud of both… I have friends who are involved in the political side of things but that is not for me. My only interest is the culture, the Euskera language, the people, our history and ways.’
Rugby union is an important sport in parts of France, particularly in Paris and Marseille. It is also a popular sport among French Basques, with major clubs Biarritz Olympique and Aviron Bayonnais traditional heavy weights in the premier division of French Rugby. Biarritz regularly play Champion Cup matches, especially knockout matches in San Sebastian, Spain. Games between the Basque clubs and Catalan club USA Perpignan are always hard fought. The fact that the French Basque and Catalans are so keen on rugby may allude to their Moab and Ammon heritage. Though Rugby is played in Spain, it is amongst the French that it is a passion. These French consider France the spiritual home of rugby, even in lieu of its origins in England.
An online encyclopaedia mentions: ‘Strabo’s account of the north of Spain in his Geographica (written between approximately 20 BC and 20 AD) makes a mention of “a sort of woman-rule…” a first mention of the – for the period – unusual position of women. Women could inherit and control property as well as officiate in churches… matrilineal inheritance laws, and agricultural work performed by women continued in Basque country until the early twentieth century. Could this be a hearkening back to the unique circumstances and reverence surrounding Moab and Ammon’s respective mothers?
For more than a century, scholars have widely discussed the high status of Basque women in law codes, as well as their positions as judges, inheritors, and arbitrators through ante-Roman, medieval, and modern times. The system of laws governing succession in the French Basque region reflected total equality between the sexes. Up until the eve of the French Revolution, the Basque woman was truly ‘the mistress of the house, hereditary guardian, and head of the lineage.’ This may have a link to the Amazons who lived in the Aegean Sea – south of the Troad and the isle of Lesbos – either a clan of warrior women or a female dominated society.
Basque Country Flag above (notice its similarity to the Union Jack of the United Kingdom) and the Catalonia Flag below.
Interestingly, the French capital Paris, apart from being known as the City of Love and the number one visited city in the world, is also known as mentioned as the City of Lights. Paris played a leading role during the Age of Enlightenment as well as literally being one of the first European cities to install gas city street lights in 1820; with the first electric streetlight appearing in 1878.
A somber and stygian matter is the aspect of Moab and Ammon’s origin. Surveys have labelled the French as the most depressed nation. In 2011, the World Health Organisation in a report, said the French are the most likely to suffer from ‘a major depressive episode’ in their lifetimes. This followed a report in 2008, where the French learned ‘they consume more anti-depressants than any other country’ in the world. What could be an underlying cause?
The coincidence of a Frenchman is repeated here in the undertaking of the following study and the nature of its subject matter. Claude Lévi-Strauss, a French and Jewish anthropologist and ethnologist ‘was key in the development of the theory of structuralism and structural anthropology.’ The chair of Social Anthropology at the Collège de France from 1959 to 1982; he was elected a member of the Académie française in 1973 and was also a member of the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences in Paris. Levi-Strauss received a number of honours from universities and institutions throughout the world and with James George Frazer and Franz Boas, is considered a ‘father of modern anthropology.’ His significant work was aimed – through a structural method – ‘at discovering universal invariants in human society, chief among which he believed to be the incest taboo.’
A poll by Ipsos in late 2020, estimated one in ten French people have been the victim of sexual abuse within the family as children or adolescents: 78% were female and 22% male. The poll suggested the number of incest cases has risen from 3% of the population in 2009 – equating to 2 million victims – to 10% in 2020; an alarming 6.7 million victims. This is shocking, though it is worth noting that the countries with the highest rate of incest are… France and Spain. Also, not all people polled are forthcoming, thus the ten percent figure may actually be higher as evidenced by the anti-depressant consumption.
At time of writing, under French law there is no legal age of consent, though the Senate voted for the threshold to be set at 13. At present a victim of rape or abuse is considered consenting by default and has to prove non-consent. New legislation proposes criminalising sexual acts between an adult and a child under 13 – currently an “offence” and not a “crime” – and extending the statute of limitations to give victims more time to bring legal proceedings. Not to single France out entirely, there are other nations with either a lax view or lenient laws regarding consenting adult incest. France is not being confined as unique by this measure; though the percentage of its occurrence is of significance, in the shadow of the French descending originally from Moab and Ammon.
The continuous perpetuation of a certain percentage of incestuous births within the population (and original endogamy), could have a bearing on the blood, hormone and DNA composition of said people in society.
Nota Bene
The original section which followed concerning Rhesus negative blood has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Rhesus Negative Blood Factor’ and is now available there for the interested reader.
Forensic Science International: Genetics, Martin Zieger & Silvia Utz, Volume 48 September 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Y-chromosomal Haplotype and Haplogroup distribution of modern Switzerland still reflects the alpine divide as a geographical barrier for human migration.’
‘A sample of 606 Swiss individuals has been characterized for 27 Y-STR and 34 Y-SNPs, defining major European haplogroups. For the first time, a subsample from the southernmost part of Switzerland, the Italian speaking canton Ticino, has been included. The data reveals significant intra-national differences in the distribution of haplogroups R1b-U106, R1b-U152, I1 and J2a north and south of the alpine divide, with R1b-U152 being the most frequent haplogroup among all Swiss subpopulations [also the dominant R1b Haplogroup in France and Italy], reaching 26% in average and 53 % in the Ticino sample.
In addition, a high percentage of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in Eastern Switzerland corresponds well with data reported from Western Austria. In general, we detected a low level of differentiation between the subgroups north of the alpine divide. This is the first comprehensive Y chromosomal dataset for Switzerland, demonstrating significant population substructure due to an intra-national geographical barrier.’
Swiss men
‘Pairwise FST calculations based on the maximal STR marker set (YFilerPlus® + PowerPlex Y23®) show little intra-national differentiation among the 6 regional subpopulations (Table 2). In line with our previous observations, all subpopulations show the largest FST values in pairwise comparison with the southernmost Swiss canton Ticino subpopulation, with the largest difference being the one between Northwestern Switzerland and Ticino. We also compared our dataset to datasets from other countries, using the AMOVA tool from YHRD. The multiple dimensional scaling plot in Fig. 2a localizes the Swiss data between the datasets from neighboring countries. For one of the direct neighboring countries,no data was included,since there wasno French datasetforPowerPlex® Y23 available on the YHRD.
If we divide the sample into language subgroups, the German speaking subpopulation locates even closer to the Austriansample, whereas the French speaking subpopulationis somewhat closer to the samples from Belgium and Spain. Surprisingly, the Italian speaking sample co-localizes with the sample from Spain and is significantly different from the Italian sample, registered on YHRD [due to the Swiss being a distinct people from the Italians, French and Germans, regardless of the different languages spoken]. As a control, we also checked the genetic distance of our regional subsamples to the four other Swiss YFiler datasets registered on YHRD. They show all a high degree of similarity, except for the sample from Basel that exhibits extremely large RST values towards all the other subpopulations, ranging from 0.084 to 0.173, even towards the sample from the same region of Northwestern Switzerland (0.101). All RST values and corresponding p-values generated with the YHRD AMOVA tool are available in Supplementary Table 2.
Pairwise FST values among the different regional subgroups. NW = Northwestern Switzerland; CS = Central Switzerland; BE = Bern area; TI = Ticino; WS = Western Switzerland; SG = St. Gallen.’
NW
CS
BE
TI
WS
SG
SG
0.0068
0.0063
0.0064
0.0109
0.0049
–
WS
0.0043
0.0032
0.0036
0.0077
–
TI
0.0141
0.0102
0.0085
–
BE
0.0050
0.0044
–
CS
0.0063
–
NW
–
Swiss women
‘Fig. 2. Multiple dimensional scaling blot based on RST values, generated for PowerPlex® Y23 datasets with the AMOVA tool from YHRD. A) Comparison of the whole sample (“Switzerland”) to other national European datasets, registered on YHRD. B) Comparison of Swiss (“CH”) subpopulations based on mother tongue to national datasets from neighboring countries.Spain was included as the next western country in mainland Europe,since no French samplefor PowerPlex® Y23was available on the YHRD. The data points for Spain and the Italian speaking Swiss subsample collapse into one.’
On PCA graphs, the Swiss-French are marginally closer to the French than Swiss-Germans, though all three form an equilateral triangle. The Swiss-Germans have an affinity with Western Germans and also with the Dutch in the southern provinces of the Netherlands. We will see this confirmed between the Swiss and Dutch later when observing their respective Haplogroups. The fact that Swiss-Italians* are genetically closer to the Spanish rather than Italians as a whole, will not be a surprise to the constant reader who has read the preceding chapters – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Zieger & Utz: ‘For the comparison of the haplogroup distributions among different regional subgroups, the regions defined in our previous work were maintained. All haplogroup proportions are listed in Table 5. We detected five significant regional differences in haplogroup spread. Whereas the [Y-DNA] haplogroups I1-M253 and R1b-U106 are more or less evenly distributed north of the Alps, they are almost absent from the Ticino sample.In return, haplogroups J2a-M410 and R1b-U152are far more abundant in the Ticino samplethan in the rest of the country. Furthermore, we detected a significant enrichment of haplogroup E1b1b-M35 in the easternmost sample from St. Gallen. We could also detect a slightly larger proportion of E1b1b-M35 in the sample from Western Switzerland. However, this observation [proved] not to be significant.
As expected, we observe a good correspondence of the dataset with the metapopulation “Western European”, what can be concluded from the distribution of the estimated haplotype frequencies. The fact that 90% of the haplotypes are predicted to be more frequent in the Western European than in the global panel, can be seen as a successful quality control of the sampling scheme. The population sample also fits well in the context of the neighboring countries and shows no noteworthy differences compared to the Swiss datasets previously registered on the YHRD.
The only exception concerns the sample from Basel. However, since the Basel sample on YHRD shows large genetic differences with all other Swiss samples, including our sample collected from the same region, we assume some kind of sampling error for this regional subsample and we would like to suggest that it should be used with caution for any interpretation and comparison. The fact that the Italian* speaking subsample co-locates rather with the sample from Spain than with the sample from Italy, might be attributed to the higher overall percentage of haplogroup R1b in Spain than in Italy. The fraction of R1b in the Spanish population corresponds better to the 70 % R1b in the Ticino sample. Given the dubious reputation of the prediction tools, we were surprised how well the haplogroup predictions corresponded to the haplogroups determined by SNaPshot assay.’
NW
CS
WS
SG
BE
TI
Hg (tot)
E1b1b (M35)
4
4
9
13**
4
6
7
G (M201)
12
9
6
6
12
4
9
I1 (M253)
13
9
10
12
11
2*
10
I2 (M223)
7
5
3
4
4
–
4
I2 (P215)
4
4
2
1
2
2
2
J1 (M267)
1
1
–
–
1
–
0
J2a (M410)
1
1
4
6
–
10*
3
J2b (M102)
4
3
3
1
3
4
3
N (M46)
–
–
–
1
–
–
0
O (M175)
–
–
1
–
–
–
0
QR (M45)
–
–
–
–
2
–
0
R1a (M198)
7
4
5
4
4
2
4
R1b (U106)
12
15
12
13
17
2*
13
R1b (U152)
19
29
24
28
20
53***
26
R1b (U198)
1
–
–
–
1
–
0
R1b (M269)
14
14
19
13
18
16
16
R1b (M343)
–
–
1
–
–
–
0
R2 (M124)
–
–
–
–
1
–
0
KLT (M9)
2
1
1
–
2
–
1
F (M213)
–
1
–
–
–
–
0
‘So, even though we would agree that for reliable results, every SNP should be finally determined in the wet lab, we cannot deny that for samples of Western European ancestry, predictors seem to deliver good preliminary results. The HAPEST predictor we used here has already been shown to deliver accurate predictions for typical European haplogroups. We assume that such a high accuracy of haplogroup prediction of 95% could be achieved only because we have very good data coverage for Western Europe. For most reliable predictions, we recommend combining an YHRD search with the haplogroup prediction tool. All haplogroups that were concordant between YHRD ancestry information and HAPEST haplogroup prediction turned out to be correct.
SNP typing for common European haplogroups revealed some expected patterns, demonstrating that the modern Swiss population still reflects the Alps as geographical barrier for human migration. We detected significantly less haplogroup I1-M253 south of the alpine divide than in the German and French speaking parts of Switzerland.This was expected, since I1 is most common in Northern Europe and can only be found in small proportions south of the Alps.We detected significant differences in the distribution of two sublineages of R1b-M269 north and south of the Alps: notably lineages R1b-U106 [Germanic -Germany and England] and R1b-U152 [Latin – Italy and France]. R1b-U106 is mainly spread along the river Rhine, reaching the largest proportions at the southern coast of the North Sea. R1b-U106 evolved approximately at the same time [as] haplogroup R1b-P312/S116. R1b-U152 is a sublineage of R1b-P312/S116 of younger origin.‘
This writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, it’s most recent mutations (see below). Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.
Martin Zieger & Silvia Utz: ‘It has been suggested that [U152] originates from a Franco-Cantabrian region and has been brought to the Alps and northern Italy by migration along the Mediterranean coast. Today [U152] reaches its highest percentages in northern Italy.Northwestern Italy has a very high percentage of haplogroup R1b (around 70 %) with the highest proportions in the area of Bergamo. In this pre-alpine region, located about 50 km from Ticino, the percentage of individuals with haplogroup R1b-U152 is around 50 %, just as for our Ticino sample. Haplogroup R1b-U152 is significantly less frequent north of the Alps, but remains the most frequent haplogroup throughout the entire country [as it is in both Italy and France].’
These findings concerning Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b as evidenced by the preceding table confirm that the Swiss are less like the northern Germans or southern English in that they do not possess R1b-U198 beyond a trace element. The Alpine split of the north and south, confirms that though many Swiss men are related to the Germans through R1b-U106; the fact remains that R1b-U152 is the main Haplogroup throughout all Switzerland. Confirming that they are more closely related to the French and Italians. This should not be a surprise when we understand that the Swiss descend from Haran, who is the grandfather of Lot’s descendants in France; and the elder brother of Nahor, the father of many Northern and to a lesser degree, Central Italians.
The Genomic Heritage of French Canadians, Razib Khan, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘One of the great things about the mass personal genomic revolution is that it allows people to have direct access to their own information. This is important for the more than 90% of the human population which has sketchy genealogical records.’
‘But even with genealogical records there are often omissions and biases in transmission of information. This is one reason that HAP, Dodecad and Eurogenes BGA are so interesting: they combine what people already know with scientific genealogy. This intersection can often be very inferentially fruitful.
But what about if you had a whole population with rich robust conventional genealogical records? Combined with the power of the new genomics you could really crank up the level of insight. Where to find these records? A reason that Jewish genetics is so useful and interesting is that there is often a relative dearth of records when it comes to the lineages of American Ashkenazi Jews. Many American Jews even today are often sketchy about the region of the “Old Country” from which their forebears arrived. Jews have been interesting from a genetic perspective because of the relative excess of ethnically distinctive Mendelian disorders within their population.
There happens to be another group in North America with the same characteristic: the French Canadians. And importantly, in the French Canadian population you do have copious genealogical records. The origins of this group lay in the 17th and 18th century, and the Roman Catholic Church has often been a punctilious institution when it comes to preserving events under its purview such as baptisms and marriages. The genealogical archives are so robust that last fall a research group input centuries of ancestry for [2,221] French Canadians, and used it to infer patterns of genetic relationships as a function of geography, as well as long term contribution by provenance.
That paper found that nearly 70% of the immigrant founding stock in this data set came directly from France. For the period before 1700 that fraction exceeds 95%. Of the remainder, about 15% of the founding stock were Acadians, who themselves were presumably mostly of French origin. Because of the earlier migration of the French founding stock, they left a stronger impact on future generations: But this research did not look directly at genetics. Rather, these inferences were generated from genealogical records which go back to the founding of Quebec and maintained coherency and integrity from generation to generation. Some of the members of the same research group now have a paper out which looks at the genomics of French Canadians, and directly compares their results to that of the earlier paper.’
Genomic and genealogical investigation of the French Canadian founder population structure – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Characterizing the genetic structure of worldwide populations is important for understanding human history and is essential to the design and analysis of genetic epidemiological [health and disease conditions] studies. In this study, we examined genetic structure and distant relatedness and their effect on the extent of linkage disequilibrium (LD) and homozygosity in the founder population of Quebec (Canada). In the French Canadian founder population, such analysis can be performed using both genomic and genealogical data. We investigated genetic differences, extent of LD, and homozygosity in 140 individuals from seven sub-populations of Quebec characterized by different demographic histories reflecting complex founder events.
Genetic findings from genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data were correlated with genealogical information on each of these sub-populations. Our genomic data showed significant population structure and relatedness present in the contemporary Quebec population, also reflected in LD and homozygosity levels.
Our extended genealogical data corroborated these findings and indicated that this structure is consistent with the settlement patterns involving several founder events. This provides an independent and complementary validation of genomic-based studies of population structure. Combined genomic and genealogical data in the Quebec founder population provide insights into the effects of the interplay of two important sources of bias in genetic epidemiological studies, unrecognized genetic structure and cryptic relatedness.’
‘In 1760 there were 70,000 residents in the areas of Canada which were under French rule. A substantial fraction of these derived from the much smaller 17th century founding population.Today the number of North Americans with some known French Canadian ancestry numbers around [10 million people]. I happen to know an individual whose great-great-grandmother was French Canadian. Using the internet it turned out that I could trace this woman’s ancestry along one line back to the countryside outside of Poitiers in the mid 16th century! Being conservative it seems that at least 5 million North Americans have overwhelming descent from the 1760 founding stock. These are the core French Canadians.
An immediate inference one might make from these background facts, therapid expansion of the French Canadian ethnic group from a small core founding stock, is that they would have gone through a “population bottleneck.” The data here are mixed. On the one hand, there are particular Mendelian diseases associated with French Canadians. This is evidence of some level of inbreeding which would randomly increase the frequencies of deleterious recessively expressed alleles.
And yet as noted in the paper French Canadians do not seem to have lower genetic diversity than the parental stock of French in the HGDP data set. Why? Because to go through a population bottleneck which is genetically significant you need a very small window of census size indeed. Tens of thousands is sufficiently large enough to preserve most of the genetic variation in the founder population which is not private to families. The sort of genetic polymorphisms which might have been typed for in widely distributed SNP chips. But that’s not the end of the story.’
‘Though French Canadians don’t seem [to] exhibit the hallmarks of having gone through an extreme population bottleneck as an aggregate, it turns out that in the populations surveyed there was evidence of substructure. The map… shows you the regions where the samples were drawn. Unlike the earlier study the sample size is smaller; this is a nod to the difference between a purely genealogical study and a genomic one. There needs to be money and time invested in typing individuals. Relatively public genealogical records are a different matter. Apparently the Gaspesia sample population were from a relatively later settlement. The urban samples naturally include descendants of local French Canadians, as well as rural to urban transplants.’
‘As one would expect the French Canadian sample clustered with the CEU (Utah whites from the HapMap) and French (from the HGDP) in the world wide PCA. And not surprisingly they exhibited smaller genetic distance to the French than to the Utah whites (who were of mostly British extraction).
Using Fst, which measures the extent of genetic variance partitioning between populations, the values from the aggregate French Canadian sample to the CEU sample was 0.0014 and to the French HGDP sample was 0.00078. The Montreal French Canadian group exhibited values of 0.0020 and 0.0012. But, it is important to observe that there was statistically significant differences between the various French Canadian populationsas well (excluding the Montreal-Quebec City pairing). This may explain the existence of particular Mendelian diseases in the French Canadian population despite their lack of reduced genetic variation: there’s localized pockets of inbreeding which are not smoked out by looking at total variation statistics. Additionally, the authors conclude that not taking this substructure into account in medical genetics could lead to false positives. Inter-population differences in disease susceptibilities correlated with genome-wide differences in allele frequencies could produce spurious associations.
In the final section the paper notes that there are some peculiarities in the genetics of the French Canadians which do indicate some level of genetic homogeneity, at least by locality. To explore this issue they focus on two genomic phenomena which measure correlations of alleles, genetic variations, over spans of the genome within populations. The two phenomena are linkage disequilibrium, which measures association across loci of particular variants, and runs-of-homozygosity, which highlights genomic regions where homozygosity seems enriched beyond expectation (the former is inter-locus, while the latter is intra-locus). Both of these values could be indicators of some level of population bottleneck or substructure, where stochastic evolutionary forces shift a population away from equilibrium as measured by the balance of parameters such as drift, selection, and mutation.’
‘To the right is a mashup of figures 5 and 6. On the left you have a figure which shows the extent of linkage disequilibrium as a function of distance between SNP. As you would expect the greater the distance between two SNPs, the more likely they’re to be in equilibrium as recombination has broken apart associations. The closer and closer two markers, the more likely they’re to be linked, physically and statistically. But there’s a difference between the two LD plots. There’s no difference between the CEU and French Canadian samples in the top panel, but there is in the bottom one. Why? The bottom panel shows LD between markers much further apart. Acadians in particular seem to exhibit more long distance LD than the other populations. This may be a sign of a population bottleneck and inbreeding.
Also, please note that the Utah white CEU sample is probably relatively similar to the French Canadians in its demographic history as North American groups go. It is homogeneous and expanded rapidly from a small founder group. To the right you have in the top panel total length of ROH per individual, and the bottom length of ROH greater than 1 MB. Again, the Acadians seem to be standouts in terms of their difference from the CEU reference. Interestingly, there’s no difference between CEU, French, and the two French Canadian urban samples. I suspect this is due to the fact that in Montreal and Quebec City the distinctive inbreeding found in the other samples has been eliminated through intermarriage. ROH disappear when you introduce heterozygosity through outbreeding.
What has all this told us? From a medical genetic perspective it is implying that population structure matters when evaluating French Canadians, an Acadian is not interchangeable with a native of Montreal.In terms of ethnically clustered diseases of French Canadians, in the USA the Cajuns, it may not be that there are patterns across the whole ethnic group, but trends within subgroups characterized by long-term endogamy. I wonder if the same might be true of Ashkenazi.
Is there is a difference between Galicians and Litvaks? Such regional differences among European Jews are new, but the French Canadians themselves are the result of the past three centuries. These results also seem to reinforce the Frenchness of the French Canadians.A group which one could analyze in a similar vein would be the Boers, who are an amalgam of French Protestants, Dutch, and Germans, but seem to exhibit a dominance of the Dutch element culturally’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah Benelux & Scandinavia.
‘Finally, the French Canadians may give us a small window in the long term demographic patterns and genetic dynamics which might be operative on a nearby ethnic group: the Puritans of New England. Because of their fecundity [fruitfulness] it seems likely that tens of millions of Americans today descend from the 30,000 or so English settlers who arrived in New England in the two decades between 1620 and 1640 [this very likely to be accurate]. This is the subject of the Greta Migration Project. With numbers in the few tens of thousands it seems unlikely that much of a thorough population bottleneck occurred with this group in a genetic sense in the aggregate. But the results from the French Canadians indicate that isolated groups can be subject to stochastic dynamics, and develop in their own peculiar directions.’
In later chapters, the Jews, Boers and Puritans will be investigated. What this article is confirming is that these peoples, regardless of religious, cultural and historical factors or influences, all remain homogenous peoples genetically. This evidence validates the proposal that these three peoples, with French Canadians are distinct peoples in their own right and not an amalgam of different unrelated ethnic groups.
Catalonians and Gascons of France, Khazaria – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Being Western Europeans, it is no surprise that the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Catalans is a branch of the R1b [M269] haplogroup. R1b1b2a1 [now R1b1a1a2] is nearly exclusive to western Europe, and the sub-haplogroup [M153] R1b1b2a1a2c [now R1b1b2a2c] is common among Catalans and Gascons.
The place of the Basques in the European Y-chromosome diversity landscape. European Journal of Human Genetics 13:12, multiple authors, (2005): pages 1293-1302.’
“The Y chromosomes of 68 male Basques were analyzed. About 86 percent of them carried varieties of haplogroup R1*(xR1a,R1b3f)-M173 [R1b-M173], of which most carried R1b3*-M269 [R1b-M269]. This is a commonality between Basques and other western Europeans. 7.1 percent of the Basques in this study (a lower frequency than other scientists had found) carried the Iberian-specific subclades R1b3d-M153 [R1b-M153 – Basque and Gascon] and R1b3f-SRY2627 [R1b-M167 Catalonian]…”
An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1 multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79.
‘This mitochondrial DNA study of 868 people from 12 areas of France includes Basques from the Basque province of Lapurdi in France. These French Basques were found to have noteworthy differences in mtDNA distribution compared to Spanish Basques.
Excerpts from the body of the paper:
“… It is somewhat surprising to find Hg U4 at a relatively high frequency (6.2%) and diversity among the French Basques (absent in Spanish Basques), because this sub-clade of U is largely East European and West Siberian (Tambets et al. 2003) in its distribution. In contrast to U4, Hg U5b2is rare among French Basques (2.5%), and more frequent in the Spanish Basques [as is HV0]. One other particularity of the French Basque is found within Hg J,more frequent than in the Spanish Basques, and also the presence of the Hg J1c haplotype with HVS-I motif 16069-16126-16300. The derivatives of this branch of Hg J have been so far found mostly in Near Eastern populations (Richards et al. 2002; Metspalu et al. 2004; and authors’ unpublished data). Likewise to U4, Hg T1 is found only in French Basques.
The pattern observed in the mtDNA pool of the French Basques from the Lapurdi region may be explained by genetic drift and cultural isolation in a relatively small long-term effective population size. In addition, it is also likely that both French and Spanish Basques, although sharing a common linguistic and probably also genetic ancestry, have been affected by admixture from different sources.
Meanwhile, the overall high frequency of autosomal recessive coagulation factors deficiencies in French Basques population (Bauduer et al. 2004) argues in favour of genetic drift acting on this population… Taken together, our findings support the notion that‘Basques’ are a strongly sub-divided population and support a conclusion that French and Spanish Basques have been effectively isolated from each other for a long enough period to allow random genetic drift to differentiate them.”
In other words, the Basque – who are related to the French – have retained their ‘Frenchness’, whereas those Basque who have dwelt with the Aramaean Spanish for many centuries or longer, show the resulting admixture. PCA graphs place the French Basque equally distant from southwest French and northwest Spanish. Ethnologists and geneticists have stressed the differences; saying the Basque especially and Catalonians, are entirely distinct from the Spanish, which is correct and the French, which is less true. The mixing with the Spanish on their side of the border has had an impact on the Basque and Catalonian Haplogroups and autosomal DNA. The Basque and Catalonians on the French side of the border have remained truer to their French origin culturally and ethnically, as descendants of probably Moab (possibly Ammon), rather than Aram – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
We Are Not Our Ancestors: Evidence for Discontinuity between Prehistoric and Modern Europeans – Journal of Genetic Genealogy, Ellen Levy-Coffman, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Other genetic studies on the Basque have focused on examining blood groups, STR loci, and autosomal markers, often in an attempt to support the Paleolithic paradigm. However, in light of the aDNA studies, Basque distinctiveness can be accounted for by the processes of genetic drift, inbreeding over long periods of time and natural selective processes. Moreover, the researchers noted that the Basque are unique among European populations due to their extremely high rate of consanguinity [‘close relationship or connection by descent from a common ancestor’]. Basque social and cultural traditions continue to promote consanguinity.
The genetic impact of such inbreeding has yet to fully explored by geneticists, but the high frequency of inherited disorders among the Basque, including Coagulation Deficiences (Factor XI) and Mutation F508 (Cystic Fibrosis Gene), support the suggestion that drift, inbreeding, and a small population size maintained over many generations, as opposed to significant retention of Paleolithic genetic ancestry, best explains the present genetic makeup of the Basque (Alonso 2005; Bauduer 2005).
Finally, even researchers that have found limited genetic evidence of probable Paleolithic ancestry among the Basque also acknowledge that such findings do not support the contention that contemporary Basque retain significant genetic links with indigenous Paleolithic Europeans. (Gonzalez 2006) For instance, although the Basque mtDNA lineage U8a may date to the late Paleolithic, it is rarely found today among modern-day Europeans and, furthermore, constitutes only [one percent]of contemporary Basque mtDNA results. Thus, U8a has diminished in frequency among populations today in a manner similar to the N1a lineage.’
French Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – Emphasis & bold mine:
‘French people mostly live in France but also live in neighboringBelgium and Switzerland andtheir descendantsnotably moved in large numbers to Quebec and Acadia. They are called Walloons in Belgium. The French are a complex mixture of ancient Celtic [Abraham], Iberian [Aram], Italic [Moab], Germanic [Ammon], and [ancient] Greek peoples [Moab and Ammon]. The standard French, Norman, and Occitan languages are members of the Romance linguistic family and all are written in the Latin alphabet.
Participants in the French Heritage DNA project belong to such Y-DNA (paternal-line) haplogroups as I-M253, I-P109, I-P37, J-P58, J-Z387, R-L21 [northwest France – Celtic] (a branch of R1b), R-M269 (R1b1a2, [now R1b1a1a2] the most common branch of R1b in western Europe), R-L552, and R-U198 [English].
Participants in the French Swiss DNA Project whose most distantly known ancestors were French people from Switzerland carry the Y-DNA haplogroups E-L542, E-V13, E-V36, E-M78, G-P15, G-M201, I-M253, I-Z138, N-M178, R-M269, R-U106 [Germanic], and R-U152 [Italian and French].
Y-chromosomal DNA analysis in French male lineages. Forensic Science International: Genetics 9, multiple authors, (March 2014): pages 162-168. First published online on December 29, 2013.
The authors analyze Y-DNA haplogroups’ variation across France using a pool of 558 samples taken from men from 7 French regions: Alsace, Auvergne, Bretagne, Île-de-France, Midi-Pyrénées, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur. Figure 2 lists all the Y-chromosomal haplogroups they found and their frequencies on a per-region basis.
“Even though we find that most of the individual populations in France were not differentiated from each other, Bretagne population shows population substructure…”
Excerpt from the body of the article:
“From a total of 27 binary markers typed in the seven regions of France, 22 different haplogroups were found. The most frequent haplogroup inallthe regions was R1b1b2* [M269] (xR1b1b2a1, 2d, 2e, 2g), with the exception of Alsace, where the most common one was R1b1b2a2g [U152].”
The coming of the Greeks to Provence and Corsica: Y-chromosome models of archaic Greek colonisation of the western Mediterranean. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11:69, multiple authors, (March 14, 2011).
‘This paper’s goal was to study the genetic traces of Greek colonization in Provence in southern mainland France. 51 samples from Provençal Frenchmen were compared with 58 samples from people from Smyrna and 31 from Asia Minor Phokaia. The Y-DNA haplogroup E-V13 is known to be “characteristic of the Greek and Balkan mainland”. It was found among 19% of the Phokaian samples and 12% of the Smyrnian samples as well as among 4% of the Provençal Frenchmen, 4.6% of East Corsicans, and 1.6% of West Corsicans. Altogether, according to the Results section, taking into account all haplogroups, “An admixture analysis estimated that 17% of the Y-chromosomes of Provence may be attributed to Greek colonization.”
An mtDNA perspective of French genetic variation. Annals of Human Biology 34:1, multiple authors, (January-February 2007): pages 68-79.
‘Mitochondrial DNA was evaluated for 868 samples these researchers and previous researchers gathered from inhabitants of France, predominantly from 12 specific locations, including but not limited to regions like Normandy, Seine-Maritime, and North-East in the north and Languedoc and Provence in the south.Ethnic French people proper as well as Bretons, Corsicans, and Basques living in France were tested…
H is by far themost common mtDNA haplogroup in France with the frequency of 45.56%.
Others include (but are not limited to) K at 8.74%, U5 at 8.3%, J at 7.65%, HV0 at 4.77%, U4 at 2.31%, I at 2.02%, and T1 at 1.66%.
The authors conclude: “The mtDNA haplogroup composition of the French does not differ significantly from the surrounding European genetic landscape.” However, they did find some level of distinctiveness among the Bretons and Basques…’
Eupedia, Genetic history of the Benelux and France, Maciamo Hay, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Note that the total [Haplogroups] for France is biased towards North Americans of French descent (mostly from Québec),asgenealogical DNA tests have not yet become popular among French people.
R1b is the most common haplogroup in France. It includes four main subclades:
theAtlantic Celtic R1b-L21 in the north-west,
the Gascon-Iberian R1b-DF27 (including the Basque R1b-M153) in the south-west,
the GermanicR1b-U106 in the north,
and the Gaulish Celtic and Italic R1b-U152 in the east.’
R1b–L21 (M529/S145) is concentrated inBrittanyand shared with the Celtic nations of Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
R1b–DF27 not only includes M153 associated with the Basque and the Gascon, but also M167 (SRY2627) which is concentrated in Catalonia and shared with the Basque as well as being found in Cornwall, England; Wales, Bavaria, Germany; Belgium and the Netherlands.
R1b–U106 (M405/S21) is concentrated in Frisia, northern Netherlands and shared with Benelux, Germany, Austria, Norway and England.
R1b–U152 (S28) is predominately found in northern and central Italy and shared with Switzerland and France.
Notice that these various R1b Haplogroup strains are principally aligned (apart from DF27) with northern and central Europe rather than with southern Europe. People often think of France as a Latin country; it is actually more Teutonic. For even its supposed ‘Latin’ influence as shown by its genetic links with Switzerland and Italy, are actually non-Latin, for both these nations though containing a Latin element, are still predominantly Teutonic, ‘Germanic’ nations – having R1b-U152 as the dominating paternal Haplogroup – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Hay: ‘The ancient Burgundians, a Germanic tribe from eastern Denmark, appear to have carried considerable percentages of haplogroups R1a* and Q*, two haplogroups that are now found at unusually high frequencies around the former Kingdom of the Burgundians, in what is now the Rhône-Alpes region and the north of Provence [refer Switzerland].
Haplogroup R1b has numerous branches, each with their own origins. The ancient Gauls during the Bronze Age and Iron Age belonged primarily to R1b-P312 [S116 Iberia: Spain & Portugal], which is divided in three main subclades: DF27, L21 [Celtic] and U152. All of them are found throughout France, but DF27 is more common in the southern half of France, while L21 is especially common [in] the Northwest. Britons fleeing the Anglo-Saxon invasions in the 5th and 6th centuries crossed the Channel and settled in great number in Brittany, which increased the percentage of R1b-L21 in that region. Nowadays half of all R1b in Brittany is L21 (35% of all Y-DNA).
Later in the Middle Ages Normandy, Anjou, Brittany and other parts of western France came under English rule, and some L21 may have come from England during that period. But it is most likely that Northwest Gaul already had a substantial percentage of L21 during the Iron Age.
The U152 clade of R1b is the most homogeneously distributed, with between 15% and 20% in most French regions.It is associated with Hallstatt and La Tène Celts that migrated from the North of the Alps to Gaul during the Iron Age, but also with the Cisalpine Gauls and Italic people from Italy. The ancient Romans and other Italic peoples would have belonged to the U152>Z56, U152>Z193 and some U152>L2 subclades [an incorrect assumption about the Romans]. Other L2 subclades [NW Europe] and the Z36 clade were found among the Etruscans (confirmed) [correct as we will discover] and probably also among the Alpine Celts [incorrect].
Data about deep clades is still sparse in France, but Italic Z56 and Z193 appear to be most common in Provence (~9%), followed by Champagne-Lorraine (5%), Alsace and Poitou-Charentes (both ~4.5%), Bourgogne-France Comté (4%) and Rhône-Alpes (3%). The ancient Romans also carried Greek/Balkanic R1b-Z2103 lineages [incorrect]. This haplogroup is found in the same regions, with a peak in the Rhône-Alpes region (~9%).
Germanic tribes brought R1b-U106 to France. It was particularly common among the Franks and was the lineage of the Kings of France.’ As we shall discover, Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b-U106 is a marker for all the male royal lines in Europe.
Hay: ‘Nowadays it is most common in Ile-de-France [including the capital, Paris] and Picardy (both ~16%), followed by Alsace (14.5%), Normandy (13.5%) and Flanders-Artois (11%). Other Germanic lineages are I1, I2a2a-L801, R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284. Almost all the I2a2a and R1a in northern and eastern France is of Germanic origin.’
‘Around 80% of G2a in France [ancient lineage from Shem] falls under the Celtic Z1816 clade. Another 15% is made up of the U1 branch, typically the L13 clade, which is usually of Italic/Roman origin. The remaining 5% of G2a descends from local Neolithic farmers. Most J2a in France belongs to the M67 and the M319 subclades, which were found among ancient Etruscans and Greeks.’
This is highly telling, as we will discover that the Etruscans were ‘Greek’ before leaving the Aegean and settling in central Italy. The Etruscans are related to the Classical and Hellenistic Greeks who formed the Greco-Macedonian Empire. In other words, the Etruscans and Moab and Ammon are closely related. The dominant connecting Y-DNA Haplogroup is R1b (U106) and not the ancient Haplogroup G2a from Shem and definitely not the Hamitic J2a, derived from admixture.
Hay: ‘These lineages probably came from Italy in Roman times, apart from some Greek lineages in the Côte d’Azur. J1 was also found among the Etruscans and is the likely source of the non-Jewish J1 in France. J2b was found in Bronze Age Illyria, among Iron Age Etruscans and Daunians, but was probably also found in other parts of central and southern Italy as well as in Greece. In France it would be mostly of Graeco-Roman (including Etruscan) origin [not so, J1 and J2 Haplogroups are the result of admixture with Arab men and related peoples]. Nowadays J2b makes up roughly half of all J2 in Provence and Languedoc, one third in Midi-Pyrénées and Lorraine, but under 20% in Aquitaine and Poitou-Charentes. It’s rare elsewhere.’
‘This map shows an estimation of the dominant ancestry in each region of France based on anthropological studies. Will DNA confirm this general pattern? Here is a summary of Y-DNA haplogroups found in France, and the ancient ethnicities associated with them:
Regardless of descriptive labels for regions and ancestry, or where one draws an approximate line to split France into approximate halves, the above map confirms the dual nature of the French. The areas encompassing the Germanic, Celto-Germanic and Celto-Italic lineages roughly highlight one half and the Celtic, Greco-Roman and Celtiberian the other half.
The defining marker paternal group for French men is Haplogroup R1b. Principally it is U152 (Gaulish-Celtic-Italic); whereas all the others, R1b-U106, R1b-L21, R1b-DF27, R1b-L23 and E1b1b, J1, J2 and T1a are from intermixing and intermarriage. Finally, Haplogroups G2a, I1 and I2 are older lineages which are indicative of men related though distinct from the later defining R1b-U152 line.
The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Swiss and French are as follows:
Switzerland: H [47.9%] – J [11.5%] – T2 [9.3%] – U5 [6.7%] – K [5.3%] –
HV0+V [4.9%] – U4 [3.1%] – T1 [2.2%] – W [1.8%] – L [0.9%] –
U2 [0.9%] – U3 [0.9%] – I [0.9%] – HV [0.4%] – U [0.4] – X [0.4]
France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] – T2 [6.2%] –
HV0+V [5%] – U4 [2.5%] – HV [2%] – I [2%] – T1 [1.9%] – W [1.9%] –
U2 [1.6%] – U [1.4%] – U3 [1%] – L [0.9%] – X [0.9%]
The mtDNA table showing the family resemblance between the Swiss and the French, yet the subtle difference between Haran and Lot’s children Moab and Ammon.
H J T2 U5 K HV0+V HV U4 T1
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3 2
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3 2
Comparing the Swiss and French with their immediate neighbours, cements the family ties between cousins. Something we will see repeated frequently as we progress with the peoples of northwestern Europe. The French and Spanish are alike in frequency levels of H, T2 and U5, though in the other main mt-DNA Haplogroups comprising J, K, HV0+V, HV, U4 and T1, the French align more closely with the Italians.
H J T2 U5 K HV0+V HV U4 T1
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3 2
Spain 44 7 6 8 6 8 0.7 2 2
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3 2
Italy 40 8 8 5 8 3 3 2 3
Adding Switzerland and France to our table of nations descended from Shem thus far, has Switzerland now as one bookend of the European descended peoples replacing Brazil, with Iran remaining at the other end. A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels for the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe, with France following this pattern. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe – in the main – exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.
H HV HV0+V J T2 U U5 K
Switzerland 48 0.4 5 12 9 0.4 7 5
France 44 2 5 8 6 1 8 9
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
It is worth reminding ourselves that Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.
Italys dominant Haplogroup is R1b and we can see the marked difference comparing with nations from Eastern Europe and beyond. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Turkey: R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia: R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
The addition of Switzerland and France highlights the north to south and east to west pattern we have noted. The Swiss exhibit higher levels of the Germanic R-U106 as reflected by their geographic position in central Europe. Switzerland’s position northwards of both France and Italy is reflected by their higher level of R-M269. The French and Italian men unsurprisingly, share an almost exact measure of R1b-M269 and R1b-U106.
In keeping with cousins exhibiting similar traits and sharing more in common – more than they have with their own siblings – we will find that the Swiss Y-DNA Haplogroup sequencing is reminisce of the Dutch. Closer bonds shared with a cousin rather than a sibling can be explained, due to a more exact sharing of common Haplogroups and genetic DNA code.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 J1 G2a
Switzerland 50 4 14 2 8 8 3 0.5 8
France 59 3 9 3 4 8 6 2 6
Comparing the main Y-DNA Haplogroups, we see a greater divergence between Switzerland and France than with the mtDNA Haplogroups; though still close enough to express a family relationship.
The main Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b is highest in Brittany with 77.3% and then Centre-Val de Loire with 70.6%. The lowest level of R1b is in Alsace with 43.7% and then Aquitaine with 48%. The highest percentage for I1 is found in Flanders-Artois with 16% and then Alsace with 15%. The highest level of R1a is in Languedoc-Roussillon with 10%; the highest level of J2 is found in Corsica with 14%; and the highest percentage of E1b1b is in Ile-de-France with 19% – due to the higher percentage of Africans from former French colonies.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 J1 G2a
N Italy 50 5 7 1 4 11 10 2 8
Switzerland 50 4 14 2 8 8 3 1 8
Tuscany 53 4 4 2 3 9 12 2 9
Lombardy 59 4 3 1 5 10 6 10
France 59 3 9 3 4 8 6 2 6
A comparison with the Northern Italian region of Lombardy shows a similarity with France. Switzerland has commonalty with the Central region Tuscany. Both France and Switzerland have common ground with northern Italy as a whole from a Y-DNA perspective. From a PCA standpoint, The French and Swiss have more in common than they do with Italy.
Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from the previous chapters, with the addition of Switzerland and France – the second major descendants from Peleg’s line, of Haran and his son Lot .
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 1.5 56 58
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 1.5 8 7 3 2 69 71
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 0.5 4.5 7 3 44 8 52
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. France has the second highest percentage of R1b after Spain, indicative of its westerly location.
Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 are compared with the ancient Haplogroup G2a also from Shem. Switzerland and France are sandwiched between Portugal, Spain and Italy, Brazil. They are both at the low end of Haplogroup R1a and the higher end with R1b.
Two Haplogroups are of note for the Swiss. First they have a trace of the very northern Haplogroup N1c1 (from admixture) – unlike France – in common with nations in the far northeast of Europe or its periphery, such as Finland and Russia. Second, Switzerland has the highest levels of Haplogroup I2a2 so far; and the second highest in Haplogroup I1 – after Finland – prevalent especially in northwestern Europe.
Y-DNA Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 reveal an older lineage of males amongst the Swiss, whom while related and also stemming from Shem’s son Arphaxad (and subsequently Peleg), they are not the same (later) line of descent from Haran (or his brother Nahor) as evidenced by Haplogroup R1b-U152.
We are increasingly able to observe more clearly the palpable east and west European divide as revealed by those nations with either R1a or R1b as their predominant paternal Haplogroup.
We have concluded the descendants of Abraham’s older brothers Haran (Swiss and French) and Nahor (Northern and Central Italians). The constant reader will be aware of the European peoples now remaining to be studied. These are all the descendants of Abraham. They reside in Northwestern Europe as well as their former colonies in the New World.
The next chapter will concentrate on Abraham’s children by his forgotten and mysterious second wife, Keturah.
One’s pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honour.
Proverbs 29:23 English Standard Version
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”
Galileo Galilei [1564-1642]
“Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.”
Peleg, the brother of Joktan, is not only synonymous with a split in Arphaxad’s line, but most famously with the division of all the peoples and ethnicities descending from Japheth, Ham, Canaan and Shem who had congregated in the Mesopotamian region – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The failed Tower of Babel venture circa 6755 BCE, had ended with the Son of Man – by some means unexplained – confounding the universal language spoken – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
Now, eleven of the main lines of people began to spread abroad; the seven from Japheth and the three from Ham. Cush, Phut and Mizra travelled to northeast Africa and Egypt; Canaan eventually to northwest Africa, via the land later known as Palestine. Gomer and Javan headed towards the Mediterranean and Magog, Tubal, Meschech and Madai northward to Anatolia – Asia Minor. The majority of Tiras’ descendants heading west into south eastern Europe as Gomer and Javan; but unlike them, continuing westwards via Scotland, Iceland, Greenland and onto North America – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The name Peleg meaning Division, Dividing Canal from the verb (palag), to split or divide. Noun (peleg) means channel or canal and noun (pelagga) means stream or division. Nouns (pelugga) and noun (miplagga) mean division.
NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names agree: the name Peleg means Division or Divider, although the word is commonly used to denote a channel or canal. Note that this “division of the earth” follows the pattern of the second creation day,in which Joktan represents the waters under the dividing firmament, which eventually produced dry land and all its creatures, while Peleg represents the dividing firmament, which eventually came to house the celestial lights that would lead the living on earth (Genesis 15:5, Daniel 12:3).’
The genealogy of Arphaxad to Abraham is listed in Genesis chapter eleven. Peleg had a son called Reu, born 6827 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Reu’s name in Hebrew means, a ‘friend, associate.’
In the Book of Jubilees we read further in chapter 10:18-27.
‘… Peleg took to himself a wife, whose name was Lomna the daughter of Sina’ar, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Reu; for he said: ‘Behold the children of men have become evil through the wicked purpose of building for themselves a city and a tower in the land of Shinar
… for in his days they built the city and the tower, saying, ‘Go to, let us ascend thereby into heaven…’ And the Lord sent a mighty wind against the tower* and overthrew it upon the earth, and behold it was between Asshur and Babylon in the land of Shinar, and they called its name ‘Overthrow’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
Two points of interest are the dating of the tower of Babel during the time of Peleg and the meaning of Peleg’s name to include a division associated with water. In an unconventional chronology, Peleg was born in 7727 BCE and died in 4737 BCE; during the precessional Age of Cancer, lasting from 8810 to 6650 BCE. Human life spans were considerably reduced post-flood – in part due to the changes in Earth’s atmosphere – though still enormously long compared with the dramatic decrease, which eventuated in Abraham’s lifetime some five generations later – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial:Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. Peleg lived for 2,990 years.
During this time frame, Nimrod challenges the Eternal and gathered the nations in support of his rebellion; with the Tower of Babel being a literal and symbolic statement of their united defiance. Nimrod had been alive for about a thousand years or longer when Peleg was born. An earlier date for the confusion of the languages and the dividing of the earth is circa 7275 BCE and a later date is 6232 BCE. Dividing in two gives 6755 BCE. This appears plausible as Nimrod would still be ‘young’ and Peleg about a third of the way through his life.
This approximate dating supports a gap in history between this event and the sudden ‘(re)appearance’ of the early – but more accurately intermediate – Sumerian Civilisation circa 4000 BCE (or earlier). It also ties in with the three hundred year transitional period – from 6976 to 6676 BCE – between the Treta Yuga Silver Age and the Dwapara Yuga Bronze Age; the epoch before our current Kali Yuga Iron Age, running from 3676 BCE to 2025 CE. Four short years from the time of writing until we enter another three hundred year transitional period, which also coincides with the Age of Aquarius beginning in 1990. Though Aquarius is an air sign, it has a strong connection with water. Cancer, the Age at the time of the Earth’s division is a water sign and is a startling coincidence.
The end of the Kali Yuga in 2015: Unravelling the mysteries of the Yuga Cycle, Bibhu Dev Misra, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The 300 year transitional period between the Treta Yuga (Silver Age) and the Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) from 6976 BC – 6676 BC also coincides with a significant environmental event –the Black Sea Catastrophe which has recently been dated to 6700 BC. The Black Sea once used to be a freshwater lake. That is, until the Mediterranean Sea, swollen with melted glacial waters, breached a natural dam, and cut through the narrow Bosphorous Strait, catastrophically flooding the Black Sea. This raised the water levels of the Black Sea by several hundred feet, flooded more than 60,000 square miles of land, and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline (by around 30%). This event fundamentally changed the course of civilization in Southeastern Europe and western Anatolia. Geologists Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York, who had first proposed the Black Sea Catastrophe hypothesis, have gone to the extent of comparing it to Noah’s Flood.
Similar major flooding events were taking place in many parts of the world,as massive glacial lakes, swelled by the waters of the melting ice, breached their ice barriers, and rushed into the surrounding areas. In the book Underworld, Graham Hancock has described some of the terrible events that ravaged the planet during that time’ – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.
‘Sometime between 6900 BC – 6200 BC the Laurentide ice-sheet disintegrated in the Hudson Bay and an enormous quantity of glacial waters from the inland Lake Agassiz/Ojibway discharged into the Labrador Sea. This was possibly the “single largest flood of the Quarternary Period”, which may have single-handedly raised global sea-level by half a metre.The period between 7000 BC – 6000 BC was also characterized by the occurrences of gigantic earthquakes in Europe.In northern Sweden, some of these earthquakes caused “waves on the ground”, 10 metres high, referred to as “rock tsunamis”.It is possible that the global chain of cataclysmic events during this transitional period may have been triggered by a single underlying cause, which we are yet to find out.’
The ‘mighty wind’ which the Lord sent against the tower* could have been a detonation of some kind. We will run into a similar scenario in the next chapter when we investigate the life of Lot and the destruction of Sodom with its neighbouring cities some five thousand years after the tower of Babel’s apparent obliteration – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. A blast of this magnitude may have set off considerable seismic activity, leading to earthquakes and localised flooding throughout the Middle East and well beyond.
Reu also had a son, called Serug, born in 5867 BCE. Serug’s name in Hebrew means, ‘branch’ from the verb sarag to be ‘intertwined.’ Between Serug’s birth and his son Nahor (I), Shem died in 5717 BCE, age 6,120 years and Arphaxad died in 5617 BCE, age 5,100 years – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Book of Jubilees 11:1-6
‘… Reu took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ora, the daughter of Ur, the son of Kesed, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seroh… And the sons of Noah began to war on each other, to take captive and to slay each other, and to shed the blood of men on the earth, and to eat blood, and to build strong cities, and walls, and towers, and individuals (began) to exalt themselves above the nation, and to found the beginnings of kingdoms, and to go to war people against people, and nation against nation, and city against city, and all (began) to do evil, and to acquire arms, and to teach their sons war, and they began to capture cities, and to sell male and female slaves. And Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of ‘Ara of the Chaldees^, and called its name after his own name and the name^ of his father.
And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol… and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness. And the prince Mastema [chief of spirits – Beelzebub]… sent forth other spirits, those which were put under his hand, to do all manner of wrong and sin… to corrupt and destroy, and to shed blood upon the earth.
For this reason he called the name of Seroh, Serug, for every one turned to do all manner of sin and transgression. And he grew up, and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, near to the father of his wife’s mother, and he worshipped idols, and he took to himself a wife… and her name was Melka, the daughter of Kaber, the daughter of his father’s brother.’
Kesed is a family name, as Nahor (II) had a grandson called Chesed. We will return to the people called the Chaldees and Chaldeans. Nahor I, Abraham’s grandfather was born in 4967 BCE, while Peleg later died in 4737 BCE. Nahor I died in 2887 BCE, though his son Terah of purported Nimrod fame (refer previous chapter), was born in 4077 BCE. Terah in Hebrew derives from the verb tarah, meaning: ‘wanderer’ or ‘turn’ and the noun ruah, means, ‘wind, breath’ or ‘spirit.’
Book of Jubilees 11:7-14
‘And she [Melka] bare him Nahor [I]…andhe grew and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, and his father taught him the researches of the Chaldees to divine and augur, according to the signs of heaven [astrology]. And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was‘Ijaska, the daughter of Nestag of the Chaldees. And she bare him Terah… And the prince Mastema sent ravens and birds to devour the seed which was sown in the land, in order to destroy the land, and rob the children of men of their labours. And the years began to be barren… it was only with great effort that they could save a little of all the fruit of the earth in their days… Terah took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Edna, the daughter of ‘Abram, the daughter of his father’s sister. And… she bare him a son, and he called his name Abram, by the name of the father of his mother; for he had died before his daughter had conceived a son.’
Abram is a family name along with Kesed and Nahor. There are two Nahors: Nahor I, the grandfather of Abraham and Nahor II, the brother of Abraham. It is Abraham’s brother we are studying and will refer to him simply, as Nahor. In Genesis 11:26, we learn of Terah’s three sons, Abram, later known as Abraham, Nahor and Haran.
It is a similar situation to Genesis 10:1, where Shem, Ham and Japheth are listed, but in fact Japheth is the eldest and while Shem appears the youngest in certain contexts, it is Ham who was the youngest of the three (Canaan not withstanding) – Genesis 9:24.
Abram is stated first as his descendants would fulfil the Genesis 3:15 prophecy. Though Haran is the eldest and Nahor is in the middle as the second born son of Terah. We will discover that Haran died prematurely and it was territory named after him, where Abraham later dwelt. More importantly, in support for Haran being the eldest is that Nahor married a niece from Haran’s family. Haran had children first and they were marriageable age, for Nahor. Similarly, Abraham also married family. What is not clear superficially, is whose exactly.
Haran was born in 2009 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE. Nahor was born perhaps circa 1993 BCE. Nahor in Hebrew means: ‘snort’ or ‘scorched’ from the verb nhr, ‘to snort vigorously’ and the root harar, ‘to be a central hub of heat.’
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so… being hot and ultimately… being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom).
Verb (harar I) means to be hot, burned or charred. Noun (harer) denotes a parched place and noun (harhur) describes a violent heat or fever. The unused verb (harar II) meansto be free… which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman. The unused verb (harar III) appears to refer to the enclosure of kilns and ovens, as the first ones were most likely built in natural hollows. The noun… (hor)… [means] hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies.
Verb (hara) means to burn or ignite (in the Bible solely in an emotional way: to get angry). Noun (haron) describes the burning of anger. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Verb (nahar) looks very much like a passive or reflexive version of (harar) or its participle. This verb isn’t used in the Bible but nouns (nahar) and (naharah) describe the vigorous snorting of a horse, and noun (nahir) means nostril (which in turn reminds of a cavern).
Whatever the true etymology and original meaning, to any Hebrew audience the name Nahor would mean both A Snort or A Snorting, and Charred or Scorched, or even Noble or Freeman. For a meaning of the name Nahor… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads… Breathing Hard.’
Joshua 24:2
English Standard Version
And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrates[Ur of the Chaldees],Terah,the fatherof Abraham and ofNahor; and they served other gods’ – Genesis 31:53
Book of Jasher 9:7-8
‘And the king [of Ur] and all his servants, and Terah with all his household were then the first of those that served gods of wood and stone. And Terah had twelve gods of large size, made of wood and stone, after the twelve months of the year, and he served each one monthly, and every month Terah would bring his meat offering and drink offering to his gods; thus did Terah all the days.’
Jubilees 12:1-15
‘And it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son.’
And he said, “What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. Why do ye worship things that have no spirit in them? For they are the work of (men’s) hands, And on your shoulders do ye bear them, And ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them, And a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: Worship them not.”
And his father said unto him, ‘I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them? And if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee.’ And these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’
Recall, Terah is recorded as originally serving Nimrod directly at his command, administering the Babylonian religious system resurrected by Nimrod after the Flood with his mother-wife Semiramis… the evil angel Lilith – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and article: Lilith.
Though historically, the king in question was perhaps Shulgi, the son of Ur-Nammu and 2nd king of the 3rd Dynasty of Ur. Shulgi ruled 46 years, from 1970 to 1924 BCE – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War ofNine Kings. Though in reality it was likely a far earlier, unknown king whom maintained the traditions of Nimrod.
Regardless, the entanglement of that situation clung to Terah as if he were shrink-wrapped in plastic. This alignment to the mystery religion is beyond coincidental, as Terah’s descendants through Nahor, have continued their unrivalled involvement and allegiance, to the present day.
After the unknown king’s death, Terah maintained an exalted position in Ur with huge strings attached. To give this up was a monumental request from Abraham. To defy the people who viewed Terah as synonymous with Nimrod’s legacy, was tantamount to death.
Book of Jasher 7:41, 49-51
‘And he [the king] placed Terah the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes… And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of [the king’s] host, was in those days very great in the sight of the king and his subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. And Terah took a wife and her name was Amthelo [Edna in the Book of Jubilees] the daughter of Cornebo; and the wife of Terah [later] conceived and bare him a son… and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him.’
Different sources include Shem, Abraham or Esau as the eventual slayer of Nimrod. If Nimrod was born circa 8700 BCE, it is dubious whether he would still be alive some 7,000 years later when Abram was born in 1977 BCE. Shem died in 5717 BCE and is the only candidate of the three who makes sense. Nimrod’s days after the failed tower were numbered and his demise in this era would appear logical.
We will look at two different versions of the events that transpired surrounding the death of Abram’s eldest brother Haran and his family’s rather hasty departure from Ur in Sumer. The two accounts may be inaccurate or contain elements of what happened. Either way, Abram’s family fled; most likely driven by their dissatisfaction with a religious-political system they could no longer support.
The Book of Jasher in chapter 8:1-36, enumerates an apparent history between Nimrod and Abraham, which began at his birth. It is proposed that it was actually the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur. Shulgi is to Ur as Hammurabi was to Babylon and Chedorlaomer to Elam – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. King Shulgi preceded them both by a few years and was a prominent ruler of his time and the most famous monarch to have reigned from Ur – after his father the renowned Ur-Nammu.
It was in 1927 BCE when Abram’s family departed Ur for Haran; with Abram being fifty years old. Therefore, the name of Nimrod has been substituted with either Ur-Nammu – who reigned from 1988 to 1970 BCE – or Shulgi as applicable, to give the account an element of veracity that it lacks with Nimrod as the king of Ur. Besides, Nimrod had been the king of ancient Babylon, yet the king of Babylon at the time of Abram’s birth in 1977 BCE was the second king of the Amorite Dynasty I of Babylon, Sumu-la-El who began his thirty-five year reign three years earlier in 1980 BCE.
1 ‘And it was in the night that Abram was born, that all the servants of Terah, and all the wise men of [Ur-Nammu], and his conjurors came and ate and drank in the house of Terah, and they rejoiced with him on that night.
2 And when all the wise men and conjurors went out from the house of Terah, they lifted up their eyes toward heaven that night to look at the stars, and they saw, and behold one very large star came from the east and ran in the heavens, andhe swallowed up the four stars from the four sides of the heavens.
4 And they said to each other, This only betokens the child that has been born to Terah this night, who will grow up and be fruitful, and multiply, and possess all the earth, he and his children for ever, and he and his seed will slay great kings, and inherit their lands.6 And they spoke and said to each other, Behold the sight that we saw last night is hidden from the king, it has not been made known to him. 7 And should this thing get known to the king in the latter days, he will say to us, Why have you concealed this matter from me, and then we shall all suffer death; therefore, now let us go and tell the king the sight which we saw, and the interpretation thereof, and we shall then remain clear.
8 And they did so… and we saw a great star coming from the east, and the same star ran with great speed, and swallowed up four great stars, from the four sides of the heavens. 11 … this thing applies to the child that is born to Terah,who will grow up and multiply greatly, and become powerful, and kill all the kings of the earth, and inherit all their lands, he and his seed forever. 14 And the king heard their words and they seemed good in his sight, and he sent and called for Terah… 15 And the king said to Terah… 16 And now thereforegive me the child, that we may slay him before his evil springs up against us, and I will give you for his value, your house full of silver and gold. 28 And Terah saw that the anger of the king was kindled against him, and he answered the king, saying, All that I have is in the king’s power; whatever the king desires to do to his servant, that let him do, yea, even my son, he is in the king’s power, without value in exchange, he and his two brothers that are older than he [Haran and Nahor]. 29 And the king said to Terah, No, but I will purchase your younger son for a price… ‘
‘Terah said, Let my king give me three days’ time [three is the number of decision and finality] till I consider this matter within myself, and consult with my family concerning the words of my king; and he pressed the king greatly to agree to this. 31 And the king hearkened to Terah, and he did so and he gave him three days’ time, and Terah went out from the king’s presence, and he came home to his family and spoke to them all the words of the king; and the people were greatly afraid. 32 And it was in the third day that the king sent to Terah, saying, Send me your son for a price as I spoke to you; and shouldst you not do this, I will send and slay all you hast in your house, so that you shall not even have a dog remaining.33 And Terah hastened, (as the thing was urgent from the king), and he took a child from one of his servants, which his handmaid had born to him that day, and Terah brought the child to the king and received value for him.
34 And Yahweh was with Terah in this matter, that [Ur-Nammu] might not cause Abram’s death, and the king took the child from Terah and with all his might dashed his head to the ground, for he thought it had been Abram; and this was concealed from him from that day, and it was forgotten by the king, as it was the will of Providence not to suffer Abram’s death. 35 And Terah took Abram his son secretly, together with his mother and nurse, and he concealed them in a cave, and he brought them their provisions monthly. 36 And Yahweh was with Abram in the cave and he grew up, and Abram was in the cave ten years, and the [new] king [Shulgi] and his princes, soothsayers and sages, thought that the [previous] king [Ur-Nammu] had killed Abram.’
Book of Jubilees 12:1-15:
‘And in the [fiftieth] year [1927 BCE] of the life of Abram… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it. And they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire. And Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died [at 82 years of age] in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father [who died in 1842 BCE], and they buried [Haran] in Ur of the Chaldees [in Sumer].’
Stalled by the palpable reticence from Terah, Abraham took matters into his own hands. Abraham would later when rescuing Lot, attack and ambush King Chedorlaomer the Elamite and his coalition army by cover of night. This Ur of Chaldea was located south of Babylon, in the area known as Sumer – the southern portion of the Land of Shinar. The descendants of Joktan had primarily dwelt in Sumer and the descendants of Peleg, mainly to the North in Akkadia where the city of Babylon was located.
Jubilees: ‘And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of [northern] Lebanon… and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran [for 25 years, from 1927 to 1902 BCE].’
At this point, after the devastating loss of his eldest son Haran, Terah – his name meaning, wanderer – decides to leave Ur and his privileged life behind. They leave to begin a new life, to soften the blow of the loss of Haran as well as possibly concern about retribution from Shulgi the king. Terah may have acted differently if he had known Haran had died at the hands of Abraham. Saying that, the Book of Jasher claims a very different version of events surrounding Haran’s death.
Book of Jasher 11:33-61, 12:1-70
33 ‘And when Abram saw all these things his anger was kindled against his father, and he hastened and took a hatchet in his hand, and came unto the chamber of the gods, and he broke all his father’s gods. 34 And when he had done breaking the images, he placed the hatchet in the hand of the great god which was there before them, and he went out; and Terah his father came home, for he had heard at the door the sound of the striking of the hatchet; so Terah came into the house to know what this was about.
35 And Terah, having heard the noise of the hatchet in the room of images, ran to the room to the images, and he met Abram going out. 36 And Terah entered the room and found all the idols fallen down and broken… 37 And when Terah saw this his anger was greatly kindled… 38 And he found Abram his son still sitting in the house; and he said to him, What is this work you hast done to my gods?
… 42 Is there in these gods spirit, soul or power to do all you hast told me? Are they not wood and stone, and have I not myself made them, and canst you speak such lies, saying that the large god that was with them smote them? It is you that didst place the hatchet in his hands, and then say he smote them all. 43 And Abram answered his father and said to him, And how canst you then serve these idols in whom there is no power to do any thing? Can those idols in which you trust deliver you? Can they hear your prayers when you call upon them? Can they deliver you from the hands of your enemies, or will they fight your battles for you against your enemies, that you shouldst serve wood and stone which can neither speak nor hear? 46 Did not our fathers in days of old sin in this matter, and Yahweh the Almighty of the universe brought the waters of the flood upon them and destroyed the whole earth?
52 … and they went and brought Abram before the king. And [Shulgi] and all his princes and servants were that day sitting before him, and Terah sat also before them. 53 And the king said to Abram, What is this that you hast done to your father and to his gods? And Abram answered the king in the words that he spoke to his father… The large god that was with them in the house did to them what you hast heard.’
Abram exhibits a black sense of humour and a level of audaciousness before the king.
Jasher: 54 ‘And the king said to Abram, Had they power to speak and eat and do as you hast said? And Abram answered the king, saying, And if there be no power in them why dost you serve them and cause the sons of men to err through your follies? 56 O foolish, simple, and ignorant king, woe unto you forever. 60 And if your wicked heart will not hearken to my words to cause you to forsake your evil ways, and to serve the eternal Yahweh, then wilt you die in shame in the latter days, you, your people and all who are connected with you, hearing your words or walking in your evil ways.’
It is worth noting that a later Chaldean king, Nebuchadnezzar II, faced a similar challenge and after being humbled, became a believer in the Eternal.
Jasher: 1 ‘And when the king heard the words of Abram he ordered him to be put into prison; and Abram was ten days in prison.3 And the king said to the princes and sages, Have you heard what Abram, the son of Terah, has done to his father? 5 And they all answered the king saying, The man who reviles the king should be hanged upon a tree [a reference to crucifixion]; but having done all the things that he said, and having despised our gods, he must therefore be burned to death, for this is the law in this matter. 6 … And the king did so, and he commanded his servants that they should prepare a fire for three days and three nights in the king’s furnace… and the king ordered them to take Abram from prison and bring him out to be burned [a pre-shadowing of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego: Daniel 3:12-30].
7 And all the king’s servants, princes, lords, governors, and judges, and all the inhabitants of the land, about nine hundred thousand men, stood opposite the furnace to see Abram. 8 And all the women and little ones crowded upon the roofs and towers to see what was doing with Abram, and they all stood together at a distance; and there was not a man left that did not come on that day to behold the scene. 9 And when Abram was come, the conjurors of the king and the sages saw Abram, and they cried out to the king, saying, Our sovereign lord, surely this is the man whom we know to have been the child at whose birth the great star swallowed the four stars, which we declared to the king…
10 And behold now his father has also transgressed your commands, and mocked you by bringing you another child, which you didst kill. 11 And when the king heard their words, he wasexceedingly wroth, and he ordered Terah to be brought before him. 15 And the king said Who advised you to this? Tell me, do not hide aught from me, and then you shall not die. 16 And Terah was greatly terrified in the king’s presence, and he said to the king, It was Haran my eldest son who advised me to this; and Haran was in those days that Abram was born, two and thirty years old. 17 But Haran did not advise his father to anything, for Terah said this to the king in order to deliver his soul from the king, for he feared greatly; and the king said to Terah, Haran your son who advised you to this shall die through fire with Abram; for the sentence of death is upon him for having rebelled against the king’s desire in doing this thing.
18 And Haran at that time felt inclined to follow the ways of Abram, but he kept it within himself. 19 And Haran said in his heart, Behold now the king has seized Abram on account of these things which Abram did, and it shall come to pass, that if Abram prevail over the king I will follow him, but if the king prevail I will go after the king. 20 And when Terah had spoken this to the king concerning Haran his son, the king ordered Haran to be seized with Abram. 22 And the king’s servants took Abram and his brother, and they stripped them of all their clothes excepting their lower garments which were upon them. 23 And they bound their hands and feet with linen cords, and the servants of the king lifted them up and cast them both into the furnace.
24 And Yahweh loved Abram and he had compassion over him, and Yahweh [the Son of Man] came down and delivered Abram from the fire and he was not burned [just as the Son of God had saved Shadrach and his friends: Daniel 3:25]. 25 But all the cords with which they bound him were burned, while Abram remained and walked about in the fire. 26 And Haran died when they had cast him into the fire, and he was burned to ashes, for his heart was not perfect with Yahweh; and those men who cast him into the fire, the flame of the fire spread over them, and they were burned, and twelve men of them died.
27 And Abram walked in the midst of the fire three days and three nights, and all the servants of the king saw him walking in the fire, and they came and told the king, saying, Behold we have seen Abram walking about in the midst of the fire, and even the lower garments which are upon him are not burned, but the cord with which he was bound is burned. 28 And when the king heard their words his heart fainted and he would not believe them; so he sent other faithful princes to see this matter, and they went and saw it and told it to the king; and the king rose to go and see it, and he saw Abram walking to and fro in the midst of the fire, and he saw Haran’s body burned, and the king wondered greatly.
29 And the king ordered Abram to be taken out from the fire; and his servants approached to take him out and they could not, for the fire was round about and the flame ascending toward them from the furnace. 30 And the king’s servants fled from it, and the king rebuked them, saying, Make haste and bring Abram out of the fire that you shall not die. 31 And the servants of the king again approached to bring Abram out, andthe flames came upon them and burned their faces so that eight of them died.
32 And when the king saw that his servants could not approach the fire lest they should be burned, the king called to Abram, O servant of Yahweh who is in heaven, go forth from amidst the fire and come hither before me; and Abram hearkened to the voice of the king, and he went forth from the fire and came and stood before the king. 34 And the king said to Abram, How is it that you wast not burned in the fire? 35 And Abram said to the king,Yahweh of heaven and earth in whom I trust and who has all in his power, He delivered me from the fire into which you didst cast me.
36 … And the king, princes, and inhabitants of the land, seeing that Abram was delivered from the fire, they came and bowed down to Abram. 38 And Abram said to them, Do not bow down to me, but bow down to Yahweh of the world who made you, and serve him, and go in his ways for it is he who delivered me from out of this fire, and it is he who created the souls and spirits of all men, and formed man in his mother’s womb, and brought him forth into the world, and it is he who will deliver those who trust in him from all pain. 39 And this thing seemed very wonderful in the eyes of the king and princes, that Abram was saved from the fire and that Haran was burned; and the king gave Abram many presents and he gave him his two head servants from the king’s house; the name of one was Oni and the name of the other was Eliezer.
40 And all the kings, princes and servants gave Abram many gifts of silver and gold and pearl, andthe king and his princes sent him away, and he went in peace. 41 And Abram went forth from the king in peace, and many of the king’s servants followed him, and about three hundred men joined him. 42 And Abram returned on that day and went to his father’s house, he and the men that followed him, and Abram served Yahweh his Almighty all the days of his life, and he walked in his ways and followed his law‘ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 43 ‘And from that day forward Abram inclined the hearts of the sons of men to serve Yahweh.
57 Now therefore my king, surely you know… since your sages saw this at the birth of Abram, and if my king will suffer Abram to live in the earth it will be to the injury of my lord and king, for all the days that Abram lives neither you nor your kingdom will be established, for this was known formerly at his birth; and why will not my king slay him, that his evil may be kept from you in latter days? 58 And [Shulgi] hearkened to the voice of Anuki [Anunnaki?], and he sent some of his servants in secret to go and seize Abram, and bring him before the king to suffer death. 59 And Eliezer, Abram’s servant whom the king had given him, was at that time in the presence of the king, and he heard what Anuki had advised the king, and what the king had said to cause Abram’s death.
60 And Eliezer said to Abram, Hasten, rise up and save your soul, that you may not die through the hands of the king, for thus did he see in a dream concerning you, and thus did Anuki interpret it, and thus also did Anuki advise the king concerning you. 61 And Abram hearkened to the voice of Eliezer, and Abram hastened and ran for safety… and the king’s servants… searched through out the country and he was not to be found, and… the king’s anger against Abram was stilled, as they did not find him, and the king drove from his mind this matter concerning Abram. 63 And Abram… was still afraid of the king; and Terah came to see Abram his son secretly… 64 And Abram said to his father, Dost you not know that the king thinks to slay me, and to annihilate my name from the earth by the advice of his wicked counsellors?
65 Now whom hast you here and what hast you in this land? Arise, let us go together to the land of Canaan, that we may be delivered from his hand, lest you perish also… 66 Dost you not know or hast you not heard, that it is not through love that [the king] gives you all this honor, but it is only for his benefit that he bestows all this good upon you? 67 And if he do unto you greater good than this, surely these are only vanities of the world, for wealth and riches cannot avail in the day of wrath and anger. 68 Now therefore hearken to my voice, and let us arise and go to the land of Canaan, out of the reach of injury from [the king]; and serve youYahweh who created you in the earth and it will be well with you;and cast away all the vain things which you pursuest. 70 And Terah hearkened to the voice of his son Abram, andTerah did all that Abram said, for this was from Yahweh, that the king should not cause Abram’s death.’
In this version, it wasn’t Abraham who accidentally killed his brother. Terah had his own firstborn son murdered. It was Terah with the grisly secret to hide. Nor did Terah altogether need Abraham to convince him to leave Ur, for how long before Shulgi’s mind returned to Terah’s betrayal, by hiding Abram after his birth. In each account, the common denominators are a. the death of Haran (by fire) because he did not have the same relationship with the Eternal as Abram; b. Abram’s dissatisfaction with his fathers’ religious beliefs and allegiance to Ur’s king and his persuading Terah to repent; and c. motives for Terah and or Abram to leave Ur behind. This was no mean decision, as Terah’s family were counted as aristocracy; royalty even, for Terah was a prince and as we shall discover as well about Abraham. It was a complete uprooting and sacrifice to abandon the privileged yet complicated life, titles, standing and influence they enjoyed in Ur.
The land of Haran, named after Terah’s eldest son Haran, was in a direct line northwest from Ur. Ur was fifty miles south of Babylon. From Ur of the Chaldees to the region of Haran is approximately 600 miles. Haran was located on the edge of southeastern Asia Minor, halfway along the Fertile Crescent between Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean and just beyond the northern reaches of the land which became known as Lebanon – the ‘land of Laban’ a grandson of Nahor. Terah and his family did not make it to the final destination of Canaan, deciding to linger in Haran.
Genesis 11:31
English Standard Version
‘Terah took Abram his son and Lotthe son of Haran, his grandson, and Saraihis daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife, and they went forth together from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan,but when theycame to Haran, they settled there.‘
Book of Jasher 13:1-2
‘… And when they came as far as the land of Haran they remained there, for it was exceedingly good land for pasture, and of sufficient extent for those who accompanied them. And the people of the land of Haran saw that Abram was good and upright with Yahweh and men, and that Yahweh his Almighty was with him, and some of the people of the land of Haran came and joined Abram, and he taught them the instruction of Yahweh and his ways; and these men remained with Abram in his house and they adhered to him.’
Terah died in Haran in 1842 BCE – Genesis 11:32. Apart from Haran, there was another city called Ur – though not to be confused with Ur located six hundred miles southeast.
Genesis 11:27-29
English Standard Version
‘Now these are the generations of Terah. Terah fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran fathered Lot. Haran died in the presence of his father Terah in the land of his kindred, in Ur of the Chaldeans. And Abram and Nahor took wives. The name of Abram’s wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran the father of Milcah and Iscah. 30 Now Sarai was barren; she had no child.’
Nahor married his niece – the daughter of his deceased brother Haran. Haran has three children mentioned in the Bible, Lot, Milcah and the mysterious Iscah. They were all born and raised in the city of Ur in Sumer. Before we turn to Milcah and Nahor, let’s look at Iscah and Sarai.
Genesis 20:9-13
English Standard Version
‘Then Abimelech [the Philistine king] called Abraham [c. 1878 BCE] and said to him, “What have you done to us? And how have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and my kingdom a great sin? You have done to me things that ought not to be done.” And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What did you see, that you did this thing?” Abraham said, “I did it because I thought, ‘There is no fear of God at all in this place, andthey will kill me because of my wife.’ Besides, she is indeed my [half] sister, the daughter of my father though not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife. And when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, I said to her, ‘This is the kindness you must do me: at every place to which we come, say of me, “He is my brother.”
Abraham feared he would be murdered for his beautiful wife Sarai – her name was later changed to Sarah. Sarai in Hebrew means, my princess and Sarah similarly means, princess. He says to Abimelech that she is his half-sister. Yet, we read above in Genesis 11:31, that Sarai was Terah’s daughter-in-law. It does not say that Sarah is Terah’s daughter. Abraham also claims that she has a different mother. We learned in the Book of Jasher that Terah had a wife named Amthelo. The Bible delineates if a man has more than one wife. It doesn’t say this for Terah. The Book of Jasher states that Terah married again, though later in his old age. Two clear falsifications from Abraham, to add to the original one, of Sarah not being his wife. This situation had apparently already occurred when Abraham and Sarah had previously travelled to Egypt.’
Genesis 12:10-20
English Standard Version
10 ‘Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. 11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, “I know that you are a woman beautiful in appearance, 12 and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me, but they will let you live.
13Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared for your sake.” 14 When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 And when the princes of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels.17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.’
These two accounts are often highlighted by commentators to show that the highly obedient patriarch to the Creator, lied – twice. Technically, the lie to Abimelech was a half-truth if the story were true. It would be more constructive, if the time spent on critiquing Abraham’s behaviour had been used to question the discrepancy in Abraham and Sarah’s cover story. For Sarah was accomplice in saying that Abraham was her brother. The Pharaoh in question – according to an unconventional chronology and a synchronisation of the Egyptian dynasties – was the third Pharaoh of Dynasty I: Djer. The meeting took place in 1902 BCE, when Sarah was sixty-five years old and just after Abraham had moved from Haran to Canaan. Djer ruled a united Egypt from 1922 to 1875 BCE.
The only plausible answer, if Sarah was not Terah’s daughter and therefore not Abraham’s sister, is that she is Iscah; the sister of Milcah and the daughter of Haran. In the Talmud, Rabbi Isaac states that Iscah is synonymous with Sarai. Thus, the two sisters, Milcah and Sarai, married the two younger brothers of their father, Haran: Nahor and Abraham. The uncles, married their nieces. In the Book of Leviticus, marriages between aunt and nephew would be later outlawed, though it did not forbid marriage between an uncle and niece, nor deem it incestuous – Leviticus 18:14; 20:19.
The name Iscah in Hebrew means, one who looks forth. This is interesting, as Sarah was barren, and so ‘one who looks forth’ for a baby, is an apt name.
The Book of Jasher 12:44 & 9:1-6
‘And at that time Nahor and Abram took unto themselves wives, the daughters of their brother Haran; the wife of Nahor was Milca and the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai. And Sarai, wife of Abram, was barren; she had no offspring in those days. And Haran, the son of Terah, Abram’s oldest brother, took a wife in those days. Haran was thirty-nine years old when he took her; and the wife of Haran conceived and bare a son, andhe called his name Lot [who was born in 1970 BCE, seven years after Abraham]. And she conceived again and bare a daughter, and she called her name Milca; and she again conceived andbare a daughter,and she called her nameSarai.
Haran was forty-two years old when he begat Sarai [in 1967 BCE], which was in the tenth year of the life of Abram; and in those days Abram and his mother and nurse went out from the cave, as the king and his subjects had forgotten the affair of Abram… and Abram knew Yahweh from three years old, and he went in the ways of Yahweh until the day of his death…’
It is interesting to note that Abraham’s nephew was of a similar age. An easy interpretation of their relationship – their closeness as evidenced with Abraham following Lot when he had been captured, securing his life in a dare devil night time raid – can incorrectly be perceived that they (as Uncle and Nephew) were like a father and son. Rather, their ages show that they must have had a relationship akin to brothers. This presumably would have been strengthened with the loss of Lot’s father – when he was forty-three – and Abraham’s eldest brother, Haran.
Also, if accurate, Abraham’s tender age highlights that the Eternal was working with Abraham from very young, showing that Abraham was precocious, open minded and humble. Quite often, though not always, it is a reoccurring theme that the Creator works with His true servants either very rarely from before birth; sometimes rarely, from birth; or less rarely (yet still infrequently), from a young child.
Genesis 22:20-24
English Standard Version
‘Now after these things it was told to Abraham, “Behold, Milcah also has borne children to your brother Nahor:
Uz [family name of Aram, Joktan and Esau] hisfirstborn, Buz his brother,Kemuel the father of Aram[family name of Shem’s son Aram], Chesed [family name], Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph [7th son]’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son – ‘and Bethuel.” (Bethuel fathered Rebekah.)’ – Genesis 24:24. ‘These eight Milcah bore to Nahor, Abraham’s brother.
Moreover, his concubine, whose name was Reumah, bore Tebah, Gaham, Tahash, and Maacah.’
Nahor and Milcah had eight sons – Uz the firstborn (or Huz) in some translations and the interlinear version. Buz means ‘to despise’ or ‘hold as insignificant’ and ‘my contempt.’ Huz is similar with Uz and means ‘wood, counsel’ and ‘fastened.’ We briefly covered Uz, the son of Aram and their fastened location in Italy – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
The peoples of (northern and central) Italy, are the principal descendants of Nahor – by his wife and concubine. Early in their northern Mesopotamian history, they settled in the same region as sons of Aram – specifically Uz – and that relationship is evident in modern Italy. To reinforce this, Kemuel, the third son is the only one stated with a son, or grandson of Nahor and his name is… Aram.
Nahor had a concubine called Reumah and she bare four sons to Nahor and so we have a third gene pool to add to Milcah’s sons and the descendants of Uz from Aram. DNA and Haplogroup evidence point to Reumah’s ancestry being possibly from Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Whereas Milcah, as her husband Nahor, were descended from Joktan’s brother Peleg – Genesis 10:25. What is significant, is that the southern Italians and Sicilians are more closely related to Greeks than they are to other Italians. The Greeks themselves are descended from Joktan’s sixth son, Uzal – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. It is more than a passing coincidence that variations of Uz, H-uz, B-uz and Aram from Nahor; Uz from Aram; and Uz-al from Joktan, should all be found either in the modern Italian nation or nearby neighbours, Greece.
Therefore the three sections of Italy: North, Central and Southern are represented by Milcah, Aram and Reumah. That said, the descendants of Nahor and Uz from Aram have in part blended, so that northern and central Italy are a mix of the two. Still, PCA graphs reveal that northern Italians are genetically closer to the related peoples from Aram in Spain and Portugal. And while the central Italians sit between the northern and southern Italians; it is the Italians in the north of Italy with which they share more in common.
Apart from Aram, many additional grandson’s of Nahor are listed in the Book of Jasher 22:15-39:
15 ‘And Abraham’s brother Nahor and his father and all belonging to them dwelt in Haran, for they did not come with Abraham to the land of Canaan. 16 And children were born to Nahor which Milca the daughter of Haran, and sister to Sarah, Abraham’s wife, bare to him.
17 And these are the names of those that were born to him, Uz, Buz, Kemuel, Kesed, Chazo, Pildash, Tidlaf, and Bethuel, being eight sons, these are the children of Milca which she bare to Nahor, Abraham’s brother… 19 And the children that were born to Nahor were twelve sons besides his daughters, and they also had children born to them in Haran.
20 And the children of Uz the first born of Nahor were Abi, Cheref, Gadin, Melus, and Deborah their sister.
21 And the sons of Buz were Berachel, Naamath, Sheva,and Madonu.
22 And the sons of Kemuel were Aram and Rechob.
23 And the sons of Kesed were Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi;
and the sons of Chazo were Pildash, Mechi and Opher.
24 And the sons of Pildash were Arud, Chamum, Mered and Moloch‘ – refer article: Belphegor.
Note that Nahor’s fifth son Chazo named his firstborn son the same name as his younger and sixth brother, Pildash.
25 ‘And the sons of Tidlaf [Jidlaph] were Mushan,Cushan and Mutzi.
26 Andthe children of Bethuel were Sechar, Laban and theirsister Rebecca.
27 These are the families of the children of Nahor, that were born to them in Haran; and Aram the son of Kemuel and Rechob his brother went away from Haran, and they found a valley in the land by the river Euphrates. 28 And they built a city there, and they called the name of the city after the name of Pethorthe son of Aram, that is Aram Naher–ayim [near Padan-Aram]unto this day.
29 And the children of Kesed also went to dwell where they could find a place, and they went and they found a valley opposite to the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 30 And they there built themselves a city, and they called the name at the city Kesed after the name of their father, that is the land Kasdim* unto this day, and the Kasdim [Chaldeans] dwelt in that land and they were fruitful and multiplied** exceedingly.’
A simplified map of the three main waves of people who entered the Italian Peninsula after the departure of the Romans. They constituted the Heruli, Ostrogoths or eastern Goths and the Lombards; who broadly represent descendants of Joktan, Aram and the branches of Nahor’s family respectively. Anciently, Nahor’s tribes were known as the Chaldees who overthrew Babylon and made it their capital; just as in Italy today and the appropriating of Rome – modern Babylon – as the capital of the Italian nation.
As an aside, the Suevi were the descendants of Shem’s son Aram and the ancestors of the Portuguese. The Visigoths are also descendants from Aram and are the ancestors of the Spaniards. The Spanish – like the Italians – are a complex amalgamation of peoples. That said, the majority of Spanish who departed for the Americas are either descended from a different branch of Aram’s four sons (Vandals and Alans), or are of Moorish and Berber stock – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Jasher: 31 ‘And Terah, father of Nahor and Abraham, went and took another wife in his old age, and her name was Pelilah, and she conceived and bare him a son [in 1867 BCE] and he called his name Zoba. 32 And Terah lived twenty-five years after he begat Zoba. 33 And Terah died in that year, that is in the thirty-fifth year [1842 BCE] of the birth of Isaac [in 1877 BCE the] son of Abraham… 35 And Zoba the son of Terah lived thirty years [1837 BCE] and he begat Aram, Achlis and Merik. 36 And Aram son of Zoba son of Terah, had three wivesand he begat twelve sons and three daughters; and the Lord gave to Aram the son of Zoba, riches and possessions, and abundance of cattle, and flocks and herds, and the man increased** greatly.’
And so today, the descendants of Terah and Nahor have been richly blessed as figures show for the economy, standard of living and quality of life of the Italian nation.
Jasher: 37 ‘And Aram the son of Zoba and his [brothers] and all his household journeyed from Haran, and they went to dwell where they should find a place,for their property was too great to remain in Haran; for they could not stop in Haran together with their brethren the children of Nahor. 38 And Aram the son of Zoba went with his brethren [Achlis and Merik], and they found a valley at a distance toward the eastern country and they dwelt there. 39 And they also built a city there, and they called the name thereof Aram, after the name of their eldest brother; that is Aram Zoba to this day.’
Aram, Achlis and Merik – sons of Zoba, son of Terah – went to dwell where the sons of Kesed the son of Nahor – Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi – had gone to dwell. Also, where Aram and Rechob – sons of Kemuel, son of Nahor – had travelled. All three groups dwelt south of Haran and in a vicinity west of Shinar. This region was adjacent to Uz, son of Aram the son of Shem, and is the Padan-Aram where Bethuel’s family also migrated. In essence, this means that the ‘Aramaean’ elements from Nahor and Terah merged with Uz from Aram and form the dual regions of northern and central Italy today.
Kemuel means, ‘congregation of God, God’s rising’ and ‘God’s grain.’ The ancient peoples of Nahor were instrumental in perpetuating the Babylonian Mystery religion inherited from Nimrod and today it is continued by the Universal Roman Catholic Church in the smallest state in the world, the Vatican City – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod^.
An aerial view of St Peter’s Basilica and of St Peter’s Square in the Vatican City, Rome.
Nahor’s people also made the city of Babylon, their own and today that great capital is represented by the city of Rome.
Just as the ancient capital of Assyria, Nineveh is replicated today in Moscow – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia^.
The other parallel, is that as the sons of Joktan lived in ancient Sumer, the South eastern portion of the Land of Shinar, the descendants of Peleg – mainly comprised from Nahor’s children – lived adjacently to the Northwest in Akkad. Today, the sons of Joktan live to the East, adjacent to the Italian Peninsula – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Chesed means, as if it were a: ‘field, mountain, breast, protecting spirit.’ The Alfred Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads for Chesed: Increase. Though for the word Chaldean: ‘as it were demons.’ The Hebrew word for Chaldeans is Kashedim* the plural of Chesed.
Researchers state that Nahor named his son after the people he came from. That is, an earlier Kesed as mentioned in the Book of Jubilees. Similarly, others claim the word Chaldean (or Chaldee) does not derive from Chesed; because Chesed is stated in chapter twenty-two of Genesis, whereas the word Chaldean is used in Genesis chapter eleven to describe Abraham’s origination in ‘Ur of the Chaldeans.’ The second view is explained by either post-dated editing, or by the fact it is substantiating the first view raised.
The line from Arphaxad to Peleg and then on to Nahor is just one line of descent. It is recorded in the Bible, that other peoples came from that line. It goes without saying that other sons and daughters were born to all the different families, even from Terah as discussed. Family trees grow large very quickly and could not all be recorded in scripture. In the book of Jubilees we read of Peleg’s son Reu. Reu married Ora, the daughter of Ur, who was the son of the earlier Kesed. Both Ur and Kesed were family names. The name Ur first being used in southern Mesopotamia for a city and then used again in Haran. The A-kkad-ians and Kashed-im were Arphaxad’s children and so Nahor using the name Kesed was not inexplicable, nor a deliberate attempt to name his son after the Kashedim. It would be like being an English person from England and having either word as your last name as people do today, for instance: John England.
Another point is that the word or prefix Kush, Kash and Kish which was common in the Babylonian region, is reflective of the original Babylonians – and Assyrians – than that of Cush, descended from Ham as discussed previously^. Speaking of family names, the prime repeating name in Arphaxad’s family has the prefix Reu. Reu the son of Peleg, just mentioned; Reu-mah the concubine of Nahor and later we will see there is a Reu-el, in the family of Esau – also Jethro the father-in-law of Moses, the priest of Midian who’s name was Reu-el – and a Reu-ben, the first born son in the family of Jacob.
Nahor’s fifth son’s name Hazo means, ‘seer, vision’ or ‘to see or have a vision.’ Pildash means, ‘steely, flashing steel, fiery iron.’ Jidlaph means, ‘he will weep, he weeps, he drips.’ Bethuel, the father of Rebekah means, ‘man of God, house of God’ and ‘virgin of God.’ There is a religious or pious theme reflected in the definitions for these names. Today, the Italian people are not just staunchly Catholic, it is the heart, soul and headquarters of the Catholic faith.
The mother of these eight sons, Milcah’s name means, ‘queen’ or ‘counsel.’ Milcah was an ancestor of the patriarch Jacob. Milcah’s son Bethuel moved to Padan-Aram and fathered Rebekah – Genesis 24:15.
Milcah’s granddaughter Rebekah, then married Milcah’s nephew Isaac (Genesis 24:67) and gave birth to Jacob (Genesis 25:21), who became Israel. Milcah and her sister Sarah are contrasted in that she conceived a bounty of sons and Sarah was barren. Eventually though, Sarah shared being an ancestor in that she bore Isaac, Jacob’s father – Genesis 21:1-4.
The mother of Nahor’s remaining four sons was Reumah and her name means, ‘exalted’ or ‘wild ox.’ Reumah’s sons names are Tebah, which means, ‘confidence, slaughter’ or ‘butcher’; Gaham, which means, ‘flame, burning’; Tahash, meaning, ‘to hurry’ or ‘hasten’; and Maacah meaning, ‘oppression, to press’ or ‘squeeze.’ It could be ventured that these names reflect the Latin temperament.
Nahor moved from Ur of the Chaldees with his father Terah and younger brother Abraham. While they settled in Haran, Nahor dwelt adjacent to Aramean territory and the land of Aram’s son Uz, which became known as Aram Nahar-aim, founding the city of Nahor.
Genesis 24:10
Young’s Literal Translation
‘And the servant taketh ten camels of the camels of his lord and goeth, also of all the goods of his lord in his hand, and he riseth, and goeth unto Aram-Naharaim, unto the city of Nahor…‘
The word Nahar-aim means ‘two rivers,’ that is, the Euphrates and the Tigris. From Hebrew, it has been translated into Greek as the midst of [two] rivers.
Genesis 25:20
English Standard Version
‘…and Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Arameanof Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife.’
The word paddan means ‘area’ in Aramaean, thus the name Paddan-Aram could be translated as the region, area – or even field – of theAramaeans. The descendants of Nahor had become interchangeably known as Aramaeans (or Syrians). Bethuel had moved away from but still adjacent to the region of Aram-Naharaim.
Genesis 27:43
English Standard Version
‘Now therefore, my son, obey my voice. Arise, flee to Laban my brother in Haran.’
Rebekah is speaking to Jacob after he had deceived his own father regarding the birthright blessing. Laban was her brother, the son of Bethuel, son of Nahor and was living in Haran. Haran was synonymous with the territory of Padan-Aram, near Aram-Naharaim.
Genesis 29:4-5
English Standard Version
4 ‘Jacob said to them, “My brothers [or cousins], where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.”
Laban is called the son of Nahor, though the Hebrew word for son can mean a descendant, as in a grandson. Abraham, Lot the son of Haran and Nahor each dwelt near each other either in Haran which included the northern Ur, Aram-Naharaim or Padan-Aram.
Nahor’s descendants in the Bible are collectively called Chaldeans from the word Chaldees, derived from Kashedim, linked to the Hebrew names Kesed and Chesed. They are not called Aramaeans (or Syrians) from an historical or prophetic viewpoint after the book of Genesis.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Abraham lived among the Chaldeans. One whole book of the Bible – Habakkuk – is entirely devoted to a prophecy concerning the Chaldeans in these latter days! But where are the Chaldeans today? Certainly they are not at ancient Babylon. No one lives there! Notice first where the Chaldeans were. Abraham came from “Ur of the Chaldees”. Ancient Ur was in Mesopotamia. Ur is a shortened name for Urfa. There were once two cities by that name.
Stephen, in his inspired sermon, makes plain that it wasthe northern Ur in Mesopotamia from which Abram came (Acts 7:2-3). That is where the Chaldeans first dwelt – over 400 miles northwest of ancient Babylon. Who are these Chaldeans so frequently mentioned in Bible prophecy? Here is the plain, simple explanation recognized by most Hebrew scholars. The word “Chaldean” comes from the Greek. The original Hebrew word is Chasdim, meaning “the people of Chesed”. Notice that Chesed was a common name in the family of Abraham (Genesis 22:22).
Next, consider the original Hebrew word translated in our Bibles as “Arphaxad”. Most biblical encyclopaedias will clearly show that the Hebrew form is Arfachesed – MEANING ARFA OR URFA THE CHALDEAN! The Chaldeans come from Arphaxad. They are his children.Abraham was a branch of this stock! The city of Ur was named after Arfa or Urfa, the Chaldean. Chaldean probably means “capturer”, just as Jacob means “supplanter”. The reason that some Chaldeans were later associated with Babylon in Daniel’s time is that a small part of them was later settled by the Assyrians near Babylon. The original inspired Hebrew of Isaiah 23:13 explains this: “Behold, the land of the Chaldeans – this is the people that was not, when Asshur founded it for shipmen”. How clear.
The Chaldeans were divided, not an organized nation. A part of them was transplanted to Babylon. At Babylon they became the ruling class. But the remainder settled farther north around Lake Van, about halfway between the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean. Here they were called [Chaldeans]… Sometimes they were referred to as HURRI or Hurrians, after Haran (Genesis 11:29; 22:20-24). Sometimes they bore the name GUTI, probably meaning “people of God.”
The Amorites and Kassites; the Guti and Gutium; the Goths and Visigoths; were all descended from Aram as studied in Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The Ostrogoths or eastern Goths who swept into the Italian Peninsula and partially into the Balkans were related and possibly composed of a mix of the descendants of Nahor, Aram and Zoba. Dr Hoeh raises the point for two locations for the ancient Chaldeans. The fragmented nature of their structure mirrors modern day Italy, which did not form a single unified nation until between 1861 to 1871. The Chaldeans from Nahor are not the same as the Guti from Gether a son of Aram; nor with the Hurrians who descend from Nahor’s elder brother Haran. Similarly, the ancient Mitanni kingdom may have comprised a mixture of Nahor and Uz from Aram. We will revisit this when we study Haran in the following chapter.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘At a later date the tribe of Kassi obtained a permanent footing in Babylonia and established a dynasty there which lasted for several centuries [circa 1200-800 BCE]. Kassites and Babylonians intermingled together, and the long continuance of Kassite rule has been thought to explain the name of Kasdim given to the inhabitants of Babylonia in the Old Testament.
Chesed, of which Kasdim is the Hebrew plural,has been explained as Kas-da the country of the Kassites… it is quite as easy to derive Kasdim from the Assyrian verb Kasddu to conquer so that the Kasidi or Kasdim would be the Kassite conquerors of the Chaldaean plain. In the Septuagint the Hebrew word Kasdim is translated… Chaldaeans… Chaldaean and Babylonian had become synonymous terms, and Babylonia had come to be known as Chaldaea…’
This writer is not convinced the Kassites were one and the same with the Chaldeans; rather, they are considered a division of Aram. The Kassites migrated from the east, from a similar location as the Guti. The Kassites, in direction of travel and time-frame, do not sit squarely enough to identify as the Chaldeans. The Kassites rose to prominence in the south of Mesopotamia at the same time as the Mitanni were rising in the North. The Mitanni are linked with the descendants of Nahor and or Uz from Aram – refer Chapter XXIII Aram &Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
The major accomplishment of the Kassites was to unify Mesopotamian culture, centred around Babylon, instead of continuing the separate independence of the surrounding city-states. This paved the way for the Chaldeans to rule a strong capital in Babylon and a unified region of neighbouring cities.
Dynasty X from 626 to 539 BCE was the most famous ruling dynasty of the Chaldeans and included Nebuchadnezzar II, who features prominently in the Old Testament.
Nebuchadnezzar II
The first king Nabopolassar – who reigned from 626 to 605 BCE – was a native of Babylon, who drove out the Assyrians and re-established an independent Babylonian kingdom. His son, Nebuchadnezzar ruled from 605 to 562 BCE and it was he, who took the Kingdom of Judah into captivity. He was succeeded by his son, Amel-Marduk (565-560 BCE). His reign was short-lived as the throne was usurped by Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law Neriglissar from 560 to 556 BCE. Then his son Labashi-Marduk, briefly reigned in 556 BCE, who in turn had the throne usurped by another possible son (Daniel 5:2, 11, 13, 18) of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabonidus (556-539 BCE).
Nabonidus ruled until the fall of Babylon, at the hands of Cyrus the Great and the Medo-Persian empire – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. This tumultuous sequence of rapidly toppled regimes is reminiscent of modern day Italian government and its frequent changes of ruling political parties and prime minsters. In 2019, Italy had endured sixty-nine governments since the ending of World War II, with an average of nearly one every year, each lasting on average for merely thirteen months. It ‘is a revolving door like no other in Europe.’
The Chaldeans are mentioned in a number of scriptures in the Bible.
Isaiah 23:13
New English Translation
‘Look at the land of the Chaldeans, these people who have lost their identity! The Assyrians have made it a home for wild animals. They erected their siege towers, demolished its fortresses, and turned it into a heap of ruins.’
The Chaldeans had originally transformed Babylon and Babylonia into a wealthy, prosperous region. Assyrian rule left it impoverished and powerless.
Habakkuk 1:6
English Standard Version
‘For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation[Latin temperament], who march through the breadth of the earth to seize dwellings not their own.’
Job 1:17
Amplified Bible
‘While he was still speaking, another [messenger] also came and said,“The Chaldeans formed three bands and made a raid on the camels and have taken them away and have killed the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”
Ezra 5:11-13
English Standard Version
‘And this was their reply to us: ‘We are the servants [tribes of Judah and Benjamin] of the God of heaven and earth, and we are rebuilding the house that was built many years ago, which a great king of Israel [Solomon] built and finished. But because our fathers had angered the God of heaven, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house and carried away the people to Babylonia. However, in the first year of Cyrus… Cyrus the king made a decree that this house of God should be rebuilt.’
Ezekiel 23:14-17, 23
English Standard Version
‘… She [Kingdom of Judah] saw men portrayed on the wall, theimages of the Chaldeans portrayedin vermilion,wearing belts on their waists, with flowing turbans on their heads, all of them having the appearance of officers, a likeness of Babylonians whose native land was Chaldea. When she saw them, she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea. And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoring lust. And after she was defiled by them, she turned from them in disgust… the Babylonians and all the Chaldeans, Pekod [visitation] and Shoa [rich] and Koa [cutting off]…’
The vermillion is reminiscent of the crimson (purple and red) worn by Cardinals in the Vatican – Revelation 17:4.
The next passage laments the fall of Babylon to the Medes. The Chaldeans were zealous, religious and deeply steeped in astrology, the occult and the mystery religion. Plus, the Chaldeans were renowned for their cultural influence and artistic talent. Just as modern Italy led the renaissance and is a global influencer in cuisine, fashion, art and film. This might explain the focus on the feminine aspect describing their empire in the Book of Isaiah (Ezekiel 16:1-58).
Isaiah chapter forty-seven, is similar to the verses we read regarding the Prince and the ‘King’ of Tyre in Ezekiel twenty-eight – refer article: Asherah. The description of the fall of ancient Babylon, runs in tandem with the descriptions in the Book of Revelation regarding the future Babylon.
Also, the “Queen forevermore, I am”and“there is no one besides me”, is a hidden reference to none other than the original Queen of Heaven, Asherah. Her wisdom – pride and knowledge – from which the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil derives, led her astray. This path was chosen in her desire to remain in the blended spirit and physical realm, where she was a god, pseudo-creator and is mystically known as the architect – Article: Asherah. This is what the Serpent Samael offered by trickery to Eve – a descent wholly from spirit to the physical with no way (seemingly) back – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Isaiah 47:1-15
Amplified Bible
1 ‘Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; Sit on the ground [in abject humiliation]; there is no throne for you, O daughter of the Chaldeans, For you will no longer be called tender and delicate. 2 “Take millstones [as a female slave does] and grind meal; Remove your veil, strip off the skirt, Uncover the leg, cross the rivers [at the command of your captors]. 3 “Your nakedness will be uncovered, Your shame will also be exposed; I will take vengeance and will spare no man.” 4 Our Redeemer [will do all this], the Lord of hosts is His name, The Holy One of Israel. 5 “Sit in silence, and go into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans; For you will no longer be called The queen of kingdoms.”
6 “I was angry with My people, I profaned [Judah] My inheritance And gave them into your hand [Babylon]. You showed them no mercy; You made your yoke very heavy on the aged. 7 “And you said, ‘I shall bea queen [H1404 – gbereth: ‘lady, mistress’ from root H1376 – gbiyr: lord, ruler] forevermore [H5769 – olam: perpetual, continuous existence, unending].’
You did not consider these things, Nor did you [seriously] remember the [ultimate] outcome of such conduct. 8 “Now, then, hear this, you who live a luxuriant life, You who dwell safely and securely, Who say in your heart (mind), ‘I am[the queen], and there is no one besides me. I shall not sit as a widow, Nor know the loss of children.’ 9 “But these two things shall come to you abruptly, in one day: Loss of children and widowhood. They will come on you in full measure In spite of your many [claims of power through your] sorceries, In spite of the great power of your enchantments.
10 “For you [Babylon] have trusted and felt confident in your wickedness; you have said, ‘No one sees me.’ [like Samael, the ‘blinded of God’] Your wisdom [Matthew 10:16 ESV “… so be wise as serpents…] andyour knowledge[Genesis 3:6 Amplified Bible “And when the woman saw that the tree was… to be desired in order to make one wise and insightful (knowledgable)…” ] have led you astray, Andyou have said in your heart (mind), ‘I am, and there is no one besides me [H657 ‘ephec & H656 ‘aphec, meaning: ‘to cease, come to an end, be clean gone, fail, finality, end, at an end].’
Exodus 3:14 ESV “God [elohiym, a God, not the God] said to Moses, “I am [H1961 hayah & H1933 hava, meaning: ‘to fall, to become, to happen, to come about, to come to pass. to appear, to arise, to come into being, to be instituted, to be established, to be brought about, to be, to exist’] who I am. (or I will be what I will be)” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’ Either an evasive, cryptic and somewhat derisive reply or just honest, blunt and to the point?
The Name of God as revealed in Exodus 3:14, An explanation of its meaning, K J Cronin – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Moses was quite understandably anticipating what the Israelites would say to him when he told them that their God had sent him to them. The first thing he anticipated them asking for was the name of their God, YHWH, which if Moses had not known would have proved that he was not sent by Him.
It would, therefore, have been a perfectly reasonable and practical question for the Israelites to ask. As for Moses’ question of Exodus 3:13, “What should I say to them?”, we need only keep in mind one certainty to understand what Moses was asking for in these words. That certainty is that Moses already knew of the existence of a Divine name in Israelite tradition when he asked this question of God. We know this for certain because Moses refers to a Divine name in Israelite tradition immediately before he asks the question of God. It is very unlikely that he could have been aware of the existence of a Divine name without being aware of what it was and so I believe that we can say with certainty that Moses knew the name YHWH before he asked his question of Exodus 3:13.
Moreover, we are informed that as a young man Moses regarded the Hebrews in his midst as his kinsfolk (Exodus 2:11). It is very unlikely that he would not have known the most important feature of his kinsfolk’s religion – the proper name of their God – and so our certainty is confirmed that Moses knew the name YHWH before asking the question of Exodus 3:13. Furthermore, his father-in-law in Midian was a priest (Exodus 2:16) and as such would surely have known the names of the most prominent regional deities amongst whom YHWH would have been counted, which also confirms our certainty that Moses would have known the name YHWH before he asked the question of Exodus 3:13. Bearing in mind these three points the question of Exodus 3:13 can perhaps best be understood as Moses saying to God “I know that You have a proper name, and I even know what that name is, but I still want direction from You as to how I should respond to the Israelites if they ask me for Your name.”
In response to his question Moses received what was no doubt more than he had expected when he asked the question of God, just as the Israelites received more than they could have expected when they asked Moses for the name of their God. Neither Moses nor the Israelites could have expected to receive two names in response to their respective questions but that is what they did receive.
For his part Moses received two answers to his question of Exodus 3:13, or two parts of the one answer, one of them in Exodus 3:14 and one in Exodus 3:15. He was told that when the Israelites ask him for the name of the God who sent him to them, he was first to say thatehyehhad sent him to them (3:14b) and he was then to say thatYHWHhad sent him to them(3:15). Both words are clearly intended to be understood as answers to the same question because the sentence structure in the two verses is identical, they have a shared vocabulary and there is only one question being answered.
Irrespective of the widespread opinion that these verses are attributable to the Elhoistic source, the entire passage is written with great care and deliberation and is clearly intended to be read and understood precisely as we find it.
Considered in this way, and as the bold-type text makes clear, the most important difference between the two answers Moses receives to his question is that in the position where Exodus 3:14b has the word ehyeh, Exodus 3:15 has the name YHWH. Both are identified as sending Moses to the Israelites and because there is only one God doing the sending both must be names of the God of Israel. Moreover the word ehyeh is a first person singular of the verb, which means that as a name it can only be one by which God knows Himself; a Personal name. Therefore Ehyeh must be the Personal name of God and YHWH His proper name. It will be recalled that this conclusion is supported by the interpretations of Recanati, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Sarna and Buber among others.’
Isaiah: 11 “Therefore disaster will come on you; You will not know how to make it disappear [with your magic]. And disaster will fall on you For which you cannot atone [with all your offerings to your gods]; And destruction about which you do not know Will come on you suddenly. 12 “Persist, then, [Babylon] in your enchantments and your many sorceries with which you have labored from your youth; Perhaps you will be able to profit [from them], Perhaps you may prevail and cause trembling.
13 “You are wearied by your many counsels. Just let the astrologers, The stargazers, Those who predict by the new moons [each month] Stand up and save you from the things that will come upon you [Babylon]. 14 “In fact, they are like stubble; Fire burns them. They cannot save themselves from the power of the flame [much less save the nation], There is no blazing coal for warming Nor fire before which to sit! 15 “This is how they have become to you, those [astrologers and sorcerers] with whom you have labored, Those who have done business with you from your youth; Each has wandered in his own way. There is no one to save you.’
This passage in Isaiah chapter forty-seven is dual in intention and loaded with meaning. We have read previously regarding Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the statue of gold, silver, brass, iron and clay in preceding chapters. The first five chapters of the Book of Daniel are dedicated to the Chaldean empire; with the first four relating to the ruler King Nebuchadnezzar himself. The king’s astrologers were not able to recount the dream, let alone explain it. Daniel had it revealed to him by the Creator through Gabriel (Daniel 9:21) and explains:
Daniel 2:1-2, 31-38
English Standard Version
‘In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar had dreams; his spirit was troubled, and his sleep left him. 2 Then the king commanded that the magicians, the enchanters, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans be summoned to tell the king his dreams. 31 You saw, O king, and behold, a great image. This image, mighty and of exceeding brightness, stood before you, and its appearance was frightening. 32 Thehead of this image was of fine gold…
37 You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, 38 and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all – you are the head of gold.’
Recall, the Medo-Persian Empire (Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) was the chest and arms comprising silver and one of the legs of iron was the Byzantine Empire, the eastern leg of the Roman Empire – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
The feet and toes of iron and clay are a spirit-human mix. Daniel 2:43 says: ‘As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage – by the seed of men – but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay.
The Chaldean empire was the most cultured, refined and resplendent of the six kingdoms described or predicted. It remained shorter – less widespread – than the ones that followed and was not as militarily dominant as evidenced by the softer, though more valuable element of gold – Article: The Ark of God.
Another description of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire is in the Book of Daniel in chapter seven. We have previously covered the Medo-Persian empire, the second kingdom being described as a bear and also in chapter eight as a ram; the fourth kingdom, of which the Byzantium empire constitutes half of, being described in chapter seven as a ‘terrible beast with ten horns.’
Daniel 7:1-4, 17
English Standard Version
‘In the first year of Belshazzar [556 BCE, son of Nabonidus] king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and visions of his head as he lay in his bed. Then he wrote down the dream and told the sum of the matter. Daniel declared, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another. The first was like a lion and had eagleswings [like the Cherubim].
Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man, and the mind of a man was given to it…” ‘These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth.’
The lion – or a bull with a human head, known as a Lamassu – with eagles wings is a prevalent animal hybrid symbol in Chaldean history.
It is also seen sometimes in Asshur’s monuments as well in Lud’s – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. Today, it is frequently seen in none other than Italy.
The symbol of Saint Mark of Venice is a prime example below.
In Daniel chapter four we read of Nebuchadnezzar’s greatness, his pride, his being humbled through madness and then his subsequent acknowledgment of the Creator for all that he had been given. The tree described, is a parallel analogy of the restraint of Asherah – refer article: Asherah.
Daniel: ‘… I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in you [Daniel] and that no mystery is too difficult for you, tell me the visions of my dream that I saw and their interpretation. 10 The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these… [Daniel] answered and said… The tree you saw, which grew and became strong, so that its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth, 21 whose leaves were beautiful and its fruit abundant, and in which was food for all, under which beasts of the field found shade, and in whose branches the birds of the heavens lived – 22 it is you, O king, who have grown and become strong. Your greatness has grown and reaches to heaven [the attention of the spirit realm], and your dominion to the ends of the earth.
23 And because the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Chop down the tree and destroy it, but leave thestump of its roots in the earth, bound with a band of iron and bronze, in the tender grass of the field, and let him be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven periods of time pass over him…’
27 Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you: break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity.” 29 At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, 30 and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?”
Pride before a fall.
31 ‘While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you… until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” 33 Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.’
34 ‘At the end of the days [seven years] I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever… 35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?” 36 At the same time my reason returned to me, and for the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and splendor returned to me. My counselors and my lords sought me, and I was established in my kingdom, and still more greatness was added to me [like Job].
37 Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, for all his works are right and his ways are just; and those who walk in pride he is able to humble.’
This was a remarkable experience, lesson and process of conversion for the arrogant and self-righteous Nebuchadnezzar who had been brought low, humbled and in an about turn admitted gratitude and became thankful to the supreme source of all his blessings.
Prior to looking at the golden age of the Chaldeans, we will look at their ancient ancestors and clarify an important scholarly debate. We have noted the sons of Canaan; as the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan – with the Nephilim and Elioud giants. In time, other peoples came to be known by the names of some of the sons of Canaan. We have seen this with the Amorites and how that name became more well known for the blond Aramaeans, than it did for the darker-skinned Amor-ites descended from Canaan.
A case in point is Heth. We have studied the original Heth, living in Hamath and now equating to modern Nigeria – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. In time there were a light-skinned people called Hittites. Where it becomes complex, is that these Hittites inherited the name of Hatti, not from the original Heth of Canaan, but rather from the proto-Chaldeans, who were known as Chatti. To further complicate the issue, historians have associated Khatti and Kheta (or Khetae) a reference to the Kittim, to then conclude that the Hatti and Hittites were tawny-skinned Asiatics descended from the Kittim of Javan. Kittim – present day Indonesia – is not the true identity of the Hatti or the Hittites.
We will study the Hittites in detail, for their imprint and impact on the world has been monumental in successive re-incarnations throughout ancient and modern history. Regarding the Hatti and the Hittites, the New World Encyclopaedia states, emphasis and bold mine:
‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa (the modern village of Bogazkoy in north-central Turkey), through most of the second millennium B.C.E. The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language.
However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the “Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-Indo–European language conventionally called Hattic.
Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people, who are also called Children of Heth. These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.
Around 2000 B.C.E., theregion centered in Hattusa that would later become the core of the Hittite kingdom was inhabited by people with a distinct culture who spoke a non-Indo-European language. The name “Hattic” is used by Anatolianists to distinguish this language from the Indo-European Hittite language, that appeared on the scene at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E. and became the administrative language of the Hittite kingdom over the next six or seven centuries.
As noted above, “Hittite” is a modern convention for referring to this language. The native term was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa.” The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes [a trait of the Chaldeans], and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite [yes], were absorbed by them [no], or just adopted their language [no].’
To summarise the aforementioned quote: Two different, successive peoples dwelt in ancient Anatolia, with different languages, the Hatti and Hattic, a non-Indo-European language and then the Hittites, speaking Hittite an Indo-European language. The Hittites are definitely not the same as the sons of Heth, or Hethites from Canaan. Identifying them as one and the same is a false premise, which is correct to remain disputed amongst scholars. We will learn definitively once we study the Hittites, that the Hatti – the future Chaldeans – did not adopt the Hittite language nor did they become absorbed into the Hittite civilisation. Rather, the Hatti were displaced by the encroaching Hittites.
Amazing Bible Time Line – emphasis mine:
‘It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of:
1) the original Hattites of Hatti; [no, they do not]
2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name ‘Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites” (the subject of this article); [yes, they are the same] or
3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities [redundant].
Other biblical scholars have argued that rather than being connected with Heth, son of Canaan, [Heth and the Hittites are different] instead the Anatolian land of Hatti was mentioned in Old Testament literature and apocrypha as “Kittim” (Chittim), a people said to be named for a son of Javan [incorrect].’
Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:
‘The Hittites who lived in Syria, and sometimes in Canaan, wanted to define themselves by their genealogical link “people from the land of Heth” as does the Bible (Genesis 26:34; 36:2), the original land being likely the region around Hat(ti)-tusa (Hattusa). According to the Bible, when Joshua entered the Promised Land (in 1493 BCE) [1407 BC] he expelled a number of nations, including the Hittites. These Hittites were located north of Syria. The few scattered references that we have to Hantili’s reign (1500-1495) indicate that he intended on maintaining Hittite influence on Syria. The Hittites, south of Euphrates, mentioned in the time of Joshua and Hantili I, are therefore the same.
The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time.’
Yes… Ephron was an original son of Heth, a son of Canaan, an African with dark skin – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
‘Consequently the history of Hittites is complex, its official beginning is the period called Early Empire (c. 1530 BCE) but previously there was a period called Hattian period, with 3 ancestors kingdoms, those of Hattusa, Kanesh and Carchemish. Those ancient Hittites, called Hattians by scholars or sons of Heth, son of Canaan in Genesis 10:15, were [incorrectly called] the ancestors of the Hittites.’
The sons of Heth – Black people – were not the ancestors of the Hittites; nor were the Hattians. The Hittites are related to the Hattians, but the Hattians are not the ancestors of the Hittites. Heth, Hatti and the Hittites are three separate, distinct peoples. Egyptian depictions of the Battle of Kadesh, show long-nosed Hattian soldiers, while the Hittite leaders look different; highlighting two different peoples.
Ancient history can be hazy for all cultures and empires with information largely based on king lists and inscriptions on tablets, steles and so forth. The Akkadian kingdom in central Mesopotamia, the northern half of the land of Shinar with Sumer, the older civilisation in the south, fascinates; yet their rise and fall are cloaked in shadows. After the Tower of Babel, all peoples dispersed eventually. The sons of Shem stayed closer to the main theatre of events, for longer. The Akkadians were the main body – or rather became the most influential – from Peleg’s branch of Arphaxad’s family tree and later Sumer were the branch from Joktan (refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans).
The Amurru or Amorites from the Northwest, circa 1994 BCE and the Gutians – both Aramaean peoples – from the East, circa 2067 BCE had invaded the region, with Terah and his family living further south, in northern Sumer at this time. Accad is listed in Genesis chapter ten with Babel, Erech and Calneh as the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom. The Akkadian Empire reached its political peak between 2224 and 2064 BCE, following the conquests of its founder the great Sargon during 2224 to 2169 BCE. Under Sargon and his successors, the Akkadian language was imposed on the neighbouring conquered states of Elam, the Guti and the Martu – or Amurru. Sargon had also defeated Sumer, Canaan and the Assyrians. Akkad is regarded as the first empire in recent ancient history.
Sargon claimed he did not know his father and that his mother was a changeling. A changeling is believed to be a fairy which has been left in place of a human, who has been stolen by fairies. Other sources say his mother was La’ibum (or Itti-Bel), either a. a humble gardener; b. a hierodule – ‘a slave-prostitute living in a temple and dedicated to the service of a god’ – or c. a priestess to the Babylonian goddess Ishtar – Inanna in Sumer. Sargon was originally a Rabshakeh, or cupbearer to a king of Kish, Ur-Zababa – Kish as in the Khatti and not from Cush – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.
After the fall of the Akkadian Empire, the people of Mesopotamia eventually split into two major Akkadian speaking nations; Assyria in the upper north, and a few centuries later, Babylonia to its south. The third Dynasty of Ur from 1988 to 1882 BCE was founded by Ur-Nammu (or Ur-Namma). Ur-Nammu became king after serving as governor to his father and Ur-Nammu – notice family name of Ur – was the first king to use the title, King of Sumer and Akkad. Ur-Nammu is credited with building the ziggurats at Ur and Uruk. The Code of Ur-Nammu, parallels the later Code of Hammurabi – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. The phrase: There will come a king of the four quarters of the earth, originated from Akkadian soothsaying.
During the same time period of the preeminence of Akkad – from 2224 to 2039 BCE – the kingdom of the Hatti existed in western Asia Minor – as evidenced by Hittite and Assyrian records. The structure of archeological finds in sites like Hattush, reveal a highly developed culture, with distinct social classes. The Hattians were organised ‘in monarchial city-states. These states were ruled as theocratic kingdoms or principalities.’ A theocracy is ‘a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission’ and ‘a form of government in which a deity is recognised as the supreme civil ruler, the deity’s laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.’ The Pope and Cardinals of the Vatican, bearing a more than coincidental parallel of similarity.
The pantheon of gods in Hatti, included the storm god Taru, represented by a bull and the sun goddess Furusemu, represented by a leopard, amongst other symbols. Certain reliefs show a female figure giving birth to a bull; as the the mother goddess Kattahha was mother to the storm god Taru – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Ancient symbols are often replicated in modern insignias by businesses and sports teams. For instance, the famous Italian sports car marque, Lamborghini.
The Hittites incorporated much of the Hattian pantheon into their own religious beliefs. James Mellaart proposed that the Hattian ‘religion revolved around a water-from-the-earth concept. Pictorial and written sources show that the deity of paramount importance to the inhabitants of Anatolia was the terrestrial water-god. The Hittite legends of Telipinu and the serpentine dragon Illuyanka found their origin in the Hattian civilization.’
World History Encyclopaedia, Hatti, Joshua J Mark, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Hatti… migrated to the area sometime prior to 2400 BCE. The region was known as ‘Land of the Hatti’ from c. 2350 BCE until 630 BCE, attesting to the influence of the Hattian culture there. Controlling a significant number of city states and small kingdoms, they had established lucrative trade with the region of Sumer (southern Mesopotamia) by the year 2700 BCE. The historian Erdal Yavuz writes: ‘Besides the timber and stone essential for construction, but deficient in Mesopotamia, Anatolia had rich mines which provided copper, silver, iron, and gold.’ Their trade with the cities of Mesopotamia enriched the region and helped to develop their kingdom. The historian Marc Van De Mieroop includes the Hatti among the nations… in the diplomatic and trade consortium he refers to as The Club of the Great Powers…it, included Mitanni, Babylonia, Assyria, Hatti and Egypt…
In 2500 BCE the Hatti established theircapital high on a hill at the city of Hattusa [seven Hills of Rome] and held lands securely in the surrounding areas, administering laws and regulating trade in a number of neighboring states. Between c. 2334-2279 BCE the great Sargon of Akkad invaded the region after sacking the city of Ur in 2330 BCE. He then turned his attention to Hattusabut failed to gain an advantage over the city’s defences which were especially strong in that it was located high on a well-defended and fortified plateau.
Following Sargon’s campaigns in the region, his grandson Naram-Sin (2261-2224 BCE) continued his policies, fighting against the Hattic King Pamba late in the 23rd century BCE with as little success as his grandfather had. In spite of the constant harassment from the Akkadians, Hattic art flourished around 2200 BCE and, by 2000 BCE, their civilization was at its height with prosperous trading colonies established between Hattusa and their other city of Kanesh and, of course, continuing trade relations with Mesopotamia.
In 1700 BCE, the Kingdom of the Hatti was again invaded, this time by the Hittites, and the great city of Hattusa was stormed and destroyed by a king named Anitta from the neighboring Kingdom of Kussara. Excavations at the site show that the city was burned to the ground. King Anitta had such contempt for the city he had vanquished that he cursed the ground and further cursed whoever should re-build Hattusa and try to rule there. Even so, not long after, the city was re-built and re-populated by a later king of Kussara who called himself Hattusili [I].
Whoever the Hatti originally were, or where they came from, remains a mystery in the modern day owing to the… lack of ancient records. The actual nature of the relationship between the Hatti and the Hittites remains a mystery in the modern day and waits on the discovery of ancient documentation to be resolved.’
Joshua Mark confirms the distinction between the Hatti and Hittites; admitting the lack of historical information regarding their relationship. When we study the Hittites, the relationship will become clearly apparent – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. The dates he provides are all earlier than Nahor’s life, for he was not born until circa 1993 BCE. These Hatti were ante-descendants of Nahor, descending from Peleg and perhaps Terah. It was from the Hatti in Anatolia that the Mitanni of upper Mesopotamia descended – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Later, the Chaldeans dwelt near the coastal area of the Persian Gulf and had not been entirely subjugated by the Assyrians. In 630 BCE Nabopolassar became king of the Chaldeans and by 626 BCE he had forced the Assyrians out of Uruk and crowned himself king of Babylonia. He endeavoured to destroy Assyria, while at the same time, to restore the dilapidated network of canals in the neighbouring cities of and including, Babylon.
As the Babylonians had grown tired of Assyrian rule and weary of internal struggles, they were easily persuaded to submit to the new Chaldean king. The result was a rapid social and economic consolidation, assisted by the fact that after the fall of Assyria, no external enemy threatened Babylonia for decades. In the cities, the temples were an important part of the economy and the business class regained its strength in the trades, commerce, livestock breeding as well as in agriculture. The collapse of the Assyrian empire, had meant many trade arteries were rerouted through Babylonia with the city of Babylon emerging as a world centre.
Naboploassar had fought the Assyrian King Ashur-uballiṭ II and then turned his attention against Egypt; his successes alternating with defeats. In 605 BCE Nabopolassar died in Babylon.
Nabopolassar had named his oldest son Nabu-kudurri-usur*, after the famous king of the second dynasty of Isin. He was trained carefully for his future kingship and shared responsibilities with his father. When Nabopolassar died, Nebuchadnezzar* II was with his army in Syria. He had just crushingly defeated the Egyptians near Carchemish in a bloody battle and was pursuing them toward the South. He returned immediately to Babylon on hearing the news of his father’s death. Nebuchadnezzar’s numerous building inscriptions enumerate his many wars, most of them interestingly, ending with prayers.
Nebuchadnezzar continued to frequently campaign in Syria in the bid to drive out the Egyptians. In 604 BCE he took the Philistine city of Ashkelon and attacked Canaan at the end of 598 BCE. King Jehoiakim of Judah had rebelled and was relying on aid from Egypt. Even so, Jerusalem was won on March 16, 597 BCE. Jehoiakim died during the siege, and his son, King Johoiachin, together with at least 3,000 people from Judah, were led into exile in Babylonia. The captives were treated well, according to document records.
Judah rebelled again in 589 BCE and Jerusalem was placed under siege. The city finally fell between 587 and 586 BCE and was completely destroyed, along with the Temple. Many thousands from Judah and Benjamin were forced into Babylonian exile. The former Kingdom of Judah, was reduced to a province of the Babylonian empire. The revolt had been caused by an Egyptian invasion which pushed as far north as Sidon. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre for thirteen years without taking the city, as he had no decisive winning fleet at his disposal. In 568 and 567 BCE he attacked Egypt, again without much success, but from that time on the Egyptians refrained from further attacks on Canaan.
Nebuchadnezzar was at peace with Media throughout his reign and he was a mediator after the Median-Lydian war which lasted five years from 590 to 585 BCE. The Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar grew, becoming one of the richest lands in western Asia – a remarkable transformation as it had been rather poor when it was ruled by the Assyrians. Babylon was the largest city of the civilised world. Nebuchadnezzar maintained the revitalised canal systems of his father and built many supplementary canals, making the land even more fertile; with trade and commerce booming during his reign.
Nebuchadnezzar’s building efforts easily surpassed those of most of the Assyrian kings before him. He fortified the old double walls of Babylon, adding a triple wall outside the old wall and erected a further wall, the Median Wall, north of the city between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers. According to Greek estimates, the Median Wall was about one hundred feet high. Nebuchadnezzar enlarged the original palace, ‘adding many wings, so that hundreds of rooms with large inner courts were now at the disposal of the central offices of the empire. Colourful glazed-tile bas-reliefs decorated the walls. Terrace gardens, called the Hanging Gardens in later accounts, were [built]. Hundreds of thousands of workers are thought to have been required for all his ambitious building projects.’
Britannica- emphasis mine:
‘The temples were objects of special concern. He devoted himself first and foremost to the completion of Etemenanki, the “Tower of babel.’ Construction of this building began in the time of Nebuchadrezzar I about 1110 [BCE]. It stood as a “building ruin” until the reign of Esarhaddon of Assyria, who resumed building about 680 but did not finish. [Nebuchadnezzar] II was able to complete the whole building. The mean dimensions of Etemenanki are to be found in the Esagila Tablet, which has been known since the late 19th century. Its base measured about 300 feet on each side, and it was 300 feet in height. There were five terrace like gradations surmounted by a temple, the whole tower being about twice the height of those of other temples. The wide street used for processions led along the eastern side by the inner city walls and crossed at the enormous Ishtar gate with its world-renowned bas-relief tiles. [Nebuchadnezzar] also built many smaller temples throughout the country.
The [last] king [of Dynasty X] was the Aramaean Nabonidus… [556–539 BCE] from Harran,one of the most interesting and enigmatic figures of ancient times. His mother, Addagoppe, was a priestess of the god Sin* in Harran; she came to Babylon and managed to secure responsible offices for her son at court. The god of the moon* rewarded her piety with a long life – she lived to be 103 – and she was buried in Harran with all the honours of a queen in 547 [BCE].
His viceroy in Babylonia was his son Bel-shar-usur, the Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel in the Bible. Cyrus… [annexed] Media in 550. Nabonidus, in turn, allied himself with Croesus of Lydia [Lud] in order to fight Cyrus. Yet, when Cyrus attacked Lydia and annexed it in 546, Nabonidus was not able to help Croesus. Cyrus bode his time. In 542 Nabonidus returned to Babylonia, where his son had been able to maintain good order in external matters but had not overcome a growing internal opposition to his father. He appointed his daughter to be high priestess of the god Sin in Ur, thus returning to the Sumerian-Old Babylonian religious tradition.
The priests of Marduk looked to Cyrus, hoping to have better relations with him than with Nabonidus; they promised Cyrus the surrender of Babylon without a fight if he would grant them their privileges in return. In 539 [BCE] Cyrus [I] attacked northern Babylonia with a large army, defeating Nabonidus, and entered the city of Babylon without a battle. The other cities did not offer any resistance either. Nabonidus surrendered, receiving a small territory in eastern Iran. Babylonia’s peaceful submission to Cyrus saved it from the fate of Assyria.It became a territory under the Persian crown but kept its cultural autonomy. Even theracially mixed western part of the Babylonian empire submitted without resistance.’
King Nebuchadnezzar was reportedly a very short man, though he overshadowed his height with his personality and achievements.
Nebuchadnezzar II king of Babylonia, Henry W F Saggs – emphasis mine:
‘Nebuchadnezzar II… is known from cuneiform inscriptions, the Bible and later Jewish sources, and classical authors. His name, from the AkkadianNabu-kudurri-usur, means “O Nabu, watch over my heir.” While his father disclaimed royal descent, Nebuchadnezzar claimed the third-millennium Akkadian ruler Naram-Sin as ancestor. The year of his birth is uncertain, but it is not likely to have been before 630 BCE, for according to tradition Nebuchadnezzar began his military career as a young man, appearing as a military administrator by 610. He is first mentioned by his father as working as a labourer in the restoration of the temple of Marduk, the chief god of the city of Babylon and the national god of Babylonia.
After his father’s death on August 16, 605, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon and ascended the throne within three weeks. This rapid consolidation of his accession and the fact that he could return to Syria shortly afterward reflected his strong grip on the empire. Much influenced by the Assyrian imperial tradition, Nebuchadnezzar consciously pursued a policy of expansion, claiming the grant of universal kingship by Marduk and praying to have “no opponent from horizon to sky.”
Nebuchadnezzar’s main activity, other than as military commander, was the rebuilding of Babylon. He completed and extended fortifications begun by his father, built a great moat and a new outer defense wall, paved the ceremonial Processional Way with limestone, rebuilt and embellished the principal temples, and cut canals. This he did not only for his own glorification but also in honour of the gods. He claimed to be “the one who set in the mouth of the people reverence for the great gods” and disparaged predecessors who had built palaces elsewhere than at Babylon and had only journeyed there for the New Year Feast. Little is known of his family life beyond the tradition that he married a Median princess, whose yearning for her native terrain he sought to ease by creating gardens simulating hills.
Despite the fateful part he played in Judah’s history, Nebuchadnezzar is seen in Jewish tradition in a predominantly favourable light. It was claimed that he gave orders for the protection of Jeremiah, who regarded him as God’s appointed instrument whom it was impiety to disobey, and the prophet Ezekiel expressed a similar view at the attack on Tyre’ – Article: The Ark of God. ‘A corresponding attitude to Nebuchadnezzar, as God’s instrument against wrongdoers, occurs in the Apocrypha in 1 Esdras and, as protector to be prayed for, in Baruch. In Daniel (Old Testament) and in Bel and the Dragon (Apocrypha), Nebuchadnezzar appears as a man, initially deceived by bad advisers, who welcomes the situation inwhichtruth is triumphant and God is vindicated.
In modern times Nebuchadnezzar has been treated as the type of godless conqueror; Napoleon was compared to him. The story of Nebuchadnezzar is the basis of Giuseppe Verdi’s opera Nabucco[the coincidental irony of a modern Italian (Chaldean) writing about an ancient Chaldean (Italian)], while his supposed madness is thetheme of William Blake’s picture “Nebuchadnezzar.”
Did King Nebuchadnezzar Really Go Mad and Eat Grass for 7 Years? David Roos, 2020 – emphasis mine:
‘The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II is one of the greatest villains of the Hebrew Bible… In… 2 Kings, Nebuchadnezzar and his army lay siege to Jerusalem, loot gold and other treasures from the temple, abduct the Judean king and his court, and carry off 10,000 officers, artisans and skilled workers into exile in Babylon. Ten years later, Nebuchadnezzar returns and razes Solomon’s temple to the ground. And in another unforgettable story in Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar is punished for his hubris and wanders the wilderness like a beast eating grass for seven years.
The question is: Did any of this really happen? For centuries, historians and biblical scholars have searched for clues about the real-life Nebuchadnezzar II… We know from the archaeological record that Nebuchadnezzar was a master builder, raising Babylon to a grandeur unmatched in the ancient Near East. But was Nebuchadnezzar really the tyrant who sacked Jerusalem and sent the Judeans into exile, and is there any truth to the Bible’s account of his “bestial” bout with madness?’
“Nebuchadnezzar is one of those characters in the Bible for whom we have an enormous amount of data from non-biblical sources,” says Eckart Frahm, a professor of Near Eastern languages and civilizations at Yale University. “There’s just a tremendous amount of material.”
‘Archaeologists have recovered tens of thousands of clay tablets and other inscribed objects from sites across the ancient Babylonian Empire, which stretched from the Mediterranean Sea (modern-day Egypt and Israel) to the Persian Gulf (Iraq, Iran and Kuwait). They were written in cuneiform and include everything from royal proclamations to accounting documents. “Among [these texts] are many, many inscriptions written in Nebuchadnezzar’s own name,” says Frahm, “and obviously in these texts he presents himself not as a villain, but as the ‘great builder.’ He’s very eager to indicate that he built these massive temples and palaces, and that he’s also very pious. He confesses that he’s constantly thinking of the gods when building temples to them.”
Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t write anything about his political or military exploits, but some important details were captured in a remarkable set of clay tablets known as the Babylonian Chronicles.’
Or, it may have been the measure of the man, why Nebuchadnezzar chose to leave these aspects of pride in his life in the background and reflect on those of higher altruistic value. Nebuchadnezzar as recoded in the Book of Daniel had a change of heart after his affliction with madness – Daniel 4:34-37. His self image was humbled to include a relationship with a Creator who had opened his mind to understand and appreciate the matters that carry important consequence.
Roos: ‘In 2 Kings, we learn that the Judean King Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute to Babylon, so Nebuchanezzar invaded Judah to quash the rebellion. The Babylonian Chronicles confirm this, and provide an exact date for the conquest of Jerusalem (597 B.C.E.)’
“There’s no reason to doubt that this really happened,” says Frahm of both the first Babylonian siege in 597 B.C.E. and the second in 587 B.C.E. “On both occasions, many people in Jerusalem were in fact taken into exile, including the royal family.”
‘King Jehoiakim died either before or during the siege, leaving his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin to taste Nebuchadnezzar’s wrath. Along with the young king and his extended royal family, thousands of Jerusalem’s elites – officials, priests, warriors, artisans – were all marched to Babylon. In the early 20th century, archaeologists excavating beneath the ruins of an ancient Babylonian palace found 14 vaulted rooms they first believed to be part of the legendary Hanging Gardens of Babylon, but later figured out were part of a royal storehouse. In that storehouse were more clay tablets, mostly records of the day-to-day affairs of the palace. And among those tablets was a 3-inch tall fragment containing the name “Jehoiakhin, king of Judah.” The fragment turned out to be part of a “ration list” indicating how much oil and foodstuffs were given to King Jehoiachin and his exiled Judean court in Babylon. “That was a remarkable find,” says Frahm. The ration list specifically mentions Jehoiachin, other Judean dignitaries and Jehoiachin’s five sons. The quantities of the rations were sizable…
So where does this leave the famous story of Nebuchadnezzar losing his marbles and eating grass for seven years? [author allows his prejudice to spill over into derogatory sarcasm] Are there also hints in the historical record?… Nebuchadnezzar has a disturbing dream that none of his court magicians could interpret, so he asks Daniel, a young exiled Judean known as a visionary. To Daniel, the dream is clear: If Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t repent and praise the one true God,he will be stricken with a madness that will cause him to wander the wilderness like a beast. Incredibly, there is an independent record of a Babylonian king going mad and wandering in the wilderness for years. But it wasn’t Nebuchadnezzar, says Frahm. In Babylonian texts, the “mad king” was Nabonidus, a king who ruled two decades after Nebuchadnezzar and ended up losing the Babylonian Empire to the Persians.’
The author places too much confidence in the suppositions of Frahm; as well as reading the Babylonian text at face value. Why would an otherwise impressive record of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements be tarnished with the sensitive episode of a sustained mental breakdown, or the fact he converted to worship the one true God of the tribe of Judah? Easy to pin the story on a later, lesser king, if such is the case?
Roos: ‘According to the records, King Nabonidus replaced the Babylonian gods with a new moon god and then led his troops on a strange campaign into the Arabian Desert to attack some towns, including Yathrib, the later Medina. He then dwelled the next 10 years in the Arabian city of Tayma. “This sojourn of Nabonidus in Arabia for 10 years is clearly the background of the story of Nebuchadnezzar in the wilderness,” says Frahm. There’s even physical proof of the Nabonidus story also being tied to a Hebrew sage.
Four fragments discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls contained what’s now known as the Prayer of Nabonidus: I was afflicted [with an evil ulcer] for seven years… and an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the [children of the exile of Judah, and said,] “Recount this in writing to [glorify and exalt] the Name of the [Most High God].”
Frahm says that the “exorcist”in the Nabonidus account is clearly Daniel, and it’s easy to understand why the authors of Daniel would have substituted the “tyrant” Nebuchadnezzar in their retelling. “In this theology, where you have to be punished for the sins you committed, it makes sense that it’s Nebuchadnezzar and not Nabonidus who is said to have had this strange episode,” says Frahm.”
It would seem that this parallel yet, different account is about Nabonidus. An exorcist and ulcer are not part of Nebuchadnezzar’s story. Frahm has made sizeable jumps in assumption which are not necessarily true. Likewise, his very reasons why Nebuchadnezzar is in the biblical account and not Nabonidus, can be swapped as to why Nabinidus is recorded in the Dead Sea Scroll fragments and not Nebuchadnezzar.
Roos: ‘The Hebrew Bible is an incredible document, not only for the faithful, but for historians like Frahm. In books like 2 Kings and Jeremiah, there are accounts of Nebuchadnezzar and later Babylonian kings that have been independently confirmed by ancient cuneiform tablets recovered from Babylonian sites. But then you have the [story] in Daniel about… Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams and being cursed with a seven-year madness, all of which Frahm describes not as history, but literature [can’t have it both ways; either both are fiction or both are historical accounts].
What does the example of Nebuchadnezzar teach us about the historicity of the Bible? That it’s neither entirely factual nor entirely made up, Frahm says. “You have to look at the details,” says Frahm. “When we have these independent sources, as we do for the sixth century B.C.E., you do have a good chance of figuring out what is historically correct and what is later theological interpretation [this line of reasoning is circular, flimsy and biased].”
Roos is keen to discredit the biblical account and promote Frahm’s agenda driven interpretation of the Babylonian texts. By Frahm’s own admission, he states the name of Nebuchadnezzar has been substituted with Nabonidus. If true, this would not be hard to understand and has support for two reasons. Firstly, Nebuchadnezzar II was the most prominent and successful ruler of the Chaldean Dynasty X of Babylon. Why besmirch his legacy and renown with an account of madness? It was easy to transfer this episode to a weak king who was the last king of the dynasty; and whom allowed the kingdom slide away irrevocably into the hands of the Medes and Persians.
Secondly, the Bible is clear that Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar had an involved and complex relationship. They have the starring roles in the first four chapters of the Book of Daniel. There is just one chapter devoted to Daniel and Nabonidus and it does not portray as close a relationship. Nor does Nabonidus appear to have any affinity with the Eternal as Nebuchadnezzar before him; therefore, as the Babylonian text accounts appear suspiciously inaccurate and do not align with the Bible, they are to be mistrusted before the Book of Daniel.
Italian men
Forwarding some five hundred years, Germanic tribes are credited with originating from a homeland in southern Scandinavia – modern day Sweden and Norway – including the Jutland area in northern Denmark and a narrow strip of Baltic coastline. The East Germanic Goths were one of the first of the Germanic tribes to form a recognised kingdom and Jordanes states, according to Dio: ‘the Goths were ever wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks.’ This is more than coincidental, in that the eastern Goths are closely related to the people we will study as the Greeks in the next chapter – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Those of noble birth amongst the Goths – from whom their kings and priests were appointed – were first known as Tarabostesei. The word ‘tarabostesei’ with its suffixe removed leaves tarabost. The first part, tara can have several meanings, including ‘bull’ or ‘fast.’ Recall the storm god of the Hatti, Taru the bull. The second half, ‘bost’ means ‘hand’ or ‘fist’.
The Goths were constantly attended by a subject tribe, the Heruli who later emerged in Italy as part of the Gothic kingdom of Rome, and to an extent by the Scirii as well. Edward Dawson proposes that there is a distinct possibility that the Goth name emerged as a result of Gaulish (Celtic) influence on a tribal name which derived from Woden (or Wodan). ‘The use of Godan instead of Wodan by the Langobard tribe is [key], given the known tendency of Gaulish to convert a ‘w’ into a ‘gw’ or ‘gu’ sound. It then appears that Wodan [from Odin], Goth, and God are cognates.’ The people of Guti, Goth, or God.
The Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths), dominated a vast swathe of what is now southern Russia and Ukraine by the mid-third century. In the Old English epic poem Widsith, the Ostrogoths are known as the Hreo-Gotum or Victory Goths. They migrated through eastern Europe and southwards through modern day Poland. In 487 CE the Scirian commander of Rome, Odoacer, defeated the Rugli tribe, long time allies of the Ostrogoths. This presented a future threat for Italy, with the Langobards migrating into the Rugli homelands in Lower Austria. Theodoric the Great, led the Ostrogothic invasion of Italy, supported by elements of the Rugli – over throwing Rome and ruling from 493 to 526 CE.
Italian women
The Langobards or Langobardi were the other significant body of people to invade and settle in Italy; who had originated in northwestern Germany from the 1st century CE and later migrated above northern Silesia – now western Poland as part of the Suevi or Suebi confederation of tribes. Recall, the Suevi continued on into the Iberian Peninsula and settled in Portugal – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain,Portugal & Brazil. The Suebi were comprised of principally Hul a son of Aram. It is probable that they, like the Goths had earlier origins in southern Scandinavia and were forced to migrate due to population expansion. They were also known by their original ethnic name, the Winnili – ‘Winn’ Germanic for ‘striving’ or ‘being victorious’, reminiscent of the Victory Goths.
In 415, continuing to wander – recall Terah’s name means, wanderer – from Poland, the Langobards had entered Vurgundaib. This is thought to be the original lands of the Burgundians – who eventually settled in present day Switzerland – located in the northern Carpathians. Their westwards journey by the tail end of the fifth century lead to the area equating with modern Austria. They began to attack the established order in Italy from 568 CE; invading northern Italy and surrounding the ‘island’ dominion in Venice. The Langobards, were now known as Lombards and they filled a void left by the demise of the Ostrogoth kingdom at the hands of Byzantium.
The Lombards occupied territory which had been home to various Celtic tribes since the sixth century BCE, almost unopposed. Their attacks badly affected Rome, cutting it off from the Byzantine empire. Unlike the Ostrogoths, the Lombards did not seek to preserve the ancient Roman methods of governance. Their kingdom in the North and the independent Lombard duchies to the South in central Italy, added a Germanic essence to the peninsula which had begun with the Goth’s arrival.
This highlights the distinction between the northern and north central Italians with the South central and southern Italians; with the Lombards in the North descending from Nahor’s wife Milcah and the Goths from Aram’s son Uz. Whereas, the southern Italians and Sicilians contain a mixture from Nahor’s concubine Reumah and Joktan’s children, such as Uzal, the progenitor of the modern Greeks. Somewhere in this mix is Terah’s other son, Zoba and his son Aram. Zoba’s descendants, like those from Uz of Aram may be represented by the ancient Mitanni of Mesopotamia – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
The biggest city in southern Italy is Naples, with some three million people. The biggest city in central Italy is the capital Rome, with approximately four million people. The biggest city in northern Italy and the fashion capital of the world, Milan – though the French would beg to differ – has three million people. It is the capital of the Lombardy region, houses the Italian stock exchange, the Borsa Italiana and has the third largest economy in Europe according to GDP after the cities of London and Paris.
During 584 to 585, the Lombards invaded the Merovingian Frankish region of Provence. Returning in kind, the Frankish king of Austrasia, Childebert II and Guntramn, king of Burgundy, invaded Lombard Italy, or Lombardy as it came to be known. They captured Trent and opened negotiations with the eastern Roman emperor with the probable view, of carving up Italy between them. The Lombards, fearing Frankish domination, elected a new king called Authari, to end their disunity after ten years of rule by various Dukes. In 590, Authari was succeeded by Agilulf, the Duke of Turin, who was able to recover most of the portions of land that had been lost to the Frankish-Byzantine alliance. The Lombards, like the Visigioths of Spain were Arians, though they later converted to orthodox christianity in the latter part of the seventh century – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
The invasion of papal territories by the Lombard kings Aistulf (749–756) and Desiderius (756–774) compelled Pope Adrian I to seek aid from the Frankish king Charlemagne. The Franks entered Italy in 773 and after a year’s siege Pavia fell to their armies. Desiderius was captured and Charlemagne became king of the Lombards as well as of the Franks. Lombard rule in Italy came to an end in 774. In a momentous and astute act, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne head of the Holy Roman Empire on December 25, 800 CE.
The Frankish king Charlemagne conquering Lombardy would be echoed centuries later, when the French Emperor Napoleon also subjugated Italy.
In the 1200s, powerful city-states – indicative of the ancient Chaldeans – began to develop throughout Italy including Florence, Milan, Venice, and Naples. The Renaissance began in Florence, Italy in the 1300s. The Lombards of Florence (or Firenze), are credited with initialising banks and the system of banking. From these Princedoms, famous merchant families arose such as the Medici in Florence, who then formed political dynasties.
Italy is responsible for driving the arts, sciences and exploration forward with massive worldwide impact; a precursor to the age of discovery, later joined by Portugal (1400-1500) and Spain (1500-1600). Famous influencers, included: Galileo, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Volta, Dante, Ariosto, Verdi and Vivaldi. Today, Italian artists, writers, designers, musicians, chefs, actors and filmmakers have added immeasurably to global art and culture.
In 1796, Northern Italy was conquered by Napoleon and incorporated into the French Empire. Later in 1805, Napoleon declared Italy a kingdom. Subsequently in 1814, Napoleon was defeated and Italy was divided up into small states. In 1815, the process of reunification began and in 1861, the Kingdom of Italy was established for the second time. Rome and Venice had been separate states, but by 1866, Venice became part of Italy and by 1870, Rome was included in one united kingdom. The key personalities in achieving unification were General Garibaldi, spear heading the campaign in Naples and Sicily, the Count of Cavour who led the government of the House of Savoy in the Kingdom of Sardinia for the Northern Italian monarchy and Victor Emmanuel II – who became the first king of the united Italy. Italy remained a monarchy until 1946.
‘From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, Italy rapidly industrialised, mainly in the north, and acquired a colonial empire, while the south remained largely impoverished and excluded from industrialisation, fuelling a large and influential diaspora.’ Many Italians migrated to Brazil – as well as Argentina, Uruguay and the United States.
Italy’s geographic shape resembles a boot. The other boot that completes the pair exists elsewhere – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. During World War I, Italy fought on the side of the Allies, though under the rule of the fascist leader Benito Mussolini (1922-1943), it waged war against the Allied powers in World War II. From 1945, Italy has had a multiparty system dominated by two large parties: the Christian Democratic Party and the Italian Communist Party.
In the early 1990s the Italian party system underwent a radical transformation and the political centre collapsed, leaving a right and left polarisation of the party options which threw the north and south divide of Italy into sharper contrast and gave rise to political leaders like media magnate Silvio Berlusconi.
Italy is considered to be one of the world’s most culturally and economically advanced countries, with 59,155,168 people. It is the third largest economy in the European Union, in the top ten in the world according to national wealth and the third largest with a central bank gold reserve, behind the United States and Germany. Italy has 2,451.8 tonnes of gold which equates to 69.3 percent of its foreign reserves. Italy has maintained the size of its reserves over a long period.
Mario Draghi, a former Bank of Italy and European Central Bank governor, ‘when asked by a reporter in 2013 what role gold plays in a central bank’s portfolio, answered that the metal was “a reserve of safety,” adding, “it gives you a fairly good protection against fluctuations against the dollar.” Recall that the Chaldeans were represented by the head of gold in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream.
Italy ‘ranks very highly in life expectancy [due to its mediterranean diet], quality of life, healthcare and education. The country plays a prominent role in regional and global economic, military, cultural and diplomatic affairs; it is both a regional power and a great power, and is ranked the world’s eighth most-powerful military.
Italy is a founding and leading member of the European Union… the country has long been a global centre of art, music, literature, philosophy, science, [technology and fashion; greatly influencing and contributing] to diverse fields including cinema, cuisine, sports, jurisprudence, banking and business. As a reflection of its cultural wealth, Italy is home to the world’s largest number of World Heritage sites (55), and is the fifth-most visited country’ in the world.
The Chaldeans were one of the foremost cultured civilisations in the ancient world, just as Italy is today.
Italy is a member of the elite group of G7 nations; comprising the most advanced, developed and biggest economies in the world – excepting the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations, comprising Brazil, Russia, India and China. These four as we have learned, represent the most prominent descendants from Japheth, Ham and Shem in the scriptures, in that they represent respectively, Tyre from Aram; Asshur and the Assyrians; Cush (biblically translated Ethiopia); and Magog, Tubal and Meschech.
Japan is the one non-European nation in the seven, though by irony is the most westernised nation of those from the East just as Tarshish was anciently – Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan. Italy is one of the four influential nations from Europe and as we shall discover, is closely related to them all – France, Germany and the United Kingdom – for they are all descended from either Nahor or one of his brothers, Haran and Abraham.
There are numerous theories on the etymology of the name Italia. One is that it was borrowed via Greek from the Oscan Viteliu, ‘land of calves’ which in Latin is vitulus. Nahor’s concubine Reumah’s name, included wild ox as a meaning. The daughters of Laban, a grandson of Nahor, both married Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. Leah’s name includes the definition of wild cow and her younger sister Rachel, includes ewe, a female sheep in hers.
Flag of the Italian Navy, displaying the coat of arms of Venice, Genoa, Pisa and Amalfi the most prominent maritime republics. The strong shipping tradition is indicative of the sons of Aram – Spanish and Portuguese.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Italian global shipments during 2021.
Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 75.3% from 2020 to 2021. That product category was propelled by Italy’s greater international sales of refined petroleum oils. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 72.9% gain.’
Flag of Italy
Allegedly, Napoleon chose the Italian flag in 1796 during the annexation of Piedmont, based on the French Tricolore and substituting blue for green. Though it may have been inspired by the colour of the uniforms of the Milanese City militia; whose members since 1782, had worn a green uniform with red and white gorget patches. Also, red and white were peculiar to the ancient municipal coat of arms of Milan and were common on Lombard military uniforms.
The world’s eighth largest economy according to GDP belongs to Italy, at $2.46 trillion in 2025. Italy’s economy and level of development vary notably by region, with a more developed, industrial economy in the North contrasted by underdeveloped southern regions. Italy’s second biggest export is automobiles, including several famous brands such as Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Ferrari, Lamborghini and Maserati. One of Italy’s most famous exports is clothing, which includes world-famous brands such as Versace, Gucci, Giorgio Armani and Prada.
The flag of Venice above and of the Vatican City below
Did you know that Italians have the most diverse DNA in Europe? L’Italo Americano, Giulia Franceschini, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘We usually say that America is a melting pot of cultures and races, but did you know that, according to genetic research, Italy may be just as varied? The study was carried out by a team of researchers from Rome’s Universita La Sapienza, in collaboration with the universities of Bologna, Cagliari and Pisa, and led by anthropologist Giovanni Destro Bisol in 2014. Its main findings show that Italian DNA has from 7 to 30 times more differences than those registered between the Portuguese and the Hungarians.This variety is present everywhere, from North to South and includes also Italy’s islands, Sardinia and Sicily. In other words, Bisol et al.’s research shows that Italians have a higher level of diversity among themselves than populations living at opposite corners of the continent.’
The diagram below is a good example of the difference between those peoples predominantly descended from Ham’s son Mizra in the Middle East (gold) and North Africa (brown) – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia – below 0.0 x axis and the peoples of Europe descending in the main from Shem’s son Arphaxad – above 0.0 x axis. It also shows the East to west gradient divide studied in the preceding chapter.
The red markers show the similarity between Eastern Europeans such as Poles and Ukrainians with south eastern Europeans including Romanians and Greeks, who all descend from Joktan and are positioned less than 0.0 y axis. The Blue of southern (central) Italy is the interconnection between Eastern and Western Europe (green) showing both the similarity with each half of the continent, yet also its uniqueness. Their markers lie predominantly above 0.0 y axis, as befits the majority of Italian descent from either Peleg (or Aram) rather than from Joktan.
Genetic History of Ethnic Italians, unknown author, 2017:
‘In… recent decades there has been a huge increase in the study of human genetics. Practically it has substituted the banned (after WW2) studies on human races. Now we don’t divide world populations because of their eyes and/or hair color, but because of their so called genetic “haplogroup.”
Ratio of blond haired people in Italy: with yellow shading, over 20% of the population; and black below 2.4% of the population. Highlighting the difference between the Teutonic (Chaldean) north; the Gothic (Aramaean/Zoba) Centre; and the Grecian (Joktan) south.
Eupedia explains the Y-DNA Haplogroup correlation for blond hair, red hair and blue eyes.
‘Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes for blue eyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I [I1, I2a1 and I2a2]. The genes for blond hair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Europe before the Bronze Age [beginning circa 2500 to 2000 BCE], and appear to have been spread primarily by R1b people.’
United States National Library of Medicine, Is eye color determined by genetics? – emphasis & bold mine:
‘A person’s eye color results from pigmentation of a structure called the iris, which surrounds the small black hole in the center of the eye (the pupil) and helps control how much light can enter the eye. The color of the iris ranges on a continuum from very light blue to dark brown.
Most of the time eye color is categorized as blue, green/hazel, or brown. Brown is the most frequent eye color worldwide. Lighter eye colors, such as blue and green, are found almost exclusively among people of European ancestry.
Eye color is determined by variations in a person’s genes. Most of the genes associated with eye color are involved in the production, transport, or storage of a pigment called melanin.Eye color is directly related to the amount and quality of melanin in the front layers of the iris. People with brown eyes have a large amount of melanin in the iris, while people with blue eyes have much less of this pigment.
A particular region on chromosome 15 plays a major role in eye color. Within this region, there are two genes located very close together: OCA2 and HERC2. The protein produced from the OCA2 gene, known as the P protein, is involved in the maturation of melanosomes, which are cellular structures that produce and store melanin. The P protein therefore plays a crucial role in the amount and quality of melanin that is present in the iris. Several common variations (polymorphisms) in the OCA2 gene reduce the amount of functional P protein that is produced. Less P protein means that less melanin is present in the iris, leading to blue eyes instead of brown in people with a polymorphism in this gene.
A region of the nearby HERC2 gene known as intron 86 contains a segment of DNA that controls the activity (expression) of the OCA2 gene, turning it on or off as needed. At least one polymorphism in this area of the HERC2 gene has been shown to reduce the expression of OCA2, which leads to less melanin in the iris and lighter-colored eyes.
Several other genes play smaller roles in determining eye color. Some of these genes are also involved in skin and hair coloring. Genes with reported roles in eye color include ASIP, IRF4, SLC24A4, SLC24A5, SLC45A2, TPCN2, TYR, and TYRP1. The effects of these genes likely combine with those of OCA2 and HERC2 to produce a continuum of eye colors in different people.’
As with fairer coloured hair, lighter eyes predominate in the northern regions of Italy. In previous chapters, particularly with the descendants of Shem, there have been sometimes irregular patterns in which nations are more closely related with other countries when comparing mitochondrial DNA inherited from mothers, or Y chromosome DNA inherited from fathers.
As Franceschini states, there is wide diversification in Italy from north to south. We will compare the mtDNA from several regions now we recognise the three component parts of Italy: northern, central and southern Italy, including Sicily. Specific regions chosen to reflect these three sections are the highest population areas of Lombardy in the North; Tuscany and Latium (or Lazio) in Central Italy; and Campania and Sicily in the South.
Lombardy: H [38.4%] – K [11.3%] – T2 [9%] – X [6.8%] –
Lombardy has the highest percentages of lesser Haplogroups K and X in Italy; though with regard to the most common mtDNA Haplogroup in Europeans, Lombardy has less than the Italian average for H. Whereas neighbouring Piedmont has the highest percentage of Haplogroup H with 56.5% and yet the lowest level of HV at 1.2%. The region of Veneto stands out with the highest percentage of Haplogroup T2 – a relatively young Haplogroup – of 18.8%. In contrast, Liguria has the lowest level of T2 with 4% but has the highest percentage of HV0+V, with 10%. Friuli-Venezia-Guilia in the far northeast has the second highest levels of Haplogroup H with 54%, yet interestingly, has the lowest levels of a number of Haplogroups: HV0+V, 0%; J, 4%; T1, 0%; K, 2%; I, 0% and X, 0%.
Tuscany: H [41.4%] – T2 [8.6%] – K [7.8%] – J [6.4%] –
T1 [2.9%] – U2 [1.9%] – U1 [1.6%] – U [1.2%] – U4 [0.6%]
Both Tuscany and Latium are not far removed from each other or from Lombardy; with mainly average levels of most Haplogroups. In fact on PCA graphs, Northern Italians and Central Italians are similar. Even Corsicans though part of France; have a genetic composition in keeping with Central Italians. It is as we move southwards that we find observable differences. For Southern Italians are more alike with Greeks and Sardinians, are not comparable with anyone, being as far removed from Southern and Central Italians as say an Iranian.
Campania: H [43.8%] – J [8%] – K [7.4%] – T2 [6.3%] –
Both Campania and Sicily, as well as Sardinia exhibit above average percentages of prime Haplogroup H. Campania has the highest levels of T1 and Sardinia lacks a number of the U sub-Haplogroups. Calabria located in the southern most tip of Italy has the highest level of HV with 10% and also the lowest percentage of Haplogroup H with 28%. Calabria also has the highest percentage of Haplogroup J and Sardinia second with 14% and 13% respectively.
The average percentages as shown across Italy as a whole.
Italy: H [40.2%] – T2 [8.2%] – J [8.1%] – K [7.7%] – U5 [4.6%] –
X [2%] – U4 [1.9%] – U2 [1.6%] – U1 [1.5%] – L [0.8%]
H HV HV0+V J T2 U5 K X
Piedmont 57 1.2 7 7 6 1.2 7 3
Lombardy 38 3 4 5 9 5 11 7
Tuscany 41 5 5 6 9 4 8 2
Latium 39 3 5 8 5 4 8 3
Campania 44 3 3 8 6 4 7 1.7
Calabria 28 10 4 14 10 12 8 2
Sicily 45 5 2 7 4 3 6 4
Sardinia 44 4 4 13 10 10 6 1.3
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 5 8 2
The demarkation between regions is blurred and not overly obvious. There are few clear patterns. For example, Haplogroup H percentages fluctuate rather than steadily increase or decrease when heading southwards, though T2 levels do decrease overall. Lombardy’s higher levels of Haplogroup K, is invariably associated with Ashkenazi Jews and the Basque in Spain and France.
H J T2 K HV U5 HV0+V
Lombardy 38 5 9 11 3 5 4
Campania 44 8 6 7 3 4 3
Portugal 44 7 6 6 0.1 7 5
Spain 44 7 6 6 0.7 8 8
According to PCA graphs, Portugal and Spain are closer to Lombardy. Contrastingly, the stronger link in maternal mtDNA is between Campania in the south of Italy and Iberia. The addition of Brazil confirms a maternal similarity amongst these four regions.
H U T J HV0+V HV X
Spain 44 14 9 7 8 0.7 1.7
Portugal 44 13 10 7 5 0.1 2
Brazil 44 16 14 11 2 3
Campania 44 15 10 8 3 3 2
It is now enlightening to add Italy to the mtDNA comparison table of the principle descendants of Shem studied thus far.
H HV HV0+V J T2 U U5 K
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
A comparison of the principal mtDNA Haplogroups for Italy with the other prominent descendants of Shem studied so far, shows that Italy with its diverse blood lines, is unlike Turkey or Iran and with its combined genetic input from Nahor, Terah, Aram and Joktan sits quite closely with Greece. Italy in fact sits squarely in the middle of the table and bisects the descendants of Arphaxad in half. From an mtDNA perspective, it is not as close to its Latin cousins.
We have Aram at one end of the spectrum and Lud at the other, with the sons of Joktan interspersed between them and Asshur and now Nahor, relatively in the centre of those nations dominated by Haplogroup H. This highlights how closely related the sons of Shem are and particularly those from Arphaxad. Note the similarity between Portugal and Spain; Russia and Ukraine; and Greece and Italy.
The Haplogroup map above emphatically shows on the maternal mtDNA side how closely related north and central Italy are; yet their paternal Y-DNA (classifications now out of date) rightly reveals a considerable difference. In other words, their original fathers were from different families, yet their mothers are near identical. This would mean that Aram’s son Uz must have married a relative of Milcah and Sarah, the daughters of Haran. On the other hand, southern Italy has a markedly different maternal lineage, as well as a unique paternal line of descent. Therefore, their original progenitors were not related to Uz, Nahor or either of their wives.
The Fifty-Three Known Forefathers of the Italian People: Latest Discoveries from Genetics, Michael Curtotti, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘If we go back far enough (thousands of years) we find (along the patrilineal line) that virtually all Italians are descended from only fifty-three men. A third kind of DNA “autosomal DNA” [First two: Y-DNA (paternal) and mt-DNA (maternal)] (found on all the chromosomes except the sex chromosome) is also used to find relatives and estimate ethnicity (although the latter process is controversial).
R1b, the highest proportion across Italy and one of the 53 forefathers we can now identify is “R1b-U152” [(S28) is most frequent in northern and central Italy, France and Switzerland]… and is the patrilineal ancestorof over 22% of Italians. The highest representation of R1b-U152 occurs in Bergamo plains (53%) and Bergamo Valleys (46%) and Tortona (35%).
The next of our fifty-three forefathers is R1b-S116 [P312] who is the patrilineal ancestorof 8% of Italians. R1b-S116 is found most frequently in Spain [and Portugal].
R1b-U106 [S21, M405], who comes in at 3.8% is a forefather of proto-Germanic speakers [Germany, Low Countries, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom]. He lived 4700 years ago and his branch expanded from northern Europe around 1700-500 BCE. Some of his descendants will have arrived in Italy during the Gothic and Lombard periods.
R1b-L23 dates to 6100 years before the present and represents 3.5% ofItalian paternal ancestry [Southern Italy, Greece, the Caucasus]. The branch is most strongly represented in Anatolia [Asia Minor, modern Turkey] and may be associated with the ancient Hittites[the Hatti]…’
In connection with sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106, this – in the form of its prototype mutations – would have been passed along Arphaxad’s line via Peleg and though present in Italy’s male descendants, is actually the dominant R1b in the Germanic related peoples of western Europe. R-U106 perhaps appearing nearly 4,000 years ago when Nahor and his two brothers were born. The approximate date given of 4,700 years ago by scientists is then seemingly quite accurate.
The R1b-L23 date of 6100 BCE is also interesting in that this goes back to Peleg, the ancestor, of Nahor and his descendants, the Chaldeans; when the divisional Haplogroup split, between R1b and R1a in Arphaxad’s line likely occurred, at the very latest. Thus the dates for R-U106 and L23 may need to be called into question and a more recent (revised) mutation for each is probable.
It is actually R1b-U152 which is the defining marker Haplogroup for men descended from Nahor. R1b-S116 is the marker paternal Haplogroup for those men descended from Aram’s son Uz. Haplogroup R1b-L23 is the Haplogroup associated with males descended from Joktan’s son Uzal. Terah’s son Zoba is a guess and could be either of the R1b sub-clades U152, L23 or even U106.
The author, inadvertently says ancient Hittites, this doesn’t mean the later Hittites, but the earlier Hatti (or Chatti), who are none other than the Chaldeans, descended primarily from Nahor – the modern day Italians.
‘According to the founding myth of Rome, Romulus and Remus descended from the Latin kings of Alba Longa, themselves descended from Trojan prince Aeneas, who fled to the Latium after the destruction of Troy by the Greeks. Troy may well have been founded by the early M269 and/or L23 branches of R1b… If there is any truth in the myth (as there usually is), the Trojans might have brought M269 or L23 (probably with other haplogroups, notably J2) to central Italy circa 1200 BCE, around the same time as U152 invaded from the north.
The Etruscans, who are thought to have originated in western Anatolia, not far from Troy, might also have brought R1b-L23 to Italy, also blended with other haplogroups. Nowadays R1b-L23 [in the south]is the second most common subclade of R1b in Italy, although well behind R1b-U152 [in northern and central Italy]. By comparing Sardinian… DNA, it can be estimated that the Sardinians have inherited between 16% and 24% of their Y-DNA from the Phoenicians.’
Investigation will show that with regard to the Trojans, M269 is an accurate assessment and L23 is not. The same can be said of the Etruscans. The more specific R1b sub-Haplogroups for both are actually M269 and U106. With regard to the Phoenicians, Hay is more accurate if he meant R1b-S116.
Eupedia: ‘In 475, various East Germanic tribes (Herulians, Rugians, and Scirians) were refused federated status by [the] Roman emperor. Under the leadership of Odoacer, a former secretary of Attila, they deposed the last emperor and created the first Kingdom of Italy (476-493), bringing to an end the Western Roman Empire.
The kingdom was taken over by the Ostrogoths, who ruled the whole of Italy except Sardinia until 553. The Ostrogoths’s capital was Ravenna. They were succeeded by the Lombards (568-774), who had to contend for the political control of Italy with the Byzantines.Like the Ostrogoths, the Lombards had invaded Italy from Pannonia and settled more densely in north-east Italy and in Lombardy, which was named after them. The Lombard capital was in Pavia, Lombardy. They set up many duchies, notably those of Friuli (based in Cividale), Trento, Tuscany (based in Lucca), Spoleto, Benevento, as well as in the major cities of Lombardy and Venetia.
In the 5th century theGoths would have become such a melting pot that their original Germanic Y-DNA might have only represented a small percentage of their lineages. This explains why there is apparently so little Germanic Y-DNA in south-western France and Spain (location of the former Visigothic kingdom)compared to other regions conquered by Germanic tribes in Western Europe, includingItaly.
In contrast with the Goths and the Vandals, the Lombards left Scandinavia and descended due south through Germany, Austria and Slovenia, only leaving Germanic territory a few decades before reaching Italy. The Lombards would have consequently remained a predominantly Germanic tribe by the time they invaded Italy.’
Hay has drawn correct conclusions though possibly via incorrect summations. The reason there is ‘little’ Germanic DNA in Spain is because they are different peoples from the Germanic Germans. Northern Italians are labelled ‘Germanic’ yet they are in part kindred peoples with the Spanish and Portuguese – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The migratory route of the Lombards had little to do with their Germanic-ness.
The Vandals and Alans were not Germanic and the Visigoths and Suevi – the Spanish and Portuguese today – were not pure Germanic. The Visigoths and Suevi were relatively Germanic, when compared with the Vandals, Alans and Moors, who were a blend of Aram and descendants from Ham, via Mizra’s sons Casluh and Caphtor – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Note the decrease of R1b heading southwards and the increase through admixture of the Hamitic J, either from inhabitants from southeastern Europe or the Middle East. Like wise the Canaanite E1b1b Haplogroup also increases as a result of intermixing from the same regions as well as North Africa. The old Shem Haplogroup G and the intermediate Haplogroup I generally increase towards the South. As does R1a from intermarriage with principally eastern Europeans descended from Joktan.
The Y-DNA percentages below for the higher population regions of Italy, plus Sardinia; followed by a comparison with the nations of Shem studied to date, reveal the following.
With the exception of Sardinia, the four predominant Italian Y-DNA Haplogroups overall, include R1b, J2, E1b1b and G2a. This grouping is similar with Spain, Portugal and Brazil. Haplogroup R1b is indicative of western Europe, J2 of West and South West Asia, E1b1b of North Africa and G2a of the Caucasus region. It is important to remember that E1b1b and J2 are paternal lines of descent from Canaan and Ham respectively and are the result of admixture from intermixing and intermarriage.
Haplogroup G on the other hand is an ancient lineage descending from Shem and it is very interesting that it has a consistently strong presence in Italian males from the South running all the way up the peninsula to the North. Again, it is Haplogroup R1b which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Italian men descended from either Nahor or Aram. What is also worth noting is the almost lack of Haplogroups I2 and I1 in Italy overall, with Sardinia being the exception and showing its parallel ties with the Balkans – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Lombardy has the highest average for R1b, though the highest level has been recorded in Tuscany with 76.2%. Sardinia has the lowest level of R1b, followed by Sicily. Lombardy has the lowest percentage for J2, while Calabria in the very south possesses an average of 29%. The highest percentage for E1b1b is found in Sicily; while Piedmont and Trentino-South Tyrol have the lowest with 6%. The highest level by far of I2a1 is Sardinia and is similar to certain countries in the Balkans. The highest percentages for I1 are found in Friuli-Venezia-Giuliai with 21% and also R1a with 13%; while Sardinia has the lowest I1 and Umbria and Molise each have with 0% of R1a.
R1b J2 E1b1b G2a I1 I2a1 I2a2 R1a J1
Lombardy 59 6 10 10 3 1 5 4
Tuscany 53 12 9 9 4 2 3 4 2
Latium 29 19 17 11 9 1 3 2 2
Campania 29 18 16 11 3 4 2 3 6
Sicily 26 23 21 9 4 3 5 4
Sardinia 19 9 10 12 38 2 1 4
There are a number of salient points highlighted in the Table. It is strikingly clear as confirmed by PCA data that the paternal ancestry for Sardinia is unlike the rest of Italy. Tuscany is counted with Central Italy, though from a paternal Haplogroup perspective, it has much in common with Lombardy in the North.
Haplogroup R1b indicative of western Europe, decreases from north to central Italy markedly, with Latium – which includes Rome – being closer with southern Italy. It also supports the evidence that R1b generally decreases as one heads in a south eastern direction in Europe.
In contrast, Haplogroups J2 and E1b1b increase. The J2 increase is understandable as it is rarer in northern Europe. Though even the Spanish and Portuguese do not have as high a percentage of J2. One has to look to Greece, Turkey and Iran for similarly high levels. Haplogroup J2 is reflective of admixture in southern European and southeastern European males, as in the near east and West Asia with a source likely in South West Asian males – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Haplogroup J2 is related to the Hamitic J1 carried by the majority of Arab men.
Haplogroup E1b1b percentages – a Canaanite paternal Haplogroup – are different, in that even Turkey and Iran do not compare with Sicily. It is only Greece which matches southern Italy. This should not be a surprise as remember, all these nations descend from Shem and as with cousins, some similarities are shared with certain cousins and other likenesses with different relatives. It bears out that those nations with these higher levels have a. been drawn to dwell further south in warmer climes and latitudes; and b. due to their location, they therefore show higher levels of admixture with men principally descended from Canaan and Mizra in North Africa and the Middle East. The approximate breakdown for E1b1b in Italy is E1b1b1a, 10%; E1b1b1c, 3%; and E1b1b1b, 1 %.
Combining the regions into the three main areas as well as a total average for Italy produces the following results.
Aside from the sub-Haplogroups mentioned of U152, U106, L23 and S116 for R1b, others include: L21 (M529) found in the Celtic arc of Europe and M167 found in northern Spain.
R1b J2 E1b1b G2a I1 I2a1 I2a2 R1a J1
Italy North 50 10 11 8 7 1 4 5 2
Italy Central 36 23 12 11 3 2 2 3 5
Italy South 28 22 19 11 3 4 1 3 4
Italy 39 16 14 9 5 3 3 4 3
Italy subdivided into its three key parts, highlights a little clearer the Haplogroup level changes. Italy as a whole and averaged out reflects central Italy in both R1b and E1b1b levels. There is a clear three way split, which can be explained by three separate paternal lineages that have intertwined, yet remain distinct. The fathers being Uz from Aram and a wife probably related to Terah’s family; Nahor from Arphaxad and Peleg and his wife Milcah from Haran, as well as his concubine Reumah, possibly descended from Joktan.
Added to this mix and not to be discounted is a mysterious father, such as Aram from Zoba (and Terah) and again a wife possibly from Joktan’s family. Perhaps revealed in the undefined grey areas above. In total, three original progenitors with Nahor providing two of the eventual four lines. Central Italians show evidence of similar admixture in that J2 Haplogroup levels are akin to southern Italy, yet their E1b1b levels are different, being closer to northern Italy. Plus, the R1b percentage is marginally closer to southern Italians which also highlights increased intermixing as opposed to northern Italian men.
Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared with Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 or S21, is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
As we progress through the descendants of Shem, we will find the levels of R1b vary, though gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups for some of the nations we will study. R-M269 stretches across Europe, with levels increasing as one heads westwards. R-U106 covers western Europe eastwards with its epicentre in Central Europe.
Turkey: R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia: R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
Italy’s dominant Haplogroup is R1b and we can see the marked difference comparing with nations from Eastern Europe and beyond. It is worth mentioning that the north to south axis is as important as the east to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – Chapters XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Our Y-DNA comparison table from the previous chapters, now sees the addition of Italy – the first major descendant from Peleg’s line, Nahor.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 1.5 56 58
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 1.5 8 7 3 2 69 71
Ukraine 5 0.5 4.5 7 3 44 8 52
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. Italy slots in towards the middle of the table with relatively average figures for all their main Haplogroups. This mirrors Italy’s geographic position in bisecting western and eastern Europe and the descendants of Peleg and Joktan.
Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 with the ancient Haplogroup G2a (all from Shem) are compared. Italy has more in common with the other Aramaean nations of south western Europe, which is not a surprise. It sits towards the top of the table due to its low levels of R1a and higher percentage of R1b. Being a southern and western European nation, Italy does not exhibit more than low percentages for Haplogroups I1 and I2. Italy has little in common with those nations further north and east such as Poland, Ukraine and Russia. Though as mentioned, Southern Italy has marked autosomal DNA commonality with Greece.
Italy is a Latin country and like Spain, it has a Gothic core. While Gothic may be considered broadly Germanic it is not an accurate label. Spain has experienced multiple influences, yet a Visigoth demographic dominance, means it is a Latin nation. Unlike Spain, Italy includes a Germanic – in a more Teuton sense – ethnic element in its north and a Balkan, Grecian composition in its south. While Spain is wholly Latin, Italy becomes more latinised as one heads southwards.
Italy during its multi-layered past received Greek, Roman and Celtic influences amongst others, yet even so, it is today a Latin nation dominated by its Ostrogoth centre. For Latin nations encompass a similar culture, a related romance language, the same religion and to some degree, shared ethnicity. In fact, Italy’s composition is closer to France – the nation forming the centre of our focus in the following chapter. Italy is a complex yet subtle blend from Germanic to Latin and sits between Spain and the French. For France has a more pronounced Latinised south and Germanic north. Still, both France and Italy, straddle the two world’s; while linguistically, it is Italy and Spain which are more closely related.
Incline your ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply your heart to… knowledge…
Proverbs 22:17 English Standard Version
“Majorities are generally wrong, if only in their reasons for being right.”
The second son born to Shem was called Asshur. The land where Asshur dwelt, became known as Assyria and it is this word which is used in the Bible. Historians also use the word Assyria to refer to the ancient peoples of Asshur and their ruling dynasties. There are today a Middle Eastern people known as Assyrians, though these are decidedly not a residue of the once mighty Assyrian Empire as we shall discover.
Asshur is mentioned repeatedly throughout the Old Testament. Its relationship with the sons of Jacob was tempestuous at best and catastrophic at worst. The vying for centre stage and influence has been waged between the two most prominent sons of Shem, Asshur and Arphaxad from the beginning and continues to the present day.
As disclosed when discussing Madai* (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes) and his relationship with Elam – the modern nation of Turkey (Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey) – Asshur is the ancestor of the peoples of Russia.
We have read previously in Zephaniah 9:13, which reveals Asshur was to ultimately live in the North, where other nations of the North are located, such as Magog and Togarmah – Northeastern China and the two Koreas – refer Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
Most biblical identity aficionados are familiar with Asshur and his prominence in the Bible. They with secular Assyriologists, share a fascination for all things Assyrian, yet do not truly understand which modern people they actually have a passion for. Nor are they aware of the considerably greater threat posed by Asshur as Russia, compared to the commonly held yet erroneous belief within the biblical identity community that Germany is Assyria. One wonders if the fascination is more with Germany than it is for Asshur.
It would be flippant to say Russia backwards spells Aissur. Though in essence this highlights exactly how many identities are deduced from nonsensical assumptions and wrongful interpretations in etymology and heraldic symbolism for example; often lacking a thorough line of reasoning and convincing evidence.
Russia is a land of superlatives; a country stretching over a vast expanse nearly twice the size of the territory of Canada, the world’s second largest nation. Extending across the whole of northern Asia and the eastern third of Europe; spanning eleven time zones; incorporating deserts and semiarid steppes; to deep forests and Artic tundra. Russia contains Europe’s longest river the Volga, its largest lake, Ladoga and the world’s deepest lake, Baikal.
The first modern state in Russia was founded in 862 CE by King Rurik of the Rus, who was made the ruler of Novgorod. The Rus King Oleg, later conquered the city of Kiev and started the kingdom of the Kievan Rus in 882.
During the tenth and eleventh centuries the Kievan Rus grew to become a powerful empire, reaching peaks under Vladimir the Great in 980 and Yaroslav I the Wise in 1015. In 1237, the Mongols led by Batu Khan, overran the region and scattered the Kievan Rus.
In its wake, the Grand Duchy of Moscow under Ivan III in 1462 rose to power and became the head of the Eastern Roman Empire, driving out the Mongols in 1480. Ivan IV (or the Terrible), crowned himself the first Tsar of Russia in 1547 and began the exponential expansion of Russian lands. The title Tsar etymologically denotes a name derived from Caesar and the Russians called their empire the Third Rome. We will discover this is more than a coincidence. In 1613, Mikhail Romanov established the Roman-ov dynasty – enduring until 1917. Under the rule of Tsar Peter the Great from 1689 to 1725, the Russian empire continued its incredible expansion – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.
It became a major power and the capital was moved again, by Peter the Great from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 1713. As the Russians have repeatedly moved their capitals from Novgorod, Kiev, St Petersburg – also called Leningrad – and Moscow; the Assyrians exhibited the same proclivity transferring their capitals from Ashur, Calah and Nineveh respectively.
Moscow – the modern incarnation of the ancient Assyrian capital, Nineveh
In 1762, Tsar Peter III was assassinated and his wife Catherine II – of German descent – assumed the crown. She ruled for thirty-four years in what would be called the Golden Age of the Russian Empire. In 1812, Napoleon unsuccessfully invaded Russia. During the nineteenth century, the influence of Russian culture was at its height. Musicians and writers such as Dostoyevsky, Tchaikovsky and Tolstoy became famous throughout the world.
In 1853 the Crimean War began, which Russia eventually lost, against an alliance comprising France, the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), Britain and Sardinia. In 1867, Russia sensationally sold Alaska to the United States of America for $7.2 million dollars. In 1897, the Social Democratic Party was established. It would later split into the Bolshevik and Menshevik parties. In 1904, Russia went to war against Japan in Manchuria and decisively lost.
In 1917 Vladimir Lenin – who was half Tatar* – led the Bolshevik Party in revolution overthrowing the Tsar. Civil war broke out in 1918 and eventually the communist Soviet Union was born in 1922. After Lenin died in 1924, Joseph Stalin – who was half Georgian (Chapter XVII Lud & Iran) – seized power. Under Stalin, approximately 20 to 40 million people ultimately died, in famines; concentration camps; and executions in the great purge beginning in 1934.
During World War II, Russia initially allied with the Germans; however the Germans invaded Russia in 1941. In 1942, the Russian army defeated the German army at the Battle of Stalingrad. This was the major turning point in World War II. From 1949, an arms race developed between Russia and the United States of America and the Cold War ensued for decades. Though in reality, has never ended.
In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev was elected General Secretary. He instituted freedom of speech and openness of the government (Glasnost) as well as a restructuring of the economy (Perestroika). After the historic fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the dissolution of the Soviet Union shortly there after occurred in December 1991. The preeminent empire constituting a union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, (or the Soviet Union) – U.S.S.R – became a single independent country, now called the Russian Federation.
The Cathedral of the Resurrection of Christ – commonly known as the Church of the Saviour on Spilled Blood – is illuminated at night in St. Petersburg, Russia.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘The children of Abraham called Asshurim received that name as a result of migrating to the land of Assyria or Asshur. We shall know where the Asshurim are if we first locate the modern day descendants of Assyria or Asshur.’
This would appear to be a reasonable line of reasoning, yet Abraham and Keturah’s children did not live anywhere near Asshur originally. We have seen replication of names already with children from Japaheth, Ham and Shem. The duplication shows a different people with the same name and may mean an amalgamation or it may not. In this instance we will learn it is the latter. Yet from a strict geographical sense, Hoeh is not far off.
Hoeh: ‘Asshur means “strong” or “powerful”. Asshur was a brother of Arphaxad (Genesis 10:22). The Assyrians – who came from Asshur – settled along the Tigris River around the city of Nineveh (Genesis 10:11). None of the sons of Asshur are mentioned in the Bible, but history gives us several of their names. Some of the sons of Asshur are these: Kharmen, or Germanni – meaning men of war; Khatti; Akkadians; Almani, or Halmani; and Kassites, or Cossaei. (For these names see any article on “Assyria”, or these separate names, in Biblical encyclopaedias).’
The Germani, Khatti, Akkadians and Kassites are not Assyrian names at all, but rather neighbours from different ancestors in different eras.
‘Where are these tribes today? They are no longer in ancient Assyria! Where did they go? The entire tenth chapter of Isaiah pictures the power that Asshur – the Assyrians – shall wield in these latter days. But where shall we look for them? First of all the Assyrians were driven from their land shortly after their fall in 610 B.C. Pliny, the Roman historian of the time of Christ, says the “Assyrians were north of the Crimea in Russia” (NATURAL HISTORY, book IV, section xii). About 300 years later Jerome writes that “Asshur is also joined with the tribes invading Western Europe ALONG THE RHINE” (Letter CXXIII, section 16, from NICENE AND POST-NICENE FATHERS).
So the Assyrians migrated to Central Europe! Notice the tribes coming into Central Europe – into Germany and Austria: the Khatti (the ancient name for Hessians – see ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANICA article “Germany”): the Quadians (Latin for the Akkadians); the Germanni from which the word German” comes today; the Chauci (the Cossaei of ancient Assyria); and the Allemani (the Latin name for the ancient Alman tribe of Assyria ). CERTAINLY HERE ARE THE TRIBES OF ASSYRIA! Germany is Assyria in prophecy! The North Germans, basically, are therefore the sons of Asshurim of Keturah. The remainder of the Germans and Austrians are the descendants of the ancient Assyrians or Asshur.’
Peoples migrated and their names did not always travel with them. The original Khatti are linked with Italy, whether there is an association with the name Hessian or not – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. The Germanni dwelt throughout much of Western Europe and beyond, with most of their numbers represented by the Saxon tribes which invaded Britain – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The Asshurim though settling adjacent to Germany, are not in Germany today – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
Asshur did not travel into western Europe as a Germanic tribe – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. They are an eastern European people; genetically, culturally and geographically linked to the Slavic speaking peoples.
Hoeh: ‘The ancient Assyrians deified their ancestor Asshur. In the Indo-Germanic language the name Asshur was spelled Athur (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANICA article “Mesopotamia”, section Persians). And when the Assyrians are next found in Central Europe they are still worshipping Athur as Thur or Thor! And we still commemorate Asshur by the name Thursday – Asshur’s day! The name Asshur or Athur is still preserved among the Thuringian Germans’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.
The word Thursday for the fifth day of the week actually derives from the planet Jupiter, also known as Jove and the god Zeus. As reflected in the Sicilian, Jovi; the French, Jeudi; Spainsh, Jueves; Uropi, Zusdia; Scots, Fuirsday; Finnish, Torstai; and the Scandinavian, Torsdag meaning ‘Thor’s day’ – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 59-60, 136-137 – emphasis mine:
‘Asshur, or Assyria… belonged both in race and language to the Semitic stock [incorrect]. The features of the Assyrian, as portrayed upon his monuments, are of a typical Semitic cast, and his mental and moral characteristics were those of the Semitic race. The country of Assyria took its name from the old capital Assur, or Asshur, now represented by the mounds of Kalah Sherghat, a little to the north of the junction of the Tigris with the Lower Zab. The founders of the city of Asshur and the kingdom of Assyria had moved northward from Babylonia. The Semitic language of Babylonia differed from that of Assyria only as the dialect of Middlesex differs from that of Oxfordshire.
It was from Babylonia that the Assyrians had brought their religion, their customs, their art of writing, their science, and their traditions. Their gods were the gods of Babylonia, with the sole exception of the supreme Assur. They built their houses of brick in a land of stone and raised their temples and palaces on lofty platforms, because this had been necessary in the alluvial plain of Babylonia, where stone did not exist and protection had to be sought from the floods of winter. It was the ambition of those Assyrian kings who aimed at empire to be crowned in Babylon. Only so could their right to dominion out side the boundaries of Assyria itself be recognised and made legitimate. To become king of Babylon and the adopted child of the Babylonian Bel [Baal] was to the Assyrian monarch what coronation in Rome [in the Vatican] was to the mediaeval [Germanic] prince.
… the [Assyrian’s]… favourite occupations were commerce and war. But the Assyrian remained to the last merely a conquering caste. His superiority, physical and mental, to the older population of the country had made his first invasion of it irresistible, and the iron discipline and political organisation which he subsequently maintained enabled him to preserve his power. He has been called the Roman of the East, and in many respects the comparison is just. Like the Roman he had a genius for organising and administering, for making and obeying laws, and for submitting to the restraints of an inexorable discipline. The armies of Assyria swept all before them, andthe conception of a centralised empire was first formed and realised by the Assyrian kings.’
The Assyrians had the advantage of a larger population, considerable intellect, with the ability to control their people as a organised militaristic unit. Some would offer the same could be said about the Germans. The difference being that Germany possesses these tendencies sporadically, whereas Russia exhibits them continually. We will learn that the Russians do actually have a connection with the Romans; specifically the later empire of the East and that it can be no surprise that Asshur was foremost in having a centralised, totalitarian and militaristic society purposed to build empires. The history of Asshur and Russia is replete with examples of their parallel empirical behavioural endeavours.
Before continuing with an article about Assyria, it would be beneficial to list the main Assyrian Kings during the period we will study the most closely. There are multiple king lists which differ prior to Ashur-dan I. He began his reign in 1178 BCE and the king lists are identical in their contents from this date. Ashur-dan I was a king of the Middle Assyrian Empire. The epoch we will be most interested, is the Neo-Assyrian era from 912 to 609 BCE. This line of Assyrian kings ended with the defeat of Assyria’s final king Ashur-uballit II by the combined efforts, of the Neo-Babylonian Empire with the Median Empire in 609 BCE.
The Adaside dynasty:
Shalmaneser IV: 783 – 773 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III
Ashur-dan III: 773 – 755 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III
Ashur-nirari V: 755 – 745 BCE – son of Adad-nirari III
The Pre-Sargonid kings:
Tiglath-Pileser III: 745 – 727 BCE – claimed to be the son of Adad-nirari III,
though actually a General who usurped the throne from Ashur-nirari V
Shalmaneser V: 727 – 722 BCE – son of Tiglath-Pileser III
Sargonid dynasty kings:
Sargon II: 722 – 705 BCE – claimed to be the son of Tiglath-Pileser III
and usurped the throne from his (brother?) Shalmaneser V
Sennacherib: 705 – 681 BCE – son of Sargon II
Esarhaddon: 681 – 669 BCE – son of Sennacherib
Ashurbanipal: 669 – 631 BCE – son of Esarhaddon
Ashur-etil-ilani: 631 – 627 BCE – son of Ashurbanipal
Sinsharishkun: 627 – 612 BCE – son of Ashurbanipal
Sin-shumu-lishir: 626 BCE – General of Ashur-etil-ilani who rebelled against
Sinsharishkun, attempting to claim the throne for himself
Ashur-uballit II: 612 – 609 BCE – unclear relationship, possibly the son of Sinsharishkun
The following article primarily about Germany – linking it erroneously with Assyria – contains valuable material regarding the identity of Germany – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Conversely, there are sections of interest worth highlighting with regard to the identity of Assyria.
The History of Germany, Stephen Flurry, 1997 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘For several years now… we have taught that modern-day Germany descended from the people the Bible refers to as the Assyrians. In this article, we will prove this factfrom the Bible and other historical sources.
As Noah’s family multiplied exceedingly, many migrated… to a plain in the land of Shinar… (modern-day Iraq). Genesis 10 gives only the briefest account of this occurrence, mainly by just listing the lineages of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. But God does draw special attention to Nimrod… Nimrod’s name means “he rebelled” – against God, that is. Nimrod established the kingdom of Babylon. Babylon means confusion, which is what happened when God confounded their language at the tower of Babel. Aside from Nimrod, Genesis 10 also draws special attention to Asshur. “Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah.” (Genesis 10:11).
As the margin suggests, a better translation of this verse would reveal that Asshur and Nimrod went out of the land of Shinar to build Nineveh and other cities. There is strong evidence to indicate that Asshur worked with Nimrod, probably in the military field, and helped to build Babel and Nineveh, as well as other cities.’
We will study Nimrod in depth in the next chapter – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. According to an unconventional chronology (note firstly, lifetimes were extended prior to the flood and secondly after the flood up until Abraham), Arphaxad was born circa 10,717 BCE; thus Asshur as the second son of Shem would have been born before Arphaxad, in circa 10,750 BCE. Nimrod was apparently the second generation after the flood, though we will consider that he was actually the third generation and born sometime later, in approximately 8700 BCE.
The Tower of Babel instigated by Nimrod, ended about 6755 BCE – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. The descent from the Ark’s original resting place by early families to the Indus Valley; building a civilisation there; and then migrating to Egypt, Anatolia and Mesopotamia would likely mean that the cities built in Shinar and later Assyria would have taken place circa 8000 BCE – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
Flurry: ‘Now notice verse 22: “The children of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram.” Notice that Arphaxad is listed in this verse as the third son of Shem. Now read Genesis 11:10: “These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood.” Neither of Shem’s first two sons, Elam or Asshur, are mentioned!
That’s because they were rejected as the heirs of Shem’s inheritance. If they were working alongside Nimrod, you can see why Shem (and God) rejected them! Asshur parted with his father and raised up the Assyrian Empire.’
There is debate over whether Arphaxad was born or conceived two years after the flood. According to the following four verses, Shem’s son Arphaxad would have been born on the Ark: Genesis 5:32, Genesis 7:11, Genesis 11:10 and Genesis 8:13. However, according to Genesis 8:15-19 and Genesis 9:18-19, no children left the Ark. A way to resolve this mathematical conundrum is to say the wording applies to conception rather than birth. This would be the only way to fit the three sons of Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad in a very busy two year period for Shem’s wife, Sedequedelabab.
If on the other hand, the sexagesimal Sumerian counting system is correctly applied as per an unconventional chronology – and not the mis-leading edited interpretation in Genesis – then Arphaxad was actually born 120 years after the flood.
Flurry: ‘Notice what the historian Josephus recorded concerning Asshur: “Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons… Ashur lived at the city of Nineveh; and named his subjects Assyrians, WHO BECAME THE MOST FORTUNATE NATION; BEYOND OTHERS.” (Antiquities, I, vi, 4). Assyria quickly became the mostprosperous, powerful nation of the day.
… in Genesis 14:1-2: “And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal KING OF NATIONS; That these made war…” These four kings in verse 1 were allied as a gigantic Assyrian empire, as Josephus points out: “At this time, when the Assyrians had the dominion over Asia, the people of Sodom were in a flourishing condition… the Assyrians made war upon them; and,dividing their army into four parts, fought against them. Now every part of the army had its own commander; and when the battle was joined, the Assyrians were conquerors; and imposed tribute on the kings of the Sodomites, who submitted to this slavery twelve years… but on the thirteenth year they rebelled, and then the army of the Assyrians came upon them, under their commanders, Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer, and Tidal. These kings had laid waste all Syria, and overthrown the offspring of the giants.” (Antiquities, I, ix, 1).
… Lange’s Commentary says, “According to Ktesias and others, the Assyrians were the first to establish a world-dominion.” (volume 1, page 403). The last king listed in Genesis 14:1 is Tidal, the “king of nations”. He ruled in the region of Asia Minor. The word Tidal comes from a Hebrew word which means “to fear, make afraid, dreadful and terrible.” For centuries, Assyria caused many nations GREAT FEAR! These four Assyrian generals [kings] came to make war with the kings in Canaan because of their rebellion (GENESIS 14:4). The Assyrians routed the people of Canaan, including the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14:17 says that Abram also killed the four [one] top leaders of the Assyrian Empire, mentioned in verse 1. It was a complete rout! The power of Assyria was smashed in one night! Think about how the course of history was changed at this point.’
We have learned in the preceding chapter regarding Chedorlaomer, how this was a period of Elamite ascendancy and that these were four Kings of separate city-states, not four Generals of one state – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Flurry has made some very big assumptions – the first based on the dubious historian, Josephus – not supported by the biblical account. Though he may be forgiven for ascribing Assyria to Tidal and Arioch, the Bible clearly states the king of Elam, Asshur’s elder brother and the king of Shinar which included Akkad and Sumer and their main capital cities Babylon and Uruk. These peoples were descended from Asshur’s younger brother Arphaxad – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Assyria was a region at this time in northern Mesopotamia; it had no jurisdiction over southern Mesopotamia which incorporated the Land of Shinar – Akkadia and Sumer – or Elam to the far southeast. Josephus states the kings had ‘laid waste all Syria’. The Gutim, Hurrian, Mitanni and Chatti states were predominantly Syrian or Aramaean regions – allied with peoples from Haran and Nahor – to the North and west of Shinar and Assyria. We also discovered that only Arioch of Ellasar (or Larsa) a giant, possibly died in the raid. Genesis 14:17 reveals Abraham defeated Chedorlaomer’s forces during his night time ambush attack; not who died in the confrontation. The Assyrians were neither involved or decimated; nor was the course of history changed for Assyria at this time.
Flurry: ‘James McCabe, author of History of the World, says the Assyrians were a “fierce, treacherous race, delighting in the dangers of the chase and in war. The Assyrian troops were notably among the most formidable of ancient warriors… They never kept faith when it was to their interest to break treaties, and were regarded with suspicion by their neighbors in consequence of this characteristic… In organization and equipment of their troops, and in their system of attack and defence and their method of reducing fortified places, the Assyrians manifested a superiority to the nations by which they were surrounded.” (volume 1, pages 155, 160).
Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote, “Ancient Assyria was the greatest war-making power in all history” (January 1963, Plain Truth, “Germany in Prophecy!”).
‘James Hastings wrote, “The Assyrians of historic times were more robust, warlike, ‘fierce’, than the mild industrial Babylonians. This may have been due to the influence of climate and incessant warfare; but it may indicate a different race… The whole organization of the State was essentially military.” (Dictionary of the Bible, article “Assyria and Babylonia”).’
This is a correct observation as the cultured Babylonians were as different from the warlike Assyrians as the modern day Italians are compared to the Russians – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Flurry: ‘Leonard Catrell in Anvil of Civilization, wrote: “In all the annals of human conquest, it is difficult to find any people more dedicated to bloodshed and slaughter than the Assyrians. Their ferocity and cruelty have few parallels save in modern times.” (It’s interesting that Catrell can only compare their ferocity with those “in modern times.” By far, the Germans have been more dedicated to bloodshed than any other nation in this century.)’
The unfortunate reality as borne out by the figures of the dead, is that Russian rule has been more fierce than the Germans; responsible for the deaths of many, many millions more. Comparisons have been made between Hitler’s and Stalin’s regimes by historians, with Stalin clearly the more diabolical, terrorising and blood-thirsty – with tens of millions dead in comparison with Hitler’s millions.
Flurry: ‘C. Leonard Woolley described what these people looked like in his book, The Sumerians: “In the Zagros hills and across the plain to the Tigris, there lived a… fair-haired… people akin to the Guti (Goths) who… remained in what was afterwards Assyria.” (page 5).
Here is what Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote in “Germany in Prophecy!”: “When the ancient Greek writers wanted to distinguish the Assyrians from the Arameans or Syrians, the Greeks called the Assyrians, ‘Leucosyri’ – meaning ‘whites’ or ‘blonds’ as distinct from the very brunette Syrians…” (Plain Truth, January 1963, page17).
By the time of Christ, the Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder recorded that the Assyrians were now dwelling north of the Black sea (Natural History, IV, 12, page 183). By this time, they had moved north. Much was written about the early German tribes which poured into Europe during the first and second centuries A.D., thanks in large part to the writings of the Roman historian Tacitus, who lived at that time. Among the most significant of these early German tribes are the Chatti… Chatti means “to break down by violence; to make afraid or terrify.” The ancestors of this German tribe, before migrating, lived mostly in Asia Minor, and were called the Assyrian Chatti.
Many of these early German tribes were in constant conflict with the Roman Empire which is why the Romans collectively labeled them Germani, meaning “war men”. These early tribes migrated into Central Europe, as historians verify. The Romans labeled all of them “war men”. But from where did they come? Smith’s Classical Dictionary answers: “There can be NO DOUBT that they (the Assyrians)… migrated into Europe from the Caucasus and the countries around the Black and Caspian seas.” (article “Germania”, page 361).’
Modern Germany has inherited the name ‘Germany’. The Germans do not call themselves by that name. They are known by different names in different languages. They call themselves Deutsch, far removed from the word German. The quote from Smith’s Classical Dictionary does not include the ‘Assyrians’, this has been added as an assumption. We will study the Chatti or Hatti in detail, as there are two different nations, a former and a later peoples, who were known by that name.
Flurry: ‘Some have argued that the Assyrian people spoke a Semitic language, not Indo-Germanic, and therefore theGermans could not be the descendants of the ancient Assyrians.Yet there is a passage in the Bible which clearly reveals how and why most of the ancient Assyrians acquired a new and different language. In the days of Nimrod, a tower was constructed at Babel which was to be the capital city of a world-ruling dictatorship, under which, God’s truth would have been completely stamped out. Concerning the rebellious people of Nimrod’s day, God said, “Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.”(GENESIS 11:6).
To keep civilization from progressing to a point of self-destruction so soon, God had to “confound their language” (v.7). This miraculous intervention by God was the origin of differing languages. This was when most of the Assyrians acquired the Indo-Germanic tongue and other related languages. Dr. Herman Hoeh wrote in his article, “Germany in Prophecy!”: “European scholars have thoroughly studied the language of the land of Hatti – the ancestors of the Hessians. They found it to be an Indo-Germanic tongue – numerous words of which were akin to Old High German!… The language of the Hatti was the language of the West Assyrians… Scholars admit that for centuries the language of the people who inhabited Assyria was not merely Semitic.” (Plain Truth, January 1963, page 27).’
The later Hatti are associated with the Germans and the link with High German we will explore. These Hatti became known as Hittites and were linked with Assyria, living to their west in ancient Anatolia. These Hatti (or Hittites) were a distinct, separate people allied with Assyria. A similar relationship has existed in more recent history, which we will cover. The language of the Hatti, was not ‘the language of the West Assyrian,’ in that the Hatti were not Assyrian. This is a stretch, as is saying the Assyrians went from a Semitic language to an Indo-Germanic one at the time of Peleg. We do not know this. While those scholars who profess ‘Semitic’ speaking Asshur could not be the ancestor of the Indo-Germanic speaking Germans are entirely correct.
Flurry: ‘On the banks of the Mosel River in western Germany, just six miles from the Luxembourg border, sits the ancient German city of Trier. The Romans claim to be the founders of this ancient city. But German tradition, and even the name of the city, suggests otherwise.
“On the Rotes Haus (Red House) beside the Steipe, there is a text in Latin boasting that Trier, or Treves, is older than Rome, thirteen hundred years older in fact. That is when Trebeta, son of Semiramis, is said to have founded the town.” That’s what it says in the opening paragraph of the Trier Colorphoto Guide to the Town. Josef K.L. Bihl writes in his German textbook, In deutschen Landen, “Trier was founded by Trebeta, a son of the famous Assyrian King Ninus” (page 69). The biblical name for Ninus is Nimrod.
Semiramis was married to Nimrod, the founder of Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10)… Genesis 10:11 says that Asshur and his descendants went out of Babylon and constructed the Assyrian capital – Nineveh. But as the margin correctly indicates, it was Nimrod who led Asshur out of Babylon and who actually supervised the construction project in Nineveh. Early on, the Bible indicates a close alliance between Nimrod and Asshur.’
Two important points from Stephen Flurry’s comments. If Ninus is Nimrod and Ninus is an Assyrian king, how does this square with Nimrod supposedly being a descendant of Cush? Secondly, if Nimrod led Asshur himself or Asshur’s people out of Babylon in the land of Shinar to build Nineveh, the future main city and capital of Assyria, how does this equate with Nimrod being a son of Cush?
Was a descendant of Cush really ruling Shinar; comprising the descendants of Arphaxad, as well as the region of Asshur? Was Nimrod actually even descended from Ham’s son Cush? We shall return to these very important questions in the following chapter. For the shocking truth is that Nimrod was a descendant of Asshur through his father Kish (and mother Semiramis).
According to Abarim Publications, Asshur in Hebrew means: ‘level plain, step, happy, just.’ Derived from the verb asher, ‘to go (straight) on’, or yasher, ‘to be level, straight up, just.’
Abarim – emphasis mine:
‘There are two men and one empire called Asshur (=Assyria) in the Bible, and the names of all of these probably derive from the similarly named primary deity of Assyria. Asshur, Assyria and the Assyrians are not to be confused with:
The name Aram, the country directly north of Israel, which in Greek times became known by its present name of Syria. Its capital has been Damascus since ancient times. Even though Syria and Assyria are different countries, the Greeks called them both [the same], which isn’t all that strange since several cities and regions in Assyria are known by names that contain Aram; see for instance the names Aram-naharaim and Paddan-aram.
The quite different name Ashhur, belonging to the head [leader] of Tekoa (1 Chronicles 2:24)
The quite similar name Asher, which belonged to the eighth son of Jacob and second of Zilpah (Genesis 30:13)’ – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.
‘The Asshurim, who were a people descending from Abraham and Keturah (Genesis 25:3)’ – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
‘The lesser known man named Asshur is mentioned in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:24), and has no further role in the Bible. The other man named Asshur was a son of Shem… (Genesis 10:22), and, on the Biblical stage, from him sprang the people called the Assyrians, who lived in Assyria, which in the Bible is known simply as Asshur. Its capital city Nineveh was built by Nimrod, according to the Bible (Genesis 10:11).
In the demographical record, the country Assyria started out as a small settlement named Assur, “built on a sandstone cliff on the west of the Tigris about 35 kilometers north of its confluence with the lower Zab River” (says The Oxford Companion to the Bible). It became an empire in the 19th century BC, but soon dwindled, reemerged in the 14th century during which it even took control over Babylon to its south, but quickly faded again.
Under Tiglath-pileser I (1115-1076 BC) the empire experienced brief and extensive success, but succumbed to the invasion of the Arameans. In 935 BC Assyria began to reconquer its territories lost to Aram, which brought them in range of Canaan, and also created the formidable Neo-Assyrian empire that we hear so much about in the Bible.
The foundations of the Neo-Assyrian empire were laid by king Ashurnasirpal II (884-859 BC), who [re]built the city of Calah, which is also known as Nimrud (in the Bible personified as Nimrod), and expanded the (up to then marginal) town of Nineveh. Ashurnasirpal’s son Shalmaneser III (859-824 BC) fought at the battle of Qarqar (853 BC), which entailed a clash between the Assyrian imperial army and a coalition of eleven states headed by king Hadadezer of Damascus, and which included the Arameans… and Israel under king Ahab.
The Bible omits this battle and we know about it from the Kurkh monoliths, which were found in 1861 in Iraq. These monoliths contain the only (possible) reference to Israel in Assyrian and Babylonian records. At Qarqar the progression of the Assyrian empire was checked and in the years that followed its power diminished.
In 745 BC, a revolt in Calah led to the assumption of the Assyrian throne by the vigorous Tiglath-pileser III… who spent his career in conflict intervention all over the broader region. Even king Ahaz of Judah called upon the intervention of this imperial sheriff, when he found his kingdom besieged by kings Rezin of Aram and Pekah of Israel (2 Kings 16:7). He embellished his request with a gift made of silver and gold from the temple of YHWH, and Tiglath-pileser responded by capturing Damascus, exiling its people to Kir and executing Rezin (2 Kings 16:9). Still, the Chronicler wryly asserts that Tiglath-pileser’s assistance didn’t help Ahaz all that much (2 Chronicles 28:21). As part of the same campaign, Tiglath-pileser also invaded the land of Naphtali in the north of Israel and apparently also the territories of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh on the east (1 Chronicles 5:6, 5:26), and deported* the people in what became known as the First Deportation (1 Kings 15:29). King Pekah of Israel was murdered and succeeded by Hoshea, son of Elah, who was made to pay an annual tribute to the king of Assyria.
After six years of paying taxes to Assyria, king Hoshea figured he could get away from it by allying Israel with Egypt. Tiglath-pileser’s son Shalmaneser V (727-722) didn’t think so, marched on Samaria, besieged it for three years and finally captured it. He imprisoned Hoshea and deported the city’s population (2 Kings 17:4-6). His successor was the usurper Sargon II (722-705 BC), who is mentioned only once in the Bible, in Isaiah 20:1 in reference to the battle of Ashdod. But it was he who deported the rest of Israel in what is known as the Second Deportation. This action effectively ended the northern kingdom of Israel and virtually wiped out the tribes other than Judah [with Benjamin] and the two nationally absorbed tribes of Levi and Simeon.
Sargon’s son Sennacherib (705-681 BC) sacked Babylon, deported its population and besieged Jerusalem in the fourteenth year of the reign of king Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:13). King Hezekiah initially bought him off with a tribute of 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold (2 Kings 18:14) but Sennacherib wanted Jerusalem’s submission. He sent Rabshakeh and a division of his army to negotiate Jerusalem’s peaceful surrender but king Hezekiah wouldn’t budge (18:36). Hezekiah sent his chief of staff Eliakim to the prophet Isaiah, who told him that the Lord had said that Jerusalem would not fall to the Assyrians (19:7, 19:20). When Rabshakeh went to report Hezekiah’s refusal to surrender to Sennacherib, he found his king engaged in battle with the army of Libnah and realized that the heat was off Jerusalem (19:8). Then one night the Lord decimated the Assyrian army by undisclosed means, and Sennacherib went home. He was killed by his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer in the temple of the god Nisroch, and his son Esarhaddon became king in his place (681-669 BC).
King Esarhaddon died of an illness and was succeeded by the great Ashurbanipal (669-627 BC), who expanded the Assyrian empire to its record size. In the Bible he’s mentioned only as the king who brought people from outside to Samaria (Ezra 4:10). After his death his empire succumbed to civil war and was left without central reign. Finally, a man named Sin-shar-ishkun (approximately 623-612) took the throne, but within a decade the empire was invaded by a coalition of Medes and Babylonians, who captured the central provinces.
The last king of Assyria was Ashur-uballit II (612-609), who ruled in Haran, in the empire’s remaining western territories. He had support from Egypt but lost his lands to the Babylonians. The Assyrian empire and its vibrant culture remained forgotten until archeologists of the modern age revived it. The name Asshur is highly similar to the Hebrew name Asher but is spelled with a waw before the resh… [the] verb (‘ashar) covers a decisive progression or a setting right, and is often applied to describe happiness and prosperity…’
We learn of two sons born to Asshur in the Book of Jasher 7:16
And the sons of Ashar were Mirus and Mokil…
In Isaiah 66:19 ESV, we read the verse in connection with Tarshish, Lud, Tubal and Javan. Pul is mentioned and commentators sometimes define Pul as Phut or Put.
‘… and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish [Japan], Pul [H6322 – Puwl: distinguishing], and Lud [Iran], who draw the bow, to Tubal [Southeastern Coastland China] and Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], to the coastlands [Gomer and Continental SE Asia] far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’
In 2 Kings 15:19 ESV, we learn:
Pulthe king of Assyria came against the land, and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that he might help him to confirm his hold on the royal power.
1 Chronicles 5:26
English Standard Version
‘Sothe God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser[745-727 BCE] king of Assyria, and he took them into exile*, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day [at time of writing].’
Pul is not Phut, but rather a king of Assyria; either Tiglath-pileser III himself, or a successor. Isaiah could well be referring to a future ruler. The most obvious explanation is the spirit or mind of Tiglath-pileser III was moved to take Israel captive. In Hebrew, Pul means: ‘distinctive, discerner’ or ‘darkling.’ From the verb palal, ‘to distinguish’ or ‘discern.’
Related names via the verb are amazingly, Amraphel the alternate name we discovered for Hammurabi – former ally and turned enemy of Chedorlaomer of Elam – and also the Nephilim, which we will discuss in the chapter following Nimrod – refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The name Pul is assigned to one human male and one country:
Pul the man is the same as Tiglath-pileser III, king of Assyria.
Pul the country is mentioned by the prophet Isaiah… Since the other lands that Isaiah lists are all well known, commentators nowadays believe that this otherwise unmentioned Pul is the same as the better known Put. This obviously remains conjecture.
It’s been a long surviving mystery where the name Pul might have come from. In Context of Scripture (2002), William W. Hallo submits: “Today we know that Tiglath-pileser III was Pul, though there is still some discussion among Assyriologists concerning the etymology and use of the name Pul”. Barry J. Beitzel writes in Biblica – The Bible Atlas (2007): “For centuries it was assumed that Pul and Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria were separate kings, as implied by the account in 2 Kings. It is now known that “Pul”is a diminutive form ofTiglath-pil…eser,presumably from the middle portion of the name from where it may have been associated in folk etymology. Pul or Pulu is a well-known Assyrian name, meaning “limestone” (or block of limestone)”.
‘There aren’t many ways to write Pul in Hebrew, but it appears that his name was really Pulu… also associated to the words for Wonderful, Judge and Gloom. NOBSE Study Bible Name List appears to go with the old tradition and reads Strong.’
In Ezekiel 27:23 ESV, we see Assyria linked in trade with Tyre (Aram), other Western European nations and the Medes (Madai-Central Asia):
‘Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you.’
Abarim Publications:
‘The name Chilmad occurs only once in the Bible, namely in Ezekiel 27:23, where it is listed among the many nations that traded with Tyre. Unlike most of the other names of this list, it’s not clear where Chilmad might have been located. Some scholars… have proposed that Chilmad isn’t really a name but simply means “all Media”… Since it’s not clear where Chilmad might have been it’s also not clear from which language this name comes, let alone what it might have meant. It’s not even certain that Chilmad is really a name, or was ever intended as one. Ancient Hebrew scribes often transliterated foreign names into barely recognizable forms, often to make a point or pun.
… we surmise that our “name” may have originated as a compressed version of, “all measure” or “all sorts”, in the vein of the similar phrase, “all wealth”, (Ezekiel 27:12 and 27:18), and the phrases, “all spices”, and, “all stones” (both 27:22). The first part of our “name” looks like the noun (kol), meaning all or the whole… And the second part of our name looks like it has to do with the name for Media, namely from the verb (madad), to measure… It’s unclear what the name Chilmad means, but among a Hebrew audience there might have been a creative few who heard Of All Sorts or In Every Measure or even All Disease.’
In Psalm 83:4-8 ESV, we read of a past alliance or at least a list of the principle adversaries against Jacob’s sons, including Asshur’s powerful military involvement or presence. We will return to this passage when we have studied all the identities listed. All the identities apart from Assyria, are usually identified as being in the Middle East or the Islamic world, which is not correct.
4 ‘They say, “Come, let us wipe them out as a nation; let the name of Israel be remembered no more!” 5 For they conspire with one accord; against you they make a covenant – 6 the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab* and the Hagrites, 7 Gebal and Ammon* and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; 8 Asshur also has joined them; they are the strong arm [for] the children of Lot*…’
Isaiah 31:5-9
English Standard Version
5 ‘Like birds hovering, so the Lord of hosts will protect Jerusalem; he will protect and deliver it; he will spare and rescue it.” 6 Turn to him from whom people have deeply revolted, O children of Israel. 7 For in that day everyone shall cast away his idols of silver and his idols of gold, which your hands have sinfully made for you. 8 “And the Assyrian shall fall by a sword, not of man; and a sword, not of man, shall devour him; and he shall flee from the sword, and his young men shall be put to forced labor. 9 His rock shall pass away in terror, and his officers desert the standard in panic,” declares the Lord, whose fire is in Zion, and whose furnace is in Jerusalem.’
This event occurred in part, when Sennacherib’s army was decimated prior to their planned attack circa 701 BCE on Jerusalem, the capital of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with Simeon and Levi. It is principally revealing a future event, as the young men of Asshur were not taken as slaves in Sennacherib’s defeat.
Isaiah 30:31
English Standard Version
‘The Assyrians will be terror-stricken at the voice of the Lord, when he strikes with his rod.’
The Assyrians are used to being the Rod of the Creator’s anger, not at the end of it.
Isaiah 10:4-8, 11-16, 24-27
New Century Version
4 ‘… God Will Punish Assyria. 5 God says, “How terrible it will be for the king of Assyria. I use him like a rod to show my anger; in anger I use Assyria like a club [rod]. 6 I send [Assyria] to fight against a nation that is separated from God. I am angry with those people, so I command Assyria to fight against them, to take their wealth from them, to trample them down like dirt in the streets.
7 But Assyria’s king doesn’t understand that I am using him; he doesn’t know he is a tool for me. He only wants to destroy other people and to defeat many nations. 8 The king of Assyria says to himself, ‘All of my commanders are like kings… 11 As I defeated Samaria and her idols, I will also defeat Jerusalem and her idols’.”
12 When the Lord finishes doing what he planned to Mount Zion and Jerusalem, he will punish Assyria. The king of Assyria is very proud, and his pride has made him do these evil things, so God will punish him. 13 The king of Assyria says this: “By my own power I have done these things; by my wisdom I have defeated many nations. I have taken their wealth, and, like a mighty one’ – refer Chapter XXI TheIncredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod – ‘I have taken their people…
Not one raised a hand or opened its mouth to stop me.” 15 An ax is not better than the person who swings it. A saw is not better than the one who uses it. A stick cannot control the person who picks it up. A club cannot pick up the person! 16 So the Lord God All-Powerful will send a terrible disease upon Assyria’s soldiers. The strength of Assyria will be burned up like a fire burning until everything is gone.
24 This is what the Lord God All-Powerful says: “My people living in Jerusalem, don’t be afraid of the Assyrians, who beat you with a rod and raise a stick against you, as Egypt did. 25 After a short time my anger against you will stop, and then I will turn my anger to destroying them.” 26 Then the Lord All-Powerful will beat the Assyrians with a whip as he defeated Midian at the rock of Oreb. He will raise his stick over the waters as he did in Egypt. 27 Then the troubles that Assyria puts on you will be removed, and the load they make you carry will be taken away…’
Matthew 12:41
English Standard Version
‘The men of Nineveh [capital of Assyria, equating to Moscow today] will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah…’
The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints – emphasis mine:
‘In 721 B.C. Assyria swept out of the north, captured the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and took the ten tribes into captivity. From there they became lost to history. Assyria, named from the god Ashur (highest in the pantheon of Assyrian gods), was located in the Mesopotamian plain. It was bordered on the west by the Syrian desert [of the Aramaeans], on the south by Babylonia [capital of the Chaldeans], and on the north and east by the Persian [Elam] and Urarthian hills [of Lud]. This area today is primarily the nation of Iraq.
“[The Assyrians (modern Russia)] took their common language and their arts from Sumeria [Joktan (modern Eastern Europe)], but modified them later into an almost undistinguishable similarity to the language and arts of Babylonia [Peleg (modern Western Europe)]. Their circumstances, however, forbade them to indulge in the effeminate ease of Babylon; from beginning to end they were a race of warriors, mighty in muscle and courage, abounding in proud hair and beard, standing straight, stern and solid on their monuments, and bestriding with tremendous feet the east-Mediterranean world. Their history is one of kings and slaves, wars and conquests, bloody victories and sudden defeat.” (Will Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, The Story of Civilization, 1:266.)
“Assyria’s ascent as a formidable power in the Near East was due in large measure to strong kings who increased her borders and subjected other nations as tributaries. Assyria first became an independent nation between 1813 and 1781 B.C. under Shamshi-Adad. Under [their] kings Assyria reached its greatest apex of power, controlling the area that included not only Assyria but also Babylonia, Armenia, Media, Judea, Syria, Phoenicia, Sumeria, Elam, and Egypt. This empire “was without doubt the most extensive administrative organization yet seen in the Mediterranean or Near Eastern world; only Hammurabi and Thutmose III had approached it, and Persia alone would equal it before the coming of Alexander” (Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, 1:270).
‘The most vital part of the Assyrian government was its army. Warfare was a science to the leaders of Assyria… cavalry [was] introduced by Ashurnasirpal to aid the infantry and chariots, [as were] sappers, armor made from iron, siege machines, and battering rams [which] were all developed or perfected by the Assyrians. Strategy and tactics were also well understood by the Assyrian officers. But it was not just Assyrian effectiveness in warfare that struck terror to the hearts of the Near Eastern world. They were savage and brutal as well.
“A captured city was usually plundered and burnt to the ground, and its site was deliberately denuded by killing its trees. The loyalty of the troops was secured bydividing a large part of the spoils among them; their bravery was ensured by the general rule of the Near East that all captives in war might be enslaved or slain. Soldiers were rewarded for every severed head they brought in from the field, so that the aftermath of a victory generally witnessed the wholesale decapitation of fallen foes.
Most often the prisoners, who would have consumed much food in a long campaign, and would have constituted a danger and nuisance in the rear, were dispatched after the battle; they knelt with their backs to their captors, who beat their heads in with clubs, or cut them off with cutlasses. Scribes stood by to count the number of prisoners taken and killed by each soldier, and apportioned the booty accordingly; the king, if time permitted, presided at the slaughter. The nobles among the defeated were given more special treatment: their ears, noses, hands and feet were sliced off, or they were thrown from high towers, or they and their children were beheaded, or flayed alive, or roasted over a slow fire…
In all departments of Assyrian life we meet with a patriarchal sternness natural to a people that lived by conquest, and in every sense on the border of barbarism. Just as the Romans took thousands of prisoners into lifelong slavery after their victories, and dragged others to the Circus Maximus to be torn to pieces by starving animals, so the Assyrians seemed to find satisfaction – or a necessary tutelage for their sons – in torturing captives, blinding children before the eyes of their parents, flaying men alive, roasting them in kilns, chaining them in cages for the amusement of the populace, and then sending the survivors off to execution. Ashurnasirpal [II] tells how “all the chiefs who had revolted I flayed, with their skins I covered the pillar, some in the midst I walled up, others on stakes I impaled, still others I arranged around the pillar on stakes… As for the chieftains and royal officers who had rebelled, I cut off their members.’
Ashurbanipal boasts that “I burned three thousand captives with fire, I left not a single one among them alive to serve as a hostage.” Another of his inscriptions reads: “These warriors who had sinned against Ashur and had plotted evil against me… from their hostile mouths have I torn their tongues, and I have compassed their destruction. As for the others who remained alive, I offered them as a funerary sacrifice… their lacerated members have I given unto the dogs, the swine, the wolves… By accomplishing these deeds I have rejoiced the heart of the great gods.”
Statue of Ashurbanipal in San Francisco
Another monarch instructs his artisans to engrave upon the bricks these claims on the admiration of posterity: “My war chariots crush men and beasts… The monuments which I erect are made of human corpses from which I have cut the head and limbs. I cut off the hands of all those whom I capture alive.” Reliefs at Nineveh show men being impaled or flayed, or having their tongues torn out; one shows a king gouging out the eyes of prisoners with a lance while he holds their heads conveniently in place with a cord passed through their lips.” (Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, 1:271, 275–76.)’
This is brutal behaviour in the extreme – even in warfare – and is indicative of one stand out peoples of West Eurasian origin… none other than the Russians. The analogy with the Romans is uncanny for its exactitude, as we shall discover. Only the Germans can bear any reasonable European comparison with the Russians for violence and as we shall learn, the comparison with Rome is also applicable.
‘Under the reign of Tiglath-pileser II[I], Assyria began consolidating its power in the western part of the empire. Around 738 B.C. he demanded and received tribute from Damascus, the capital of Syria, and Samaria, the capital of Israel (2 Kings 15:19-20). But four years later, the two… states rebelled, and once again Tiglath-pileser moved in. Damascus was conquered, as was part of the territory of the Northern Kingdom, and the people were carried off into captivity (2 Kings 15:29). It seems to have been Tiglath-pileser who originated large-scale deportations of conquered peoples. By deporting a conquered people en masse to a foreign land, Tiglath-pileser hoped to break their unity and destroy their national identity. The practice of large deportations continued under Shalmaneser [V] and later Sargon II, successors to Tiglath-pileser [III] who also played an important role in the history of the Northern Kingdom of Israel.’
Reproduced almost in its entirety below, is the entry for Assyria by Britannica. The casual reader may skim or skip ahead; though readers with a special interest in Asshur and Assyria, may find much value if they have not read the information previously – emphasis mine.
‘Strictly speaking, the use of the name “Assyria” for the period before the latter half of the 2nd millennium BCE is anachronistic; Assyria – as against the city-state of Ashur – did not become an independent state until about 1400 BCE. In contrast to southern Mesopotamia… written sources in Assyria do not begin until very late, shortly before Ur III [Neo-Sumerian Empire 2100 BCE]. In the early 2nd millennium the main cities of this region were Ashur (160 miles north-northwest of modern Baghdad), the capital (synonymous with the city god and national divinity)… [and] Nineveh, lying opposite modern Mosul… In Assyria, inscriptions were composed in Akkadian from the beginning. Under Ur III, Ashur was a provincial capital. The inhabitants of southern Mesopotamia called Assyria Shubir in Sumerian and Subartu in Akkadian; these names may point to a Subarean population that was related to the Hurrians.
The Assyrian dialect of Akkadian found in the beginning of the 2nd millennium differs strongly from the dialect of Babylonia. These two versions of the Akkadian language continue into the 1st millennium. In contrast to the kings of southern Mesopotamia, the rulers of Ashur styled themselves not king but partly issiakum, the Akkadian equivalent of the Sumerian word ensi, partly ruba’um, or “great one.” Unfortunately, the rulers cannot be synchronized precisely with the kings of southern Mesopotamia before Shamshi-Adad I.
Aside from the generally scarce reports on projected construction, there is at present no information about the city of Ashur and its surroundings. There exists, however, unexpectedly rewarding source material from the trading colonies of Ashur in Anatolia. The texts come mainly from Kanesh (modern Kultepe, near Kayseri, in Turkey) and from Hattusa (modern Bogazkoy, Turkey), the later Hittite capital.In the 19th century BCE three generations of Assyrian merchants engaged in a lively commodity trade (especially in textiles and metal) between the homeland and Anatolia, also taking part profitably in internal Anatolian trade. Clearly these forays by Assyrian merchants led to some transplanting of Mesopotamian culture into Anatolia. Thus the Anatolians adopted cuneiform writing and used the Assyrian language.
From about 1813 to about 1781 [rather 1910-1878 BCE] Assyria was ruled by Shamshi-Adad I… Shamshi-Adad’s father – an Amorite [Aramaean], to judge by the name – had ruled near Mari. The son, not being of Assyrian origin, ascended the throne of Assyria as a foreigner and on a detour, as it were, after having spent some time as an exile in Babylonia. He had his two sons rule as viceroys, in Ekallatum on the Tigris and in Mari, respectively, until the older of the two, Ishme-Dagan [I], succeeded his father on the throne. Through the archive of correspondence in the palace at Mari, scholars are particularly well informed about Shamshi-Adad’s reign and many aspects of his personality. Shamshi-Adad’s state had a common border for some time with… Babylonia… Soon after Shamshi-Adad’s death, Mari broke away, regaining its independence under an Amorite dynasty that had been living there for generations; in the end, Hammurabi [1894-1852 BCE] conquered and destroyed Mari. After Ishme-Dagan’s death [1857-1837 BCE], Assyrian history is lost sight of for more than 100 years.
Very little can be said about northern Assyria during the 2nd millennium BCE. Information on the old capital, Ashur, located in the south of the country, is somewhat more plentiful. The old lists of kings suggest that the same dynasty ruled continuously over Ashur from about 1600. All the names of the kings are given, but little else is known about Ashur before 1420.
Almost all the princes had Akkadian names, and it can be assumed that their sphere of influence was rather small. Although Assyria belonged to the kingdom of the Mitanni [Hurrians] for a long time, it seems that Ashur retained a certain autonomy. Located close to the boundary with Babylonia, it played that empire off against Mitanni whenever possible. Puzur-Ashur III concluded a border treaty with Babylonia about 1480, as did Ashur-bel-nisheshu about 1405. Ashur-nadin-ahhe II (c. 1392 – c. 1383) was even able to obtain support from Egypt, which sent him a consignment of gold.
Ashur-uballit I (c. 1354 – c. 1318) was at first subject to King Tushratta of Mitanni. After 1340, however, he attacked Tushratta, presumably together with Suppiluliumas I of the Hittites. Taking away from Mitanni parts of northeastern Mesopotamia, Ashur-uballiṭ now called himself “Great King” and socialized with the king of Egypt on equal terms, arousing the indignation of the king of Babylonia. Ashur-uballiṭ was the first to name Assyria the Land of Ashur, because the old name, Subartu, was often used in a derogatory sense in Babylonia. He ordered his short inscriptions to be partly written in the Babylonian dialect rather than the Assyrian, since this was considered refined.
Marrying his daughter to a Babylonian, he intervened there energetically when Kassite nobles murdered his grandson. Future generations came to consider [Ashur-uballit I] rightfully as the real founder of the Assyrian empire. His son Enlil-nirari (c. 1326 – c. 1318) also fought against Babylonia. Arik-den-ili (c. 1308 – c. 1297) turned westward, where he encountered Semitic tribes of the so-called Akhlamu group.
Still greater successes were achieved by Adad-nirari I (c. 1295 – c. 1264). Defeating the Kassite king Nazimaruttash, he forced him to retreat. After that he defeated the kings of Mitanni, first Shattuara I, then Wasashatta. This enabled him for a time to incorporate all Mesopotamia into his empire as a province, although in later struggles he lost large parts to the Hittites. Adad-nirari’s inscriptions were more elaborate than those of his predecessors and were written in the Babylonian dialect. In them he declares that he feels called to these wars by the gods, a statement that was to be repeated by other kings after him. Assuming the old title of great king, he called himself “King of All.” He enlarged the temple and the palace in Ashur and also developed the fortifications there, particularly at the banks of the Tigris River. He worked on large building projects in the provinces.
His son Shalmaneser I (Shulmanu-asharidu; c. 1263 – c. 1234) attacked Uruatru (later called Urartu)’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran – ‘in southern Armenia, which had allegedly broken away. Shattuara II of Hanigalbat, however, put him into a difficult situation, cutting his forces off from their water supplies. With courage born of despair, the Assyrians fought themselves free. They then set about reducing what was left of the Mitanni kingdom into an Assyrian province. The king claimed to have blinded 14,400 enemies in one eye – psychological warfare of a similar kind was used more and more as time went by. The Hittites tried in vain to save Hanigalbat. Together with the Babylonians they fought a commercial war against Ashur for many years. Like his father, Shalmaneser was a great builder. At the juncture of the Tigris and Great Zab rivers, he founded a strategically situated second capital, Kalakh (biblical Calah; modern Nimrud).
His son was Tukulti-Ninurta (c. 1233 – c. 1197), the Ninus of Greek legends. Gifted but extravagant, he made his nation a great power. He carried off thousands of Hittites from eastern Anatolia.He fought particularly hard against Babylonia, deporting Kashtiliash IV to Assyria. When the Babylonians rebelled again, he plundered the temples in Babylon, an act regarded as a sacrilege, even in Assyria. The relationship between the king and his capital deteriorated steadily. For this reason the king began to build a new city, Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta, on the other side of the Tigris River. Ultimately, even his sons rebelled against him and laid siege to him in his city; in the end he was murdered. His victorious wars against Babylonia were glorified in an epic poem, but his empire broke up soon after his death. Assyrian power declined for a time, while that of Babylonia rose. Assyria had suffered under the oppression of both the Hurrians and the Mitanni kingdom. Its struggle for liberation and the bitter wars that followed had much to do with its development into a military power.
In his capital of Ashur, the king depended on the citizen class and the priesthood, as well as on the landed nobility that furnished him with the war-chariot troops. The breeding of horses was carried on intensively; remnants of elaborate directions for their training are extant’ – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. ‘After a period of decline following Tukulti-Ninurta I, Assyria was consolidated and stabilized under Ashur-dan I [1178-1133 BCE] and Ashur-resh-ishi I (c. 1133 – c. 1116). Several times forced to fight against Babylonia, the latter was even able to defend himself against an attack by Nebuchadrezzar I. According to the inscriptions, most of his building efforts were in Nineveh, rather than in the old capital of Ashur. His son Tiglath-pileser I (Tukulti-apil-Esharra; (c. 1115 – c. 1077) raised the power of Assyria to new heights.
First he turned against a large army of the Mushki that had entered into southern Armenia from Anatolia, defeating them decisively. After this, he forced the small Hurrian states of southern Armenia to pay him tribute. Trained in mountain warfare themselves and helped by capable pioneers, the Assyrians were now able to advance far into the mountain regions’ – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. ‘Their main enemies were the Aramaeans… whose many small states often combined against the Assyrians’ – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
‘Tiglath-pileser I also went to Syria and even reached the Mediterranean, where he took a sea voyage. After 1100 these campaigns led to conflicts with Babylonia. Tiglath-pileser conquered northern Babylonia and plundered Babylon, without decisively defeating Marduk-nadin-ahhe. In his own country the king paid particular attention to agriculture and fruit growing, improved the administrative system, and developed more thorough methods of training scribes.
Three of his sons reigned after Tiglath-pileser, including Ashur-bel-kala (c. 1074 – c. 1057). Like his father, he fought in southern Armenia and against the Aramaeans with Babylonia as his ally. Disintegration of the empire could not be delayed, however. The grandson of Tiglath-pileser, Ashurnasirpal I (c. 1050 – c. 1032), was sickly and unable to do more than defend Assyria proper against his enemies. Fragments of three of his prayers to Ishtar are preserved; among them is a penitential prayer in which he wonders about the cause of so much adversity. Referring to his many good deeds but admitting his guilt at the same time, he asks for forgiveness and health. According to the king, part of his guilt lay in neglecting to teach his subjects the fear of god. After him, little is known for 100 years.
State and society during the time of Tiglath-pileser were not essentially different from those of the 13th century. Collections of laws, drafts, and edicts of the court exist that go back as far as the 14th century BCE. Presumably, most of these remained in effect. One tablet defining the marriage laws shows that the social position of women in Assyria was lower than in Babylonia or Israel or among the Hittites. A man was allowed to send away his wife at his own pleasure with or without divorce money. In the case of adultery, he was permitted to kill or maim her. Outside her house the woman was forced to observe many restrictions, such as the wearing of a veil. It is not clear whether these regulations carried the weight of law, but they seem to have represented a reaction against practices that were more favourable to women.
Two somewhat older marriage contracts, for example, granted equal rights to both partners, even in divorce. The women of the king’s harem were subject to severe punishment, including beating, maiming, and death, along with those who guarded and looked after them. The penal laws of the time were generally more severe in Assyria than in other countries… The death penalty was not uncommon. In less serious cases the penalty was forced labour after flogging. In certain cases there was trial by ordeal. One tablet treats the subject of landed property rights. Offences against the established boundary lines called for extremely severe punishment. A creditor was allowed to force his debtor to work for him, but he could not sell him.
The greater part of Assyrian literature was either taken over from Babylonia or written by the Assyrians in the Babylonian dialect, who modeled their works on Babylonian originals. The Assyrian dialect was used in legal documents, court and temple rituals, and collections of recipes – as, for example, in directions for making perfumes. A new art form was the picture tale: a continuing series of pictures carved on square stelae of stone. The pictures, showing war or hunting scenes, begin at the top of the stela and run down around it, with inscriptions under the pictures explaining them. These and the finely cut seals show that the fine arts of Assyria were beginning to surpass those of Babylonia. Architecture and other forms of the monumental arts also began a further development, such as the double temple with its two towers (ziggurat). Colourful enameled tiles were used to decorate the facades.
The most important factor in the history of Mesopotamia in the 10th century was the continuing threat from the Aramaean[s]. Again and again, the kings of both Babylonia and Assyria were forced to repel their invasions. Even though the Aramaeans were not able to gain a foothold in the main cities, there are evidences of them in many rural areas. Ashur-dan II (934-912) succeeded in suppressing the Aramaeans and the mountain people, in this way stabilizing the Assyrian boundaries. He reintroduced the use of the Assyrian dialect in his written records.
Adad-nirari II (c. 911-891) left detailed accounts of his wars and his efforts to improve agriculture. He led six campaigns against Aramaean intruders from northern Arabia. In two campaigns against Babylonia he forced Shamash-mudammiq (c. 930–904) to surrender extensive territories. Shamash-mudammiq was murdered, and a treaty with his successor, Nabu-shum-ukin (c. 904–888), secured peace for many years. Tukulti-Ninurta II (c. 890–884), the son of Adad-nirari II,preferred Nineveh to Ashur. He fought campaigns in southern Armenia. He was portrayed on stelae in blue and yellow enamel in the late Hittite style, showing him under a winged sun – a theme adopted from Egyptian art.
His son Ashurnasirpal II (883-859) continued the policy of conquest and expansion. He left a detailed account of his campaigns, which wereimpressive in their cruelty. Defeated enemies were impaled, flayed, or beheaded in great numbers. Mass deportations, however, were found to serve the interests of the growing empire better than terror. Through the systematic exchange of native populations, conquered regions were denationalized. The result was a submissive, mixed population in which the Aramaean element became the majority. This provided the labour force for the various public works in the metropolitan centres of the Assyrian empire. Ashurnasirpal II rebuilt Kalakh, founded by Shalmaneser I, and made it his capital. Ashur remained the centre of the worship of the god Ashur – in whose name all the wars of conquest were fought. A third capital was Nineveh.’
Remember the Russians have moved their capitals from Novgorod, Kiev, St Petersburg (Leningrad) and Moscow.
‘Ashurnasirpal II was the first to use cavalry units to any large extent in addition to infantry and war-chariot troops. He also was the first to employ heavy, mobile batteringrams and wall breakers in his sieges. The campaigns of Ashurnasirpal II led him mainly to southern Armenia and Mesopotamia.
After a series of heavy wars, he incorporated Mesopotamia as far as the Euphrates River. A campaign to Syria encountered little resistance. There was no great war against Babylonia. Ashurnasirpal, like other Assyrian kings, may have been moved by religion not to destroy Babylonia, which had almost the same gods as Assyria. Both empires must have profited from mutual trade and cultural exchange. The Babylonians, under the energetic Nabu-apla-iddina (c. 887-855) attacked the Aramaeans in southern Mesopotamia… Ashurnasirpal, so brutal in his wars, was able to inspire architects, structural engineers, and artists and sculptors to heights never before achieved. He built and enlarged temples and palaces in several cities. His most impressive monument was his own palace in Kalakh, covering a space of 269,000 square feet (25,000 square metres). Hundreds of large limestone slabs were used in murals in the staterooms and living quarters.’
Recall Pul or Pulu, is a well-known Assyrian name, which includes the meaning ‘limestone’ or ‘block of limestone.’
‘Most of the scenes were done in relief, but painted murals also have been found. Most of them depict mythological themes and symbolic fertility rites, with the king participating. Brutal war pictures were aimed to discourage enemies. The chief god of Kalakh was Ninurta, a god of war and the hunt. The tower of the temple dedicated to Ninurta also served as an astronomical observaotory. Kalakh soon became the cultural centre of the empire. Ashurnasirpal claimed to have entertained 69,574 guests at the opening ceremonies of his palace.
The son and successor of Ashurnasirpal was Shalmaneser III (858-824).His father’s equal in both brutality and energy, he was less realistic in his undertakings. His inscriptions, in a peculiar blend of Assyrian and Babylonian, record his considerable achievements but are not always able to conceal his failures. His campaigns were directed mostly against Syria. While he was able to conquer northern Syria and make it a province, in the south he could only weaken the strong state of Damascus [of the Aramaeans] and was unable, even after several wars, to eliminate it. In 841 he laid unsuccessful siege to Damascus.
Also in 841 King Jehu of Israel was forced to pay tribute. In his invasion of Cilicia, Shalmaneser had only partial success. The same was true of the kingdom of Urartu in Armenia, from which, however, the troops returned with immense quantities of lumber and building stone. The king and, in later years, the general Dayyan-Ashur went several times to western Iran, where they found such states as Mannai in northwestern Iran and, farther away in the southeast, the Persians. They also encountered the Medes during these wars. Horse tribute was collected’ – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
‘In Babylonia, Marduk-zakir-shumi I ascended the throne about the year 855. His brother Marduk-bel-usati rebelled against him, and in 851 the king was forced to ask Shalmaneser for help. Shalmaneser was only too happy to oblige; when the usurper had been finally eliminated (850), Shalmaneser went to southern Babylonia, which at that time was almost completely dominated by Aramaeans. There he encountered, among others, the Chaldeans, mentioned for the first time in 878 BCE, who were to play a leading role in the history of later times; Shalmaneser made them tributaries.
During his long reign he built temples, palaces, and fortifications in Assyria as well as in the other capitals of his provinces. His artists created many statues and stelae. Among the best known is the Black Obelisk, which includes a picture of Jehu of Israel paying tribute. In the last four years of the reign of Shalmaneser, the crown prince Ashur-da’in-apla led a rebellion. The old king appointed his younger son Shamshi-Adad as the new crown prince. Forced to flee to Babylonia, Shamshi-Adad V (823-811) finally managed to regain the kingship with the help of Marduk-zakir-shumi I under humiliating conditions. As king he campaigned with varying success in southern Armenia and Azerbaijan, later turning against Babylonia. He won several battles against the Babylonian kings Marduk-balassu-iqbi and Baba-aha-iddina (about 818-12) and pushed through to Chaldea. Babylonia remained independent, however.
Shamshi-Adad V died while Adad-nirari III (810-783) was still a minor. His Babylonian mother, Sammu-ramat, took over the regency, governing with great energy until 806. The Greeks, who called her Semiramis, credited her with legendary accomplishments, but historically little is known about her. Adad-nirari later led several campaigns against the Medes and also against Syria and Palestine. In 804 he reached Gaza, but Damascus [later the capital of the Aramaeans] proved invincible. He also fought in Babylonia, helping to restore order in the north. Shalmaneser IV (c. 783-773) fought against Urartu [of Lud], then at the height of its power under King Argishti (c. 780-755). He successfully defended eastern Mesopotamia against attacks from Armenia. On the other hand, he lost most of Syria after a campaign against Damascus in 773. The reign of Ashur-dan III (772-755) was shadowed by rebellions and by epidemics of plague. Of Ashur-nirari V (754-746) little is known.
In Assyria the feudal structure of society remained largely unchanged. Many of the conquered lands were combined to form large provinces. The governors of these provinces sometimes acquired considerable independence, particularly under the weaker monarchs after Adad-nirari III. Some of them even composed their own inscriptions. The influx of displaced peoples into the cities of Assyria created large metropolitan centres. The spoils of war, together with an expanding trade, favoured the development of a well-to-do commercial class. The dense population of the cities gave rise to social tensions that only the strong kings were able to contain.
A number of the former capitals of the conquered lands remained important as capitals of provinces. There was much new building. A standing occupational force was needed in the provinces, and these troops grew steadily in proportion to the total military forces. There are no records on the training of officers or on military logistics. The civil service also expanded, the largest administrative body being the royal court, with thousands of functionaries and craftsmen in the several residential cities.
The cultural decline about the year 1000 was overcome during the reigns of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III. The arts in particular experienced a tremendous resurgence. Literary works continued to be written in Assyrian and were seldom of great importance. The literature that had been taken over from Babylonia was further developed with new writings, although one can rarely distinguish between works written in Assyria and works written in Babylonia. In religion, the official cults of Ashur and Ninurta continued, while the religion of the common people went its separate way.
For no other period of Assyrian history is there an abundance of sources comparable to those available for the interval from roughly 745 to 640. Aside from the large number of royal inscriptions, about 2,400 letters, most of them more or less fragmentary, have been published. Usually the senders and recipients of these letters are the king and high government officials. Among them are reports from royal agents about foreign affairs and letters about cultic matters. Treaties, oracles, queries to the sun god about political matters, and prayers of or for kings contain a great deal of additional information. Last but certainly not least are paintings and wall reliefs, which are often very informative.
The decline of Assyrian power after 780 was notable; Syria and considerable lands in the north were lost. A military coup deposed King Ashur-nirari V and raised a general to the throne. Under the name of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727), he brought the empire to itsgreatest expanse.He reduced the size of the provinces in order to break the partial independence of the governors. He also invalidated the tax privileges of cities such as Ashur and Harran in order to distribute the tax load more evenly over the entire realm. Military equipment was improved substantially. In 746 he went to Babylonia to aid Nabu-nasir (747-734) in his fight against Aramaean tribes. Tiglath-pileser defeated the Aramaeans and then made visits to the large cities of Babylonia. There he tried to secure the support of the priesthood by patronizing their building projects. Babylonia retained its independence.
His next undertaking was to check Urartu [modern day Persians]. His campaigns in Azerbaijan were designed to drive a wedge between Urartu [Lud] and the Medes [Madai]. In 743 he went to Syria, defeating there an army of Urartu. The Syrian city of Arpad, which had formed an alliance with Urartu, did not surrender so easily. It took Tiglath-pileser three years of siege to conquer Arpad, whereupon he massacred the inhabitants and destroyed the city. In 738 a new coalition formed against Assyria under the leadership of Sam’al (modern Zincirli) in northern Syria. It was defeated, and all the princes from Damascus to eastern Anatolia were forced to pay tribute. Another campaign in 735, this time directed against Urartu itself, was only partly successful.
In 734 Tiglath-pileser invaded southern Syria and the Philistine territories in Palestine, going as far as the Egyptian border. Damascus and Israel tried to organize resistance against him, seeking to bring Judah into their alliance. Ahaz of Judah, however, asked Tiglath-pileser for help. In 733 Tiglath-pileser devastated Israel and forced it to surrender large territories. In 732 he advanced upon Damascus, first devastating the gardens outside the city and then conquering the capital and killing the king, whom he replaced with a governor. The queen of southern Arabia, Samsil, was now obliged to pay tribute, being permitted in return to use the harbour of the city of Gaza, which was in Assyrian hands.
The death of King Nabonassar of Babylonia caused a chaotic situation to develop there, and the Aramaean Ukin-zer crowned himself king. In 731 Tiglath-pileser fought and beat him and his allies, but he did not capture Ukin-zer until 729. This time he did not appoint a new king for Babylonia but assumed the crown himself under the name Pulu (Pul in the Hebrew Bible). In his old age he abstained from further campaigning, devoting himself to the improvement of his capital, Kalakh. He rebuilt the palace of Shalmaneser III, filled it with treasures from his wars, and decorated the walls with bas-reliefs. The latter were almost all of warlike character, as if designed to intimidate the onlooker with their presentation of gruesome executions. These pictorial narratives on slabs, sometimes painted, have also been found in Syria, at the sites of several provincial capitals of ancient Assyria.
Tiglath-pileser was succeeded by his son Shalmaneser V (726-722), who continued the policy of his father. As king of Babylonia, he called himself Ululai. Almost nothing is known about his enterprises, since his successor destroyed all his inscriptions. The Hebrew Bible relates that he marched against Hoshea of Israel in 724 after Hoshea had rebelled. He was probably assassinated during the long siege of Samaria. His successor maintained that the god Ashur had withdrawn his support of Shalmaneser V for acts of disrespect.
It was probably a younger brother of Shalmaneser who ascended the throne of Assyria in 721. Assuming the old name of Sharru-kin (Sargon in the Bible), meaning “Legitimate King,” he assured himself of the support of the priesthood and the merchant class by restoring privileges they had lost, particularly the tax exemptions of the great temples. The change of sovereign in Assyria triggered another crisis in Babylonia.
An Aramaean prince from the south, Marduk-apal-iddina II (the biblical Merodach-Baladan), seized power in Babylon in 721 and was able to retain it until 710 with the help of Humbanigash I of Elam. A first attempt by Sargon to recover Babylonia miscarried when Elam defeated him in 721. During the same year the protracted siege of Samaria was brought to a close. The Samarian upper class was deported, and Israel became an Assyrian province. Samaria was repopulated with Syrians [Aramaeans] and Babylonians [Chaldeans]. Judah remained independent by paying tribute. In 720 Sargon squelched a rebellion in Syria that had been supported by Egypt. Then he defeated both Hanunu of Gaza and an Egyptian army near the Egyptian border. In 717 and 716 he campaigned in northern Syria, making the hitherto independent state of Carchemish one of his provinces. He also went to Cilicia in an effort to prevent further encroachments of the Phrygians under King Midas (Assyrian: Mita).
In order to protect his ally, the state of Mannai, in Azerbaijan, Sargon embarked on a campaign in Iran in 719 and incorporated parts of Media as provinces of his empire; however, in 716 another war became necessary. At the same time, he was busy preparing a major attack against Urartu. Under the leadership of the crown prince Sennacherib, armies of agents infiltrated Urartu, which was also threatened from the north by the Cimmerians.
Many of their messages and reports have been preserved. The longest inscription ever composed by the Assyrians about a year’s enterprise (430 very long lines) is dedicated to this Urartu campaign of 714. Phrased in the style of a first report to the god Ashur, it is interspersed with stirring descriptions of natural scenery. The strong points of Urartu must have been well fortified. Sargon tried to avoid them by going through the province of Mannai and attacking the Median principalities on the eastern side of Lake Urmia. In the meantime, hoping to surprise the Assyrian troops, Rusa of Urartu had closed the narrow pass lying between Lake Urmia and Sahand Mount. Sargon, anticipating this, led a small band of cavalry in a surprise charge that developed into a great victory for the Assyrians’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. ‘Rusa fled and died. The Assyrians pushed forward, destroying all the cities, fortifications, and even irrigation works of Urartu. They did not conquer Tushpa (the capital) but took possession of the mountain city of Musasir. The spoils were immense. The following years saw only small campaigns in Media and eastern Anatolia and against Ashdod, in Palestine. King Midas of Phrygia and some cities on Cyprus were quite ready to pay tribute.
Sargon was now free to settle accounts with Marduk-apal-iddina of Babylonia. Abandoned by his ally Shutruk-Nahhunte II of Elam, Marduk-apal-iddina found it best to flee, first to his native land on the Persian Gulf and later to Elam. Because the Aramaean prince had made himself very unpopular with his subjects, Sargon was hailed as the liberator of Babylonia. He complied with the wishes of the priesthood and at the same time put down the Aramaean nobility. He was satisfied with the modest title of governor of Babylonia.
At first Sargon resided in Kalakh, but he then decided to found an entirelynew capital north of Nineveh.He called the cityDur-Sharrukin – “Sargons-burg” (modern Khorsabad, Iraq). Reminiscent of a certain Peter the Great, who moved his capital from Moscow to St Petersburg in 1713!
He erected his palace on a high terrace in the northeastern part of the city. The temples of the main gods, smaller in size, were built within the palatial rectangle, which was surrounded by a special wall. This arrangement enabled Sargon to supervise the priests better than had been possible in the old, large temple complexes. One consequence of this design was that the figure of the king pushed the gods somewhat into the background, thereby gaining in importance. Desiring that his palace match the vastness of his empire, Sargon planned it in monumental dimensions. Stone reliefs of two winged bulls with human heads flanked the entrance; they were much larger than anything comparable built before.
The walls were decorated with long rows of bas-reliefs showing scenes of war and festive processions. A comparison with a well-executed stela of the Babylonian king Marduk-apal-iddina shows that the fine arts of Assyria had far surpassed those of Babylonia. Sargon never completed his capital, though from 713 to 705 BCE tens of thousands of labourers and hundreds of artisans worked on the great city. Yet, with the exception of some magnificent buildings for public officials, only a few durable edifices were completed in the residential section. In 705, in a campaign in northwestern Iran, Sargon was ambushed and killed. His corpse remained unburied, to be devoured by birds of prey.
Sargon’s son Sennacherib, who had quarreled with his father, was inclined to believe with the priests that his death was a punishment from the neglected gods of the ancient capitals. Sennacherib (Assyrian: Sin-ahhe-eriba; 704-681) was well prepared for his position as sovereign. With him Assyria acquired an exceptionally clever and gifted, though often extravagant, ruler. His father, interestingly enough, is not mentioned in any of his many inscriptions. He left the new city of Dur-Sharrukin at once and resided in Ashur for a few years, until in 701 he made Nineveh his capital.
Sennacherib had considerable difficulties with Babylonia. In 703 Marduk-apal-iddina again crowned himself king with the aid of Elam, proceeding at once to ally himself with other enemies of Assyria. After nine months he was forced to withdraw when Sennacherib defeated a coalition army consisting of Babylonians, Aramaeans, and Elamites. The new puppet king of Babylonia was Bel-ibni (702–700), who had been raised in Assyria.
In 702 Sennacherib launched a raid into western Iran. In 701 there followed his most famous campaign, against Syria and Palestine, with the purpose of gaining control over the main road from Syria to Egypt in preparation for later campaigns against Egypt itself. When Sennacherib’s army approached, Sidon immediately expelled its ruler, Luli, who was hostile to Assyria. The other allies either surrendered or were defeated.An Egyptian army was defeated at Eltekeh in Judah. Sennacherib laid siege to Jersualem, and the king of Judah, Hezekiah, was called upon to surrender, but he did not comply.
An Assyrian officer tried to incite the people of Jerusalem against Hezekiah, but his efforts failed. In view of the difficulty of surrounding a mountain stronghold such as Jerusalem, and of the minor importance of this town for the main purpose of the campaign, Sennacherib cut short the attack and left Palestine with his army, which according to the Hebrew Bible (2 Kings 19:35) had been decimated by an epidemic. The number of Assyrian dead is reported to have risen to 185,000. Nevertheless, Hezekiah is reported to have paid tribute to Sennacherib on at least one occasion.
Bel-ibni of Babylonia seceded from the union with Assyria in 700. Sennacherib moved quickly, defeating Bel-ibni and replacing him with Sennacherib’s oldest son, Ashur-nadin-shumi. The next few years were relatively peaceful. Sennacherib used this time to prepare a decisive attack against Elam, which time and again had supported Babylonian rebellions. The overland route to Elam had been cut off and fortified by the Elamites. Sennacherib had ships built in Syria and at Nineveh. The ships from Syria were moved on rollers from the Euphrates to the Tigris. The fleet sailed downstream and was quite successful in the lagoons of the Persian Gulf and along the southern coastline of Elam. The Elamites launched a counteroffensive by land, occupying Babylonia and putting a man of their choice on the throne. Not until 693 were the Assyrians again able to fight their way through to the north. Finally, in 689, Sennacherib had his revenge. Babylon was conquered and completely destroyed, the temples plundered and leveled. The waters of the Arakhtu Canal were diverted over the ruins, and the inner city remained almost totallyuninhabited for eight years.
Even many Assyrians were indignant at this, believing that the Babylonian god Marduk must be grievously offended at the destruction of his temple and the carrying off of his image. Marduk was also an Assyrian deity, to whom many Assyrians turned in time [of] need. A political-theological propaganda campaign was launched to explain to the people that what had taken place was in accord with the wish of most of the gods.
A story was written in which Marduk, because of a transgression, was captured and brought before a tribunal. Only a part of the commentary to this botched piece of literature is extant. Even the great poem of the creation of the world, the Enuma relish, was altered: the god Marduk was replaced by the god Ashur. Sennacherib’s boundless energies brought no gain to his empire, however, and probably weakened it. The tenacity of this king can be seen in his building projects; for example, when Nineveh needed water for irrigation, Sennacherib had his engineers divert the waters of a tributary of the Great Zab River. The canal had to cross a valley at Jerwan. An aqueduct was constructed, consisting of about two million blocks of limestone, with five huge, pointed archways over the brook in the valley. The bed of the canal on the aqueduct was sealed with cement containing magnesium. Parts of this aqueduct are still standing today. Sennacherib wrote of these and other technological accomplishments in minute detail, with illustrations.
Sennacherib built a huge palace in Nineveh, adorned with reliefs, some of them depicting the transport of colossal bull statues by water and by land. Many of the rooms were decorated with pictorial narratives in bas-relief telling of war and of building activities. Considerable advances can be noted in artistic execution, particularly in the portrayal of landscapes and animals. Outstanding are the depictions of the battles in the lagoons, the life in the military camps, and the deportations. In 681 BCE there was a rebellion. Sennacherib was assassinated by one or two of his sons in the temple of the god Ninurta at Kalakh. This god, along with the god Marduk, had been badly treated by Sennacherib, and the event was widely regarded as punishment of divine origin.
Ignoring the claims of his older brothers, an imperial council appointed Esarhaddon (Ashur-aha-iddina; 680-669) as Sennacherib’s successor. The choice is all the more difficult to explain in that Esarhaddon, unlike his father, was friendly toward the Babylonians. It can be assumed that his energetic and designing mother, Zakutu (Naqia), who came from Syria or Judah, used all her influence on his behalf to override the national party of Assyria. The theory that he was a partner in plotting the murder of his father is rather improbable; at any rate, he was able to procure the loyalty of his father’s army. His brothers had to flee to Urartu. In his inscriptions, Esarhaddon always mentions both his father and grandfather.
Defining the destruction of Babylon explicitly as punishment by the god Marduk, the new king soon ordered the reconstruction of the city. He referred to himself only as governor of Babylonia and through his policies obtained the support of the cities of Babylonia. At the beginning of his reign the Aramaean tribes were still allied with Elam against him, but Urtaku of Elam (675-664) signed a peace treaty and freed him for campaigning elsewhere. In 679 he stationed a garrison at the Egyptian border, because Egypt, under the Ethiopian king Taharqa, was planning to intervene in Syria.
He put down with great severity a rebellion of the combined forces of Sidon, Tyre, and other Syrian cities. The time was ripe to attack Egypt, which was suffering under the rule of the Ethiopians [descended from Cush] and was by no means a united country. Esarhaddon’s first attempt in 674-673 miscarried. In 671 BCE, however, his forces took Memphis, the Egyptian capital. Assyrian consultants were assigned to assist the princes of the 22 provinces, their main duty being the collection of tribute.
Occasional threats came from the mountainous border regions of eastern Anatolia and Iran. Pushed forward by the Scythians, the Cimmerians in northern Iran and Transcaucasia tried to gain a foothold in Syria and western Iran. Esarhaddon allied himself with the Scythian king Partatua by giving him one of his daughters in marriage. In so doing he checked the movement of the Cimmerians.Nevertheless, the apprehensions of Esarhaddon can be seen in hismany offerings, supplications, and requests to the sun god’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.‘These were concerned less with his own enterprises than with the plans of enemies and vassals and the reliability of civil servants. The priestesses of Ishtar had to reassure Esarhaddon constantly by calling out to him, “Do not be afraid.” Previous kings, as far as is known, had never needed this kind of encouragement.
At home Esarhaddon was faced with serious difficulties from factions in the court. His oldest son had died early. The national party suspected his second son, Shamash-shum-ukin, of being too friendly with the Babylonians; he may also have been considered unequal to the task of kingship. His third son, Ashurbanipal, was given the succession in 672, Shamash-shum-ukin remaining crown prince of Babylonia. This arrangement caused much dissension, and some farsighted civil servants warned of disastrous effects. Nevertheless, the Assyrian nobles, priests, and city leaders were sworn to just such an adjustment of the royal line; even the vassal princes had to take very detailed oaths of allegiance to Ashurbanipal, with many curses against perjurers.
Another matter of deep concern for Esarhaddon was his failing health. He regarded eclipses of the moon as particularly alarming omens, and, in order to prevent a fatal illness from striking him at these times, he had substitute kings chosen who ruled during the three eclipses that occurred during his 12-year reign. The replacement kings died or were put to death after their brief term of office. During his off-terms Esarhaddon called himself “Mister Peasant.” This practice implied that the gods could not distinguish between the real king and a false one – quite contrary to the usual assumptions of the religion. Esarhaddon enlarged and improved the temples in both Assyria and Babylonia. He also constructed a palace in Kalakh, using many of the picture slabs of Tiglath-pileser III. The works that remain are not on the level of those of either his predecessors or of Ashurbanipal. He died while on an expedition to put down a revolt in Egypt.
Although the death of his father occurred far from home, Ashurbanipal assumed the kingship as planned. He may have owed his fortunes to the intercession of his grandmother Zakutu, who had recognized his superior capacities. He tells of his diversified education by the priests and his training in armour-making as well as in other military arts. He may have been the only king in Assyria with a scholarly background. As crown prince he also had studied the administration of the vast empire. The record notes that the gods granted him a record harvest during the first year of his reign. There were also good crops in subsequent years. During these first years he also was successful in foreign policy, and his relationship with his brother in Babylonia was good.
In 668 he put down a rebellion in Egypt and drove out King Taharqa, but in 664 the nephew of Taharqa, Tanutamon, gathered forces for a new rebellion. Ashurbanipal went to Egypt, pursuing the Ethiopian prince far into the south. His decisive victory moved Tyre and other parts of the empire to resume regular payments of tribute. Ashurbanipal installed Psamtik (Greek: Psammetichos) as prince over the Egyptian region of Sais. In 656 Psamtik dislodged the Assyrian garrisons with the aid of Carian and Ionian mercenaries, making Egypt again independent. Ashurbanipal did not attempt to reconquer it. A former ally of Assyria, Gyges of Lydia, had aided Psamtik in his rebellion. In return, Assyria did not help Gyges when he was attacked by the Cimmerians. Gyges lost his throne and his life. His son Ardys decided that the payment of tribute to Assyria was a lesser evil than conquest by the Cimmerians.
Graver difficulties loomed in southern Babylonia, which was attacked by Elam in 664. Another attack came in 653, whereupon Ashurbanipal sent a large army that decisively defeated the Elamites. Their king was killed, and some of the Elamite states were encouraged to secede.Elam was no longer strong enough to assume an active part on the international scene. This victory had serious consequences for Babylonia. Shamash-shum-ukin had grown weary of being patronized by his domineering brother. He formed a secret alliance in 656 with the Iranians, Elamites, Aramaeans, Arabs, and Egyptians, directed against Ashurbanipal. The withdrawal of defeated Elam from this alliance was probably the reason for a premature attack by Shamash-shum-ukin at the end of the year 652, without waiting for the promised assistance from Egypt.
Ashurbanipal, taken by surprise, soon pulled his troops together. The Babylonian army was defeated, and Shamash-shum-ukin was surrounded in his fortified city of Babylon. His allies were not able to hold their own against the Assyrians. Reinforcements of Arabian camel troops also were defeated. The city of Babylon was under siege for three years. It fell in 648 amid scenes of horrible carnage, Shamash-shum-ukin dying in his burning palace. After 648 the Assyrians made a few punitive attacks on the Arabs, breaking the forward thrust of the Arab tribes for a long time to come.
The main objective of the Assyrians, however, was a final settlement of their relations with Elam. The refusal of Elam in 647 to extradite an Aramaean prince was used as pretext for a new attack that drove deep into its territory. The assault on the solidly fortified capital of Susa followed, probably in 646. The Assyrians destroyed the city, including its temples and palaces. Vast spoils were taken. As usual, the upper classes of the land were exiled to Assyria and other parts of the empire, and Elam became an Assyrian province. Assyria had now extended its domain to southwestern Iran. Cyrus I of Persia sent tribute and hostages to Nineveh, hoping perhaps to secure protection for his borders with Media. Little is known about the last years of Ashurbanipal’s reign.
Ashurbanipal left more inscriptions than any of his predecessors. His campaigns were not always recorded in chronological order but clustered in groups according to their purpose. The accounts were highly subjective. One of his most remarkable accomplishments was the founding of the great palace library in Nineveh (modern Kuyunjik), which is today one of the most important sources for the study of ancient Mesopotamia. The king himself supervised its construction. Important works were kept in more than one copy, some intended for the king’s personal use. The work of arranging and cataloging drew upon the experience of centuries in the management of collections in huge temple archives such as the one in Ashur. In his inscriptions Ashurbanipal tells of becoming an enthusiastic hunter of big game, acquiring a taste for it during a fight with marauding lions. In his palace at Nineveh the long rows of hunting scenes show what a masterful artist can accomplish in bas-relief; with these reliefs Assyrian art reached its peak. In the series depicting his wars, particularly the wars fought in Elam, the scenes are overloaded with human figures. Those portraying the battles with the Arabian camel troops are magnificent in execution.
One reason for the durability of the Assyrian empire was the practice of deporting large numbers of people from conquered areas and resettling others in their place. This kept many of the conquered nationalities from regaining their power. Equally important was the installation in conquered areas of a highly developed civil service under the leadership of trained officers. The highest ranking civil servant carried the title of tartan, a Hurrian word. The tartans also represented the king during his absence. In descending rank were the palace overseer, the main cupbearer, the palace administrator, and the governor of Assyria. The generals often held high official positions, particularly in the provinces. The civil service numbered about 100,000, many of them former inhabitants of subjugated provinces. Prisoners became slaves but were later often freed.
No laws are known for the empire, although documents point to the existence of rules and standards for justice. Those who broke contracts were subject to severe penalties, even in cases of minor importance: the sacrifice of a son or the eating of a pound of wool and drinking of a great deal of water afterward, which led to a painful death. The position of women was inferior, except for the queen and some priestesses.
As yet there are no detailed studies of the economic situation during this period. The landed nobility still played an important role, in conjunction with the merchants in the cities. The large increase in the supply of precious metals – received as tribute or taken as spoils – did not disrupt economic stability in many regions. Stimulated by the patronage of the kings and the great temples, the arts and crafts flourished during this period. The policy of resettling Aramaeans and other conquered peoples in Assyria brought many talented artists and artisans into Assyrian cities, where they introduced new styles and techniques. High-ranking provincial civil servants, who were often very powerful, saw to it that the provincial capitals also benefited from this economic and cultural growth.
Harran became the most important city in the western part of the empire; in the neighbouring settlement of Huzirina (modern Sultantepe, in northern Syria), the remains of an important library have been discovered. Very few Aramaic texts from this period have been found; the climate of Mesopotamia is not conducive to the preservation of the papyrus and parchment on which these texts were written. There is no evidence that a literary tradition existed in any of the other languages spoken within the borders of the Assyrian empire at this time, except in peripheral areas of Syria and Palestine.
Culturally and economically, Babylonia lagged behind Assyria in this period. The wars with Assyria – particularly the catastrophic defeats of 689 and 648 – together with many smaller tribal wars disrupted trade and agricultural production. The great Babylonian temples fared best during this period, since they continued to enjoy the patronage of the Assyrian monarchs.Only a few documents from the temples have been preserved, however. There is evidence that the scribal schools continued to operate, and “Sumerian” inscriptions were even composed for Shamash-shum-ukin. In comparison with the Assyrian developments, the pictorial arts were neglected, and Babylonian artists may have found work in Assyria.
During this period people began to use the names of ancestors as a kind of family name; this increase in family consciousness is probably an indication that the number of old families was growing smaller. By this time the process of “Aramaicization” had reached even the oldest cities of Babylonia and Assyria. Apparently this era was not very fruitful for literature either in Babylonia or in Assyria. In Assyria numerous royal inscriptions, some as long as 1,300 lines, were among the most important texts; some of them were diverse in content and well composed. Most of the hymns and prayers were written in the traditional style. Many oracles, often of unusual content, were proclaimed in the Assyrian dialect, most often by the priestesses of the goddess Ishtar of Arbela. In Assyria as in Babylonia, the beginnings of a real historical literature are observed; most of the authors have remained anonymous up to the present.
The many gods of the tradition were worshiped in Babylonia and Assyria in large and small temples, as in earlier times. Very detailed rituals regulated the sacrifices, and the interpretations of the ritual performances in the cultic commentaries were rather different and sometimes very strange. On some of the temple towers (ziggurats), astronomical observatories were installed. The earliest of these may have been the observatory of the Ninurta temple at Kalakh in Assyria, which dates back to the 9th century BCE; it was destroyed with the city in 612. The most important observatory in Babylonia from about 580 was situated on the ziggurat Etemenanki, a temple of Marduk in Babylon. In Assyria the observation of the Sun, Moon, and stars had already reached a rather high level; the periodic recurrence of eclipses was established. After 600, astronomical observation and calculations developed steadily, and they reached their high point after 500, when Babylonian and Greek astronomers began their fruitful collaboration. Incomplete astronomical diaries, beginning in 652 and covering some 600 years, have been preserved. Few historical sources remain for the last 30 years of the Assyrian empire. There are no extant inscriptions of Ashurbanipal after 640 BCE, and the few surviving inscriptions of his successors contain only vague allusions to political matters. In Babylonia the silence is almost total until 625 BCE, when the chronicles resume. The rapid downfall of the Assyrian empire was formerly attributed to military defeat, although it was never clear how the Medes and the Babylonians alone could have accomplished this.’
Part of the answer is that the Scythians were an ally of the Medes and Chaldeans and involved in the overthrow of Assyria.
‘More recent work has established that after 635 a civil war occurred, weakening the empire so that it could no longer stand up against a foreign enemy. Ashurbanipal had twin sons. Ashur-etel-ilani was appointed successor to the throne, but his twin brother Sin-shar-ishkun did not recognize him. The fight between them and their supporters forced the old king to withdraw to Harran, in 632 at the latest, perhaps ruling from there over the western part of the empire until his death in 627. Ashur-etel-ilani governed in Assyria from about 633, but a general, Sin-shum-lisher, soon rebelled against him and proclaimed himself counter-king. Some years later (629?) Sin-shar-ishkun finally succeeded in obtaining the kingship. In Babylonian documents dates can be found for all three kings. To add to the confusion, until 626 there are also dates of Ashurbanipal and a king named Kandalanu.
In 626 the Chaldean Nabopolassar (Nabu-apal-uṣur) revolted from Urek and occupied Babylon. There were several changes in government. King Ashur-etel-ilani was forced to withdraw to the west, where he died sometime after 625. About the year 626 the Scythians laid waste to Syria and Palestine. In 625 the Medes became united under Cyaxares and began to conquer the Iranian provinces of Assyria. One chronicle relates of wars between Sin-shar-ishkun and Nabopolassar in Babylonia in 625-623. It was not long until the Assyrians were driven out of Babylonia. In 616 the Medes struck against Nineveh, but, according to the Greek historian Herodotus, were driven back by the Scythians. In 615, however, the Medes conquered Arrapkha (Kirkuk), and in 614 they took the old capital of Ashur, looting and destroying the city. Now Cyaxares and Nabopolassar made an alliance for the purpose of dividing Assyria. In 612 Kalakh and Nineveh succumbed to the superior strength of the allies. The revenge taken on the Assyrians was terrible: 200 years later Xenophon found the country still sparsely populated.
Sin-shar-ishkun, king of Assyria, found death in his burning palace. The commander of the Assyrian army in the west crowned himself king in the city of Harran, assuming the name of the founder of the empire, Ashur-uballiṭ II (611–609 BCE). Ashur-uballiṭ had to face both the Babylonians and the Medes. They conquered Harran in 610, without, however, destroying the city completely. In 609 the remaining Assyrian troops had to capitulate. With this event Assyria disappeared from history. The great empires that succeeded it learned a great deal from the hated Assyrians, both in the arts and in the organization of their states.’
The double headed eagle, an ancient symbol of Assyria and their allies the Hittites – above. Most famously associated with the Byzantine Empire – below.
Czar Ivan III ruled from 1462 to 1505 and instituted the black double-headed** eagle as an official emblem of the Russian state; for he was eager to create a link between Byzantium and Russia (which is more than a random coincidence). It featured as a design motif in the regalia of the Russian Imperial Court until the fall of the monarchy in 1917.
In 1992 the Russian Federation restored it to the state coat of arms. In Russia, the double-headed eagle was accompanied by another national symbol: a horseman slaying a serpent with a spear, portrayed on a shield. The horseman is a symbol of Russia’s capital, Moscow and usually represents St George the Victorious. Notice the small saltire in the tail feathers, reminiscent of Scotland’s State flag. It is worthy to note that the horseman slaying a dragon (serpent) is in eerie similitude with the tribe of Dan, who are described as a serpent who bites a horse’s heels, bringing down its rider – Genesis 49:17. There is considerably more to learn about the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.
The coat of arms has changed throughout history, with the eagle changing from gold to black and then back to its current gold; as well as losing and gaining the crowns over the heads. Currently, each head is topped with another crown floating between them, which once more symbolizes unity. In its talons, the eagle holds an orb and a sceptre – symbols of power and authority. The current interpretation of the coat of arms is quite similar to those used in the Russian Empire. After the monarchy was overthrown in 1917, the eagle became white; then the Bolsheviks gave the bird a rest for about 70 years, replacing it with the communist hammer and sickle.
Prior to Asshur’s re-appearance from the embryonic Rus and long after their demise as the Assyrian Empire, the descendants of Asshur held another lengthy period of preeminence on the world stage as the rulers of the early period of the Eastern Roman Empire. A fascinating connection between the Byzantine Empire and Russia, is the use of the term Tzar and Czar (or Csar) for their kings and the etymological link with C-ae-sar, the rulers of the Roman empire.
The family name of Romanov in Russia derived from the word Roman. The Russian alphabet remarkably resembles the Greek alphabet and its letters used by Byzantium. Russia’s state religion is Eastern Orthodox Christianity, the most similar to yet still distinct from, Roman Catholicism. Assyria also had a parallel system of worship to ancient Babylon, substituting their god Assur for the Babylonian Marduk – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Marduk is thought to be derived from amar-Utu, the ‘immortal son of Utu’ or ‘the bull calf of the sun god Utu’ – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy, Addendum II. The double-headed** Sumerian sun god had the epithet Bel from Baal, meaning Lord. Marduk was also known as the storm god – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America. More than coincidently, Nimrod also, was revered as the god, Marduk.
Salient points are that Marduk is associated with the planet Jupiter, also important in the Roman pantheon of gods. Marduk is often depicted as a man and his predominant symbol is a serpentine dragon. Marduk ascended to great power after being chosen to lead the Annunaki gods during a cosmic civil war… the primeval angelic rebellion – refer Samael: Chapter XXII Alpa & Omega. As an aside, Marduk was the god revered by the great Nebuchadnezzar II of Chaldea-Babylon.
Shamash was the Sumerian sun god, though Assur was also represented as the solar disc that appears frequently in Assyrian iconography. Typically, the symbol of Assur was a winged disc with horns (symbol for the crescent Moon) and rippling rays either side a circle or wheel, suspended from wings, enclosing a warrior drawing a bow to discharge an arrow. A comment online states: ‘An Assyrian standard… has the disc mounted on a bull’s head with horns. The upper part of the disc is occupied by a warrior, whose head, part of his bow, and the point of his arrow protrude from the circle. The rippling water rays are V-shaped, and two bulls, treading river-like rays, occupy the divisions thus formed. There are also two heads^ – a lion’s and a man’s – with gaping mouths (refer article: Belphegor), which may symbolize tempests, the destroying power of the sun, or the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates.’
Jastrow regards the winged disc as “the purer and more genuine symbol of Ashur as a solar deity”. He calls it “a sun disc with protruding rays”, and says: “To this symbol the warrior with the bow and arrow was added – a despiritualization that reflects the martial spirit of the Assyrian empire.” Notice the depiction of Assur with an eagles^ head – refer Cherubim, article: The Ark of God; and article: Thoth.
In the past, Assyria kindled an allied relationship with the Hittites to their west in Anatolia, later eclipsing them. Millennia onwards, Asshur replicated the relationship, as the Eastern Roman Empire which evolved from and later shaded the western leg of the Roman Empire – the original founding Romans – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Russia in modern times has maintained a covert relationship with these present day Hittites. Who financed in part, the 1917 Revolution and lent support after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In return, Russia has provided military technology to the similarly warlike modern day Hittites.
The Byzantine Empire was the continuation of the Roman Empire in its eastern provinces, when its capital was Constantinople – formerly Byzantium, now Istanbul. It survived the fragmentation and fall of the Western Roman Empire in the fifth century CE and continued to exist for an additional thousand years until it fell to the Ottoman Empire in 1453. During most of its existence, the empire was the most powerful economic, cultural and military presence in Europe.
We learned with ancient Elam how its power faded, with its people migrating and re-appearing as the Persians. Their original home and the people who remained dwelling there are called Elam by historians, even though they were not originally Elamites – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Similarly, portions of Asshur migrated northwards during the middle of the first millennium CE. Gradually leaving their name Byzantium behind as evidence and re-surfacing as the early Rus. The Russian peoples progressively grew more powerful as the subsequent waves of migrants arrived, leaving Byzantium successively weaker.
The name Byzantine Empire, is a term created after the end of the realm, as its citizens continued to refer to their empire simply as the Roman Empire and to themselves as Romans. Though the Roman state continued and its traditions were maintained, historians confirm the difference in distinguishing Byzantium from its predecessor the empire of Rome. For it was centred in Constantinople not Rome and oriented towards Greek rather than Latin culture; characterised by Eastern Orthodox Christianity as opposed to Roman Catholicism.
Several events occurring from the fourth to sixth centuries mark the period of transition during which the Roman Empire’s Greek East and Latin West diverged. Constantine I – whom in more than passing, we have mentioned regarding the Council of Nicaea and the Arian controversy – ruling from 306 to 337 CE sought to unify the empire – Articles: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. He established Constantinople as the new capital in 330 CE – again, an Asshurite proclivity – while legalising Christianity, giving it imperial preference. Under Theodosius I from 379 to 395, Christianity officially became the formal state religion. In the reign of Heraclius during 610 to 641, the Empire’s military and administration were restructured; as was the adoption of Greek for official use – replacing Latin.
The West had suffered heavily from the instability of the third century CE and the distinction between the Hellenised East and the Latinised West persisted; becoming increasingly important in later centuries, leading to a gradual estrangement of the two Roman worlds. An early instance of the partition of the Empire occurred in 293 when Emperor Diocletian created a new administrative system, the tetrarchy, to guarantee security in all endangered regions of the Empire. He associated himself with a co-emperor, Augustus and each co-emperor then adopted a young colleague given the title of Caesar to share in their rule and eventually to succeed the senior emperor. The tetrarchy was short-lived, collapsing in 313 with Constantine I reuniting the two administrative divisions of the Empire as the sole Augustus.
Theodosius I was the last Emperor to rule both the Eastern and Western halves of the Empire. In 391 and 392 he issued a series of edicts banning pagan religion. Pagan festivals and sacrifices were banned, as was access to all pagan temples and places of worship. The last Olympic Games are believed to have been held in 393 CE. In 395, Theodosius I bequeathed the imperial office jointly to his sons: Arcadius in the East and Honorius in the West, effectively dividing Imperial administration. During the fifth century the Eastern empire was spared the difficulties faced by the West. It had a more established urban culture and greater financial resources, allowing it to placate invaders with tribute or pay foreign mercenaries.
For instance, to fend off the Huns, Theodosius had to pay an enormous annual tribute to Attila. After the fall of Attila, the Eastern Empire enjoyed a period of peace, while the Western Empire continued to deteriorate due to the expanding migration and invasions of the Germanic barbarians. The West’s demise is dated at 476 CE, when the Germanic Eastern Roman Foederati General Odoacer, deposed the Western Emperor Romulus Augustulus.
Previously, we investigated the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the correlation of the Medes with the Turko-Mongol peoples (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes), as well as the Persians with Turkey (refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey), as both representing the chest and two arms of Silver. In Daniel 2:33, 40-43 NET, it says:
33 ‘Its legs were of iron; its feet were partly of iron and partly of clay. Then there will be a fourth kingdom, one strong like iron. Just like iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything, and as iron breaks in pieces all these metals, so it will break in pieces and crush the others. 41 In that you were seeing feet and toes partly of wet clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom. Some of the strength of iron will be in it, for you saw iron mixed with wet clay. 42 In that the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, the latter stages of this kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 And in that you saw iron mixed with wet clay, so people will be mixed with one another without adhering to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay’ – refer articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and 2050.
It would be highly unusual to miss out the Assyrians, from the statue, as other major European powers are included as we shall discover. The two legs represent the division of the Roman Empire – as the two arms reflect the dual nature of the Medo-Persian Empire. One leg was the Eastern Roman Empire, Byzantium and this leg incorporated the descendants of Asshur – the modern Russians. We will study the identity of the other leg in a subsequent chapter. Some commentators believe the ten toes, represent a grouping of nations yet to occur, or ten rulers administering regions of the earth; even proposing a divisional split of nations from Western and Eastern Europe. The legs are of iron, being much stronger than the silver of the Medes and Persians, yet not as culturally sophisticated or resplendent.
Only the toes are stated as iron and clay, a mix that cannot fully meld or last. Judging from Daniel chapter seven, the possibility exists that the mixing could be between flesh and spirit; humans and Nephilim; or between humankind and angelic kind. This would be a formidable mix, though ultimately flawed in any capacity to endure. The days of Noah are to be repeated in the latter days and so this scenario, is worthy of consideration – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
The genesis of Rome and its end are split into different periods, dependant on which stage of its civilisation is being referred to. Rome was officially founded circa 753 BCE, though it earliest incarnation was much earlier. Two brothers and demigods – Romulus and Remus – are credited with founding Rome and it was allegedly ruled by seven kings during the Roman Kingdom until 509 BCE. It was then that the monarchy was replaced with elected magistrates and is known as the Roman Republic, lasting until 27 BCE with the establishment of the Roman Empire by Octavius, appointing himself Augustus – the first emperor. The empire divided in 395 CE, with the Western branch ending when it fell in 476 CE and the Eastern branch’s demise not until 1453.
Arithmetically, it would seem that one leg is longer than the other in that the Roman Empire lasted from 27 BCE to 476 CE. Whereas the Byzantine Empire lasted from 395 to 1453 CE. If we compare the period of the Roman Republic and Empire from 509 BCE to 476 CE, it is 985 years. Similarly, if we consider the Byzantine Empire beginning when the Western fell from 476 to 1453 CE, it results in 977 years. The legs would appear to actually match. Rome began its conquest of Greece at the Battle of Corinth in 146 BCE – the same year Rome defeated Carthage.
Daniel 7:7, 17-28
New English Translation
7 ‘After these things, as I was watching in the night visions afourthbeast appeared – one dreadful, terrible, and verystrong. It had two large rows of iron teeth. It devoured and crushed, and anything that was left it trampled with its feet. It was different from all the beasts [kingdoms and empires] that came before it, and it had ten horns.17 These large beasts, which are four in number, represent four kings who will arise from the earth. 18 The holy ones of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will take possession of the kingdom forever and ever.
19 Then I wanted to know the meaning of the fourth beast… 20 I also wanted to know the meaning of the ten horns on its head, and of that other horn that came up and before which three others fell.This was the horn that had eyes and a mouth speaking arrogant things, whose appearance was more formidable than the others. 21 While I was watching, that horn began to wage war against the holy ones and was defeating them, 22 until the Ancient of Days arrived and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Most High. Then the time came for the holy ones to take possession of the kingdom.
23 This is what he told me: “The fourth beast means that there will be a fourth kingdom on earth that will differ from all the other kingdoms. It will devour all the earth and will trample and crush it. 24 The ten horns mean that ten kings will arise from that kingdom. Another king will arise after them, but he will be different from the earlier ones. He will humiliate three kings. 25 He will speak words against the Most High. He will harass the holy ones of the Most High continually. His intention will be to change times established by law. The holy ones will be delivered into his hand for a time, times, and half a time.
26 But the court will convene, and his ruling authority will be removed – destroyed and abolished forever! 27 Then the kingdom, authority, and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be delivered to the people of the holy ones of the Most High. His kingdom is an eternal kingdom; all authorities will serve him and obey him.” 28 This is the conclusion of the matter. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts troubled me greatly, and the color drained from my face. But I kept the matter to myself.’
Note the impact this prophecy had on Daniel, the righteous man who recorded it – Ezekiel 14:14. It is truly astounding and terrifying in its implications and in its eventual future reality. The ‘changing times by law’ has been interpreted by some biblical scholars as already occurring with manipulations of the calendar, so as to make it difficult for worshipers in observing the true sabbath and holy days. We will study what the possible ramifications mean, in an additional article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Each empire lasted a longer period of time than its predecessor. The fourth empire endured considerably longer than the first three, in fact longer than all of them combined. Each empire included territory greater in size than its predecessor. It is thought by most biblical prophecy scholars that the fourth empire is a system that still exists today, or is a continuance of the Holy Roman empire as exhibited through the last millennia and a half by the supremacy of the Church at Rome; a type of modern Babylon – for this Church has had influential control over the governments of Europe and the crowning of its kings.
The ten horns are viewed as successive rulers of the ‘Roman system’ with the little horn a future ruler. We will study this subject further in the following chapter – also refer article: Is America Babylon? The fourth beast is certainly not like the ones preceding it, such as the bear (or ram) of Medo-Persia. The fourth beast is likened more to a Tyrannosaurusrex (ora Xenomorph), something Daniel was not familiar with, yet inspired genuine horror and dread.
If we are dealing with a supernatural intruder, the ‘little horn’ may try to actually alter or revise time scales in the latter day events, so as to thwart the Son of Man’s return. The little horn equates to the Son of Perdition and the Man of Lawlessness – 2 Thessalonians 2:3. This entity fulfils the role of the false prophet, the second beast who worships the first beast – Revelation 13:11-18. We will discuss this relationship in more depth in the next chapter.
2 Thessalonians 2:3-13
New Century Version
3‘Do not let anyone fool you in any way. That day of the Lord will not come until the turning away from God happens and the Man of Evil, who is on his way to hell, appears. 4 He will be against and put himself above any so-called god or anything that people worship. And that Man of Evil will even go into God’s Temple and sit there and say that he is God.
5 I told you when I was with you that all this would happen. Do you not remember? 6 And now you know what is stopping that Man of Evil so he will appear at the right time. 7 The secret power of evil is already working in the world, but there is one who is stopping that power. And he will continue to stop it until he is taken out of the way.
8 Then that Man of Evil will appear, and the Lord Jesus will kill him with the breath that comes from his mouth and will destroy him with the glory of his coming. 9 The Man of Evil will come by the power of Satan. He will have great power, and he will do many different false miracles, signs, and wonders. 10 He will use every kind of evil to trick those who are lost. They will die, because they refused to love the truth. (If they loved the truth, they would be saved.) 11 For this reason God sends them something powerful that leads them away from the truth so they will believe a lie. 12 So all those will be judged guilty who did not believe the truth, but enjoyed doing evil.
13 Brothers and sisters, whom the Lord loves, God chose you from the beginning to be saved. So we must always thank God for you. You are saved by the Spirit that makes you holy and by your faith in the truth.’
The term ‘holy one’ can refer to righteous angels as in Daniel 4:13, 17 and 23; the Creator as in Isaiah 6:3; as well as including true believers in the latter days.
1 Thessalonians 3:13
New International Version
‘May he strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones.’
English Standard Version
‘… so that he may establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints [G40 – hagios: saint, holy one].’
2 Thessalonians 1:10
New American Bible
‘…when he comes to be glorified among his holy ones [G40 – hagios] and to be marveled at on that day among all who have believed, for our testimony to you was believed.’
1 Peter 1:15-16
New English Translation
‘… but, like the Holy One who called you, become holy yourselves in all of your conduct, for it is written, “You shall be holy, because I am holy”.’
The migration of people – the descendants of Asshur travelling in a long arc from Asia Minor to Scandinavia – as the Eastern Roman Empire weakened and disintegrated saw them eventually surface as the Rus Grand Principality of Kiev beginning in 882 and which lasted until 1239. Led by Rurik, the Rus Vikings ruled the northern Slavs from Novgorod – a region between present day St Petersburg and Moscow. Kiev was captured – according to legend – by Askold and Dir, two Rus boyars of high nobility.
The settlement was on the main north-south trade route which was used by the Vikings to reach the rich markets of Constantinople; therefore conquering Kiev meant controlling trade. They were soon dispossessed by a Rus prince by the name of Oleg, a kinsman of Rurik who then moved the capital to Kiev from Novgorod. By the eleventh century the word Rus was associated with the Principality of Kiev, while the term Varangian was common as a term for Scandinavians traveling the river routes.
The Rus are considered to have originated on the Roslagen or Rus-law seashore of Uppland. This is not universally accepted, though Ros-lagen adapted into Slavic easily becomes Rus. An alternative option for naming the Rus, is that it may originate in the Proto-Finnic word for Swedish Scandinavians Ruotsi – a possible Finnic origin for Rurik’s name. This name may have been used by the Rus for themselves, or alternatively by the eastern Slavs who would soon be subjects of the Rus. Ruotsi is derived from ruskea, meaning light brown which is related to the old Russian rusi, for brown. Hence the name Rus and a Slavic word rusy – referring to hair colour ranging from dark ash-blond to light-brown – cognate with ryzhy, used for red-haired.
The two main theories for the Russian’s origins are the Normanist, which places the Rus ancestrally as Northern Vikings trading and raiding on the river routes between the Baltic and the Black Seas from the eighth to eleventh centuries and the anti-Normanist explanation, which places their origins as being autochthonous (meaning: ‘indigenous rather than descended from migrants or colonists’) with the region of the Carpathian Mountains.
There is merit to both theories which can be reconciled by the Assyrian descended peoples travelling from western Asia Minor to the Carpathian Mountains and then onwards to Scandinavia. The Russian Y-DNA Haplogroups are similar with northern Slavic speaking peoples as well as the Finno-Ugric peoples of the Baltic. There is some minor influence evidenced from Scandinavia and vice-versa. In the words of F Donald Logan: ‘… in 839, the Rus were Swedes; in 1043 the Rus were Slavs.’
The Primary Chronicle is a Slavonic language narrative account of Rus history, compiled from a wide range of sources in Kiev at the start of the thirteenth century. Coincidently, the chronicle includes the texts of a series of Rus-Byzantine Treaties from 911, 945 and 971. The Rus-Byzantine Treaties give a valuable insight into the names of the Rus. Of the fourteen Rus signatories to the Treaty in 907, all had Norse names, though by the Rus-Byzantine Treaty in 945, some signatories of the Rus had Slavic names while the vast majority still retained Norse names.
Other possible origins for the name Rus include the three early emperors of the Urartian Empire in the Caucasus – enemies and neighbours north of Assyria – from the eighth to sixth centuries BCE. Their names being Rusa I (735-714 BCE), Rusa II and Rusa III, documented in cuneiform monuments – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.
The ancient Sarmatian tribe of the Roxolani, from the Ossetic, ruhs meaning ‘light’; the Russian rusyje volosy, meaning ‘light-brown hair’ or Dahl’s dictionary definition of rus, meaning: ‘world, universe’, or literally ‘white world, white light.’
From the Old Slavic name that meant ‘river-people’, tribes of fishermen and ploughmen settled near and navigated the rivers Dnieper, Don, Dniester and Western Dvina. The rus root is preserved in the modern Slavic and Russian words ruslo for ‘river-bed’ and rusalka, for ‘water sprite’. From one of two rivers in the Ukraine near Kiev and Pereyaslav, Ros and Rusna, whose names are derived from a postulated Slavic term for water, akin to rosa for dew.
Lastly, a postulated proto-Slavic word for bear, cognate with Greek arctos and Latin ursus – refer Ursa Minor and the North Pole Star, article: The Pyramid Perplexity. This is interesting as we hear of Russia described, as the Russian Bear.
A look at an atlas shows the outline of Russia – and particularly the old Soviet union – and its likeness to a bear. Its head and mouth pointing westwards and its tail and hind paw eastwards.
The Russias were all the lands of the Rus, incorporating the principalities and states which had existed from the ninth century onwards.
A Japanese map from 1900.
Ivan Vasilyevich (or the Terrible), ruled from 1547 to 1584; spending a great deal of his reign fighting the Livonian Wars in an effort to conquer Old Livonia and North Estonia. With the expectation of expanding his new empire westwards; the forces of Sweden, Lithuania and Poland were able to check Ivan. Ivan IV, known as Grozny the Terrible, was the first Czar of all the Russias and was a descendant of Theodora, a daughter of Sartaq Khan of the Golden Horde – refer Chapter XVII Elam & Turkey.
The descendants of Rurik of Novgorod who had ruled the Rus from the late ninth century, had their rule ended in the early seventeenth century; by an interregnum period of civil war following the murder of Czar Dimitri I and then his successor being deposed by the Seven Boyars, or nobles. These same nobles invited Sigismund III of Poland-Lithuania to Moscow in 1610; electing his son, Wladyislaw as Czar. But, Wladyislaw was unable to take up the position due to his father’s opposition and so the Czarate continued to fight within itself for three years without a Czar to rule Russia at all. This was known by later generations as the Times of Troubles.
A prominent family called the Romanovs, formed Russia’s second dynasty. The most famous being Mikhail Romanov who was descended from a mysterious Boyar – privileged landowner from high ranking feudal nobility – Andrei Ivanovich Kobyla. During the reign of Ivan IV, Koblya’s descendants via his son Feodor, became known as the Yakovlev family. A grandchild from one of them, Roman Yurievich Zakharyin-Yuriev, assumed the formation of a clan name, by adapting his first name into Romanov or Romanoff – essentially meaning the clan or descendants of Roman. Roman’s daughter, Anastasia Zakharyina, became the wife of Ivan IV in 1547; bringing the family great wealth and influence.
Following the expulsion of the Poles in 1612, the crown was offered to several Rurik and Gedimin princes whilst a number of pretenders also sought to claim the throne. In the end, the son of the highly respected Filaret Romanov was asked – the sixteen year old Mikhail Romanov I, who ruled from 1613 to 1645 – and the nephew of Czar Feodor I. Once he had been persuaded to accept by his mother Kseniya Ivanovna Shestova, he pursued a policy of emphasising family ties with the Ruriks.
Mikhail made sure that he sought the advice of the Assembly of the Land on important issues, thereby ensuring that the populace loved him and the nobility respected him. Mikhail (or Michael) Romanov ended the wars against Sweden and Poland-Lithunia, allowing the return of his father from exile. Filaret Romanov then assumed the administrative duties of Czar, without the trappings of power. Michael’s role was ceremonial until his father’s death in 1633. The direct line of Romanov rulers died out with Elizabeth Petrovna, the daughter of Peter the Great. She had ruled from 1741 to 1762; although the direct male line had already ended with the death of Peter II in 1730. A period of crisis followed her death until a suitable candidate was sought amongst various distant relatives. In the end, a grandson of Peter I was found in the German House of Holstein-Gottorp, a branch of the House of Oldenburg.
Peter III (or Karl Peter Ulrich), was the son from a marriage between Grand Duchess Anne, daughter of Peter I and Duke Charles-Frederick of Holstein-Gottorp. Acclaimed as a Romanov, the fact remains he began the line of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov which ruled Russia until 1917. As the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp he had an extra degree of interest in the affairs of Germany – too much for some elements of the Russian nobility. Peter III planned an attack on Denmark in order to restore areas of Schleswig to his duchy, and thereby withdrawing Russian troops from the Seven Years War.
In Europe, the Seven Years War was fought between an alliance constituting France, Russia, Sweden, Austria and Saxony, against Prussia, Hanover and Great Britain between 1756 and 1763. The war had international interest, particularly as Britain and France were fighting one another for domination of North America and India. As such, it had been originally referred to as the first world war.
The plot to depose Peter III was led by his own wife. He was transported to captivity at Ropsha, where he died after only six months on the throne in mysterious circumstances. Catherine Yekaterina became Czarina and is known in history, as Catherine II and the Great, ruling from 1762 until 1796. Catherine cast a long shadow over neighbouring lands during her reign. Beginning in 1762, she tightened Russian control of Livonia and Estonia. In 1764, she created the imperial province of Novorossiya or New Russia along the central northern area of the Black Sea coast – which is now part of Ukraine. The province was a merging of several military districts and the Cossack Hetmanate in order to improve and increase Russian control of the region as part of the ongoing process of impinging on the Ottoman Empire.
In 1767, all of Alania fell under the Russian Empire’s rule as part of Catherine’s thrust southwards through the Caucasus Mountains to remove territories from Turkey’s influence. During 1768 till 1774, the First Russo-Turkish War was part of Catherine’s desire to secure the conquest of territory on Russia’s southern borders. The most serious revolt during Catherines’s reign was the Ural Cossack rebellion of 1773 to 1775. Two battles fought back to back over four days at Kazan, eventually defeated the rebels. The Second Russo-Turkish War occurred between 1787 and 1792, with Russia gaining from Turkish losses.
From 1791, Russia operated an area known as the Pale of Settlement. Initially it was small, but increased greatly from 1793 and the Second Partition of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. By the mid-nineteenth century it incorporated a substantial territory comprising modern Belarus – eastern Poland at the time – eastern Latvia, Lithuania, the province of Bessarabia – modern Moldova – and western Ukraine. Having formerly been citizens of the defunct commonwealth, the Jewish population of the Pale were restricted from moving eastwards into Russia. Catherine II died in 1796 after an eventful reign that greatly solidified and strengthened the Russian Empire. Her son Paul I reigned briefly from 1796 to 1801; cut short when he was killed in a palace coup.
The threads of Russia’s ties with Germany remained entwined when the Bolshevik government seized control in 1917 – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. The new government, far from stable, badly handled what remained of Russia’s First World War effort, holding out for a beneficial peace agreement with Germany. Instead, Russia was forced to accept the harsh terms of the Brest-Litovsk treaty. As a result of that as well as too many reforms in too short a period, Russia lost control over many of its outlying states and provinces. Principally those which had been handed over to Germany under the terms of the treaty, Bessarabia, such as Byelorussia, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldavia, Russina Poland, Western Ukraine, the Crimea, the industrial Donetz basin and the Don. It took the collapse of Imperial Germany and three long years of civil war before the Russian empire could be reborn under Soviet control.
The former Soviet Union at the height of its power and territory, which in reality was a modern day Empire and reflective of the dictatorial and militaristic martial based civilisation of the mighty Assyrian Empires of the past.
Modern claims of sovereignty over the Russias included Grand Duke Vladimir Cyrillovich Romanov to be the rightful heir to Czar Nicholas II, which was not disputed.
Czar Nicholas II
However, since his death in 1992 the divided branches of the House of Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov each put forward their own claimant as heir to the throne of the Russias. Prince Nicholas Romanovich is recognised by most of the family, bearing direct descent from the uncrowned successor to Nicholas II, Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich. Meanwhile, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, the daughter of Grand Duke Vladimir, upholds her claim because her father issued a controversial decree recognising her as his successor.
Left: Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany (left) with Nicholas II (right) in 1905.
Nicholas is wearing a German Army uniform, while Wilhelm wears that of a Russian hussar regiment.
Right: Tsar Nicholas II (left) and King George V of Britain (right) in Berlin, 1913
Nicholas married Princess Alexandra of Hesse-Darmstadt less than a month after he became Tsar at the age of twenty-six in 1894. Alexandra was a grand daughter of Queen Victoria. Meanwhile Nicholas was first cousin to King George V of England – of which he bore an uncanny resemblance – and second cousin to Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany.
The most infamous claim in succession for the Russian throne was by Anna Anderson the supposed daughter Anastasia (later disproved genetically), of Czar Nicholas who had been able to escape, when her father, mother, brother and sisters had all been shot and their bodies amateurishly cremated. Even so, her claim as a pretender to any throne was redundant while a valid male heir lived.
Modern Russia is a federal, semi-presidential republic founded in 1991 in the wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. ‘Despite bearing the resemblance of a democratic state in terms of its offices and elections, it always manages to convey the impression that old habits die hard in terms of its tendencies towards strong centralist control.’
The map above shows the extent of the Soviet Union’s geo-political power and reach after World War II until 1991.
The apt term Iron Curtain was coined by Winston Churchill. The map is also significant as it shows the split between Western Europe and Eastern Europe – with the exceptions of Finland and Greece which should be orange and East Germany, blue – which we will discover is the family division of one of Shem’s sons – not including Iran, Turkey, Russia, Spain and Portugal.
Russia lays at the heart of the CIS – the Commonwealth of Independent States – a voluntary organisation of republics that had once formed part of the original Soviet empire. Its creation had been principally masterminded by Boris Yeltsin the president of the Russian republic. The clever ploy had been carried out behind the back of Mikhail Gorbachev; leaving him with no other choice than to announce the dissolution of the Soviet state.
Most of the Russian population is concentrated in the western European portion of the country, especially in the fertile region surrounding Moscow. Moscow and St Petersburg – formerly Leningrad – are the two most important cultural and financial centres in Russia and are among the most picturesque cities in the world.
Russians are also populous in Asia; beginning in the seventeenth century and particularly pronounced throughout much of the twentieth century, a steady flow of ethnic Russians and Russian speaking peoples migrated eastward into Siberia, where cities such as Vladivostok and Irkutsk flourish today.
Russia is a multinational state with over one hundred and ninety ethnic groups within its twenty-two republics; all with unique languages and cultures. The population is 144,156,010 people of which eighty-one percent are ethnic or Slavic Russian. It is the most populous country in Europe and the ninth most populous country in the world. Russia’s population density stands at only nine inhabitants per square kilometre, or twenty-three per square mile. Russia has one of the oldest populations in the world, with an average age of 40.3 years and a projected population by 2030 of 139,599,000 people.
The Russian economy can be fragile at times, though still ranks as one of the world’s biggest economies by nominal GDP. Russia is the world’s eleventh largest economy, with a GDP of $1.70 trillion as of 2019, 1.3% higher than in 2018. Russia has moved toward a more market-based economy over the three decades since the collapse of the Soviet Union, though government ownership of and intervention in business, is still common. As a leading exporter of oil and gas, as well as other minerals and metals, Russia’s economy is highly sensitive to swings in world commodity prices.
Austrian statesman Klemens Furst von Metternich aptly noted: “Russia is never as strong as she appears, and never as weak as she appears.”
As one of the world’s largest producers of gas and oil derived from its considerable mineral and oil reserves, Russia does not refrain from using its power in this area as an economic weapon. Russia is an energy superpower. The country has the world’s largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves and the eighth largest oil reserves. Russia is the world’s leading natural gas exporter – which gives it immense control over much of Europe – and the second largest oil exporter. Added to these impressive statistics, Russia is the fourth largest electricity producer and the ninth largest renewable energy producer in the world. Russia was the first country to develop civilian nuclear power and to construct the world’s first nuclear power plant. In 2019, nuclear energy generated twenty percent of the country’s electricity.
It is prophesied in the scriptures how Russia will be catapulted to the top of world hegemony – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen. A part of that process will be investing in the infrastructure required to tap into the immense wealth of resources in the Arctic Ocean – something the United States appears reticent. In 2014, President Putin ‘for the first time added the Arctic region as a sphere of Russian influence in its official foreign policy doctrine’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 282.
And for good reason: ‘In 2008 the United States Geological Survey estimated that 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids and 90 billion barrels of oil are in the Arctic, with the vast majority of it offshore. As more territory becomes accessible, extra reserves of the gold, zinc, nickel and iron already found in part of the Arctic may be discovered’ – Tim Marshall, pages 277-278.
Marshall, page 19: ‘Energy as political power will be deployed time and again in the coming years, and the concept of “ethnic Russians” will be used to justify whatever moves Russia makes.’
Russia’s land offers a massive source of crops and its Chernozemie region in Central Russia makes it one of the major bread basket nations of the world with China, Brazil, Canada and the United States. This region is renowned for its rich soil known as Black Earth. The soil contains a high humus percentage and other soil enriching nutrients such as ammonia and phosphorous. It is also deep and its clay like qualities give it water retaining properties. This makes the area an agricultural powerhouse for Russia. Main crops include grains, particularly wheat and sunflowers, corn, soy beans, peas, rapeseed and barley.
Of the top ten Countries with the most natural resources, Russia is ranked number five in the world; behind India at four and ahead of Brazil at six. Also, Russia is positioned at number two behind South Africa for the world’s top five mineral producing powers. Russia’s total estimated natural resources are worth $75 trillion. The country boasts the biggest mining industry in the world, which is a driving force in its national economy; producing substantial volumes of mineral fuels, industrial minerals, and metals. Russia is a leading producer of aluminum, arsenic, cement, copper, magnesium metal, as well as compounds like nitrogen, palladium, silicon, and vanadium. The nation is the second-largest exporter of rare earth minerals and accounts for up to 20% of nickel and cobalt production in the world and 7% of global iron ore and coal exports.
Of the top ten technological nations in the world, Russia is at number six, ahead of the United Kingdom at seven and behind Germany at five. Russia led the space race with space exploration and moon landings. It is a leading producer and inventor of weapons technology and defence systems; being a major exporter of its equipment worldwide.
The richness of resources has not translated into an easy life for most of the country’s people; much of Russia’s history has been a grim tale of the very wealthy and powerful few, ruling over the great mass of their poor and powerless compatriots. An uncompromising parallel with the ancient Assyrians and their martial driven society and warlike persona. Despite such weighty problems, Russia shows potential promise of re-gaining its superpower* status.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Russian global shipments during 2021.
Mineral fuels including oil: US$211.5 billion
Gems, precious metals: $31.6 billion
Iron, steel: $28.9 billion
Fertilizers: $12.5 billion
Wood: $11.7 billion
Machinery including computers: $10.7 billion
Cereals: $9.1 billion
Aluminum: $8.8 billion
Ores, slag, ash: $7.4 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion
Iron and steel was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 80.4% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were international sales of Russian fertilizers via a 78.5% gain. Russia’s shipments of ores, slag and ash posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 71.2%. The sole decliner among Russia’s top 10 export categories was cereals thanks to its -2.2% drop year over year.’
Russia is listed at number five in the world for countries with the largest gold reserves. Russia possesses 2,295.4 tonnes which equates to 22.0% of foreign reserves. ‘The Russian Central Bank has been one of the largest buyers of gold for the past seven years and overtook China in 2018’ who is now sixth. ‘In 2017, Russia bought 224 tonnes of bullion in an effort to diversify away from the U.S. dollar, as its relationship with the West has grown chilly since the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in mid-2014. To raise the cash for these purchases, Russia sold a huge percentage of its U.S. Treasuries.’
As of 2017, the Russian military comprised over one million active duty personnel, the fifth largest in the world.It is mandatory for all male citizens aged between 18 and 27 to be drafted for a year of service in Armed Forces – a distant residue of the militaristic mindset of Assyria. Russia’s tank force is the biggest in the world, while its surface navy and air force are among the largest. The country has a huge and fully indigenous arms industry producing most of its own military equipment with only a few types of weapons imported. It has been one of the world’s top supplier of arms since 2001, accounting for about thirty percent of worldwide weapons sales; while exporting weapons to about eighty countries. Russia is the third biggest exporter of arms behind the United States and China.
The state flag of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – USSR – from 1922 to 1991
Above: The Russian Naval ensign adopted in 1712 and designed by Czar Peter I, between 1692 and 1712, after proposing eight different designs. Inspiration taken from the Scottish Saltire of the same colours in reverse.
Below: The current flag of the Russian Federation
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘The Russian Federation has been suggested as a potential candidate for resuming superpower* status in the 21st century… while others have made the assertion that it is already a superpower.
In his 2005 publication entitled Russia in the 21st Century: The Prodigal Superpower, Steven Rosefielde, a professor of economics at University of North Carolina… predicted that Russia would… augur another arms race… Rosefielde noted that such an end would come with tremendous sacrifice to global security and theRussian people’s freedom.
Matthew Fleischer of the Los Angeles Times contends that Russia will not become a superpower unless climate change eats away at the permafrost that covers, as of March 2014, two-thirds of the country’s landmass. The absence of this permafrost would reveal immense stores of oil, natural gas, and precious minerals, as well as potential farmland,which would allow Russia to “become the world’s bread basket – and control the planet’s food supply.”
… in December 2013, Russian president Vladimir Putin denied any Russian aspiration to be a superpower. He was quoted saying: “We do not aspire to be called some kind of superpower, understanding that as a claim to world or regional hegemony. We do not infringe on anyone’s interests, we do not force our patronage on anyone, or try to teach anyone how to live [a dig aimed at the United States].”
Forbes writer Jonathan Adelman… summarized the arguments against Russia’s superpower potential… “Russia has a trade profile of a Third World country [for now], a GNP the size of Canada which is less than 15 percent of the United States GDP, no soft power, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Wall Street or highly rated universities.” Former political journalist Peter Brown wrote that Russia “would like to reclaim the superpower status it held for nearly 40 years after World War II,” but in the 21st century “may lack the combination of economic and military power” to do so. He said that “Russia won’t be a superpower anytime soon,” [agreed] citing Russia’s shrinking population, high levels of poverty and poor public health. In 2011, British historian and professor Niall Ferguson… suggested that Russia is on its way to “global irrelevance”.
The world’s economic pundits and other experts may have written Russia off, predicting its near future decline; though the scriptures paint a different picture for the destiny of the King of the North. A century or two, can change the fortunes of a nation considerably, particularly after a major conflagration such as a Third World War – refer articles: 2050; and Four Kings & One Queen.
Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 7: ‘Russia, like all great powers, is thinking in terms of the next 100 years and understands that in that time anything can happen.’
Encyclopaedia: ‘Russia has, however, shown a slight population growth since 2012, partly due to immigration. The number of Chinese in… Russia’s Far East has been growing.’
Marshall, page 11: ‘China may well eventually control parts of Siberia in the long-term future’ – in fulfilment of the Genesis 9:27 prophecy – ‘but this would be through Russia’s declining birth rate and Chinese immigration moving north. The empty depopulating spaces of Russia’s Far East are… likely to come under Chinese cultural, and eventually political, control.’
An important aspect of the Russian mentally and a palpable trait of the ancient Assyrians was insightfully and eloquently opined by Winston Churchill in 1939 and embellished seven years later:
“It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest… I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for weakness, especially military weakness.”
In Chapter XVII Lud & Iran and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey, we studied the two sons of Shem who have the most in common with regard to their mtDNA maternal and Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups. The Persian Iranians with the Turks, exhibit varying admixture with the neighbouring Arab related peoples and or, a shared past history with the Turko-Mongol peoples. Underlying these factors though, is the fact their autosomal DNA bears a closer resemblance. In contrast, comparing them with the Russians, it soon becomes obvious there is a marked difference between the latter and the former two peoples.
What we will discover as we progress through each of Shem’s five sons, is that some are more closely related to certain brothers than others. We will also find, especially towards the end, how similar cousins can be to each other compared to their own siblings. It is quite common for cousins to be drawn to each other and get along better with one another than with their own brothers and sisters. Haplogroups can reflect these relationship dynamics.
Russian men
Asshur shares Haplogroups and autosomal DNA predominantly with Eastern Europe, partially with Northern Europe and negligibly with Southern Europe and Western Europe. Contrastingly, Aram shares Haplogroups split between Western Europe and Southern Europe, with little commonalty with either Northern or Eastern Europe.
The remaining son of Shem, Arphaxad sits in the middle of these two geographically and bridges the gap between them genetically.
Russian women
Of all the peoples investigated thus far, either descended from Japheth and his seven sons; Ham and his three sons (Canaan and his six sons); or Shem’s two out of five sons, who have exhibited black or brown hair and brown eyes regardless of skin tones and eye tints; it is the Russians from Asshur, who are the first peoples on our identity journey, who possess a marked increase in fair hair and blue eyes.
The mtDNA Haplogroups for Russians in descending order.
U4 [3.9%] – K [3.7%] – T1 [2.7%] – U [2.2%] – I [2%] – HV [1.8%] –
W [1.8%] – U2 [ 1.4%] – X [1.3%] – U3 [1.1%] – L [0.2%]
The main maternal Haplogroups shared with Turkey and Iran include H, U, J and T2. Haplogroup H is the most frequent Haplogroup throughout West Eurasia; J is a major European Haplogroup and T, a more recent European Haplogroup. It is Haplogroup U5, where there is a more pronounced difference between Russia and the West Asian nations descended from Elam and Lud. As Turkey exhibits a significantly higher percentage of Haplogroup H than Iran, so does Russia compared with Turkey.
Russia: H [41.2%] – U5 [10.4%] – J [7.8%] – T2 [6.5%] – K [3.7%] –
HV [1.8%]
Turkey: H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] – T2 [4.3%]
Iran: H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –
T2 [4.9%]
The three Haplogroups which Iran and Turkey share higher levels, which Russia also possesses but in lower percentages include K, U and HV. Haplogroup K is higher in distinctive groups such as the Basque and the Ashkenazi Jew and found in Central Asia and North Africa.
In contrast with Haplogroup T, Haplogroup U is one of the oldest and most diverse of the European Haplogroups. Haplogroup HV is the ancestral group to both H and V, with H dominating European lineages.
H HV J T2 U U5 K
Russia 41 2 8 7 2 10 4
Turkey 31 5 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 14 5 12 3 7
Iran and Turkey – who are similar genetically – share dominancy in Haplogroup H, followed by J, U and K, with T2 and U5 rarer. So it is interesting that for Russians the main Haplogroups following H, are U5, J and T2, with K and U rarer. Thus all three nations share H and J as overall predominant, yet after that the frequency is opposite in that Russians exhibit more of maternal Haplogroups U5 and T2.
Russia ostensibly, has more in common albeit distantly, with Turkey than Iran. We will learn that Russia in fact, has more commonality with the Northern Slavic and Baltic nations. Recall the first and fourth points in the introduction. Peoples today invariably live next to those peoples they are most related to – with a few notable exceptions and Haplogroups provide the evidence that this hypothesis is a valid one.
Khazaria, Russian Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Russians are the dominant ethnicity in Russia today. The Russian language belongs to the East Slavic family and is related to Ukrainian and Belarusian. The Russian people, too, are closely related to their Belarusian and Ukrainian neighbors, and also fairly close to Poles and Slovenians… We can genetically divide the Russian people into two* main types: Northern Russians and Southern Russians.’
Mitochondrial DNA variability in Poles and Russians, Annals of Human Genetics 66, multiple authors, 2002, pages 261-283. Excerpts from the summary:
“The main mitochondrial haplogroup of the Polish and Russian sequences is groupH, which is the most frequent haplogroup in Europe and also common in the Near East.Haplogroup H comprises the majority of the Russian (42.3%) and Polish (45.2%) samples… The node designated as HV* is highly important in mtDNA phylogeny because two of the most frequent haplogroups in Europe, H and pre-V, descend from it. The haplogroup HV*, rare in European populations, was identified in Polish and Russian samples with low frequency (1% and 2%, respectively)…
“Haplogroup J sequences in Poles and Russians are characterized by similar frequencies of 7.8% and 8%, respectively… HaplogroupU and K sequences, which are defined by a variant-12308HinfI, were found in 19.5% of the Polish mtDNAs and in 20.0% of the Russian mtDNAs.”
“The distribution of the subgroup U5a and U5b frequencies in Poles and Russians is approximately equal, with the U5a subgroup prevailing over U5b – 5.3% and 3.4% in Poles, and 7.5% and 3% in Russians. U4 (with CR motif 16356-195) is the next relatively frequent subgroup in the populations studied, being found at a frequency of 5% in Poles and 3.5% in Russians.”
Mitochondrial DNA variation in Russian populations… Genetika 38:11, multiple authors, 2002, pages 1532-1538. Excerpts from the abstract, translated into English:
“Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) polymorphism was examined in three Russian populations from the European part of Russia (Stavropol krai, Orel oblast, and Saratov oblast). This analysis showed that mitochondrial gene pool of Russians was represented by the mtDNA types belonging to haplogroups H, V, HV*, J, T, U, K, I, W, and X. A mongoloid admixture(1.5%) was revealed in the form of mtDNA types of macrohaplogroup M. Comparative analysis of the mtDNA haplogroup frequency distribution patterns in six Russian populations from the European part of Russia indicated the absence of substantial genetic differences between them.However, in Russian populations from the southern and central regions the frequency of haplogroup V (average frequency 8%) was higher than in the populations from more northern regions…”
The macrohaplogroup U structure in Russians, Human Genetics 53:4, multiple authors, 2017, pages 498-503. Abstract:
“The structure and diversity of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) macrohaplogroup U lineages in Russians from Eastern Europe are studied on the basis of analysis of variation of nucleotide sequences of complete mitochondrial genomes. In total, 132 mitochondrial genomes belonging to haplogroups U1, U2e, U3, U4, U5, U7, U8a, and K are characterized.
Results of phylogeographic analysis show that the mitochondrial gene pool of Russians contains mtDNA haplotypes belonging to subhaplogroups that are characteristic only of Russians and other Eastern Slavs (13.7%), Slavs in general (11.4%), Slavs and Germans* (17.4%), and Slavs, Germans, and Baltic Finns (9.8%).
Results of molecular dating show that ages of mtDNA subhaplogroups to which Russian mtDNA haplotypes belong vary in a wide range, from 600 to 17000 years. However, molecular dating results for Slavic and Slavic-Germanic* mtDNA subhaplogroupsdemonstrate that their formation mainly occurred in the Bronze and Iron Ages(1000 to 5000 years ago). Only some instances (for subhaplogroups U5b1a1 and U5b1e1a) are characterized by a good agreement between molecular dating results and the chronology of Slavic ethnic history based on historical and archaeological data.”
Genetic studies show that modern Russians are closest to Belarussians, Poles, Slovaks, Czechs, Balts and Ukrainians. In an interesting twist, the Ethnographer Zelenin, affirms ‘that Russians overall are more similar to Belarusians and to Ukrainians than southern Russians* are to northern Russians.’
A study found that ‘the genetic distances from the Russians to the European language groups indicate that the gene pool of present-day Russians bears the influence of Slavic, Baltic, Finno-Ugric and, to a lesser extent, Germanic groups, as well as Iranian and Turkic groups.’
These findings ‘uphold the traditionally held genetic differentiation between Northern and Southern Russians, with the decisive ethnic element being the Finno-Ugric one, more important in the north, the southern population having substantial – generally unacknowledged in historical debates about Russian ethnogenesis – Germanic influence.’
The Russians as Asshur are a bridge genetically amongst the sons of Shem and this will be affirmed; becoming more apparent when we study his brothers, Aram and Arphaxad. Aram and the western half of Arphaxad are both similar, as Lud and Elam are to each other.
Asshur stands between the two pairings, leaning towards the eastern half of Arphaxad’s descendants. The reason and evidence for these relationships will be supported once Arphaxad’s descendants through Joktan’s mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups are studied – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
In reiteration of point one in the introduction, peoples today are living next to those people they are most related to. Even though Russians have had interaction and inter-marrying with Germanic and Finno-ugric peoples, as well as Turks and Iranians, their dominant association in shared migration, history, culture and language has been with fellow Slavic speaking peoples.
What historians and geneticists have not understood is that the Russians (or the Rus), did not originate in the Carpathian Mountains nor from Uppland in Scandinavia. These were merely settlements along their northwestern route from the lands of Byzantium, and anciently before that in upper Mesopotamia.
The northward dwelling Russian men, have similarity with the Finno-Ugric peoples in that they have similarly high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 admixture from the line of Japheth. The southward male Russian inhabitants display higher levels of I2a1 in common with southeastern Slavic speaking Europeans. Russians possess these two male lineages, as does Arphaxad, with geneticists and ethnologists seeking to explain these paternal Haplogroups as deriving from mixing alone.
This may be accurate for N1c1, but not for I2a1. The reason being that I2a1 is an older ancestral Haplogroup from which descendants possessing R1a are related. The two Y-DNA Haplogroup maps of Europe show that the R1a Haplogroup is indigenous to not only Russians but also much of Eastern Europe, particularly northeastern Europe. Each may have had an influence on the other, for Ukraine, Belarus and Poland have high levels of R1a like Russia. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland have high levels of N1c1, like a sizeable minority of Russian men.
The paternal Haplogroups for Russians match the northern Slavic and Baltic peoples they reside next too. Likewise, the nation of Germany’s regional Haplogroup spread match their neighbours. That is, the people with which they are related to in West Central Europe. When we study the Slavs of Eastern Europe and then the Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Latin peoples of Western Europe, it will be self-evident why Russia identifies with Asshur and why Germany cannot be Assyria.
Similarly, the peoples of the Middle East called Assyrians – who are either Arab or Kurdish extraction – are descended from principally Ham and Mizra (or partially from Shem via Lud) and cannot be from Asshur.
Four of the five sons of Shem all live on the periphery of Europe, surrounding where Arphaxad’s descendants dwell. Asshur, Elam and Lud – Russia, Turkey and Iran – live in Eastern Europe and West Asia. We will find that the sons of Aram dwell in peripheral locations within and without Europe – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
As a guide it is worth mentioning as we delve into the European peoples more fully that broadly speaking, their principle Y-DNA Haplogroups of R1a, R1b, I1 and I2a1 signify approximately the four quarters of Europe. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 in the North; with I2a1 in the South (and east). Added to this, is N1c1 originating from Japheth prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance Haplogroup J2 (with J1 and E1b1b) from Ham, found more commonly in southern Europe.
Khazaria, Russian Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroup R1a and its offshoots are very common among Russian men. Some specific subgroups of R1a [M420] found among ethnic Russians in the “Russia-Slavic DNA Project” include R1a1 [M459], R1a1a [M17], R1a1a1g, and R1a1a1g2. The “Russia-Slavic DNA Project” includes men who have the sub-types R1b1a2 and R1b1a2a1a1b… [and] the sub-types I2a and I2a2. The Y-DNA haplogroup N is also common among Russian men… N haplogroups are often signals of Finnic ancestry… N1c1 is a sub-type that’s found in Russia. E1b1b Y-DNA haplogroups (ultimately originating in northeastern Africa) are not very common among Russian men, but some do have them.’
Two Sources of the Russian Patrilineal Heritage in Their Eurasian Context, American Journal of Human Genetics 82:1, multiple authors, 2008, pages 236-250. Excerpts from the abstract:
“… In the present study of the variation of the Y chromosome pool of ethnic Russians, we show that the patrilineages within the pre-Ivan the Terrible historic borders of Russia have two main distinct sources. One of these antedates the linguistic split between West and East Slavonic-speaking people and is common for the two groups; the other is genetically highlighted by the pre-eminence of haplogroup (hg) [N] and is most parsimoniously explained by extensive assimilation of (or language change in) northeastern indigenous Finno-Ugric tribes.
The distribution of all frequent Y chromosome haplogroups (which account for 95% of the Y chromosomal spectrum in Russians) follows a similar north-south clinal pattern among autosomal markers, apparent from synthetic maps.”
‘Excerpts from middle of the study: “We collected 1228 DNA samples from 14 regional Russian populations. All sampled individuals identified their four grandparents as ethnic Russians, with their mother tongue being Russian. The rural areas and small towns were chosen for sampling so that the influence of more recent migrations could be minimized. Only individuals with all four grandparents born in the local area were sampled… The 1228 Russian Y chromosomes analyzed, all except 20 (1.6%) fall into seven major haplogroups (E, G, I, J, K2, N, and R1)characteristic to West Eurasian populations.
Eleven samples could be classified up to the root level of haplogroups F and K, and nine samples (0.7%) fell into haplogroups C, Q, and R2 that are specific to East and South Asian populations. At a higher level of molecular resolution, only eight subclades of these major West Eurasian Y chromosome haplogroups are presented with their average frequency greater than 1%, including R1a, [N1c1], [I1], R1b, [I2], J2, [N1b1], and [E1b1b]. Taken together, they account for 95% of the total Russian Y chromosomal pool.
… Every second Russian Y chromosome belongs to haplogroup R1a… within the boundaries of Europe, R1a is characteristic for Balto–Slavonic populations, with two exceptions: southern Slavs [I2a1] and northern Russians [N1c1]. R1a frequency decreases in northeastern Russian populations down to 20% – 30%, in contrast to central-southern Russia, where its frequency is twice as high…
The second frequent among Russians is haplogroup [N1C1, formerly N3], which is a typical haplogroup for Altaic and Finno-Ugric populations of Siberia and northeastern Europe… within the Russian area, the frequency of [N1c1] decreases significantly from north (>35%) to south (<10%)… The third most frequent haplogroup in Russians is [I2a1], and its variation is also clinal… The remaining two haplogroups, J2 and [E1b1b, formerly E3b], exhibit spotty frequencies in Russians, expected for low-frequency haplogroups.”
Map above of R1a-Z282 (R1a1a1b1a) specific to Russian males
A 2008 paper, sampling 1,228 people in Russia who self-identified as ethnic Russians, found the following top four Y-DNA Haplogroups among the sample:
R1a: 19.8% to 62.7%, with an average of 46.7%
N1: 5.4% to 53.7%, with averages of 21.6% for all regions
(10% Central and South Russia)
I: 0% to 26.8%, with an average of 17.6% for all regions
(23.5% Central and South Russia)
R1b: 0% to 14%, with an average of 5.8%
Y-DNA Haplogroups listed for Russia, Turkey and Iran. The constant reader will recall the similarities between Turkey and Iran.
From this comparison, we learn that Russia’s Y-DNA Haplogroups – though similar when comparing lineages descending from Shem: R1a, I2a1, R1b, I1 and G2a – stand out as different from those of Turkey and Iran in sequencing and percentages. Caused in part through admixture, though not wholly. We will learn that Asshur has a closer genetic relationship with his younger brother, Arphaxad.
Viewing the table from the preceding chapters and adding Russia highlights the disparity between Russia and the other two peoples in those paternal Haplogroups more usually associated with North Africa, the Middle East and West Asia (as well as southern Europe from admixture), consisting of E1b1b, J1 and J2 from Ham – and in the Caucasus, G2a from Shem.
Whereas, Russia’s high frequency of R1a firmly places it in the Eastern European genetic sphere. The one small surprise is the low level of R1b in Russians (from admixture); though six percent is an average and levels can be comparable with Turkey and Iran in certain areas. What is more significant and shows Russia’s closer genetic ties with north and eastern Europeans is adding the percentages for R1b and R1a. Russia has 52% compared with 24% and 26% for Turkey and Iran respectively.
J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b
Iran 9 23 7 10 16 10
Turkey 9 24 11 11 8 16
Russia 3 3 1 46 6
Selecting the key Haplogroups more closely associated with the majority of the European nations and particularly in the northern regions of Europe, reveals how Russia’s highest percentages position it with similarly related peoples in north eastern Europe – as will be discussed in later chapters – whilst highlighting how similar, yet distinct Turkey and Iran are compared with Europe as a whole.
For both Turkey and Iran in their male populations reveal heavy intermixing over many centuries – in part generated by their geographic positions – where half their Haplogroups have originated from Shem (R1a, R1b, G, I) and the other half have derived from admixture with Ham (J2, J1, E1b1b).
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
The comparison table subtly shifts with the emphasis on northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising the far older I1 and I2a1 from Shem and – resulting from admixture with Japheth – Haplogroup N1c1. Iran’s dominant paternal Haplogroups are J2 and R1a; Turkey’s comprise J2 and R1b; whereas Russia’s include R1a and N1c1.
It is not surprising that Haplogroup I2a2 is negligible in Russia as this is found primarily in northwestern Europe, or that the R1b percentage is low, as this is predominantly a western European Haplogroup.
As Haplogroup J2, followed by E1b1b and J1 seemingly distinguishes Turkey as a southern European nation at best and in reality a nation of the near east; Haplogroup R1a with N1c1, I2a1 and I1, identifies Russia as both an eastern and a northern European nation. That said, the original core paternal line for Turkish men descended from Elam is R1b, followed by G2a. The other paternal Haplogroup lineages are evidence of intermixing and intermarriage.
Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table comprising Iran, Turkey and their related neighbours, with the addition of the Russians.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
As Georgia bookends one end with the highest Haplogroup J percentages and lowest R1; Russia bookends the other with the lowest Haplogroup J levels and contrastingly the highest R1 groups. Georgia possesses the highest level of J2 as well as its core male Haplogroup G2a; while Russia has the highest percentage of its core male Haplogroup R1a and secondly N1c1 from intermixing with males from Japheth.
The next two chapters concentrate on firstly, Nimrod from the Book of Genesis and his link with Asshur… in more ways than one. And Secondly, the Earth’s physical and spiritual history preceding Nimrod and how it arrived at the circumstances which allowed Nimrod to take centre stage in the post global Flood cataclysm world.
Chapter twenty-three will resume with Shem’s fifth and youngest son, Aram; whom we have discussed in part in Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino & Hispano America.
For those readers interested in all things Assyrian or Russian, there is an excellent two volume historical novel that brings the ancient world of Assyria colourfully alive, called The Assyrian by Nicholas Guild (1987) and its sequel The Blood Star (1989).
If a wise man has a controversy with a foolish and arrogant man, The foolish man ignores logic and fairness and only rages or laughs… there is no peace… or agreement.
Proverbs 29:9 Amplified Bible
“… we must bear in mind that the cause of learning has often been promoted by scholars who are prepared to take a risk and expose their brain-waves to the pitiless criticisms of others.”
F F Bruce 1910-1990
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
The first born son of Shem is Elam. We have discussed his relationship with Japheth’s son Madai and Elam’s identity as the people of Turkey in Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. The impact of Turkey’s influence and culture on the peoples who live adjacent is palpable in names and language, particularly on the Central Asian Republics descended from Madai.
The Elamites were historically known as Persians and in the Bible, it is Elam which is being referred to and not the Persians from the nation of Iran who dwell in the region today. We have learned in the preceding chapter that Iran is descended from Lud and Lud is associated closely with Phut, Cush and Persia in the Bible – the nations respectively of Pakistan, India and Turkey. The regional powers of Lud-Iran and Elam-Turkey have crossed swords more than once. They are both descended from Noah’s son Shem and due to their location, have similarly intermingled with other people from primarily the Middle East for Iran and likewise plus Central Asia for Turkey, to each produce a complex ethnicity as shown by their paternal Haplogroups for example.
Iran has intermixed with a son of Mizra from Ham and Turkey likewise as well as with the sons of Madai, a son from Japheth. Of the five sons of Shem, Elam and Lud are the closest genetically and so it is not a surprise that they should dwell in close proximity or share the same Islamic faith; both having one foot in two different worlds, geographically and in ideology.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Elam was a son of Shem (Genesis 10:22). Elam settled east of the ancient city of Babylon. Daniel the prophet spent some time in Elam (Daniel 8:2). The Elamites named the most famous mountain in their land Elwend (Rawlinson’s SEVEN GREAT MONARCHIES, chapter 1. Media). No wonder the Elamites were called the “Wends” in Europe.
Elam early invaded the Palestinian Coast of the Mediterranian (Genesis 14:1). There they named a river Elwend – the Greeks called it the Orontes. Some of them migrated into Asia Minor where they were named the people of Pul (Isaiah 66:19). From the word “Pul” comes P-o-land – the land of Pol or Pul! From Asia Minor they migrated into South Russia, then into Eastern Europe. Another tribe in ancient Elam was called KASHU (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA…) In Poland we find the Kashub living today! (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA “Kashubes.”) The Greeks in ancient times said that the Elimaei dwelled northwest of them – in what is Southern Yugoslavia today (SMITH’s CLASSICAL DICTIONARY “Elimea”).
The word Elimaei was also used by the Greeks to refer to the ancient land of “Elam” near Babylon. The Latins called the Elamites or Wends “Eneti”. Strabo, the Roman geographer wrote about the migration “of Enetians from Paphlagonia in Asia Minor TO THE ADRIATIC” – modern Yugoslavia! (GEOGRAPHY OF STRABO, page 227). Surely there is no mistaking where Elam is today.
… “Siberia!” The same word was used to refer to a part of ancient Elam, and today we have the Serbians in Yugoslavia – part of the land of Elam today! In Bible times Elam was divided between East and West, that is, between Media and Babylon. The same is true today! The Elamites are divided between East and West – between Western Europe and the Russian Iron Curtain’ – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The former Yugoslavia and Poland do descend from Shem, though not from Elam. Pul is not a mistranslation for Phut, nor does it refer to Poland, but rather a King of Assyria as already touched upon previously – Article: Four Kings & One Queen.
Israel a History of – emphasis mine:
‘The first of Shem’s sons listed is Elam. The Elamites are recurrent throughout Scripture, and many monuments attest to their prominence in the region. Genesis 14 describes a confederation of Kings that waged war in Canaan during the times of Abram.
One of the leaders of this alliance was Chedorlaomer, King of Elam. The Elamites capital city was Susa, or Shushan. This archaic city was located east of Mesopotamia. The Noahic Prophecy of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem is fulfilled through the Elamites. They later merged with other peoples, namely the Medes. The Medes were descended from Madai, a son of Japheth. These two peoples joined forces to form the Persian Empire. Thus, the descendants from two of the sons of Noah, Shem and Japheth, joined together to form one of antiquity’s most powerful empires.’
According to Abraim, the meaning of Elam in Hebrew is ‘hidden’, from the verb ‘alam ‘to be hidden.’
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
A region named Elam is first mentioned in the War of Four Against Five Kings, when Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, enters into an alliance with kings Amraphel, [Arioch] and Tidal to battle an alliance of five Canaanite kings (Genesis 14:1).
The Persian province named Elam, or Elymais, mentioned by the prophets Jeremiah 49:36… and Isaiah (21:2). The author of Acts seems to distinguish between Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia [Sumer] (Acts 2:9), and Ezra equates the Elamites with the men of Susa (a Persian city – Ezra 4:9).
The first mentioned person named Elam is a son of Shem… It’s assumed that the Biblical narrative identifies this Elam as the ancestor of the Persians.
A gatekeeping Korahite (1 Chronicles 26:3).
A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 8:24).
An Elam among the signers of the covenant (Nehemiah 10:14).
Two heads of families that came back from exile, both named Elam (Ezra 2:7 and 2:31). One of these is possibly the same as the next:
The father of Shecaniah, son of Jehiel, who confessed to Ezra that Israel’s marriage to local women was contrary to the stipulations of YHWH (Ezra 10:2).
A priest present at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall (Nehemiah 12:42).
‘The verb (‘alam)… can be derived of any of the following: to be hidden or concealed and noun (ta’alumma) describes a hidden thing, but all this with an emphasis on a potential coming out rather than a hiding for, say, safety or mysteriousness. Noun (‘elem) describes a young man, (‘alma) a young woman, and (‘alumim) youth(s) in general, which appears to appeal to the still “hidden” potential of youth. Likewise the noun (olam), which means forever or everlasting, appears to refer to the potential of any present situation, which may realise when time is unlimited.
For the meaning of the name Elam, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Hidden, and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Hidden Time, Eternity, but the name Elam means just as much Young Man or Always.’ Strong’s Concordance adds ‘distant’.
‘Persia: from the verb (paras), to split or divide.
The name Persia once belonged to a huge empire, and is today mostly used to refer to the geographical area in which the much smaller derivative state of Iran (… which was named after king Aryaman, who lived around the time of David in 1000 BC) is situated, as well as its culture, history and language (Farsi, from the same root as Persia, which is spoken in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajkistan and some other formerly Persian regions)’ – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran.
‘Cyrus descended from Achaemenes (born around 700 BC… ) who had founded the Achaemenid dynasty of rulers of Persis (now Fars province of Iran; its ancient capital was called Parsa or Persepolis by the Greeks), and was named after his paternal grandfather Cyrus the First. Cyrus the Second’s maternal grandfather Astyages was a Median king and Cyrus may actually have spent his early childhood at the Median court.
For some obscure reason, themean Median king Astyages went to war with his noble grandson Cyrus, who by that time had just ascended the modest and feudal throne of Persis. The ensuing victory was Cyrus’, but was also strikingly reported due to a mutiny on the Median side. Cyrus marched onto to the Median capital, and kept going until he had conquered Lydia [Lud] and Babylon… Cyrus the Great, had liberated and united their countless tribes and peoples into the largest empire the world has ever seen, stretching from the Balkans to India.
Persia’s signature quality was its promotion of religious and cultural diversity via a centralized administration, and for many centuries, Cyrus’ Persia was remembered with great nostalgia as a time of worldwide peace. It was that international nostalgic memory of Persian global freedom that paved the way for the copy-cat empire of Alexander of Macedon.
The origin of the name Persia appears to be not wholly agreed upon, but an excellent candidate is the ancient root far-, from whence come the Farsi word fars, meaning horseman, and the Arabic word farash, meaningstable [for horses]. The original Persians were either part of or developed close to the Eurasian nomads of the steppes, who are credited with the domestication of the horse. Tamed horses did wonders for the advancement of civilization, as well as for warfare and the centralization of large territories. For better or worse, the horse culture was exceedingly dominant in Eurasia, and it stands to reason that the Persians proudly dubbed themselves The Horse People.
This far- root may even be related to the Greek word (peri) and Avestan pairi-, meaning “around”, from which comes the modern Persian and Arabic word firdaus, meaning garden, and ultimately our word “paradise”. This very common Greek word (peri) is also the root of words such as the adjective (perissos), meaning exceeding, and the noun (perisseuma), meaning abundance. The Greek name for Persia was (Persis), which to a Greek ear probably sounded like Land of Plenty. This is not so strange since even in our time the word Persia brings to mind surplus and luxury (think of Persian rugs, Persian cats and even the peach, or “persic”).
The roots (paras)… most basically speak of a sudden bursting forth in a wide spray of elements of something that was previously well concealed [see meaning for Elam]. Verb (paras) means to breakanddividein equal shares. The name Persia probably literally means Land Of The Horses*, but because the horse became known as “one hoofed” and then simply as “a hoof” and the hoof in turn began to be known mostly for its cloven variety of domesticated cattle, the name Persia in Hebrew adopted the additional meaning of Land Of Divisions.’
An important element in Persia’s rise to immense power was their terrifyingly effective use of cavalry. Cyrus the Great’s marriage allowed Persia access to the renowned Median horses, as well as allowing the Persians to adopt a variety of military tactics borrowed from the Medes – as used by the Scythians. Many breeds were used and colours ranged from black to light chestnut.
No mixed colours, light colours or white markings were allowed as these horses were prone to bad hoofs and becoming lame. The situation could not be solved prior to the advent of horseshoes. The Median horses were noted as being exceptionally powerful, with larger heads and proud necks. Stunning white Nisean horses – carefully trained – were used for kings and generals to stand out; denoting wealth and authority.
Persian cavalry soldiers used large bright, heavily embroidered saddle cloths. Stirrups and saddles were not yet in use, so they were essentially riding bareback. In time, horses acquired armour of barding, a leather and metal apron to protect their chest; a bronze plate to protect their head; and a parmeridia which was a curvature of the saddle to protect the rider’s thighs. The Assyrians and the Sakaehad used horse armour from the seventh century BCE, though the Persians first mentioned employing it in 401 BCE with Cyrus the Younger’s Guard Cavalry. Cyrus the Younger was the son of Darius II of Persia and a prince and general Satrap of Lydia and Ionia from 408 to 401 BCE, when he died during a failed attempt to oust his older brother Artaxerxes II from the Persian throne.
The Nisean* or Nisaean horse is mentioned by Herodotus circa 430 BCE: “In front of the king went first a thousand horsemen, picked men of the Persian nation – then spearmen a thousand, likewise chosen troops, with their spearheads pointing towards the ground – next ten of the sacred horses called Nisaean, all daintily caparisoned. (Now these horses are called Nisaean, because they come from the Nisaean plain, a vast flat in Media, producing horses of unusual size.)” They were the most valuable horse breed, with a more robust head compared to Arabian breeds and the royal Nisean was the preferred mount of the Persian nobility.
The Nisean horse was so sought after, that the Greeks – particularly, the Spartans; Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – imported Nisean horses and bred them with their native stock and many nomadic tribes, such as the Scythians also imported, captured, or stole Nisean horses. Nisean horses had several traits, which they passed on to their descendants. One of them were bony knobs on their forehead often referred to as horns. This could have been due to prominent temple bones or cartilage on their forehead and is reminiscent of a unicorn. Pure white Niseans were the horses of kings and in myth, the gods. The Assyrians started their spring campaigns, by attacking the Medes so as to take their horses. The Medes were the breeders of the first Nisean horses; though the Nisean eventually became extinct by 1200 CE.
Turkish Flag
Earlier, a number of scriptures regarding Elam were studied, when verses on Madai were read – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. The Turk and Turko-Mongol relationship now established, we will concentrate on Elam; though we shall return to Madai towards the end of this chapter.
Ezekiel 32:24
English Standard Version
‘Elam is there, and all her multitude around her grave; all of them slain, fallen by the sword, who went down uncircumcised into the world below, who spread their terror in the land of the living; and they bear their shame with those who go down to the pit.’
Daniel 8:2
Expanded Bible
‘In this vision I saw myself in thecapital city [or fortress city] of Susa, in the area [or province] of Elam. I was standing by the Ulai Canal [or Gate].’
The capital of Elam was Susa or Shushan, where the christian name Susan derives. Today, the capital of Turkey since 1923 is Ankara. Historically, it was Constantinople – changed to Istanbul in 1453 – and it is this city that equates with ancient Susa.
In the Book of Jasher 7:15, we learn of the sons of Elam:
… and the sons of Elam were Shushan, Machul and Harmon.
Turkey – in Asia Minor or Anatolia – is located at the crossroads between Europe and Asia and thus has had a pivotal geographic role. The city of Troy, famous in Greek literature, was located on the present western Turkish coastline – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
There were numerous city states in the Aegean-Asia Minor region, with the first major empires in Anatolia including the Hittite Empire in the west and the Assyrians to the east. The Persian Empire followed, then the Greco-Macedonian and of course the Roman Empire. In 330 CE, Byzantium became the new capital of the Roman Empire under Roman Emperor Constantine I – Articles: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. The city was renamed Constantinople and remained the capital of the Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years.
In the eleventh century, the Turks began to invade the area. The Seljuk Sultanate defeated the Byzantium army at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. The Ottoman Empire was founded by Osman I in 1299. It would become a powerful empire and ruled for just over six hundred years. In 1453 the Ottomans, under Sultan Mehmet II – the Conqueror – defeated Constantinople after besieging it for fifty-five days bringing an end to the Byzantium Empire. From 1520 until 1566, Suleiman the Magnificent ruled and he expanded the empire to include much of the Middle East, Greece, and Hungary. In 1568, the first conflict between Russia and Turkey initiated a series of Russo-Turkish wars which endured until 1878.
After World War I, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and Turkish war hero Mustafa Kemal founded the Republic of Turkey in 1923. He became known as Ataturk, which means ‘father of the Turks’. Turkey has the second largest standing military force in NATO, after the United States Armed Forces. The population of Turkey is 87,639,088 people, now less than neighbouring Iran.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Turkish global shipments during 2021.
Vehicles: US$25 billion
Machinery including computers: $20.8 billion
Iron, steel: $17.1 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $12 billion
Gems, precious metals: $11 billion
Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $10.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $10 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $8.8 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $8.5 billion
Clothing, accessories (not knit or crochet): $7.5 billion
Iron and steel represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 94.1% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which rose 80.5% led by refined petroleum oils. Turkey’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 63.8%, propelled by higher international revenues from gold.’
Turkey is the 19th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $761.43 billion in 2019. Turkey has a mainly open economy, containing large industrial and service sectors. Major industries include: electronics, petrochemicals and automotive production. Ever present political turmoil, with involvement in regional armed conflicts result in financial and currency market instability for Turkey; raising questions on its economic future.
‘The nation’s geography is a mirror of its political and military position… [and] it is being pulled both ways. Turkey covets recognition by the West – even to the point of desiring inclusion in the European Union. Turkey as part of NATO regularly cooperates with the United States in military operations in the region. But Turkey is still a Muslim nation. The Turkish government pays the salaries of 60,000 imams and dictates the contents of their sermons, often down to the last word.
In the years following World War I, Kemal Ataturk aggressively transformed Turkey from a theocratic autocracy into a Western-oriented democracy. In 1922 he abolished the Sultanate. In 1924 he abolished the Caliphate and religious courts. In 1925 he made it illegal to wear the fez (a symbol of backwardness). Having rid Turkey of the trappings of Islam,he adopted Western ways. In 1925 Turkey adopted the Western calendar; in 1926 the Swiss civil code and Italian penal code; in 1928 [Turkey] switched to the Latin alphabet; in 1931 the metric system; in 1934 all Turks were obliged to take a surname, and women were given the vote. After World War II Turkey joined all the main Western institutions: the UN, IMF, OECD, Council of Europe and NATO. Turkey received associate membership in the EU in 1963. A crisis began to loom as Turkey applied for full membership in 1987. Although full membership was held out as an eventual goal, it began to become clear that Turkey was not being welcomed by the EU.
Turkey’s rejection has understandably clouded its course and strategy. Turkey is still viewed by many as a Middle Eastern nation with no place in Europe. This is an affront to the Turkish people who have, for many years, rejected much of their own past in favour of becoming members of the West. While full membership negotiations continue (since 2005) their future as part of the EU is still very much in doubt.
… up to quite recently, Turkey has been an ally of Israel, trading the use of air bases while the generals signed military assistance pacts with Israel. The generals have also made sure that Turkey remains a strictly secular state according to its constitution. But their power in Turkey is now waning.Islam has again become a rising influence in Turkey, particularly through the Directorate of Religious Affairs, which is attached to the Prime Ministry and has substantial resources (including 90,000 civil service personnel) under its control.
The Directorate supplies imam (mosque prayer leaders) to every village or town; it writes the sermons the imam must preach; it organises the pilgrimages to Mecca; it provides commentaries on religious themes and publishes the Koran and other works; it pronounces judgements on religious questions and monitors mosque building; and it provides teachers and advisors to Turkish citizens living abroad and helps oversee official religious ties with other countries. The secondary education system, the Ankara University faculty, the police force, and the media are all becoming increasingly Muslim controlled.In each succeeding election, conservative Islamic elements seem to be gaining more power.
Turkey has been integrated with the West through membership of organizations such as the Council of Europe, NATO, OECD, OSCE and G-20. But [Turkey] has also fosteredclose cultural, political, economic and industrial relations with the Eastern world, particularly with the Middle East and the Turkic states of Central Asia, through membership in organizations such as the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and Economic Cooperation Organization. Since Turkey is linked to Central Asia both ethnically and linguistically, it has a natural relationship to these nations, and since the breakup of the former Soviet Union she has been able to strengthen her relationship with them greatly. [Four of the five] former Soviet Central Asian republics are Turkic speaking (Tajikistan is the exception, with a Persian dialect).
There has been a recent rise of political Islam… Since gaining power they have gradually been moving Turkey away from the west and towards the east, partly because of the Party’s Islamic roots and partly because of the EU’s rejection of Turkey.If this continues, Turkey will pursue its destiny more towards Eurasia and the Islamic Middle East. If [Turkey] moves away from the West [it] will come under Russian influence, who covets Turkey as it is strategic, giving Russia control of the vital ports on the Mediterranean and the ability to outflank much of Europe [refer article: Four Kings & One Queen].’
Turkey is becoming more like Iran and is increasingly adrift from any real connection with Europe. The Bible supports this role for Elam and its eventual alliance with both the nations of Iran and Pakistan. We will look at the Old Elamite period from 2700 to 1500 BCE, when we study a prominent Biblical Elamite king, Chedorlaomer in the following chapter.
Turkish women
The Middle Elamite period began with the rise of the Anshanite dynasties circa 1500 BCE. Their rule was characterised by an ‘Elamisation’ of language and culture in Susa, and their kings took the title ‘king of Anshan and Susa.’ Anshan was located in the mountainous north of Elam’s territory and Susa in the lowland south. The relationship between the two akin to the one today between Ankara the capital and Istanbul. The city of Susa, is one of the oldest in the world – as a past forerunner to the future Constantinople – dating back in records to at least 4200 BCE. Since its founding, Susa was known as a central power location for Elam and then later, for the related Persian dynasties. Susa’s power peaked during the Middle Elamite period between 1500 to 1100 BCE as the region’s capital.
Some of the kings married Kassite princesses. The Kassites were also a Language Isolate speaking people – arriving from the Zagros Mountains – who had taken Babylonia shortly after its sacking by the Hittite Empire in 1595 BCE. The Kassite king of Babylon Kurigalzu II – who had been installed on the throne by Ashur-uballit I of the Middle Assyrian Empire – temporarily occupied Elam circa 1320 BCE. We will look further into the relationship between the Hittites and Assyria, as well as the association of the Kassities with the Arameans. Kassite-Babylonian power waned and was defeated in 1158 BCE, by a combined force of Elam and the Middle Assyrian Empire, led by their king, Ashur-Dan I.
A couple of decades later, the Elamites were defeated by Nebuchadnezzar I of Babylon who reigned from 1125 to 1104 BCE – not to be confused with Nebuchadnezzar II written at length in the scriptures and king from 605 to 562 BCE – who sacked Susa; thus ending the greatest period of Elamite power during the Middle dynasties, but who was then himself defeated by the Assyrian king Ashur-resh-ishi I. The Elamite king – Khutelutush-In-Shushinak circa 1120 to 1110 BCE – fled to Anshan, but later returned to Susa and his brother, Shilhana-Hamru-Lagamar may have succeeded him as the last king of the Middle Elamite dynasty.
The last part of Shilhana’s name, ‘Lagamar’ is also the end suffix of Chedor-laomer. We will study this in significantly more detail – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings. Following Khutelutush-In-Shushinak, the power of the Elamite empire began to wane quickly and Elam disappears into obscurity for over three centuries.
The darkening shroud enveloping Elam’s history from 1100 to 770 BCE included their migration northwards to Lake Urmia after their defeat. They resurfaced in the region as the Parsu. Assyrian sources circa 800 BCE distinguish the ‘powerful Medes.’ Medes was a broad term and included a number of peoples such as the Parsu Persians, who would cause the Elamite’s original home in the Iranian Plateau, to be renamed Persia.
In the 653 BCE, the Assyrian vassal state of Media fell to the Scythians and Cimmerians, causing the displacement of the migrating Parsu peoples to Anshan which their king Teispes had captured that same year; turning it into a kingdom under Asshurbanipal’s rule, which would a century later become the nucleus of the Achaemenid dynasty. King Asshurbanipal drove the Scythians and Cimmerians from their lands, while the Medes and Persians remained vassals of Assyria.
We have discussed in our study about Madai, how the Persian Cyrus the Great (576-530 BCE), defeated Media at the Battle of Pasargadae in 551 BCE and became king of both kingdoms. The Median-Persian Empire endured from 550 to 330 BCE, when it was eventually conquered by Alexander the Great.
After the fall of Persia, Elam migrated north again and now we will find them some seven hundred years later in that melting pot region of Central Asia. Madai migrated to the region known as Mongolia, east of central Asia. We would expect to find both Elam as Persia and Madai as Media in Asia and then track them both to their present locations in primarily: Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan.
We will now investigate the proposition, that the Persians of Elam were included in the Hunnic peoples of Asia and were therefore the principal body of people known as the Huns; who in turn ultimately, settled in Asia Minor evolving into the mighty Ottoman Empire, the precursor to the modern nation of Turkey. As with many discussions on peoples of the past and their link with modern nations, there is much debate and polarisation in viewpoint on the Hunnic-Turkic association. Ultimately, there is an accurate explanation and this is what we are endeavouring to discover with each and every identity.
The Huns invaded southeastern Europe circa 370 CE and for seven decades built an enormous empire in central Europe. The Huns appeared from behind the Volga and the Don Rivers. They had overrun the Alani (Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America), overthrew the Ostrogoths (Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans) and defeated the Visigoths (Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil), in present day Romania by 376. ‘As warriors, the Huns inspired unparalleled fear. They were amazingly accurate mounted archers and their complete command of horsemanship, their ferocious charges… unpredictable retreats and the speed of their strategical movements brought them overwhelming victories.’
The Huns extended their power over many of the Germanic peoples of Europe and fought for the Romans. By 432 CE the leadership of the Huns had been centralised under a single king, Rua, or Rugila, who ruled for two years. Rua died in 434 and he was succeeded by his two nephews, Bleda and Atilla. About 445, Attila murdered his brother Bleda and in 447 continued his assault on the Eastern Roman Empire. He decimated the Balkans and forged south into Greece.
The Huns acquired gold from a. their treaties with Rome; b. plunder and c. by selling prisoners back to the Romans. This wealth altered the nature of their society. The military leadership became hereditary in Attila’s family and Attila assumed autocratic powers both in peace time and war. Atilla administered his impressive empire by means of loyal men, logades, whose function was the governing of and the collection of, the food and tribute from subject peoples.
In 451 Attila invaded Gaul but was defeated by Roman and Visigoth forces at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains or according to some authorities, of Maurica. This was Attila’s first and only defeat. In 452 the Huns invaded Italy but famine and pestilence forced them to abandon the campaign. In 453 Attila died and his many sons began quarrelling among themselves, whilst embarking on a series of costly struggles with their subjects who had revolted. The Huns were finally routed in 455 by a combination of Gepidae, Ostrogoths, Heruli and others in a great battle on the unidentified river Nedao in Pannonia. From there, they receded into the historical background.
The Huns, reminiscent of the Turks over a thousand years later, were able to push deep within civilised Europe, but weren’t able to subjugate all of southern Europe. As the Turks pressed deep into eastern Europe and encroached on the Austro-Hungarian Empire, they were not able to penetrate any further west. The influence of the Huns is shown by their name left in the country of the Magyars, Hun-gary.
The Origins of the Huns – A new view on the eastern heritage of the Hun tribes. Text edited from conversations with Kemal Cemal, Turkey, 1 November 2002 – apart from Editor’s note, emphasis mine:
Editor’s Note: “When it was published in 2002 the subject of this article was somewhat controversial, and is even more so with hindsight. The views expressed here are the author’s own. They are presented here as the ‘opposition’ view of Hunnic origins, a view which did not fully tie in with prevailing thought on the Huns, and does so even less today.”
‘Although in the past the Huns are thought to have been Mongolian emigrants[descended from Madai (and Japheth) for instance],it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin[descended from Elam (and Shem)]. This point has been repeated by thousands of historians, sinologists, turcologists, altaistics, and other researchers. Let me try to state how this idea began with Sinology researchers.
While the Mongol Empire was in the ascendancy, the power of the Catholic Church seemed to be fading, and the power of the Pope was somewhat shaky. At the same time, the Mongols opened the eastern roads for travel, and the Pope decided that there were now so many evident non-Christians that his power in the West was under severe threat. If he could convert these non-Christians he could regain power. As a result, Jesuit missionaries started to head east. Before spreading Christianity, they researched Chinese beliefs. They examined Chinese history and philosophy’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. ‘There were some missioners who stayed twenty or thirty years in China, and built up healthy relations with Chinese scholars. They also started to translate Chinese books about both history and philosophy into Western languages.
The first translations were made in Portuguese. Then this was translated to the other languages; Spanish, Italian and French’ – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. ‘So the West started to learn about China from these Jesuit missionaries.
Sin means China in Latin and Sinology means“sciences of China.” Sinology mainly started with these translations in the sixteenth century, and Turk history became part of this study. Later, the number of Sinology studies increased with many travellers from the West heading to China. The book written by de Guinness in the eighteenth century is accepted as one of the important collected studies about Turkish history. De Guinness did not know Chinese but he wrote the history of the Turks [Elam-Turkey], Mongols [Madai/Turko-Mongols] and Tartars [Madai/Turko-Mongols] by using Jesuit missionaries’ translations. It was printed under the name of “General History of Turks, Tatars andMongols.”
All the information obtained to this point by the researchers showed that the Huns were of Turkic origin. We learn nearly all our current knowledge on the Huns from the information left to us by their contemporary neighbours. For example. It is pretty definite that their language was Turkic. Chinese annals reveals that the Hunnic language was very close to that of the Toles, a Turkic tribe. The Byzantine Empire said that the language of the Huns was the same as the languages of the Bulgars, Avars, Szeklers and other tribes which were flooding into Eastern Europe from Central Asia. The historians of that period accepted that these Turkic-speaking tribes were no different from the Huns because their languages were the same.
There are many words written in Chinese chronicles which were used by Huns in daily life. These are Turkic words. K Shiratoriy, reading a Hunnic sentence which has survived to the present day, has proven that it is Turkic. Hunnic-runic writings belonging to European Huns in Cafcasia has been read and has been proven to be of Turkic origin.
One area for backing up this claim is that of Hunnic names. It is difficult to explain the names belonging to Asian Huns because of [the] fact that they were translated into Chinese in the form of Chinese names. The meanings of the names of European Huns can be comfortably explained in Turkish. One of the most striking features related to European Hunnic names is that they can’t be explained by any language but Turkish. Some of the names belonged to the German language due to cultural interaction, but the majority of them were Turkish. The author W Bang has proven the name of Attila’s wife was Arikan in Turkish in the result on his researches.
There are many names and captions belonging to Hunnish leaders which were written down in a document at Duro-Eropas, a border castle in Doma which was captured by the Persians in 260 BC. These names and captions are Turkish names and captions. Aramaic writing in present-day Georgia appeared in the period following the Huns’ penetration into the Caucuses. This writing was also used by the Bulgars. It is estimated that this writing was proto-Turkic and appeared before the Orkhun inscriptions in Mongolia.
The word “Hun”comes from the word“kun” in Turkish… It means people, or nation.
Tengri also means ‘God’ or ‘Heaven’ in Mongolian
English GOD POLITICALPOWER GIRL WOMAN HORSETAIL MAGIC ARMY IRANIAN GO WOLF STRONG/THICK SWORD COUNTRY
Hunnish TENGRI KUT KIZ KATUN TUG BÜYÜ ORDA TAT BAR BÖRI TOK KILIÇ EL
Turkish TENGRI KUT KIZ KATUN/KADIN/HATUN TUG BÜYÜ ORDA/ORDU TAT BAR BÖRI/KURT TOK KILIÇ EL
A book written by Gyula Nemeth, the world famous Hungarian historian is recommended for further reading on this subject, and will greatly expand on this short feature.There are many Turkology institutes which study… the origins of the Turks in many European countries from Denmark and Germany to Russia and Japan. All of these contain a great number of resources regarding the origin of the Huns.
As stated, many sources claim the Huns were of Mongol origin, since European Huns were somewhat mongoloid in appearance. Some historians also accept Turks as Mongols. All of these views are somewhat back-to-front. The Chinese annals say the Mongols[from Madai] always lived to the east ofthe lands in which the Huns [from Elam]dwelt.The Mongols originate from what is now known as Manchuria [and Mongolia].
The Mongol Empire was based on Turkic elements rather than Mongol elements. The governing structure of the empire was based on Turkic ideas of governing. The official language of the Mongol Empire was Uigrian, which is a Turkic language. Eighteen Turkish tribes played an important role in the founding of the Mongol Empire. There are many more examples that show the effects of Turkic elements on the Mongol Empire. For example, the Indian Moghal Empire was established by Turks. But many scholars still hold the belief that the Moghals were of Mongol origin. The truth is that the language of the Moghals* was Turkic, and that the founders of this empire were proud of being Turk.’
The Moghuls* may have actually been a Turko-Mongol mix of people as scholars profess, with their offspring deriving from inter-tribal wars and the intermixing of the various Central Asian tribes. For they possessed not only a Turkic physiognomy but also included distinct mongol features. More indicative of the line of Madai than Elam, who were already a mixture of the two peoples. Generally aggressive towards their enemies and competitors they were known as excellent horse riders. Their descent seems to be via Timur-i Lang – or Tamerlane, founder of the eastern Iranian Timurid dynasty – and Chagatai Khan of the Chaghatayids. From 1519, as the ruler of Kabul, in Afghanistan, their leader Babar led a great many raids on Delhi, in India. In 1526, he was invited by the nobility to invade the sub-continent. Babar created a Moghal empire which eventually sacked and controlled Delhi, making it the heart of the empire.
Kemal Cemal: ‘You can come across many researchers who say the Huns are a nation whose origin is still [a] mystery. When you look at bibliographies on internet sites you will see that those sites have referenced the work of historians such as McGovern and Haelfen-Manchen, but these sitesdon’t say these authors already accept the Huns as Turkic.Haelfen-Manchen accepts that Asiatic Huns were in fact of Turkic origin and says that their language was also Turkic, but he raises an objection by adding that, in his view, European Huns are not descended from Asiatic Huns.
I don’t know the reason for it but many European researchers still seem not to accept that Attila’s Huns were of Turkic stock.’
A selection of insightful comments from forums on the general question: Who are the Huns Today? Emphasis mine.
1 ‘… less educated people, and advocates of the “non-Türkic origin theory of the Huns” also often claim that “the Turks did not exist before the 6th century AD”. But these arguments have been refuted by theknown fact that names evolve and change, and the same [people] during different eras are mentioned under different names.
If in today’s terminology, the linguistic family and ethnos are called ‘Turkic’, they were called “Hun, Scythian, Tatar” etc. during other periods. The main body of the Turkic people consisted of ‘Tele/Tiele’ tribes, a confederation of nine Turkic [peoples]. The main body of the Huns consisted of Uigur tribes, and the modern descendants of the Tiele people are called the Turks. The first known records of the Turks are milleniums older than the modern notions of the linguistic family and the ethnos termed ‘Turkic’. For instance, Ptolemy used “Huns, Ases/Alans” instead of “North Pontic Turks”. Therefore, the Great Hunnic Empire was founded, and governed by the Turks. The first ‘tanhu/khan’ of the empire was Teoman/Tu-Man. He was succeeded by his son Mete/Mo-Tun. According to some theories, Mete and Oghuz Khan, the semi-mythological ancestor of the Turks, are the same persona.
The Gokturks considered themselves as the continuation of the Huns as well. The European Huns also emerged as a result of the migration movements following the collapse of the Hunnic Empire. Which means that Attila [the Hun], Teoman and Mete were the leaders of the same nation.
The list of scholars who acknowledge that the Huns were Turkic covers the whole alphabet:
“Altheim.. Bazin.. Bernshtam.. Chavannes.. Clauson.. de Guignes.. Eberhard.. Franke.. Grousset.. Gumilev.. Haussig.. Hirth.. Howorth.. Klaproth.. Krouse.. Lin Gan.. Loufer.. Marquart.. Ma Zhanshan.. McGovern.. Nemeth.. Parker.. Pelliot.. Pricak (Pritsak).. Radloff.. Remusat.. Roux.. Samolin.. Szasz.. and Wang Guowei.”
‘Chinese chronicles carry numerous statements on the linguistic and ethnological closeness or identity of the many Hunnic tribes. Among them are direct statements :
“Weishi and Beishi say that the customs and language of Yueban Xiongnu were the same with the Gaoche… Beishi gives the ancestry legend of the Gaoche and links it with the Xiongnu [Huns]. Zhoushu and Beishi state that the “Tujue [Turks-Gokturks]” were a branch of the Xiongnou. Suishu states that the ancestors of Tiele were descendants of Xiongnu. Xin Tangshu says that the ancestors of Huihe [Uigur] are the Xiongnu.”
‘The Eastern and Western Huns belonged to the Ogur linguistic family, the kin of Oghuz branch. Ogur is modestly called as the Karluk group today. In the antiquity, the Ogur family was much more visible than the Oghuz, due to their proximity to the literate southern populations. In addition, the Ogur group included Tochars, Kangars, Uigurs, Karluks, Bulgars, Khazars, Sabirs, Agathyrs and Avars. Huns are the ancestors of both Turks[from Elam] and Mongols [from Madai]…Turks and Mongols were once the same [united] people and have separated into two different ethnic groups after the Huns. In the past Mongolians looked more European than they do today. The Huns were genetically Eurasiatic. Chinese historians make this very clear.
The confusion… arises from the fact that, defeated by the Chinese (3rd century?), half the Huns stayed in their ancestral homeland (Mongolia and Manchuria) and were gradually assimilated by the Chinese, and [the] other half moved Westward. Part of those that moved West became the ancestors of the modern Turks and Mongols [Turko-Mongol, Tatar], whereas the bulk, still under the ethnonym Hun, ended up in Europe and ruled most of Europe for close to a century. These (European) Huns [the Turks] had Uralic, Iranic, Slavic and Germanic people as their loyal subjects.
The Xiongnu from Mongolia/Manchuria predates the Huns in Europe (as they showed up 200 years later from the northern borders of China). Many scholars have debated for years and many now are in… agreement that they’re the same confederacy who… reached Europe. There were many Turkic tribes in Central and Western Asia. Many of the Mongol or Manchu origin of Xiongnu have integrated with the Turks, Alans, and other nomadic people as they [traveled] further to the west.
[A] Russian anthropologist (1960s) provided the ethnological details of the skulls and remains when [visiting] the Hunnish and Avar cemetary sites in Hungary and Romania. Most of [the] Hunnish elite leaders had a striking resemblance to modern Manchurians and the elite Avar remains with central Mongolians. He… also noted that… most of calvary remains were either intermixed or homogenous.
Overall, it had a higher Turkic related remains (70% Turkic vs 30% Mongoloid). What’s interesting about his report is that the elite skulls were purely Mongoloid [Madai] without any mixture of Turks [Elam].
Hun, Avar and conquering Hungarian nomadic groups arrived into the Carpathian Basin from the Eurasian Steppes and significantly influenced its political and ethnical landscape. In order to shed light on the genetic affinity of above groups we have determined Y chromosomal haplogroups and autosomal loci, from 49 individuals, supposed to represent military leaders. Haplogroups from the Hun… are consistent with Xiongnu ancestry of European Huns [from Elam]. Most of the Avar… individuals carry east Asian Y haplogroups [C2, K and O2]… and their autosomal loci indicate mostly unmixed Asian characteristics [of Madai].
Let’s not speculate and have too much dependency on the languages and cultures alone as much can be borrowed. At the end of the day, the genetic proof wins in understanding the origin.’
2. ‘A great way of viewing the legacy of the Turkic migration is by looking at the spread of Altai-Uralic speaking minorities and nations. Speaking about the Uralic tribes, they are believed to share some basic fundamental similarities in language with the Altaic family. Uralic languages would include Hungarian, Finnish and Estonian. The Turkic tribes and Huns introduced the Uralic tribes to the Altaic language. All the Ural-Altaic languages share certain characteristics of syntax, morphology, and phonology. The languages use constructions of the type the-by-me-hunted bear rather than “the bear that I hunted,” and a-singing I went rather than “I sang as I went.” There are few if any conjunctions. Suffixation is the typical grammatical process – that is, meaningful elements are appended to stems, as in house-my, “my house,” go-(past)-I, “I went,” house-from, “from the house,” go-in-while, “while (in the act of) going,” and house-(plural)-my-from, “from my houses.”
A great many Ural-Altaic languages require vowel harmony; the vowels that occur together in a given word must be of the same type. Thus poly, “dust,” is a possible word in Finnish because o and y are both mid vowels and hence belong to the same phonetic class; likewise polku, “path,” is possible because o and u are both vowels. Words such as polu or poly are not possible, because o and u, or o and y, are too dissimilar. Stress generally falls on the first or last syllable; it does not move about, as in the English series family, familiar, familiarity.
Typically, the Ural-Altaic languages have no verb for “to have.” Possession is expressed by constructions such as the Hungarian nekem van, “to-me there-is.” Most of the languages do not express gender, do not have agreement between parts of speech (as in French les bonnes filles, “the good girls”), and do not permit consonant clusters, such as pr-, spr-, -st, or -rst, at the beginning or end of words.
Before the Hunnic empire the Scythians had migrated west from central Asia and had adopted Iranian influence. Just like the Oghuz Turkic tribes centuries later. However, The Scythians spoke a ‘Turkisized Iranian dialect’.
The Scythians are very hard to uncover but are believed to have included groups of Huns with major Iranian influence’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. ‘Turkic tribes were believed to have lived on the fringes of Scythia. All these Proto Turkic-Mongol groups were nomadic horse-riding pastoralists in north-east Asia, and would attack ruthlessly with bow and arrow when migrating west. The Yuezhi, Huns and Turkic-Mongol groups lived in exclusive historical periods to one another. Their descendants and precursors lived close to each other, occasionally intermarried and influenced each other culturally.
Interestingly Yuezhi were Chinese with Indian influence, in modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan. The Huns consisted of many smaller Turkic tribes in their advancements into Europe as well as Scythian tribes. Scythian and the Uralic tribes are also believed to form the Huns, Many Germanic tribes also formed infantry in the Hunnic empire against the Eastern and Western Roman empire. Still, the father of the Turkic peoples is considered – Bumin Qaghan the founder of the first Turkic empire called the Celestial Turks : Gokturks.
Bumin Qhagan was born [in 490 CE] just 37 years after the death of Atilla [in 453 CE]. Bumin Qhagan was the first to refer to himself as a Turk which stems origins to the word ‘Combat helmet’ in Chinese. Theseearly Turkic people spoke old Turkic dialectand believed inTengri – the one god represented by the Sun. Modern day Turks call God Tanri, and believe in the one god. Common Turkish and Turkic names include Atilla, Cengiz (Genghiz), Kaan (Qhagan).
It is a question whether the early Proto Turkic-Mongol groups such as the Avars, Khazars, Huns influenced the languages of the indigenous people. The Orkhon Inscriptions is the oldest preserved Old Turkic script. The inscriptions provided much of the foundation for translating other Turkic writings.The Hunnic language has been compared mainly with Turkic, Mongolic and Yeniseian languages, but bears most resemblance to this Old Turkic script.
The Huns are considered inter-related to these Turkic tribes just as much as Mongolians are.When calling Huns ‘Turk’ and ‘Turkic’ it is very misleading. The Turks mentioned are the descendants of the Gokturks of the Altai mountains hence ‘Altaic’ or the members of the Ashina [ancient Elamite city of Anshan] tribe. Also known as Asen, Asena, or Açina. It was the ruling dynasty of the old/ancient Turkic Peoples. It rose to prominence in the mid 6th century when Bumin Qaghan, revolted against the Rouran Khaganate and established the first Turkic empire.
Modern day Turks were so proud of their ancestry, they carried on the name Turk instead of Oghuz or Seljuk, the name of the Turkic Tribes in Persia and Anatolia, unlike many Central Asian nations such as the Kazakh’s, Azeri’s, Uzbeks, Turkmens, Kygrz… In fact, the Oghuz and Seljuks predecessor, the Ottomans, named their empire after their leader Osman and still referred to themselves as the ‘Turkish Empire’ for centuries.
Modern day Turkey is more the Oghuz Turkic tribe or Oghuzstan/Seljukstan bearing heavy Persian and Byzantine influence than ‘Land of the Turks’. Therefore the term ‘Turk’ and ‘Turkic’ arevery distinct. Information on the Hunnic language is contained in personal names and tribal ethnonyms. On the basis of these names, scholars have proposed that Hunnic may have been a Turkic language,a languagebetweenMongolic and Turkic.Since the Huns consisted of many Turkic tribes, Turkic language had a huge influence in the Hunnic language.’
‘The Hunnic language is part of the broader Altaic languages, which is the family of Turkic and Mongolian languages. The Huns can be considered Altaic if we were to reference language and therefore Mongolian-Turkic.’
3. ‘Of course [the]… Xiongnu was [a] confederation of both Turks and Mongols. When we look at the DNA results, it’s shown clearly. Xiongnu samples divided into two [groups] as Xiong-Nu and Xiong-Nu_WE. Xiong-Nu results are closer to Mongolics and Xiong-Nu_WE results are closer to Central Asian Turkics (mostly to Uzbeks and Uighurs). And if we look [at] their descendants [the] Tian_Shan_Hun, they’re mostly closer to Turkics than any other [nation]. Short answer: Yes. Some [ignorant people] will deny this fact but facts are always painful.’
These comments with the article, support what we have learned about Elam and Madai and their close cultural, linguistic and migratory ties. They also support the assertion that the Huns were the precursors to the Turks and hence are descendants from Elam in the Bible. For there is a connecting link between the Turkic Huns and the Seljuks and Ottoman Turks.
The House of Seljuk originated from the Kinik branch of the Oghuz Turks who dwelt on the outskirts of the Muslim world, in the Yabgu Khagnate of the Oguz confederacy; located to the north of the Caspian and Aral Seas in the ninth century.In the tenth century, the Seljuks began migrating from their ancestral homeland into Persia, which became the base of the Great Seljuk Empire, after its foundation by Tughril.*
In 1071, the Seljuks defeated the Byzantines at the Battle of Manzikert, beginning the Turkification of the region. The Turkish language with Islam, was introduced to Armenia and Anatolia. The culturally Persianised Seljuks laid the foundation for a Turkic-Persian culture in Anatolia; continued by their successors the Ottomans. In 1243, the Seljuk armies were defeated by the Mongols at the Battle of Kose Dag, causing the Seljuk Empire’s power to slowly wane. One of the Turkish principalities governed by Osman I would evolve over the next two hundred years into the formidable Ottoman Empire.
In 1514, Sultan Selim I – ruler from 1512 to 1520 – vigorously expanded the empire’s southern and eastern borders, by defeating Shah Ismail I of the Safavid dynasty of Iran (Lud) in the Battle of Chaldiran. In 1517, Selim I also expanded Ottoman rule into Algeria (Mizra) and Egypt (Pathros) and created a naval presence in the Red Sea.
A contest arose between the Ottoman and Portuguese empires to become the dominant sea power in the Indian Ocean, with a number of naval battle exchanges between the two in the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. The Portuguese presence in the Indian Ocean had been perceived as a threat to the Ottoman monopoly over the ancient trade routes between East Asia and Western Europe – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
The Ottoman Empire’s power and prestige peaked in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, particularly during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, from 1520 to 1566; who instituted major legislative changes relating to society, education, taxation and criminal law. The empire was often in conflict with the Holy Roman Empire in its stubborn advance towards Central Europe through the Balkans and the southern part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the east during the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, the Ottomans were invariably at war with Safavid Persia over conflicts stemming from territorial disputes or religious differences. The Ottoman wars with Persia continued until the first half of the nineteenth century.
An Ottoman Turk Cavalryman
From the sixteenth to the early twentieth century, the Ottoman Empire fought twelve wars with the Russian Tsardom and its sprawling Empire. Primarily about Ottoman territorial expansion and consolidation in southeastern and eastern Europe – beginning with the Russo-Turkish War of 1768 to 1774 – they became more about the survival of the Ottoman Empire; which had begun to lose its strategic territories on the northern Black Sea to the advancing Russians. From the second half of the eighteenth century onwards, the Ottoman Empire began to decline and ultimately culminated in its defeat in World war I after allying with the Central Powers.
The Mongols of Madai meanwhile – on the other side of Asia – had been steadily growing in power at the same time the Seljuk Turks of Elam were migrating to Persia. The father of infamous Chingiz Khan, his real name Temujin was a powerful clan leader named Yesukhei (or Yesugei). He led the Borjigin clan but died when Temujin was still a child – poisoned by Tartars the constant enemies of the Mongols.
Temujin attempted to seize leadership of the Borjigin, but the tribesmen refused to be led by someone so young; so he and his family were cast adrift. Temujin and his brothers grew up in the wilderness, hunting for their own food. A dispute in which he and another brother killed a half-brother called Begter over hunting spoils, cemented his position for being ruthless and a worthy contender for commander. Thus by the time he was a young man, Temujin commanded a group of Mongol warriors. He won favour with Toghril* Khan of the Kerait tribe and was able to build up his forces into a powerful army; including the Onggirat (or Qongrat tribe), the same tribe his mother and his first wife were from. Soon, he was strong enough to attack the hated Tartars, defeating them in battle, beheading all their men, taking their women and children as concubines and slaves and at the same time, avenging his father’s death.
Later, Jamuka a childhood friend, initiated a power struggle, betraying a close bond of trust that had been established between them as children at the age of twelve. For Jamuka and Temujin had become andas, or blood brothers; cemented by drinking each others blood. Jamuka persuaded Toghril that Temujin was a threat to them all and so the two of them allied against him. In the resulting close run campaign which was protracted for a year, Temujin emerged victorious against all the odds. Jamuka fled for his life with Toghril left for dead.
Temujin was elevated to the most powerful warrior chief and at the age of forty-four in 1206, he was declared supreme khan. He then took a completely unique title, Chingiz Khan, meaning ‘the fierce king.’ Genghis Khan – descended from Madai – is as infamous and notorious as his Elamite counterpart before him: Attila the Hun. Gengis Khan died ironically, from a fall from his horse in 1227.
A Mongol cavalryman
Another famous Mongol, was the leader Kublai Khan born in 1215. The Mongols had taken control of China through a series of conquests, ending with total domination between the reigns of Genghis Khan and Kublai Khan. Kublai Khan retained China as his base during a civil war against his brother from 1260 to 1264, for control of the Mongol Empire. From 1279, he was emperor of the Chinese as well as great khan of the Mongols. The centre of the Mongol empire shifted with him to China, fragmenting its authority farther west. Kublai Khan’s death in 1294 heralded the eventual end of the empire’s power, so that the eastern Mongols ruled only in China, Mongolia, southern Siberia, and Tibet.
The Medo-Persian Empire in the Bible is represented by the chest and arms of silver in the prophetic vision of a male statue experienced by Nebuchadnezzar – Daniel 2:32, 39. The silver reflects a lesser refinement and status compared with the previous Chaldean-Babylonian Empire which was represented by a head of gold. The silver alternatively, is a stronger metal portraying a more robust kingdom, lasting longer. The two arms represent the two political-ethnic components of the Persian Empire – Media and Persia.
This great world empire, which followed Babylon’s rise to power, defeated the Chaldeans in 539 BCE. It was symbolised by a bear (Daniel 7:5) and also as a ram in Daniel 8:2-7, 20-21, NET:
2 ‘In this vision I saw myself in Susa the citadel, which is located in the province of Elam.In the vision I saw myself at the Ulai Canal. 3 I looked up and saw a ram with two horns standing at the canal. Its two horns were both long, but one was longer than the other. The longer one [Persia] was coming up after the shorter one [Media]. 4 I saw that the ram was butting westward, northward, and southward.’
The last verse is a clue to Elam’s historic central geographic location, which is replicated today in Turkey’s position in Asia minor; at the strategic crossroads between Europe, the Near east, the Middle East and West Asia – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
‘No animal was able to stand before it, and there was none who could deliver from its power. It did as it pleased and acted arrogantly.
5 While I was contemplating all this, a male goat was coming from the west over the surface of all the land without touching the ground [with great speed]. This goat had a conspicuous horn between its eyes. 6 It came to the two-horned ram that I had seen standing beside the canal and rushed against it with raging strength.
7 I saw it approaching the ram. It went into a fit of rage against the ram and struck it and broke off its two horns. The ram had no ability to resist it. The goat hurled the ram to the ground and trampled it. No one could deliver the ram from its power [in 330 BCE]. 20 The ram that you saw with the two horns stands for the kings of Media and Persia. 21 The male goat is the king of Greece, and the large horn between its eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great].’
We read of a severe judgement on Elam in Jeremiah 49:34-38 ESV, yet a curiously enigmatic and hopeful statement about Elam’s future is written in verse thirty-nine.
“But in the latter days I will restore the fortunes of Elam, declares the Lord.”
The NET says:
“Yet in future days I will reverse Elam’s ill fortune,” says the Lord.
The BBE says:
“But it will come about that, in the last days, I will let the fate of Elam be changed, says the Lord.”
Studies have revealed that Turkish people cluster most closely with population groups such as Armenians, Chechens, Georgians, Kurds, as well as with Iran and have the lowest Fst distance with these peoples – refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. Benedetto in 2001, revealed that Central Asian genetic contribution to the current Anatolian mtDNA gene pool was estimated as roughly thirty percent by comparing the populations of Mediterranean Europe and the Turkic-speaking people of Central Asia.
Recall, a comparison of the Y-DNA Haplogroups for these nations in the preceding Chapter; verified Iran’s link with Turkey, though particularly Azerbaijan. Whereas Turkey, is closer to Armenia and Georgia sits between these two pairings.
A 2012 study of ethnic Turks by Hodoglugil stated – emphasis mine:
‘[The] Turkish population has a close genetic similarity to Middle Eastern and European populations and some degree of similarity to South Asian and Central Asian populations.
Results also indicated previous population movements [such as migration, admixture] or genetic drift and that the Turkish genetic structure is unique.’ This completely supports Elam’s identity as distinct from either Persian, Arab or southeastern European. ‘A study in 2015 confirmed that previous genetic studies have generally used Turks as representatives of ancient Anatolians… results show that Turks are genetically shifted towards Central Asians, a pattern consistent with a history of mixture with populations from this region.’
With the rather recent development of genetic research in relation to human history and population genetics; inevitable criticism has arisen from researchers and scholars traditionally considered expert on the subject – including anthropologists, archaeologists and historians – because the formation of a ‘biological construct of historical communities’, in part, repudiates their twentieth century ‘scholarly’, error-ridden discourses. Or more bluntly: has put a lot of egg on their faces.
Thus, the relatively new proposition of the Central Asiatic ethnic origin of the Turkish people is viewed as problematic, rather than a resolution. The status quo is perceived to be under threat and rightly so, as ensuing collisions between scholastic history which is often theory or opinion-led and fact-based scientific genetic evidence will continue to challenge incorrect orthodoxy. As one academic states: ‘… [the] clash with modern human [genetic research] raises in a new light the questions: What was a “Turk [or Turkic person]” and who are the modern Turks?’
An alarmed academia are rightly concerned that their control over unscientific hypothesising versions of history, will be exposed for the agenda-filled falsehoods it invariably represents. A similar stance will be held by some in that microcosm of historical research, which is influential in the biblical identity of nations movement. A new perception, contrary to the orthodox position is usually received as heretical, no matter how well documented – even with the solid unmoving evidence of science, underpinning it. Yet, as with all truth, it will eventually win out and have the last word.
The mtDNA Haplogroups for Turkey are similar to Iran in that the sequence for their first six groups are in common, though in marked varying percentages; for Turkey is more closely matched with Armenia.
Turkey: H [30.8%] – J [8.9%] – U [6.3%] – K [5.6%] – HV [4.8%] –
W [1.9%] – X [1.9%] – I [1.5%] – U2 [1.3%] – L [1.3%] – HVO + V [0.7%]
Iran: H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] –
T2 [4.9%]
As we did not consider the Tatar mtDNA Haplogroups earlier in Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and only cursorily looked at the Kazakh mtDNA Haplogroups; we will include them in the comparison table.
U4 [7%] – K [5.7%] – HVO + V [3.9%] – U [3.1%] – T1 [2.6%] –
U3 [2.2%] – W [1.8%] – U2 [0.9%] – HV [0.9%] – I [0.9%]
HV H J T2 U K
Kazakhstan 14 4 6 3 3
Iran 7 17 14 5 12 7
Georgia 4 20 3 9 5 12
Azerbaijan 6 23 6 10 9 4
Armenia 6 30 10 5 8 7
Turkey 5 31 9 4 6 6
Tatars 1 32 8 9 3 6
The Tatars possess an interesting resemblance to the Turks; though after everything we have investigated in Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and in this chapter, it is not a surprise. Coupled with the fact that the Tatars are interspersed within the Russian people. The Russian Communist leader Lenin from 1917 to 1924, is repudiated to have had Tatar blood, as well as Jewish. It is difficult to substantiate either, though Lenin was born in Ulyanovsk – known as Kazan/Simbirsk – a city where Russians and Tatars lived together.
The Kazakhs and Tatars aside, Iran and Turkey guided by the dominant H levels, bookend the mtDNA maternal Haplogroups in the wider Caucasus region.
As previously noted when investigating Lud, ‘autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups show a different line of descent for Arab related peoples compared with Europeans, [yet there] must be a common denominator in the maternal lineage for Indians and Arabs from Ham with Europeans from Shem.’ As Haplogroup H is the most common group amongst Europeans and generally Arabs; followed by U and J.
According to a 2004 study by Cinnioglu, there are many Y-DNA Haplogroups present in Turkey. The majority of Haplogroups in Turkey are shared with West Asian and Caucasian neighbours, similar with Iran.
‘The most common haplogroup in Turkey is J2 (24%), which is widespread among the Mediterranean, Caucasian and West Asian populations. Haplogroups that are common in Europe (R1b and I – 20%), South Asia (L, R2, H – 5.7%) and Africa (A, E3*, E3a – 1%) are also present. By contrast, Central Asian haplogroups are rarer (C, Q and O). However, the figure may rise to 36% if K, R1a, R1b and L (which infrequently occur in Central Asia but are notable in many other Western Turkic groups) are also included. J2 is also frequently found in Central Asia, a notably high frequency (30.4%) being observed particularly among Uzbeks.’
Turkey’s Y-DNA Haplogroups in comparison with its near neighbour, Iran.
Turkey: J2 – R1b – G2a – E1b1b – J1 – R1a – I2a1 – N – L –
A Comparison of the main Haplogroups shared between these two nations, highlights that they have the first six in common. The key difference – aside from J2 and G2a – is that it is R1b which Turkey predominates in above R1a; whereas Iran has the opposite correlation. R1a in Europeans is concentrated in eastern Europe and R1b in western Europe. Both J2 and G2a are found in the Caucasus region, southern Europe and the Middle East. Yet J2 is an intermediate paternal line of descent from Ham – particularly defining men from Phut in Pakistan – and G2a an early lineage from Shem. Haplogroups J1 and E1b1b are associated heavily with the Middle East and North Africa and by degree with southern Europe from admixture.
E1b1b [6.5%] – L [6.5%] – Q [5.5%] – T [3%] – N [1%] – I [0.5%]
When we investigated Madai, we compared only those Y-DNA Haplogroups which clearly derived from Japheth – such as C, K, O and Q – and not any suspected admixture Haplogroups from Elam or others.
C O K P Q
Kazakhstan 40 8 10 3 2
Kyrgyzstan 14 8 2 2
Uzbekistan 12 4 7 6
Turkmenistan 13 10
Tajikistan 3
Thus, a comparison table of the principle Y-DNA Haplogroups for Turkey and Iran, as well as the Central Asian Republics as per the Haplogroups more closely associated with Shem of R1a, R1b and G2a or from Ham of J1, J2 and E1b1b – are now appropriate. Tajikistan is included even though it is the least representative of Madai and bears a closer similarity with Pakistan and Afghanistan – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
J1 J2 R1a R1b G E1b1b
Georgia 16 27 9 10 30 2
Iran 9 23 16 10 10 7
Turkey 9 24 8 16 11 11
Armenia 11 22 5 30 12 6
Azerbaijan (31) 7 11 18 6
Tajik 18 44
Turkmen 17 7 37
Uzbek 13 25 10
Kazakh 8 7 6
Kyrgyz 2 64 2
Turkey and Iran apart from R1a and R1b percentages, are remarkably similar in their paternal descent – closer than their mtDNA maternal lineages. The Central Asians are a highly mixed peoples and as viewed on the PCA plot below, act as a genetic bridge between South Asia and Anatolia with the Caucasus.
Recall from the previous chapter, where Iran-Lud-Ludim has interacted considerably with the Arab world, as has Turkey-Elam. Both nations have not strayed as far from their original homeland positions in ancient Mesopotamia – as Asshur, Aram and Arphaxad have – so that they have been in the pathway of peoples migrating east-west and vice-versa. Located at the crossroads of the world in Asia Minor – much like Madai in Central Asia – has meant a variety of additional paternal Haplogroups, albeit some at fractional percentages, being added to their core DNA.
The pie charts reflect the difference between the not so distantly related Greek and Turkish men. The latter having more E1b1b (from admixture) and I2a, whereas the Turks have more G2a.
Turkey and Iran share a number of similar Haplogroup percentages as brothers and sons of Shem.
We will learn in time, that Asshur and Aram are distinct from one another, yet both are more closely related to their brother Arphaxad than to either Elam or Lud. Supporting the hypothesis that nations today are more times than not, located next to those peoples they are more genetically related too. There are exceptions to the rule as we have seen already with Togarmah-Korea and Tarshish-Japan and there will be a handful more.
Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table begun with Lud and now with the addition of Turkey.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b L
Uzbekistan 13 13 25 10
Turkmenistan 17 17 7 37
Azerbaijan 31 6 18 7 11 2
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 7
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 3
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 4
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 2
Turkey and Iran as Elam and Lud, are both Y-DNA Haplogroup J driven and specifically J2. This reveals the impact of intermixing and intermarriage with the dominant Middle Eastern J1 Haplogroup and the enigmatic J2 Haplogroup of West Asia – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens.
We will confirm that the remaining three sons of Shem have more in common with each other and they are R1a or R1b dominant, with Haplogroups G2a, J1, J2 and E1b1b all varying in lesser percentages as a result of admixture.
The focus will shift from J2 and G2a of South West Asia and the Caucasus to R1a and R1b, with the addition of I1 and I2; just as the nations of the Caucasus region shifted from the J1 and E1b1b emphasis of the Arab nations of the Middle East and North Africa.
Haplogroup G is an ancient line of descent from Shem and therefore Haplogroup G2a is an important component in the Turkish paternal heredity as is R1b and a lesser degree R1a – a reverse mirror image of Iran. For while Iran’s non Hamitic sequence is R1a, G2a and R1b; it is R1b, G2a and R1a for Turkish men.
It was concluded in the previous chapter that Persian men descending from Lud, are represented by the defining marker Haplogroup R1a-Z93. Whereas for Turkish males representing the original lineage from Elam, the defining marker Haplogroup – albeit perhaps also originally stemming via Haplogroup G – is R1b-Z2103.
The second son born to Shem after Elam is Asshur. He was an influential ancestor of a mighty people and yet their true identity today is completely mis-understood by experts in the field. So eager are they in convincing the Bible student of their role as Germany which superficially fits, the fact that it is easily exposed as entirely deficient when investigated fully against genetics and hereditary autosomal DNA, completely passes over them.
Though first, the next chapter will focus on the most famous yet enigmatic king in ancient Elam’s history – where the spotlight shines on him brightly in the early chapters of the Book of Genesis.
The ear that hears and the eye that sees – the Lord has made them both.
Proverbs 20:12 New English Translation
“A lie doesn’t become truth, wrong doesn’t become right, and evil doesn’t become good, just because it’s accepted by a majority.”
The fourth son of Shem is Lud. His descendants are an elusive people to track historically and next to impossible to locate for identity researchers and biblical scholars alike. We have discussed the descendants of Phut and of Mizra’s son Lehab intermingling, so that the Bible translation ‘Libya’ applies to both – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.
Commentators have resolutely taught that Lud from Shem and the Lud-im from Mizra are separate peoples. Any references to Lud or ‘Lydia’ have been even more perplexing to the identity hunter in trying to establish which Lud in question is being addressed – the one from Ham, or the one descended from Shem? The answer is that the descendants of Lud, primarily descended from Shem, are living nestled within the region of Ham.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:
‘Shem had a son named Lud (Genesis 10:22). Lud early migrated from the Mesopotamian Valley. We read of Lud only as a trading people in the Old Testament. They play no important part in prophecy, but we ought to know where Lud’s descendants are today.
From the region of Western Mesopotamia, the sons of Lud spread into Western Asia Minor and founded the ancient Kingdom of Lydia. “The Assyrians called Lydia Ludu”, says the International Standard Bible Encylopaedia. From Lydia they spread into Europe. Enroute they gave the name Ludias to a river in Macedonia, north of Greece. Nearby, in Thrace, we find the town of Cabyle. A people of the white race called Cabyle or Kabyle are found in North Africa today!
The Romans found the Lydians spread over much of Italy and along the shores of the Adriatic in early times. They called the Lydians Etruscans and Tuscans. In the little country of Albania (next to Greece) the Tosks live today. The BRITANNICA states that these Albanians are probably “identical with Tuscus [and the] Etruscans” of Roman times, who were of Lud (article “Albania”). The Greeks call Albania Arberia, a word akin to Berber or Barbar. Associated with them are the Berbers, or Barbars. The Greeks probably derived the word Barbarian, meaning non-Greek, from the Berbers of Lud whom they met.
Ezekiel 30:5 gives the definite implication that part of Lud is to be found today in North Africa. Various forms of the name “Albania” are common even today in Italy. From Italy we can trace many Lydians to the East, around the Black Sea, where they founded another Kingdom of Albania in the Caucasus.
According to many historians, “the name [Albania] arose from the alleged fact that the people were the descendants of emigrants from Alba in Italy”, the BRITANNICA states. In the region of the Causasus today dwell many small tribes, related to one another racially, but distinct linguistically. They are not related to any other people in Russia. They are known by a dozen different names. Among these are the Georgians from whom Joseph Stalin came.
The sons of Lud have not become a great people in the world [in part] due to the… geographic areas in which they settled. Isaiah 66:19 describes them today as dwelling among the Latin and Slavic peoples of Europe.’
The descendants of Lud actually play an important role in the future. Understanding their identity reveals they are located in West Asia and therefore not associated with North African, Latin or Slavic speaking peoples. The Albanians have inherited names from previous peoples who have migrated through Southern Europe. Their name Alba-nia does have a close association with the peoples of Alba who passed through Albania and Italy en route to ultimately, Alba in Britain. The Albanians were not a people living in the same location for over 2,500 years; thus their name today is inherited and not original to them – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The Lydian civilisation dwelt in Western Asia Minor and then seemingly disappears from view. We will discover that it was a different people descended from Shem who were the ancient Etruscans. The Etruscans racially and culturally, have much more in common with the Romans and Greeks as well as with the Phoenicians of Carthage – with whom they had an alliance – to indicate any link with Lydia from Lud, to be unlikely. The Georgians though, are a part of Lud’s descendants.
Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:
‘Although there is a Semite of the same name, we find that Lud, grandson of Ham, was father of the Ludim. He was also the first-born of Mizraim. The Hebrew word is ludiyiy (SHD 3866), meaning tothe firebrands: travailings (BDB). (The descendants of Lud, the fourth son of Shem, were supposedly the Lydians.)’
Recall, the definition for Lehab or Lubim, the son of Mizra living with Phut in Pakistan, is: ‘flames, to burn.’
CCG: ‘The entry in the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia is as follows:
“In Genesis 10:13 Ludim appears as the firstborn of Mizraim (Egypt), and in 10:22 Lud is the fourth son of Shem. We have therefore to do with two different nationalities bearing the same name, and not always easy to distinguish…”
‘In Isaiah 66.19 Lud is mentioned with Tarshish and Pul (generally regarded as a mistake for Phut), Tubal, Javan, and the isles. Accepting this emendation, the passage agrees with Jeremiah 46:9, where the Ludim are spoken of with Kush and Phut as the allies of Egypt; and also with Ezekiel 27:10, where Lud is referred to with Persia and Put… Lud, again, is mentioned with Ethiopia (Cush), Put, all the mingled people, Cab, and the children of the land which is in league (or, margin “the land of the covenant”), which were all to fall by the sword (Eze 30:5)…
The existence of Lud in the neighborhood of Egypt as well as in Asia Minor finds parallels in… Assyrian inscriptions… and… certain Assyrian letters relating to horses, by the side of the Cush (Kusu likewise) which stands for Ethiopia. Everything points, therefore, to the Semitic Lud and Ludim being Lydia, and the identification may be regarded as satisfactory. It is altogether otherwise with the Egyptian Lud and Ludim, however, about which little can be said at present.
The reference in Isaiah 66:19 seems to locate the land of Lud in the Mediterranean, whilst Jeremiah (46:9) and Ezekiel (27:10; 30:5) place it squarely in Africa. The likelihood is that it is in North Africa on the Mediterranean shores. The Lydians in Asia Minor came into contact with the Assyrians and with Egypt in the early Seventh century BCE when their king Gyges sent an embassy to Ashurbanipal in 668 or 660 (Interpretative Dictionary Volume 3, page 179).Their language was not known and they were not really understood until the Persians conquered them in 546 BCE. Mellink (ibid.) considers the Lydians of Asia Minor to be neither Hamitic nor Semitic. However, if they were either it would be Semitic.’
We can understand the confusion caused in trying to separate both Luds. This then creates difficulties in who is who; with one commentator even saying they are neither. The Bible reveals the answer and it has been available all along, waiting to be read and plainly understood.
Ezekiel 30:5
Young’s Literal Translation
‘Cush [India], and Phut [Pakistan], and Lud, andall the mixture, and Chub[Lehab], And the sons of the land of the covenant with them by sword do fall…’
Lud is associated with India and Pakistan. Pakistan is Phut and Lehab together. Similarly, Lud is a mixture of peoples and thus all mention of Lud, Ludim or Lydia in the Bible relate to the two lines of Lud, together.
Lud is the nation of Iran.
Iran is also known as Persia and the main body of people are called Persian and speak Persian or Farsi. The original Persians once lived in this region and are now identifiable with Elam – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. Modern Iranians have inherited the name and again, it is not original to them.
The name Ludim is used once in the Bible, also translated as Lydia as opposed to Lud in other places.
Jeremiah 46.9
Bible in Basic English
‘Go up, you horses; go rushing on, you carriages of war; go out, you men of war: Cush and Put, gripping the body-cover, and the Ludim, with bent bows.’
New English Translation
‘Go ahead and charge into battle, you horsemen! Drive furiously, you charioteers! Let the soldiers march out into battle, those from Ethiopia and Libya who carry shields, and those from Lydia who are armed with the bow.’
The proficiency with bow and arrow may extend to modern warfare. If so, what tends to be thrown or fired now… is missiles.
Statue of Arash the Archer at the Sa’dabad Complex in the capital, Tehran
Isaiah 66.19
New English Translation
‘I will perform a mighty act among them and then send some of those who remain to the nations – to Tarshish [Japan], Pul [Asshur], Lud (known for its archers), Tubal [economic power located in southeastern coastal China], Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], and to the distant coastlands that have not heard about me or seen my splendor.’
Ezekiel 27:10
New English Translation
‘Men of Persia [Turkey (Elam)], Lud [Iran], and Put [Pakistan] were in your army, men of war. They hung shield and helmet on you; they gave you your splendor.’
We learn that Lud is associated with Cush, Phut and Elam geographically and militarily. All the verses are connected with warfare. It is not a surprise therefore to connect Lud with the modern militaristic state of Iran. Their complex geopolitical relationship with Turkey, Pakistan and India, also now falls into place.
The Middle Eastern and Southwest Asian jig-saw is looking a little more complete and hopefully of sense to the constant reader. Pul, is not a mis-translation of Put or Phut. Rather, we will learn later it is a name of a king – a King of Asshur. The reference is about Assyria and again, Iran has close historic ties with Russia – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
What is worth noting from Ezekiel 27:10, is that Elam-Turkey, Lud-Iran and Phut-Pakistan are the heart and core of a future Islamic Alliance, which is referred to in the Book of Daniel, as the King of the South.* Peripheral players in this powerful alliance may well include other major Islamic nations, including: Egypt-Pathros from Mizra; Bangladesh-Havilah from Cush; and Indonesia-Kittim from Javan – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.*
The Oxford Bible Church article by Derek Walker, provides a good synopsis of Iran, though understandably links Iran with ‘Persia’, which is actually Elam in the Bible rather than Lud – emphasis mine:
‘Ezekiel 38:5 lists Persia as the principal (first mentioned) ally of Magog in the end-time war against Israel [not the state of Israel]. Persia is easy to identify as modern Iran. Iran was called Persia until 1935… then in the 1979 Revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran. Once [Iran] was pro-western and pro-Israel but after Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution, [it] became anti-western, anti-Israel and more within the Russian sphere of influence.
Iran is a predominantly Muslim nation, with a radical fundamentalist leadership. Israel considers Iran as its most dangerous enemy. [Iran] desires to lead* the Muslim world, taking centre stage to bring Muslim and Arab nations together against Israel and the USA. [Iran] wants all Muslim nations to devise a common strategy against Israel in the Middle East. Iran is the most extreme of the extremists. Hezbullah is essentially an arm of Iran. Hamas is becoming increasingly dependent on [Iran]. On many occasions [its] leaders have expressed the desire to wipe Israel from the map, which is why there is so much concern that [Iran] is determined to have… nuclear capability.
[Iran] supports many terrorist groups and could easily pass nuclear weapons to them to use against Israel and the West. That is why sanctions have been applied but Russia has protected Iran from the worst of them, because [it] has many lucrative contracts with [Iran], including helping Iran build its nuclear reactor and selling weapons…
Russia continues to align [itself] with Israel’s enemies, and the top of this list is Iran, who would not hesitate to join in [an] invasion. In order to mount this large-scale invasion, Russia needs Iran as an ally. It would be much more difficult to move a large land army across the Caucasus Mountains bordering Turkey, than the Elburz Mountains bordering Iran. [Iran’s] general terrain is also easier to cross than Turkey’s.’
The map below shows the highest population regions and density. Most of Iran’s bigger cities are located in the west of the nation. Iran’s affinity lays more with Turkey and the Arab world, than its eastern neighbours comprising Pakistan and Afghanistan.
There are a handful of contender nations for leader* of the Muslim world: population wise, Bangladesh and Indonesia; diplomatically wise, as in gaining pan-Arab support, Egypt; militarily, Pakistan and critically, ideologically wise, Iran. The last two would appear favourites and Iran has the edge maybe, in religious zealotry and militancy compared with Pakistan. On the fringes because of its ostensibly more western footing is Turkey. How it would fit into an Islamic alliance is not as clear cut. Potential leader cannot be ruled out particularly as its economy (19th in the world) and marginally behind Indonesia (at 16th) and Saudi Arabia (at 18th), is growing to soon make it the dominant nation of the South.
In the Book of Jasher 7:17, we learn that Lud had two sons: Pethor and Bizayon.
The Muslim historian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, circa 915 CE recounts a tradition that the wife of Lud was named Shakbah, a daughter of Japheth and their two sons were Faros and Jurjan. He further states that Lud was also the progenitor of the Amalekites – both a grandson of Esau and a separate people by the same name – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
The first son, Far-os is reminiscent of Fars province in Iran. Fars, Pars or Faristan is the state that was once the southern part of the original homeland of Elam. The native name of the Persian language is Farsi or Parsi. Persia and Persian both derive from the Hellenized form of Persis, from the root word pars. The Old Persian word was Parsaa; while Fars is the Arabicised version of Pars.
The Book of Jubilees 9:6, says that Lud received: “the mountains of Asshur and all appertaining to them till it reaches the Great Sea, and till it reaches the east of Asshur his brother”. The Ethiopian version specifically reads: “… until it reaches, toward the east, toward his brother Asshur’s portion.” Scholars have associated Lud with the Lubdu of Assyrian sources, who inhabited certain parts of western Media.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The people called Ludim descend from Mizraim… spelled Ludiyim in 1 Chronicles 1:11. But the only person named Lud is a son of Shem. It appears that the only Lud in the Bible and the only Ludim in the Bible have nothing to do with each other; i.e. the Ludim stem from some other, otherwise unmentioned Lud. It may be that there once were two patriarchs named Lud and thus two peoples named Ludim, but that one people and the other patriarch vanished from the story.’
It is incredible that a commentary would head off on such a completely incorrect tangent and therefore, in a mis-leading direction, instead of seeing the simplicity of the obvious answer – that two merged to become one. Some forbearance needs to be given, as in nearly all other instances, Abarim have been far and away the best Bible concordance for this project’s requirements and of which I am grateful.
Abarim: ‘It’s a mystery what the names Lud and Ludim might mean, although scholars have proposed several possibilities. The name Lydia means From Lud and the name Ahilud may mean Brother Of Lud. It can also be that – as is attested by Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names – in the language where this name came from (Phoenician, says Jones) the ‘d’ and the ‘z’ were pretty much indistinguishable and the name is actually Luz, meaning Turn of Twist, and thus the word by which the crooked almond tree was known.
The word (lwd) simply does not occur in Hebrew. BDB Theological Dictionary and NOBSE Study Bible Name List do not translate. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names, slightly more daring, indeed derives (Lud) from (luz), a verb meaning to turn aside, depart: The verb (luz) means to turn aside, [to bend] or away. Noun (lazut) means deviation or crookedness. Noun (luz) describes almond wood. To a Hebrew audience, perhaps the name Lud rang like it has something to do with the verb (yalad), meaningto beget, bring forth: perhaps Lud… means something like [twisted] ProductivityorEmergence.‘
I cannot attest to the national character or approach of an Iranian, so do not know if the following is indicative or not – though its current leadership would indicate a correlation. It is not too dissimilar to the definition for a Philistine – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Luddite: ‘a member of any of various bands of workers in England (1811–16) organised to destroy manufacturing machinery, under the belief that its use diminished employment. Also: someone who is opposed or resistant to new technologies or technological change.’
The historical and chronological link between ancient Lydia and modern Iran can be found in the former state of Urartu. It received its name from the Assyrians who bordered their land to the south. The Hebrews called them Ararat and like present day Iran – with formerly Shahs and currently Ayatollahs – were synonymous with aprominentruler who was the focal point of their civilisation. Herodotus called them Alarodians.**
Urartu was known for its indomitable fighting spirit and development of a high culture. H A B Lynch, remarked that Urartu was “no obscure dynasty which slept secure behind the mountains, but a splendid monarchy which for more than two centuries rivalled the claims of Assyria to the dominion of the ancient world.” Between 860 and 585 BCE, Urartu contested with Assyria for the dominance of western Asia. Its beginnings are supposedly lost in the mists of pre-history, though their identification with Lud and the people of Lydia in western Asia Minor fits their profile and location.
Lehmann-Haupt proposes they migrated from that direction, citing as proof their ‘metallurgy, architecture and folkways.’ The people were first known as Nairi. They were also known as haldians** or children of the god (K)haldis. Haldi was portrayed as a man standing on a bull or lion, symbolic of his power – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Temples were built in Haldi’s honour, which had distinctive square towers and reinforced corners. The king was known as the ‘servant of Haldi’ and all wars were carried out in his name.
Urartu sphinx statue above top and Haldi god relief above; compared to modern Persian symbols of a winged bull below and the Golden Lion below bottom – found on the Iranian flag prior to 1979.
An important deity was Shivani, the Sun god, who given his representation with a winged solar disk, was similar to the Egyptian god, Ra. The consort of Haldi was Arubani, the most important female goddess. Sielardi was the moon goddess and Sardi a star goddess. Urartu artwork includes the Tree of Life symbol common to Mesopotamian cultures and is depicted with a figure stood either side making offerings – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
The Urartians referred to themselves as Shurele – transliterated as Shurili or Surili. A name mentioned within the royal titles of the kings of Urartu; the king of Suri-lands. The word Suri has been theorised as originally referring to chariots or swords. The Shur-ili were able warriors typical of Lud, so this is possible; or it might be related to the word, king or ruler as in Shah.
All Urartu kings took pride in leading their armies into battle. Weapons as shown in temples, included iron and bronze swords, spears, javelins and bows. Lud likewise, is associated with weaponry in the scriptures. The modern Iranians combine religion and military as the Shurili Urartians did. The Uratians employed heavy shields which had large central bosses decorated with images of mythical creatures such as bulls and lions. They wore helmets and metal scale armour.
The main adversary of their kingdom was the Neo-Assyrian Empire, though there is evidence of trade between the two during times of peace. As the Assyrians used chariots, the Shurili may have as well, particularly as they were adept at horse breeding. Urartu did secure some victories in the mid-eighth century BCE, though Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 BCE) laid siege to Tushpa and Sargon II (722-705) in 714 BCE mounted successful campaigns against the Urartu. Other enemies who bordered the Shurili, included the Cimmerians, Scythians and later the Medes – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
Forty-two inscriptions found at Van in 1842, reveal a unique people and culture. Professor A H Sayce said: ‘a new language and a new people to the museum of the ancient Oriental world’ has been added. The Vannic texts were described as ‘a vanished civilization from the grave.’ War, vandalism and the passing of time has obscured the chance to learn more than fragments of their history. The seat of the Shurili theocratic monarchy – like the Shah and Ayatollah combined – was Thuspa; capital of the territory called Biaina, later called Van. Tiglath-Pileser I, king of Assyria, asserted that he had conquered twenty-three kings of Nairi in 1114 BCE. These kingdoms must have been comparatively small regions within the greater Shurili empire of Urartu.
An inscription of the Assyrian king Assurbelkala (1073‑1056 BCE), first includes the name Uruatru. Shalmanaser II (1030‑1019 BCE), claimed the conquest of ‘the entire country of Uruatru’ in three days. Sardur I (844‑828) united into a confederation the different segments of Urartu.
Sardur was the son of Lutipris, who had succeeded Arame. He left an inscription in the Assyrian language, calling himself King of Sura, which, according to Professor Albrecht Goetze, ‘is the same as Subaru.’ Sardur’s other titles included, ‘Great King,’ and ‘Ruler of Four Regions,’ or Shar-Kishatti, according to Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions. Sardur built a fortress of huge stones west of the Rock of Van, and his son and successor Ispuinis, chose that rock as his residence and the holy seat of the god Khaldis.
The period of rule by Ispuinis and his son Menuas is recognised as the highpoint in Urartean history. Under their successive reigns, it extended from the Zagros Mountains in the East to Palu in the North and Malatia in the West. During their combined reigns great works were constructed around Van, including the aqueduct of Shamiram‑Su, which was forty-five miles in length and brought the pure water of the Khoshab River to the eastern shores of Lake Van whose water is undrinkable, enabling King Menuas to found a city there in his name. This canal irrigates the plain of Van even to the present time.
Menuas strengthened the existing, great fortification of Melazkert. It was an ideal location for a fortress, for a power operating from the southern lowlands and building an empire on the Armenian plains. Made more secure by a fleet of ships on the lake and by the fortification of the passes of Mount Varag; the region became of first rate military importance against the hostile forces that lay in Mesopotamia. These factors explain the comparative immunity and rapid development of the empire under the successors of Sardur I – at a time when Assyria was ruled by warlike monarchs.
In 758 BCE, after crushing the revolt of the Hatti king of Milidu (Malatia), Sardur III successor of Argistis I, moved southward, putting the Great King of Carchemish, Jarablus under tribute and captured the whole territory as far as Halpa (Aleppo). ‘The empire of Assyria was then encircled’ says the Turkish scholar, Professor Shemseddin, ‘as if [in an iron hoop].’ Later, Surili rulers possessed the name of Rusas I and Rusas II. An intriguing coincidence, as the Shurili were neighbours of the Assyrians, who themselves were later to be known as Rus and eventually as Russians.
The Urartean language has been deemed as neither^ Semitic nor Indo-European, as efforts to decipher the cuneiform inscriptions through the present day Armenian language have failed. One investigator, P Jensen, found a certain similarity between the Urartean language and that in which the letter of King Tushratta of Mitanni – found at Tel-el‑Amarna, Egypt – was written. The name of the god Tesub of the Mitanni closely resembles that of the god Teisbas of Urartu. Another scholar thinks that ancient Urartu had a cultural connection with Asia Minor and Syria; citing the Hurri-Mitanni or Subarean remains in upper Mesopotamia and Syria as having points of resemblance with the characters of the Khaldian inscriptions.
Scholars suggest: ‘there appears to have been a pre-Indo-European substratum of speech which strongly influenced the Indo-European-Armenian’ and that ‘the Aryo-European must have exerted great influence upon the Urartean, even long before the times of the Vannic Empire.’ This coincides with modern day Persian, as even though classed as Indo-European and supposedly related to the Slavic, Germanic, Romance, Greek and Armenian languages, it is not mutually intelligible with them, for Persian is entirely unique.^ Shurili artwork has been found outside Urartu – when finding bronze items belonging to the royal household and identifying inscriptions on them – such as in Etruscan tombs in central Italy.
The Iranian flag above is pre-revolution and the flag below post-revolution.
The symbol in the centre of the flag means: God
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Iran… is a country in Western Asia with [92,227,196] inhabitants. Its central location in Eurasia and proximity to the Strait of Hormuz give it significant geostrategic importance. Iran is the world’s 17th most populous country. Spanning 1,648,195 km2 (636,372 square miles), it is the second largest country in the Middle East and the 17th largest in the world.
The term Iran derives directly from Middle Persian Eran, first attested in a third-century inscription at Rustam Relief, with the accompanying Parthian inscription using the term Aryan, in reference to the Iranians… recognized as a derivative of Proto-Indo-European *ar-yo-, meaning “one who assembles (skilfully)”. According to the Iranian mythology, the country’s name comes from the name of Iraj, a legendary prince and shah who was killed by his brothers.
Historically, Iran has been referred to as Persia by the West, due mainly to the writings of Greek historians who referred to all of Iran as Persis… meaning “land of the Persians”, while Persis itself was one of the provinces of ancient Iran that is today defined as Fars. In 1935, Reza Shah requested the international community to refer to the country by its native name, Iran, effective 22 March that year. Today, both Iran and Persia are used in cultural contexts, while Iran remains irreplaceable in official state contexts.
“Greater Ira” (Iranzamin or Iran e Bozorg)refers to territories of the Iranian cultural and linguistic zones. In addition to modern Iran, it includes portions of the Caucasus, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Afghanistan and Central Asia.
By the 1500s, Ismail I of Ardabil established the Safavid Empire with his capital at Tabriz. Beginning with Azerbaijan he subsequently extended his authority over all of the Iranian territories, and established an intermittent Iranian hegemony over the vast relative regions, reasserting the Iranian identity within large parts of Greater Iran.’
‘Iran was predominantly Sunni, but Ismail instigated a forced conversion to the Shia branch of Islam, spreading throughout the Safavid territories in the Caucasus, Iran, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia. As a result, modern-day Iran is the only official Shia nation of the world, with it holding an absolute majority in Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan, having there the first and the second highest number of Shia inhabitants by population percentage in the world. Meanwhile, the centuries-long geopolitical and ideological rivalry between Safavid Iran and the neighboring Ottoman Empire [Turkey] led to numerous Ottoman-Iranian wars.
The Safavid era peaked in the reign of Abbas I (1587–1629) [who reinforced Iran’s military, political and economic power], surpassing their Turkish arch-rivals in strength, and making Iran a leading science and art hub in western Eurasia. The Safavid era saw the start of mass integration from Caucasian populations into new layers of the society of Iran, as well as mass resettlement of them within the heartlands of Iran, playing a pivotal role in the history of Iran for centuries onwards.’
This migration of people from the north is indicative of those descendants of Lud and Shem, amalgamating with the established peoples related to Arabs and in turn representing a lineage from the Ludim of Mizra and Ham.
‘The Russo-Iranian wars of 1804-1813 and 1826-1828 resulted in large irrevocable territorial losses for Iran in the Caucasus, (comprising modern-day Dagestan, Georgia [population: 3,806,893], Armenia [population: 2,957,151] and [the] Republic of Azerbaijan [population: 10,384,029]), which made part of the very concept of Iran for centuries, and thus substantial gains for the neighboring Russian Empire… which got confirmed per the treaties of Gulistan and Turkmenchay.
Despite Iran’s neutrality during WW I, the Ottoman, Russian and British empires occupied the territory of western Iran and fought the [P]ersian Campaign before fully withdrawing their forces in 1921. [Britain] directed [the] 1921 Persian coup d’etat and Reza Shah’s establishment of the Pahlavi dynasty. Reza Shah, became the new Prime Minister of Iran and was declared the new monarch in 1925.
In June 1925, Reza Shah introduced conscription law… At that time every male person who had reached 21 years old must serve [in the] military for two years… [and the] Iranian constitution obliges all men of 18 years old and higher to serve in [the] military or police… They cannot leave the country or be employed without completion of the service period.
The 1979 Revolution, later known as the Islamic Revolution, began in January 1978 with the first major demonstrations against the Shah. After a year of strikes and demonstrations paralyzing the country and its economy, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi [Reza Shah’s son] fled to the United States, and [Ayatollah, meaning a high ranking Shiite religious authority] Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile to Tehran in February 1979, forming a new government. After holding a referendum,Iran officially became an Islamic republic in April 1979. A second referendum in December 1979 approved a theocratic constitution.
The Leader of the Revolution (“Supreme Leader”) is responsible for delineation and supervision of the policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Iranian president has limited power compared to the Supreme Leader Khamenei.The current longtime Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has been issuing decrees and making the final decisions on the economy, environment, foreign policy, education, national planning, and everything else in the country.
The officially stated goal of the government of Iran is to establish a new world order based on world peace, global collective security, and justice. Iran’s syncretic political system combines elements of an Islamic theocracy with vetted democracy.
On 22 September 1980, the Iraqi army invaded the western Iranian province of Khuzestan, launching the Iran-Iraq War. Although the forces of Saddam Hussein made several early advances, by mid 1982, the Iranian forces successfully managed to drive the Iraqi army back into Iraq. In July 1982, with Iraq thrown on the defensive, the regime of Iran took the decision to invade Iraq and conducted countless offensives in a bid to conquer Iraqi territory and capture cities, such as Basra. The war continued until 1988 when the Iraqi army defeated the Iranian forces inside Iraq and pushed the remaining Iranian troops back across the border. Subsequently, Khomeini accepted a truce mediated by the United Nations.’
Iran’s conflicts with Iraq, Turkey, Russia and of late, Israel parallels the war-like stature of Lud and reflects its militaristic leanings.
‘As of 2009, the government of Iran maintains diplomatic relations with 99 members of the United Nations, but not with the United States, and not with Israel – a state which Iran’s government has derecognized since the 1979 Revolution. Among Muslim nations, Iran has an adversarial relationship with Saudi Arabia due to different political and Islamic ideologies. While Iran is a Shia Islamic Republic, Saudi Arabia is a conservative Sunni monarchy. Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the government of Iran has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Palestine, after [President] Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Judaism has a long history in Iran, dating back to the Achaemenid conquest of Babylonia. Although many left in the wake of the establishment of the State of Israel and the 1979 Revolution, about 8,756 to 25,000 Jewish people live in Iran. Iran has the largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel.’
This is immensely ironic and will be apparent; when we study the state of Israel and the modern Jewish people – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.
‘Iran has the world’s second largest proved gas reserves after Russia, with 33.6 trillion cubic meters and the third largest natural gas production after Indonesia and Russia. It also ranks fourth in oil reserves with an estimated 153,600,000,000 barrels. It is OPEC’S second largest oil exporter, and is an energy superpower.’
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Iranian global shipments during 2020.
Mineral fuels including oil: US$16.7 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $4.7 billion
Iron, steel: $4.2 billion
Fruits, nuts: $2.9 billion
Organic chemicals: $2.4 billion
Vegetables: $941.2 million
Copper: $876.2 million
Fertilizers: $722.9 million
Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $512.3 million
Machinery including computers: $489.8 million
Fruits and nuts was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 22% from 2019 to 2020. The only other product category to post expanding export sales was plastics both as materials and items made from plastic articles via its 7.5% increase. The leading decliner among Iran’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil thanks to a -27.2% drop year over year.’
‘… two-thirds of the population [are] under the age of 25. Iran’s population grew rapidly during the latter half of the 20th century, increasing from about 19 million in 1956 to more than 84 million by July 2020. Due to its young population, studies project that the growth will continue to [grow] until it stabilizes around 105 million by 2050.’
‘The Library of Congress issued… estimates [of the Iranian population]: 65% Persians (including Mazenderanis, Gilaks, and the Talysh), 16% Azerbaijanis, 7% Kurds, 6% Lurs, 2% Baloch, 1% Turkic tribal groups (including Qashqai and Turkmens), and non-Iranian, non-Turkic groups (including Armenians, Georgians, Assyrians, Circassians, and Arabs) less than 3%. It determined that Persian is the first language of at least 65% of the country’s population, and is the second language for most of the remaining 35%. Other nongovernmental estimates regarding the groups other than Persians and Azerbaijanis are roughly congruent with the World Factbook and the Library of Congress.
However, many estimates regarding the number of these two groups differ significantly from the mentioned census; some place the number of ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran between 21.6 and 30% of the total population, with the majority holding it on 25%. In any case, the largest population of Azerbaijanis* in the world live in Iran [higher than in Azerbaijan].’
Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal stratification in Iran: relationship between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, multiple authors, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Similarly, Quintana-Murci et al. found greater proportions of mtDNA haplogroups N1b, R2 [India],HV2, U7 [Pakistan], J2 and T* innorthern Iran, whereas M* [India], N*, R5, B,pre-HV1, U2* [India], U2e and U3lineages were higher in the south.
A recent study, based on both Y-chromosome and mtDNA analyses, found little to no differences in ethnic groups (Indo–European speakers versus Semitic speakers) residing in close geographical proximity within Iran. Furthermore, another mtDNA investigation led to the conclusion that two Indo-Iranian-speaking Talysh groups from Iran and Azerbaijan, that claim a common ancestry, were genetically similar. In the same study, however, Y-chromosomal marker composition was shown to differ considerably between the Iranian and Azerbaijani Talysh, with the Azerbaijan Talysh more closely resembling the Azerbaijan neighbors than its Iranian counterpart.
Results reported by Regueiro et al. also indicate differential gene flow between northern and southern Iranian groups (divided by the Dasht-e Kavir and Dash-e Lut deserts) not only with respect to the R-M198 [R1a1a] mutation, as illustrated by Wells et al., but also with R-M269 [R1b1a1a2] as well.
The same study also reveals significant divergence in the overall Y-haplogroup distributions between northern and southern Iranians as well as between both groups and other spatially separated Iranian populations (the Esfahan of Central Iran reported by Nasidze et al. and Uzbekistan discussed in the study by Wells et al. In spite of these efforts, a consensus has not yet been reached as to the source populations, overall genetic relationships and degree of stratification between different Iranian regions.’
The mtDNA Haplogroups in Iran reveal a divergent north-south divide and in the overall Y-DNA Haplogroup picture it is replicated, so that combined there is a haziness in what are the original Iranian or Persian Haplogroups. This is due to the simple fact that there is autosomal DNA via Lud from Shem and also, via the Ludim from Mizra and Ham, which has intermingled over a very long period of time.
‘In the MDS plot based on mtDNA [below], the southwest Asian populations are restricted to the left portion of the chart, the majority of which sequester in the lower left quadrant. The Afghanis group with the central Asians in the lower center of the graph is an expected association given that Afghanistan is frequently considered as a part of central Asia’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. ‘The Balkan Peninsula populations form a tight cluster at the right-most extreme of the lower right quadrant, whereas the populations from the Caucasus, Levant/Anatolia and North Africa conform to a ladder-like pattern that extends from the extreme right center of the chart into the upper right quadrant.
The central and southern Iranians are close to each other andto the North Africa and Levant/Anatolia assemblages [those Arab, Berber and related peoples stemming from Casluh/Caphtor and Pathros, as well as Turkish from Elam, whereas] The Peninsular Arabs partition to the left of above mentioned groups of populations [those Arabs descending from Naphtuh and Anam]; interestingly, IN (present study) is located within this cluster, specifically close to the Qatar collection. Two other North Iranian populations from the South Caspian region, the Gilaki and Mazandarian, are positioned between Arabian and Levant groups, closest to Saudi Arabia, Oman and Egypt.
Clear differences are observed in the maternal versus paternal gene pools of each specific Iranian region, as well as when these are compared with each other. The IN collection exhibits a 92.1% influence from the Peninsular Arabs when mtDNA is examined while this impact[diminishes] to11.2% whenY-chromosomaldata are examined.’
Either way, the maternal ancestry in Iran is heavily weighted towards an affinity with the Arab sphere – Qatar, Egypt and Iraq – as clearly delineated on the first PCA plot below. This aligns with an ancestral line from Ludim or rather, his wife.
‘Similarly, the north Iranian Caspian populations of Gilaki and Mazandarian as well as central Iran and IS exhibit considerable proportions of mtDNA from the Arabian Peninsula (43.5 and 64.3%, 53.3% and 52.1%, respectively), whereas no apparent effect is seen in the Y-chromosomal component for central Iran and only 7.3% is observed for IS.
Unfortunately, the Y-chromosome haplogroup counterparts were not reported at the resolution required for these analyses in the north Iran/Caspian populations. Balkan inputs are observed in the mtDNA pool of both IN (7.9%) and IS (23.1%), but are absent in Central Iran and in the other two north Iran collections. Whereas the Balkan region impacts the central Iran group at 28.7% via Y-chromosomal inputs,noY-influence is detected in either the IN or IS populations.
Imprints from the Levant and southwest Asia are mostly of Y-chromosomal origin, but are seen in the mtDNA of the central Iranian population and in the Gilaki. Central Asian impacts are only detected at the Y-chromosomal level and are absent from IS, whereas influences from Caucasia are observed in all instances except via mtDNA in IN despite its close geographical proximity to the region. No north African effects were detected for any of the Iranian populations using either mtDNA or Y-markers.’
(a) MDS plot based on observed frequency of mtDNA haplogroup distributions (stress=0.28852) (b) MDS plot based on observed frequency of Y-chromosome haplogroup distributions (stress=0.12492)
The graphs highlight the fact that in northern Iran the mtDNA maternal Haplogroups share an affinity with the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula descended from Ham. Both central and southern Iran are more related to each other and are distinct; being relatively equally distant from say Egypt from Mizra and Ham and Turkey from Elam and Shem.
Regarding Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups; northern Iran is closest to Georgia, central Iran with the countries of the Balkans, such as Macedonia and Greece, while southern Iran with Azerbaijan and Turkey. These nations are all descended from Shem and not from Ham. Thus confirming a related European lineage from Lud in contrast with the Hamitic maternal line from Ludim.
‘A comparison of the mtDNA pools of IN and IS populations reveals contrasting frequencies of haplogroups H, J and U [the primary mtDNA Haplogroups for peoples of European and West Asian extraction descended from Shem]. Although haplogroup J constitutes the majority (35.5%) of the maternal component in the north, it is considerably lower (14.5%) in IS.
Haplogroup U accounts for the majority (22.2%) of the mtDNA lineages in the south… The IN and IS also differ with respect to haplogroups T*, T1 and T3 (middle eastern – and lower Arabian Peninsula-specific), and L0 and L1 (characteristic of sub-Saharan Africans). In IS, haplogroups T and L are detected at frequencies of 3.4 and 2.56%, respectively, whereas both lineages are completely absent from the northern sample set. These findings, however, contradict the data published by Quintana-Murci et al., where L lineages are reported for the northern but not southern groups, and haplogroups T* and T1 are observed in both regions of the Plateau but are higher in the north than in the south. These differences could be due to the small sample size of the North Iranian collection. The presence of both haplogroups in the Iranian populations may be indicative of gene flow from the Middle East and Africa‘ [yes, agreed].
Or simply, that the Haplogroups from Ludim, which would account for the Middle East and North Africa input, are included* with Lud and his similar ancestry with the European peoples of the Balkans, Caucasia and Anatolia.
‘The admixture analysis results indicate that the majority of Iran’s mitochondrial pool is derived from Arabia [and subsequently from Ludim of Ham]. The Persian groups obtained from previous studies also display high degrees of similarity with the Peninsular Arabs; however, they all exhibit greater contribution from adjacent populations especially with groups from Caucasia. These genetic affinities are also evident in the MDS projection in which all the Iranian populations plot between the Arab collections, and the Levant-Anatolia and the northeast Africa assemblages. The three north Iranian populations partition nearest to the Arab cluster, whereas the central and south Iranian populations segregate closest to the Levant–Anatolia and the north African groups.
The genetic affinities* between the Arabian Peninsula and Iranian groups may stem from gene flow at various points during the time continuum since the initial out-of-Africa dispersal… and/or during the Arab expansions of the third to the seventh centuries AD [unlikely]. Another plausible explanation for the closeness between Persia and Arabia may be the result of dispersals emanating out of central Asia into the Arabian Peninsula via Persia [unlikely].
However, the effect of these migrations is not well understood, and the degree of similarities between the Peninsular Arabs and the Iranians suggests widespread (involving the movement of large numbers of individuals) rather than discreet (a few scattered communities) migratory waves.
It should be noted that the degree of genetic flow from Arabia, as seen in the admixture analysis results, is much lower for the Y-chromosome than it is for the mtDNA. It is possible that this is the result of a larger male dissemination from other territories into Persia. This is apparent in the high frequencies of Y-haplogroup R1a1 (M198) of central Asian descent, which is believed to be a tell-tale marker for the expansion of the Kurgan horse culture and Indo-European languages. It is widely accepted that Iranians are Aryans [European or western as opposed to Hamitic or equatorial in origin] who migrated from the central Asian steppes around 4000 years before present.
The [mtDNA] J1b sub-haplogroup is abundant in the Mediterranean and southern Atlantic regions. Interestingly, the frequency of this marker in IN is significantly (with the Bonferroni adjustment for 11 comparisons) higher than that of any of the surrounding regions surveyed (panel J in portrays mtDNA haplogroup J as a whole), including those from the Levant (Palestine, Syria, Egypt and Jordan), west central Asia (Armenia), the Near East (Iraq and Iran Kurdish) and the Arabian Peninsula (Oman, UAE, Qatar and Yemen)… it is tempting to conclude that this distribution pattern suggests a North Iranian origin for this lineage…
Although IN and IS individuals form part of the ancestral core in the global J1b network, most of the remaining Iranian J1b haplotypes are located individually along the branch harboring the 16 222 transition. If the J1b source lies within northern Iran, it seems logical to expect more haplotype sharing or, at least, more integration of the IN and reference collections J1b sequences. The significance of the Iranian J1b frequency distribution and lineage pattern is not clear* at this point.Denser sampling within and around Iran may provide added insight with respect to the phylogeographic history of J1b within this region.’
Phylogeography, is the study of the “historical processes that may be responsible for the past to present geographic distributions of genealogical lineages. This is accomplished by considering the geographic distribution of individuals in light of genetics, particularly population genetics.”
‘The asymmetrical partitioning of mtDNA haplogroups J(IN 35.5% and IS 14.5%) and J1b (IN 22.7% and IS 6%) between the two study populations parallels that of the Y-lineage R1b1a-M269, also found at a substantially higher frequency in the northern portion of the Plateau (15 versus 6% for IN and IS, respectively). Furthermore, as was observed with the J and J1b mtDNA haplogroups, this Y-specific marker is substantially more abundant in IN than in most of the surrounding Middle East, Near East and Levantine groups examined, with the exception of Turkey (14.5%)’ – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
‘The M269 mutation is observed at elevated levels throughout Europe and declines in frequency along a southeast trajectory from Europe toward Pakistan (14.5–2.8%). The significance with respect to the enrichment of this European Y-chromosome marker in IN remains unclear. It is not known whether the presence of M269 in north Persia is associated with the northwest Neolithic agricultural movement from the Near East to Europe or if it signals a subsequent back migration eastward from Europe.’
The middle of this paragraph is highly signifiant, repeat: highly significant. For here is where we find men who have a higher concentration of R1b than all the other peoples of the Middle East or West Asia and South Asia – with the exception of Turkey. As explained, Iran as Lud, is a unique blend of Lud from Shem a western lineage and Ludim from Ham, an equatorial line of descent. The fact that Turkey is the only other major nation with a similar percentage of R1b is not a coincidence. For Turkey and Iran are brother nations, as Elam and Lud; both descending from Shem.
As we learned earlier: Pakistan is also a blend of two distinct peoples albeit, both from Ham; Iran is a blend of two separate unrelated peoples. Notice scientists use the term ‘back migration’ when they don’t realise they are dealing with an anomaly that is pointing towards an event not explicable by the hypothetical theories of evolution and the out of Africa paradigm.
‘The distribution of haplogroup I also differs between the northern (9.7%) and southern (1.7%) regions of Iran. This incongruence is significant at α=0.05 (P<0.03) but not following the application of the Bonferroni adjustment. It is noteworthy that, with the exception of its northern neighbor Azerbaijan, IN is the only population in which haplogroup I exhibits polymorphic levels. Also, a contour plot based on the regional phylogeographic distribution of the I haplogroup exhibits frequency clines consistent with an Iranian cradle. Moreover, when compared with other populations in the region, those from the Levant (Iraq, Syria and Palestine) and the Arabian Peninsula (Oman and UAE) exhibit significantly lower proportions of I individuals (1–2%). It should be noted that this haplogroup has been detected in European groups (… a tiny island off the coast of Croatia (11.3%), and Lemko, an isolate from the Carpathian Highlands (11.3%) at comparable frequencies to those observed in the North Iranian population.
In addition, several studies report the Middle East as the origin of this haplogroup, but for unknown reasons, the prevalence of this lineage in the region has been lost. Thus, it is plausible that the high levels of haplogroup I present in IN may be the result of a localized enrichment through the action of genetic drift or may signal geographical proximity to the location of origin.’
Or, it might just simply be that Iranians paternally are fundamentally a white, western (‘European’) people enriched with maternal Hamitic, equatorial (Arab) DNA comparable to that exhibited in their near neighbours; geographically and ethnically .
‘Although [mtDNA] haplogroup H and its subclades are found in highest frequencies in Europe and Caucasia, the presence of these haplogroups in Iran may reflect gene flow from neighboring southwest Asia where they are present at moderate frequencies. Furthermore, considering the substantial frequency of H2a1 (12.5%) in central and inner Asia, its low frequency in eastern Europe and its absence in western Europe, it is likely that its presence in Iran may be due to gene flow from Asia. The fact that sub-haplogroups H2, H2a1, H4 and H7 are seen only in IS (absent in IN), and at relatively low frequencies, may stem from the low number of individuals collected in IN (n=31).
… mtDNA haplogroup T is common in eastern and northern Europe, and is found as far as the Indus Valley and the Arabian Peninsula. Thus, the presence of sub-haplogroups T*, T1 and T3 in IS, and their absence in IN, may be associated with gene flow from the Arabian Peninsula to southern Iran.’
Huge study on Y-chromosome variation in Iran – Viola Grugni (et al. 2012), posted online – emphasis & bold mine:
UPDATE I: ‘One of the most interesting finds is the presence of afew IJ-M429* chromosomes in the sample. Haplogroup IJ encompasses the major European I subclade, and the major West Asian J subclade. The discovery of IJ* chromosomes is consistent with the origin of this haplogroup in West Asia; it is widely believed that haplogroup I represents a pre-Neolithic lineage in Europe, although at present there are no Y chromosome-tested pre-Neolithic remains.’
‘There is also a wide assortment of Q and R in Iran. While some of these may be intrusive (e.g., the 42.6% of Q1a2 in Turkmen, likely a legacy of their Central Asian origins), the overall picture appears consistent with a deep presence of these lineages in Iran. This is especially true for haplogroup R where pretty much every paragroup and derived group is present, excepting those likely to have originated recently elsewhere.’
UPDATE II: From the paper
“Although accounting only for 25% of the total variance, the first two components (Figure above) separate populations according to their geographic and ethnic origin and define five main clusters: East-African (1), North-African and Near Eastern Arab (2) [Ludim], European (3) [Lud], Near Eastern (4) [Ludim and Lud] and South Asian (5). The 1st PC clearly distinguishes the East African groups (showing a high frequency of haplogroup E) from all the others which distribute longitudinally along the axis with a wide overlapping between European and Arab peoples and between Near Eastern and South Asian groups. The 2nd PC separates the North-African and Near Eastern Arabs (characterized by the highest frequency of haplogroup J1)from Europeans(characterized by haplogroups I, R1a and R1b) and the Near Easterners from the South Asians(due to the distribution of haplogroups G, R2 and L).
Iranian groups do not cluster all together, occupying intermediate positions among Arab, Near Eastern and Asian clusters. In this scenario, it is worth… noticing the position of three Iranian groups: (i) Khuzestan Arabs (KHU-Ar) who, despite their Arabic origin, are close to the Iranian samples; (ii) Armenians from Tehran (TEH-Ar), whose position, in the upper part of the Iranian distribution, indicates a close affinity with the Near Eastern cluster, while their position near Turkey and Caucasus groups, due to the high frequency R1b-M269 and other European markers (eg: I-M170), is in agreement with their Armenia origin…”
UPDATE V: ‘This confirms my observation from the recent studies in Afghanistan, that there is an inverse relationship of J2a and R1a in Iranian-speaking groups, with an excess of the latter among the eastern Iranians, and of the former among the Persians.’
From the paper:
“Among the different J2a haplogroups, J2a-M530 is the most informative as for ancient dispersal events from the Iranian region. This lineage probably originated in Iran…The high variance observed in the Italian Peninsula is probably the result of stratifications of subsequent migrations and/or of the presence of sub-lineages not yet identified.”
‘Of course, the idea that the diffusion of J2a related lineages ties in with early agricultural expansions has been with us for a long time, but it is time to abandon it. First of all, as we have seen,J2a diminishes greatly as we head towards South Asia; it certainly doesn’t look like the lineage of the multitude of agricultural settlements that sprang up along the southeastern vector soon after the invention of agriculture. Second, it is lacking so far in all ancient Y chromosome data from Europe down to 5,000 years ago. It seems much more [probable] that J2 related lineages spread from the highlands of West Asia much later.
It is unfortunate that there is no progress in the phylogeographic assessment of R1a in this paper. There have been substantial discoveries of SNPs within this haplogroup as a result of commercial testing; however there is clearly an ascertainment bias in the newer discoveries, as almost all these SNPs have been detected in Europeans [Eastern Europeans or Slavic speakers]. The new paper confirms the high levels of Y-STR variance in India [Cush], Pakistan [Phut], and Iran [Lud].
The Indo-Iranians were then initially the mixed descendants of the Indo-Europeans and the R1a old agricultural population, and were formed in the territory of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex. This also explains the contrast between Iranian and Armenian groups: the latter mostly lack the R1a lineage, contrasting with all Iranian groups (even their Kurdish neighbors) who possess it. Conversely, Iranian groups, and especially easternIranians and Indo-Ayrans lack the R1b lineage.
UPDATE VI: I have created… [a] dendrogram using the Y-haplogroup frequencies and the hclust package of R (default parameters):
From top to bottom, one can identify some clusters:
Eastern Europe, further broken down into Balkans and Slavic+Hungary
West Asian/Caucasus
Iranian Proper
Arab
These correspond largely to the clusters identified by the authors, with India and the Turkmen sample emerging as the clear outliers.’
The constant reader is urged to take time to study the dendrogram, as it aptly shows the evidence of Iran having one foot in the Arab world as Lud-im and one foot in the Caucasian world as Lud.
UPDATE VII: ‘At present, the Iranian population is characterized by an extraordinary mix of different ethnic groups speaking a variety of Indo-Iranian, Semitic and Turkic languages. Despite these features, only [a] few studies have investigated the multiethnic components of the Iranian gene pool.
In this survey 938 Iranian male DNAs belonging to 15 ethnic groups from 14 Iranian provinces were analyzed for 84 Y-chromosome biallelic markers and 10 STRs. The results show an autochthonous but non-homogeneous ancient background mainly composed by J2a sub-clades with different external contributions.
The phylogeography of the main haplogroups allowed identifying post-glacial [post Flood] and Neolithic expansions toward western Eurasia but also recent movements towards the Iranian region from western Eurasia (R1b-L23 [R1b1a1a2 – downstream from M269]), Central Asia (Q-M25), Asia Minor (J2a-M92) and southern Mesopotamia (J1). In spite of the presence of important geographic barriers (Zagros and Alborz mountain ranges, and the Dasht-e Kavir and Dash-e Lut deserts) which may have limited gene flow, AMOVA analysis revealed that language, in addition to geography, has played an important role in shaping the nowadays Iranian gene pool. Overall, this study provides a portrait of the Y-chromosomal variation in Iran…’
Complete Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in Iranians, multiple authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘By reconstructing the complete mtDNA phylogeny of haplogroups R2, N3, U1, U3, U5a1g, U7, H13, HV2, HV12, M5a and C5c we have found a previously unexplored genetic connection between the studied Iranian populations and the Arabian Peninsula, India, Near East and Europe…
It is worth pointing out the position of Azeris from the Caucasus region, who despite their supposed common origin with Iranian Azeris, cluster quite separately and occupy an intermediate position between the Azeris/Georgians and Turks/Iranians grouping. Interestingly, the results of our MDS analysis do not combine the populations studied according to their geographic and/or linguistic affinity.’
‘Therefore, Turkic-speaking Qashqais, Azeris, and Turks are located quite distantly from each other on the plot, even though association between the latter two groups has been recently revealed based on complete mtDNA sequences. All populations from the Caucasus region (Armenians, Azeris, and Georgians) are scattered on the plot though their genetic proximity has been demonstrated by Schönberg et al. Similarly, Iranians from Tehran province and Persians studied here are clearly separated from each other.
Overall, the complete mtDNA sequence analysis revealed an extremely high level of genetic diversity in the Iranian populations studied which is comparable to the other groups from the South Caucasus, Anatolia and Europe. The Iranian populations studied here and previously exhibit similar mtDNA lineage composition and mainly consist of a western Eurasian [European] component, accounting for about 90% of all samples, with a very limited contribution from eastern Eurasia, South Asia and Africa. The South Asian and African influence is more pronounced in Iranians from the southern provinces of the country.
Our results confirms that populations from Iran, Anatolia, the Caucasus and the Arabian Peninsula display a common set of maternal lineages although considerable regional differences in haplogroup frequencies exist. Meanwhile, some haplogroups previously defined as South Asian (such as [Y-DNA] R2 and [mtDNA] HV2) could be considered as having Southwest Asian origin, taking into account the relatively high frequency and diversity of those haplogroups in Iran.’
The ‘origin’ of these Haplogroups is South Asian – not South West Asian – entering Iran via admixture.
Persian men
It would be expected to view a rather complicated Haplogroup structure for Lud – comparing Iran with the three related peoples from the Caucasus region of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia.
There is the admixture of Ludim from Mizra to consider and also Iran’s proximity to the descendants from Ham, with Iraq on its western border, Pakistan on its eastern border, Uzbekistan descended predominately from Japheth to the North and finally Lud’s brother Elam-Turkey on its northwestern frontier – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
The mtDNA maternal Haplogroups for Iran are:
H [16.9%] – J [13.8%] – U [11.8%] – HV [7.4%] – K [7.3%] – T2 [4.9%] –
U5 [3.3%] – T1 [3.1%] – U3 [2.8%] – X [2.8%] – I [2.4%] W [2.4%] –
U2 [1.6%] – U4 [1%] – HV0+V [0.6%] – L [0.2%]
HV H J T2 U K
Iran 7 17 14 5 12 7
Iraq 9 17 13 4 7 5
Georgia 4 20 3 9 5 12
Azerbaijan 6 23 6 10 9 4
Armenia 6 30 10 5 8 7
In essence, Iran’s combined regions provide an mtDNA top three Haplogroup picture the most reminiscent of Iraq. The admixture with Ludim is evident; yet the fact remains that the Arab and Persian peoples are still distinct ethnicities – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.
It is of note that this maternal Haplogroup spread is closely associated with the descendants of Shem. While autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups show a different line of descent for Arab related peoples compared with Europeans, there must be a common denominator in the maternal lineage for Indians and Arabs from Ham with Europeans from Shem.
Haplogroup H is the most common group amongst Europeans and generally Arabs, then U and J; so it is interesting that in Iran there is a higher frequency of J in proportion, similar to Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
It is apparent overall that Iran has more in common with Azerbaijan and Georgia than Armenia; which we will confirm, has a closer link with Turkey.
Iranian men have a higher percentage of J2 than J1; meaning less J1 which is associated with Middle Eastern peoples and more of Haplogroup J2 which is primarily associated with Pakistan from Phut and Lehab. Haplogroup J2 mutations are also found in the Levant, Anatolia and Southeastern Europe from admixture. Haplogroup E1b1b shows Iran’s link with ostensibly Mizra and inherited Haplogroups from Ludim resulting from intermixing with Canaan – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
Haplogroup G is indicative of peoples in the Caucasus region and beyond – an older lineage descending from Shem. The more recent R1a and R1b Haplogroups are typically European Haplogroups and show Iran’s link with other male sibling descendants of Shem. There are exceptions, such as Pakistan, India and Central Asia, whom possess different sub-clades or mutations of R1a derived from admixture through intermixing and intermarriage – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
The total percentage for the European paternal Haplogroups of G, I, R1a and R1b is 35.5% and reflects the European status of Iran from Lud. The total percentage of those Haplogroups associated with the Ludim of J1, E1b1b and T1a, totals 18%. The remaining Haplogroup percentages reveal the extent intermixing has occurred with neighbouring peoples over the centuries.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups of Iran’s near neighbours to the north.
Azerbaijan: J – G2a – R1b – R1a – E1b1b – I – L
Georgia: G2a – J2 – J1 – R1b – R1a – E1b1b – I – L – T1a – Q
E1b1b [6%] – I [4.5%] – T [4%] – L [3%] – Q [1%] – N [0.5%]
Iran is closest to Azerbaijan genetically and the fact more Azerbaijanis live in Iran – approximately twenty million people plus, as opposed to inside Azerbaijan with approximately ten million – is a fact that supports common ancestry from Lud. Iran also shares some common ground with Georgia, but not so much with Armenia. The Haplogroups associated with descent from Ham are E1b1b, J1, J2, L and T. Haplogroups common with descent from Shem, are G, I, R1a and R1b.
Y-DNA Haplogroups for Iran’s immediate neighbours to the Northeast, East and West.
I [4%] – T1a [3.5%] – G2a [2.5%] – E1b1a [0.9%] – L [0.5%] –
Q [0.5%] – N [0.5%]
Iran shares similar Hamitic Haplogroups with its western neighbour and nemesis, Iraq. As Iraq is adjacent to Iran and descended from Mizra and possibly from Ludim in part (with Naphtuh), we would expect them to be related to the Ludim within Iran – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Not surprisingly, Iran shares Y-DNA commonality with Pakistan-Phut and Turkmenistan from Madai, the closest of the Central Asian Republics.
Yet, we will discover that it is Turkey apart from Azerbaijan, which Iran has the most Y-DNA Haplogroup synchronicity with of its seven neighbours. This may be a surprise to many readers, who while they may be aware that Iran is not the same as Iraq and Pakistan, would have assumed a similar paternal linage with them rather than Turkey. Whereas Iran’s predominant lineage as Lud, is linked more closely instead with Turkey from Elam.
The table shows the key Y-DNA Haplogroups for the nations neighbouring Iran.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b L
Turkmenistan 17 17 7 37
Pakistan 20 10 6 37 12
Azerbaijan 31 6 18 7 11 2
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 7
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 3
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 2
Iraq 63 43 20 10 3 6 10 0.5
There is an obvious relationship between Azerbaijan and Iran and the PCA plot clusters for Iran and Near Eastern peoples indicate that Azerbaijan has a closer link with Iran than Georgia or Armenia. The Bible says that Lud and Ludim (Iran), with Phut and Lehab (Pakistan), are a mingled and mixed people and this region of the world certainly fits this description.
We will leave Turkmenistan out of the equation as they have a closer relationship with Turkey; which will be explored in the next chapter. Pakistan is clearly not related to the Caucasus nations and nor is Iraq with its higher levels of the Hamitic Haplogroups, J1 and E1b1b. Using Haplogroups J1 and J2 as geographic marker Haplogroups, it is Azerbaijan and Georgia who bookend the table. Georgia possesses the highest percentages of Haplogroups G and J2; Armenia for R1b; and Iran in R1a. All four nations possess Haplogroup L, normally associated with India and Pakistan; with the small amounts hinting at admixture.
The four nations reveal their commonality – as well as a different lineage from the descendants of Ham dwelling in Pakistan and Iraq – exhibiting considerably higher levels of Haplogroup G – indicative of Shem’s early descendants – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve:The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.
Worthy of mention is that both Iran-Lud and Turkey-Elam, have interacted considerably with the Arab world. Both nations have not strayed as far from their original homeland positions in ancient Mesopotamia – unlike Asshur, Aram and Arphaxad – so that Iran has been in the pathway of peoples migrating east-west and vice-versa.
Located in the southern crossroads of the world, which incorporates Anatolia and stretches to West Asia much like Madai in Central Asia, has meant a variety of additional paternal Haplogroups for Iranian males, such as the related G, R1b and I from Shem; E1b1b, L and T from Ham; and Q and N from Japheth. These have been added to their core defining marker Haplogroup signatures: of R1a-Z93 as Lud, descended from Shem; and J as Ludim, descended from Mizra and Ham.
Wisdom rests in the heart of the discerning; it is not known in the inner parts of fools.
Proverbs 14:33 New English Translation
“Being on the side of the majority is often a sign that you are wrong, or the most unlikely to be right.”
Noah’s third son is Shem. His descendants are prominent in the Bible and influential in the history of civilisation. His descendants – from all his five sons – are the European, western peoples of the Earth located in Europe, West Asia and the New World of the Americas as well as in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. They include a diverse range of peoples from fair skin, blue eyes and blond hair, to olive skin, brown eyes and black hair.
Shem in Hebrew, means: ‘name’ or ‘renown’ from the noun shem.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘Shem became the ancestor of Abraham and thus Jesus (Luke 3.36)… Shem… lent his name to the language group that Hebrew is part of: Semitic. The name Shem is equal to the word (shem), which itself means “name”:
The name Shem means Name, Fame or Reputation, or even Identity or Personality… we’re pretty sure that Shem wasn’t named after his own fame or prowess but rather after the Name of the Creator, which in turn reflected all of his deeds…
For a meaning of the name Shem, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads… Renown. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… adds Celebrated, Distinguished.’
We will look at additional definitions and ramifications for Shem’s name when we study Nimrod in Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod. Shem is mentioned in the genealogical lists in Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One with his brothers. We have investigated the incident involving Noah, Ham and Canaan – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Shem with Japheth, acted honourably in dealing with the aftermath and his reward is recounted in Genesis 9:26, Expanded Bible:
Genesis 9:26
Expanded Bible
‘Noah also said, “May the Lord, the God of Shem, be praised [or blessed]! May Canaan be Shem’s slave.”
Notice, Shem wasn’t being praised or his name, but rather the Creator. There is a clue here that Shem may have been similar to Noah, Enoch and Abel before them, in being a member of a priestly line and a servant of the Creator.
Some teach that Shem is the same person as the priest of the most High God, Melchizedek, whom Abraham paid tithes to and partook of bread and wine. In the Book of Jasher it says in chapter sixteen, verses 11-12:
11 ‘And Adonizedek king of Jerusalem, the same was Shem [of renown], went out with his men to meet Abram and his people, with bread and wine, and they remained together in the valley of Melech‘ – refer articles: Na’amah; and Belphegor. 12 ‘And Adonizedek blessed Abram, and Abram gave him a tenth from all that he had brought from the spoil of his enemies, for Adonizedek was a priest before God.’
Using Usher’s widely accepted biblical chronology, this would be possible. Combining science (worldwide geological flood evidence is missing for circa 4000-2500 BCE) and an accurate chronology (an unconventional chronology based on the Sumerian sexagesimal base 60 system) for the Old Testament epoch following the Flood – and prior to Genesis chapter twelve – it would be impossible for Shem and Abraham to meet, as Shem died in 5717 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE. That aside, Melchizedek is a unique personality and not to be mistaken for Shem or even Christ as some propose. We will look at Nimrod’s kingdom later, though for now it is interesting to note that his territory was the ‘land of Shinar’ – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.
Shinar is mentioned outside of the Nimrod account recorded in Genesis Ten and Eleven.
Joshua 7:20-21
English Standard Version
20 ‘And Achan answered Joshua, “Truly I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel, and this is what I did: 21 when I saw among the spoil a beautiful cloak fromShinar, and 200 shekels of silver, and a bar of gold weighing 50 shekels, then I coveted them and took them. And see, they are hidden in the earth inside my tent, with the silver underneath.”
Isaiah 11:11
English Standard Version
11 ‘In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria [Asshur (Russia)],from Egypt [Mizra – Arabs (of the Middle East and North Africa)], from Pathros [nation of Egypt], from Cush [India], from Elam [Turkey], fromShinar [Europe], from Hamath [Nigeria], and from the coastlands of thesea [East Asia and South East Asia].’
Zechariah 5:10-11
English Standard Version
10 ‘Then I said to the angel who talked with me, “Where are they taking the basket?” 11 He said to me, “To the land of Shinar, to build a house for it. And when this is prepared, they will set the basket down there on its base.”
What is the Land of Shinar and Where is it Located? Petros Koutoupis, 2007 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Genesis 10:10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel [Babylon], and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Genesis 10:11 Out of that land went forth Asshur [Nimrod], and builtNineveh [capital], and Rehoboth-ir, and Kalaḥ, Genesis 10:12 and Resen between Nineveh and Kalaḥ – the same is the great city.
In the past, many have argued… about the true location of the land of Shinar… among a majority of scholars in the same field, [I] have identified this to mean the land of Sumer. While the Sumerians themselves called their land ki-en-gir (“place of the civilized lords”), the name Sumer is derived from the Akkadian Shumer [Shem].
Shinar is simply a Hebrew corruption of the Akkadian word. It literally translates to“country of two rivers” which could only mean the Tigris and Euphrates when taking into account the cities mentioned above.
Erech/Uruk, Akkad/Agade, and Babylon existed nowhere else but the land of Shinar. In times past, early rulers used to differentiate the lands between Sumer and Akkad when boasting of their achievements, making the one the southern kingdom (Sumer) and the other the northern kingdom (Akkad).
Collectively this had evolved to one piece of land between the two rivers. Further evidence of its location, outside of Genesis 10:10-11 comes to us from the Book of Daniel:
1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. 1:2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; and he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god, and the vessels he brought into the treasure-house of his god.
Nebuchadnezzar [II], a Neo-Babylonian king to whom Jerusalem fell [during 607-587 BCE] under which also resulted in the Jewish Exile, was said to have come from the land of Shinar or Chaldea.
Erech has been identified with the Mesopotamian city of Uruk (Sumerian Unug); the home and kingdomof Gilgamesh. Akkad has been identified with Agade, the capital of the Akkadian Empire. Babel was the native name of the city the Greeks called Babylon, which literatally translates [as] “gate of god”, corresponding to the Akkadian Bab-ili. As for the location of Calneh, modern day scholars have located this to be Nippur (modern day Niffer), which is situated in the marshes of [the] east bank of the Euphrates; roughly 60 miles southeast of Babylon.’
Assyria derived from Asshur, was situated to the north of Akkad and not counted as the land of Shinar. The land of Shinar incorporated Akkad and Sumer, with Babylon formerly Babel, to the south of Akkad; located approximately in the middle of the two regions. Thus the cities of Accad and Babylon were northwards in Akkad and Calneh or Nippur and Erech further south in Sumer. ‘Sumer’ and the Sumerians derive from the name Shem, while the Akkad[ian] origin is unclear. The term Chaldea[n] is believed to have derived from Shem’s son Arphaxad. Akkad is possibly linked to Arphaxad as well.
The early geography involved descendants from three of the sons of Shem in close proximity after the Tower of Babel, so that in the north of the fertile crescent there was located Asshur, below them, Arphaxad and beneath them, Elam. Aram or Syria and Lud or Lydia, were not so clearly defined. Lud has been identified more with Ham’s children, particularly Mizra and may have been located originally south of Shinar. Lud is invisible until he appears in Anatolia in Western Asia Minor – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. The same applies to Aram until he appears north of Assyria and to the East of Lud. This layout will come into clearer focus, once we uncover the five identities of the sons of Shem.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 60-61 – emphasis mine:
‘… But Babylonia had not always been in Semitic hands. Its earliest population belonged to another race, and the language which they spoke was agglutinative… it was the pre-Semitic population, and not the Semitic intruders, to whom the origin of Chaldaean culture and civilisation were due. It was this population who were the inventors of the pictorial characters which developed into the cuneiform syllabary, they were the first to write on tablets of clay, they founded the great cities and temples of the country, and initiated the art and science, the literature and law, the systems of government and religion which the Semitic Babylonians afterwards inherited. Babylonia was divided into the two provinces of Accad in the north and Sumer… in the south; Accad was the first to fall under Semitic influence and domination, and it was here that the first Semitic empire that of Sargon of Accad took its rise.’
Turkey (or Elam) is not considered by all biblical historians as a line of Shem but invariably from Japheth. The interaction of Elam with Madai – descended from Japheth – accounts for some of the confusion. The pictorial characters are the cursive script of Elam and evidenced today by modern Turkish. Recall in the previous chapter we touched upon the link between Turkish and Sumerian. Agglutinative is defined as: ‘pertaining to or noting a language, as Turkish, characterized by agglutination.’ It includes ‘the act or process of uniting by glue or other tenacious substance, the state of being thus united; adhesion of parts, that which is united; a mass or group cemented together.’
In linguistics: ‘a process of word formation in which morphemes, each having one relatively constant shape, are combined without fusion or morphophonemic change, and in which each grammatical category is typically represented by a single morpheme in the resulting word, especially such a process involving the addition of one or more affixes to a base, as in Turkish, in which ev means “house,” ev-den means “from a house,” and ev-ler-den means “from houses.”
Though descended from Shem, Elam as Turkey, has its feet planted firmly in the two worlds of Japheth and Ham, as evidenced by its link with the Central Asians; a Turko-Mongol language; and the non-European religion of Islam – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. In time, Elam moved eastwards from Sumer – adjacent to the Persian Gulf, into modern day Iran – and hence the gradual lessening of their influence on the descendants of Arphaxad who moved southwards from Akkadia into Sumer – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
Two other nations which have agglutinating languages, causing dispute regarding their language families are the Korean and Japonic languages. An understandable coincidence, as we have learned in Chapter six and nine, that both Korea descending from Gomer and Japan from Javan, migrated in a different pattern to their brothers in South East Asia. Thus, their languages are not readily linked to not-so-related close neighbours China, or more closely related, yet geographically distant relatives in the southeast of Asia – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.
Book of Jubilees 7:13-18
‘And Ham knew that his father had cursed his younger son, and he was displeased that he had cursed his son andhe parted from his father, he and his sons with him, Cush [Indians] and Mizraim [Arabs] and Put [Pakistan] and Canaan [Africans]. And he built for himself a city and called its name after the name of his wife Na’elatama’uk. And Japheth saw it, and became envious of his brother, and he too built for himself a city, and he called its name after the name of his wife ‘Adataneses.
And Shem dwelt with his father Noah, and he built a city close to his father on the mountain, and he too called its name after the name of his wife Sedeqetelebab. And behold these three cities are near Mount Lubar; Sedeqetelebab fronting the mountain on its east; and Na’eltama’uk on the south; ‘Adatan’eses towards the west. And these are the sons of Shem: Elam, and Asshur, and Arpachshad…’
This account relates to the period after the flood, or shortly after the incident with Noah – Chapter XI Ham Aequator. If Noah stayed close to the Kashmir area, then the locations for Ham’s and Japheth’s children equate with their travelling along the Indus River and populating this region in southwest Asia. Japheth and Ham continued to the far west; Shem migrating behind them both. Japheth’s descendants eventually dwelling in the Aegean and Anatolia; Ham’s descendants living in Canaan, Egypt and North Africa; while Shem’s descendants settled in Mesopotamia.
Shem’s descendants migrating westward and displacing the children of Japheth and Ham would answer two questions. Why the sons of Ham migrated into North Africa, though the children of Canaan lingered in the coastal strip of the East Mediterranean – because the land was rich in natural resources and beautiful, being the best real estate in the area – rather than continuing southward with Cush, Phut and Mizra. And, Why the sons of Japheth moved northward into Asia Minor and west into Greece and its islands. Javan or ‘Greece’ – the island peoples – left their family names throughout the area until the present day – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.
It would explain why the area is now known as Sumer, as Shem’s descendants have left a more recent and indelible imprint. Remember, the time frame is considerably longer ago than typically credited by historians or biblical scholars. Some time well after 10,837 BCE, though still prior to Nimrod circa 6755 BCE. Then we are introduced to Nimrod and the emphasis of the names for the areas of Assyria named after Asshur, Akkad named after Arphaxad and Sumer after Shem; even though his first born Elam, may have been originally first, his memory has been erased or blurred due to his migration further southeast – possibly directly after the Tower of Babel – as well as the important fact of lower Mesopotamia being inhabited by additional children of Arphaxad – for Arphaxad had numerous descendants – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The Book of Jubilees provides additional details regarding Shem’s territory – the central middle eastern region – which was sandwiched between Japheth to the north and Ham to the south. It is referenced against the Garden of Eden, which we will return to when we study Eden – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Book of Jubilees 8:10-18, 21
8:10 ‘And it came to pass… that they divided the earth into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth, according to the inheritance of each… 11 And he called his sons, and they drew nigh to him, they and their children, and he divided the earth into the lots, which his three sons were to take in possession, and they reached forth their hands, and took the writing out of the bosom of Noah, their father.
12 And there came forth on the writing as Shem’s lot the middle of the earth which he should take as an inheritance for himself and for his sons… from the middle of the mountain range of Rafa, from the mouth of the water from the river Tina, and his portion goes towards the west through the midst of this river, and it extends till it reaches the water of the abysses, out of which this river goes forth and pours its waters into the sea Me’at, and this river flows into the great sea. And all that is towards the north is Japheth’s, and all that is towards the south belongs to Shem. 13 And it extends till it reaches Karaso… which looks towards the south. 14 And his portion extends along the great sea, and it extends in a straight line till it reaches… the Egyptian Sea… and it extends to the west to ‘Afra, and it extends till it reaches the waters of the river Gihon, and to the south of the waters of Gihon, to the banks of this river.
21 And he knew that a blessed portion and a blessing had come to Shem and his sons unto the generations… the whole land of Eden and the whole land of the Red Sea… the land of Bashan, and all the land of Lebanon and the islands of Kaftur, and all the mountains of Sanir and ‘Amana, and the mountains of Asshur in the north, and all the land of Elam, Asshur, and Babel, and Susan [the eventual capital of Elam] and Ma’edai [Madai], and all the mountains of Ararat [Turkey], and all the region beyond the sea, which is beyond the mountains of Asshur towards the north, a blessed and spacious land, and all that is in it is very good [the whole of Mesopotamia and Anatolia].’
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘Shinar Meaning: From the root (s’r), which expresses intense negative emotion and the experience of violence. From the root (na’ar), to growl, shake or be young. From (1) the verb (shanan), to be sharp, and (2) the noun (‘ir), city. Scholars generally assume that Shinar is the Hebrew interpretation of what is commonly referred to as Sumer.
Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names derives [shinar] from (sh’r): (se’ar) means hair… the… verb (sa’ar)… literally mean[s] to be hairy… but in fact is solely used to mean to be afraid… Noun (sa’r) means horror. Verb (sa’ar) means to sweep or whirl away… in relation to a storm wind.
Verb (she’ar)… to break, tear through or split… nouns (sha’ar), gate, and (sho’er), gatekeeper… The core idea of root (sh’r) is to split open, to break through. Thus, for a meaning of the name Shinar, Jones reads Casting Out, or Scattering In All Manner Of Ways…’
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘The name Sin’ar occurs eight times in the Hebrew Bible… This location of Shinar is evident from its description as encompassing both Babel/Babylon (in northern Babylonia) and Erech/Uruk (in southern Babylonia). In the Book of Genesis… Verse 11:2 states that Shinar enclosed the plain that became the site of the Tower of Babel after the Great Flood. [The Book of] Jubilees 9:3 allots Shinar (or, in the Ethiopic text, Sadna Sena`or) to Ashur… Jubilees 10:20 states that the Tower of Babel was built with bitumen from the sea of Shinar. David Rohl theorized that the Tower was actually located in Eridu*, which was once located on the Persian Gulf, where there are ruins of a massive, ancient ziggurat worked from bitumen.’
Alan Alford comments on Sumer – emphasis mine:
‘The discovery of ancient Sumer is an exciting story, which begins in the nineteenth century… Spurred on by Biblical clues, the accounts of earlier travellers and by local folklore, archaeologists such as the Paris-born Englishman Sir Austen Henry Layard indeed found their fame and fortune. It was a Frenchman who made the first important discovery. In 1843, Paul Emile Botta uncovered fantastic temples, palaces and a ziggurat (step-pyramid) at a site identified as Dur-Sharru-Kin, the eighth century BC capital of Sargon II, king of Assyria. Botta will always be remembered as the discoverer of the Assyrian civilization.
Whilst archaeologists such as Botta and Layard continued to seek and explore new sites such as Nimrud and Nineveh, scholars such as Sir Henry Rawlinson and Jules Oppert began to shed light on the numerous clay tablets which the digs had uncovered. It soon became apparent that the ancient Mesopotamians were diligent record keepers, preserving information in a cuneiform script, inscribed on clay tablets. In 1835, Rawlinson had carefully copied a vital trilingual inscription on a stone slab found at Behistun in Persia; in 1846, he deciphered the script and its languages, one of which was Akkadian, common to the Assyrians and the Babylonians, who had inherited the Near East after the collapse of Sumer c. 2000 BC.
Sir Henry Rawlinson’s timing was fortuitous. A few years later, Sir Austen Henry Layard began to excavate the mounds of the ancient Assyrian capital Nineveh, 250 miles north of modern-day Baghdad. As well as fantastic temples and palaces, he discovered in 1850 the library of Ashurbanipal [Assyrian King, from 669 to 631 BCE], containing a collection of 30,000 clay tablets. As more and more tablets were translated, the archaeologists became increasingly excited by the independent confirmation of Biblical rulers and cities.
One inscription, listing the achievements of an earlier ruler, Sargon I, claimed that he was the “King of Akkad, King of Kish”, and that he had defeated in battle the cities of “Uruk, Ur and Lagash”. Scholars were amazed to find that this Sargon had preceded his later namesake by nearly two thousand years, taking the Mesopotamian civilization back to at least 2400 BC. This was just the beginning of a series of tremendous finds which turned back the clock on the beginning of civilization and enriched the museums of Europe and America with some of their prize exhibits. At this time, Sumer did not exist in the history books – it is only with hindsight that we now recognize it as the Biblical “Shinar”.
Further south, the hot and dusty wasteland of Uruk yielded the world’s first ever ziggurat, dedicated to the Goddess Inanna, as well as examples of some of the earliest inscribed writing. The best preserved ziggurat in the whole of Mesopotamia was found at Ur, the birthplace of the Old Testament patriarch Abraham. The partly restored ruins of that ziggurat still dominate the landscape today at the modern town of Muqayyar, 186 miles south-east of Baghdad. It was at Eridu, however, almost 200 miles south-east of Baghdad that the earliest Sumerian city was found. The city of Eridu is [today] an abandoned, windswept wilderness, dominated by the ruins of Ur-Nammu’s* ziggurat’ – Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings.
With all that said, it is important to understand that it will be discovered later on in our journey that the original and first Shinar was located in a different geographical position to the one it became synonymous with in lower Mesopotamia – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
The subjects of albinism, Noah, his son Shem and the introduction of white skin were addressed in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; as well as discussing melanin variation which causes the darkness and lightness of skin, hair and eyes in Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
Blond hair is linked to the carriers of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a; blue eyes with Haplogroup I1; and Red hair with Haplogroup R1b. The argument for antediluvian humans possessing a light shade of brown skin is incontrovertible and the introduction of all other shades which are evident in South Asians, East Asians, Arabs, Latinos and Europeans through Noah, his sons and their wives is the only scenario that fits the 11,000 to 19,000 years ago timeline, provided by scientists – and supported by an unconventional chronology.
Due to lengthened ages in the antediluvian age, Noah was born nearly 19,000 years ago and his sons about 14,000 years ago; with Noah’s grandsons beginning to be born approximately 13,000 years ago – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. The exact time frame when the explosion of Haplogroup mutations is thought to have occurred.
Real History explains the scientific process of where and how white skin originates – capitalisation theirs, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Gene copies, however, are not always healthy. When the copies of a gene differ from each other, as through deleterious mutation or failure: Then in this heterozygous condition, we call the two parts “Alleles” and the undamaged or un-mutated allele is dominant, and the organism’s appearance and function is normal. The damaged “other” allele has no noticeable effect on the organism’s appearance, and is called the “Recessive” allele.
When BOTH alleles of a gene become recessive, then the gene cannot complete its assignment. As an example: many Black people have alleles of their “P” gene which are heterozygous and they look normal in every way: (The “P” gene controls the production of Melanin in the skin for protection from the Sun).’
‘But if TWO of these people with heterozygous alleles in their “P” gene [reproduce], then one or more, of their children will be an Albino. If two Albinos mate, there is only damaged or recessive “P” genes to inherit; therefore ALL of their children will be White.’
‘The trait for curly hair (which is the [norm] for humans) follows the same rules, two damaged or recessive allele’s of the “TCHH” gene [results in] straight hair. Same for the genes which control eye color and hair color: (Blonde and Red hair isrecessive,as is Blue, Green, and Gray eyes).’
‘Washington Post: Friday, May 1, 2009, Study Finds Africans More Genetically Diverse Than Other Populations:
“Africans are more genetically diverse than the inhabitants of the rest of the world combined, according to a sweeping study that carried researchers into remote regions to sample the bloodlines of more than 100 distinct populations. So says Sarah Tishkoff, a University of Pennsylvania geneticist who led the international research team. The report was published in the journal Science Express.”
‘Spencer Wells, [Genetic Anthropologist, on the first Great Migrations] page 39 The Journey of Man: A genetic Odyssey
“… Genetic data corroborates the mitochondrial results, placing the root of the human family tree – our most recent common ancestor – [from Africans]… Consistent with this result, all of the genetic data shows the greatest number of polymorphisms in [Africans] – there is simply far more variation in that continent than anywhere else. You are more likely to sample extremely divergent genetic lineages within a single African village than you are in whole of the rest of the world.
The majority of the genetic polymorphisms found in our species are found uniquely in Africans – Europeans, Asians and Native Americans carry only a small sample of the extraordinary diversity that can be found in any African village.”
‘The question was asked: If Europeans are Albinos, then how is it that they still make [white children]? [The] confusion is due to believing [the] definition of [an] Albino. In order to confuse pigmented people, [Europeans]… try to say that ONLY type 1 (OCA1) [Chromosome 11] Albinos exist.’
‘They say: “Though we have White Skin, we DON’T have White Hair and Red eyes. We also have good vision and can TAN, so that proves that we are NOT Albinos… Type “1” Albinos are [those] with White hair, White Skin, Red Eyes, and poor eyesight. There are “8” (so far discovered) types of Albinism, with type 2 (OCA2) [Chromosome 15] being by far the MOST COMMON!’
‘The phenotype typical of type 2 Albinism (OCA2) is “TANNABLE WHITE SKIN, BLONDE to BROWN HAIR, and BLUE, GREEN, GRAY, or BROWN EYES” – sound familiar? And how is it that type 2 (OCA2) Albinos can still make type 1 (OCA1) Albinos? Simple, normal everyday European Albinism is caused by mutation of the “P” (OCA2) gene. Whereas type 1 (OCA1) Albinism is caused by a mutation of the tyrosinase gene. These genes are at different locations of the cell Chromosome, therefore one mutation does not exclude the other. Consequently type 2 Albinos producing type 1 Albinos is not unusual in the least. And just like in Blacks with Albinism, future generations are dependent only on the… partner’s mutations or lack of mutations.’
“It is my conviction that a white skin is not natural to man, and that by nature he has either a black or brown skin like our forefathers… and that the white man was never originally created by nature; and that, therefore, there is no race of white people.” From… Metaphysics of Sexual Love by Arthur Schopenhauer.’
‘Genetics Out of Africa, Dr. Orville Boyd Jenkins:
“Recently a major molecular cause of this change in skin color has been discovered in Europeans. Specifically, the gene SLC24A5 turns out to be critical for the production of melanin, the predominant dark pigment of the skin and hair… 100 percent of Europeans have a mutation in SLC24A5 that impairs the function of the protein… Asians share the fully functional version of SLC24A5, but have acquired mutations in other genes that result in lighter skin, while retaining black hair (Francis Collins, The Language of Life (NY: Harper, 2010), page 150).”
Keith Cheng from Penn State College of Medicine reported that one amino acid difference in the gene SLC24A5 is a key contributor to the skin color difference between Europeans and West Africans. This is undoubtedly where the Irish get their light skin from. “The mutation in SLC24A5 changes just one building block in the protein, and contributes about a third of the visually striking differences in skin tone between peoples of African and European ancestry,” he said.’
The study by professor of pathology Keith Cheng, was published in the Genetics Journal, 2005. Cheng worked together with Victor Canfield, assistant professor of pharmacology, studying DNA sequence differences across the globe. Segments of genetic code have a mutation located closely on the same SLC24A5 chromosome and are often inherited together. Specifically the mutation is called A111T and is found inevery one of European ancestry.
A111T is also found in peoples of the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent, though not in high numbers in Africans. Researchers discovered that all individuals from the Middle East, North Africa, East Africa and Southern India who carry the A111T mutation share a common ‘fingerprint’ or ‘traces of the ancestral genetic code’ in the corresponding chromosomal region; which indicates that all existing instances of this mutation originated from the same person. That same person would be ancestor zero: Noah. Cheng unwittingly confirms: “This means that Middle Easterners and South Indians, which includes most inhabitants of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, share significant ancestry” – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
Apparently, the mutated segment of DNA was itself created from a combination of two other mutated segments which are commonly found in Eastern Asians. Cheng comments: “The coincidence of this interesting form of evidence of shared ancestry of East Asians with Europeans, within this tiny chromosomal region, is exciting… the combining of segments occurred after the ancestors of East Asians [descended from Japheth] and Europeans [descendants of Shem] split geographically [genetically] more than 50,000 [14,000] years ago; the A111T mutation occurred afterward” in Noah’s sixteen grandsons.
Differences in skin colour affect skin cancer rates. For instance, Europeans have ten to twenty times more instances of melanoma than Africans; yet despite having lighter skin as well, East Asians have the same lower melanoma rates as Africans. The reason for this difference could only be explained once the gene mutations for both groups are found.
It is proposed that it is linked to the fact that the original two lines of humankind before Noah’s sons (Homo sapiens sapiens) were the Neanderthal line created on Day Six; and the Adamic line (Homo sapiens) created on Day Eight – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV. These antediluvian lines are replicated today with modifications, respectively to the oriental peoples descended from Japheth and the section of equatorial peoples descended from Ham’s wife, Na’eltama’uk (and Noah) through their son, Canaan – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.
‘The study above mentions the term “Nonsyndromic”: A “Syndrome” is a set of signs and symptoms that appear together and characterize a disease or medical condition. Therefore “Nonsyndromic” means something that is not associated with other signs and symptoms. This comes into play because Europeans typically deny their Albinism by claiming that “REAL” Albinos have bad eyesight!
This study makes clear that is not the case: Note that this study was [conducted] by Asians. Just like SLC24A5 is a gene denoting Albinism, so too is SLC45A2, an Albino gene. What is the official name of the MC1R gene? The official name of this gene is “melanocortin 1 receptor (alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone receptor).”
What is the normal function of the MC1R gene? The MC1R gene provides instructions for making a protein called the melanocortin 1 receptor. This receptor plays an important role in normal pigmentation. The receptor is primarily located on the surface of melanocytes, which are specialized cells that produce a pigment called melanin. Melanin is the substance that gives skin, hair, and eyes their color. Melanin is also found in the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina), where it plays a role in normal vision.
Melanocytes make two forms of melanin, eumelanin and pheomelanin. The relative amounts of these two pigments help determine the color of a person’s hair and skin. People who produce mostly eumelanin tend to have brown or black hair and dark skin that tans easily. Eumelanin also protects skin from damage caused by ultraviolet (UV) radiation in sunlight. People who produce mostly pheomelanin tend to have red or blond hair, freckles, and light-colored skin that tans poorly. Because pheomelanin does not protect skin from UV radiation, people with more pheomelanin have an increased risk of skin damage caused by sun exposure.
The melanocortin 1 receptor controls which type of melanin is produced by melanocytes. When the receptor is activated, it triggers a series of chemical reactions inside melanocytes that stimulate these cells to make eumelanin. If the receptor is not activated or is blocked, melanocytes make pheomelanin instead of eumelanin.
Common variations (polymorphisms) in the MC1R gene are associated with normal differences in skin and hair color. Certain genetic variations are most common in people with red hair, fair skin, freckles, and an increased sensitivity to sun exposure. These MC1R polymorphisms reduce the ability of the melanocortin 1 receptor to stimulate eumelanin production, causing melanocytes to make mostly pheomelanin. Although MC1R is a key gene in normal human pigmentation, researchers believe that the effects of other genes also contribute to a person’s hair and skin coloring. The melanocortin 1 receptor is also active in cells other than melanocytes, including cells involved in the body’s immune and inflammatory responses. The receptor’s function in these cells is unknown.
The MC1R gene belongs to a family of genes called GPCR (G protein-coupled receptors). A gene family is a group of genes that share important characteristics. Classifying individual genes into families helps researchers describe how genes are related to each other. Many genetic changes in the MC1R gene increase the risk of developing skin cancer, including a common, serious form of skin cancer that begins in melanocytes (melanoma). Alterations in the MC1R gene disrupt the ability of the melanocortin 1 receptor to trigger eumelanin production in melanocytes.
Because eumelanin normally protects skin from the harmful effects of UV radiation, a lack of this pigment leaves fair skin more vulnerable to damage from sun exposure. Skin damage caused by UV radiation from the sun is a major risk factor for developing melanoma and other forms of skin cancer.
Studies suggest that variations in the MC1R gene may also increase the risk of developing melanoma in the absence of UV radiation-related skin damage. In these cases, melanomas can occur in people of dark or light skin coloring. These cancers are often associated with mutations in additional genes related to melanoma risk, such as the BRAF and CDKN2A genes. Researchers are working to explain the complex relationship among MC1R variations, other genetic and environmental factors, and melanoma risk.’
Online source: “[The top four] places in the world where… [Europeans] refuse to accept the fact that they have physical disadvantages as regards the Sun [are] Israel, Australia, New Zealand [and] California… In these places they inhabit beaches as if they were Black or Brown people. The results are often disastrous.’ Since this comment, the state of Israel has been passed by Australia, moving into second and New Zealand has leapt into first, regarding the highest rates of skin cancer in the world.
‘Certain genetic changes in the MC1R gene modify the appearance of people with oculocutaneous albinism type 2. This form of albinism, which is caused by mutations in the OCA2 gene, is characterized by fair hair, light-colored eyes, creamy white skin, and vision problems. People with genetic changes in both the OCA2 and MC1R genes have many of the usual features of oculocutaneous albinism type 2; however, they typically have red hair instead of the usual yellow, blond, or light brown hair seen with this condition.’
Wiki: ‘Sodium/potassium/calcium exchanger 5 (NCKX5), also known as solute carrier family 24 member 5 (SLC24A5), is a protein that in humans is encoded by the SLC24A5 gene that has a major influence on natural skin colour variation. The NCKX5 protein is a member of the potassium-dependent sodium/calcium exchanger family. Sequence variation in the SLC24A5 gene, particularly a non-synonymous SNP changing the amino acid at position 111 in NCKX5 from alanine to threonine, has been associated with differences in skin pigmentation.’
‘The SLC24A5 gene’s derived threonine or Ala111Thr allele (rs1426654[3]) has been shown to be a major factor in the light skin tone of Europeans compared to Africans, and is believed to represent as much as 25–40% of the average skin tone difference between Europeans and West Africans. It has been the subject of recent selection in Western Eurasia, and is fixed in European populations.
The SLC24A5 gene, in humans, is located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 15 on position 21.1, from base pair 46,200,461 to base pair 46,221,881. NCKX5 is 43 kDa protein that is partially localized to the trans-Golgi network in melanocytes. Removal of the NCKX5 protein disrupts melanogenesis in human and mouse melanocytes, causing a significant reduction in melanin pigment production. Site-directed mutagenesis corresponding to a non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphism in SLC24A5 alters a residue in NCKX5 (A111T) that is important for NCKX5 sodium-calcium exchanger activity. SLC24A5 appears to have played a key role in the evolution of light skin in humans of European ancestry… The Penn State team [calculated] that the gene, known as slc24a5, is responsible for about one-third of the pigment loss that made black skin white. A few other as-yet-unidentified mutated genes apparently account for the rest…’
This removes any doubt that Homo sapiens, from the line of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve were darker skinned. Science has confirmed that white skin is a mutation – the SLC24A5 gene on Chromosome 15 – of a darker skinned human. Science dating of this event aligns with the birth of Shem and the genetic bottleneck at the time of the Flood. Eve as mitochondrial Eve would have been mtDNA Haplogroup L0 at least. Adam as Y-DNA Adam, would have been Y-DNA Haplogroup A. Both these Haplogroups are Haplogroups found in sub-Saharan Black African peoples – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
‘The gene’s function in pigmentation was discovered in zebrafish as a result of the positional cloning of the gene responsible for the “golden” variety of this common pet store fish. Evidence in the International HapMap Project database of genetic variation in human populations showed that Europeans, represented by the “CEU” population, had two primary alleles differing by only one nucleotide, changing the 111th amino acid from alanine to threonine, abbreviated “A111T”.
The derived threonine allele (Ala111Thr; also known as A111T or Thr111) represented 98.7 to 100% of the alleles in European samples, while the ancestral or alanine form was found in 93 to 100% of samples of Sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians and Indigenous Americans. The variation is a SNP polymorphism rs1426654, which had been previously shown to be second among 3011 tabulated SNPs ranked as ancestry-informative markers.This single change in SLC24A5 explains between 25 and 38% of the difference in skin melanin index between peoples of West African vs. European Ancestry.
Furthermore, the European mutation is associated with the largest region of diminished genetic variation in the CEU HapMap population, suggesting the possibility that the A111T mutation may be the subject of the single largest degree of selection in human populations of European ancestry. It is theorised that selection for the derived allele is based on the need for sunlight to produce the essential nutrient vitamin D. In northerly latitudes, where there is less sun, greater requirement for body coverage due to colder climate, and frequently, diets poor in vitamin D, making lighter skin more suitable for survival. Tests for this variation have obvious application to forensic science.
It has been estimated that the threonine allele became predominant among Europeans 11,000 [circa 9,000 to 10,000 BCE and the birth of Shem’s sons: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram] to [circa 17,000 BCE and the birth of Noah] 19,000 years ago.
After providing all manner of scientific data to prove European Albinism: We now turn to the common sense approach to proving European Albinism… todays White Europeans… are clearly loath to admit that they are [technically] Albinos. So to hide this truth, they utilize all manner of “Double-Speak”: that is defining Albinism, but turning aside all inference to themselves. They say things like: OCA2 is rare in Europe, but more common in Africa… ALL White Europeans are ALREADY OCA2, so to hide that; they only count as Albino, those of their number who have genetic vision problems because of their OCA2 Albinism: (Another lie they tell is that ALL Albinos have vision problems). So for a better understanding, [let’s] DEFINE OCA2. OCA2 stands for Oculocutaneous Albinism type II.
“OCA” stands for Oculocutaneous Albinism. The “OC” stands for “Oculocutaneous” Definition of OCULOCUTANEOUS: relating to or affecting both the eyes and the skin – oculocutaneous albinism – Definition of ALBINISM: the condition of an albino. Full Definition of ALBINO: an organism exhibiting deficient pigmentation; especially: a human being that is congenitally deficient in pigment and usually has a milky or translucent skin, white or colorless hair, and eyes with pink or blue iris and deep-red pupil (In short, Albino means WHITE or WHITE like – from the Latin albus “white”).
These are the symptoms of OCA2. Genetics Home Reference
“The OCA2 gene (formerly called the P gene) provides instructions for making a protein called the P protein. This protein is located in melanocytes, which are specialized cells that produce a pigment called melanin. Melanin is the substance that gives skin, hair, and eyes their color. Melanin is also found in the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina), where it plays a role in normal vision.”
NOAH: National Organization for Albinism and Hypopigmentation. Striking coincidence, or is it? Andan intriguing irony that this is the acronym,for Noah… who is patently Ancestor Zero.
“A common myth is that people with albinism have red eyes. Although lighting conditions can allow the blood vessels at the back of the eye to be seen, which can cause the eyes to look reddish or violet, most people with albinism have blue eyes, and some have hazel or brown eyes. There are different types of albinism and the amount of pigment in the eyes varies; however, vision problems are associated with albinism.”
‘Did you notice in the “Genetics Home Reference” definition where it said that “The OCA2 gene was formerly called the P gene”? Now why would White people RENAME a gene after a disease?
THE HUMAN BODY DOES NOT “NORMALLY” COME WITH DISEASE! So why did [Europeans] RENAME the “P” gene, and give it the name of a DISEASE? They did that when they found out that the MUTATED form of the “P” gene was “NORMAL” in THEM! OCA2 “IS” the “MUTATED” FORM of the “P” gene. To put it plainly… A normal Black person’s gene would be called a “P” gene. And only the MUTATED form found in Europeans and African Albinos, would be called the OCA2 gene. Since ALL Europeans have the OCA2 gene, therefore they are all Albinos. And of course it’s rare in Africa, most Africans are NOT Albinos.
So then, if the OCA2 gene is a “Normal” human gene, then BLACKS MUST HAVE A “OCA-2” (Albinism gene) too? Logically then: if “OCA2” means “Oculocutaneous Albinism type 2” – HOW CAN BLACK PEOPLE HAVE THIS GENE AND NOT BE WHITE?… Of course Black People DO NOT have a OCA2 Gene, they have a “P” gene. When the “P” gene is healthy, Black people make Black people. But when the “P” gene has “Mutated” and is no longer healthy, It CAN cause Black people to produce WHITE people (Albinos).
How can two people with normal pigmentation (Black people) produce a child with albinism? That is because these parents – like one out of every 75 people – are carriers for albinism. A carrier is someone who has one functional gene and one abnormal gene. (We all have two copies of all genes). Because the functional gene overrides the abnormal gene, these people do not have albinism themselves. However, they are still able to pass the abnormal gene on to their child. If the other parent is also a carrier for the same type of albinism, the offspring has a 25% chance of having albinism, a 50% chance of being a carrier, and a 25% chance of having two “normal” genes.
In Herodotus’s “History of the Persian Wars” of the dozens of peoples that he describes in the book; he chooses to describe only three peoples by racial type. The Colchians… whom he describes as “black-skinned and have woolly hair”. And the Budini of Gelonus (east-central Ukraine), whom he describes as (they have all deep blue eyes, and bright red hair). The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.) said this about them:
“For my own part, I agree with those who think that the tribes of Germany are free from all taint of intermarriages with foreign nations, and that they appear as a distinct, unmixed race, like none but themselves. Hence, too, the same physical peculiarities throughout so vast a population. All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, fit only for a sudden exertion. They are less able to bear laborious work. Heat and thirst they cannot in the least endure; to cold and hunger their climate and their soil inure them.”
‘From those passages we know for sure what White Europeans looked like when they first invaded Europe – they were Pure Albinos. But today, they rarely have the RED HAIR and BLUE EYES of their ancestors – What Happened?’
We will learn that the Germanic tribes in Germany were peoples who were predominantly fair and blue eyed and they still are today. It doesn’t account for all the White people in Europe with brunette hair and brown eyes. Thus the assertion that the blue eyed, red haired people are disappearing is not true in this background context, of ‘all white people were red haired and blue eyed.’ What is true, is that those nations which are predominately fair and blue eyed are being ‘watered down’ so-to-speak through intermarriage and inter-mixing. Thus the following is relevant in that context.
‘THIS HAPPENED! “Since the turn of the century, people born with blue eyes in the United States have dramatically decreased, with only about 10 percent having blue eyes today.
According to Mark Grant, an epidemiologist from Loyola University in Chicago. During the turn of the last century, the percentage of people with blue eyes stood at 57.4% for those born between 1899 through 1905; and 33.8% for those born between 1936 through 1951. According to Grant, in a study titled “Cohort effects in a genetically determined trait: eye color among US whites.” This decrease in the occurrence of blue eyes is due to many factors, with the majority pointing to the increase in brown-eyed immigrants, mainly Hispanics and Asians, as well as heightened interracial relationships: as the other determinant,(when a normal Black person and a European make a baby, the baby GAINS varied ability to make MELANIN). Blue eyes, next to green, are the rarest eye color in the world, as people of countries in Asia and Africa possess brown eyes.”
‘Are there three Races? As the evidence indicates… [Europeans have]… taught… that there [are] THREE RACES: The Black Race. The White Race. The [Asiatic] type Race. This was just to give themselves an undeserved place of importance in the Human hierarchy. Following the evidence, it becomes clear that there are indeed THREE RACES, but their types are different: [1] Blacks with “Negroid” features, produce Albinos with Negroid features. [2] Blacks with “Caucasian” features, produce Albinos with Caucasian features. And [3] Blacks with “Mongol” features produce Albinos with Mongol features… there is the one Black Human Race. Then there are TWO sub-races:The Albino Race – which encompasses Whites/Albinos of EVERY Phenotype. (Europeans insist that they are the only “True” Whites: but as is clear from the evidence, they are in no way unique). And then there is the “MULATTO” Races: which are MIXTURES of all the above, in varying QUANTITIES… [including] the Middle East, North Africa, and Latin American: as well as Asia…’
A rather abrupt expression of the no less undeniable reality, that the oldest genes – as expressed by paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup A – pre-flood, are the ancestor genes (and Haplogroup) which mutated through Noah’s sons and grandsons into the variety of races or ethnicities we observe today. Thus the original mtDNA L and Y-DNA A Haplogroups were passed from Noah and Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, to Canaan.
Future mutations of the founding Haplogroup A, would have been passed via Ham to each of his own three sons. Each son receiving a unique sequence, yet there are some Haplogroups common to each or all. Japheth received a unique set which diversified amongst his seven sons, as did Shem for his five sons. The fact there are crossover Haplogroups between Japheth, Ham and Shem’s grandson’s descendants, proves their family link and supports the scientific understanding of genetic mutations as evidenced by Haplogroup expansions and admixture.
For example, let’s take R1a and R1b. Both are European marker Haplogroups, for western and eastern Europe respectively. Yet, many Indian males in India also carry R1a. Geneticists debate the origin of R1a: is it West Eurasian and therefore European; or Central Eurasian and South Asian in origin? Which line came from who? The answer is that it is Shem’s line who carried the Y-DNA R Haplogroup with any subsequent evidence in Ham’s line (R1a, R2) originating from admixture. Therefore, Indians and Eastern Europeans are related, just not as closely as scientists believe. They are not both Aryan, as the Indian peoples are Hamitic. Not brothers per se, but more accurately, cousins – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
The principal mtDNA maternal Haplogroups associated with Shem’s descendants via his wife, Sedeqetelebab include:
HaplogroupH – is the most frequently found Haplogroup throughout West Eurasia, with a uniform distribution throughout Europe.
Haplogroup HV – is the ancestral Haplogroup to H and V, which dominates the western European lineages today. About seventy-five percent of the western European population descends from this Haplogroup.
Haplogroup I – is widespread throughout Europe, although at relatively low levels occurring at about two percent.
HaplogroupJ – is one of the four major specific European Haplogroups.
Haplogroup K – spread throughout Europe. Certain lineages are also found in Central Asia and Northern Africa. It is known for its presence in distinct population groups, such as the prehistoric Basques and the Ashkenazi Jews.
Haplogroup N – is one of the two major lineages from which non-African Haplogroups descend. Today, members of this Haplogroup are found in many continents around the world.
Haplogroup T – is a relatively young European Haplogroup.
Haplogroup U – is one of Europe’s oldest and most diverse Haplogroups. About 10 to 11% of Europeans and Americans of European descent belong to this Haplogroup.
Haplogroup V – a European Haplogroup with links to Iberia [Spain], which spread east and north.
Haplogroup W – is found throughout Europe, deriving from super Haplogroup N.
Sedeqetelebab
The global distribution of Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups associated with Shem’s descendants are summarised in Retina, Fifth Edition, 2013:
‘The highest frequencies of haplogroup G appear in the Caucasus region; however it also shows significant frequencies in the Mediterranean areas and the Middle East.
Haplogroup I [I1, I2a1 and I2a2] is a clear European haplogroup; it is one of the most frequent haplogroups among northwestern European populations.
The extensive haplogroup R, which is mainly represented by two lineages – R1a and R1b. The members of R1b are… the most common Y haplogroup in Europe. More than half of men of European descent belong to R1b. Haplogroup R1a is currently found in central and western Asia, India, and in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe.’
A PCA graph below highlighting the descendants of Shem and their genetic proximity with one another.
We will now turn our attention to Shem’s five sons and their offspring; beginning with the elusive descendants from Lud.
And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
Colossians 3:17 English Standard Version
Sir Isaac Newton was asked how he discovered the law of gravity.He replied:
“By thinking about it all the time.”
“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.”
Casluh and Caphtor are listed as Mizraim’s sixth and seventh sons. We touched on in the previous chapter the debate amongst scholars about which son the Philistines descend from. That is, where the parenthesis should be. Some advocate where it is, after Casluh and others say it should be placed following Caphtor.
Genesis 10:14
English Standard Version
‘Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.’
We have already learned that there is some pairing of sorts, for the brothers from Mizra with the Lud-im and Lehab; and with Anam and Naphtuh. It is worth considering the same situation for Casluh and Caphtor. The additional information that they were now called Philistines undoubtedly has been added to the Bible verse.
An explanation is that the sons of Caphtor ostensibly lived on the island of the same name. Casluh then migrated to Caphtor now known as Crete and together they left and settled on the southern coast of Canaan, which became known as Palestine derived from the word Philistine. Another possibility, the one favoured and hence the parentheses, is that Casluh is the father of Caphtor. Thus, one could say Casluh is the father of Caphtor, or Casluh is the father of the Philistines. Caphtor is not described as the father of the Philstines… as he was the Philistines.
The Interlinear says: ‘And Pathrusim, Casluhim out whom came Philistim [the Pelishites or inhabitants of Pelesheth].’ The Hebrew word is H3318 – yatsa’, translated by the KJV as out, 518 times; forth, 411 times; come, 24 times; and proceed, 16 times. It means ‘to come out, go forth’ and ‘begotten, grow’ and ‘shoot forth.’ My suggestion for Genesis 10:14 to make it clear would be:
Casluh the father of Caphtor (from whom the Philistines came).
There are no verses for Casluh outside of Genesis ten and 1 Chronicles one. There are a couple or so regarding Caphtor – whereas all other scriptures use the word Philistine. An indication I believe, that the Philistines are in part, from Caphtor the son of Casluh and the grandson of Mizra. I say in part, as the explanation of the Philistine identity is complex and we will discuss it further in a moment.
Deuteronomy 2:23
English Standard Version
‘As for the Avvim [a clan of Nephilim], who lived in villages as far as Gaza, theCaphtorim, who came fromCaphtor, destroyed them and settled in their place.’
In the Book of Jasher 10:21-23, we have extra detail on Mizra’s sons:
21 ‘And the children of Mitzraim are the Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuchim, Pathrusim, Casluchim and Caphturim, seven families. 22 All these dwell by the river Sihor, that is the brook of Egypt, and they built themselves cities and called them after their own names.
23 And thechildren of Pathros and Casloch intermarried together, and from them went forth the Pelishtim, the Azathim, and the Gerarim, the Githim and the Ekronim, in all five families; these also built themselves cities, and they called their cities after the names of their fathers unto this day.’
Three bear resemblance to the three of the five major branches or city-states of the Philistines listed in the Bible and located in the lower southwest coast of Canaan: Ashdod; Ashkelon; Gaza or Azath; Ekron;and Gath or Gith. Gerar was another city of the Philistines and it was this city where Abraham and later his son Isaac visited its king, Abimelech – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. Pelisht looks a little like Pereth. The Book of Jasher supports the contention that Casluh is the progenitor of Caphtor, the founder of the Philistines.
The Philistines were the remnants of the ancient Minoan civilisation on Crete. A disaster forced the majority to migrate to the already established colony in Canaan during the same time frame the Israelites left Egypt and were later subduing Canaan.
‘The Casluhim are listed among the descendants of Mizraim… (Genesis 10:14, 1 Chronicles 1:2). They are also named as the ancestors of the Philistines and the Caphtorim…
The etymology of this name is uncertain. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names cites Jerome and reads Their Boundary Protected. Fuerst’s Hebrew & Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament assumes relations with cognate words ks meaning mountain, and lh meaning to lighten burn, shine, make dry. The whole name would mean Dry, Barren Mountain. To a Hebrew audience, however, the dominant segment, which comprises the initial part of the name, looks a lot like the verb (kasal), meaning to be foolish…
The verb (kasal) means to have no skeletal strength or engage in pareidolia (falsely recognising images in random patterns…) or a “belief” in the systematic link between uncorrelated events. Nouns (kesel) and (kisla) mean stupidity or (misplaced) confidence. Noun (kesil)… is also the word for stellar constellations in general, and more specific the constellationOrion – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Since all other meanings are deeply hidden, to a Hebrew audience the name Casluhim must have sounded similar to either Orionites or Bunch Of[Fools].
And if that isn’t bad enough, the segment (salah) is a common verb that means to forgive or pardon; this verb always describes God’s forgiving of man. Together with the particle (ke), as if, like, the name would also mean As If They Forgive, or As If They Were Forgiven, which seems to express a doubt and doesn’t sound very positive; the Casluhim are the Fools. Another name that may have to do with theconstellation Orion is that of the mysteriousrace of theNephilim – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
The Torah explains that Caphtor is the land of the Caphtorim, who descended from Mizraim… (Genesis 10:4), which is to say that the ancient culture of Egypt radiated its science and technology and ignited an independent derivative culture, on the north and eastern coasts of the Mediterranean,long prior to the emergence of the Phoenicians (and note that Luke places a harbor named Phoenix on Crete: Acts 27:12). These Caphtorim appear to have displaced several earlier cultures, among which the Avvim (Deuteronomy 2:23), but somewhere along the line the Caphtorim culture itself came under pressure of others. Through the prophet Amos YHWH declared that he brought up the Philistines from Caphtor, and through Jeremiah that the Philistines emerged as a separate derivative culture from a remnant of Caphtor.
At that time this remnant of Caphtor appears to have been concentrated on an island (the noun ‘i refers to a coast region: coast, capes and islands off the coast). Most commentators seem to favor Crete as the last stronghold of the Caphtorim, which would make the Philistines displaced survivors of the Minoan culture. The Minoans had maintained a highly advanced civilization from the 4th millennium BCE, which had absorbed much of Egypt’s culture and which in turn had radiated its own identity to the Greek and Canaan coasts. After a series of natural calamities and attacks by Hittites and probably others, the Minoan culture began to decline halfway [through] the 2nd millennium BCE. Around 1200 BCE, the Minoan culture had been eradicated from the island.
It seems reasonable to expect that certain Minoan refugees began to seek refuge with their old business partners. Right around the time that the Minoan culture came to an end, Egyptian records begin to make mention of the Philistines in their realm, and the distinct Philistine identity may very well have come about when waves of late-Minoan refugees overwhelmed native Canaanite tribes.
The name Caphtor is most likely a loan word from the Minoan language to indicate Minoan Cretans.Consequentially, this word, (kaptor), came to indicate the capital on top of a pillar, named after Crete as the place from which they were first imported (Amos 9:1) or knob of bulb as seen on the Menorah in the tabernacle (Exodus 25:33). But, because the Caphtorim appear so early in the Book of Genesis, the name should also have some Hebrew connection. Hence some commentators recognize the root group (kapar): The verb (kapar) describes the formation of any sort of protective perimeter around any sort of vulnerable interior… The renowned theologian Gesenius… proposed that the name Caphtor could be seen as the superimposition of two three-letter roots, namely(kapar)and [the verb] (katar),meaning to surround: Noun (keter) meanscrown. Noun… (koteret)… denotes thecapital of a pillar. The final part of the name bears strong resemblance to the word (tur), to explore or survey, and derivation (tor), dove.’
We will learn that all these definitions have merit and application.
Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:
‘This “son” [Casluh] of Mizraim was the forefather of one of the more notable of the tribes, namely the Philistines… The name Casluhim (SHD 3695, kasluchiym) means fortified and is of foreign derivation. The brief entry for these people in the ISBE reads: Casluhim – an unknown people – or, according to [the] Septuagint, of the Casmanim, which would mean “shavers of the head” – a custom of the Phoenicians (forbidden to Hebrews as a rule)…
The term Caphtorim means crowns (SHD 3732, kaphtoriy) from Caphtor (3731)… They are called Gapthoriim in the Septuagint. Capthor first appears in the Akkadian texts as Kaptara, where it was described as beyond the Upper Sea and within the sphere of influence of Sargon of Akkad. References to Kaptara are found in the 18th century BCE Mari economic archives and in texts in both Akkadian and Ugaritic in Ugarit where it is kptr… The Egyptians refer to a place as Keftiu (kftywor kftiw) from what Egyptologists date as 2200 down to 1200 BCE. Egyptologists generally accept that keftiu is the Egyptian form of Kaftara/Caphtor and it is clear from all contexts that it is Crete that is being mentioned.
It has been suggested that this tribe was in fact a son of the Casluhim (and thus a grandson of Mizraim… The ISBE provides several theories on the identity of this group, the first one considered the most likely.
1. Crete:
The country and people whence came the Philistines (Genesis 10:14 = 1 Chronicles 1:12 (here the clause “whence went forth the Philistines” should, probably come after Caphtorim); [Deuteronomy 2:23; Jeremiah 47:4; Amos 9:7). Jeremiah…] calls it an “island”; there isevidence of [an] ancient connection between Crete and Philistia; and the Philistines are called Cherethites, which may mean Cretans…
These considerations have led many to identify Caphtor with the important island of Crete. It should be noted, however, that the word ‘i, used by Jeremiah, denotes not only “isle,” but also “coastland.”
2. Phoenicia:
Ebers (Aegypten und die Bucher Moses, 130 ff) thought that Caphtor represented the Egyptian Kaft-ur, holding that Kaft was the Egyptian name for the colonies of Phoenicians in the Delta, extended to cover the Phoenicians in the north and their colonies. Kaft-ur, therefore, would mean “Greater Phoenicia.” But the discovery of Kaptar among the names of countries conquered by Ptolemy Auletes in an inscription on the Temple of Kom Ombo is fatal to this theory.
3. Cilicia:
A third theory would identify Caphtor with the Kafto of the Egyptian inscriptions. As early as the time of Thotmes III the inhabitants of this land, the Kafti, are mentioned in the records. In the trilingual inscription of Canopus the name is rendered in Greek by Phoinike, “Phoenicia.” This seems to be an error, as theKafti portrayed on the monuments have no features in common with the Semites. They certainly represent a western type.’
This raises a pointed coincidence, as we shall learn that the Philistines and the Phoenicians from Tyre are entwined geographically, culturally, linguistically and in large part, ethnically – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. This leads to an important realisation in that the Philistines are composed of one people of lesser Hamitic descent and the other of greater descent from Shem.
This was not obvious initially for the information provided in Genesis ten only provides detail on the Mizra component of the Philistines. We learn from other passages that the Philistines are – for the want of a better term – a mongrel people Yet the truth of this mixture did not become fully apparent until paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups – in tandem with autosomal DNA – proved the reality of the heterogeneous origin of the Philistines.
The Philistines today, are the peoples of Latino and Latina descent in Spanish Central and South America.
The article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve:The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens is not a definitive study by any stretch and is very much a work in progress. Still, it seeks to address this issue as well as others which have come to my attention when revising individual chapters. The most pressing point to arise is one concerning the Philistines. Though the Bible cryptically states they came forth from Mizra’s son Casluh [Genesis 10:14] – who may or may not have been the father of Caphtor – with Caphtor being synonymous with ancient Crete; the possibility exists that while the Philistines dwelt on Crete, their bloodline is predominantly from Shem’s son Aram – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
The evidence for this is in the paternal Haplogroup R1b, the dominant group in Latino-Hispano American men. If the Philistines were principally descended from Mizra and akin to Arabs or Berbers, the dominating paternal Haplogroup would be either J1, [and perhaps J2] or E1b1b. Though with that said, these Haplogroups are invariably the next most frequently exhibited after R1b, with the exception of sometimes Haplogroup Q from the Amerindian demographic of the Americas. Therefore, the information provided in verse fourteen in Genesis chapter ten is partially about ethnic lineage; for it is really revealing a geographical history.
For the remainder of this chapter, any reference to the Philistines, incorporates Casluh – and or Caphtor – from Mizra; as well as Aram, the youngest son of Shem. This current chapter would now more accurately follow the chapter on Aram. Though as Mizra’s descendants are included – even if as a minority – there is a case to leave it in the present order. Therefore, it is recommended that this chapter is read in conjunction with Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘Philistine Meaning: Griever, Burrower, Weakner. From the verb (palash), to burrow or to grieve loudly.
The Philistines were an immigrant people who lived under five kings in six Canaanite cities or regions: Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath, Ekron and Avva (Joshua 13:3, Judges 3:3). They dominated the region during the reign of [King] Saul [1025-1010 BCE] (1 Samuel 13:19), and even defeated him on mount Gilboa, killed his sons and drove him to suicide (1 Samuel 31:6). The Philistines were subdued and decimated by king David [1010-970 BCE] (2 Samuel 8:1), most famously in the valley of Elah where David killed Goliath of Gath, and it should be noted that the name Goliath doesn’t mean giant but refugee (1 Samuel 17:51). By the time of [King] Solomon [970-930 BCE], the Philistine cities had been largely destroyed or annexed by Israel although pockets of Philistine populations appear to have perpetuated until the time of Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:8). The ultimate end came for the Philistine culture when they were taken to Babylon… A related tribe, the Cherethites, who were possibly a rejected class of the Philistines, had even worked their way up into David’s military elite… (2 Samuel 20:7).
… the Minoan culture… invented a writing system that remains undeciphered to this day, called Linear A… the Philistines emerged from the Minoan civilization of Crete (Caphtorim), which in turn had emerged from a class of Egyptian dreamer-astronomers (Casluhim). The Minoan civilization lasted for three millennia but ultimately [grew] weak and petered out and was displaced by Mycenaeans from mainland [Greece]. This social pressure caused by an influx of Mycenaeans from the north probably caused waves of Minoan refugees toward the south.
The name Philistine comes from the verb (palash),which originally described the digging of burrows in river banks by rodents such as rats. By doing so, these creatures weaken the shore and may ultimately cause it to collapse. In Hebrew… this verb came to denote the verbal expression of intense grief brought about by a sudden destruction:
The verb (palash) mostly means to roll around in ashes or dust due to intense grief. In cognate languages it describes the digging of tunnels or burrows.
The ethnonym (Philistine) occurs predominantly in reference to Goliath of Gath (1 Samuel 17) and his descendants (2 Samuel 21). The proper plural, (Philistines), occurs all over the Bible, but in two cases a special plural, (Philistinians) is used: 1 Chronicles 14:10 and Amos 9:7… noun (pura) denotes a winepress, which is a synonym of (gat), from whence comes the name Gath: The verb (parar) means to split, divide and usually make more, expand or multiply… (pa’ar) means to branch out or to glorify. Verb (para) means to bear fruit or be fruitful.
The name Cherethites:‘Cretans, Outcasts‘from the name Crete, in turn from the verb (karat), to round up and cut off. In 2 Samuel 15:18, the Cherethites are mentioned along [with] thePelethites but also the Gittites, who were Philistine refugees from Gath, as all three groups joined David on his flight from Absolam. By the time Sheba of Bichri of Benjamin tries to ignite a rebellion against David, the Cherethites and Pelethites are mentioned along [with] general Joab and the elite Mighty Men as they set out to deal with Sheba (2 Samuel 20:7). In the aftermath of this crisis it becomes clear that the Cherethites and Pelethites are now choice warriors and Benaiah is their general (20:23)… the prophet Ezekiel… proclaimed the Cherethites doomed, and confirms their origin among the Philistines (Ezekiel 25:16). And since the Philistines themselves originate from Crete, the Cherethites are Cretans. The word “cretin” describes a fool or deficient person and is officially of unclear origin but it doubtlessly also relates to our verb (karat).’
The words Cretan and Philistine have very similar meaning. Cretan: ‘a native or inhabitant of Crete. A person considered to be foolish or unintelligent.’ Whereas Philistine means: ‘a person who is lacking in, or hostile, or smugly indifferent to cultural values, intellectual pursuits and aesthetic refinement, or is contentedly commonplace in ideas and tastes.’
Abarim: ‘The civilization of Crete was one of the most advanced… in antiquity, which is probably due to the same reason why Holland became so successful in the 17th century and the United States of America in the 20th. It’s because these nations absorbed all the rejects of other nations, which created a huge diversity of people who were desperate to improve their lives.’
The countries located in Central and South America are mixed race nations to a very high degree with populations containing Amerindians, refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; imported Black slaves, refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; peoples of seemingly Spanish descent, including the Hamitic, Philistines descended from Casluh and Caphtor and those similarly of Spanish descent in greater numbers, who are fairer complexioned and lighter skinned – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
Abarim: ‘The name Pelethites derives from the name Peleth, which, quite fittingly is of unclear origin. It may come from an otherwise unused verb that would be spelled (palat), and which exists in Arabic with the meaning oftofleeor be swift. It may also derive from the Hebrew verb (pala), to be distinguished or separated: Verb (napal) means to fall (down, down to, into or upon). The plural form (napalim) literally means ‘fallen ones’ [like the Nephilim linked to the Avv or Avva displaced by the Philistines – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega] ‘settled ones.’ Noun (nepel) refers to an abortion or untimely birth. The Pelethites were obviously Special Forces…’
Map of Central America and the Caribbean, including Cuba and Haiti with the Dominican Republic; as well as one of Crete below. Cuba was where Columbus first arrived, thinking he was in Asia. The colonising of Cuba began first, then the Americas. Comparing the shape of the islands of Crete and Cuba, they are similar, though Cuba is some ten times bigger. Certainly, Cuba has been a modern type and fulfilment for the island of Caphtor.
Sons of Ham: Part III Mizraim, Christian Churches of God – emphasis mine:
‘[The Philistines] areamong the most frequently mentioned people in the Bible. Their control and influence in the Mediterranean was such that it was once referred to as the “sea of the Philistines” (Exodus 23:31). The Hebrew term for them is Pelishtiy (SHD 6430, meaning immigrants), a patrial from Pelesheth or Philistia, the land ofsojourners.
In his ISBE entry, C.R. Conder seems convinced that the Philistines were a Semitic rather than a Hamitic people.
“The Philistines were an uncircumcised people inhabiting the shore plain between Gezer and Gaza in Southwestern Palestine… Besides these personal names, and those of the cities of Philistia which are all Semitic, we have the title given to Philistine lords, ceren, which Septuagint renders “satrap” and “ruler,” and which probably comes from a Semitic root meaning “to command.” It constantly applies to the rulers of Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath and Ekron, the 5 chief cities of Philistia.”
The understandable confusion arises, for even today, the Latino-Hispano peoples though speaking a European Latin* language, Spanish; include a Hamitic peoples descended from Ham through Mizra.
‘The fact that the Philistines were uncircumcised does not prove that they were not a Semitic people. Herodotus (ii.104) says that the Phoenicians acknowledged that they took this custom from the Egyptians, and the Arabs according to this passage were still uncircumcised, nor is it known that this was a custom of the Babylonians and Assyrians.
The Septuagint translators of the Pentateuch always render the name Phulistieim, and this also is found in 8 passages of Joshua and Judges, but in the later books the name is translated as meaning “strangers” throughout, because they were not the first inhabitants of Philistia…
In the Tell el-Amarna Letters we have also (about 1480 BC) letters from chiefs subject to Amenophis III at Joppa, Ashkelon, Gezer, Lachish and Keilah which show us a Semitic population, not only by the language of these letters, but also by the names of the writers.
In the case of Ashkelon especially the Semitic rulers are found to have worshipped Dagon; and, though the name “Philistine” does not occur, the race was clearly the same found by the Assyrians in 800 BC in the land of Palastan beside the Great Sea. (ISBE)”
It must be remembered that in 1480 BCE the Exodus [1446 BCE] had not yet occurred… The Canaanites and Amorites were still in occupation and their language was identical with Hebrew and derived from the Akkadian, Sumerian and Amorite north – yet clearly they were not Semites. It is thus of no surprise that the Hamitic Philistines used the Canaanite forms in communication with them…*
The Philistines were accomplished and feared warriors. In one particular battle in the Bible, they were able to put 30,000 chariots, 6000 horsemen and innumerable troops into the field (1 Samuel 13:5). And, along with the Ammonites, the Philistines were used directly by God to punish Israel (Judges 10:7). Other nations were also given the same task at various times, namely the Egyptians, Amorites, Zidonians, Maonites (from Moab and Ammon) and Amalekites (verses 11-12). However, the arrogance or pride of the Philistines, perhaps in their pre-eminent military power, was condemned in Zechariah 9:6.
In a number of scriptures we see King David accompanied by a bodyguard of Cherethites and Pelethites, which most commentators agree were clans of the Philistines… The ISBE article gives a view contrary to the accepted one regarding these people as mercenary bodyguards to a king of Israel.
“The real explanation of these various words for soldiers seems simple; and David – being a very popular king – is not likely to have needed foreign mercenaries; while the Philistines, whom he had so repeatedly smitten, were very unlikely to have formed trusty guards. The word “Cherethi” (kerethi) means a “smiter”or a“destroyer,” and “Pelethi” (pelethi) means “a swift one” or “pursuer.”… Evidently we have here two classes of troops – as among the Romans – the heavier regiment of “destroyers,”or “stabbers,”being armed with swords, daggers or spears; while the “swift ones” or “runners” pursued the defeated foe… The Pelethi or “pursuers” may have been “runners” on foot, but perhaps more probably mounted on camels, or on horses like the later Assyrians; for in the time of Solomon (I Kings 4:28) horses and riding camels were in use – the former for chariots.”
It seems unlikely that these are merely different classes of troops, as the nation (or people: Hebrew goyim) of Cherethites is mentioned prophetically in Zephaniah 2:5; and the taking of bodyguards from among other nations, including former enemies, is not as unusual as it might appear. As one example, Pharaoh Amenophis IV (Akhenaton) is said to have employed Syrians [Arameans], Libyans [Phut] and Nubians [Cush] in his bodyguard. In fact, kings were often in more danger from their own countrymen and close associates than from (former) foreign enemies. King Elah of Israel, for instance, was killed by his own chariot commander.
In 2 Samuel 15:18, the Cherethites and Pelethites were included with 600 Gittites from the Philistine city of Gath (the home of Goliath) in putting Solomon on King David’s mule and accompanying him as a declaration of his kingship. We thus have the remarkable situation of Cherethites and Pelethites remaining faithful to the ordained kings of Israel – both David and Solomon – in contrast to such men as the normally loyal priest Abiathar, who uncharacteristically sided with Adonijah against David’s approved successor, Solomon. This example may be typical of Gentiles brought into Israel displaying greater loyalty and valuing their ‘citizenship’ more highly than many native-born Israelites.
Ironically, the land of the Philistines was also seen as a place of refuge on several occasions [as Mexico is today. There is even an expression in the United States when on the run: ‘Gone South’]. Isaac went to Abimelech(meaning Father-king: apparently an official title, as with Pharaoh of Egypt) in Philistiawhen famine was threatening the land of Canaan (Genesis 26:1). Similarly, the Shunemite woman was sent to Philistia by Elisha to escape the seven-year famine in Israel (2 Kings 8:1-3). And even David, former scourge of the Philistines, sought refuge in the city of Gath when pursued by Saul (1 Samuel 27:1-2).
In 1 Samuel 6, we see that while they held the Ark of the Covenant, the Philistines were given the chance for salvation – but they did not take it – refer article: The Ark of God. In consequence, they effectively invited the plagues of Egypt upon themselves… In the time of the Judges, Israel experienced 40 years of peace under Gideon (Judges 8:28) [1184 to 1144 BCE], followed by 40 years of grief under the Philistine yoke as purposed by God [1086 to 1046 BCE], until Samson was raised up [1066 to 1046 BCE] to deliver Israel’ – Judges 13:1.
A selection of verses from the over two hundred references to the Philistines – and eleven for the Cherethites – including some of the principal and traditional enemies of the sons of Jacob.
Ezekiel 30:5
Bible in Basic English
‘Ethiopia [Cush] and Put and Lud and all the mixed people and Libya and thechildren of the land of the Cherethites will all be put to death with them by the sword.’
2 Samuel 15:18
English Standard Version
‘And all his servants passed by him, and all the Cherethites, and all the Pelethites, and all the six hundred Gittites who had followed [David] from Gath, passed on before the king.’
2 Samuel 8:12
English Standard Version
‘… from Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, the Philistines, Amalek, and from the spoil of Hadadezer the son of Rehob, king of Zobah.
Jeremiah 25:19-20
English Standard Version
‘Pharaoh king of Egypt, his servants, his officials, all his people, and all the mixed tribes among them; all the kings of the land of Uz [Aram] and all the kings of the land of the Philistines (Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron, and the remnant of Ashdod)…’
Jeremiah 47:4
English Standard Version
‘… because of the day that is coming to destroy all the Philistines, to cut off from Tyre and Sidon every helper that remains. For the Lord is destroying the Philistines, the remnant of the coastland [or isle] of Caphtor.’
Ezekiel 25:16
English Standard Version
‘… therefore thus says the Lord God, Behold, I will stretch out my hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cherethites anddestroy the rest of the seacoast.’
Amos 1:8
New English Translation
“I will remove the ruler from Ashdod, the one who holds the royal scepter from Ashkelon. I will strike Ekron with my hand; the rest of the Philistines will also die.” The Sovereign Lord has spoken!
Zechariah 9:5-7
Expanded Bible
‘The city of Ashkelon will see it and be afraid. The people of Gaza will shake with fear, and the people of Ekron will lose hope. No king will be left in Gaza, and no one will live in Ashkelon anymore. Foreigners will live in Ashdod, and I will destroy the pride of the Philistines. I will stop them from drinking blood andfrom eating forbidden food [a reference to the Giants who ruled amongst them and their cannibalistic habits]. Those left alive will belong to God. They will be leaders in Judah, and Ekron will become like the Jebusites.’
Joshua 11:22
English Standard Version
‘There was none of the Anakim [Elioud giants] left in the land of the people of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod did some remain.’
Joshua 15:45-47
English Standard Version
‘Ekron, with its towns and its villages; from Ekron to the sea, all that were by the side of Ashdod, with their villages. Ashdod, its towns and its villages; Gaza, its towns and its villages; to the Brook of Egypt, and the Great Sea with its coastline.’
2 Samuel 1:20
English Standard Version
‘Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised exult.’
Jeremiah 47:5
New Century Version
‘The people from the city of Gazawill be sad and shave their heads.The people from the city of Ashkelon will be made silent. Those left alive from the valley, how long will you cut yourselves?’
Wall reliefs, such as in the temple of Karnak indicate a major influx of the Philistines arriving in southern Canaan from Crete possibly shortly after the fall of Troy, circa 1185 to 1180 BCE. The Judge Deborah witnessed the arrival of the Philistines, during her forty years of peace, beginning in 1184 BCE. The Philistines established themselves in southern Israel’s coast, but did not start oppressing the tribe of Judah until 1086 BCE, the year of Samson’s birth. Samson battled the Philistines [Judges 13:1] from when he turned twenty until his death and the destruction of the main Philistine temple palace in 1046 BCE. It would not be until the time of David [1010-970 BCE] that the Philistines were fully subdued. By 604 BCE the Philistine state, after having been subjugated for centuries by Assyria, was finally destroyed by the Chaldean king, Nebuchadnezzar II from Babylon. After becoming part of the Neo-Babylonian Empire and its successor the Medo-Persian Empire, the Philistines seemingly vanish from the historical record by the late fifth century BCE.
Abraham and Chedorlaomer Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gerard Gertoux – emphasis mine:
‘Philistines in the time of Abraham are they Anachronistic?
The Philistines (pelisti) are mentioned for the first time in the Great inscription of Ramses III, year 8 (1185 BCE), among the list of Sea Peoples. Amenemope’s Onomasticon (c. 1100 BCE) then locates the Philistines (p-w-l-y-s3-ti) in Ahsdod, Ashkelon, Gaza, and [Ekron?] This massive influx of Philistines in the southern coastal plain of the Levant is mentioned 23 years before they annexed the land of Israel (1162-1122). According to Justinus (Philippics Histories XVIII:3:5), the Sidonians had already pushed back the Philistine ships one year prior to the Trojan War (1186 BCE).
On the walls of Medinet Habu pirates from the Sea Peoples appear with plumed helmets while a Philistine chief is wearing a kind of beret. Emergence of the Philistines in Palestine is concomitant in Israelite and Egyptian chronologies. However, this synchronism is problematic because, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 2:23, Jeremiah 47:4, Amos 9:7), the Philistines who came from Crete (Caphtor) were already settled in this region (c. 2000 BCE) in the time of Abraham (Genesis 21:32-34).
These Philistines associated with the Sea Peoples, were therefore installed in their ancient colonies before dominating the Israelites. If biblical research experts agree that the Philistines were from Crete (the system of their confederation of five tyrants inspired by Aegeans, for example, differed from surrounding Canaanite kingdoms), the Akkadian Kaptaru or Egyptian Keftiu, they consider however their mention in the Bible prior to Ramses III as an anachronism. In fact, the translation of the Egyptian word Keftiu, “those of Crete/Cretans” instead of “Crete”, not only solves many paradoxes in Egyptian data, but also confirms the great antiquity of the Philistines, which the Egyptians called, in accordance with their origin: Cretans from islands in the middle of the [Mediterranean] sea (= the Minoans, at that time).
The term Philistia appeared during the 22nd dynasty… The Philistine cities of Ashkelon and Ekron are already mentioned in the execration texts (dated c. 1950) and archaeological excavations have shown that the Philistine city of Gerar (Tel Haror), cited inGenesis 26:1, flourished in the period 2000-1550 BCE. In addition, Crete was never a vassal of Egypt as was the case of southern Palestine (between 1530 and 1350 BCE). As noted Vercoutter the final w in the word Keftiu (k-f-ti-w) is abnormal (plural marker) but can be explained linguistically since the Akkadian name kaptaru “Crete” corresponds to the Egyptian k-f-ti-[r] with a disappearance of the final r. Thus keftiu can be translated as “those of Kaphto[r]” which refers to Cretans in an ethnic way, not geographic…
… the Treasury of Tod (discovered in Upper Egypt) enclosed in 4 chests bearing the cartouche of Pharaoh Amenemhat II (1901-1863) [1593-1558 BCE] contains 153 silver cups of Minoan manufacturing. These findings show that trade with Crete began prior to 2000 BCE [?] and mainly concerned the exchange of metal (and of precious materials). Mesopotamia imported mainly Cretan tin and Cypriot copper to make bronze while Egypt favoured Cretan vases including silver rhytons.
A letter (EA 114) sent by Rib-Hadda, mayor of Byblos, to his suzerain, Pharaoh Amenhotep III (1383-1345) [877-840 BCE], confirms the crucial role of this port city, as well as the cities of Tyre, Beirut and Sidon, for ships transporting from Cyprus to Egypt. Thus the Egyptians of that time considered “those of Crete” (Keftiu), that they rubbed shoulders with in “Philistia”, were coming from these “islands in the middle of the sea (Crete)” with which they traded. Knossos must have been the main focus exporter, at least until 1370 BCE (date of the destruction of the palace at Knossos).
To sum up, until 1370 BCE, the Egyptians had relations with Cretans who were living in the islands in the middle of the sea (Minoans in Crete) mainly through those who were residing in their colony of Palestine (Philistines). This extraterritorial extension of Crete explains the paradoxes concerning the location of Keftiu and the representation of its inhabitants.
The term Keftiu signifying Aegean figures (Minoans from Crete) in the tomb of Rekhmire (c. 1450 BCE) also appears in tombs of Menkheperreseneb (TT86) and Amenemhab (TT85), but here this term signifies Syrian figures (Philistines), some of which carry Aegean objects. The earliest iconographical hybrid with Aegean elements is known from the tomb of Puimre (TT39). The figure from the scene with four foreign princes in the tomb of Puimre shares elements in skin colour and hair style of Aegean figures and clothes of Syrian figures. Greek historians provide some information that illuminate the ethnic origin of the Philistines.
According to Homer: Amid the vast sea is the beautiful and fruitful island of Crete thousands of men live, and 90 cities are enclosed in this country, where people speak different languages. Amidst this country stands the city of Knossos, where Minos reigned for 9 years (Odyssey XIX:173-177). Plato confirms this tradition on the primacy of Cretans (Laws I:1). A scholion on this passage says that the epithet of Zeus Pelasgikos was also read as Pelastikos. Pelasgians were originally called Pelastians from which derives the name Philistines (The words pelagos “high seas”, pelasgoi* (pélas-koi) “seamen” and pelastoi “philistines” are close).
Chronological reconstruction of Philistia: Around 2000 BCE, massive departure of Pelastians (former Philistines), a migratory ethnicity of Crete, towards Palestine (from whom it owes its name). Founding of sale counters at Ashkelon and Ekron (maybe also Ahsdod, Gaza and Gat[h]). “Philistia”is perceived by theEgyptians as aprovince of the Minoan kingdom. About 1930 BCE, Abraham met Abimelech [1878 BCE], a Canaanite [Philistine] king in Philistine territory (east of Gaza) and Phicol (Indo-European name), his army commander.Abimelech gave to Sarah 11 kilos of silver (Genesis 20:16), a rare metal in Palestine but abundant in Crete. Circa 1530 BCE, expulsion of the Hyksos. “Philistia” is perceived as a Cretan principality that became vassal of Egypt. According to the biblical text, the Philistines were experts in the art of forging (Judges 1:18-19, 1 Samuel 13:19).
Circa 1185 BCE, Philistines associated with Sea Peoples [had] revolted unsuccessfully against Egypt.Philistia is now called by the Egyptians according to its ethnic origin (Philistines) and not according to its geographical origin (Cretans). It became a province subordinate to Israel. The name Goliath was close to the Lydian name Alyattes and to the name written ‘LWT on an inscription (dated c. 900 BCE) found at Tel es-Safi (Gath?) – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. Circa 800 BCE, Adad-nerari III [811-783 BCE] attacked Philistia (Palastu) which became, despite several harshly repressed revolts, a vassal country of the Assyrian empire. In 604 BCE Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Ashkelon, which would then be attached to Tyr. The province of Philistia was integrated into the Babylonian empire and lost all autonomy.
Archaeologists have long believed that the Aegeans representations in Egyptian tombs fell more under artistic convention than historical accuracy. This negative bias, as for biblical data on Crete and Philistines, has since been refuted by a thorough analysis of all these representations. The first trade links between Egypt and the Aegean world could even go up to 2400 BCE because there was discovered on the island of Cythera, a glass in marble on behalf of the Solar Temple Userkaf. These trips could possibly have been by sea because a boat with about twenty sailors on board (Egyptian and Phoenician) was represented on the walls of the mortuary temple of King Sahureat Abusir. As the history of Philistines is only beginning to emerge we cannot use its shortcomings to discredit the biblical data,which are further confirmed by archaeological discoveries.’
It isn’t imperative to understand the exact identity of the five to eight branches – and specifically, the five principal cities – and who they equate to today. Prophetic verses are aimed at the ‘Philistines’, which in the main, refer to Mexico as the leading economic and military power. The Philistines were frequent and dangerous enemies of the sons of Jacob. The exceptional warriors of Chereth and Pereth, with the Gittites of Gath are invariably grouped together. Ashdod, Ashkelon and Gaza appear to be possibly more preeminent, in that they are mentioned more often than Gath or Ekron.
Separating the Central and South American nations into potentially five groups, results in:
a. Argentina – with Uruguay and Chile. Argentina’s population is 45,813,367 people. Argentina in English comes from Spanish, though the word is actually Italian, argentino meaning ‘[made] of silver’
b. the smaller nations of Central America and the Caribbean; Guatemala being the largest with 18,618,630 people
c. Colombia – and Venezuela. Colombia has a population of 53,293,237 people
d. the nations southwards; with Peru the most prominent and with a population of 34,488,564 people and
e. Mexico, with a population of 132,680,487 people.
Ashkelon in Hebrew means: ‘I shall be weighed’ or ‘the Fire of Infamy.’ Ashdod means ‘powerful’ and Gaza means ‘strong.’ Gath means ‘winepress’, Chereth means ‘destroyer, smiter’ and ‘outcast’ while ‘Peleth means ‘pursuer, swift; or ‘separated.’ Ekron means ‘extermination, too pluck’ or ‘root up.’ These definitions are powerful and ominous. Assigning a name to a grouping is a guess at best.
What is significant, is that the combined population of these nineteen countries is approximately 420 million people. Their future allegiance with Tyre will prove to be a formidable economic and military bloc. – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. This number is similar to the 450 million of Mizra’s offspring in North Africa and the Middle East. Another similarity, is that as the Arab people are predominately Islamic, invariably exhibiting a high level of zealousness; the same can be said for their literal and figurative brothers in Roman Catholic Latin America, who are equally as ardent.
Bob Thiel: ‘According to the detailed Pew multi-country survey in 2014, 69% of the Latin American population is Roman Catholic and 90% claim some type of Christianity (Religion in Latin America: Widespread Change in a Historically Catholic Region).’
We will turn our attention to the precursor people for the Philistine colony on the Canaan coast, the Minoans of Crete or Caphtor; then, their descendants who considerably later converged on the Iberian Peninsula; their subsequent migration to the New World and lastly, the most influential nation incorporating descendants from Casluh and Caphtor amongst others: Mexico.
The Griffin Warrior: A Staggering Discovery from Ancient Greece, Philip Chrysopoulos, 2012 – emphasis mine:
‘The discovery of the Griffin Warrior Tomb is one of the most fascinating archaeological findings as it seems to link the Minoan and the Mycenaean civilizations. On May 28, 2015, the archaeologists excavating in Pylos, southwestern Greece, discovered a Bronze Age tomb with a skeleton surrounded by rich artifacts, suggesting it belonged to an important man. The grave belongs to the Mycenaean Civilisation… 1750 BC – 1050 BC.
Also, many of the objects found seem to be related to the Minoan Civilization, c. 3500 BC – 1100 BC. Overall archaeological research has shown that the Mycenaeans had reached most of the eastern Mediterranean, including ancient Egypt, the city-states of the Near East (today’s Turkey), and the islands of the Mediterranean. However, the strongest connection discovered is the one with the Minoan Civilization in the island of Crete. The Minoan Civilization was named after the legendary King Minos, but the islanders’ culture was very different from that found on mainland Greece.
The findings were jewelry, sealstones, carved ivories, combs, gold and silver goblets, and bronze weapons, hence the warrior suggestion. The artifacts included… Carnelian, amethyst, amber, and gold beads, four gold rings, many small, carved seals with etched depictions of combat, goddesses, reeds, altars, lions, and men jumping over bulls… A plaque of ivory with a representation of a griffonin a rocky landscape…
Excavations on the Greek mainland and Crete have shown that, beginning around 1600 BC, the comparatively unsophisticated culture on the mainland underwent a transformation. “In time, there’s a blossoming of wealth and culture,” Stocker told UC Magazine. “Palaces are built, wealth accumulates, and power is consolidated in places such as Pylos and Mycenae.” For a few centuries, mainland Greeks seemed to imitate the Minoans. Pylos, an early Mycenaean power center, had buildings that resembled the large houses with ashlar masonry found at Knossos, Crete.
“There were probably four or five fancy mansions in Pylos at the time of the Griffin Warrior, all very Minoan in style,” Davis said. The mansions had painted walls, a type of artistry pioneered by the Minoans. For a time period, the Mycenaeans imported Minoan luxury goods and incorporated Minoan symbols, such as the bull, into their own art. Rich Mycenaeans were buried with Minoan luxury goods, while some other graves included locally produced Mycenaean objects, such as painted pottery, copies of Minoan originals. Mycenaean society also changed shape, becoming more hierarchical.’
Unknown source:
‘The best example of a palace society are the Minoans in Crete. According to Greek myth, Minos was a powerful ruler who lived in Crete in a palace so big that it is known as the Labyrinth. The Athenians had wronged him, so every nine years they had to send seven youths and seven beautiful maidens who were devoured by the Minotaur, a fearsome beast half man half bull.’
Samson from the tribe of Dan judged Israel for 20 years. He died in 1046 BCE after 40 years of Philistine oppression. His death caused the killing of thousands of influential Philistines and it was the beginning of the sons of Jacob eventually overthrowing their rule – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. In Judges 16:23-30 ESV, we read of this event.
23 ‘Now the lords of the Philistines gathered to offer a great sacrifice to Dagon their god and to rejoice, and they said, “Our god has given Samson our enemy into our hand.” 24 And when the people saw him, they praised their god. For they said, “Our god has given our enemy into our hand, the ravager of our country, who has killed many of us.” 25 And when their hearts were merry, they said, “Call Samson, that he may entertain us.” So they called Samson out of the prison, and he entertained them. They made him stand between the pillars.
26 And Samson said to the young man who held him by the hand, “Let me feel the pillars on which the house rests, that I may lean against them.” [for the Philistines had blinded Samson] 27 Now the house was full of men and women. All the lords of the Philistines were there, and on the roof there were about 3,000 men and women, who looked on while Samson entertained.
28 Then Samson called to the Lord and said, “O Lord God, please remember me and please strengthen me only this once, O God, that I may be avenged on the Philistines for my two eyes.” 29 And Samson grasped the two middle pillars on which the house rested, and he leaned his weight against them, his right hand on the one and his left hand on the other. 30 And Samson said, “Let me die with the Philistines.” Then he bowed with all his strength, and the house fell upon the lords and upon all the people who were in it. So the dead whom he killed at his death were more than those whom he had killed during his life.’
This ‘house’ or temple palace had to be huge to hold so many people and this style of architecture was indicative of the Minoan civilisation located on Crete.
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘The Minoan civilization was a Bronze Age Aegean civilisation on the island of Crete… flourishing from c. 3000 BC to c. 1450 BC until a late period of decline, finally ending around 1100 BC. It represents the first advanced civilization in Europe, leaving behind massive building complexes, tools, artwork, writing systems, and a massive network of trade. The civilization was rediscovered at the beginning of the 20th century through the work of British archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans.
The Minoan civilization is particularly notable for its large and elaborate palaces up to four stories high, featuring elaborate plumbing systems and decorated with frescoes. The most notable Minoan palace is that of Knossos, followed by that of Phaistos. The Minoan period saw extensive trade between Crete, Aegean, and Mediterranean settlements, particularly the Near East. Through their traders and artists, the Minoans’ cultural influence reached beyond Crete to the Cyclades, the Old Kingdom of Egypt, copper-bearing Cyprus, Canaan and the Levantine coast and Anatolia [Asia Minor].
The Minoans primarily wrote in the Linear A… preceded by about a century by the Cretan hieroglyphs. It is unknown whether the language is Minoan, and its origin is debated. Although the hieroglyphs are often associated with the Egyptians, they also indicate a relationship to Mesopotamian writings. They… were used at the same time as Linear A (18th century BC). The hieroglyphs disappeared during the 17th century BC.’
Unknown source:
‘The Linear B tablets also reveal what may have been the most important activity of all: that is textile production’ – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. ‘Knossos ran a massive textile industry in which every aspect of manufacture and production was centrally controlled from management to wool producing cloths, to the provision of raw materials and rations to skilled specialists in textile workshops. The workforce involved was substantial. A tablet in the Ashmolean Museum records monthly rations for women at Knossos and Phaistos, and the amount of grain issued would have sufficed for 500 women at each location. The tablets record some 100,000 sheep producing between 30 and 50 tons of wool annually for luxury textile manufacturers – this was large scale industry.’
Artwork from Minoan Crete depicting a bull and a double blade axe, prevalent in their culture.
Online Encyclopaedia:
‘Bull-leaping is thought to have been a key ritual in the religion of the Minoan civilisation in… Crete… the bull was the subject of veneration and worship. Representation of the Bull at the palace of Knossos is a widespread symbol in the art and decoration of this archaeological site. The assumption, widely debated by scholars, is that the iconography represents a ritual sport [non-combatitive bull fighting] and/or performance in which human athletes – both male and female – literally vaulted over bulls as part of a ceremonial rite.’
‘This ritual is hypothesized to have consisted of an acrobatic leap over a bull, such that when the leaper grasped the bull’s horns, the bull would violently jerk its neck upwards, giving the leaper the momentum necessary to perform somersaults and other acrobatic tricks or stunts. The sport survives in modern France, usually with cows rather than bulls… in Spain, with bulls… and in Tamil Nadu, India with bulls…’
Bull vaulting or leaping artwork from Minoan Crete above and as it is performed today below.
‘A running of the bulls… is an event that involves running in front of a small group of cattle, typically six but sometimes ten or more, that have been let loose on a course of a sectioned-off subset of a town’s streets, usually as part of a summertime festival. Particular breeds of cattle may be [favoured], such as the toro bravo in Spain… Bulls (non-castrated male cattle) are typically used in such events.’
Unknown source:
‘Bull fighting is very closely associated with Spain and can trace its origins back to 711 A.D [no coincidence that this was the peak of Al-Andalus and Moorish rule]. This is when the first bullfight took place in celebration for the crowning of King Alfonso VIII. It is very popular in Spain with several thousand Spaniards flocking to their local bull-ring each week. It is said that the total number of people watching bullfights in Spain reaches one million every year.’
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘Tauroctony is a modern name given to the central cult reliefs of the Roman Mithraic Mysteries. The imagery depicts Mithras killing a bull, hence the name tauroctony after the Greek word tauroktonos… A tauroctony is distinct from the cultic slaughter of a bull in ancient Rome called a taurobolium; the taurobolium was mainly part of the unrelated cult of Cybele.’
Britannica – emphasis mine:
‘Mithra, also spelled Mithras, Sanskrit Mitra, in ancient Indo-Iranian mythology, thegod of light, whose cult spread from India in the east to as far west as Spain, Great Britain, and Germany. The first written mention of the Vedic Mitra dates to 1400 BC. His worship spread to Persia and, after the defeat of the Persians by Alexander the Great, throughout the Hellenic world. In the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, the cult of Mithra, carried and supported by the soldiers of the Roman Empire,was the chief rival to the newly developing religion of Christianity.
According to myth, Mithra was born, bearing a torch and armed with a knife, beside a sacred stream [Holy Spirit] and under a sacred tree [in the Garden of Eden], a child of the earth itself. He soon rode, and later killed, the life-giving cosmic bull [the Storm god, Baal Hadad], whose blood fertilizes all vegetation [a god who oversaw the creation/evolution of life on the Earth]. Mithra’s slaying of the bull was a popular subject of Hellenic art and became the prototype for a bull-slaying ritual of fertility in the Mithraic cult. As god of light [a light bringer], Mithra was associated with the Greek sun god, Helios, and the Roman Sol Invictus [a god who rules life on Earth].’
Argentina [first flag] and Uruguay [second flag] have the golden sun god of May on their flags. The month of May’s name comes from the Italian Goddess of Spring: Maia. She was the wife of Vulcan [or the Greek god Zeus]. Maia is the eldest of the seven sisters, which comprise the Pleiades constellation – Article: The PyramidPerplexity. She is a nymph, the daughter of Atlas and her name means great one.
The month of May begins in the sign of Taurus the Bull. Two common sayings describing bulls include: being ‘bull headed’; and like ‘a bull in a china shop’. These have similarity with the definitions for being a Cretan or a Philistine.
As well as ‘Two bulls do not live in the same shade’, a Swahili Proverb reminiscent of a Mexican standoff; where there are no winners… and ‘Talking about bulls is not the same as facing them in the ring’, a Mexican Proverb.
With reference to the Pleiades, it is an asterism in the Taurus the Bull constellation, adjacent to Orion and contain stars visible in the night sky. Pleiades is well known as the Seven Sisters and Orion as the Great Hunter.
Intriguingly, the Bible deems the Pleiades and Orion important enough to mention them thrice.
Job 38:31-33
English Standard Version
31 “Can you bind* the chains [H4576 ma’adannah – (sweet) influence]of the Pleiades or loose the cords[belt]of Orion?[Job 9:9] 32Can you lead forth the Mazzaroth in their season[the 12 signs of the Zodiac and their 36 associated constellations], orcan youguidetheBear [Ursa Major constellation] with its children? [Arcturus, a red giant star, 4th brightest in the sky, in the Bootes (the herdsman) constellation westwards of Ursa Major] 33 Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule [H4896 mishtar – dominion, authority] on the earth?
Amos 5:8
English Standard Version
‘He who made thePleiades [the seven sisters] andOrion[the great hunter], and turns deep darkness into the morning and darkens the day into night, who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out on the surface of the earth, the Lord is his name…’
The Belt of Orion has been written about copiously since the three stars, Zeta, Epsilon and Delta were discovered to be apparently in the same alignment as the three pyramids of the Giza complex – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Inside the Great Pyramid there are four internal shafts originating from the Kings Gallery and the Queens Gallery which point to four different constellations.
There is reason to consider that the constellations of Orion to the South and Draco in the North are linked to the ancestral homes respectively of the Sons of God and of the fallen Angels; the progenitors of the Nephilim – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
‘… [the]… Pleiades as a group of seven stars… [are] visible to the naked eye as seven bright, blue-white stars, also called the Seven Sisters. Modern astronomy has shown that the constituent stars of Pleiades are expected to dissociate within the next 250 million years, and hence Pleiades is an open or unbound* cluster. That is, the motions and velocities of its constituent objects are such that the gravitational forces between them are not sufficient to hold it together (as a recognizable cluster) over the longer term. A ‘bound’ cluster, by contrast, can be shown to still be a recognizable grouping even if its motions are projected forward by a billion years or so.
Modern astronomy has revealed that more than 500 mostly faint stars belong to the Pleiades star cluster… Pleiades is a large but expanding, or unbound, cluster of stars that are all just passing the same region of space at the same time with the same motion. What was originally thought to be bound is unbound and what was thought to be unbound is bound (given current astrophysical definitions).
The text in Job 38:31, 32 describe real astronomical bodies. God is speaking to Job in practical terms about [actual] objects that Job can see (or has seen) and He is expecting Job to give Him immediate answers’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. ‘In the past, some have used this passage in Job to claim biblical accuracy in relation to the universe… it was argued that God was asking Job if he can do the same as God, while now we could turn the argument around and suggest that God is asking Job if he can undo what God has done…’
The veneration of the Bull was so prevalent and dominant in the second millennium BCE, that the sons of Jacob incredibly, made an idol of a golden calf soon after they had been miraculously delivered from bondage in Egypt. Staggeringly, over five hundred years later, when Israel and Judah split into two kingdoms after King Solomon’s reign, golden calfs were erected again – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
Exodus 32:1-8, 35
English Standard Version
‘When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron and said to him, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” 2 So Aaron said to them, “Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron.
4 And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool [H2747 cheret – ‘a stylus, chisel’] and made a golden [H4541 maccekah – ‘molten metal, cast image’] calf [H5695 egel – ‘bull-calf, bullock, a steer’ a male calf* nearly grown]. And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” 5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said,“Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord” – which lord?
6 ‘And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. 7 And the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, for your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves. 8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way that I commanded them.They have made for themselves a golden calf [the Sun god, Ra] and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it and said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!”
19 And as soon as he came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing,Moses’ anger burned hot, and he threw the tablets out of his hands and broke them at the foot of the mountain. 20 He took the calf that they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder and scattered it on the water and made the people of Israel drink it.
21 And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought such a great sin upon them?” 22 And Aaron said, “Let not the anger of my lord burn hot. You know the people, that they are set on evil. 24 So I said to them, ‘Let any who have gold take it off.’ So they gave it to me, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf.”
35 Then the Lord sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf, the one that Aaron made.’
This is quite a scenario. There were people who were either oblivious or chose to ignore the leadership of Moses and how the Eternal was working through him, or the fact that the Creator had delivered the Israelites from Egypt through a series of ten spectacular miraculous plagues and then again in a mind boggling act of parting the Red Sea to save them; afterwards crashing down the thousands of tons of water to kill their enemies. The very people who had cruelly enslaved them for one hundred and forty-seven years – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?
Moses’s elder brother Aaron is a revelation; the man chosen to found the Levitical Priesthood for the ancient Israelites – temporarily substituting the perpetual Melchizedek Order. Aaron put his artistic ability to use, fashioning the calf of gold and then he used his carpentry skills to build an altar to a pagan, false god. Aaron ironically next blames the people for being set on evil. And finally how does he think he can fool Moses, with: ‘I threw [the gold] into the fire, and out came this calf’ line. Miracles had been plenteous, so it was worth a shot it would seem.
The Creator reveals His wrath and disgust not for the last time, when He says to Moses that they are ‘your people, whom you brought up out of… Egypt.’ It is not surprising Moses lost his temper – ‘his anger burned hot’ – forgetting himself and dares to smash the tablets of the Law, whom the Creator had only just given him; the very One who has also delivered Moses and everyone that is partying, giving veneration to a god of gold which has no life, no power and for deeds not done, not worthy of any honour. As an after thought, the Creator inflicts a plague.
It wasn’t a good start for the fledgling relationship between the Eternal and the sons of Jacob and the tempestuousness of the marriage covenant continued, so that eventually the Creator divorced his chosen people and sent them into captivity some seven hundred years later for the Kingdom of Israel, and eight hundred and fifty years for the Kingdom of Judah.
1 Kings 12:27-32
English Standard Version
27 ‘If this people go up to offer sacrifices in the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem, then the heart of this people will turn again to their lord, to Rehoboam king of Judah, and they will kill me and return to Rehoboam king of Judah.” 28 So the king took counsel [not good or wise counsel] and made two calves of gold. And he said to the people, “You have gone up to Jerusalem long enough. Behold your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.” 29 And he set one in Bethel [in the south], and the other he put in Dan [in the north].
30 Then this thing became a sin, for the people went as far as Dan to be before one. 31 He also made temples on high places and appointed priests from among all the people, who were not of the Levites. 32 And Jeroboam appointed a feast on the fifteenth day [the sabbath] of the eighth month [October/November] like the feast [of Tabernacles] that was in Judah [during the seventh month, September/October], and he offered sacrifices on the altar. So he did in Bethel, sacrificing to the calves that he made. And he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places that he had made.’
We will return to the appointed feast in the eighth month later – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The weakness of Jeroboam is sad in that he established a different feast, illegal temples and false gods so as to retain his new position as King of Israel and not lose his power to Rehoboam, the King of Judah and Solomon’s son.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 228, 585-586 – emphasis mine:
‘The golden calf altercation communicates more significance than the superficial text delivers, explicating why God responded the way He did. The idol was part of the bull cult of Canaan… and the mysticism of [evil] Enoch. The golden calf would not have been a calf but rather a bull… Exodus describes the idol as a calf to denigrate it… a bull, the aboriginal symbol or potency. Others… conclude the golden calf was indeed a calf* and base this on the Apis/Osiris bull cult of ancient Egypt… Isis bore from her womb a calf that died and later became Osiris. The Apis bull was part of Horus-king tradition…’ Article: Belphegor.
‘The bull from Egypt’s rival bull cult was a symbol of power and defiance… the skill set required for Aaron to manufacture the golden calf came from Jethro… these skills were derived from his Kenite background that allegedly dated back to Tubal-Cain and Cain, the master antediluvian metallurgists. Baal and related deities were by and large portrayed as mating bulls symbolising fertility… Early depictions of Molech portrayed him to be a man with a bull’s head… [with a] striking similarity between Molech… and the bull of Minos… on Crete’ – Article: Na’amah.
In the Mithras Symbolism [refer earlier photo] theBullis Taurus; theDog is Canis Major, the Greater Dog star, Sirius; the Snake is Hydra and Serpens from Draco and the Scorpion is Scorpius or scorpio. Coincidentally, all are represented in the shaft positions within the Great Pyramid.
Sun – Bull Cult: English Words Ox, Cow and Latin Taurus… derive from Sumerian Turkish, Mehmet Kurtkaya, 2019 – emphasis mine:
‘Imagine how important it was for the people living in the region to have domesticated these big animals. Aurochs [wild bulls] are the biggest animals ever domesticated apart from the elephant. There is a dispute whether elephants are [truly] domesticated or not. Moreover, cattle and [oxen were] not only a symbol of richness, it meant richness. Domestication of… cattle was a major breakthrough that provided the opportunity for people to rely less on game hunting. Cattle provided them milk, meat and blood. Their hides were used for clothing, their [dung] as fuel, and their bones as tools.’
Wild Aurochs painted on the walls of Lascaux Caves, France.
‘Gobeklitepe was deliberately buried with dirt and stones some 10,000 years ago. The reason is still unknown’ – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. “Many animals have been totem animals for tens of thousands of years. These animals were representative of the group/tribe of people and their beliefs. Cult animals were symbols. Even today, sports teams have animal mascots… maybe remnants from ancient periods. At the very least, associating a team with an animal is a major coincidence with ancient practices.”
[The] Bull is the oldest and most prominent [animal worshiped] in early agricultural societies. Latest genetics research revealed that [the] farming revolution… started in and around the Taurus mountains in Southeast Turkey and spread West to Europe and East to Iran from there. In fact, our modern wheat was first domesticated in Alacadag (Alaca mountain), near Gobeklitepe!’ – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
‘We know that bulls are specially portrayed by the hunter gatherers of Gobeklitepe. Not too far from Gobeklitepe, neolithic site of Catalhoyuk had a bull cult about 8000 years ago. We find a bull cult in the indigenous Hatti civilization in Turkey (Anatolia) some 4500 years ago. And in Sumer (starting around 4000 BC), bulls represented sun and sky gods, their highest gods. So, there is a continuity of [the] bull cult for civilizations in Turkey and Mesopotamia for thousands of years. The fact that Gobeklitepe is located on a hill is an indication of a very important aspect of human beliefs some 12,000 years ago: sky and sun worship. This is in line with the idea of [a] sacred mountain found in Shamanistic beliefs from Siberia. In Sumer, we find Ekur, [a] sacred mountain house where gods resided, very similar to Olympos Mountain in Ancient Greece.’
From Ankara Medeniyetler Muzesi. Bull Cult from Catalhuyuk, a famous pre-pottery neolithic archeological site in Central Turkey 9,500-6,500 BP.
‘Egyptian Pyramids are the representations of the same beliefs based on sacred mountains. In Sumerian, “E” means house and the word “kur” represents a cosmic mountain, in addition to being the term for mountain: e+kur = Ekur. “Kur” is also the stem for the Turkish word “kurgan”, the burial mound found all over Eurasia, north Africa and [the] Americas. It also means the underworld. “Gin” is [a] Sumerian word for mountain. “Gan” is gate as in gate to heaven. Kur+gan = Kurgan means “underworld mountain”. Some of the highest Sumerian gods, Enlil and Enki, who resided in Ekur were thought to have brought agriculture and animal husbandry to humans.
In Turkey, Mesopotamia and the surrounding regions, the bull was commonly associated with [the] sun and later [the] storm gods. Ugur (Hurrian) religious mountain sanctuaries Musasir, Kumme, Ukku and Subria located along the Taurus mountains in Southeastern Turkey, were considered as the most important centers of the Hurrian weather god Teshub (similar to Hatti Taru). Hence, the name of the mountain ranges in Southern Turkey is the same as the word for Bull, [the] symbol animal of the storm god… They were first found in Sumer, Akkadian, Assyrian, and other ancient Near Eastern societies including the later Urartu kingdom, and Persia, Iran’ – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran. ‘Winged animal deities continued to be used elsewhere, for example in Ancient [Greece] such as the Pegasus, with [a] horse instead of the bull. [The] Cretan Minotaur is the half man-half bull deity.
Gold was the most important precious metal for ancient people, and it still is, many thousands of years later’ – Article: The Ark of God. Sumerians used gold and lapis lazuli not only as [an] ornament but more so, for religious reasons. Gold represented the sun, and lapis lazuli the sky and the heavens. However, there was no lapis lazuli nor gold mines in Sumer or in the immediate vicinity. Moreover, their knowledge and their advanced workmanship of gold proves they worked with gold before migrating to Sumer. These are among the many evidences indicating the origins of the Sumerian people. For gold, Iran, Turkey, [and the] Indus Valley civilization are the potential sources but for lapis lazuli, there is only one source: Afghanistan! All of this clearly point[s] at [the] Northeast’ – the Himalayan Mountains: refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – ‘as the direction of their migration.
Gold and Lapis Lazuli were not the only ones, they alsoimported silver which they used as money, as well as carnelian and chlorite. Sun Language Theory states that languages were born out of religious rituals, specifically sun [sky] worship. Taurus is the word used for bull in Latin and similar words are found in other Indo-European languages that prove a single origin for the word. Taurus is also the name of the constellation deriving from the word for bull. Moreover, Taurus is the name of the mountain ranges extending from Southwest to Southeast Turkey!
… The chapter “Gat (Gut) / Hatti / Hittite civilizations” [from] my book on Sumerian Turks:
“How many people know that Taurus, the name of the zodiac sign, derives from a rather unknown civilization that lived in Turkey in ancient times? The bull was commonly the symbol and depiction of ancient Near Eastern storm gods, Taru/Taur is [the] Gat/Hatti bull cult from some 5,000 years ago. In Turkmenistan, Sumer, Anatolia, Ancient Greece and elsewhere in many corners of Eurasia we find: Taurus.”
Taru was the name of the Hatti storm god and also the basis of Hittite Tarhunz, Etruscan Tarkan, similar in function to Greek Zeus, Indian Indra, Roman Jupiter and other Indo-European gods as well as Hurrian Teshub. In Greek mythology, many deities had an animal form. They are called theriomorphic gods. Note the relation of the Ancient Greek word “Theri” meaning “wild beast” to the word for Hatti god Taru and the word for bull “Taurus”.
In “Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical”, late German Professor Walter Burkert explains [the] bull god in Greek mythology and shows that major Greek gods, Zeus, Dionysus, and Poseidon among others were at times associated with the bull. In Kyzikos, founded by the Pelasgians / Etruscans, Dyonisus has a tauromorphic cult image. Poseidon, the god of the sea, was associated with either a horse or a bull. Zeus, in the form of a bull, abducted Europa and brought her to Crete. It is very likely that the Latin word for sea “Mare” derives from [the] Sumerian word for bull “Amar”… and this is due to the role of [the] bull in Greek mythology! Indian god Nandi is associated with the bull. Indra also is often mentioned as a bull. In Egypt, the bull was worshiped as Apis, and representative of the Sun god Ra.
In Irish mythology, the hero Cu Chulainn appears in [the] Ulster cycle and Scottish folklore. Donn Cuailnge the bull, appears in Tain Bo Cuailnge, a legendary tale from Early Irish mythology. From [a] Wikipedia article for “Cu Chulainn”. “Cu Chulainn shows striking similarities to the legendary Persian hero Rostam, as well as to the Germanic Lay of Hildebrand and the labours of the Greek epic hero Heracles, suggesting a common Indo-European origin, but lacking in linguistic, anthropological and archaeological material.”
“Lacking linguistic material”, wrong! And there is quite a lot of groundbreaking genetic studies involving the peopling of Europe and the British Isles that supports the connection. As a side note, Rostam or Rustam is the legendary hero in Shahname and Iranian mythology. Irish mythological hero Cu Chulainn sounds the same as Sumerian divine bull Gugalanna! This is not a coincidence and points at the Sumerian Turkish origins of the Irish and English language and civilization.
Turkish word “okuz”… sounds and means exactly [the] same thing as the English word “ox”. In Hungarian, the word for “ox” is “okor”. It is very telling that Turkish “okuz” which is connected to the word “Oguz” Turkish has an “r” counterpart in Hungarian, as “okor”. There are currently two versions of Turkish, one is Ogur Turkish the older one, and Oguz the newer one marked by an r-z conversion and some other features. This is additional evidence for [a] Hungarian connection to ancient Ogur Turkish which includes Sumerian.That’s why Hungarian matches Sumerian so well.’
We will return to the pivotal Hungarian, Turkish and Sumerian language link – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; Chapter XVIII – Elam & Turkey.
The tradition of keeping alive the veneration of the bull is highly visible in Spain, where a portion of the descendants of Casluh and Caphtor once dwelt – yet where the descendants of Aram* still do – Chapter XXXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. This is a good example of a previous people leaving behind traditions, language, names and so forth which make it look like they are the one-and-the-same people, but actually they are not, even if related. We will encounter a similar scenario with the Vikings who migrated from Scandinavia into Britain – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.
The exodus of peoples from Spain to New Spain – similar to the migration of people from Britain and Ireland to North America – was a staggering relocation of peoples. The people remaining in Old Spain are not Philistines. We will confirm that they are descended from the line of Shem*, not Ham, Mizra, Casluh or Caphtor – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. While the Spanish were still a recipient of the vast wealth derived from an enormous empire in the Americas, they were not the exact same ethnic stock as the migrant peoples in the America’s; even though in large part related.
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘The weakening of the Western Roman Empire’s jurisdiction in [Roman] Hispania began in 409, when the Germanic Suebi [or Suevi] and Vandals, together with the Sarmation Alans entered the peninsula at the invitation of a Roman usurper. These tribes had crossed the Rhine in early 407 and ravaged Gaul [modern France].
The Suebi established a kingdom in what is today modern Galicia and northern Portugal, whereas the Vandals established themselves in southern Spain by 420 before crossing over to North Africa in 429 and taking Carthage in 439.
The Byzantines established an occidental province, Spania, in the south, with the intention of reviving Roman rule throughout Iberia. Eventually, however, Hispania was reunited under Visigothic rule. These Visigoths or Western Goths, after sacking Rome under the leadership of Alaric (410), turned towards the Iberian Peninsula with Athaulf for their leader, and occupied the northeastern portion. Wallia extended his rule over most of the peninsula, keeping the Suebians shut up in Galicia.
Theodoric I took part, with the Romans and Franks, in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains where Atilla was routed. Euric (466), who put an end to the last remnants of Roman power in the peninsula, may be considered the first monarch of Spain, though the Suebians still maintained their independence in Galicia. Euric was also the first king to give written laws to the Visigoths. In the following reigns the Catholic kings of France assumed the role of protectors of the Hispano-Roman Catholics against the Arianism* of the Visigoths…’
There is considerable information presented and essentially provides the names of the peoples who either remained in the Iberian Peninsula and Hispania, forming the eventual nations of Spain and Portugal and those Hispanics who departed for the New World and New Spain.
We will discover that the Visigoths were the nucleus of people who remained in Spain; while the Suebians were split between those people who migrated to Brazil and those who remained to form the modern nation of Portugal.
Whereas, the Vandals and Alans principally represent the Philistine peoples descended from Aram and who had been migrating from the Canaanite coast and through Europe for the past nearly one thousand years. The one people not mentioned are the Moors, who represent the other integral branch of Philistine peoples descended from Caphtor and in turn, Casluh.
The misnomer is that the Moors were ‘Black’ or ‘dark’ skinned, yet this appellation was to distinguish the Moors from lighter skinned Europeans. Just as Sicilians were once labelled as black on census forms to segregate them from lighter skinned northern Italians. The Moors were the ancestors of Berbers and certain Arabs. This is a vital point to remember as the paternal Haplogroups of Latin American men indicate their heritage as either being a ‘Philistine’ descended from Aram and Shem; or from Caphtor, Mizra and Ham.
Returning to the Arianism held by the Visigoths. The Trinitarian view of the Godhead was first imposed on Christianity in 325 CE at the Council of Nicaea, with an initial Binitarian definition and then again in 381 CE, at the Council of Constantinople, with the addition of the Holy ‘Ghost’ as a person. It is a confusing doctrine for it is concocted by men in error and not drawn from the simplicity of the scriptures or founded in truth. This new view – for Christianity, though actually an ancient idea – of the Godhead is, in paraphrased terms:
A unity of a singular Deity, composed of three co-eternal, distinct identities.
The doctrine is convoluted and serpent-like and cannot be supported by the Bible, hard as people endeavour to try. It willingly misinterprets and mis-understands the uniqueness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The concept of a triune of gods was not new. A Queen of Heaven and Mother of God reach back into time, way farther than the beginning of humankind. This is why Christ’s mother Mary, has been elevated to Mother of God status – the real Trinity of the Universal Church – hidden in plain sight, in the shadow of the Trinity doctrine, but no less foisted on unsuspecting believers – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius.
Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz were a prominent triad in ancient Babylon. In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis and Horus; and in Mesopotamia, Anu, Enlil and Ea – or Enki. Hinduism has Brahma, Shivu and Vishnu; and even Plato taught of an Unknown Father, a Logos and a World Soul. In Greece, there was Zeus, Athena and Apollo – or Zeus, Poseidon and Pluto – and in Rome, the most well known trio of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva; though just one triad of a myriad believed by the ancient Romans – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.
There is the triad of Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat in the time of Mohammed, referenced in Surah 53:19-22; the Lugus – Esus, Toutatis and Taranis – in Celtic mythology; and the Saha Realm in Mahayana Buddhism – Shakyamuni, Avalokitesvara and Ksitigarbha. As well as the Three Pure Ones of Taoism; Fu, Lu and Shou; and the Hooded Spirits of the Gauls, to name literally just a few.
Let no one persuade the reader that the Trinity is unique to Christianity, that it is Bible based or that it was taught by Christ and the apostles in the early church. The Arian* view, upheld by the Goths for centuries, simply held that the Holy Spirit and Christ were not God, like the Father. Rather, the Father is the one true God; Christ his begotten, created son; and the Holy Spirit, God’s divine essence and power with which He simultaneously creates and upholds the creation – 1 Timothy 1:17; Revelation 3:14; Acts 1:8.
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘The name Alan is an Iranian dialectal form of Aryan. Having migrated westwards [from Central Asia] and [becoming] dominant among the Sarmations [the future Slavs] living between the Don River and the Caspian Sea… The Alans are mentioned in the Vologases inscription which reads that Vologeses I, the Parthian king between around 51 and 78 AD, in the 11th year of his reign (62 AD), battled Kuluk, king of the Alani. The 1st century AD Jewish historian Josephus supplements this inscription. Josephus reports in the Jewish Wars (book 7, chapter 7.4) how Alans (whom he calls a “Scythian” tribe) living near the Sea of Azoz crossed the Iron Gates for plunder (72 AD) and defeated the armies of Pacorus, King of Media, and Tiridates King of Armenia, two brothers of Vologese I.’
There are three points of interest. First, the old foes Israel and the Philistines were fighting each other once more. A different time, a different place and with different names but still the same peoples; with the duality of living near each other and the same requirement to fight.
Second, we will study the Parthians and investigate their identity as sons of Jacob. For it is no coincidence that the Mexican Philistines dwell adjacent to the United States of America today, acting one half, friendly economic ally and one half troublesome rival neighbour; with twin detrimental society changing influences of the drug trade on one hand and human traffic of some two thousand illegal immigrants a day, entering the United States on the other.
Third, the Alan Philistines holding to type and plundering. We will repeatedly confirm that the Vandals and Alans were masters of looting and pillage warfare.
Encyclopaedia: ‘In 135 AD, the Alans made a huge raid into Asia Minor via the Caucasus, ravaging Media and Armenia. They were eventually driven back by Arrian the governor of Cappadocia, who wrote a detailed report (Ektaxis kata Alanoon or ‘War Against the Alans’) that is a major source for studying Roman military tactics.
From 215 to 250 AD, the Germanic Goths expanded south-eastwards and broke the Alan dominance on the Pontic Steppe. The Alans however seem to have had a significant influence on Gothic culture, who became excellent horsemen and adopted the Alanic animal style art. After the Gothic entry to the steppe, many of the Alans seem to have retreated eastwards towards the Don, where they seem to have established contacts with the Huns. Ammianus writes that the Alans were “somewhat like the Huns, but in their manner of life and their habits they are less savage.” Jordanes contrasted them with the Huns, noting that the Alans “were their equals in battle, but unlike them in their civilisation, manners and appearance”.
‘Around 370, according to Ammianus, the peaceful relations between the Alans and Huns were broken, after the Huns attacked the Don Alans, killing many of them and establishing an alliance with the survivors. These Alans successfully invaded the Goths in 375 together with the Huns. They subsequently accompanied the Huns in their westward expansion. Following the Hunnic invasion in 370, other Alans… migrated westward.
As the Roman Empire… [declined] the Alans split into various groups; some fought for the Romans while others joined the Huns,Visigoths [Spain] or Ostrogoths [Eastern Goths, Italy and Greece]. A portion of the western Alans joined the Vandals and Suebi in their invasion of Roman Gaul…’
The Alans joined their kin, the Vandals and the Visigoths; with all entering Spain and the Ostrogoths in Italy. Many Italians migrated to the New World, especially to Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. These Italians, are principally a different people to the Italians in Italy, just as the Spanish remaining in Spain are not the same as the Hispanics who migrated to the America’s.
Encyclopaedia: ‘In 406 the Vandals advanced from Pannonia travelling west along the Danube without much difficulty, but when they reached the Rhine, they met resistance from the Franks, who populated and controlled Romanized regions in northern Gaul. Twenty thousand Vandals, including [their leader] Godigisel… died in the resulting battle… The Alan king Respendial saved the day for the Vandals in an armed encounter with the Franks at the crossing of the Rhine on December 31, 406. The Vandals crossed the Rhine, probably while it was frozen, to invade Gaul, which they devastated terribly. Under Godigisel’s son Gunderic, the Vandals plundered their way westward and southward through Aquitaine.
Following the fortunes of the Vandals and Suebi into the Iberian Peninsula (Hispania, comprising modern Portugal and Spain) in 409, the Alans led by Respendial settled in the provinces of Lusitania [west] and Cartaginensis. The Kingdom of the Alans was among the first Barbarian kingdoms to be founded. The Siling Vandals settled in Baetica [south], the Suebi in coastal Gallaecia, and the Asding Vandals in the rest of Gallaecia.
In 418 (or 426 according to some authors), the Alan king, Attaces, was killed in battle against the Visigoths, and this branch of the Alans subsequently appealed to the Asding Vandal king Gunderic to accept the Alan crown.Although some of these Alans are thought to have remained in Iberia,most went to North Africa [crossing the Strait of Gibraltar]with the Vandals in 429. Later the rulers of the Vandal Kingdom in North Africa styled themselves Rex Wandalorum et Alanorum (“King of the Vandals and Alans”).
There are some vestiges of the Alans in Portugal, namely in Alenquer (whose name may be Germanic for the Temple of the Alans, from “Alan Kerk”, and whose castle may have been established by them; the Alaunt is still represented in that city’s coat of arms), in the construction of the castles of Torres, Vedras and Almourol and in the city walls of Lisbon, where vestiges of their presence may be found under the foundations of the Church of Santa Luzia.
In 422 Gunderic decisively defeated a Roman-Suebi-Gothic coalition… For the next five years… Gunderic created widespread havoc in the western Mediterranean. In 425, the Vandals pillaged… Hispania and Mauritania, sacking Carthago Spartaria (Cartagena) and Hispalis (Seville)…
The capture of the maritime city of Carthago Spartaria enabled the Vandals to engage in widespread naval activities. In 428 Gunderic… died… He was succeeded by his half-brother Genseric who although he was illegitimate (his mother was a Roman slave) had held a prominent position at the Vandal court, rising to the throne unchallenged.’
Map of the Vandal and Alan Kingdom at the height of their power. Notice the geography of their lands. Coasts and isles as in keeping with their preference for these types of regions, evidenced by the Minoan island of Crete and the Philistine coast in South-west Canaan.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Genseric is often regarded by historians as the most able barbarian leader of the Migration Period… he probably contributed more to the destruction of Rome than any of his contemporaries. It is possible that the name Al-Andalus (and its derivative Andalasia) is derived from the Arabic adoption of the name of the Vandals. The Vandals under Genseric (also known as Geiseric) crossed to Africa in 429. Although numbers are unknown and some historians debate the validity of estimates, based on Procopius’ assertion that the Vandals and Alans numbered 80,000 when they moved to North Africa… Genseric seized Carthage on October 19 [in 439 CE]. The city was captured without a fight; the Vandals entered the city while most of the inhabitants were attending the races at the hippodrome. Genseric made it his capital, and… he built his kingdom into a powerful state.
The impression given by ancient sources… was that the Vandal take-over of Carthage and North Africa led to widespread destruction. However, recent archaeological investigations have challenged this assertion. Although Carthage’s Odeon was destroyed, the street pattern remained the same and some public buildings were renovated. The political centre of Carthage was the Byrsa Hill. New industrial centres emerged within towns during this period. Historian Andy Merrills uses the large amounts of African Red Slip ware discovered across the Mediterranean dating from the Vandal period of North Africa to challenge the assumption that the Vandal rule of North Africa was a time of economic instability.
During the next thirty-five years, with a large fleet, Genseric looted the coasts of the Eastern and Western Empires. Vandal activity in the Mediterranean was so substantial that the sea’s name in Old English was Wendelsæ (i.e. Sea of the Vandals). After Atilla the Hun’s death, however, the Romans could afford to turn their attention back to the Vandals, who were in control of some of the richest lands of their former empire. In an effort to bring the Vandals into the fold of the Empire, Valentinian III offered his daughter’s hand in marriage to Genseric’s son. Before this treaty could be carried out, however, politics again played a crucial part in the blunders of Rome.
Petronius Maximus killed Valentinain III and claimed the Western throne. Diplomacy between the two factions broke down, and in 455 with a letter from the Empress Licinia Eudoxia, begging Genseric’s son to rescue her, the Vandals took Rome, along with the Empress and her daughters Eudocia and Placidia… on 2 June 455, Pope Leo the Great received Genseric and implored him to abstain from murder and destruction by fire, and to be satisfied with pillage. Whether the pope’s influence saved Rome is, however, questioned. The Vandals departed with countless valuables. Eudoxia and her daughter Eudocia were taken to North Africa. As a result of the Vandal sack of Rome and piracy in the Mediterranean, it became important to the Roman Empire to destroy the Vandal kingdom. In 460, Malorain launched an expedition against the Vandals, but was defeated at the battle of Cartagena.
In 468 the Western and Eastern Roman empires launched an enormous expedition against the Vandals under the command of Basiliscus, which reportedly was composed of 100,000 soldiers and 1,000 ships. The Vandals defeated the invaders at the Battle of Cap Bon, capturing the Western fleet, anddestroyingthe Eastern through the use of fire ships.Following up the attack, the Vandals tried to invade the Peloponnese, but were driven back by the Maniots at Kenipolis with heavy losses. In retaliation, the Vandals took 500 hostages at Zakynthos, hacked them to pieces and threw the pieces overboard on the way to Carthage. In the 470s, the Romans abandoned their policy of war against the Vandals… and in 476 Genseric was able to conclude a “perpetual peace” with Constantinople. Relations between the two states assumed a veneer of normality. From 477 onwards, the Vandals produced their own coinage, restricted to bronze and silver low-denomination coins.’
‘Differences between the Arian Vandals and their Trinitarian subjects (including both Catholics and Donatists) were a constant source of tension in their African state. Catholic bishops were exiled or killed by Genseric and laymen were excluded from office and frequently suffered confiscation of their property. He protected his Catholic subjects when his relations with Rome and Constantinople were friendly, as during the years 454-57, when the Catholic community at Carthage, being without a head, elected Deogratias bishop. Huneric, Genseric’s successor, issued edicts against Catholics in 483 and 484 in an effort to marginalise them and make Arianism the primary religion in North Africa. Generally most Vandal kings… persecuted Trinitarian Christians to a greater or lesser extent, banning conversion for Vandals, exiling bishops and generally making life difficult for Trinitarians.
According to the 1913 Catholic Encyclopaedia: “Genseric, one of the most powerful personalities of the “era of the Migrations”, died on 25 January 477, at the great age of around 88 years… [The Vandal-Alan Kingdom waned over the next fifty years and] in 534 Gelimer [Vandal leader] surrendered to the Byzantine conqueror, ending the Kingdom of the Vandals. North Africa… became a Roman province again, from which the Vandals were expelled. Many Vandals… fled to the two Gothic kingdoms (Ostrogothic Kingdom and Visigothic Kingdom) [Italy and Spain respectively].
The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia states that “Gelimer was honourably treated and received large estates in Galatia. He was also offered the rank of a patrician but had to refuse it because he was not willing to change his Arian faith.
In the words of historian Roger Collins: “The remaining Vandals were then shipped back to Constantinople to be absorbed into the imperial army. As a distinct ethnic unit they disappeared”.Some… Vandals remained in North Africa while more migrated back to Spain.’
The Vandals did not cease to exist – they disappeared of sorts, just not quite in the way Roger Collins is saying – as they were assimilated into the Gothic lands of Spain and Italy, to later emigrate to the Americas.
Encyclopaedia: ‘The etymology of the name [Vandal] may be related to a Germanic verb “wand – to wander” (English wend, German wandeln). The Germanic mythological figure of Aurvandil “shining wanderer; dawn wanderer, evening star”, or “Shining Vandal”…
Renaissance and early-modern writers characterized the Vandals asbarbarians, “sacking and looting” Rome [in AD 455]. This led to the use of theterm “vandalism” to describe anypointless destruction,particularly the“barbarian” defacing of artwork.
English Restoration Poet John Dryden wrote, Till Goths, and Vandals, a rude Northern race, / Did all the matchless Monuments deface. Vandals and other “barbarian” groups had long been blamed for the fall of the Roman Empire by writers and historians.’
Two important points to remember about the Vandals and Alans. Firstly, their corollary traits with the Philistines – rampaging and pillaging with total disregard for property – building elaborate palaces and staying true to their roots as sea peoples, migrating by ships and dwelling on coasts and isles. Secondly, not all Vandals and Alans stayed in North Africa, some ventured to Italy and Asia Minor, though the vast majority returned to Spain. We will pick up their story again, a thousand years hence.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Castile, under the reign of Henry III, began the colonization of the Canary Islands in 1402… The conquest of the Canary Islands, inhabited by Guanche people, was only finished when the armies of the Crown of Castile won, in long and bloody wars, the islands of Gran Canaria (1478–1483), La Palma (1492–1493) and Tenerife (1494–1496). In 1492, Spain drove out the last Moorish king of Granada. After their victory, the Catholic monarchs negotiated with Christopher Columbus a Genoese sailor attempting to reach Cipangu by sailing west. Castile was already engaged in a race of exploration with Portugal to reach the Far East by sea when Columbus made his bold proposal to Isabella. Columbus instead inadvertently “discovered” the Americas, inaugurating the Spanish colonization of the continents. The Indies were reserved for Castile.
Spanish immigration to Cuba began in 1492, when… Columbus first landed on the island, and continues to the present day. The first sighting of a Spanish boat approaching the island was on 28 October 1492, probably at Baracoa on the eastern point of the island… Columbus on his first voyage to the Americas, sailed south from what is now the Bahamas to explore the northeast coast of Cuba and the northern coast of Hispaniola. Columbus found the island believing it to be a peninsula of the Asian mainland.
In 1511, Diego Velazquez de Cuellar set out with three ships and an army of 300 men from Santo Domingo to form the first Spanish settlement in Cuba, with orders from Spain to conquer the island. In 1517 Cuba’s [now] governor Diego Velazquez de Cuellar commissioned a fleet under the command of Hernandez de Cordoba to explore the Yucatan peninsula. They reached the coast where mayans invited them to land. They were attacked at night and only a remnant of the crew returned.
Velazquez then commissioned another expedition led by his nephew Juan de Grijalva, who sailed south along the coast to [the] Tabasco part of the Aztec empire. In 1518 Velazquez gave the mayor of the capital of Cuba, Hernan Cortes, the command of an expedition to secure the interior of Mexico but, due to an old gripe between them, revoked the charter. In February 1519 Cortes went ahead anyway, in an act of open mutiny. With about 11 ships, 500 men, 13 horses and a small number of cannons he landed in Yucatan, in Mayan territory,claiming the land for the Spanish crown. From Trinidad he proceeded to Tabasco and won a battle against the natives. Among the vanquished was Marina (La Malinche), his future mistress, who knew both (Aztec) Nahuatl language and Maya, becoming a valuable interpreter and counsellor. Cortes learned about the wealthy Aztec Empire through La Malinche.
In July his men took over Veracruz and he placed himself under direct orders of new king Charles I of Spain. There Cortes asked for a meeting with Aztec Emperor Montezuma II, who repeatedly refused. They headed to Tenochtitlan and on the way made alliances with several tribes. In October, accompanied by about 3,000 Tiaxcaltec they marched to Choula, the second largest city in central Mexico.
Either to instill fear upon the Aztecs waiting for him or (as he later claimed) wishing to make an example when he feared native treachery, they massacred thousands of unarmed members of the nobility gathered at the central plaza and partially burned the city. Arriving in Tenochtitlan with a large army, on November 8 they were peacefully received by Montezuma II, who deliberately let Cortes enter the heart of the Aztec Empire, hoping to know them better to crush them later. The emperor gave them lavish gifts in gold which enticed them to plunder vast amounts.
In his letters to King Charles, Cortes claimed to have learned then that he was considered by the Aztecs to be either an emissary of the feathered serpent god Quetzacoatl or Quetzalcoatl himself – a belief contested by a few modern historians – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. But he soon learned that his men on the coast had been attacked, and decided to hostage Moctezuma in his palace, demanding a ransom as tribute to King Charles. Meanwhile, Velasquez sent another expedition, led by Panfilo de Narvaez, to oppose Cortes, arriving in Mexico in April 1520 with 1,100 men. Cortés left 200 men in Tenochtitlan and took the rest to confront Narvaez, whom he overcame, convincing his men to join him. In Tenochtitlan one of Cortes’s lieutenants committed a massacre in the Great Temple, triggering local rebellion.
Cortes speedily returned, attempting the support of Montezuma but the Aztec emperor was killed, possibly stoned by his subjects. The Spanish fled for the Tlaxcaltec during the Noche Triste, where they managed a narrow escape while their back guard was massacred. Much of the treasure looted was lost during this panicked escape. After a battle in Otumba they reached Tlaxcala, having lost 870 men. Having prevailed with the assistance of allies and reinforcements from Cuba Cortes besieged Tenochtitlan and captured its ruler Cuauhtemoc in August 1521. As the Aztec Empire ended he claimed the city for Spain, renaming it Mexico City.’
The Spanish adopted at this time and continued throughout the Americas, a program of destroying indigenous settlements and then re-building them, destroying native art and literature, so that hardly any records remain today and near genocide of Amerindian populations, including Aztecs and Incas. From Cretans and Philistines to Vandals and Conquistadors; five thousand years of history for the descendants of Casluh, his son Caphtor, as well as Aram are charted with destruction and desecration. One item the Philistines were prudent enough not to destroy was the Israelite’s Ark of the Covenant which they captured and held for seven months – refer 1 Samuel 5:1-11; 6:1… article: TheArk of God.
Man and woman from Venezuela
Early Chinese descriptions of the ‘Spanish’ in the Philippines:
“These barbarians (Europeans) [Philistines] have a grim look, untidy hair, and an unpleasant smell. They have no rituals worthy of the name, they’re liars, and are rather arrogant. They conquer countries by fraud and force, ingratiating themselves in a friendly way, before they oppress the natives.At the heart of their conduct is Violence.”
Mexican Flag
Encyclopaedia: ‘Mexihco is the Nahuatl term for the heartland of the Aztec Empire… with its people being known as the Mexica. After the colony achieved independence from the Spanish Empire in 1821, [the] territory came to be known as the State of Mexico, with the new country being named after its capital: Mexico City, which itself was founded in 1524 on the site of the ancient Mexica capital of Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Mexico City is the… largest city of Mexico andthe most-populous city in North America.Mexico City is one of the most important cultural and financial centres in the world. It is located in the Valley of Mexico (Valle de México), a large valley in the high plateaus in the center of Mexico, at an altitude of 2,240 meters (7,350 ft).
… the population of Greater Mexico City is [21,918,936 people] which makes it the second-largest metropolitan area of the Western Hemisphere (behind Sao Paulo, Brazil… [with 22,237,472 people]). Mexico’s capital is both the oldest capital city in the Americas and one of two founded by indigenous people the other being Quito, Ecuador. The city was originally built on an island of Lake Texcoco by the Aztecs in 1325 as Tenochtitlan, which was almost completely destroyed in… 1521… Mexico City was systematically rebuilt by Cortes…
Much of the identity, traditions and architecture of Mexico developed during the 300-year colonial period from 1521 to independence in 1821. The two pillars of Spanish rule were the State and the Roman Catholic Church, both under the authority of the Spanish crown. In 1493 the pope had granted sweeping powers to the Spanish crown, with the proviso that the crown spread Christianity in its new realms. [Montezuma’s] successor and brother Cuitlahuac took control of the Aztec empire, but was among the first to fall from the first smallpox epidemic in the area a short time later.
Unintentionally introduced by Spanish conquerors, among whom smallpox, measles, and other contagious diseases were endemic, epidemics of Old World infectious diseases ravaged Mesoamerica starting in the 1520s. Severely weakened, the Aztec empire was easily defeated by Cortes and his forces on his second return… The territory became part of the Spanish Empire under the name of New Spain [Nueva Espana] in 1535.
The indigenous population stabilized around one to one and a half million individuals in the 17th century from the most commonly accepted five to thirty million pre-contact population. During the three hundred years of the colonial era, Mexico received between 400,000 and 500,000 Europeans, between 200,000 and 250,000 African slaves and between 40,000 and 120,000 Asians. The first census in Mexico (New Spain) that included an ethnic classification was the 1793 census. Also known as the Revillagigedo census. Europeans ranged from 18% to 22% of New Spain’s population, Mestizos from 21% to 25%, Indians from 51% to 61%…
The total population ranged from 3,799,561 to 6,122,354. Society was organized in a racial hierarchy, with whites on top, mixed-race persons and blacks in the middle, and indigenous [Indians] at the bottom’ – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. ‘In the late eighteenth century the crown instituted reforms that privileged Iberian-born Spaniards (peninsulares) over American-born (criollos), limiting their access to offices. This discrimination between the two became a sparking point of discontent for white elites in the colony.
Mexico covers 1,972,550 square kilometers (761,610 square miles)… making it the world’s 13th-largest country by area, 10th-most populous country and most populous Spanish-speaking nation. It is a federation comprising 31 states. Pre-Columbian Mexico traces its origins to 8,000 BC and is identified as one of six cradles of civilisation; it was home to many advanced… civilizations, most well known among them the [Olmecs], Maya and the Aztecs. The War of Texas Independence in 1836 and the Mexican-American War led to huge territorial losses in Mexico’s sparsely populated north, contiguous to the United States.
The Mexican Armed Forces maintain significant infrastructure… advanced naval dockyards… and advanced missile technologies. In recent years, Mexico… has taken steps to becoming more self-reliant in supplying its military by designing as well as manufacturing its own arms, missiles, aircraft, vehicles, heavy weaponry, electronics, defense systems, armor, heavy military industrial equipment and heavy naval vessels. Historically, Mexico has remained neutral in international conflicts, with the exception of World War II. However, in recent years some political parties have proposed an amendment of the Constitution to allow the Mexican Army, Air Force or Navy to collaborate with the United Nations in peacekeeping missions, or to provide military help to countries that officially ask for it.
The electronics industry of Mexico has grown enormously within the last decade. Mexico has the sixth largest electronics industry in the world after China [1], [the] United States [2], Japan [3], South Korea [4] and Taiwan [5]. Mexico produces the most automobiles of any North American nation. The industry produces technologically complex components and engages in some research and development activities…’
Mexican men
Mexico’s GDP was $1.27 trillion in 2019, making it the 15th largest economy in the world. Over recent decades, Mexico emerged as a manufacturing economy under a series of free trade arrangements with the United States, Canada, and forty-four other nations. Many major United States manufacturers have integrated supply chains with counterparts or operations in Mexico. ‘The international drug trade constitutes an ongoing challenge to Mexico’s development, which has directly contributed to violence and corruption in the country.’
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Mexican global shipments during 2021.
Vehicles: US$115 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $87.1 billion
Machinery including computers: $85.3 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $27.6 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $20.6 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 65.8% from 2020 to 2021. That leading product category was propelled by Mexico’s higher international sales of petroleum oils (both processed and crude). In second place for improving export sales was plastics as materials and items made from plastic via a 24.9% gain.’
‘The large economy, area, population and politics make Mexico a regional power and a middle power, and is often identified asan emerging power. However, Mexico continues to struggle with social inequalities, poverty and extensive crime; the country ranks poorly on the Global Peace Index.’
Mexican women
Aside from Mexico being a Latin economic leader, Venezuela is number eight in the top ten countries with the most Natural Resources. Venezuela has an estimated $14.3 trillion worth of natural resources and is the leading exporter of bauxite, coal, gold, iron ore, and oil.
Flag of Venezuela and the pan South American colours comprising Yellow, blue and red.
Incredibly, the country’s oil reserves are greater than those of the United States, Canada, and Mexico combined. Venezuela is the third largest producer of coal after Brazil and Colombia. It also has the eighth largest reserves of natural gas accounting for 2.7% of the global supply and Venezuela has the second largest reserves of gold deposits in the world.
Encyclopaedia: ‘Regardless of ethnicity, the majority of Mexicans are united under the same national identity… it is also observed that when asked directly about their ethno-racial identification, many Mexicans nowadays do not identify as Mestizos and that “static” ethnoracial labels such as “White” or “Indian” are far more prominent in contemporary Mexican society than the “Mestizo” one is…
… estimates of the percentage of European-descended Mexicans vary considerably depending [on] the criteria used: recent nationwide field surveys that account for different phenotypical traits (hair color, skin color etc.) report a percentage between 18% – 23% if the criteria is the presence of blond hair, and of 47% if the criteria is skin color… While during the colonial era, most of the European migration into Mexico was Spanish, in the 19th and 20th centuries a substantial number of non-Spanish Europeans immigrated to the country, with Europeans often being the most numerous ethnic group in colonial Mexican cities. Nowadays Mexico’s northern and western regions have the highest percentages of European populations, with themajority of the people not having native admixtureor being of predominantly European ancestry.
The Afro-Mexican population (1,381,853 individuals as of 2015) is an ethnic group made up of descendants of Colonial-era slaves and recent immigrants of sub-Saharan African descent. Mexico had an active slave trade during the colonial period, and some 200,000 Africans were taken there, primarily in the 17th century. The creation of a national Mexican identity, especially after the Mexican Revolution, emphasized Mexico’s indigenous and European past; it passively eliminated the African ancestors and contributions. Most of the African-descended population was absorbed into the surrounding Mestizo (mixed European/indigenous) and indigenous populations through unions among the groups. Evidence of this long history of intermarriage with Mestizo and indigenous Mexicans is also expressed in the fact that in the 2015 inter-census, 64.9% (896,829) of Afro-Mexicans also identified as indigenous.
During the early 20th century, a substantial number of Arabs (mostly Christians), began arriving from the crumbling Ottoman Empire. The largest group were the Lebanese and an estimated 400,000 Mexicans have some Lebanese ancestry.’
A sampling of revealing quotes from a forum entitled: What ancestry do most Mexicans have really?
“… even the Spanish mixed with the Moors, and were already a heavily mixed group before they arrived to the Americas…Actually, mostSpanish/Spaniards were and still are white people, not mixed.”
“The claim of Spain being racially and genetically mixed is often exaggerated. As for Mexicans mostMexicans are a mixofEuropean, Native American, African, Asian in varying degrees.”
“I’ve been to both Spain and Mexico and the difference in physical appearance in both countries is quite palpable… the average Mexican face stands out in Spain, you can easily tell they come from the americas.”
“Mexicans are very diverse. Many look hardcore native, others look Arab, others look Italian, and others blend with white Americans (albeit most of these have light skin, dark brown hair, and dark eyes). All of my brothers and sisters and I look so different, it is amazing. I look Asian. My sister looks Middle Eastern. Everyone thinks my mother is Armenian. My little sister has blondish hair with hazel eyes. My father looks Native American. My extended family is just as mixed!”
“Many of the Spaniards were of [‘Jewish’] or Morisco (Moorish) heritage. There are records that in 1492, 1 out of every 4 Spaniards was a Jew or of [‘Jewish’] background. Because of the Inquisition, a great deal of those Converso Jews and Moors fled to the New World to escape, so factor in how many of those made it to Mexico and started families. Moriscos were Moors forced to convert to Catholicism, and were also discriminated and persecuted for centuries due to the Inquisition because of their Muslim roots. I am Mexican of Jewish Converso blood on my father’s side. Many of my dad’s family look Middle Eastern.”
“Around the middle of the 10th century, the majority of Spaniards living within Andalusia had converted to Islam. The Arabic language was then fully adopted by the 12th century, and it had supplanted the Arabized-Latin dialect (“Mozarabic”) that was spoken in Andalusia. Muslims did make the majority of Andalusia at one period in history. By the time of the Fall of Granada, the Muslim Spaniards had assimilated the minorities (Mid-Easterners, North Africans, Visigoths, Blacks, East Europeans) and the whole nation had become an “Arab” Andalusian society. That is to say, they identified as “Arabs” and… [were] called “Moors” in the West… Today’s Spaniards are not Muslim nor Arabic-speaking because the Christian Spaniards from [the] north… converted them to Christianity and imposed the Romance (mostly Castillian) language upon them. North Africans, Arabs, and Jews are ancestors of some Mexicans…”
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 430:
‘Although led by a white-looking elite, the vast majority of the population of Mexico was, and still is, of mixed-racial origin, and openly antagonistic to the white settlers to the north [in the USA], referring to them disparagingly as “gringoes,” a slang term which means “foreigner.” That Mexicans and other Latin Americans refer to whites as “foreigners” reveals much about the racial attitudes which prevailed, and still prevail, in this part of the world.’
Men from Argentina
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In the Y-chromosome, the haplogroup R1b (West European gene) is prevalent and is carried by 50% of Mexican men. Haplogroups J1/J2 (Middle Eastern) and E1b1b(North African)combined show up in 20%of Mexican men. Haplogroups G, I[2a1], and R1a (Caucasus, Balkans, and East European, respectively) show up at a combined 12% of Mexican males. Haplogroup Q (Amerindian/Native American) is carried by around 16% of Mexican males.’
Argentinian women
It is quite apparent when comparing Latins from Spain and Latinos or Hispanics from the Americas, that there is a difference. Many Central and South Americans do look like or could pass as an Arab. Males in this category would ostensibly carry Haplogroups J1, J2 or E1b1b and be from a Moorish or Arab and Berber related lineage, signalling a likely descent from Casluh, Caphtor and Canaan – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. And, there are people with fair or sallow skin and features more reminiscent of an Iberian in these countries too. The men are likely descended from Aram and possessing Haplogroup R1b.
As varied amounts of Europeans have migrated to the Americas, there are probably a small minority of those of true Spanish and Italian descent who are actually the same as Spaniards and Italians in Europe and while descendants of Aram, not necessarily those who could be deemed Philistines. They are obviously not descended from Mizra and the Moors and though migrating from Spain and Italy, they are not Vandal or Alan heritage either, but rather, possess Visigoth or Ostrogoth ancestry. We will later confirm an historic precedent for these two peoples being closely aligned as they were in the Iberian Peninsula as Vandals and Visigoths and in the ancient past as Philistines and Phoenicians – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
There are Haplogroup clades associated with Europeans, just as there are for Arabs, Indians, Asians and Africans. The Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is found outside of Europe, for example in South Asia via admixture; though it is principally a European marker – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Europe is split roughly in half, with R1a being indicative of Eastern Europe and the Slavic speaking peoples and R1b associated with Western Europe, from the Nordic nations in the north through to the Latin nations of Southern Europe.
What the online encyclopaedia does not delineate, is if the Haplogroups identified as ‘European’ and principally R1b – such as the major sub-clade for non Asian and Africans, R-M269 (R1b1a1b) – are exhibited in different frequencies and concentrations in the Central and South American White male populations, compared with the Spanish and Italians of Europe. Nor does it discuss the variety of R1b sub-clades that are not typical to northwestern and western Europeans yet which are found in Mexican men and in other males of Central and South American nations. The R1b of Latin America reveals its ancestral link with Iberia in southwestern Europe. This is due in part to the fact that this is where the Hispanics have most recently originated from and where they have intermixed with the Spanish over many centuries. Conversely, a residue of descendants from Casluh, Caphtor and the Aramaean Philistines undoubtedly still reside in Spain.
The following article addresses the difference in the percentage ratio of R1b in the Mexican people, compared to their ‘origin’ with the Spanish in Spain – as well as the inclusion of R1 in the Native Indian population prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Geneticists have been lax, in assuming that European peoples in the Americas – including the United States, Canada and other immigrant nations constituting Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – with their lineage from Europe, carry the same Haplogroup frequencies and myriad sub-clades. The truth is that these new nations outside Europe, are unique and individual nations with their own Haplogroup footprint. The principal manner of understanding these newnations identities, is to understand that they are not exact extensions of the mother country, but different daughter nations.
Y chromosome Haplogroup R in America, The overlooked lineage, Austin Whittall, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘There is a very particular Y chromosome haplogroup in the Americas which is often ignored, overlooked or clumped together with “others” since it is not considered a founding lineage:haplogroup R [M207] with its M173 mutation [R1].
Since modern Eurasian populations are predominantly haplogroup R, the Spaniards and Portuguese, French and British have a high proportion of hg. R in their genes. It was these people who discovered and conquered America so their admixture with the conqueredAmerican Native races will surely be reflected in contemporary Native Americans’ Y chromosomes by the presence of typically European R haplotypes.
Officially there are two Y chromosome haplogroups accepted as founding lineages in America: haplogroup Q, which prevails among Amerindians with a 92.9% frequency and a less frequent haplogroup C, which is found at a much lower 7.1% frequency among indigenous American men, mostly in North America, but also with a patchy distribution in South America’ – refer Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian. ‘Then we have Haplogroup R which is considered by some to also be another Y chromosome founding Amerindian haplogroups. See, for instance Schurr et al., (2004) who add haplogroups P-M45, F-M89 and R1a1-M17 to hgs. Q and C as founding lineages. But others such as Zegura et al., (2004) are quite convinced that haplogroup R in Native Americans is of a recent European origin and that it admixed into the local natives during the last 500 years, after the discovery of America in 1492. This is a reasonable assumption: Hg. R[1] is found among Europeans at very high frequencies. But, it is also found all over the world, so why would it be absent in America?
Although the presence of hg. R[2] in South eastern Asia and Australia could also be attributed to European colonization (the Spaniards in the Philippines, the French in Indochina, the Dutch in Indonesia, and the British in Australia, etc.), but actually there is no serious academic objections to the notion that these are local Asian haplotypes and not the outcome recent admixture… [combined] data from three papers… show the frequency of hg. R in certain parts of the Old World and the Americas…
…the Asian frequencies are relatively low (2.5 to 8.6%), furthermore haplogroup R has not been detected in the highlands or coastal areas of West New Guinea and Papua New Guinea, New Britain, Moluccas, Vietnam (surprising since this was actually a French Colony) Taiwan or China. The American data on the other hand is quite different; the frequencies are much higher among some groups (12.6 to 100%), and lower in others (2.5 to 8.3%), at levels similar to those found in Asians.
This panorama indicates, in my opinion that America has the basic ancient coating of haplogroup R at Asian levels which was later overlain by additional hg. R from the European settlers. The problem is that mainstream science places all hg. R natives into the “mixed – races” category and dismisses haplogroup R as a founding lineage among Native Americans.’
But was a Haplogroup R really a founding lineage? Where did the ‘basic ancient coating of haplgroup R’ originate from? If not from admixture in the distant past? For Y-DNA Haplogroups C, D, K, N, O and Q are indicative of an Oriental, Eastern, Asian or Yellow origin; whereas paternal Haplogroups G, I and R are indicative of a European, Western, Occidental or White origin. It is the conviction of this writer that any exceptions are from admixture via intermixing and intermarriage – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve:The Genesis and Evolution of Homo sapiens.
Whittall: ‘The whole of Mexico which has a very dense population and a history of admixture… of Spaniards with Native Americans and also (but to a lesser extent, African slaves) has a very low frequency of haplogroup R. Why?
Spaniards have a high frequency of hg. R and were particularly keen on mingling with the locals (natives) and with the African slaves (in Northern South America and Central America mostly), to an even greater degree than the more Puritan New England settlers. Admixture was due to a very concrete cause: women did not want to cross the oceans and settle in the New World. The few that did were wives of the Royal government officials. So the only available source of women were the local natives. Initially Spanish colonies were based on exploiting the local natives in mines and smelters to produce precious metals for export back to the Metropolis. The conquistadors were men whose aim was to make a quick fortune and return home to wife and family. Their relationships in America were basic and obviously had only one outlet: the local women. Only much later would European women migrate to America but again, they would only wed within their social circles.
So quite soon, Spanish American societies had plenty of mixed-race people: Spanish with Indian resulted in Mestizo, Spanish and Mestizo in Castizo, Mestizo and Indian: Coyote, a black and a Spanish woman: Mulato, and so on… To maintain social order, each group had its privileges and obligations marked out by the Crown’s law (for instance Mestizos could not bear arms or have Indians given to them as encomienda – a form of serfdom), these legal inequalities eventually festered into the independence revolutions that began in 1810 and led to the creation of Spanish Americas Republics, ran by Criollos (descendants of Spaniards, but born in America) and Mestizos.
So, why is the prevalence of R haplogroup lower in Mexico and their former Colonial territories in S.W. USA? Do Spaniards have less proportion of haplogroup R than the French (in Canada) or the Britons (in the Eastern Seabord states)? No they don’t. Current Spaniards have between 51 and 85% haplogroup R, similar to the frequencies found among English and French. So this is not the cause of the unequal cline. And we have seen above that there was no reluctance on their part towards mingling with the natives.
I believe that the reason for this is that haplogroup R was already present among the natives as a founding clade in America, introgression with Europeans added some percentage points to the mix, and very likely it incorporated new European R haplotypes, but there was a substantial presence of hg. R among North American natives. These appear… in the joining-network trees as outliers with unique haplotypes not shared with Europeans.’
While I do not argue with Haplogroup R1 being an ancient ‘outlier’ presence in the Amerindian with ‘unique haplotypes’; I do not concur that it is original with them but rather from admixture in the distant past. An example is with their name sakes in the Indian sub-Continent, who possess R1a-Z93, a mutation common to Central Asia, Southwest Asia and South Asia, yet still having its origin in R1a-M417 – a line originating with White males. For while Indian men can be erroneously labeled Aryan or Indo-European, they are no such thing and are a result of admixture, pure and simple – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. So too, for any Amerindian male who possesses Haplogroup R1. It proves in the past, a non-Amerindian male was his ancient ancestor.
Whittall: ‘The exceptions that confirm the rule. The issue can be easily settled. An in depth sequencing of native hg. R haplotypes would help distinguish the “American” lines from those haplotypes that are surely “European”, however this has not been done. There is a clear preconception – prejudice among scholars that simply ignores the option that hg. R is a founding lineage among Amerindians.’
Whittall’s frustration is understandable, though results from such a test would reveal the mutational differences between an early R1 infusion and R1 admixture in more recent centuries. It would not validate Haplogroup R1 as an original founding lineage only that is was an early admixture. The same case could be said for Haplogroup C found in a minority of Amerindian males. This shows commonality through admixture with those males in Central Asia who predominantly carry Haplogroup C. It is in fact Haplogroup Q, which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Amerindian men; not C even and definitely not R1.
Even so, Austin Whittall as far back as 2014, raises a key point. Though not with just any differences between the founding Spanish and the Amerindian Y-DNA R1 Haplogroup, but taken one step further to include a comparison between the founding Spanish and those that remained in Spain. Science will provide the data we seek, as the Principle Component Analysis plot below highlights the genetic difference between the Latino and European peoples.
Results should support the premise that R1b sub-clades carried to the America’s are not all the same as those that either remained in Spain or more accurately are not all exhibited by the Spanish in Spain. In fact, the Mexico DNA Project poses a similar question – emphasis mine:
“It is widely believed that a large percentage of the earliest settlers of Mexico may have origins in the Middle East and were a result of the expulsion of non-Catholics out of Spain, just before the conquest of Mexico. Did the early Iberian settlers of Mexico have proportionately different origins than modern day Spaniards?”
We will discover in fact, that there are clues that the differences in R1b sub-clades in the Americas do exist, as completed studies by the Mexico DNA Project on specific people and surnames reflective of Mexican heritage via Spain, have flagged outlier R1b Haplotypes.
‘Since most studies consider haplogroup R as a non-Native American line, it is “often removed from phylogenetic analysis”. As an example I quote a paper (Malhi et al., 2008) which describes the methodology: “All individuals that did not belong to haplogroup Q and C were excluded from the Haplotype data set because these haplotypes are likely the result of non-native admixture“. And that is that; the data that is inconvenient is not even analysed. In all fairness, some studies have included Amerindian hg. R in their data (to disprove it as a founding lineage) and others have proposed it is a founding lineage, but that was long ago…
[One] paper… compares haplotypes… [and] overlooks something very interesting: 28.3%* of the populations sampled belonged to hg. R., the majority were R1b1a2, [now R1b1a1b – M269] but 2 individuals out of the 40 belonging to hg. R, were typed as being R1a1a1. This is… uncommon… identified by the mutations M17 ([M198] for R1a1a) and M417 (for R1a1a1), both are very basal and are found in men living in a vast area: Northern India, Slavic countries, Siberia, and, evidently America. This is not the typical R1b Western European haplotype, it is a rare variety. Of course, the authors do not analyse the R hg. samples at all. They declare it foreign and then focus on the accepted Amerindian lineages (Q and C).’
Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In a study conducted in 2014 by V. V. Ilyinskyon on bone fragments from 10 Alanic burials on the Don River, DNA could be abstracted from a total of seven. Four of them turned out to belong to yDNA Haplogroup G2 and six of them had mtDNA I. The fact that many of the samples share the same y- and mtDNA raises the possibility that the tested individuals belonged to the same tribe or even were close relatives. In 2015 the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow conducted research on various Sarmato-Alan and Saltovo-Mayaki culture Kurgan burials.
In this analysis, the two Alan samples from the 4th to 6th century AD had yDNAs G2a-P15 and R1a-z94, while from the three Sarmatian samples from 2nd to 3rd century AD two had yDNA J1-M267 and one possessed R1a. Also, the three Saltovo-Mayaki samples from 8th to 9th century AD turned out to have yDNAs G, J2a-M410 and R1a-z94 respectively. A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of six Alans buried in the Caucasus from ca. 100 AD to 1400 AD. The sample of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1 and haplogroup Q-M242.’
The Haplogroup findings in this study are evidence of later peoples falling under the umbrella of the Alan-Sarmatian label. The Haplogroup remotely close was the one significantly earlier, R1. The Y-DNA Haplogroup G, is an older mutation yet lesser frequency clade for European descent. The other Haplogroups of interest are J1 and J2 – indicative of the Arab and Arab related peoples of the Middle East, West Asia and South West Asia respectively.
Eupedia: Genetic History of the Italians, Maciamo Hay, 2013 & 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Vandals were the first to reach the Italian peninsula. They had migrated to Iberia, then crossed over [to] North Africa in 429, where they founded a kingdom that also comprised Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica. Sardinia is the best place to look for traces of their DNA because on the one hand it is the best studied region of Italy, and on the other hand no other Germanic peoples settled there (apart from a very brief Gothic reign), which means that the presence of Germanic lineages on the island would incontestably be of Vandalic origin.
Based on the detailed Y-chromosomal study of 1200 Sardinians by Francalacci et al. (2013), the Vandals appeared to have carried 35% of R1a, 29% of I2a2a, 24%* of R1b, 6% of I2a1b* and a mere 6% of I1. The subclades identified were I1a3a2 (L1237+), I2a2a (L699+ and CTS616+), I2a1b (M423+), R1a-Z282 (including some Z280+), R1a-M458 (L1029+), R1b-U106 (Z381+), R1b-L21 (DF13>L513+), R1b-DF27 (Z196>Z209+). The probable reason for the elevated (Proto-)Slavic R1a and the presence of the Eastern European I2-M423* is that the Vandals stayed in Poland before migrating to the Roman Empire. Over a third of Vandalic male lineages were therefore of Proto-Slavic origin.’
Not sure if these figures are helpful, as the percentages for R1a and I2a2 do not appear to match anyone today in the Americas. Of most interest are the R1b details as particularly R1b-DF27 is associated with Iberia. R1b-U106 is associated with Central and Western Europe, thus highlighting perhaps the similarity or the related ‘Spanish’ who left for the America’s compared to the Spaniards who stayed. Interestingly, the R1b-Z381 sub-clade is invariably indicative of a royal line – Articles: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens; and The Life & Death of Charles III.
The main Arabic mtDNA Haplogroups are L, H and U – which are shared with Europeans, except L, shared with sub-Saharan Africans – and the main Y-DNA Haplogroups are J1, J2, E1b1b and T. These Y-DNA Haplogroups are not indicative of Europeans, apart from exceptions in southeastern Europe and western Asia through admixture. The main European Haplogroups in contrast, are R1a, R1b, I1, I2a1 and I2a2.
It is worth noting the Spanish of the America’s exhibiting higher levels of Haplogroups associated with Arabs; while supporting the proposed link between the Latino-Hispano of Central and South America with not just Aram but also kin descended from Mizra’s sons. Especially, if there is an ancient relationship between Pathros of Egypt and Casluh from North Africa and subsequently Caphtor.
There is scant information on the Haplogroups of Spanish descended peoples in the Americas. Particularly regarding mtDNA maternal Haplogroups as the focus understandably, is placed on the Amerindian wives which the vast majority of Conquistadors and settlers took. The main Haplogroups of the Native American wives – refer Chapter II Tiras the Amerindian – were A2, B2, C1 and D1 totalling an average of 93.3%. The Haplogroups associated with the Spanish admixture of some 6.7%, include H, J, K, T, U and V, with 0.7% L3 from Africans, are all low percentages in the diagram and pie chart, showing the mtDNA of the Mexican Mestizo – European and Indian mixed – population.
Online forums included one person with Native American ancestry, who stated their mtDNA Haplogroup was B2g2, while another shared: ‘A Cuban-American friend had tested 95% European and 4% Native American, yet had the mtDNA Haplogroup A2d1, which is Native American.’ Thus showing a Native American heritage through the maternal line.
The main R1b sub-Haplogroups stemming from M269 include the following…
U106: is frequent in Western Europe and decreases through out Central Europe, reaching 66.8% in parts of Germany
U152: is most frequent in France as well as in northern and central Italy
U198: is prevalent in England
M529: has high frequencies in Wales, Scotland and Ireland
Though it is S116 that is the sub-lineage heavily associated with the Iberian Peninsula.
From which derives DF27 and includes M153, located primarily in the Basque Country of Spain and France; with a very high frequency in Gascony.
DF27 also includes M167, which is found at high frequencies in northeastern Spain, the Pyrenees and principally Catalonia. It is also found in the Celtic arc of peoples, which includes: the Basque Country, Portugal, parts of western Europe, Wales and Cornwall, England.
Interesting R1b sub-clades which showed up in the Mexico DNA Project’s analysis included P25, a NorthAfrican clade relating particularly to Jews. L21>DF73, a northwestern Iberian clade; though typically, L21 is associated with northwestern Europe; L150, a North African and eastern European clade; and P66, of rare Italian origin. This is pertinent as we know some Vandals and Alans migrated to Italy.
Of more interest, was not the expected M269 which is dominant throughout western Europe, but the numerous clades associated with DF27. DF27 is of special interest as some of the peoples associated with it have the highest levels of Rh-negative blood types in the world. Something we will study further in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
R1b clades that appeared regularly included DF81, which stems from DF27. The sub-lineage associated with DF27, M167 was frequent in the form of SRY 2627. One person commented on a forum: “SRY2627 is just one small subclade of hundreds of subclades in the R1b tree. With so many subclades there is going to be a limited amount of people that are positive for the mutation. For instance, R1b exists in about 60% of the Spanish population, DF27 exists in about 40% of the Spanish population, about half of DF27 is Z195, and even fewer are Z198, and even fewer are Z292, and even fewer are SRY2627.”
Even so, the fact that SRY 2627 was frequent in Mexicans, shows their link to Catalonia – more than the rest of Spain. This is significant, because the Catalonians are also viewed as being distinct from the rest of Spain. Another frequent clade of DF27 in Mexico is Z196; strongly linked with Iberia and southwest France.
M65 is a R1b clade associated with the Basque like M153. Two clades that were very frequent in the Mexican’s sampled included Z278 and Z214. A comment online explains their relationship: “My paternal Haplogroup also changed from R-z278 to R-Z214. R-z278 is most common in Northern Spain (Including Catalonia and Galicia) the Basque Country and Gascony, but can also be found throughout Atlantic Europe and the British Isles. R-Z214 is much more specific to the Basque Country and Gascony. In fact, if you’re positive for R-Z214 then there’s a good chance that you are positive for R-M153 which is downstream from R-Z214. R-M153 is called the “Basque Marker” and is virtually nonexistent outside of the Basque Country or with non-Basques. 23andMe does not test for R-M153.”
Other frequent Y-DNA Haplogroups included J2 and J1 clades, particularly J1 M267, which has its highest frequencies in the Middle East and North Africa and J1 P58, which is also indicative of Arabs with the highest frequencies. Trace elements of E1b1a were found, though this could be from intermixing with Africans. Two derivatives of E1b1b (M215) were common, E1b1b1b (Z287) and E1b1b1b1; both tellingly associated with North Africa and the Middle East. The areas that the Vandals and Alans either occupied or shared with Berbers and Arabs.
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 403-405:
‘It is estimated that over six million Europeans, mainly of Spanish or Italian origin, emigrated to Argentina after its establishment as an independent state [in 1816]. A genetic study… in 2009… concluded that Argentinian DNA is 78.6 percent European, 17.3 percent Amerind, and 4.2 percent African… in Bolivia… in 2006, whites made up 15 percent of the population, with the rest comprising Amerind or mixed-race elements… a 2006 genetic study by the University of Chile revealed that… 30 percent of Chileans had Caucasian-only ancestry… a 2006… study in Uruguay [showed] 82 percent of male chromosomes were of European origin, 8 percent Amerindian and 10 percent African. On the maternal side, 49 percent of chromosomes were of European origin, 30 percent were Amerind, and 21 percent African.
Venezuela does not keep racial statistics of any sort… Costa Rica on the other hand, has one of the highest white populations of all the Central American countries. Politically, these nations have swayed betweentotalitarian dictatorships and partial democracies, while socially, South America has become the source of some of the greatest disparities in the world. The end result of this tremendous mix of races in South America has been a continent of extremes: relatively well-off white enclaves surrounded by masses of desperately poor and ever growing numbers of nonwhites.’
“We like to be called the ‘Continent of Hope’… This hope is like a promise of heaven, an IOU whose payment is always put off” – Pablo Neruda.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the nations of the Caribbean, Central, and South America with the limited data available. Note the countries are not strictly grouped geographically but with those which have a similar sequence. D.R. is the Dominican Republic and R1 includes R1b and R1a.
Paraguay: Q – R1 – E1b1b – J
Bolivia: Q – R1 – E1b1b – J – I2
Ecuador: Q – R1 – E1b1b – J – I2 – G
These three nations are situated in east-central South America and have a high proportion of native American Indians; hence the leading Haplogroup Q percentage – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. The only other nation to exhibit Q as their dominant Haplogroup is Guatemala, situated to the south of Mexico.
Guatemala: Q – R1 – I2 – J – E1b1b – G
Two nations which have Q and R1 swapped as their two main Haplogroups are Belize and Peru. Belize is also beneath Mexico and northeast of Guatemala. Likewise, Peru is situated between the Indian led populations of Ecuador and Bolivia. In fact, it is Peru which Mexico shares a simpler sequence, when comparing the first three dominant Haplogroups comprising R1, Q and J.
Belize: R1 – Q – I2 – J – E1b1b – G
Peru: R1 – Q – J – I2 – E1b1b – G
The next set of Latino nations possess R1 as their primary Haplogroup and correspondingly, have either less or no, Haplogroup Q; due to considerably smaller indigenous Indian populations. In each case, Haplogroup J is second and includes El Salvador and Costa Rica from Central America and two groupings from South America: Colombia and Venezuela in the northwest of South America and Uruguay, Chile and Argentina in the southern tip of South America.
El Salvador: R1 – J – I2 – E1b1b – Q – G
Costa Rica: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G
Colombia: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G
Venezuela: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G
Uruguay: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G
Chile: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G – Q
Argentina: R1 – J – E1b1b – I2 – G – Q
Costa Rica like Argentina and it near neighbours exhibit a higher percentage of European descended citizens – from principally Spain and Italy – as shown by the R1 Haplogroup, indicative of a male line of descent from Aram. Whereas the J Haplogroup is reflective of an Arab related lineage from Casluh and Caphtor.
The next three nations in Central America have relatively high Indian admixture and are also where Haplogroup E1b1b is more dominant – a Haplogroup shared with the Berbers of North Africa and Pathros of Egypt – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.
Honduras: R1 – E1b1b – I2 – J – Q – G
Nicaragua: R1 – E1b1b – J – I2 – Q – G
Panama: R1 – E1b1b – Q – J – I2 – G
The last two countries exhibit a stronger Black African presence as evidenced by the Haplogroups E1b1a and B.
Cuba: R1 – E1b1a/E1b1b – I2 – G – J – T
D R: R1 – E1b1a/E1b1b – J – I2 – G -B
Though R1b, R1a and I2 are indicative of western and eastern Europeans, the Haplogroups of E1b1b and J are closer to nations from North Africa and the Middle East – and Southern Europe due to admixture – from the line of Ham. While Haplogroup G is an ancient lineage of Shem dominant in the Caucasus. The lower percentage of R1b – in Mexico for instance – and the separate R1b clades which thread back to Iberia, show clues that the Latinos of the New World are distinct from the Latins of the Old.
The assumption that the Latin American peoples are the same as the people in Spain, has only led to confusion for geneticists, ethnologists and historians alike. Mexico and Cuba, though near neighbours, appear to have the greatest contrast in Y-DNA composition between them and bookend the Latino nations.
Mexico has a high percentage of Indian males in its population as evidenced by Haplogroup Q; and shows its link with North Africa and the Middle East in its 20% share of Haplogroups J and E1b1b. Even so, a Mexican man with Haplogroup R1b, may not be primarily Spanish and instead a mix of ethnicities as shown by autosomal DNA.
Recall in the previous chapter, we learned how ‘the variation amongst Ham’s sons is the broadest of Noah’s three sons… In fact, it is hard to credit that Ham’s sons, Cush, Phut, Canaan and Mizra all came from him and that they are all brothers; until we put their primary Haplogroups together’ in the following table.
Remember that there is strong support for Canaan being a half brother – Chapter XII Canaan &Africa. His parentage actually being Noah, his real father and Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk – refer Chapter XI HamAequator.
‘Taking the African core Haplogroups A, B and E, these are the defining Canaanite Haplogroups. The Arab related core Haplogroup is J1 and to a lesser extent E1b1b and J2 through admixture. The Berber men are clearly related to the sub-Saharan African males as they share E1b1b, which is a bridge Haplogroup for the two peoples.
The core Haplogroups for the South Asians include H, L and J2. These are the defining Haplogroups for Cush and Phut. Their bridge Haplogroup, which Canaan and Mizra do not exhibit in quantity, is’ L. India and particularly Pakistan ‘share the bridge Haplogroup J2 with Arab related peoples and therefore all these equatorial peoples are linked or bonded through the bridge Haplogroups’ of either: E1b1b, J2 or L.
Comparing two sets of peoples each from Canaan‘s descendants, Nigeria and Ethiopia; Cush, India and Pakistan; and Mizra, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, previously was revealing, for it displayed the uniqueness and relatedness of Ham and Na’eltama’uk’s descendants in equal measure.
A/B E1b1a E1b1b J1 J2 H L R1
Nigeria 13 68 4
Ethiopia 11 63
Egypt 1.3 3 46 21 7 1 8
Saudi Arabia 8 8 40 17 2 7
Pakistan 20 6 12 37
India 9 23 18 29
Mexico 10 10 54
The addition of Mexico, provides a contrasting bookend to Nigeria at the other end with its high level of E1b1a. Mexico on the other hand, exhibiting the highest percentage of Haplogroup, R1 due to its Aramaean majority.
A comparison of Egypt and Pathros with Mexico, Casluh, Caphtor and Aram with Aramaic Spain later, reveals that they are quite different. Ostensibly, Spain and Mexico look similar. Living together for fifteen hundred years cannot be discounted. The marked variance in R1b levels, shows there is yet a significant difference. It could be argued that intermixing with the Amerindian has reduced the R1b percentage. Until detailed studies are implemented on the exact composition and descent of the R-M269 sub-Haplogroups in Latin America, it will be up for debate.
The converse could also be a factor, in that Spain has increased levels of E1b1b and J because of the descendants of Casluh and Caphtor dwelling in the Iberian Peninsula for so many centuries and North Africa prior to that. As we progress and witness more identity discussion, the logic of the Philistine identity presented will fit smoothly into place as the only plausible answer.
Just as there appears to be a wide genetic gap between the Arab and the Black African – though they are surely related (as plausibly half-brothers) – the same is also true comparing Arab and Berber lineages; each a significant minority of the Latino-Hispano Americans. The later identification of Spain, Brazil and the United States of America, will lend considerable weight in evidencing the modern Philistine identity.
Thus ends the investigation into the descendants of Ham (and Na’eltama’uk). The principle (maternal) mtDNA Haplogroups are in alphabetical order: H, L, M and U. Whereas the prime (paternal) Y-DNA Haplogroups are: E1b1a/E1b1b (1), J1/J2 (2), H (3) and L (4). In each instance there are four Haplogroups, matching the three sons of Ham (plus Canaan) and the four sons from Na’eltama’uk.
As we confirmed with Japheth’s sons, there is widespread confusion in the biblical identity community. Cush is misidentified as Ethiopia or as the Black Africans with Phut, who is also incorrectly associated with the modern nation of Libya. Some equate Sheba and Dedan with Saudi Arabia; while Canaan and Mizra are barely identified with any significant country or people and the Philistines are invariably though erroneously, linked with the Palestinians.
The constant reader now has a firm foundation to rely upon as we proceed to investigate the five sons of Shem, beginning in the next chapter.
Don’t answer fools according to their folly, or you will become like them yourself. Answer fools according to their folly, or they will deem themselves wise.
Proverbs 26:4-5 Common English Bible
“There is a view of life which conceives that where the crowd is, there is also truth. There is another view of life which conceives that wherever there is a crowd, there is untruth.”
Conventionally, Canaan is the fourth and youngest son of Ham. Yet, as discussed in the previous chapter, enough evidence exists to cast doubt on the scriptural account as presently translated – Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Editing appears to have sought to cover Canaan’s true identity as actually the fourth and youngest son of Noah. The complex and distinct genetic blueprint for Canaan’s descendants would appear to support this premise. For the purpose of the current study and the coherence of The Noachian Legacy endeavour as a whole, the orthodox view of Canaan’s parentage will be assumed.
Before we continue in earnest, there is a vital key to understanding not just Canaan but numerous identities to follow. This matter is being laboured as it has been the single biggest block in understanding where the peoples of the Bible were in the past and where they are now. It requires a return to point number two in the introduction.
Original peoples dwelt in a region after the flood; then they migrated. New peoples would move in; they then would be known by the names already associated with the area, the actual land, invariably from the previous dwellers. Tracking and identifying these former peoples, plus now the new ones becomes difficult, because historians and researchers assume they can rely on the names already established for the land area as still being applicable to the new migrations who are actually completely different people.
Giving two peoples the same name because of where they are living and not based on who they are is non-sensical and mis-leading. We will discuss why the children of Canaan dwelt where they did and who the new people were that moved into their territory when Canaan migrated. All the information one can find on Canaan and Canaanites* in books, papers and online, unknown to the authors themselves, invariably relates to either: a. other people from Ham’s line; b. Shem’s descendants; c. the line of Cain; and d. the Nephilim. But incredibly, not the true descendants of Canaan.
Israel a History of – emphasis mine:
‘From Ca’naan came eleven sons, the eldest being Sidon. Sidon founded the city Sidon, and was the progenitor of the Phoenicians. From Heth came the Hittites (Genesis 23:10), who ruled over an empire in Asia Minor for over 800 years. Hittites are very active throughout the entire Old Testament. They were present in Canaan at the time of Abraham, reaching their zenith sometime later in Asia Minor, yet were still a force during the reign of Solomon 1,000 years later (II Chronicles 1:17). Eventually their empire crumbled, and there is evidence that some of the Hittite people fled eastward. Cuneiform monuments record the name“Khittae”, and this may have been modified to Cathay. Archaeologists have noted many similarities between the Hittites and the Mongoloids.’
We will discover that the Phoenicians are descended from Shem and not Ham – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. True Canaanites had well dispersed by the time the Israelites arrived in Canaan in 1407 BCE. The Phoenicians were a mercantile, shipping and sea people. The original Canaanites were not fond of the sea or boats.
Similarly, Heth was a prominent son of Canaan. Later, notable descendants of Shem became known as Hittites – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. These Hittites were a war-like people, establishing a powerful empire which rivalled the Assyrians – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Both Empires lived side-by-side in Asia Minor and established an alliance, rather than antagonising each other.
We have seen earlier that the Khitt-ae are descended from Kittim, a son of Javan and are the Malay peoples of Indonesia today – refer Chapter VIII Kittim& Indonesia. The Khittae dwelt in Asia Minor millennia before the Hittites. An earlier people in Anatolia prior to the Hittites – though after the Khittae – were the Hattians. The Hatti, derived from Khatti – a different word – and though easily confused with the Khittae, are an entirely different people, descending from Shem – Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Israel a History of: ‘The Sinites are an interesting tribe. There is tenuous evidencethat they may be the ancestors of the Chinese. Possibly the Sinites migrated east all the way to China. Of the descendants of Ham, Sin and Heth are the two most probable ancestors of the Oriental people. Ca’naan’s descendants, according to scripture, “spread abroad” (Genesis 10:18). Of the lines descending from the sons of Noah, these peoples migrated perhaps more than any other.
The contributions made by the descendants of Ham, the youngest of the sons of Noah, are staggering. They were the first explorers. They became the first cultivators of the basic food groups. They discovered and invented medicines, and surgical practices. They were the first to develop fabrics, and the devices used to sew these fabrics. They were the inventors of mathematics, surveying, and navigation.‘
The Chinese descend from Japheth and are East Asian, not Hamitic – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meschech. The Phoenicians, Hittites and Chinese have not been slaves or subjugated to other nations – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. The peoples described above who travelled extensively and contributed to the advancement of civilisation are the Phoenicians who built the city of Tyre and caused Sidon to flourish, making them world-renowned with their import-export trading interests. We will investigate and identity their descent as being from Shem and not Canaan – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 55-59 – emphasis mine:
‘Canaan bordered on Egypt, and the name is usually explained to mean the lowlands. It originally denoted, in fact, the narrow strip of land which lies between the sea and the mountains on the coast of Palestine. Here the great cities of the Phoenicians were built, and it was from hence that the Phoenician ships started on their voyages in search of wealth. As time went on, the name of Canaan came to be applied to the land beyond the mountains on the east. In the letters written from Palestine to the Egyptian court a century before the Exodus, and discovered among the ruins of Tel el-Amarna, Kinakhkhi or Canaan denotes the district which intervened between the cities of the Philistines and the country northward of Gebal. The latter was called the land of the Amorites. In the books of the Old Testament the word Canaan has acquired an even greater extent of meaning than it has in the tablets of Tel el-Amarna. The cities of the Philistines, as well as the barren region east of them, are alike included in Canaan. Even the Amorites have become Canaanites, like the inhabitants of Hamath far away to the north.’
Canaan is mentioned many, many times in the Bible, not in reference to their people but the land they first settled, that in time became busier than ‘grand central station’ in terms of human traffic and the varying numbers of nations who dwelt in the region for millennia.
Sayce: ‘The original land [actually much later] of Canaan was called Phoenicia by the Greeks and Kaftby the Egyptians. It is possible that both names were derived from the palms which grew luxuriantly there. Kaph and Kipptih signify a palm-branch in Hebrew, and phoenix in Greek has the same meaning. But it is also possible that the latter word was derived from the name of the country in which the Greeks first became acquainted with the palm, not that the country took its name from the tree.
The language of Canaan, as it is called by Isaiah [19:18], differed but slightly from Hebrew. The Hebrew tribes, in fact, like their kindred in Moab and Ammon, must have exchanged their earlier Aramaic dialects for the language of the country in which they settled. In no other way can we explain how it came about that the Syrian emigrant [Deuteronomy 26:5] should have acquired the ancient language of Canaan. The adoption of the new language was doubtless facilitated by the relationship of the Aramaic dialects to Hebrew or Phoenician. They belonged to the same family of speech and bore the same relation to one another that French bears to Italian.’
Interesting and coincidental observation regarding language, which we will re-visit when studying Aram and Moab – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil, Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
Sayce: ‘It will be seen that the tribes and cities of which Canaan is said to have been the father were related to one another only geographically. The blond Amorite and the yellow-skinned Hittite [rather Khittae] of the north had nothing in common from a racial point of view either with one another or with the Semitic tribes of Canaan. Geography and not ethnology has caused them to be grouped together.’
Sayce hits upon the key point regarding Canaan. The blond Amorites are not the descendants of Amor, the son of Canaan. All the information we read regarding Canaan in extraneous material and in the Bible after Abraham and certainly by the time the descendants of Jacob – the Israelites – arrived in stages between circa 1900 to 1400 BCE; witnesses a change in who the actual Canaanites were. The original Canaanites had departed for Africa and other Canaanites* had moved into the vacated strip of land, or had forced the true Canaanites southwestwards.
It was a lucrative piece of real estate with its rich soil and farm land, beautiful landscapes and extensive ports. There were numerous peoples who converged and those who were evil – the Nephilim descended Elioud giants and those who had intermarried with them, by default – fell to the descendants of Jacob during the waging of a monstrous war for seven years to clear the land after they entered in 1407 BCE – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?
An online encyclopaedia, accurately states the multiculturalism and the variety of ethnicities incorporated under the ‘Canaanite’ umbrella during this intermediate period; with the incorrect ascribing of the term Phoenician from an ethnic vantage, yet accurate from a geographic perspective – emphasis mine:
‘The name “Canaan” appears throughout the Bible, where it corresponds to the Levant, in particular to the areas of the Southern Levant that provide the main setting of the narrative of the Bible: Phoenicia, Philistia, Israel, and other nations. The word “Canaanites” serves as an ethnic catch-all term covering various indigenous populations. It is by far the most frequently used ethnic term in the Bible. The name “Canaanites” is attested, many centuries later, as the endonym of the people later known to the Ancient Greeks from c. 500 BC as Phoenicians, and after the emigration of Canaanite-speakers to Carthage (founded in the 9th century BC), was also used as a self-designation by the Punics (chanani) of North Africa during Late Antiquity.’
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:
‘Originally the sons of Canaan settled in Palestine. Canaan, remember, was the first born of Ham [Canaan is Ham’s youngest son, Genesis 10:6 – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator]. Canaan’s descendants – and this includes the other sons of Ham [incorrect, Genesis 9:25-27] – were to be “servant of servants” (Genesis 9:25) [Genesis 9:25 states Canaan not Ham]. Their children are to serve both Shem and Japheth (verses 26,27). There is nothing wrong with serving – we all have to learn to serve [Note: difference between serving, servitude and slavery]. Shem and Japheth must become God’s servants, too. That is why Canaan is called a “servant of servants.” Many have quoted this in direct reference to the [Black African]. As brothers of Canaan, the [Africans] have shared the same position in life, but [Africans] are not Canaanites.’
Dr Hoeh has confidently stated his position, firstly, based on the later ‘Canaanite’ peoples and the trading ‘trafficking’ of the Phoenicians – very understandable, yet incorrect. And secondly, to distance himself from the thorny issue of equating the Black peoples with Canaan – particularly at time of writing in 1957 America.
Hoeh: ‘The Canaanites were great traffickers of old. The word Canaanite in Zechariah 14:21 is, in fact, translated as “trafficker” in the Jewish translation. The Sidonians, descendants of Canaan, were famous seamen in the days of Solomon. The Greeks called them “Phoenicians”. But the Phoenicians called themselves “Kna” or “Knana”, meaning Canaanite.’
From a historical time-line perspective, the original Sidonians were linked to Canaan, who were not sea-traders; the intermediate Sidonians linked to Aram were the original Phoenicians, descending from a son of Shem; and the later Sidonians were linked with Midian, another successful trading people and a son of Abraham. The Phoenicians lived in Canaan as the collective area was known, hence their identification with this name – it was they who were the ‘famous seamen.’
Hoeh: ‘When Israel entered the land of Palestine under Joshua, whole tribes of the Canaanites were destroyed or driven out of central Palestine (Judges 3:1-4) because some of the Canaanites were extremely degenerate in their morals. Now turn to Genesis 10:18, “Afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad”. Where did they journey?’
The ‘extremely degenerate’ Canaanites at this time, which the sons of Jacob encountered, were not the original sons of Canaan but the Nephilim descended Elioud giants who had infiltrated the land. We will cover this subject in-depth in later sections – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Origin, Identity and Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
Hoeh: ‘The Canaanites settled the island of Malta and parts of Sicily, Southern Italy, Sardinia, North Africa and even Southern Spain and Portugal, where the sons of Javan were already living [The sons of Javan had long gone – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia]. Most people are familiar with the Phoenicians from grade and high school days. In North Africa the Canaanites are called Moors – a name probably derived from Amors, the Hebrew form of “Amorites”. From these lands they have spread into North and South America since the days of Columbus. The Portuguese – of mixed Canaanite and Tarshish stock – have settled much of Brazil. And the Sicilians are [well known] in big cities in America. The underworld “Mafia” organization which springs from Canaanitish Sicily, is but a modern version of their ancient tendency to traffic among the nations of the world.
Canaanites have also intermarried into Esau – Turkey today (Genesis 26:34), and Judah (Genesis 38:2), and Israel (Judges 3:5-7). Only a few Canaanites remain in North Palestine and Lebanon. The [true] Canaanites are seldom included in the prophecies which pertain to this twentieth century. They exert no great position or influence in the world.’
Esau’s ‘Canaanite’ wives were not true Canaanites but – as stated earlier of the four options for non-Canaanite* peoples a, b, c & d – they were from d. Nephilim families – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Judah did take a wife from the original Canaanites. The Israelites as mentioned in the Book of Judges took wives from later Canaanites from b. Shem’s descendants. We will learn that the Latins of Europe – such as the Portuguese and Sicilians mentioned by Hoeh – are descended from Shem and are not from Japheth or Ham. The majority of Latino-Hispano Americans are descended from a. Shem and b. Ham, but not from Canaan; as is also true of the Moors and the Arab peoples of the Lebanon and Palestine – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. Another fascinating coincidence has occurred, with regard to the Portuguese and Brazil, which we will return to in a later chapter.
The original meaning of Canaan was different. The term ‘trafficker’ and the link to trade, was applied to Canaan the land and the people living in Canaan later and not to the original Canaanites.
Herman Hoeh states the brother[s] of Ham have ‘shared the same position in life’. The Bible reveals that Canaan was to be a servant people, not Ham or any of the other three brothers of Canaan. Herman Hoeh ironically, while denying the simple truth of the Canaanites classification, in the process, reveals the true identity of Canaan. For they are the Black peoples of Eastern, Central, Western and Southern sub-Saharan Africa; while including those non-Arab related peoples residing in Northern Africa.
Matthew 18:1-5
New English Translation
‘At that time the disciples came to Jesus saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 He called a child, had him stand among them, 3 and said, “I tell you the truth, unless you turn around and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven! 4 Whoever then humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me.’
A child who has a basic understanding of world history and has learned about the slave trade, would… if presented with the question: which people in the world have endured untold hardships, extremes of poverty and the severest of suffering at the hands of slave traders, throughout recorded history? One can’t help but think a child, in their natural, honest speak-as-they-see-it innocence, would quickly offer the Black descended people of Africa as their answer. It has been in the scriptures, right in front of us for a very long time.
Luke 7:35
New English Translation
35 ‘But wisdom is vindicated [or shown to be right ] by all her children [by all those who follow her].’
It is a highly sensitive issue and many are reticent to vocalise the palpable truth; so as to escape the vitriolic criticism that could inevitably ensue. Not speaking the undeniable, doesn’t alter it or make it disappear. It is a harshness beyond compare, that a whole line of people would be punished because of one man’s transgression; though we do not see all the pieces of the puzzle put together as the Creator does.
The reality is that the Black peoples have suffered immeasurably at the hands of the British, Americans, Dutch, Portuguese, as well as the Arabs in recent history and as recorded in the Bible; at the hand of the Egyptians – per the El Amarna tablets circa 1500 BCE. African tribes have continuously waged war against each other with horrific violence, making slaves of each other, cannibalising one another. There has been no rest for the descendants of Canaan and it continues to the present day, where in the main, African governments and regimes ruthlessly and relentlessly, brutally subjugate their own people.
As tragic as the taking of people from their families and homes was and transplanting them in the New World of America, the Caribbean and Brazil, with dangerous, deadly ocean crossings and often savage masters; it has resulted for future generations of African Americans to have at least a chance of a life of opportunities, far greater than their fellow peoples – those living on the African Continent today. I empathise with all the descendants of African Americans who have not benefited in being transplanted from their homeland and if history could be rewound, this reason alone would be enough cause to turn back time.
Africa is vast, with immense natural resources. In the top ten countries with the most natural resources which China tops, one African nation is included at number nine; the Democratic Republic of Congo. Mining is the primary industry of the DRC. It is estimated that the country has over $24 trillion in mineral deposits including the largest coltan reserve and vast amounts of cobalt. The DRC also possesses large copper, diamond [21% of Global production in 2019], gold, tantalum, and tin reserves, along with over three million tons of lithium. Lithium and cobalt both integral ingredients for batteries in electric vehicles for instance – refer article: Climate Change & Global Warming – Climate Crisis or a New Equilibrium?
The severity of the punishment handed down to the Canaanites stopped short with them and seemingly did not include their inherited possession of territory. Yet, ‘Africa has been equally cursed and blessed by its resources – blessed in so far as it has natural riches in abundance, but cursed because outsiders have long plundered them. In more recent times the nation states have been able to claim a share of these riches, and foreign countries now invest rather than steal, but still the people are rarely the beneficiaries’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 131.
Regarding Canaan’s name, there is somewhat of a conflict, between what the word actually means and what it became associated with. Strong’s Concordance H3667 includes: merchant, traffic, traffickers, trader, Lowland and from the root H3665, humiliated. Canaan, as inferred by several commentators, was to be a ‘servant of servants’, ‘humbled, subdued’ and ‘subjugated’. The land of Canaan was low lying and it became synonymous with merchants and trafficking of goods. Saying that, Canaan as a people were also trafficked and treated as merchandise.
Abarim Publications – emphasis theirs:
‘For a meaning of the name Canaan, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Merchant or Servant… We would interpret the name Canaan as International Trade or International Synchronicity…From the verb (kana), to be brought into synchronicity.’
Canaan can also mean the ‘land of purple’ from the term kinahnu: purple dye. The colour purple became associated with the Phoenicians. It is an interesting coincidence that The Color Purple is the title of Alice Walker’s 1982 novel and subsequent Steven Spielberg film. The story is about African American gender, race and nationhood. The link with purple to Canaan’s descendants is insightful, as purple is associated with the following lofty traits, invariably denied to Canaan but no less desired:
Bourne Creative – emphasis mine:
‘Purple combines the calm stability of blue and the fierce energy of red. The color purple is often associated with royalty, nobility, luxury, power, andambition. Purple also represents meanings of wealth, extravagance, creativity, wisdom, dignity, grandeur, devotion, peace, pride, mystery, independence, and magic. The color purple is a rare occurring color in nature and as a result is often seen as having sacred meaning. Lavender, orchid, lilac, and violet flowers are considered delicate and precious. Throughout history, purple robes were worn by royalty and people of authority or high rank…the rare occurrence of purple in nature made it one of the most expensive color dyes to create.’
Speaking of colour, the amount of melanin a person has dictates not only the shade of their skin.
Rastafari: The Truth About Melanin – emphasis mine:
‘Melanin refines the nervous system in such a way that messages from the brain reach other areas of the body [more] rapidly in Black people… Black infants sit, stand, crawl and walk sooner than [white infants], and [demonstrate] more advanced cognitive skills than their white counterparts… Carol Barnes writes “… your mental processes (brain power) are controlled by the same chemical that gives Black humans their superior physical (athletics, rhythmic dancing) abilities.This chemical… is Melanin!”
The abundance of Melanin in Black humans produces a superior organism physically… Melanin is the neuro-chemical basis for what is called [Soul] in Black people. Is God Black? The Original Man was [black], “made in the Image of God” his Parent. Children look like their parents. All the other races are but diluted variations of the Original Black Race.‘
This raises some key points. When studying Noah, we established that the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man are described as white in the Bible – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The same is written in the Book of Enoch chapter 46:1-3.
1 At that place, I saw the One to whom belongs the time before time. And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of splendor… 2 And I asked the one… who had revealed to me all the secrets… “Who is this… 3 And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells. And He will open all [that is] hidden… for Yahweh of Hosts [Ancient of Days] has chosen Him, and He is destined to be victorious before Yahweh of Hosts in eternal uprightness.”
We will look further in to man being the image of God. There is a link to the colour black as this author states; just not quite the answer one would expect – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Rastafari: ‘Most [white people] have calcified pineal glands which thwarts Melatonin production, thereby limiting their [spiritual]* capacity. Located in the brain, the tiny pineal [and] pituitary glands regulate the body’s other glands’ – refer article: 33. ‘Esoteric tradition regards the area of these glands as the third eye, seat of the soul, and the mystical Uraeus represented by the cobra on the forehead of Egyptian [royalty’s] crowns.’
A succinct definition online: ‘Uraeus is an important symbol associated with the Gods, Goddesses, and Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. It is represented by the image of an upright cobra in a threatening pose and is believed to have its origins in Iaret, an Egyptian word meaning the risen one. The icon symbolized divine authority, royalty, sovereignty, and supremacy and was worn as a crown or head ornament by the ancient Egyptian divinities and rulers. This sacred serpent symbol reiterated the connection between the Gods and the Pharaohs and wearing the Uraeus conveyed legitimacy to the royal personage. The rearing cobra indicated that the ruler enjoyed the protection and patronage of Goddess Wadjet, the Lower Egypt deity. After the unification of Egypt, the Uraeus was depicted together with the Vulture, which was the symbol of Nekhbet, the patroness of Upper Egypt. The merged symbol was called ‘The Two Ladies’, the joint protectors of the country’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
Rastafari: ‘Why did Africans view the European as a child of God, but the Europeans viewed the African as a soulless savage? Because of “melatonin,” described as a mentally and morally stimulating humanizing hormone produced by the pineal gland. Scientific research reveals that most [white people] are unable to produce much melatonin because their pineal glands are often calcified and nonfunctioning.
Pineal calcification rates with Africans is 5-15%; Asians 15-25%; Europeans 60-80%! This is the chemical basis for the cultural differences between [blacks] and whites, causing some Black scholars to raise the question that the European approach, that of the logical, erect, rigid, anti-feeling posture, reflects a left brain orientation and reflects that they lack the chemical key of melatonin to turn on their unconscious and… feelings. Melanin [gives] humans the ability to [feel] because it is the absorber of all frequencies of energy.’
A case in point, is the faith* which Black people exhibit towards their Saviour and their exuberance and passion in church congregations. This has often produced thoughts of respect and a little jealousy, towards their genuine peace and joy.
Rastafari: ‘After considering Melanin to be a “waste” product of body-metabolism which “served no useful function,” … science has now discovered that Melanin is the chemical key to life and the brain itself! All studies and facts about Melanin suggest that after 400 years of attempting to make [the Black race inferior], “Western science is facing the sobering reality that, by its own self-defined standards, Black people are probably superior to whites in both intellectual potential and muscle coordination.” (Sepia magazine interview).
In humans, melanin is the primary determinant of skin and hair color. However, few people know that melanin is found in almost every organ of the body and is necessary for the brain and nerves to operate, the eyes to see, and the cells to reproduce. It is also found in the stria vascularis of the inner ear. In the brain, tissues with melanin include the medulla and pigment-bearing neurons within areas of the brainstem, such as the locus coeruleus and the substantia nigra. It also occurs in the zona reticularis of the adrenal gland.
Exposure to the sun has the potential to cause premature aging of the skin, as well as various skin cancers. [The] ability to withstand the potentially damaging effects of the sun’s ultraviolet radiation depends on the amount of melanin in your skin, which is determined by the number of melanocytes that are active beneath the surface… Melanin is an effective absorber of light; the pigment is able to dissipate more than 99.9% of absorbed UV radiation. In even the most light-skinned people, the body’s melanocytes respond to sun exposure by producing more melanin, which creates the effect known as tanning. However, there is a limit to the degree of protection that melanin can provide, and it’s significantly higher in people with naturally darker skin.
Melanin can absorb a great amount of energy and yet not produce a tremendous amount of heat when it absorbs this energy, because it can transform harmful energy into useful energy. According to dermatologist and dermapathologist Dr. Leon Edelstein, director of the National American West Skin Pathology Consultation Service, melanin can absorb tremendous quantities of energy of all kinds, including energy from sunlight, x-ray machines, and energy that is formed within cells during the metabolism of cells. His theory is that melanin has the ability to neutralize the potentially harmful effects of these energies.
Darkly pigmented people tend to exhibit less signs of aging. Dermatologist Susan C. Taylor, author of “Brown Skin,” points out that Blacks and other people of color generally look younger than their lighter-skinned peers because of the higher levels of melanin in their skin. The dark pigmentation protects from DNA damage and absorbs the right amounts of UV radiation needed by the body, as well as protects against folate depletion.
Folate is water soluble vitamin B complex which naturally occurs in green, leafy vegetables, whole grains, and citrus fruits. Women need folate to maintain healthy eggs, for proper implantation of eggs, and for the normal development of placenta after fertilization. Folate is needed for normal sperm production in men. Furthermore, folate is essential for fetal growth, organ development, and neural tube development. Folate breaks down in high intense UVR. Dark-skinned women suffer the lowest level of neural tube defects.’
‘Dr. Frank Barr, pioneering discoverer of melanin’s organizing ability and other properties, theorizes in his technical work, Melanin: The Organizing Molecule: “The hypothesis is advanced that (neuro)melanin (in conjunction with other pigment molecules such as the isopentenoids) functions as the major organizational molecule in living systems. Melanin is depicted as an organizational “trigger” capable of using established properties such as photon – (electron) – photon conversions, free radical-redox mechanism, ion exchange mechanisms, and semiconductive switching capabilities to direct energy to strategic molecular systems and sensitive hierarchies of protein enzyme cascades. Melanin is held capable of regulating a wide range of molecular interactions and metabolic processes…”
The map of former African colonies is a grim picture. To be clear, the African people have suffered because of their forefather Ham and his actions; not, because the Black people are inferior to any other ancestry group and ethnic line, or because they have brought suffering on themselves. Black people are not lesser to any other race of people on the Earth.
Nor do they deserve any kind of racial discrimination for their ethnic characteristics and colour of their skin.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘In the Greek New Testament the name Canaan is spelled Χανααν [Acts 7:11 and 13:19] and Canaanite (female) is spelled Χαναναια (Matthew 15.22]. The masculine form Χαναναιος does not occur in the New Testament but both Matthew and Mark make mention of a Simon the Kanaanite (Κανανιτης; [Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18]).
The name Canaan may have been original – meaning “land of purple,” says HAW Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, which relates it to Phoenicia, also meaning purple – and turned proverbial, but it may also have been taken from the Hebrew verb (kana) and projected back upon this person… The verb (kana) means to synchronize, or to give up individual leanings in order to unite more effectively as a group. Noun (kin’a) means bundle or pack.‘
A further irony, as the sons of Canaan have not been a unified people and their leaders have not given up individual leanings.
Abarim: ‘The Old Testament’s passion for reaching the “land of Canaan” may have a very clear connotation of reaching the blissful situation of international synchronicity. Being located on the bridge between three continents, the [intermediate]historical people of Canaan maintained a flowering culture of trade. Thus the words, meaning Canaan, and, meaning Canaanite, acquired the additional meaning of trade or merchant (Zephaniah 1:11, Ezekiel 16:29).’
The original allotment of land running north-south on the furthest eastern coast of the mediterranean or the far west coast of the fertile crescent, had been designated for Shem’s descendants. Canaan’s descendants had dwelt there before migrating southwest to Africa. Ultimately, the sons of Jacob also migrated away from this strip of land.
In the Book of Jubilees chapter ten, verses 28-33, we read about Canaan following the Flood and when land was apportioned to Japheth Ham and Shem, in the wider Near and Middle Eastern region. Recall, Madai in Chapter IV, requested to live adjacent to Shem’s descendants – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
‘And Ham and his sons went into the land which he was to occupy, which he acquired as his portion in the land of the south. And Canaan saw the land of Lebanon to the river of Egypt [the Nile], that it was very good, and he went not into the land of his inheritance to the west (that is to) the sea [North Africa], andhe dwelt in the land of Lebanon, eastward and westward from the border of Jordan and from the border of the sea.
And Ham, his father, and Cush and Mizraim his brothers said unto him: ‘Thou hast settled in a land which is not thine, and which did not fall to us by lot: do not do so; for if thou dost do so, thou and thy sons will fall in the land and (be) accursed through sedition; for by sedition ye have settled, and by sedition will thy children fall, and thou shalt be rooted out for ever. Dwell not in the dwelling of Shem; for to Shem and to his sons did it come by their lot. Cursed art thou, and cursed shalt thou be beyond all the sons of Noah, by the curse by which we bound ourselves by an oath in the presence of the [Holy Judge], and in the presence of Noah our father.’ But he did not harken unto them, and dwelt in the land of Lebanon from Hamath* to the entering of Egypt…’
Canaan’s three brothers all migrated to northern Africa and the horn of Africa. Canaan followed later as predicted, settling in North West Africa. Ultimately, two brothers left Africa and two remained. One being Canaan, who eventually spread southward throughout Sub-Saharan Africa.
We read in Genesis 10:15-18 ESV, of the sons of Canaan:
‘Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth, and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.* Afterward the clans of the Canaanites dispersed.’
In other words: Sidon, Heth, Jebu, Amor, Girgash, Hiv, Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath.
The endeavour to identify all eleven of Canaan’s lines of descendants – as there are some fifty-four plus African nations containing Canaan’s offspring – for now, remains a future project. We will concentrate on Sidon the firstborn and Heth the second born, who are each prominent lines.
Insight into Canaan’s sons is provided by Professor Aaron Demsky, in Reading Biblical Genealogies – Including a close look at how the description of the Canaanite lineage was constructed (Genesis 10:15-18) – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Sons of Canaan… include twelve names. In order to come up with twelve Canaanite sons – another typological number implying a full people (see below) – it needed to include different kinds of names.
… Six of the names are ethnic names, known from the lists of the indigenous Canaanite peoples, that appear either in part or in full some twenty-five times in the Bible. Three of these terms are the externally documented: Canaanites, Amorites and Hittites. The rest are unknown in non-biblical texts: Jebusites, Girgashites and Hivites. The [Perizzites], who appear in a number of these lists, are not mentioned here.
… The list also includes five Phoenician-Syrian city-states as part of the Canaanite league:
1. Sidon along the coast,
2. ‘Arqa (Tel ‘Arqa, ca.20 kms north east of Tripoli) [Ark]
3. Sin (Shian in the Assyrian sources; in later Jewish documents it is identified with Tripoli in Lebanon)
4. Arwad (Ruad, an island port between Tripoli and Latakia) [Arvad]
5. Ṣemer (Assyrian Ṣumur, south of Arwad) [Zemar]
6. Hamath (Ḫama one of the major cities in middle Syria), situated on the Orontes.
The names of these “sons” are not presented uniformly.
1. The first three – Canaan, Sidon and Heth – are proper names.
2. The “descendants” are written as gentilics (i.e., relational adjectives in the nisbe form) with the definite article (the Jebusite, the Amorite), etc. Canaan also appears in this form at the end of the list.
Chiastic Form
The “descendants” are listed in chiastic order. Sidon is the firstborn followed by Heth. Following Heth are the other five Canaanite peoples, related to Heth, and then the five city states, obviously related to Sidon, as they are all Phoenician city-states like Sidon…
The Significance of Twelve
As we see from the later genealogies of Nahor (Genesis 22:20-24), Ishmael (Genesis 25:13-15), and of course, Jacob, twelve is a significant number in biblical tradition for classifying large ethnic units, or tribal leagues, in the patriarchal period. In this case of Canaan, however, we find a certain creativity in order to produce the desired number. The list has two anomalies:
1. The patriarch here is one of the twelve.
2. Five city-states (or feudal kingdoms) have been recast as clan units.
As noted above, the larger branches of the three sons of Noah are defined not only by ethnicity and language affinity, but also by geographic proximity (verses 5, 20, 31). Moreover, emphasizing the integral territorial aspect of tribal identity, sundry geographical notices were appended, e.g., verses 10-12; 30. Similarly, in verse 19, this genealogy of Canaan is enhanced by a fascinating geographic description of the borders of Canaan (verse 19): The Canaanite territory extended from Sidon as far as Gerar, near Gaza, and as far as Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, near Lasha. This description serves both to minimalize Canaanite territory and to introduce places that will appear in later narratives.
Northern Border – Phoenician Cities
Following a three pointed pattern of delineating borders, which I have identified, i.e., “From X, coming to Y, near Z”, the list begins with Sidon, which probably now implies the entire Tyrean kingdom on the Phoenician coast from Acco in the south to Nahr Kalb in the north (Joshua 13:4-6; compare the territory of Asher 19:24-30).
South-Western Border – Philistine Cities
The second point, on the south-western border of Canaan, Gerar (Tel Harur, present day Netivot on Nahal Gerar, i.e. biblical Nahal HaBesor), was defined by the third point Gaza, some 20 kms away. This description of the southern border of Canaan serves another literary purpose by anticipating the stories of Abraham and Isaac going to Gerar and the story of Jacob’s funeral cortège from Egypt to Hebron at the end of the book (Genesis 50:10-11).
Eastern Border – The Dead Sea and the Five Cities
From the south western corner of the Land, the border goes to the southern edge of the Dead Sea. The description introduces the five cities [technically only four, as Lot escaped to Zoar and it was spared] which are eventually destroyed in the story of Lot and Sodom.’
Twin groupings for the descendants of Canaan, as proposed by Demsky.
Cities: Sidon, Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath
Clans: Heth, Jebus, Amor, Girgash, Hiv, (Canaan)
According to Demsky, the clans are the literal sons of Canaan and amongst other places, they lived in the aforementioned cities. This position seems to create further questions. How did these six cities acquire their names? It would seem plausible they are so named after their founders. They being the first and seventh to eleventh sons listed in Genesis chapter Ten. Is an extra Canaan applicable and if so, is he Canaan junior or possibly a grandson of Canaan senior?
As Sidon is a proper name with Heth and clearly dominant, it perhaps should be included with the clans. The addition of Canaan as a clan is likely redundant and so a more accurate and redrawn list of clans would be:
Sidon, Heth, Jebus, Amor, Girgash and Hiv.
The cities of Ark, Sin, Arvad, Zemar and Hamath have been included for a reason and while perhaps not sons names, became synonymous with sons from the clan list. Support for this premise is that a. Heth, Amor and Hiv became names attributed to Shem’s descendants – with Sidon in part – while the other two did not; and b. Ark, Sin and Zemar are not discussed prophetically, though both Arvad and Hamath are and became identifiable people in the world today.
Therefore it is proposed that there are six key lineages for Canaan’s descendants from the following six clans and cities:
Sidon, Heth, Amor, Hiv, Arvad and Hamath.
There are a fair number of scriptures for some of the cities and sons, so we will look at a sample. The majority refer to ‘Canaanites’ during a later period where the original sons of Canaan were not living and so are discounted in this chapter.
The Book of Jasher 7:13 includes additional or duplicate names, totalling ten sons instead of eleven, with Jebus missing:
And the sons of Canaan were Zidon, Heth, Amori, Gergashi, Hivi, Arkee, Seni, Arodi [Arvad?],Zimodi [Zemar?] and Chamothi [Hamath].
Sidon, or Zidon in Hebrew means: ‘fishery, hunting place.’ From the verb sud, to hunt or fish. The noun mesad means fastness or stronghold – a typically defensive structure. ‘Sud’ in French means south.* When studying Javan’s son Kittim – refer Chapter VIII Indonesia: Kittim, Khitai & Cathay – a key economic, geographic maritime, port people; we looked at Isaiah chapter 23. There are additional major nations in a similar key geographic port location.
Isaiah 23:1-3
Complete Jewish Bible
A prophecy about Tzor [Tyre]: Howl, you “Tarshish” [Japanese] ships, because the harbor is destroyed! On returning from Kittim [Indonesia], they discover they cannot enter it. 2 Silence, you who live on the coast, you who have been enriched by themerchants of Tzidon [Sidon] crossing the sea. 3 By the great water the grain of Shichor, the harvest of the Nile, brought you profits. She was marketplace for the nations. 4 Shame, Tzidon, for the sea speaks; the fortress of the sea says, “I no longer have labor pains or bear children, yet I have raised neither boys nor girls.”
Verse 12 NCV:
He said, “Sidon, you will not rejoice any longer, because you are destroyed. Even if you cross thesea to Cyprus [Kittim], you will not find a place to rest.”
Zechariah 9:1-3
Revised Standard Version
‘The word of the Lord is against the land of Hadrach and will rest upon Damascus [capital of Aram]. For to the Lord belong the cities of Aram [son of Shem], even as all the tribes of Israel; Hamath[city of Canaan] also, which borders thereon, Tyre and Sidon, though they are very wise. Tyre has built herself a rampart, and heaped up silver like dust, and gold like the mud of the streets.’
Tyre is associated with the intermediate ‘Canaanites’ or Phoenicians; whereas the later ‘Phoenicians’ are linked with Sidon. Though the Phoenicians are White peoples descended from Shem, both nations today also contain a Black population descended from Canaan. We will study scriptures regarding Sidon, when we look at the European peoples who dwell within this nation. Modern day Sidon is en route from Tarshish-Japan and Kittim-Indonesia and links them to present day Tyre. All are major trading nations and key ports. As Sidon is associated with Hamath and other Canaanites, we are looking for a prominent nation on the coast of Africa. Sidon is the Republic of South Africa* and its Black citizens include the Canaanite clan of Hiv.
Sin and Zemar are not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Ark is mentioned in Joshua 16:1-3, NET within the original lands of the tribe of Jospeh:
‘The land allotted to Joseph’s descendants extended from the Jordan at Jericho to the waters of Jericho to the east, through the desert and on up from Jericho into the hill country of Bethel. The southern border extended from Bethel to Luz, andcrossed to Arkite territory at Ataroth. It then descended westward to Japhletite territory, as far as the territory of lower Beth Horon and Gezer, and ended at the sea.’
Arvad equates with the people of Angola. Arvad is connected in a military capacity with Sidon and particularly Tyre.
Flag of Angola
Ezekiel 27:8, 11
New English Translation:
‘The leaders of Sidon and Arvad were your rowers; your skilled men, O Tyre, were your captains… The Arvadites joined yourarmy on your walls all around, and the Gammadites were in your towers. They hung their quivers on your walls all around; they perfected your beauty.’
Angolan man and woman
The link between Angola and Tyre will be become very clear when we study Tyre – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Excluding Arab nations, Angola is the eighth most populous African nation – with 38,722,187 people – and possesses the fifth strongest military in sub-Saharan Africa, behind Ethiopia, South Africa, Nigeria and Kenya at fourth. Angola is Africa’s second largest oil producer. The meaning of Arvad is a ‘wandering fugitive’ from the verb ‘arad, ‘to flee’ or ‘be free’ and the verb rud, ‘to wander restlessly.’
Hamath is mentioned a number of times and linked with Arvad, who in turn is associated with Sidon. Hamath is the most prominent Canaanite region [city-state] after Sidon and today is the nation of Nigeria,with its people coming from the clan of Heth. An interesting coincidence is Ham-ath being similar to the name Ham, as Niger-ia has been named from their racial strand.
Nigerian man and woman
2 Kings 19:13
English Standard Version
‘Where is the king of Hamath, theking of Arpad [Arvad], the king of the city of Sepharvaim, the king of Hena, or the king of Ivvah?’ – Isaiah 36:19.
2 Samuel 8:9-10
English Standard Version
When Toi king of Hamath heard that David had defeated the whole army of Hadadezer [of Zobah], Toi sent his son Joram to King David…’ – 1 Chronicles 18:1-5, Ezekiel 47:17.
The link between Hamath and King David of Judah is significant and not a coincidence – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. These verses also highlight the strength of Hamath – a sizeable nation commensurate with the economic or military clout of Sidon is being discussed. Nigeria with South Africa is a leading nation in Africa. It has an immense population of 236,199,400 people – sixth highest in the world.
Notice on the fertility rate chart that Nigeria has one of the highest rates in the world. Nigeria is in red, located south of Niger in Pink, with the highest rate in the world. Nigeria’s projected population by 2050 is 400 million people and by 2100, it is a staggering 730 million people. This would make Nigeria the third most populated nation in the world after India and China.
An online encyclopaedia, provides a summary of Nigeria’s recent history – emphasis mine:
‘… The Kano [Canaan] Chronicle highlights an ancient history dating to around 999 AD of the Hausa Sahelian city-state of Kano,[Hamath city-state of Canaan] with other major Hausa cities… all having recorded histories dating back to the 10th century. With the spread of Islam from the 7th century AD, the area became known… as Bilad Al Sudan (English: Land of the Blacks…)There are early historical references by medieval Arab and Muslim historians and geographers which refer to the Kanem-BornuEmpire[Kainam, Kenan] as the region’s major centre for Islamic civilization.
In the 16th century, Portuguese explorers [modern day descendants of the Phoenicians] were thefirst Europeans to begin significant, direct trade with peoples of Southern Nigeria, at the port they named Lagos and in Calabar along the [regions of the] Slave Coast.Europeans traded goods with peoples at the coast; coastal trade with Europeans also marked the beginnings of the Atlantic slave trade. The port of Calabar on the historical Bight of Biafra (now commonly referred to as the Bight of Bonny) became one of the largest slave trading posts in West Africa in the era of the transatlantic slave trade.
The majority of those enslaved and taken to these ports were captured in raids and wars. Usually the captives were taken back to the conquerors’ territory as forced labour; [in] time, they were sometimes acculturated and absorbed into the conquerors’ society. A number of slave routes were established throughout Nigeria linking the hinterland areas with the major coastal ports.’
We will return to the significance of the Portuguese being the first European peoples in the modern era, to both trade and colonise areas outside of Europe – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.
‘In the north, the incessant fighting amongst the Hausa city-states and the decline of the Bornu Empire gave rise to the Fulani people gaining headway into the region. At the beginning of the 19th century, Usman dan Fodio led a successful jihad against the Hausa Kingdoms founding the centralised Sokoto Caliphate (also known as the Fulani Empire).
The empire with Arabic as its official language grew rapidly under his rule and that of his descendants, who sent out invading armies in every direction. The vast landlocked empire connected the East with the West Sudan region and made inroads down south conquering… and [advancing]… with the goal of reaching the Atlantic Ocean. The territory controlled by the Empire included much of modern-day northern and central Nigeria.
The Sultan sent out emirs to establish a suzerainty over the conquered territories and promote Islamic [civilisation], the Emirs in turn became increasingly rich and powerful through trade and slavery. By the 1890s, the largest slave population in the world, about two million, was concentrated in the territories of the Sokoto Caliphate. The use of slave labor was extensive, especially in agriculture.By the time of its break-up in 1903 into various European colonies, the Sokoto Caliphate was one of the largest pre-colonial African states.
A changing legal imperative ([the] transatlantic slave trade [was] outlawed by Britain in 1807)… [caused]… illegal smugglers[to purchase] slaves along the coast by native slavers. Britain’s West Africa Squadron sought to intercept the smugglers at sea. The rescued slaves were taken to Freetown, a colony in West Africa originally established for the resettlement of freed slaves from Britain. In 1885, British claims to a West African sphere of influence received recognition from other European nations at the Berlin Conference. The following year, it chartered the Royal Niger Company… By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the company had vastly succeeded in subjugating the independent southern kingdoms along the Niger River.
[The] British conquered Benin in 1897, and, in the Anglo-Aro War (1901–1902), defeated other opponents. The defeat of these states opened up the Niger area to British rule. In 1900, the company’s territory came under the direct control of the British government and established the Southern Nigeria Protectorate as a British protectorate and part of the British Empire, the foremost world power at the time. On 1 January 1914, the British formally united the Southern… and the Northern… [Protectorates] into the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria.
Inhabitants of the southern region sustained more interaction, economic and cultural, with the British and other Europeans owing to the coastal economy. By independence in 1960, regional differences… were marked. The legacy, though less pronounced, continues to the present [day, with imbalances] between North and South. For instance, northern Nigeria did not outlaw slavery until 1936 whilst in other parts of Nigeria slavery was abolished soon after colonialism.
Nigeria is classified as a mixed economy emerging market. It has reached lower-middle-income status according to the World Bank with its abundant supply of naturalresources, well-developed financial, legal, communications, transport sectors and stock exchange (the Nigerian Stock Exchange), which is the second-largest in Africa. Nigeria is the United States’ largest trading partner in sub-Saharan Africa and supplies a fifth of its oil (11% of oil imports). The United States is the country’s largest foreign investor.
Economic development has been hindered by years of military rule, corruption, and mismanagement. The restoration of democracy and subsequent economic reforms have successfully put Nigeria back on track towards achieving its full economic potential. As of 2014 it is the largest economy in Africa, having overtaken South Africa. Next to petrodollars, the second-biggest source of foreign exchange earnings for Nigeria are remittances sent home by Nigerians living abroad. Nigeria made history in April 2006 by becoming the first African country to completely pay off its debt (estimated $30 billion) owed to the Paris Club. Nigeria is trying to reach the Sustainable Development Goal Number 1, which is to end poverty in all its forms by 2030.’
Nigeria is the 25th largest economy in the world and the biggest in the sub-Saharan African continent. Its 2019 nominal GDP was $448 billion dollars. Nigeria’s economy relies heavily on the oil industry and is the largest oil exporter on the continent; with Africa’s largest reserves of natural gas. Resource extraction industries, such as coal, tin, and other metal mining are integral to the Nigerian economy. Oil dominates in terms of contribution to GDP and exports. Between a fifth and a half of Nigerians work in agriculture, primarily small-scale subsistence agriculture. Nigeria’s economy has grown rapidly in the past few decades, but it also faces significant challenges such as desertification and lack of infrastructure.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Nigerian global shipments during 2021.
Mineral fuels including oil: US$42.4 billion
Ships, boats: $1.4 billion
Fertilizers: $949.8 million
Cocoa: $628.8 million
Oil seeds: $326.2 million
Zinc: $258.8 million
Aluminum: $190.3 million
Aircraft, spacecraft: $143.7 million
Tobacco, manufactured substitutes: $112.8 million
Lead: $94.1 million
Fertilizers represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 423.8% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for Nigeria’s improving export sales was aluminum via a 341.2% gain. Shipments of lead: posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 256.5%. The leading decliner among Nigeria’s top 10 export categories was ships and boats, thanks to a -30.3% drop year over year.’
The Flag of Nigeria with Coat of Arms
Heth in Hebrew means: ‘terror, dread,’ From the verb hatat, ‘to deplete of courage.’ A formidable name and the latter White peoples known by that name, certainly lived up to it. The Hittites in the Bible, are in every case, in reference to the later peoples. One passage which refers to the original people of Heth is in Genesis chapter twenty-three.
Genesis 23:8-11
English Standard Version
8 ‘And he said to them, “If you are willing that I [Abraham] should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me and entreat for me Ephron the son of Zohar, 9 that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he owns; it is at the end of his field. For the full price let him give it to me in your presence as property for a burying place.” 10 Now Ephron was sitting among the Hittites, and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, of all who went in at the gate of his city, 11 “No, my lord, hear me: I give you the field, and I give you the cave that is in it. In the sight of the sons of my people I give it to you. Bury your dead.”
Jebus in Hebrew means: ‘trodden underfoot, he will trample down.’ The numerous references to the Jebusites including all the Canaanite clans, are in the main, about the Nephilim descended Elioud giants or people who intermarried with them, dwelling in Canaan. We will look at a selection of verses for these peoples in a different chapter. Amor in Hebrew means: ‘talkers.’
Genesis 15:18-21
English Standard Version
18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, 19 the land of the… 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites… 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.”
Girgash in Hebrew means: ‘dwellers in a clayey soil,’ ‘take and stroke’, Hiv: ‘villagers’ and Perizz: ‘wildling, rural.’ The Canaanites and Perizzites are almost always placed together. Their relationship is not clear.
Genesis 13:7
English Standard Version
‘… and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time theCanaanites and the Perizziteswere dwelling in the land.’
Online encyclopaedia – emphasis mine:
‘A 2009 genetic clustering study, which genotyped 1327 polymorphic markers in various African populations,identified six ancestral clusters. The clustering corresponded closely with ethnicity, culture and language.A 2018 whole genome sequencing study of the world’s populations observed similar clusters among the populations in Africa.’
Whether there are twelve, eleven or six main Canaanite lines of descent appeared difficult to ascertain. Though the identification of six ancestral clusters, supports Aaron Demsky’s hypothesis and so we may well have found Canaan’s six clans comprising: Sidon, Heth, Amor, Hiv, Arvad and Hamath.
The major African ethnic groups could be divided as located in: 1 Southern Africa; 2 Central Africa; 3 Western Africa; 4 Eastern Africa; 5 the Horn of Africa; and 6 the Berbers in North Africa.
The fact there are six major mtDNA founding lineages aside from Haplogroup L0 from Na’eltama’uk, comprising the L1 to L6 Haplogroups – all stemming from Haplogroup L carried by mitochondrial Eve and perhaps Emzara, the wife of Noah – and exhibited in the peoples primarily in sub-Saharan Africa, is assuredly beyond a coincidence – Chapter XI Ham Aequator.
In Chapter X Magog, Tubal & Meshech, the article Y Chromosomes of 40% Chinese Descend from Three Neolithic Super-Grandfathers stated in its additional paper – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… clade E [is distributed] mainly in Africa, so there are two hypotheses, 1) haplogroups D and CF migrated out of Africa separately; 2) the single common ancestor of CF and DE migrated out of Africa followed by a back-migration of E to Africa. From this study, the short interval between CF/DE and C/F divergences weakens the possibility of multiple independent migrations (CF, D, and DE*) out of Africa, and thus supports the latter hypothesis… Y DNA haplogroup A represents the oldest branch of the Y-chromosome phylogeny. Like haplogroup B, it only appears in Africa, with the highest frequency among the hunter-gatherer groups in Ethiopia and Sudan. A3b1 is a Khoisan exclusive haplogroup [in Southern Africa].’
The alternative view of mankind ‘beginning’ in the Middle East is more viable and this would support what we have learned with the descendants of Canaan migrating to Africa, not from Africa and culminating in a supposed ‘back-migration.’ Scientists concur that Y-DNA Haplogroup A is the oldest and original Haplogroup – derived from Y-DNA Adam – associated with Black people and then make the incorrect assumption, that all people have come out of Africa. The exact same presumption has been made with mtDNA Haplogroups L0 and L1.
This fabrication supports the unproven evolutionary theory for mankind, but does not allow for a provable pre-flood world, with a singular Black line – or dual racial lines if we include the Neanderthal of Day Six, a Yellow/Red line – and the introduction or rather activation of the genes for a White line through Noah and his son Shem after the great Flood – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; Articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV; Designated Design or Chance Chaos? and Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens. After the deluge, the new races would evolve from the sixteen lines from Noah’s grandsons, repopulating the world from the Hindu Kush and Indus Valley regions, as opposed to the African continent – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
African Human mtDNA phylogeography at a glance, Alexandra Rosa & António Brehm, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine:
L0
‘Macrohaplogroup L divides into haplogroups L0-L6… Haplogroup L0 further includes sub-haplogroups L0a, L0d, L0f and L0k… L0d, the first individual sub-clade to derive from the L0 node…its divergence from L0abfk… The distribution of this clade appears to be restricted to Khoisan people in South Africa, and to Tanzanian and Angolan populations… Similarly, sub-haplogroup L0k is found almost exclusively among South African Khoisan… existing also at low frequencies among click-speaking Tanzanian groups…
Their L0d and L0k shared lineages, which represent more than half of their maternal pool suggest an ancestral link predating the appearance of present-day click-speakers, likely remnants of an East African proto-Khoisan population… The mtDNA pool of the Khoisan people shows over 60% of L0d and L0k lineages… The L0a1 sub-clade has an eastern and southeastern African distribution including Nubia, Sudan and Ethiopia… L0a2 lineages are thought to trace the dispersal of Bantu-speakers towards South Africa…’
L1
‘MtDNA L1… One of its daughter clades, haplogroup L1b, is concentrated inwestern-central Africa, particularly along the coastal areas… peaking in the Senegal Mandenka and Wolof… and Fulani people in Burkina-Faso, Chad and South Cameroon… L1c occurs frequently in Central and West Africans… Curiously, more recent reports state frequencies ranging 18-25% in Angola Bantu ethnic groups…
A substantial revision for the L1c phylogeny has been proposed by Quintana-Murci et al. (2008). It shed additional light… and helped corroborate past relationships between Central African Bantu-speaking farmers and their hunter-gathering neighbors, thePygmies… Both groups likely shared an ancestral Central-African proto-population rich in L1c mtDNAs… and evolved into the diverse forms observed today among the modern agricultural populations (L1c1a, L1c1b, L1c1c, L1c2-6, etc.) while L1c1a is the only surviving clade in western Pygmies… Both L1b and L1c were proposed as Central Africa autochthonous [indigenous] lineages…’
L2
‘Together with L3, haplogroup L2comprises~70% of the sub-Saharan maternal variation. Haplogroup L2a is the most frequent and wide-spread mtDNA cluster in Africa, reaching over 40% in Tuareg from Niger/Nigeria and Mali… Recent star-like demographic bursts in L2a1a and L2a2 and their expansion to southeast people are most likely associated with the expansion(s) of the Bantu-speaking populations… L2b-L2d haplogroups are dominant and largely confined to West and West-Central Africa…’
L3
‘… superhaplogroup L3… is widespread in Africa, its frequency and diversity providing evidence of a sub-Saharan expansion of its sub-clades towards West Africa… This superhaplogroup is subdivided into various clades and harbours also the two main M and L superhaplogroups found outside of Africa. Both L3b and L3d are prevalent in the West quadrant of sub-Saharan Africa… in average 10%…
L3b also shows considerable frequencies in the Hutu people in Rwanda… and South African Kung… L3d constitutes an important percentage of the South African maternal pool, being more expressive in Angola and Tanzania… a subset of L3b is common among Bantu speakers of south-western Africa and thus is a likely marker of the Bantu expansion… The L3e cluster has been subdivided into L3e1, L3e2, L3e3 and L3e4, since the time of HVS-I information per se… The oldest branches of L3e are thought to have arisen in Central Africa/nowadays Sudan… Within L3e2, the L3e2b lineages constitute the most frequent and widespread type of L3e, primarily found in West and Central Africa…
The network in Cerný et al. (2007) reflects a clear starlike phylogeny of L3e5 types found mostly in western Central Africa. Although an important diffusion has occurred into North Africa, the root type is relatively prevalent in the Chad Basin… The diffusion of haplogroup L3f ranges from Ethiopia in the east, to Angola and Mozambique in the south, the Chad Basin in Central Africa, Guinea-Bissau in the west and Tunisia in the north…
L3f1 founder lineages in Central and West Africa… L3f2 is a quite infrequent clade found almost exclusively among Chad speaking populations from the Chad Basin and virtually absent from Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan peoples… Therefore, it is contemporary with its sister clade L3f1, and probably arose around the Chad Basin area. Nevertheless, the haplogroup is present in northern Cushitic groups from Somalia and Ethiopia…’
L4
‘Haplogroup L4is a sister clade of L3, typical of East and Northeast Africa, although present at low frequencies… The L4a motif has been found in Sudan and Ethiopia, though initially misclassified as L3e4… Similarly we also refer to L4b2, previously known as L3g… or L4g… This is frequent in Tanzania and Amhara and Gurages from Ethiopia…’
L5
‘Haplogroup L5, previously known as L1e, occupies an intermediate position between L1 and L2’3’4’6… It has been observed at low frequencies in eastern Africa, namely Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda and Tanzania, with minor gene flow introducing these lineages in the Mbuti Pygmies and North Cameroon Fali… The Central African Pygmies particular genetic pool including both L1c and L5 may assign them a “relict” status, similar to that proposed for the Khoisan…’
L6
‘The variation classified as haplogroup L6… is nowadays largely confined to Yemeni people and a few samples in Ethiopian Amhara and Gurages. It is noteworthy that L6 presents a very narrow phylogeography… Given its presence in Ethiopians, where its sister clades are also diverse and frequent… L6 has a most likely origin in East Africa, where it might have been preserved in isolation for tens of thousands of years. In any case the homeland of L6 may still be missing.’
African Americans
‘The current distribution range of African mtDNA lineages is far broader than the African continent. Long-distance gene flow mediated by the Atlantic slave trade since the 16th century is worth mentioning in this review.
Brazilians harbor the most important reservoir of African maternal lineages outside of Africa. Early description of the genetic landscape of Brazilians with sub-Saharan ancestry confirms the historical evidence, with L1c and L3elineages summing up to nearly half of the African share… Later studies on Afro-Americans residing in the American continent report 65% of mtDNA types in South America as having a Central African origin, 41% and 59% of Central Americans tracing progeny to West Central Africa and West Africa respectively, while North American ancestors are estimated as being 28%West-Central Africans and 72% West Africans… These results corroborate the historical record of these regions… The origin of Afro-Americans in U.S.A. is associated with West African (>55%) and West-Central/Southwest African (<45%) mothers, also in close proximity to historical data…
Recent results on admixture analysis suggest that Africans brought to Brazil as slaves were originally from two geographical regions: i) 69% of the maternal pool of Black Brazilians in Rio de Janeiro is attributed to West-Central and Southeast Africa, close to two former Portuguese colonies(Angola and Mozambique)’ – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil – ‘and ii) 82% of mtDNA lineages in Porto Alegre are found in West Africa, in the northern portion of the Gulf of Guinea… Such detailed analysis is possible given the clear mtDNA haplogroup structure which allows the discrimination of geographic/linguistic origins. Once again genetic records are in agreement with historical data…’
African-American mitochondrial DNAs often match mtDNAs found in multiple African ethnic groups, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Atlantic slave trade resulted in the forced migration of an estimated 11 million Africans to the Americas. Only 9 million are thought to have survived the passage, and many more died in the early years of captivity. Historical accounts indicate that virtually all enslaved Africans brought to North America came from either West or West Central Africa. A recent comparison of mtDNA sequences from 1148 African Americans living in the US with a database of African mtDNA sequences showed that more than 55% of the US lineages have a West African ancestor, while fewer than 41% came from West Central or South West Africa.
Because mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is passed from mother to daughter with few, if any, changes occurring over many generations, it is possible to compare contemporary African-American mtDNA haplotypes with contemporary mtDNA haplotypes in a worldwide database to obtain information about the ancestral origins of these mtDNAs.’
‘In such a comparison, continent-specific haplotypes are readily observed, and the assignment of mtDNAs to continent of origin is relatively straightforward. The more difficult task is to tie particular mtDNA haplotypes to specific geographical regions and ethnic groups within a continent. This task is particularly difficult for Africa, as there is more genetic diversity among Africans than among people from any other continent…
The most extensive pan-African haplotype… is in the L2a1 haplogroup. 40% of African-American mtDNAs did not match any sequence in the database, it is clear that matches to a single African ethnic group will not be the outcome for most African Americans, and even when a match to a single ethnic group is obtained, multiple matches may occur in a larger database. Furthermore, for the typical African American, the maternal ancestor who was the source of the mtDNA was just one of hundreds of enslaved African ancestors. In fact, it [is] likely that there has been more mixing of African ethnic groups in the Americas than has ever occurred elsewhere. Thus, the ancestors of virtually all contemporary African Americans came from a large number of ethnic groups located throughout the region from Senegal toAngola.’
Whole-mtDNA Genome Sequence Analysis of Ancient African Lineages, multiple authors, 2007:
‘Several L haplogroup lineages occur most frequently in eastern Africa (e.g., L0a, L0f, L5, and L3g), but some are specific to certain ethnic groups, such as haplogroup lineages L0d and L0k that previously have been found nearly exclusively among southern African “click” speakers. The presence of very old mtDNA haplogroups (i.e., L0d, L0f, and L5) in Tanzanians that are rare or absent in other regions of Africa suggests populations in Tanzania may have had a large long-term effective population size and/or a large degree of long-term population structure, which has acted to preserve many divergent and rare mtDNA haplogroup lineages that appeared early in modern human history. The presence of these ancient lineages in Tanzania also suggests that eastern Africa might be the source of origin of many other African mtDNA haplogroup lineages. Our findings are consistent with other studies of mtDNA genetic diversity in African populations that have suggested populations in eastern Africa form a highly diverse gene pool…’
We have learned that certain African populations – for instance in Tanzania and Angola – are older, in that they possess clades of mtDNA Haplogroup L0. It is the oldest Haplogroup on the mtDNA tree originating from mitochondrial Eve and has been passed from mothers to sons and daughters ever since. Haplogroup L0 is indicative of the peoples of Southern Africa and the Khoisan are a good example. They possess a light brown skin. Thus the biblical Eve would have been in all probability… light brown – as would Noah’s wife, Emzara.
Khoisan of South Africa
The most ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup – the Y sex chromosome passed from fathers only to sons – originating from Y-DNA Adam, is Haplogroup A.
It is indicative of sub-Saharan Africans and the oldest clade of A00, known as ‘Perry’s Y’ was discovered in 2012 in an African American. Haplogroup A00 was first discovered in Mbo Bantu men from West Cameroon. Bantu can vary in skin tone from light brown to medium brown. The highest concentration of Haplogroup A00 found in 2015, belonged to the Bangwa – Grassfields Bantu – of the Mbo. The Bantu woman below, is a similar skin tone to the Khoisan. Again, the probability that the biblical Adam was also light brown… is highly likely. Every human descends from mutated DNA genetic code, which originally began with ancestors in the distant past who are today, most closely aligned with the Bantu and Khoisan peoples.
A sample of Y-DNA Haplogroups, representing the six largest African nations in population; with the addition of Ghana, Namibia, Senegal and Rwanda. Kenya and Tanzania are represented by Bantu; South Africa is represented by the southern Bantu; the Zulu, who are also southern Bantu; and the Khoisan. Namibia’s Haplogroups derive from the Nama; and Rwanda’s from the Tutsi, a Northeast Bantu people.
Ethiopia: E1b1b [62.8%] – A [10.3%] – T [5.1%] – J [3.8%] –
Khoisan: E1b1a [35.7%] – A [33.3%] – E1b1b [14.7%] –
B [12.4%] – E2 [3.9%]
Namibia: A [64%] – E1b1a [18%] – E1b1b [9%]
Haplogroup J in Ethiopia is reflective of Arab related peoples or admixture. Haplogroups E1b1a [V38], E1b1b [M215] and A, are the predominant Y-DNA defining marker Haplogroups for sub-Saharan Africans; with E2 [M75], B and E1a [M132], lesser Haplogroups, yet still distinctive markers for Black people. Notice that these total six paternal lineages in alignment with the six identified biblical clans descending from Canaan’s sons.
When compared to the core Y-DNA Haplogroups for Japheth’s descendants covered in chapters two to ten – the predominant Haplogroups are O2a, and then O1 with lesser Haplogroups in order C, D, Q, K and N – it is abundantly clear that there is no close connection, only a distant one through the interconnecting Haplogroups of BT and F, later mutations inherited from Japheth and Ham.
The erroneous claim that there are no racial lines and only one race, collapses in a pile when these six key male African Haplogroups are contrasted with the seven primary paternal Haplogroups for the East Asians, Central Asians and Amerindians. Haplogroups are the scientific evidence that races exist within humankind. Not that mankind is one race. This is non-sensical reasoning, all in the endeavour to be pseudo-politically correct and not offend anyone – refer finalis verbum.
Ethiopia is located in the Horn of Africa and its population is 134,544,831 people, the second highest in sub-Saharan Africa. The largest ethnic group in Ethiopia is the Oromo; of which it is their Y-DNA Haplogroup spread used rather than the combined population, as it affects the E1b1b, A and J percentages significantly.
Flag of DR Congo
Kenya in East Africa has the sixth highest population with 57,234,386 people. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is in Central Africa, with the third highest population of 111,863,873 people. The main ethnic group in the Congo are the Kongo and in Nigeria it is the Igbo. Tanzania is in East Africa, with the fourth highest population of 70,005,792 people. Ghana in West Africa, has a population of 34,891,699 people – the tenth highest.
Flag of Ghana, constituting the pan African colours: red, yellow and green
In the South, the Republic of South Africa has the fifth highest population of 64,547,268 people, of which the vast majority are Black. The Y-DNA Haplogroups of the largest ethnic group, are taken from the Zulu.
Y heat map of current concentrations of the Y-DNA Haplogroup mutation of E1b1a1, M2 derived from E1b1a, V38
A comparison table of the sub-Saharan African peoples discussed in this chapter and their Y-DNA marker Haplogroups.
A B E1a E1b1a E1b1b E2 E
Namibia 64 18 9 27
RSA Khoisan 33 12 36 15 4 55
Kenya 14 3 52 14 17 83
Ethiopia 10 1.3 63 1.3 64
RSA Bantu 5 11 55 4 21 80
RSA Zulu 3 20 55 21 76
Nigeria 3 10 5 68 4 7 79
Tanzania 3 9 48 22 16 86
DR Congo 3 64 14 19 97
Rwanda 15 80 1 4 85
Senegal 5 81 7 3 96
Ghana 2 92 1 95
There is a correlation between the percentage of Haplogroup A and E1b1a or Haplogroup E overall. The higher Haplogroup A, the lower generally Haplogroup E and vice versa. As the Namibians are at one end with the highest percentage of Haplogroup A, it is the people of Ghana with E1b1a and the Congo, with E overall which are the other bookends.
Haplogroups A, B and E are three of the five oldest or original Y-DNA Haplogroups. Thus, if Adam possessed Haplogroup A, this then passed along the line of Seth to reach Noah. Regardless, in this instance ostensibly Ham – though in reality, Noah; refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator – carrying A, passed on the future mutations for Haplogroups B and DE which would later be exhibited in Canaan’s male descendants.
Therefore, it is Canaan for whatever reason, whose male descendants have inherited and retained the oldest and original Haplogroups comprising A and B; while also predominantly carrying Haplogroup E. Haplogroups E1a and E2 prevalent in subequatorial Africa, are unique to Black Africans. Clades of E1b1b* from intermixing and intermarriage are found in Shem’s descendants; refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans, as well as the Berbers of North Africa – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.
The highest percentages of Haplogroup A is found in southern Africa and particularly the Khoisan, Zulu and Bantu males of South Africa. It is Haplogroup E1b1a which is the dominant sub-Saharan paternal Haplogroup, much like O2a1 is in East Asia and South East Asia. The next most frequent Haplogroup E1b1b* and second to E1b1a is an interesting Haplogroup as we shall discover, for it is not just found in sub-Saharan Africa, but is widespread in North Africa; with relatively high concentrations in parts of southeastern and southern Europe.
The next chapter discusses the eldest and most influential of Ham’s sons.
People with understanding want more knowledge, but fools just want more foolishness.
Proverbs 15:14 New Century Version
“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widely spread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”
Javan’s second son Tarshish, figures prominently in the Bible. He lived the furthest of all his brothers; somewhat similar to Togarmah separating from Gomer’s other sons – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas. Tarshish grew wealthy through trade and is synonymous with shipping. Of all the eastern peoples, Tarshish had a strong orientation to the West, enduring until the present day. There is only one candidate remaining in East Asia who could fulfil Tarshish’s identity as a maritime island nation inherited from Javan. The people descended from Tarshish today, comprise the people of Japan.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:
‘Tarshish first settled in Asia Minor. The city of Tarsus was named after him. Here… Paul was born. From Tarsus the tribe spread into Spain and northern Portugal, founding the famous port of Tartessus – the Tarshish of the Old Testament history of Solomon’s time…’
During Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE, the people of Tartessus were Phoenicians and not the descendants of Tarshish who founded the city. The following regions are attributed to Tarshish and are all plausible cities and ports established during trading expeditions and migrations in the ancient past, as we have formerly noted with Kittim in the Mediterranean – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia.
The Targum of Jonathan renders Tarshish as Carthage in north Africa, though a biblical commentator Samuel Bochart, read it as Tartessos in ancient Hispania on the Iberian Peninsula, near Huelva and Sevilla today. Jewish scholar, Isaac Abarbanel, described Tarshish as ‘the city known in earlier times as Carthage and today called Tunis.’ An earlier identification had been with the inland town of Tarsus in Cilicia of south-central Turkey. American scholars William Albright and Frank Cross suggested Tarshish was located in Sardinia because of the discovery of the Nora Stone, whose Phoenician inscription mentions Tarshish.
Nineteenth century commentators proposed Tarshish was fulfilled in Britain, including proponent Alfred Dunkin. This idea stemmed from the fact that Tarshish is recorded to have been a trader in tin, silver, gold and lead which had all been mined in Cornwall. Britain is still reputed to be the ‘Merchants of Tarshish’ today by some Christian believers; which is weighted with irony, due to the many points of similarity between Japan and Britain.
Much could be written on the fascinating inter-relatedness of Japan and Great Britain – Island nations on the periphery of continents; part of yet separate, from their neighbours geographically and ideologically; strong self-identity; cultural icons; empires; military and economic powers; sea-faring and maritime states; ship builders; inventors; traders… world influencers – Article: 2050.
Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:
‘… within Church of God circles [some] have… speculated that the Japanese may have descended from Ashkenaz [Vietnam], a son of Gomer (Generations of Japheth. Church of God News… 1965) or Togarmah [North Korea and South Korea], another of Gomer’s [sons]; the… Plain Truth magazine stated, “Japan is Tarshish of Asia in Bible prophecy” (Plache R F, Lexander G L. Japan’s New Role in Asia. Plain Truth, April 1968, page 27).
Steven M Collins in his book, The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! 1992, proposes three explanations on the Biblical Tarshish – emphasis mine:
‘The King James Version of the Bible records in I Kings 10:22 that King Solomon “had at sea a navy of Tharshish” (other versions simply say “Tarshish”). One possibility is that Solomon had a fleet of ships based in Spain because Tartessus (in ancient Spain) is often identified as “Tarshish”… “ships of Tarshish” were recorded as having made voyages to the New World… It is also significant to note that I Kings 10:22 is the Bible’s first mention of “ships of Tarshish.” I Kings 10:22 may be a reference to a Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain which became the homeport of a major… fleet during Solomon’s reign. If so, Tartessus (or Tarshish) was a jumping-off point for voyages throughout the Atlantic… [and] that a reference to “ships of Tarshish” identified the fleet that Israel (together with Tyre and Sidon) had based in ancient Spain.
The second explanation considers the possibility that the extra “h” in the word Tharshish identifies this navy with one of the clans of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, which was named “Tharshish” (I Chronicles 7:10). Since “Tharshish” is an Israelite name, the Bible’s reference to “ships of Tharshish” could mean that this navy was primarily crewed by members of this branch of the tribe of Benjamin. It is also possible that the term “ships of Tarshish” later came to describe a particular class of seagoing vessels used by the Phoenicians. This possibility is supported by the reference in I Kings 22:48 that over a century later Judah’s King Jehoshaphat tried to “make” a fleet composed of “ships of Tarshish” for basing in the Red Sea port of Eziongeber.’
This is an insightful observation, as we will learn that modern day Benjamin does indeed have a strong ship building legacy – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Collins: ‘Some readers might wonder whether the “ships of Tarshish” belonged to the Japhethic tribe of Tarshish mentioned in Genesis 10:4. While that would seem to be a possibility at first, the fact that the Tartessian “Tarshish” was located in the direction that Jonah sailed to Tarshish, and the fact that the Iberian “Tarshish” spoke a dialect of Phoenician (a Semitic language) argues for a Semitic origin for Solomon’s “ships of Tharshish” and the Iberian “Tarshish.” Furthermore, there is no biblical evidence of any close cooperation between King Solomon’s Israelites and the Japhethic nation of Tarshish. Since Barry Fell’s book, America B.C. gives evidence of “the ships of Tarshish” being involved in ancient explorations of North America, this also argues that the biblical “Tarshish” was located proximate to the Atlantic Ocean (such as in ancient Spain).’
Tarshish may well be the city port, located in Spain.
Recall, we learned with Kittim, in the preceding chapter, that the verse in Daniel detailing a naval fleet setting sail from Kittim is not a reference to the West, or to Rome, or even Italy, but as the verse states, it is a direct reference to the Kittim the descendants of Javan. Albeit, it is a future prophecy. The difference here, is that the ‘ships of Tarshish’ are detailing a current event; though it is the ships of Tarshish stated, not Tarshish the port. With that in mind, there are verses which record a round trip to Tarshish being considerably further than merely from Canaan to Spain.
Bochart suggested eastern localities for the ports of Ophir and Tarshish during King Solomon’s reign, specifically the Tamilakkam continent: present day Southern India and Northern Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, where the Dravidians were famous for their gold, pearls, ivory and peacock trade.
1 Kings 10:22
English Standard Version
‘For the king [Solomon] had a fleet of ships of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram [the Phoenician]. Once every three years the fleet of ships of Tarshish used to come bringing gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks.’
Contrary to Collins dismissing a relationship with Tarshish the nation, this verse may well be supporting an economic arrangement with the Tarshish of the East – rather than the city-port, of the western Mediterranean. If the visits were this infrequent, it supports Tarshish was all the way around the Earth, either in Japan or East Asia – some 5,656 miles from the Israelite Kingdom – and their ships were collecting exotic items throughout Southeast Asia and India en route. See 2 Chronicles 9:21, 1 Kings 22:48 and 2 Chronicles 20-36-37.
Psalm 72:10
New Century Version
‘Let the kings of Tarshish and the faraway lands bring him [King Solomon] gifts. Let the kings of Sheba and Seba [a grandson and a son of Cush respectively] bring their presents to him.’
Jeremiah 10:9
English Standard Version
‘Beaten silver is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz. They are the work of the craftsman and of the hands of the goldsmith; their clothing is violet and purple; they are all the work of skilled men.’
The Japanese are a highly skilled people with an economy reflecting their talent, work ethic, technological prowess and subsequent wealth.
The reference to violet and particularly purple, lends itself to either the Phoenicians – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa – or it is exemplifying the quality of the workmanship, the products and the fitness for royalty, such as for King Solomon himself. Either way, it cannot be ignored, that Tarshish was linked to ‘faraway’ lands – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia – and with ‘Sheba and Seba’ of Cush – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Both associations are clues to Tarshish being located a great distance away, as in Asia and not the western Mediterranean.
Ezekiel 27:12,25
English Standard Version
‘Tarshish did business with you because of your great wealth of every kind; silver, iron, tin, and lead they exchanged for your wares…The ships of Tarshish traveled for you [Tyre] with your merchandise. So you were filled and heavily laden in the heart of the seas.’
Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi:
‘In sixteenth-century Japan, the production of gold and particularly silver grew so significantly that it left a mark on world economic history. Indeed, Japan may have accounted for as much as one-third of the world’s silver output at the end of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth century’ – Kozo Yamamura, editor, The Cambridge History of Japan, pages 60-61.
‘The warlords of this period encouraged gold and silver mining as a source of funds, leading to the discovery and development of many more mines. Most of the daimyos held large stocks of gold and silver bullion and gold dust. Nobunaga, (1534-82, the ‘Japanese Attila’), and Hideyoshi (1535-98, a brilliant commander and statesman), both had great reserves of bullion collected in their castles and used gold freely and ostentatiously to impress the world with their magnificence’ – George Sansom, AHistory of Japan1334-1615, pages 339-340.
Isaiah 23:1, 6, 10, 14
English Standard Version
‘The oracle concerning [the fall of] Tyre.
Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for Tyre is laid waste, without house or harbor! From the land of Kittim [Indonesia] it is revealed to them… Cross over to Tarshish; wail, O inhabitants of the coast! Cross over your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish; there is no restraint anymore… Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for your stronghold is laid waste.’
The fall of Tyre – a key trading partner – impacts both East Asia and Southeast Asia. Notice Tarshish and Kittim, two brothers in the far East, are linked together. This is not referring to a Phoenician port in the Mediterranean.
Isaiah 66:19
English Standard Version
‘… and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud [fourth son of Shem], who draw the bow, to Tubal [fifth son of Japheth] and Javan,to the coastlands far away[archipelago Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines], that have not heard my fame or seen my glory [non-Christian countries]. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’
Ezekiel 38:13
New English Translation
‘Sheba and Dedan [grandsons of Cush] and the traders of Tarshish with all its young warriors [Hebrew: lions, the East Asian ‘Tiger Economies’] will say to you, “Have you come to loot? Have you assembled your armies to plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to haul away a great amount of spoils?”
Tarshish, an economic and military power with Cush, stands against the great military alliance comprising Magog, Meshech, Tubal and Gomer – which includes the continental Southeast Asian nations of Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, with Togarmah, of North Korea and possibly, South Korea – and does not join with them.
Jonah 1:1-3
New English Translation
‘The Lord’s message came to Jonah son of Amittai, “Go immediately to Nineveh,that large [Hebrew – gadol: great, populous, mighty, powerful, fierce] capital city, and announce judgment against its people because their wickedness has come to my attention.”
Instead, Jonah immediately headed off to Tarshish to escape the commission from the Lord. He traveled to Joppa and found a merchant ship heading to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went aboard it to go with them to Tarshish, far away from the Lord.’
Jonah understandably, was not keen to go to Nineveh in northern Mesopotamia, the very capital of the mighty Assyrian Empire. The equivalent assignment today would be travelling to Russia and preaching a message of sin and repentance to the Russian people in Moscow… daunting indeed – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. There is a humorous element to Jonah boarding a vessel that would not just take him away, but take him to the furthest reaches logistically possible. The furthest destination was Tarshish.
Similarly, for most people today, travelling to Japan would be going to the ends of the earth. Japan is so far east, it is in the west so-to-speak. It can even be seen to be far west, depending on which direction one is heading. For example, viewed from the United States – Isaiah 2:16; 60:9.
Psalm 48:7
Common English Bible
‘… or like the east wind [from the Pacific] when it smashes the ships of Tarshish [Japan].’
Exodus 28:20
King James Version
‘And the fourth row a beryl [H8658 – tarshiysh: a precious stone or gem], and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their in closings.’
The Hebrew term tarshish is a homonym, occurring seven times in the Bible and translated beryl in older English versions. It is also the name of a gem stone associated with the Tribe of Asher, which has been identified by the Septuagint and by Josephus as the ‘gold stone’ possibly linked to the chrysolite – a gold, yellow colour – or yellow jasper.
Well known varieties of beryl include emerald and aquamarine. The meaning of Beryl in Sanskrit is a ‘light green semi-precious gemstone’ and in Italian, ‘blue green from the sea.’ It is often colourless* or translucent, though impurities give it colours ranging from green to blue, yellow, red the rarest, and even black. It is the first stone on the fourth row of the priestly breastplate – Exodus 28:20. See also, Ezekiel 1:16 and Daniel 10:6.
Tarshish in Hebrew means: ‘his Excellency’ and ‘breaking, subjection’. The connotation includes a ‘white dove’ or being ‘dove-white’ and a ‘search for alabaster’. The verb rashash means to ‘beat down, shatter’, the noun shayish ‘white alabaster’, the noun tor, ‘dove’.
Tarshish has a similar definition as Riphath, Togarmah and Kittim in the element of either ‘beating or breaking.’ This shows their familial ties and perhaps somewhat of a future warning.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The name Tarshish (or Tharshish according to some translations) is assigned five times in the Bible: The first Tarshish is a son of Javan son of Japheth, son of Noah (Genesis 10:4). This name is spelled (Tarshishah) in 1 Chronicles 1:7, but the -ah ending may in fact stem from a locative suffix that means toward or unto, so that it could refer to the rangeof the sons of Javan:all the way toTarshish.
Most famous is Tarshish the city famed for its wealth and merchant fleet… but which location is unknown…
A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 7:10).
One of seven Persian princes (Esther 1:14). Note that the name of one of two aspiring assassins of king Ahasuerus, namely Teresh (Esther 2:21), seems like a truncated version of Tarshish. And both may have something to do with the Persian governmental title tirshatha, usually translated with “governor” (Ezra 2:63, Nehemiah 7:65).
The Hebrew name of a certain precious stone (perhaps yellow jasper, says BDB Theological Dictionary, but translated chrysolite by NIV and beryl by NAS) is also tarshish…
These names (and noun) Tarshish come from different languages and have different etymologies. The Persian prince was probably known as Tarshata, meaning His Excellency (says BDB Theological Dictionary). Another suggestion is a relation to the word tarsta, meaning the feared or revered (BDB Theological Dictionary).
… Jones translates the name Tarshish with Breaking or Subjection, and the prefix taw would denote a thorough destruction or an ongoing one. But although Tarshish is mentioned here and there as subject of God’s wrath (Psalm 48:7, Isaiah 2:16, 23:1),it is mostly known for itsgreat success in the economic arena.Isaiah even predicts that Tarshish is not going to be simply destroyed, as were Sodom and Gomorrah, but that its legacy will one day be employed to service God (Isaiah 60:9). It is unlikely that the name Tarshish is supposed to be linked to a verb that denotes defeat and destruction. Note that the shish-part of the name Tarshish looks a lot like the word (shayish), meaning alabaster amostly translucent or white crystal:
The beryl stone is transparent* in its purest form, though it can also amongst all the other colours stated, be white.
‘There’s an odd correlation between the color white and the number six. The nouns… shesh… and… shayish… mean alabaster, which is a whitish translucent material. The identical word… shesh… means six. The noun… shushan… describes the lily, which has six leaves and is… white. The adjective… yashesh… means old or white haired. The verb… tur… means to explore or survey and associates with a broad, circular or sweeping motion. Noun… tor… appears to describe a circular braid of hair.’
On a personal note, I am reminded of the Japanese symbol, the Cherry blossom. One of my vivid memories after being fortunate to visit Tokyo in 1989, was all the beautiful white – and not to forget pink – tree blossom. The ‘circular braid’ is reminiscent of ancient Samurai warriors and modern Sumo wrestlers, with their long braided hair. The related Polynesians and also the Amerindians from Tiras, wore their hair in a similar fashion.
Japan comprises an amazing archipelago of 6,852 islands covering 145,937 square miles. The country’s five main islands from north to south, are Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu and Okinawa. Tokyo is both the capital and largest city.
Other major cities include Yokohama, Osaka, Nagoya, Sapporo, Fukuoka, Kobe and Kyoto. Japan is the 11th most populous country in the world, as well as one of the most densely populated and urbanised. About three quarters of the country’s terrain is mountainous, concentrating its population of 123,294,298 people on narrow coastal plains. The Greater Tokyo area has approximately thirty-six million residents – the most populous metropolitan area, or mega-city in the world.
The first mention of the archipelago appear in Chinese chronicles from the first century CE. Between the fourth and ninth centuries, the kingdoms of Japan were unified under an emperor and beginning in the twelfth century political power was held by a series of military dictators, the Shoguns and feudal lords, known as Daimyo; each enforced by a class of warrior nobility, the Samurai. A century long period of civil war ended in reunification in 1603 under the Tokugawa Shogunat.
A lengthy isolationist foreign policy was then enacted until 1854, when a United States fleet forced Japan to open trade – the awakening and emergence of the great trading nation of Tarshish – to the West, which led to the end of the shogunate and the restoration of imperial power in 1868. Japan adopted a Western styled constitution and pursued a program of industrialisation and modernisation.
Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 235: ‘By the beginning of the twentieth century Japan was an industrial power with the third-largest navy in the world, and in 1905 it defeated the Russians in a war fought on land and sea. However, the very same island-nation geography that had allowed it to remain isolated was now giving it no choice but to engage with the world. The problem was that it chose to engage militarily.
Both the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War were fought to thwart Chinese and Russian influence in Korea. Japan considered Korea to be, in the words of its Prussian military advisor, Major Klemens Meckel, ‘A dagger pointed at the heart of Japan’. Controlling the Peninsula removed the threat, and controlling Manchuria made sure the hand of China, and to a lesser extent Russia, could not get near the dagger’s handle.’
In 1937, Japan invaded China and by 1941 it had entered World War II as an Axis power. After suffering defeat in the Pacific theatre of war, Japan surrendered in 1945. After World War II, Japan experienced impressive economic growth – boosted by American investment and loans – becoming the second largest economy in the world by 1990, before being surpassed by China in 2010. A leader in the automotive and electronics industries, Japan has made considerable contributions to science and technology.
Japan is a great power and maintains Self-Defence Forces which rank as the world’s 4th most powerful military. During the 1980s, political pundits and economic analysts predicted Japan achieving superpower status; due to its population, GDP and economic growth. It was thought, as with China today that Japan would eventually surpass the economy of the United States. Japan is considered a cultural superpower in terms of its large-scale influence in food, ‘electronics, automobiles, music, video games and anime.’ Japan has faced an ongoing period of stagnation since the 1990s, an ageing population since the early 2000s and serious population decline beginning in 2011, all of which has eroded its potential as a superpower.
Japan’s name in Japanese is written using ‘the kanji 日本 and pronounced Nippon or Nihon’ and was adopted in the early 8th century. Prior to this, the country was known ‘in China as Wa (倭) and in Japan by the endonym Yamato.’ The characters 日本 mean a ‘sun origin’, which is in reference to Japan’s far eastern location and the source of the western epithet ‘Land of the Rising Sun.’ The official name of the Japanese flag is Nisshoki, which means the ‘sun-mark flag’, though most people call it Hinomaru, meaning ‘circle of the sun’, for the circle in the centre of the flag represents the sun. The flag of Japan isn’t white and red, it is actually white and crimson. The first documented use of the flag of Japan was in 701 CE and was mentioned in the Shoku Nihongi, ‘a classical Japanese history text, which credited Emperor Mommu with the flag’s use.’
The name Japan is based on Chinese pronunciation and was introduced to European languages through trade. In the 13th century, Marco Polo recorded the early Mandarin or Wu Chinese pronunciation as Cipangu.
Japanese Flag (above) and Naval Ensign (below)
The old Malay name for Japan, Japang or Japun, was borrowed from a southern coastal Chinese dialect and encountered by Portuguese traders in Southeast Asia, who brought the word to Europe in the early 16th century. An interesting coincidental similarity exists between the the English word, Jap-an and the biblical name of their forefather, Jap-heth. The first version of the name in English appeared in a book published in 1577, which spelled the name as Giapan in a translation of a 1565 Portuguese letter.
Japan leads the world in robotics production and use; supplying approximately 55% of the world’s total. The Japanese consumer electronics industry once the strongest in the world, now faces stiff competition from South Korea, the United States and China. Japan remains a major leader in the video gaming industry, with the United States.
On the index of most technological nations in the world, Japan is number one. Japanese scientists have made enormous contributions in the following fields: automobiles, electronics, machinery, earthquake engineering, optics, industrial robotics, metals and semi-conductors. Japanese researchers have won numerous Noble Prizes in recognition for their superior contribution in technological pursuits.
Japan is the fourth largest economy in the world; its projected GDP is $4.39 trillion for 2025. Effective co-operation between government and industry, coupled with advanced technological know-how have built Japan’s manufacturing and export-oriented economy. Japan is low in natural resources and dependent on energy imports, particularly after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and a general shutdown of its nuclear power industry.
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Japanese global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$147.1 billion
Vehicles: $137.8 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $117.9 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $43 billion
Iron, steel: $34.6 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $30.3 billion
Organic chemicals: $18.3 billion
Other chemical goods: $14.6 billion
Gems, precious metals: $14.3 billion
Copper: $12.9 billion
Iron and steel as materials represent the fastest growers among the top 10 export categories, up by 51.9% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was copper which appreciated 37.7%.’ In 2020, Ships and boats at $10.8 billion was listed at number ten.
Japan is a member of the prestigious intergovernmental G7 Group of nations. These are the major industrialised nations, who drive the world economy, monetary issues and policy. Japan’s inclusion is significant as it is the only descendant of Japheth and the only nation from East Asia or outside the European and North American spheres. Major nations not included are Russia (11th) due to its expulsion from the G8 in 2014 because of its annexation of the Ukraine and the Crimea; as well as the less developed major economies of China (2nd), India (5th) and Brazil (9th). The other nations of the G7 include: the United States of America (1), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (6), France (7), Italy (8) and Canada (10).
Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi – emphasis mine:
‘It appears that the sons of Tarshish originally settled in southern Asia Minor, giving their name to the city of Tarsus. The traditions of ancient Japan claim its people were led to the “Land of the Rising Sun” by a three legged crow – the “sun crow” representing the sun deity in the ancient Far East. Surprisingly, the rare imagery of three-legged birds as sun symbols has also been found on coins of Asia Minor, where sat Tarsus.
A.L. Sadler, a professor of Oriental Studies at the University of Sydney, wrote in his 1946 book A Short History of Japan: “… Some Japanese ethnologists favour the theory that the Yamato came from Central Asia” (pp. xi-xii).’ Support for this premise is the paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup D, which is prevalent in two countries: Tibet and Japan.
Salemi: ‘The peoples of Persia called those descended from Javan in Asia Minor, Yuna or Yuana (Rapson 1914 : 86). Tarshish migrated with Kittim’ – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. ‘They stayed with Kittim for a time in northern China. The Chinese… Yuan Empire and Yuanan region take their names from Javan, father of Tarshish. In China, along the coast, there was a people called the Three Han by the early Chinese writers. Han may be a derivation of Javan or Yahan. They were recognized as being a very different people to the rest of the Chinese. The three were the Ma-Han, Shon-Han and the Pien-Han.
There is, as Bishop writes, a very close relationship between them and the people who settled Japan (Bishop 1925: 556). Their culture may be described as partly Chinese and partly central Asian (ibid, 558). Hurlimann traces them back to central Asia (Hurlimann 1970: 90) and Japanese traditions maintain they originated in the far west of Asia. (Odlum 1937: 17).
Colin in his Native Races and Their Customs writes: “The principle settler in these archipeligoes was Tharsis, son of Java, together with his brothers. (quoted in The Philippine Islands 1493-1898). Of further interest is the statement in a Japanese document compiled in 720 AD, the Nihon Shoki; (The Chronicles of Japan), that Ninigi, a forefather of their race, had four sons. This may have been Javan, who also had four sons. From one of these sons descended the Japanese emperor Jemmu Tenno. This son was named Po-wori which means “Fire Bender” and may be compared to Tarshish which means “smelter” or “refiner”.
Japan’s role in Biblical Prophecy, Steve M Collins, 2007 – emphasis mine:
‘… Tarshish… A huge clue as to their modern identity is that Ezekiel 38:13 calls them “the merchants of Tarshish.” Their entire nation is so closely linked to merchandising goods to others that they are called a nation of “merchants”… Japan pioneered the export-driven model of mercantile sales to other nations as a national policy. This trait was so well-known that the nation was sometimes called “Japan, Inc.” in media articles… also prophesied [is] that there would be “young lions” that would be closely linked to the “merchants of Tarshish” in the latter days.
There are a number of smaller Asian nations on the Pacific Rim which have copied the mercantile, export-driven success of the Japanese nation. These nations are even called the “young tiger” nations or “young tiger” economies of Asia. The “young tiger” nations include such nations as South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand… Japan is an island nation and it lives at the doorstep of two powerful nations: Russia and China. Japan has fought wars with both nations, and China bears a vengeful grudge against Japan as a result of World War II. Russia seized Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands after World War II and its retention of these formerly Japanese islands is a bone of contention between Russia and Japan. Japan cannot hope to make allies of these nations. Therefore, Japan must side with the USA and the West by default. However, Japan and the USA have grown to be genuine allies in the period after World War II. The USA was not a harsh conqueror of Japan.
The USA (in Japan’s post-World War period of reconstruction) preserved Japan’s monarchy, treated the Japanese people and their culture with respect and laid the foundation for Japan’s mercantile success by blending Western, democratic institutions with Japan’s own unique culture. Japan has become a trusted ally and friend and it becoming an ever-more important nation in the Western alliance.
An article… in… The Economist… stated that Japan: ‘seeks closer ties with democratic India’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut – ‘and recently formalized a security alliance of sorts, only Japan’s second, with Australia… in addition to becoming an ally of Australia, Japan “sought a new partnership with India while building security ties with South east Asia,” and that “the main catalyst for the security pact (is) the rise of China.”
Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:
“Ise is the most venerated shrine in Japan, representing the indigenous religion, Shinto, and the mythical origins of the Japanese people. The sacred mirror is kept at Ise… individuals, who claim to have seen the mirror, agree that the horizontal writing on the bronze back is distinctly un-Japanese in style and resembles ancient Hebrew or Aramaic, spawning theories that connect the Japanese people to the ancient… [Israelite] tribes who vanished from history after the Assyrian conquest in 722 BC.
Scholars have found similarities in ancient Hebrew and Japanese ceremonies, priest apparel, the structure and layout of shrines, language used in ancient texts, and the three imperial regalia having been used as tokens of authority. It has also been argued that the Ise Shrine symbol, carved into the stone lamps surrounding the complex, is the Star of David.”
Theiel: ‘Perhaps it should be mentioned that in Japan there has long been a small Caucasian group who has been there for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It is possible that they had some contact with the Middle East and brought that knowledge with them when they [ended] up in Japan.’
A significant identification of Tarshish in the past was its interaction with the descendants of Shem through extensive trade and its western cultural leanings; considerably more so than any other descendant of Japheth. In modern times, Japan has repeated this assimilation of all things western to become technologically almost more western than the West. It is ironic that this began after centuries of self-imposed isolation beginning in 1624, after the Japanese government refused a Spanish trading delegation to step on Japanese soil. Japan reluctantly came out of isolation due to American intervention and displays of naval sea power during 1853 to 1864.
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 374-376 – emphasis mine:
‘The Japanese government then began copying everything they saw in… European nations, a pattern for which their country later became famous. Frencharmy officers were paid to enter Japan to remodel the Japanese army while British naval officers were paid to reorganise the JapaneseNavy. Dutchengineers were paid to supervise the construction of the first major Western style public works and infrastructure… and Japanese officials were sent abroad to study the… workings of [European] governments and to select their best features for duplication in Japan.
The new Japanese parliament [opened] in 1891, modelled directly on [European] parliaments… The Japanese constitution was drawn up by a specially-appointed commission under a samurai nobleman, Ito Hirobumi, who in 1882 sent missions to the US, Britain, France, Spain and Germany to observe their democratic systems. Eventually, the Germanmodel (and the Prussian variant in particular) was selected and implemented…
A new penal code was modelled on that of France, and a ministry of education, based on that of the United States, was established in 1871 to develop a system of universal education. Rapid industrialisation, under government direction, accompanied… political development and by 1890, Japan had completely revised its criminal, civil, and commercial law codes to match the European and American models.
By the end of the twentieth century, both Japan and China had developed into industrial giants, responsible for the production (but not the invention) of the majority of day-to-day appliances and convenience goods used all over the world. Both nations… practice immigration policies designed to preserve their racial homogeneity… unlike the … Western nations. Japan… famously refused to take Vietnamese boat people refugees of the 1970s and 1980s unless they were racially compatible with the existing Japanese population. This strict, racially-based immigration policy is Japan[‘s]… formula for long-term survival and progress. If maintained, this policy will ensure that they escape the fate of Western nations who have abandoned such policies.’
Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 239-240:
‘It is China that keeps Japanese leaders awake at night and keeps them close to the USA, diplomatically and militarily. Japanese statisticians fear that the population will shrink to under 100 million by the middle of the century. If the current birth rate continues, it is even possible that by 2110 the population will have fallen below the 50 million it was in 1910… Japan, itself a re-militarising power with a quietly hawkish outlook, is going to require friends in the neighbourhood… this means the US 7th fleet will remain in the Bay of Tokyo and US Marines will remain in Okinawa, guarding the paths in and out of the Pacific and the China Sea… The waters can be expected to be rough.’
Japanese men
Japanese society is linguistically, ethnically and culturally homogeneous, composed of 98.1%^^ ethnic Japanese. The most dominant native ethnic group is the Yamato. Primary minority groups include: the indigenous Ainu and Ryukyuan people and also Brazilians, mostly of Japanese descent. We will return to the Brazilian connection – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The Japanese population is rapidly ageing and predicted to drop to only ninety-five million people by 2050.
A study by Hideaki Kanzawa, showed that the Jomon of Hokkaido and Honshu – the first of three peoples to have migrated into Japan – have a genome that is commonly found in Arctic populations but is rare in Yamato people.^^ According to Mitsuru Sakitani, the Jomon are an admixture of two distinct ethnic groups: a more ancient group, carriers of Y chromosome D-M55 – D1a2a – and a more recent group, carriers of Y chromosome C-M8 – C1a1 – ‘that migrated to Japan about 13,000 years ago.’
Haplogroup D1a2a, originates in the Japanese archipelago and is distinct from other D-branches, with five unique mutations not found in the D1 Haplogroups. Scientists also propose that Haplogroup C1a1 originated about 12,000 years ago, which aligns with the start of the Jomon period. Haplogroup D1a2a is found in approximately 20% to 40% of the male population and Haplogroup C1a1 in about 6% of modern Japanese men. According to a 2011 study, all major East Asian mtDNA lineages expanded prior to 8000 BCE, except for two Japanese lineages of D4b2b1 and M7a1a expanding circa 5000 BCE, again during the Jomon Period.
It is interesting that the timeline presented by scientists for the spreading and fanning out of the relevant ancient C and D Haplogroup mutations, mirror the dates of key events in our ancient past. The ending of the last ice age with the Flood in 10,837 BCE; according to an unconventional chronology – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World – and the birth of Tarshish sometime after this; as well as the ‘time of Peleg’ circa 6755 BCE. We will investigate Peleg and the Tower of Babel, when we study Nimrod; Shem’s third son Arphaxad; and Abraham’s eldest brother, Nahor – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: The Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.
Some readers will be aware that the early Haplogroups are often given as originating much further back than 13,000 years ago. The pre-flood world’s chronology and the vast difference in human longevity – due in large part to environmental factors – is a missing key in understanding the time frames of the antediluvian world. It will be a shock for some and others will be incredulous, as initially I was too, in the knowledge that before the flood, human ages were of immense length.
A different method of counting was used – the sexagesimal system of the Sumerians, based on multiples of 60 as touched upon in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – and not the metric decimal system based on multiples of 10, we use today or the imperial system based on multiples of 12; a descendant of the Sumerian counting system. The biblical ages of the pre-flood patriarchs appear to have been manipulated – making them easier to mentally digest – after the flood, resulting in our real pre-history being extraordinarily hidden. The king lists for ancient rulers length of reigns, for instance in Sumer are fantastically long. Many thousands of years for individual rulers. Historians have just dismissed them as fanciful and created a completely erroneous timeline of history more in accord with those who squeeze all creation and mankind’s history into a mere six thousand years, based on a misguided interpretation of an edited biblical chronology – refer article: Na’amah.
The longevity of humans post-flood though considerable until the time of Abraham, were not nearly as long as prior to the flood – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. A result of the flood and the changes in the earth’s atmosphere, gravity and electro-magnetism was to reduce human life-span. The alternative explanation, is genetic manipulation. From Abraham’s birth in 1977 BCE, we have witnessed human longevity reduce dramatically again to a ‘maximum’ of what we are now familiar with, of approximately one hundred and twenty years.
Genesis 6:3
New Century Version
The Lord said, “My Spirit will not remain in human beings forever, because they are flesh. They will live only 120 years.”
This verse is actually predicting how much time was left before the Deluge flooded the Earth, though it has been interpreted that it refers to the length of a human’s life, and since the patriarch Joseph at least, this has been true – Genesis 50:22. It is one of the reasons – perhaps the principal argument – in which the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, was able to convince Eve in taking the ‘fruit’ from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; deceiving her and Adam regarding the truth about life and death… subtly twisting what the Creator had taught. Adam and Eve didn’t die and in fact, lived for millennia – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning?
Thus the promise of dying was delayed considerably, to the point of them appearing to almost live forever; though ultimately death came for them, with the tragic lie of the Serpent being eventually exposed – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega*.
When scientists propose the earliest Haplogroups divided and sub-divided between 20,000 to 60,000 thousand years ago for example, this is inaccurate because Noah was born circa 17,000 BCE and possessed the entire genome for the races and Y-DNA Haplogroup A, which then mutationally diverged with his three son’s descendants and so on. Noah’s sons were born circa 12,000 BCE – Genesis 5.32, 9.28, 11.10-11. Adam and his wife, [Mitochondrial] Eve, were formed nearly thirty thousand years ago, circa 27,000 BCE and the line from which Noah descended was from their son Seth, who was born circa 26,097 BCE. We will comprehensively study the antediluvian age in a separate chapter,* as well as an unconventional chronology for the history of humankind – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.
Japanese women
It is believed the Yayoi people – the second group of people to migrate into Japan – were migrants to the Japanese archipelago from Korea or China during the Yayoi period from 1000 to 300 BCE. They are seen as the direct ancestors of the modern Yamato, the majority of Japanese, as well as the Ryukyuan. It is estimated that modern Japanese share on average about 90% of their genome with the Yayoi. There was a third period of major migration, during the Kofun period from 250 to 538 CE.
Ancient DNA rewrites early Japanese history – modern day populations have tripartite genetic origin, Trinity College Dublin, 2021:
‘Ancient DNA extracted from human bones has rewritten early Japanese history by underlining that modern day populations in Japan have a tripartite genetic origin – a finding that refines previously accepted views of a dual genomic ancestry. Twelve newly sequenced ancient Japanese genomes show that modern day populations do indeed show the genetic signatures of early indigenous Jomon hunter-gatherer-fishers and immigrant Yayoi farmers – but also add a third genetic component that is linked to the Kofun peoples, whose culture spread in Japan between the 3rd and 7th centuries.’
A 2007 study by Nonaka, reported that the frequencies of the D1, [O1b], and O2** lineages in Japan were 38.8%, 33.5%,* and 16.7% respectively, constituting approximately 90% of the Japanese [male] population. It is thought that the Yayoi mainly belonged to Haplogroup O-M176 [O1b2] found in 32%* of present day Japanese males; Haplogroup O-M122 [O2, formerly O3]; Haplogroup O-K18 [F2320 – O1b1]; and Haplogroup O-M119 [O1a] which are all typical for East Asian and Southeast Asians.
Mitsueu Sakitani, suggests that Haplogroup O1b2, which is common in today’s Japanese, Koreans, and some Manchu, and O1a are one of the carriers of Yangtze civilisation. As the Yangtze civilisation declined, several tribes crossed westward and northerly, to the Shandong peninsula, the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago. One study labels Haplogroup O1b1, a major Austroasiatic paternal lineage and the Haplogroup O1b2 of Koreans and the Japanese as a ‘para-Austroasiatic’ paternal lineage.
A study in 2018, confirmed that the modern Japanese are predominantly descendants of the Yayoi and that they largely displaced the local Jomon. The mitochondrial chromosomes of modern Japanese are nearly identical with the Yayoi and differ significantly from the Jomon population. It is estimated that the majority of Japanese have about 12% Jomon ancestry or less.^ A more recent study by Gakihari in 2019, estimates the gene-flow from the Jomon into modern Japanese people at only 3.3%.^
Further studies report: ‘A 2011 SNP consortium study done by the Chinese Academy of Science and Max Planck Society consisting of 1,719 DNA samples determined that Koreans and Japaneseclustered near to each other, confirming the findings of an earlier study that Koreans and Japanese are related.
However, the Japanese were found to be genetically closer to Southeast Asian populations as evident by a genetic position that is significantly closer towards Southeast Asian populations on the principal component analysis (PCA) chart. Some Japanese individuals are also genetically closer to Southeast Asian and Melanesian populations when compared to other East Asians such as Koreans and Han Chinese, indicating possible genetic interactions between Japanese and these populations.
A 2008 study about genome-wide SNPs of East Asians by Chao Tian et al. reported that… the Japanese are relatively genetically distant from Han Chinese, compared to Koreans. Another study (2017) shows a relative strong relation between all East and Southeast Asians.’
We would expect to see the evidence of a link between Tarshish and his brothers located in archipelago Southeast Asia. Nor is it a surprise that the Japanese have DNA in common with Koreans and Chinese, for two reasons. First, they are originally blood brothers, then becoming cousins all stemming from Japheth and second, there would have been noticeable admixture if the Japanese migrated through China, possibly Taiwan and then the Korean peninsula. Similar transference occurred when Koreans migrated through China and some travelled to the Japanese Islands; as well as Chinese traders who visited both Korea and Japan.
The key in answering the Japanese identity, is not with the Japanese clustering with Koreans descended from Gomer, but rather their closer genetic link with South East Asians also descended from Javan.
Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis mine:
‘This survey of Y chromosome SNPs in Asia reveals a set of 41 haplogroups, 19 of which are present in Japan. Three haplogroups are almost entirely restricted to the Japanese archipelago: haplogroup D-P37.1 and its descendants (D-P37.1*, D-M116.1*, D.M125*, and D-P42), O-47z, and C-M8.
These lineages account for 34.7, 22.0, and 5.4% of Japanese Y chromosomes, respectively, and may have originated on the Japanese archipelago. The Japanese population also has high frequencies of other haplogroup O lineages that are shared mainly with Southeast Asian populations, and C lineages that are shared primarily with northern Asians. In this section, we make the case that these Y chromosome lineages descend from different ancestral populations that gave rise to the Jomon and Yayoi cultures.
We plotted the frequencies of haplogroups D, O-P31 [O1b], and O-M122 [O2] in each of our six Japanese samples against the approximate geographic distances of each of these populations from Kyushu Island. Together, these haplogroups account for 86.9% of Japanese Y chromosomes. There is a U-shaped cline for haplogroup D, and inverted U-shaped patterns for haplogroups in clade O. Based on the frequencies of these two clades, we estimate theJomon contribution to modern Japanese to be 40.3%,^ with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%). On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly, there is no evidence for Yayoi lineages in the Ainu [only Jomon].
The highest frequency of continental D lineages is found in central Asia (especially in Tibet (50.4%). Evidence for shared ancestry between Tibetans and Japanese is seen in the MDS plot. The survival of ancient lineages within haplogroup D in Tibetans and Japanese may well reflect long periods of isolation for both groups. Interestingly, a Y-SNP survey of Andaman Islanders found a very high frequency of haplogroup D-M174* chromosomes in this isolated population…’
The connection between higher levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup D and isolated, endogamic Asian populations is important. The Tibetans have been secluded from external contact and mixture for centuries as have the Japanese. The fact that Tibet and Japan – two very isolated regions – possess an ancient and prime Haplogroup, with a high percentage cannot be a coincidence.
‘The other postulated Japanese Paleolithic founding haplogroup, C-M8 [C1a1], is associated with Y-STR haplotypes that are related to Indian and central Asian C chromosomes. The presence of NO* chromosomes in Japan also may be an indication of a remnant Tibetan ancestry. A recent mtDNA study revealed direct connections of Japanese haplotypes with Tibet, parallel to those found for the Y chromosome. Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage. This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet.
Our data also support the hypothesis that other Y haplogroups, such as lineages within haplogroup O-M122 (i.e., O-M134 and O-LINE), as well as the O-M95 lineage within O-P31, entered Japan with the Yayoi expansion.
High frequencies of these lineages in southwestern Japan, Korea, and Southeast Asian populations likely explain the affinity of these populations in the MDS plot. The entire O haplogroup has been proposed to have a Southeast Asian origin (Su et al. 1999; Kayser et al. 2000; Capelli et al. 2001; Karafet et al. 2001). In fact, nearly all lineages within the O-M175 clade… except O-SRY465 and O-47z, are present at their highest frequencies (e.g., O-M95, O-P31*, M122*, O-LINE, O-M119) in southeastern Asia/Oceania, and have been proposed to have southern Chinese origins…’
This is a significant parallel connection between the related peoples of Korea and continental South East Asia and Japan and archipelago South East Asia. Togarmah of Korea is closely connected to Ashkenaz of Vietnam and Riphath of Cambodia, as Tarshish of Japan is related to Elishah of Malaysia, Dodan of the Philippines and the Kittim from Indonesia.
While the ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup D is almost entirely indicative of descendants from Japheth, it is found in a small number of males descending from Ham.
Phylogentic Tree by ISOGG (Version 14.151)
DE (YAP) Nigeria, Guinea-Bissau, Caribbean, Tibet
D (CTS3946)
D1 (M174) East Asia, Andaman Islands, Central Asia, Mainland Southeast Asia
– D1a1b (P99) Mainland China, Tibet, Mongol, Central Asia
D1a2 (Z3660)
– D1a2a (M55) Japan (Yamato)
– D1a2b (Y34637) Andaman Islands (Onge and Jarawa)
D1b (L1378) Philippines (Ryukyuan and Ainu of Japan)
D2 (A5580.2) Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria, African Americans
Wa-pedia – emphasis mine:
‘The origins of the Japanese people is not entirely clear yet. It is common for Japanese people to think that Japan is not part of Asia since it is an island, cut off from the continent’ – akin to the British who are alienated from Europe; whether in customs, culture, politics or national identity. ‘This tells a lot about how they see themselves in relation to their neighbours. But in spite of what the Japanese may think of themselves, they do not have extraterrestrial origins, and are indeed related to several peoples in Asia.’ Many a word spoken in jest – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.
‘Kenichi Shinoda (2003) found Chinese-looking maternal lineages (haplogroups A, B, F, M8a and M10) in the Kanto region dating from the late Jōmon period mixed with typical Jōmon lineages (M7a, N9b)… this could indicate that farmers from mainland China colonised Japan several millennia before the Yayoi invasion, which would explain why the Japanese also possess typically South Chinese Y-haplogroups not found in Korea, such as O1a, O2a [now O1b], O3a1c [now O2a1c1 – F18] and O3a2 [now O2a2 – P201].
Haplogroup C is another extremely old lineage that… spread over most of Eurasia. Two subclades of C are found in Japan: C1a1 (aka C-M8, formerly C1) and C2a (aka C-M93, formerly C3). Both are likely to have been in the Japanese archipelago since the first human beings reached the region… Haplogroup C1a seems to have split… in the middle of Eurasia, one group going west to Europe, and the other east to Japan. C1a2 is now nearly extinct in Europe. C1a1 is particularly common in Okinawa (7%), Shikoku (10%) and Tohoku (10%), but is apparently absent from Hokkaido and Kyushu.’
An explanation for this occurrence, would be that Tarshish migrated through Asia as the other sons of Japheth – particular via Tibet – though like their sea-faring, maritime bothers descended from Javan – for example the Maori from Rodanim – a portion likely travelled via the Mediterranean, heading south past the eastern coast of Africa, beneath South Asia, around Southeast Asia and north past China to Japan. Paternal Haplogroup C1 is more commonly associated with Central Asia and the North, while Haplogroup C2 in the East and Amerindian men of the Americas.
Wa-pedia: ‘Haplogroup C2a, representing also 3% of the population, is typically found among the Mongols, Manchus, Koreans and Siberians, which suggest a propagation by the Yayoi farmers. The last surviving tribes of ‘pure’ Ainu people, living on the island of Sakhalin in Russia, just north of Hokkaido, possess 15% of C2a (the remaining 85% being D1b [D1a2a]). There is therefore a good chance that C2a could also have come to Japan from Siberia through Sakhalin and Hokkaido. C2a is indeed found at both extremities of the country, peaking in Kyushu (8%), Hokkaido (5%), but is rare in central Japan, which supports the theory of two separate points of entry.
Over 40% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup D, a paternal lineage…
Its first carriers would have migrated along the coasts of the Indian Ocean, from the Arabian peninsula all the way to Indonesia, then following the chain of islands up through the Philippines and using the land bridge from Taiwan through the present-day Ryukyu islands to Japan.’
When studying the Bible verses regarding Tarshish, we contemplated that the outposts of Tarshish from the mediterranean via India and Southeast Asia could lead to Japan. Therefore, not only were the various locations given for Tarshish ports accurate, they also provide a trail of Tarshish’s descendants all the way to Japan over a period of about 5,500 years – leading to the Yayoi entry into Japan by at least circa 1000 BCE.
Wa-pedia: ‘Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a] (aka D-M55 or D-M64.1, formerly known as D2)… is found almost exclusively in Japan, with a small minority in places who have had historical ties with Japan, such as Korea.
D1b is most common in Hokkaido (60-65%)… If D1b colonised Japan from the north, it would explain why its frequency is highest in northern Japan and, conversely also why [allegedly] pre-LGM [last glacial maximum] lineages like C1a1 survived better in southern Japan…
The only other variety of D identified among the Japanese is D1a1[a] (D-M15), which only makes up 0.5% of the Japanese male population. This haplogroup is particularly common among some ethnic groups from Southwest China and Indochina, such as the Hmong and Ksingmul in Laos… and the Yao people in Guanxi and Vietnam. Tibetans carry about 54% of haplogroup D.
Andaman Islanders belong to the basal D*. It means that their most recent common ancestors goes back tensof thousands of years. In other words the genetic gap between these ethnic groups is immense, despite false appearances of belonging to a common haplogroup.
Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a]… [is thought to have] formed 45,000 [13,000] years ago, [after the Flood cataclysm bottleneck], but the most recent common ancestor of Japanese D1b members lived 23,000 [circa 10,000] years ago [or less after the births of Japheth and Ham’s sons] which means that other D1b branches may have become extinct outside Japan. Haplogroup D1b is found among the Ryukyuans as well as the Ainus, and is thought to have been the dominant paternal lineage of the Jōmon people.
Almost exactly half of Japanese men belong to haplogroup O, a paternal lineage of Paleolithic Sino-Korean origin that is now found all over East and Southeast Asia. Haplogroup [O1b2 – M176*] (aka O-SRY465) is found especially in Manchuria, Korea and Japan, and very probably came to Japan with the Yayoi people. It reaches its highest frequency in western Japan (35%) and is least common in Hokkaido (12.5%) and Okinawa (22%). In the rest of the country its frequency is around 30%.
Approximately two thirds of the Japanese [O1b – M268] belong to the [O1b2] subclade, which is much less common in Korea and Manchuria… Haplogroup [O1b2] (SRY465, M176): Found almost exclusively among the Korean, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese and Indonesian. Haplogroup O-47z [O1b2a1a1 – F1204; a sub-clade of OK10 from O-M176*]: Found frequently among Japanese and Ryukyuans, with a moderate distribution among Indonesians, Koreans, Manchus, Thais, and Vietnamese.
Haplogroup [O2] (aka O-M122) is the main Han Chinese paternal lineage. It is an extremely diverse lineage, with numerous subclades, including many associated with the expansion of agriculture from northern China. Most of them are found in Korea and would have been part of the Yayoi migration to Japan.
Within Japan, it reaches a maximum frequency in Okinawa (16%),** a region with low Yayoi ancestry. Its frequency among non-Okinawan Japanese is of 10-15%, about twice higher than in Korea, a fact that cannot be explained by the Yayoi invasion.
A negligible percentage of the Japanese belong to haplogroup O1a (aka O-M119), a lineage especially common in southern China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, and haplogroup O2a1 (aka O-M95 [L127]), which is found in south-west China, Indochina, around Malaysia and in central-eastern India. Both of them might have also have come with South Chinese Neolithic farmers during the Jomon period.
Approximately 3% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup N, a lineage that is thought to have originated in China… but underwent a serious population bottleneck during the Last Glacial Maximum, and re-expanded after that. Japanese people belong to N1… Haplogroup N1 was found at high frequency (26 out of 70 samples, or 37%) in Neolithic and Bronze Age remains (4500-700 BCE) from the West Liao River valley in Northeast China (Manchuria) by Yinqui Cui et al. (2013). Among the Neolithic samples, haplogroup N1 represented two thirds of the samples from the Hongshan culture (4700-2900 BCE) and all the samples from the Xiaoheyan culture (3000-2200 BCE).
Haplogroup N1c is found especially among Uralic and Turkic peoples… including among the Finns, Estonians and Sami in Northeast Europe, and among the Turks in Central Asia and Turkey. It is found at low frequencies in Korea and could have arrived with the Yayoi people.
A comparison of Malay (Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu) and Japanese languages reveals a few uncanny similarities. Apart from the very similar phonetics in both languages, the same hierarchical differences exist in personal pronouns. For example ‘you’ can be either anda or kamu in Malay, and anata and kimi in Japanese.
Not only are the meaning and usage of each identical, but they also sound almost the same. Likewise, the Japanese verb suki (to like) translates suka in Malay. The chances that this is a pure coincidence is extremely low, and may reveal a common origin. Furthermore, in both languages the plural can be formed by simply doubling the word. For instance, in Japanese hito means ‘person’, while hitobito means ‘people’. Likewise ware means ‘I’ or ‘you’, whereas wareware means ‘we’. Doubling of words in Japanese is so common that there is a special character used only to mean the word is doubled (々) in written Japanese. In Malay, this way of forming the plural is almost systematic (person is orang, while people is orang-orang). Furthermore, expressions like ittekimasu, itteirashai, tadaima and okaeri, used to greet someone who leaves or enter a place, and which have no equivalent in Indo-European languages, have exact equivalents in Malay/Indonesian (selamat jalan, selamat tinggal…). One could wonder how Malay and Japanese ever came to share such basic vocabulary and grammatical features, considering that there is no known historical migration from one region to other.’
The preceding paragraph is truly incredible, if one did not suspect a common ancestor linking Tarshish-Japan with Elishah-Malaysia. Though the constant reader will already know the obvious linguistic and ethnic tie between two such seemingly separate peoples geographically, is easily, logically and reasonably explained; for they share the same father, Javan – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South EastAsia & Polynesia. As we have learned with Togarmah-Korea and Ashkenaz-Vietnam, both sons of Gomer, a genetic link proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the familial bond of sibling brothers.
Wa-pedia: ‘The Palaeolithic Jōmon people are thought to have arrived from Austronesia during the Ice Age. The original inhabitants of Indonesia and the Philippines might have been related to Dravidians of Southern India – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.
Y-haplogroup C, which has been associated with the first migration of modern humans… towards Asia, is relatively frequent in Kerala (southern tip of India) and Borneo. These early Austronesians are thought to have been the ancestors of the Ice Age settlers of Japan (Y-haplogroups C1a1 and D1b [D1a2a). The common root of the two languages must be more recent, and indeed there is one migration that could explain the connection between the two groups: the Neolithic Austronesian expansion from southern China.’
Recall in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; where the Polynesians descended from Rodan and the Melanesian and Negritos peoples were investigated. The suspicion was that the physiognomy of these people, particularly the Australian Aborigine was similar to the Dravidian Indians. We will return to this question as the evidence indicates the Melanesians are not descended from Japheth, but rather from Ham – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
Wa-pedia: ‘From approximately 5,000 BCE, South Chinese farmers expanded southward to Taiwan and Southeast Asia, bringing Y-haplogroups [O1a, O1b and O2] to the region, which are still the dominant paternal lineages today. There is evidence of farming in Taiwan at least from 4000 BCE, but agriculturalists would probably have arrived earlier considering that the Neolithic reached the Philippines circa 5000 BCE, and Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia around 4,000 BCE… the same migration could have followed the Ryukyu archipelago until Kyushu, then colonised Honshu and Shikoku. In fact, there is no good reason why these seafaring farmers would travel as far as Indonesia and not to Japan, which is much closer.
Many more Japanese words could be of Austronesian origin. The linguist David B. Solnit estimates that among 111 common Japanese words he analysed, 28% had Austronesian cognates only, while 40% had Altaic cognates, 23% competing cognates, and 9% no cognate in either. Considering that the various branches of Proto-Austronesian split over 6,000 or 7,000 years ago, longer than Indo-European languages, it is not surprising that even languages that are undeniably classified as Austronesian… have evolved very diverging vocabularies today (except Polynesian languages, which only started to diversify with the Polynesian expansion 2,000 years ago).
It is generally more useful to look at the Proto-Autronesian root of words rather than to try to find direct matches between modern Japanese and modern Austronesian languages. For example, the Proto-Austronesian root for fish is *sikan, which gave sakana in Japanese (and maybe also ika, which means squid), ikan in Malay, ika in Fijian, and isda in Tagalog. Cases of high lexical-semantic retention over six millennia like kamu/kimi, anda/anata and suka/suki are extremely rare. The Austronesian connection with Japanese was first suggested in 1924 by the Dutch linguist Dirk van Hinloopen Labberton.
Many linguists have since proposed the hypothesis that the Japonic language family evolved from an Austronesian substratum (Jōmon) onto which was added an Altaic superstratum (Yayoi).
However, if Austronesian speakers came to Japan with South Chinese Neolithic agriculturalists, the original Jomon people would have spoken another language, either one of Siberian origin, in light of the mtDNA ties between Jomon and Ainu people and eastern Siberians, or a language isolate, reflecting the uniqueness of the Jomon paternal lineage. Therefore, Middle and Late Jomon people would already have spoken a hybrid language. Likewise, the Koguryoic Korean language of the Yayoi people would also be a hybrid incorporating Altaic elements of Mongolian origin into an older Korean substratum of Paleosiberian origin.
Since the 6th century CE, the Japanese started incorporating words from Chinese after adopting Buddhism and Chinese characters, in the same way that English absorbed a huge amount of Norman French and Latin words in the late Middle Ages [a further Japanese and British similarity]… approximately half of the Japanese vocabulary is of Chinese origin. This explains why Japanese does not neatly fit in one or even two linguistic families, but is a hybrid of at least five separate sources: aboriginal Jomon, Austronesian, Korean, Altaic and Chinese.
Cultural and religious similarities also exist between Japan and Austronesia… most ethnic Malays and Indonesians are Muslim, but traditional religion survives in some islands, including Bali, which practices a syncretic form of Hinduism and aninism. Basically, Balinese religion is a form of Hinduism that has incorporated the aboriginal animistic religion. The parallel with Japan is obvious for people familiar with this culture.
Japanese Shintoism is also a form of animism, and is practised side-by-side with Buddhism, a religion derived from Hinduism, sometimes blending the two religions in a syncretism known as Shinbutso-shugo. The relation between Hinduism and Buddhism is irrelevant here, and both are relatively recent imports in historical times. Before that, however, Jomon people and Neolithic Austronesians would have practised a very similar form of animism.
Japanese matsuri (festivals) resemble so much Balinese ones that one could wonder if one was not copied from the other. During cremations in Bali, the dead body is carried on a portable shrine, very much in the way that the Japanese carry their mikoshi. Balinese funerals are joyful and people swinging the portable shrine in the streets and making loud noise to scare the evil spirits. There are lots of other cultural similarities between ancient cultures of Indonesia and Japan. For example, both Balinese temples and Japanese shrines, as well as traditional Japanese and Balinese houses have a wall surrounding them, originally meant to prevent evil spirits from penetrating the property. Despite the radical changes that Indonesian culture underwent after the introduction of Islam and Christianity, and the changes that Buddhism brought to Japan, it is still possible to observe clear similarities between the supposed original prehistoric cultures of the two archipelagoes.’
This is at once incredible yet not, for we would expect more similarities between Japan and its related kin in Malaysia, Indonesia and by extension the Philippines and Polynesia; whether culturally, linguistically or ethnically, rather than with China or even Korea. The Koreans and Chinese are cousins, whereas the language and cultural similarities with the Malay peoples supports the proposition that the Japanese as Tarshish, are the brother of Elishah of Malaysia, Kittim of Indonesia, Dodan of the Philippines and Rodan of Polynesia. Recall, an earlier quote from Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.
Wa-pedia: ‘The study…[of]… Jung et al. (2010) said…that Koreans are genetically homogenous. The study said that the affinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asian with an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… allof the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dualpattern ofNortheast Asian and Southeast Asian origins. The study said that Koreans andJapanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.’
The principle Japanese mtDNA Haplogroups include:
D4 [34%] – M7 [12.5%] – B4 [7.5%] – G [7.5%] – A [7%] – N9 [7%] – F [5.5%]
– B5 [4.5%]
A comparison of mtDNA Haplogroups common throughout Southeast Asia such as M7, B5 and F1 show that the percentages decrease in both estranged northern nations. Japan and Korea have similar levels and more closely match the Philippines, which happens to be located between the northern two and the southern nations of Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand who all have higher percentages overall.
Even though mtDNA Haplogroup D is the primary maternal Haplogroup in the Koreas as well as in Japan and Haplogroups M and F figure prominently, it is as noted in previous chapters, Haplogroup B which as the common thread binds the descendants of Japheth from Tiras, Madai, Gomer and Javan.
The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for the minority peoples in Japan: the Ainus descended from the Jomon; and the Ryukyuans, descended from the Yayoi.
Region / Haplogroup
C
D1b
N
O1a
O1b
O2
Q
Others
Ainus (n=20)
15%
85%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Ryukyuans (n=132)
8.5%
45.5%
1.5%
1.5%
23%
19%
0%
1%
Notice the males of the Ainus and Ryukyuans both carry D1b which is found in the Philippines.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Yamato majority of Japan.
A simplified percentage sequence for the Y-DNA Haplogroups.
Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1 [31.5%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%] – Q [0.1%]
The Japanese possess the key Oriental and East Asian Haplogroups O and C [with the absence of K]; while exhibiting the lesser marker Haplogroups, N and Q. The very high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup D is unique amongst the descendants of Japheth with the only other peoples bearing similar high levels, the Tibetans of Tibet.
Japan: D1 – O1b – O2 – C – N – O1a – Q
Malaysia: O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F
Indonesia: O2 – O1b – O1a – C – K – D1
Korea: O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – D1 – Q – K
Vietnam: O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D1 – N
Philippines: O2 – O1a – K – C – O1b
A comparison of Japan with a selection of the nations studied thus far reveals the similarity of the East Asian peoples descended from Japheth’s sons Javan and Gomer; while at the same time highlighting the unique and different paternal heritages. The Japanese are clearly distinct with high levels of D1. The second major Japanese Haplogroup is O1b and so it is Malaysia – which has O1b as their principle group – that is ostensibly closer to the Japanese – as shown on the PCA graph below. We have already learned about the close linguistic ties between the two peoples.
The other four nations, two from Javan – Indonesia and the Philippines – and two from Gomer, all share O2a1 as their prime Haplogroup and so are further removed from the peoples residing on the Japanese isles.
Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%]
– O1a [1.5%] – Q [0.1%]
Malaysia: O1b [32%] – O2 [30%] – O1a [8%] – K [8%] – C [6%]
– F [6%]
Korea: O2 – [42.1%] – O1b [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%]
Philippines: O2 – [39%] – O1a [28%] – K [20%] – C [5%]
– O1b [3%]
Comparing the defining marker Haplogroups of O, C and K, with the addition of Japan. The four main descendants of Javan have a distinct Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence; yet in these core groups, Japan and Malaysia bridge a closer gap overall with the Philippines and Indonesia bridging the other, albeit not as closely.
Taiwan: O1a [66%] O1b [11%] O2a1 [11%] C [0.4%]
Korea: O1a [3%] O1b [33%] O2a1 [42%] C [13%] K [0.5%]
Vietnam: O1a [6%] O1b [33%] O2a1 [40%] C [4%]
Philippines: O1a [28%] O1b [3%] O2a1 [39%] C [5%] K [20%]
Indonesia: O1a [18%] O1b [23%] O2a1 [29%] C [13%] K [3%]
Malaysia: O1a [8%] O1b [32%] O2a1 [30%] C [6%] K [8%]
Japan: O1a [1.5%] O1b [30%] O2a1 [19%] C [7%]
Togarmah is estranged from his brothers in continental southeast Asia and of those brothers, Ararat, Minni, Riphath and Diphath, it is Ashkenaz with whom the clear closer genetic tie is shared – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. Similarly, Tarshish is estranged from his brothers in archipelago Southeast Asia; yet in stark contrast with Togarmah, none of his brothers, whether Kittim, Dodan or Rodan is similar. It is Elishah that the semblance of a closer genetic tie is exhibited.
Continuing the comparison table begun in Chapter IV of those peoples of Japhetic lineal descent; with samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer, Javan’s sons and the addition of Tarshish.
O O2a1 O1a O1b C D K Q N
NA Amerindian 6 77
Cook Islands 5 83 8
Kazakhstan 8 40 10 2 7
Micronesia 9 19 65
Japan: 51 19 1.5 30 7 40 0.1 2
Sulawesi 51 17 21 13 22 7
Tonga 60 23 1
Borneo 66 36 9 21 22
Indonesia 69 29 18 23 13 0.5 3
Malaysia 70 30 8 32 6 8
Philippines 70 39 28 3 5 20
Sumatra 72 40 18 14 5 2 4
Vietnam 79 40 6 33 4 3 7 3
South Korea 79 42 3 33 13 2.5 0.5 2 4
Bali 84 7 18 59 2 1 0.4
Java 88 23 23 42 2 2
Taiwan: 88 11 66 11 0.4
The five regions of Indonesia are retained due to the diversity of its large population. Immediately, a number of points concerning the Japanese are apparent.
First, the Japanese are one of the few peoples to have minute trace levels of the interconnecting Haplogroup, K.
Second, the minute percentage of Haplogroup O1a compared with their eastern relatives. In so doing, a percentage for total Haplogroup O which would otherwise be comparable with Malaysia at 70% does not exist.
Third, though the Japanese possess an average level of O1b, similar to South Korea and Malaysia, they have a much lower level of O2, in keeping with much of Indonesia. Especially similar to the Indonesian island Sulawesi, with O2 and total Haplogroup O percentages matching.
Fourth, this is due to a higher percentage in a Haplogroup other than O, like Sulawesi. For Sulawesi it is Haplogroup C and for Japan, it is Haplogroup D.
Fifth, the dominance of D in the men of Japan as the defining paternal marker Haplogroup puts them along side those other peoples which are defined by a Haplogroup other than O: and not with the Taiwan aborigines with 66% in O1a; Bali with 59% in O1b; or South Korea with 42% in O2.
Those peoples include, the Cook Islander men with 83% of Haplogroup C; Micronesia with 65% of K; and the North American Indian males with 77% of Q. In fact, no one else – excepting Tibet – has any percentage above 3% for D1. Japan is glaringly unique in the Japheth lineage. A study of the Japanese themselves only bears out their singularity in all aspects amongst East Asian peoples.
The next chapter concludes the study on Japheth’s children and what a finale it is.
Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.
Ecclesiastes 1:10 New Century Version
“The more obvious a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards.”
There are exceptions to every rule in family living together, as per point number one in the introduction (primus verba). We will encounter two significant exceptions amongst Japheth’s grandsons, with the first being the youngest son of Gomer and his prompt decision to dwell apart from his siblings, Ashkenaz and Riphath. Togarmah is highlighted as a people with military capability and forms a prominent part of the formidable future alliance with Magog and Gomer’s other sons – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
Book of Jasher 10:10-12
10 ‘And the children of Tugarma are ten families, and these are their names:
all these spread and rested in the north and built themselves cities. 11 And they called their cities after their own names, those are they who abide by the rivers Hithlah and Italac unto this day.
12 But the families of Angoli, Balgar** and Parzunac*,
they dwell by the great river Dubnee; and the names of their cities are also according to their own names.’
The sons of Togarmah are not recorded in the Bible. It is of significance that of the eleven families in the Book of Jasher, there was a split with eight living in one location and three in another. Remember this detail, for we will discover that modern Togarmah is in fact split into two.
Ancient Civilisation:
‘Encyclopaedia Britannica says that the Armenians traditionally claim to be descended from Togarmah… Ancient Armenia reached into Turkey. The name Turkey probably comes from Togarmah.’
On our journey we will experience more than once nations claiming a specific biblical identity, though this does not make it so.
Israel a History of:
‘The Jewish Targums claim that Germany was also derived from Togarmah and his descendants. Turkey and Turkestan also have possible connections with Togarmah.’
Derek Walker – emphasis mine:
‘Togarmah is another country aligned with Russia [Russia is not Magog, Meshech or Tubal]. He was a son of Gomer, son of Japheth (Genesis 10:1-3), known in Assyrian records as Tilgarimmu, a city state in Eastern Anatolia (Asia Minor, modern Turkey)… This identification is generally acknowledged by all. The Bible confirms Togarmah’s location in Ezekiel 38:6: “Beth-Togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all its troops.”
The word Beth at the beginning of the word is the Hebrew word for “house.” It means “house or place of Togarmah.” In Ezekiel 38:6: “the house of Togarmah, and all its hordes” are specifically pointed out as being from the north.
Therefore we know it is directly north of Israel [the sons of Jacob – not the state of Israel]. Some of the sons of Togarmah can be traced to the Turkoman tribes of Central Asia. Rimmer had no doubts that Togarmah is ancient Armenia (most of which is in Turkey today…) and cited certain Assyrian chronicles as well as Tacitus in support of his view.’
Walker: ‘He said that the title the House of Togarmah is a common description for Armenia in Armenian literature.
All agree to identify Togarmah with Armenia and Turkey. This fits Ezekiel, for Turkey is directly north of Israel. There’s a possible etymological connection between the names Togarmah and Turkey and Turkestan. In Ezekiel’s time, there was a city in Cappodocia (Turkey) known as Tegarma, Tagarma, Til-garimmu, and Takarama. It’s significant that [four] of the ancient locations Ezekiel gives are found today in the nation of Turkey. Clearly God is emphasising Turkey’s important part in the end-time coalition…’
Who Togarmah is not… the map above is an example of a common representation for the biblical identities listed in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight. All without exception are incorrect, as our progression through the descendants of Japheth, Ham, Canaan and Shem will reveal. Put and Cush are cold; Magog (Meshech and Tubal) is cool; Persia warm; and Gomer with Togarmah, freezing.
The once location of Togarmah in Asia Minor relates to thousands of years ago, directly after the Flood – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Many peoples have dwelt at this major continental intersection at one time or another; migrating as new peoples encroached. All these different groups of people cannot now still be living there, or all be identified as Turks.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:
‘One branch of the family of Gomer, however, did not journey to Southeast Asia’ – Chapter V Gomer:Continental South East Asia. ‘Ezekiel 38:6 explains it: “The house of Togarmah in the uttermost parts of the north, and all his bands” (Jewish translation). The far, far north means Russian Siberia today! That is where the descendants of Togarmah (Genesis 10:3) live. These Asiatics are still a wild nomadic people, much as they were 2500 years ago, trading “with horses and horsemen and mules” (Ezekiel 27:14).’
While Hoeh is closer to the truth than those who identify Togarmah with Armenia or Turkey, the descendants of Togarmah figure far more prominently in world affairs than as non-specifically identified nomadic, tribal, horsemen.
Korea in Prophecy, Bob Thiel, 2009:
‘A Chinese tradition [states] that Korea came from a small kingdom within China:
“Somewhere north of that vast region watered by the Sungari River, itself only a tributary to the Amur, there existed, according to Chinese tradition, in very ancient times, a petty kingdom called Korai, or To-li. Out of this kingdom sprang the founder of the Corean race…” (Griffis, William Elliot. Corea, The Hermit Nation: I. Ancient and mediæval history. II. Political and social Corea. III. Modern and recent history 8th Edition. C. Scribner’s sons, 1907, pages 19, 21).
Koreans [maintain] their own tradition about where they [originate] from:
“Korean legends say that Tangun, who lived in the 2300’s B.C., was the father of the Korean civilization. Korea developed by itself until Kija, an exile from China, led about 5,000 followers to Korea in 1122 B.C. He founded a kingdom called Chosen [Chosun, meaning Morning Calm].” (Hu, Charles Y. Korea. World Book Encyclopedia, 50th edition, Volume 11. Chicago, page 296).’
The two scriptures referenced by Hoeh pertaining to Togarmah:
Ezekiel 27:14
New Century Version
‘People of Beth Togarmah traded your goods for work horses, war horses, and mules.’
This verse is a past reference to when Koreans were one people. Though with a modern application today, it reveals a nation who is economically and technically advanced; producing machinery and transport for industry as well as military arms and weaponry.
Ezekiel 38:6 English Standard Version, translates as quoted by Hoeh.
‘Gomer and all his hordes; Beth-togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.’
Derek Walker explained the meaning of Beth as house. It is a family unit. Its use is showing Togarmah as a separate entity from his brothers Ashkenaz and Riphath – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. We learned when studying Madai, that Asshur (or Assyria) lives in the North – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XX Will theReal Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
There are not many options in Central Asia and East Asia for who Togarmah might be today. Other translations state:
New Century Version
… the nation of Togarmah from the far north…
New English Translation
… and by Beth Togarmah from the remote parts of the north…
There are only four peoples or five nations, which Togarmah could be: China, Mongolia, North Korea, South Korea and Japan.
Youngs Literal Translation
… The house of Togarmah of the sides of the north…
This is a more specific translation and eliminates China and Mongolia.
Modern King James version
… the house of Togarmah from the recesses of the north…
This translation effectively eliminates Japan, for the connotation of this word is a bend, a crook or even a hook. In the King James version it says ‘of the north quarters.’
North in Hebrew – tsaphon from the root H6845 tsaphan – signifies ‘hidden, stored up, dark, gloomy’ and ‘unknown.’
Quarters in Hebrew, from H3411: yrekah, meaning side or sides; is used 21 times in the KJV; coasts (3), parts (2); border (1); quarters (1). It also means ‘flank, extreme parts, the rear or recess’ and ‘recesses.’
The Peninsula jutting out from the Asian continent with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the north and the Republic of Korea in the South, is the clear answer to where Togarmah is located today.
It was not obvious until studying this verse very closely. This writer had initially considered that Meshech and Tubal were North Korea and South Korea respectively and that Japan was Togarmah. Though only Korea, could equate to being tucked away and hidden in a crook or recess.
Yet Korea’s strategic geographical location meant it was a ‘target for domination, occupation and plunder’, so that in attempting to isolate itself it earned the name, The Hermit Kingdom in the eighteenth century – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 223-224. Even today, North Korea exists under self-imposed isolation.
Korea was split in two – arbitrarily along the 38th parallel – in 1945 and unlike North Vietnam and South Vietnam does not look like uniting anytime soon.
The use of House of Togarmah in Ezekiel 38:6, does not hint at just one of the Koreas being part of the far distant military alliance with Magog and the remainder of Gomer (refer article: Four Kings & One Queen) – but rather reveals the eventual unification of both North Korea and South Korea.
Seoul: Capital of South Korea
Tim Marshall: ‘The two Koreas are still technically at war, and given the hair-trigger tensions between them a major conflict is never more than a few artillery rounds away. South Korea’s capital, the mega-city of Seoul, lies just 35 miles south of… the DMZ [demilitarised zone]. Almost half of South Korea’s 51 million people live in the greater Seoul region, which is home to much of its industry and financial centres, and it is all within range’ of the estimated ten thousand North Korean artillery pieces along the 148 mile long DMZ border… ‘each side continues to prepare for a war; as with Pakistan and India, they are locked in a mutual embrace of fear and suspicion’ – pages 227-228, 232.
Abarim Publications:
‘The name Togarmah most likely originated in a language other than Hebrew, and therefore does not occur as a word in the Hebrew language. But, transliterated as is, at the heart of the name Togarmah sits the common Hebrew noun (gerem), bone, which figuratively is used to mean self or strength. It comes from the verb (garam), meaning to lay aside or save… The verb [garam] means to leave over, to save for later… to break bones [or breaking bones].’
Recall the names of Gomer, Riphath and Ashkenaz: ‘Bring to an end’, ‘Crushers’, ‘fire is scattered’ or ‘sprinkling of blood’ – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. Further dread then, with the addition of ‘Bone breaker’ to this formidable list of adversaries.
Readers paying careful attention, may remember this quote earlier from the preceding chapter regarding Gomer – emphasis mine:
‘The study said that Vietnamese people were the only population in the study’s phylogenetic analysis that did not reflect a sizable genetic difference between East Asian and Southeast Asian populations. Jung Jongsun et al. (2010) said that genetic structure analysis found significant admixture in “Vietnamese (or Cambodian) with unknown Southern original settlers.” The study said that it used Cambodians and Vietnamese to represent “Southern people,”… The study also said that Vietnamese people are located between Chinese and Cambodian people in the study’s genome map.’
Bhak Jong-hwa, a professor in the biomedical engineering department at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) states:
‘… the ancient Vietnamese, which was a population that flourished with rapid agricultural development after 8,000 BC, slowly travelled north to ancient civilizations in the Korean peninsula and the Russian Far East. Bhak said that Korean people were formed from the admixture of agricultural Southern Mongoloids from Vietnam who went through China – [According to most linguists and archaeologists with expertise in ancient Korea, the linguistic homeland of proto-Korean and of the early Koreans is located somewhere in Manchuria, particularly the Liao River.] – and hunter-gatherer Northern Mongoloids in the Korean Peninsula. Bhak said, “We believe the number of ancient dwellers who migrated north from Vietnam far exceeds the number of those occupying the peninsula,” making Koreans inherit more of their DNA from southerners.’
Regarding Vietnam, recall that the Vietnamese have a genetic structure that is partially dissimilar to their related neighbours – with an unknown admixture – and contrastingly aligned to East Asian peoples instead. Korea has been populated partially from a migratory wave of people travelling eastward in the north and primarily from another wave of migrants travelling northwards through China from… Vietnam – with Koreans actually possessing a majority of their DNA inherited from these southern immigrants.
This is quite an admission and provides the genetic link between Togarmah and his brother Ashkenaz in continental South East Asia. Who would have thought there is a genetic association between the Vietnamese and Koreans. Yet the Bible revealed this fact millennia’s ago, when it described Togarmah dwelling separately from his brothers.
North Korean soldiers
The Genetic history of Koreans: Studies of polymorphisms in the human Y-chromosome produced evidence to suggest that: ‘the Korean people have a long history as a distinct, mostly endogamous [marrying their own] ethnic group, with successive waves of people moving to the peninsula and three major Y-chromosome haplogroups [O2a1, O1b and C]. Several studies confirmed that Koreans have both a Northeast and Southeast Asian genome.‘
Paternal lineages, Jin Han-jun, 2003: ‘Korean males display a high frequency of Haplogroup O-M176 [O1b2, formerly O2b], a subclade that probably has spread mainly from somewhere in the Korean Peninsula or its vicinity, and Hapologroup O-M122 (O2, formerly O3), a common Y-DNA haplogroup among East and Southeast Asians in general.’
The men of the South East Asian nations of Gomer – Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Myanmar – likewise predominantly carry Y-DNA Haplogroup O2a1 and secondly, Haplogroup O1b.
Maternal lineages: ‘Haplogroup B [B4 and B5], which occurs very frequently in many populations of Southeast Asia, Polynesia, and the Americas, is found in approximately 10% (ethnic Koreans from Arun Banner, Inner Mongolia) to 20% (Koreans from South Korea) of Koreans. Haplogroup A has been detected in approximately 7% (Koreans from South Korea) to 15% (ethnic Koreans from Arun banner, Inner Mongolia) of Koreans.’ Haplogroup A is the most common mtDNA haplogroup among the Eskimo and many other Amerind ethnic groups of North and Central America.’
Other major Korean mtDNA Haplogroups include: D4 [29%], M7 [11%], G [6%] and F [5%]. Similarly, the prevalent maternal Haplogroups in the South East Asian nations comprising Gomer include Haplogroups B, F and M7.
Immunoglobulin G: Hideo Matsumoto professor emeritus at Osaka medical College, tested Gm types [genetic markers] of immunoglobulin G of Korean populations in 2009.
Matsumoto said that, ‘Gm afb1b3 is a southern marker gene possibly originating in southern China and found at high frequencies across Southeast Asia, southern China, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Assam and parts of the Pacific. Matsumoto said that the average frequency of Gm afb1b3 for Koreans was 14.7% which was intermediate between a frequency of 10.6% for general Japanese and a frequency of 24.1% for Beijing Han Chinese.’
Autosomal DNA, Jin Han-jun, 1999: ‘… based on genetic studies of classic genetic markers of protein and nuclear DNA… that these 9-bp deletion frequencies are consistent with earlier surveys which showed that 9-bp deletion frequencies increase going from Japan to mainland Asia to the Malay peninsula.’
South Korean man
‘The Cavalli-Sforza’s chord genetic distance (4D,) from Cavalli-Sforza & Bodmer (1971), which is based on the allele frequencies of the intergenic COII/tRNALys region, showed that Koreans are more genetically related to Japanese than Koreans are genetically related to the other East Asian populations which were surveyed. The close genetic affinity between present day Koreans and Japanese is expected due to the Yayoi migration from China and the Korean Peninsula to Japan which began about 2,300 years ago. Horai [1996] detected mtDNA D-loop variation which supports the idea that a large amount of maternal lineages came into Japan from immigrants from the Korean Peninsula after the Yayoi period.’
‘Kim Jong-jin [2005] conducted a study about the genetic relationships among East Asians based on allele frequencies. Focusing on how close Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are genetically related to each other.
The study concluded that Middle West Korea was a melting pot in the Korean Peninsula with people traveling from North to South, South to North, and people traveling from East China…’
Jung [2010] said that Koreans are genetically homogenous. The study stated ‘theaffinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asianwith an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… all of the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dual pattern of Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian origins. The study said that Koreans and Japanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.’ We will refer again to this fascinating parallel when we discuss the Japanese – Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan.
South Korean woman
The Emerging Limbs and Twigs of the East Asian mtDNA Tree, multiple authors, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Haplogroups A, C, D, G, Y, and Z almost completely cover the mtDNA pool of Northeast Asians, whereas in Southeast Asians C, Y, or Z mtDNAs have rarely been found, but instead haplogroupsB and Fare predominant.’
Recall the Korean population exhibit the maternal Haplogroups associated with South East Asia – B: 10% to 20%; M7: 11%; F: 5%. Haplogroup B is of particular interest for both Central Asians and the Amerindians carry it as well. Thus creating a common maternal ancestral tie between South East Asia, Central Asia and the Native Indians of the Americas. Though it is mtDNA Haplogroup D4, which highlights the unique maternal inheritance of Koreans.
‘N9a** is, compared with its sister bough Y, widely spread [in SE Asia], although at very low frequencies, among most East Asian populations… Considering the geographic distribution of the boughs and twigs we see further regional patterns. In contrast to A4, which is widely spread, theA5 twig,with its low diversity suggesting shallow time depth[not sons of Japheth but grandsons of Japheth with a mutational evolution and migration, unlike their siblings and uncles], isspecific to Koreans and Japanese… Similarly, B4 is the prevailing bough in haplogroup B… covering all haplogroup B types in Native Americans and Polynesians. B5 isfound most frequent, accounting for about one third to one half of the B types, in eastern China,Korea, and Japan…
E1 is so far found only in Southeast Asia…F1a is the main branch of F… in Southeast Asia, whereas F1b is more frequent in Central Asians and Mongols, Koreans, and Japanese. G2a is highest among Central Asians (8.8%) [Kazakhstan] and also above 3% in Tibetans and Ainu and rare or absent among southern Chinese, Vietnamese, island Southeast Asians… and Siberians. G3 is not yet well screened, but evidently it is seen in Korea, Mongolia, and Central Asia.
Haplogroup M7, although characteristic for East Asian populations, has not been found in the northeast of the continent…It is also very rare in Central Asians… This haplogroup has been detected so far in China and Vietnam, the Korean peninsula and Japanese islands, as well as among Mongols, the West Siberian Mansi, and island Southeast Asia. Koreans possess lineages from both the southern and the northern haplogroup complex and share M7a with Japanese, Ainu, and Ryukyu islanders. The geographic specificity of the boughs andtwigs of M7… is most intriguing:M7c1c is specific to island Southeast Asiaand M7b1 is of Chinese provenance, whereas M7a, M7b2, and M7c1b are found almost exclusively in Korea and Japan. In fact, M7 is one of the prevailing haplogroups not only among Japanese (of Honshu and Kyushu) but also for Ainu and Ryukyuans, thus testifying to a common genetic background.’
Khazaria, Korean Genetics – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Among Korean males who have been studied, the Y-DNA (paternal DNA) haplogroups [O1b2] (P49) [M176] and [O2] (M122) were particularly common… Koreans are racially a purely Mongoloid population. They carry the 1540C allele on their EDAR gene which among other things results in thicker hair than other races. Koreans also have the ABCC11 gene nearly universally so they have dry earwax as opposed to the wet earwax of most people in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.’
The Peopling of Korea Revealed by Analyses of Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosomal Markers, Han-Jun Jin, Chris Tyler-Smith, and Wook Kim, 2009:
‘The mtDNA haplogroup D4 is very common among Korean people. This haplogroup is also prevalent in Siberia. The study found mtDNA haplogroup A in about 10% of the Koreans tested.
A is the most frequently encountered mtDNA haplogroup among… New World Indian (Amerindian) populations from North America and Central America. Meanwhile, the mtDNAhaplogroup B is also found in some Koreans and it’s also common in China and Japan. Less common Korean mtDNA haplogroups include F, M, R, U, and Z.’
“The Koreans are generally considered a northeast Asian group because of their geographicallocation. However,recent findings from Y chromosome studies showed that theKorean population contains lineages from both southernand northern parts of East Asia.”
Y-chromosoaml DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans, multiple authors, 2003:
“We have analyzed eight Y-chromosomal binary markers (YAP, RPS4Y(711), M9, M175, LINE1, SRY(+465), 47z, and M95) and three Y-STR markers (DYS390, DYS391, and DYS393) in 738 males from 11 ethnic groups in east Asia in order to study the male lineage history of Korea… the distribution pattern of Y-chromosomal haplogroups reveals the complex origin of the Koreans, resulting from genetic contributions involving the northern Asian settlement and range expansions mostly from southern-to-northern China.”
“The haplogroups carrying the M9-G mutation and additional sublineages of M9-G in Korea appear to be at an intermediate frequency (81.9%) between southeast and northeast Asian populations. This result implies that the Korean population may be influenced by both the northeast and southeast Asian populations.Even within haplogroup O, the most frequent Korean STR haplotype (23-10-13 with the markers DYS390-DYS391-DYS393), 19% of haplogroup O… is the most frequent in the Philippines (27%), whereas the second most frequent Korean haplotype (24-10-12, 16%) is the most frequent in Manchuria (45%)…”
‘In this study, the Koreans appear to be most closely related overall to the Manchurians among east Asian ethnic groups… although a principal components analysis of haplogroup frequencies reveals that they also cluster with populations from Yunnan and Vietnam…’
“Using two multiplex systems, all 593 Korean mtDNAs were allocated into 15 haplogroups: M, D, D4, D5, G, M7, M8, M9, M10, M11, R, R9, B, A, and N9. As the D4 haplotypes occurred most frequently in Koreans, the third multiplex system was used to further define D4 subhaplogroups: D4a, D4b, D4e, D4g, D4h, and D4j.”
“[Mitochondrial] Haplogroup N9a** is characteristic of eastern Asian populations, where it is detected at… frequencies in Japan (4.6%), China (2.8%), Mongolia (2.1%) and Korea (3.9%)…”
Mapping Human Genetic Diversity in Asia, 2009:
‘Koreans were found to have the least amount of Austronesian DNA compared to other East Asian peoples, even a little less than the Japanese.’
This is a significant point, as this lends weight to the proposal that the Koreans with the Japanese, have been separated from the main body of their respective family enclaves. The Austronesian peoples, including the related archipelago southeast Asian nations of the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Polynesia, migrated southwards from Taiwan after crossing from mainland China thousands of years ago – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The Japanese as the remaining major Island people, were not included in this migratory path. Similarly, for the majority of the Korean people. Thus the Koreans and Japanese having the lowest amount of Austronesian DNA is not a surprise and supports their unorthodox movement and mutual mutational evolution in relation to their respective brothers and cousins.
Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2005:
“All southeastern Asian populations cluster together on the left side of the plot [not shown]; with only northern Han Chinese, Korean, and Manchu populations showing closer affinities with southeastern groups than with their geographic neighbors. All other northeast Asians, as well as central Asians, south Asians, and Oceanic populations, are on the right side of the plot…
[There is a] very low incidence of (Y-DNA) D chromosomes in Korea [D1 (M174)]… [and] very few O-47z [sub-clade of M176 – O1b2] chromosomes found in Korea [8.7%] and Southeast Asia… Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage. This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet (Tanaka et al. 2004).
… Y chromosomes that originated in Southeast Asia expanded to Korea and Japan…”
The final sentence is highly significant for the Japanese – as we shall discover – like the Koreans, are related to their brother nations in South East Asia; and for whatever reason, both chose to dwell separately in the ancient past, replicating this pattern in the age which followed into the present era.
There is a wealth of Haplogroup data for South Korea and the opposite for North Korea. Even so, there is confirmation unsurprisingly, that the paternal Haplogroups match as they are one people artificially separated and politically divided within two states.
The male South Korean Y-DNA Haplogroups in descending percentage order:
O2a [42.1%] – O1b2 [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%] – O1a [3.1%] –
D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%]
It is now interesting to compare South Korea and Vietnam.
If we disregard Vietnam’s West Asia influenced J2; the rarer Q for East Asian populations; the northern Eurasian N; the maverick Haplogroup D; and the ancient Haplogroup C indicative of Central Asians; it is remarkable how aligned Korea and Vietnam are not only in their prime paternal marker Haplogroup of O2a1 – followed by O1b and O1a – but also in line with their autosomal DNA, as shown on the PCA graph below. One can with little difficulty, readily accept they had the same ancestral father – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.
Therefore substantiating the palpable familial link with the paradoxical geographic estrangement – as revealed in the scriptures – regarding Togarmah and his brothers Ashkenaz and Riphath.
What would be the odds that these two peoples – two brothers – consisting of Vietnam and Korea would both be cut in half so-to-speak, during the twentieth century. The two peoples are also located on the eastern extremity or coastline, of their respective regions.
Now adding the prime Korean Haplogroups to the table we began in chapter III – with the addition of Haplogroup N – while also delineating between the three main strains of the O Haplogroup.
O O2a O1a O1b C D K Q N
NA Amerindian 6 77
Kazakhstan 8 40 10 2 7
Vietnam 79 40 6 33 4 3 7 3
South Korea 79 42 3 33 13 2.5 0.5 2 4
The Koreans show the link with north Asian migration by a considerably higher level of Haplogroup C, as we find in Central Asia and Mongolia. Some dispute that Y-DNA Haplogroups O1 and O2 are East Asian defining markers, but as we progress it will become difficult to support that premise. We have now studied all three of Gomer’s sons, of which Haplogroup O is clearly the principle group. As O2a followed by O1b are the principle paternal defining marker Haplogroups for continental South East Asian males, so they are for Korean men as well.
We will soon turn our attention to Javan and his four sons, whom parallel Gomer’s sons in more ways than one – Chapter VII Javan: ArchipelagoSouth East Asia & Polynesia.
The House of Togarmah is a very specific title and an uncommon usage in the Bible. It distinctly alludes to one Korea in the predicted East Asian Army of the future; specifying a united Korea’s involvement in Magog’s military machine – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
A comparison of North and South Korea:
Indicator
North Korea
South Korea
Capital
Pyongyang
Seoul
Official languages
Korean
Government
Juche single-party state
Representative Democracy
Formal declaration
9 September 1948
15 August 1948
Area
120,540 km2
100,210 km2
Population (2025)
26,549,015
51,682,430
GDP total (2011/2014)
$40 billion
$1.755 trillion
Currency
Korean People’s won
Korean Republic won
Active military personnel
1,106,000
639,000
Military expenditure (2010/2012)
$10 billion
$30 billion
North and South Korea’s combined population is very close to the Amerindian and the Turko-Mongol populations in the world. With regard to Ezekiel 27:14 and the economic and military strength of Togarmah, it is worth listing the key industries and exports of both countries.
North Korea: military products, machine building, electric power, chemicals, mining [coal, iron ore, limestone, magnesite, graphite, copper, zinc, lead and precious metals], metallurgy, food processing and tourism.
South Korea: electronics, telecommunications, automobile production, chemicals, shipbuilding and steel.
China buys 84.48% of North Koreas’s exports and in turn North Korea imports 84.12% of its goods from China; so fragile is the North Korean economy – Observatory of Economic Complexity figures, 2014.
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is the ‘least democratic state in the world’ and is ‘not run for the people’ or a republic. ‘North Korea is a stain on the world’s conscience, and yet few people know the full scale of the horrors taking place there’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 222.
South Korea, with a 2019 GDP of $1.65 trillion was the 12th largest economy in the world. South Korea’s economic journey is a twentieth century success story – the miracle on the Han River. South Korea is reputed for its strategy of export led growth, the dominance of its large business conglomerates called Chaebols and its highly motivated and educated populace. South Korea has built a network of free trade agreements with as many as fifty-eight countries which account for over three-quarters of the world’s GDP.
South Korea ranks highly on the index of nations with superior technology – at number three in the world. South Korea is the birthplace to some of the biggest names in technology and development: LG, Hyundai, and Samsung are all global leaders. South Korea is also in the forefront of the incredibly vital robotics field. In 2023, South Korea was ranked 10th in the world on the Global Innovation Index – only one of two East Asian countries in the top ten, the other being Singapore at number five.
South Korea is included in the group of Next Eleven countries which are projected to dominate the global economy in the middle of the 21st century. The other N-11 nations include Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Turkey, and Vietnam. Most of the group’s total gross domestic product derives from Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey, whose economies have grown significantly. The World Bank described South Korea as one of the fastest growing major economies of the next generation along with the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations comprising Brazil, Russia, India and China as well as non-BRIC nation Indonesia – Chapter VIII Indonesia:Kittim, Khitai & Cathay.
North Korea holds the dubious honour of being one of the world’s foremost powder kegs. While there are potential military hotspots in the world – such as in the Middle East, Africa and Russia – where conflagrations could ignite in a flash; it would not be a surprise if East Asia were to become the focus of attention, should a third world war enveloping the major powers arise over a geo-political crisis regarding North and South Korea or perhaps Taiwan for instance; or even from escalated economic tension stemming from evolving trading blocs.
Regardless, an infamous place in history lays in wait for a combined Korean nation when they join in the grand East Asian alliance at the very end of the age following our present era – refer articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and Is America Babylon?
Chapter seven focuses on Gomer’s younger brother and nearest neighbours in South East Asia.
Fools do not want to understand anything. They only want to tell others what they think.
Proverbs 18:2 New Century Version
“Did I ever think I might have been wrong? Yes, sometimes and briefly. But never because of the supposed majority against me.”
Imagine the pleasant surprise when this writer noticed the following article, being drawn to its title.
Who Is North Korea In The Bible, Cassie Grissom, October 28, 2023:
‘North Korea is often regarded as one of the most mysterious countries in the world, shrouded in secrecy and largely isolated from the rest of the world. But there are some surprising references to North Korea in the Bible. Here, we take a closer look at this fascinating connection.
The most common biblical reference to North Korea comes from the Old Testament. In the Book of Isaiah, chapter 64, verse 2, there is mention of a land that the Hebrews call “Haemim”. The Hebrew word “Haemim” translates to “the hidden” or “the secret” and is believed to be a reference to North Korea, which was then known as Goguryeo.
This passage reads: “As wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God. He rooted out their cities; no one was left to inhabit them. Haemim was taken in his wrath and his fury, his fierce anger and whirlwinds of devouring fire.”
The passage appears to describe the power of God destroying the kingdom of Goguryeo and its inhabitants. It is also believed to be a prophetic warning to the North Korean government of the potential consequences of ruling an oppressive and authoritarian regime.’
Regrettably, anticipation turned to disappointment for Isaiah 64:2 does not seem to express the sentiments above and a search for the passage quoted (to date), has remained fruitless.
The Hebrew word hā·’ê·mîm (H348) is the plural of H357 and means ‘terrors’. The Emim were one of the Nephilim descended clans of giants, recorded in Genesis 14:5 and Deuteronomy 2:10-11. This particular clan was located in Moab – articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II.
Grissom: ‘The Bible itself does not give any specific information about North Korea [apart from Ezekiel 27:14], but there are some scholars who believe that there are other references to North Korea scattered throughout scripture. In Deuteronomy 33:1, for instance, the author talks about a “people inhabiting the mysterious north [Ezekiel 38:6]”. This could be referring to the kingdom of Goguryeo, which was located in the northern part of the Korean peninsula.’
While we have investigated Togarmah dwelling in the North, chapter thirty-three of Deuteronomy does not discuss Togarmah but rather the sons of Jacob in the latter days.
Grissom: ‘Others point to the fact that the names of the two main rivers in North Korea, the Taedong and the Yalu, appear in the Bible as well. In the Book of Habakkuk, the prophet refers to “the streams of Taedong and Yalu”, which suggests that these were known to the Hebrews at one time.’
The banks of the Taedong River in the North Korean capital, Pyongyang
This would be spectacular to say the least, though a search of the three chapters of the Book of Habakkuk did not yield any positive results on the two rivers in question.
Alas, the three separate claims of North Korea in the scriptures are unfounded, though what was interesting was to be made aware of the Gog-uryeo Kingdom. Particularly in light of the prophetic significance of Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight, where a united Korea (Togarmah) is mentioned in relation with Ma-gog, Meshech, Tubal and their leader, Gog – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
The Goguryeo Kingdom was established in 37 BCE and lasted until the fall of Pyongyang in 668. It was later known as Goryeo (meaning ‘high and beautiful’) – alternatively spelled as Koryŏ – a shortened form of Goguryeo (Koguryŏ), meaning ‘high Castle.’ It was adopted as the official name in the fifth century and is the origin of the English word, Korea.
The Goguryeo Kingdom was one of the great powers in East Asia and was located on the northern and central parts of the Korean Peninsula, as well as the southern and central parts of Northeast China.
Encyclopaedia: At the peak of its power, ‘Goguryeo encompassed most of the Korean peninsula and large parts of Manchuria, along with parts of eastern Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, and modern-day Russia. Along with Baekje and Silla, Goguryeo was one of the Three Kingdoms of Korea. It was an active participant in the power struggle for control of the Korean peninsula and was… associated with the foreign affairs of neighboring polities in China and Japan.’
Japheth’s eldest son is Gomer. He had three sons and they are the first three great grandsons of Noah listed in Genesis Ten – Chapter II Japheth Orientallium.
Genesis 10:3
English Standard Version
The sons of Gomer:
Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.
We will discuss the first two sons Ashkenaz and Riphath with their father Gomer, while studying the third son Togarmah separately – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.
The following quotes are reprinted in large part, to show how the first suggestion of an identity – in one instance 439 years ago – can take hold perpetuating an error. Also, to highlight the pitfalls of using any given word as a proof, when they are either just interesting or completely misleading. These two points have almost irreparably discredited the identity of nations teaching.
Ancient Civilisation:
‘In modern Turkey is an area which in New Testament times was called Galatia. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus records that the people who were called Galatians or Gauls in his day (c. AD 93) were previously called Gomerites.’
This is disputable, for Josephus has been found an unreliable historian on more than one occasion, with an agenda of his own.
Ancient Civilisation: ‘They migrated westward to what are now called France and Spain [yes, the Galatians or Gauls did]. For many centuries France was called Gaul [true], after the descendants of Gomer [incorrect]. North-west Spain is called Galicia to this day [true]. Some of the Gomerites migrated further to what is now called Wales [incorrect, though the Cymry did]. The Welsh historian, Davis… records that the Welsh language is called Gomeraeg [true] (after their ancestor Gomer) [incorrect].’
The words Gaul and Gallic have a closer ethnic association with the words Gael(s) and Gaelic, though not necessarily an etymological one – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. The descendants of Gomer as Asian kin of Tiras and Madai, cannot be the ancestors of the Welsh. Refer previous chapters: Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.
Israel a History of:
‘Herodotus and Plutarch associate Gomer, Japheth’s first son, with the peoples of Cimmeria, a region north of the Black Sea. Cimmeria is modern day Crimea. A certain group of Gomer’s descendants eventually moved westward, and the name was more than likely preserved in the names Germany and Cambria, or Wales.’
There is a link between the Welsh and the Cimmerians, just not with Gomer. Likewise, some have tried to equate the name Gomer with the word German. Trying to squeeze an Asian ancestry group into a European lineage does not work. Assumptions are easily conceived from selective word associations and dubious ancient historians and then too readily relied upon.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 48-49 – emphasis mine:
‘Jeremiah (51.27) makes it pretty clear in what part of the world we are to look for Ashkenaz… Ararat was the district which lay between the Araxes and the mountains south of Lake Van, while the Minni adjoined the kingdom of Ararat on the east. Ashkenaz accordingly must have been precisely where an inscription of Sargon places the people of the Asguza, and we may therefore feel but little hesitation in identifying the two together. The Gimirra, or Kimmerians, are placed in the same locality by certain cuneiform inscriptions which relate to the closing days of the Assyrian Empire. On Riphath no light has as yet been thrown by the decipherment of the records of the past…’
As per point number two in the introduction (primus verba), Sayce has probably located where these people once lived though not where they finally migrated.
‘Another participant in the end-time confederation of nations is ancient Gomer… Some prophecy teachers as well as the Rabbinical view identify Gomer as Germany, and the Jewish Talmud positively identify Gomer with the Germans.’
An Asian line from Japheth has been incorrectly matched to a European line of Shem. It would be helpful to learn exactly what the positive identification of Germany with Gomer is?
Walker: ‘A closer examination, however, reveals that the Gomerites were the ancient Cimmerians, expelled in 700 BC from the southern steppes of Russia into the area we know today as Turkey. Gomer, scholars seem to almost universally agree, “refers to the Celtic Cimmerians of Crim-Tartary.” Gomer is well known to the ancient world as Gimarrai of north central Asia Minor [Cappadocia]. These people are also known as the Cimmerians. This seems to be the simplest, most obvious interpretation. Gomer is to be identified with the Cimmerians (the Cimarrai of the Assyrian inscriptions), located on the shores of the Black and Caspian Seas. Gomer is Gimarra is Cimmeria is Cappadocia – central Turkey.
The Cimmerians are well known to secular historians. The Scythians chased them across the Caucasus mountains into Asia Minor (Turkey). They made their way through that land, destroyed the Phrygian kingdom in the 7th-8th century BC., and in the 5th century raided the kingdom of Lydia. They kept all of southern and western Asia in turmoil for a century and a half.
Dr Young, citing the best of the most recent archaeological finds, says of Gomer [the Cimmerians]: “They settled on the north of the Black Sea and then spread themselves westward and southward to the extremities of Europe.” Josephus said Gomer founded those whom the Greeks called the Galatians. This confirms the best identification of Gomer as Turkey.’
Who Gomer is not… the map above is an example of a common representation for the biblical identities listed in Ezekiel chapter thirty-eight. All without exception are incorrect, as our progression through the descendants of Japheth, Ham and Shem will reveal. Put, Cush and Magog are cold; Persia warm, yet still cool; and Gomer, Togarmah, Meshech and Tubal freezing.
Confusion has arisen as ‘Gomer’ is superficially linked to the Gimarri or Cimmerians and later, with the Gauls. The Cimmerians were warlike and spread to the extremities of southwestern Europe, before migrating to the British Isles. They justwere not the Gomerites descended from Japheth.
Possibly the first author to identify Gomer, the Cimmerians and Cimbri with the Welsh name for themselves Cymri or Cymry, was the English antiquarian William Camden in his work: Britannia, published in 1586. In his 1716 book Drych y Prif Oesoedd, Welsh antiquary Theophilus Evans, posited correctly that the Welsh were descended from the Cimmerians and incorrectly, from Gomer.
An identity is offered and whether correct or incorrect, it is upheld. Scholars and researchers assume the question is answered. A certain academic laziness ensues and 439 years later, an original error deleteriously affects the mosaic of the overall identity jig-saw puzzle.
Celtic linguists follow the etymology proposed by Johann Kaspar Zeuss in 1853, which derives Cymry from the Brythonic word Combrogos, meaning ‘fellow countryman.’ The name Gomer – as in the pen-name of 19th century editor and author Joseph Harris – and its modern Welsh derivatives such as Gomeraeg – as an alternative name for the Welsh language – became popular for a time in Wales, but the Gomerian theory has long since been discredited as an outdated hypothesis with no historical or linguistic validity.
In rabbinic literature the kingdom of Ashkenaz was associated with the Scythian region, then later with the Slavic territories and from the Eleventh century, with Germany and northern Europe. Medieval Jews associated the term with the geographical area of the Rhineland and the Palatinate of Western Germany. The Jewish culture which developed in the area came to be called Ashkenazi. How the name of Ashkenaz came to be associated in the rabbinic literature with the Rhineland is a subject of speculation.
Associating a name from a grandson of Japheth with descendants from Shem has certainly muddied the waters. Ironically, we will learn later that the name Ashkenaz actually does have an association with the Jewish people – just not the one derived from Gomer – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: TheThirteenth Tribe.
The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Look in your Bible for a map – if you have one in your Bible. There you will probably have pictured the descendants of Gomer migrating into Europe! Nothing could be further from the truth. They migrated in exactly the opposite direction! But do you know why many have assumed that Gomer may be in modern Europe today? Because the people of Northwest Europe journeyed through the land of Gomer before coming to Europe and were therefore called Kymmri! Prophecy says this very fact would occur!
Notice what Israel is called while in captivity: “Gomer” (Hosea 1:3). The woman “Gomer” mentioned by the prophet had the same name which the children of Israel bore when coming into Europe! The Israelites were called Khumri or Cymmri, or Khmeri, or Cimmerians upon reaching northwest Europe. But where are the descendants of Gomer today?’
This is conjecture on Hoeh’s part, for there is a better case for the word Khumri deriving from a king of Israel, called Omri – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
Hoeh: ‘Gomer originally settled northeast of Elam. From here they were driven to the Caucasus, between the Black and the Caspian Sea. Then they journeyed to Southeast Asia! Notice! The native name for Cambodia in Indo-China is Khmer – the land of Gomer! Read the BRITANNICA article on Cambodia. Associated with Gomer are the Chams and Annamese. Could this be only a coincidence? The Cambodians are related to the Siamese, [and] Burmese… In the ancient land of Gomer dwelled a small tribe called the Lullu (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA). In extreme South China today dwell the Lulu, a non-Chinese race related to the people of Southeast Asia!’
Korea in Prophecy, Bob Thiel, 2009 – emphasis mine:
‘An account penned in the nineteenth century…
“According to the Tartars and Orientals, the Chinese [specifically, South East Asians] are descended from Tchin, or Gin, the son of Japheth, and brother of Tarag [Togarmah]… Tchin is the Ashchenaz of Scripture, the son of Gomer… The Orientals call all grandsons, sons. Another division of the descendants of Aschenaz or Atchinez – as his name was pronounced in the following parts – migrated across the Imaus mountains, now the great Altai and Changai. These people spread to a vast extent, till they reached the Pacific Ocean.
They formed the following nations:-
First – The Issedones, about the river Etchine, on the borders of China [1 – Ashkenaz] and the Desert of Thamo.
Second – The “Kin Tartars”, inhabiting the territory round the north of Corea [2- Togarmah], and along the shores of the Pacific Ocean…
[Third -] Tonkin, Cochin-China, Tciampa, Laos or Schan States, and Cambodia [3 – Riphath], anciently formed part of the Chinese Empire, the name of which was Tchin, so called from Atchinez, from which the names of nearly all these countries are derived.”
(Source: Painter, John Thomas. Ethnology: or The History & Genealogy of the Human Race. Baillière, Tindall & Cox, 1880 Original from Oxford University Digitized July 3, 2006, page 106).’
Online Encyclopaedia:
‘Cochinchina or Cochin-China is a historical exonym for part of Vietnam, depending on the contexts, usually for Southern Vietnam. Sometimes it referred to the whole of Vietnam, but it was commonly used to refer to the region south of the Gianh River. In the 17th and 18th centuries, Vietnam was divided between the Trịnh lords to the north and the Nguyễn lords to the south. The two domains bordered each other on the Son River. The northern section was called Tonkin by Europeans, and the southern part, Đàng Trong, was called Cochinchina by most Europeans and Quinam by the Dutch.’
The two eldest sons of Gomer, Ashkenaz and Riphath, migrated to mainland South East Asia and settled in what was historically called, Indochina. The name Indochina, was given to Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, due to their being culturally and socially influenced by the Indian (Indo) and Chinese (China) cultures.
The region comprises the nations of Myanmar (formerly Burma and the Burmese), Thailand (formerly Siam and the Siamese), Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
We will look at the island nations of South East Asia separately as they identify with a different son from Japheth – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.
The meaning of Gomer in Hebrew is: ‘completion, complete’ or ‘perfect.’ From the verb meaning, ‘to complete, bring to an end’ or ‘come to an end.’
We read of Gomer in the Book of Jubilees 9:8-9.
‘And the first portion came forth for Gomer to the east from the north side to the river Tina; and in the north there came forth for Magog all the inner portions of the north until it reaches to the sea of Me’at.’
Gomer is described as being adjacent and southwards of Magog, when Japheth’s descendants formed their original settlement in south eastern Europe and western Asia some time after the flood cataclysm – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.
Riphath is not mentioned outside Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One, though seems to be synonymous with Gomer. The meaning of his name is not straight forward. It can include: ‘fruit, grain, healers’ and possibly ‘crushers.’ The noun is ripa, some sort of beaten and dried grain or fruit. The verb is rapa, ‘to heal.’
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘… since we don’t know how to translate the word [Riphath] we also don’t know what to do with the name… To add to the confusion, in 1 Chronicles 1:6 this descendant of Gomer is called Diphath – the letters d and r look much alike. Maybe this discrepancy is due to a scribal error, and maybe the man simply had two names.
Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names refers to a root that doesn’t exist. Jones erroneously points at Job 26:11, where the verb (rapap), meaning to shake or tremble is used. And so Jones reads Crusher… NOBSE Study Bible Name List and BDB Theological Dictionary don’t even try to translate this name. Whatever Riphath may have been supposed to mean, the intent is lost for good. But to a Hebrew audience, the name Riphath may have sounded like Healers.’
Ashkenaz and Riphath are not obvious in their identification, though their names provide possible clues. Thailand is at the forefront for herbal remedies as well as cosmetic surgery; as Riphath possibly alludes to heal.
Gomer’s eldest son, Ashkenaz’s name is from the noun esh, meaning: ‘fire’, ke: ‘like’ or ‘as’ and the verb naza, ‘to sprinkle.’ In Hebrew it means: ‘sprinkles like fire’ or ‘so fire is scattered’, with a connotation of a fire offering or a ritualistic sprinkling of blood or water and immediately reminds of the Vietnam war and the destructiveness of napalm.
Flag of Thailand
The leading economy of the the five nations is Thailand, with the second highest population after Vietnam, and the second biggest area after Myanmar. Thailand is the 30th largest economy in the world – 7th in East Asia – with a GDP of $546.22 billion in 2025 (while Vietnam the 9th in East Asia and 34th in the world, had a GDP of $490.97 billion in 2025).
The Thai economy possesses relatively high quality infrastructure as well as pro-free enterprise and pro-investment policies. Thailand is very dependent on exports; accounting for about two-thirds of its GDP. Thailand has a substantial international tourism industry. While its agricultural sector only makes up about 10% of its economy, it employs nearly a full 30% of its workers.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Thai global shipments during 2020.
Machinery including computers: US$37.7 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $34.1 billion
Vehicles: $24.1 billion
Gems, precious metals: $18 billion
Rubber, rubber articles: $15.5 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $11.9 billion
Meat/seafood preparations: $6.6 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $6.1 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $4.7 billion
Fruits, nuts: $4.2 billion
Gems and precious metals was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 14.9% since 2019 propelled by higher international sales of gold. The leading decliner among Thailand’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil which fell -27.8% year over year.’
Thai Woman
In the Bible, Gomer is mentioned just once, aside from the genealogical lists; in a yet future, intimidating military alliance with several other nations – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.
In Ezekiel 38:2-6, ESV we read:
2 “Son of man, set your face toward Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him 3 and say, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.
4 And I will turn you about and put hooks into your jaws, and I will bring you out, and all your army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed in full armor, a great host, all of them with buckler and shield, wielding swords.
5 Persia, Cush, and Put are with them, all of them with shield and helmet;
6 Gomer and all his hordes;
Beth-togarmah from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.”
Notice Togarmah is differentiated from Gomer, as his descendants migrated to a distant land. Gomer is able to field a large army in this already massive military operation.
With a combined population of just over 250 million people, we can understand how this would be feasible. If we return briefly to Gomer and his first two sons names meanings, it is a rather frightening prospect when they are pieced together:
Bring to an end, Crushers, fire is scattered and sprinkling of blood.
Ashkenaz is highlighted in a single verse in Jeremiah 51:27, NET:
“Raise up battle flags throughout the lands. Sound the trumpets calling the nations to do battle. Prepare the nations to do battle against Babylonia. Call for these kingdoms to attack her: Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz. Appoint a commander to lead the attack. Send horses against her like a swarm of locusts” – Revelation 9:3-11.
Footnote:
‘Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz were three kingdoms located in the Lake Van-Lake Urmia region that are now parts of eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran. These kingdoms were conquered and made vassal states by the Medes [Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes] in the early sixth century.’
The regions of Ararat and Minni are described as kingdoms, placed on a similar footing with Ashkenaz. Actually, they are even listed before Ashkenaz. Thus they are not regions within another territory. The fact that the Bible states them, shows they are an identifiable family subdivision of Gomer as his additional sons, or perhaps the link to his eldest son Ashkenaz, means they are Gomer’s grandsons. As we read from A H Sayce, we know this was where these peoples were once located in modern Armenia, though they are not there now. If Ashkenaz and Riphath’s children are located in former Indo-China; how do these other two peoples relate to them?
It is not integral in understanding Gomer’s future role, where Ashkenaz and Riphath are specifically located, though it is invaluable for those people investigating who may be represented by them today. With the introduction of Ararat and Minni, coupled with Diphath, the enigmatic double of Riphath, the mystery deepens.
We have five Biblical identities associated with Gomer’s sons Ashkenaz and Riphath and we have unsurprisingly, five modern nations in continental Southeast Asia.
Previously, we addressed the original mountains of Ararat as representing the Himalayas, with the mountain ranges in Anatolia – modern Turkey – becoming a later identification – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. If the people of Ararat and Minni were once associated with this area in the past, then might they be near the Himalayas or in a mountainous region today?
The most mountainous nation in Southeast Asia is coincidentally, Myanmar – followed by Indonesia. The Hkakabo Razi is believed to be Myanmar’s highest mountain. The 19,295 foot tall mountain is also the highest mountain in Southeast Asia and is located in the northern Myanmar state of Kachin, in an outlying subrange of the Greater Himalayan mountain system adjacent to the tri-point border with India and China.
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘Ararat is the name of a mountain range, which is famous for being the site of the first ship wreck in history: the stranding of the Ark of Noah (Genesis 8:4). Nowadays nobody knows for sure where the Ararat might be… according to Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names the name Ararat comes from (1) the common Hebrew word (har) hill, mountain. And (2) the Hebrew verb (yarad) to go down, descend, march down. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Mountain Of Descent, which is a wonderful interpretation if it didn’t ignore the final teth.
The following cluster of words seems more appropriate: (‘arar), to curse; (retet),trembling, panic, and (rata), wring out (Job 16:11), a word that, according to BDB Theological Dictionary may have to do with (yarat), precipitate, or be headlong, contrary (Numbers 22:32, “… because your way is contrary to me”. BDB Theological Dictionary suggest an alternative reading, “… thou hast precipitated the journey in front of me”.)
As is the case with many names from the earliest chapters of Genesis, it’s impossible to retrieve the intended meaning of the name Ararat. We can’t even be sure in which language this name originated. But the way this name was later spelled, it seems to stylise the Noah story: A curse and a trembling; then a mountain and a future in a flash laid out.’
The definition of Ararat is insightful with its accurate description of Noah’s family trekking down a mountain of magnitude, to populate the Indus Valley after the Flood.
Minni in Hebrew means: ‘my portion, partly’. A subtle link with ‘my portion’ to Madai’s ‘middle land’ and Japheth’s ‘enlarged.’ From the preposition min, ‘from’, or the verb mana, ‘to count or reckon.’ The name Minni appears to have also originated from a language other than Hebrew.
In 1 Chronicles, Riphath is called Diphath. This is puzzling, as this writer does not believe it is an accident of a scribes quill. We learnt there was no clear definition for Riphath. Diphath seems a reflection for the same name. As there appears to be three components to Ashkenaz, there seems to be a similar aspect of two parts for Riphath.
Book of Jasher 10:8-9
8 ‘And the children of Gomer, according to their cities, were… by the river Franza, by the river Senah. 9 And the children of Rephath are the Bartonim, who dwell in the land of Bartonia by the river Ledah, which empties its waters in the great sea Gihon, that is, oceanus.’
In like manner, the River Mekong is 2,703 miles long; the worlds 12th longest river and 7th longest in Asia. It serves all five nations and strategically opens out to the South China Sea via Vietnam.
Online comment:
‘Interestingly, linguistic-wise, Cambodia and Vietnam share… the same language family. Integration of Cambodia into [the Vietnamese] cultural and political [spheres] also took place regularly in [an] historical context[;] [with the] conquest and cultural conversion often [instigated] by the Vietnamese empire of the past[,] against the remnant of the old Khmer empire.’
Flag of Vietnam
Online comment – emphasis mine:
‘I’m often asked how similar Burmese is to the national languages of its Southeast Asian [neighbours], namely Thai, Lao and Khmer. And I’ve got to say: Burmese is quite different from the other three, whether it’s phonology, grammar, vocabulary, or writing.
In my perspective, one can divide Southeast Asia into two distinct sub-regions: continental Southeast Asia (Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam) and insular Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, Singapore [refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia]).
The national languages of Southeast Asia can similarly be divided along those same lines. It’s worth noting that all languages fall into a number of language families, which groups together languages that share a common ancestor, the proto-language of that family.
According to this conceptualization, Burmese is a clear outlier, as it is the only national language that’s part of the Sino-Tibetan language family, among the ranks of Chinese varieties and Tibetan. Thai and Lao are members of the Tai-Kadai language family. In fact, the two are quite similar, such that Thai and Lao are seen as languages in a Tai language ‘dialect continuum’ spanning from Thailand to southwest China. On the other hand, Khmer is part of the Mon-Khmer language family, linguistically related with neighboring Vietnamese.’
The principal lowland inhabitants of Laos are the Lao, who politically and culturally are the dominant group. They comprise the bulk of the Lao Loum; approximately 60% of the total population. The Lao are considered a branch of the Tai people, who began migrating southward from China in the first millennium CE.
Thai Man
Thais tend to have high frequencies of Y-DNA Haplogroup O-M95 including its O-M88, O1b sub-clade, which also has been found with high frequency among both the Cham of Vietnam, the Kuy people in Laos and Cambodia, as well as the Jarai of Cambodia.
The genetic testing website 23andme groups Khmer people under the ‘Indonesian, Khmer, Thai and Myanmar’ reference population. This reference population contains people who have had recent ancestors from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. Notice Vietnam is excluded, plus the similarity with Malaysia and Indonesia is possibly due to overspill from the migration of people of Ashkenaz, Riphath and the others to these two, non-Gomer descended nations.
Kim Wook in 2000, stated that genetically, Vietnamese people are mostly clustered with East Asians, of which his study analyzed DNA samples from Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and Mongolians, rather than with Southeast Asians. The same study analysed DNA samples of Indonesians, Filipinos and Thais included with the Vietnamese. The study observed that Vietnamese people were the only population in the study’s phylogenetic analysis that did not reflect a sizeable genetic difference between East Asian and Southeast Asian populations. In other words, they intriguingly bridge the genetic gap between these two regions.
Jung Jongsun in 2010, said that genetic structure analysis found significant admixture in ‘Vietnamese with unknown Southern original settlers’ and that Vietnamese people are located between Chinese and Cambodian people in the study’s genome map.
We will return to the anomaly of the Vietnamese being distinct from their four related neighbours, whilst possessing a strong link with northeastern Asia – refer Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.
Vietnamese woman
Complete human mtDNA genome sequences from Vietnam and the phylogeography of Mainland Southeast Asia, multiple authors, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Vietnam is an important crossroads within Mainland Southeast Asia (MSEA) and a gateway to Island Southeast Asia… However, comparatively few studies have been undertaken of the genetic diversity of Vietnamese populations. We sequenced the entire mtDNA genome from 609 unrelated Vietnamese individuals… 399 distinct sequences (haplotypes) belonging to 135 haplogroups were identified, all belonging to the two macro-haplogroups M and N…
Overall, F1 is the predominant haplogroup (19.38%) followed by B4 (17.41%), M7 (9.36%), B5 (7.22%), and M71 (6.08%); these haplogroups are also common in other MSEA populations…**
To identify Vietnamese-specific lineages (clades or branches consisting of sequences only from Vietnam), we constructed phylogenetic trees relating 2742 entire mtDNA genome sequences (including 609 newly sequenced mitogenomes from the present study and 2133 previously reported sequences from MSEA). Several previously undescribed sub-branches of haplogroups A, B, C, D, F, M and N were identified… In total, 111 novel lineages unique to Vietnam were found in the dataset. The majority of these belong to haplogroups B, F and M (25, 26 and 29, respectively); these are major haplogroups of MSEA, accounting for 76.35% of the sequences.**
Haplogroup A occurs mostly in northern and eastern Asia at frequencies from 5 to 10%, and is one of five founder haplogroups among native Americans. Overall, haplogroup A is most widespread in AA groups from Vietnam and Thailand… Within MSEA, haplogroup A is at highest frequency in northern Vietnam and northwestern Thailand.
Haplogroup B is one of the most common haplogroups in northern and eastern Asia, with three major subhaplogroups B4, B5 and B6. With the 164 Vietnamese mtDNA sequences belonging to haplogroup B, several new sub-clusters within B4, B5, and B6a are identified… B4 is the second most frequent haplogroup in Vietnam and is widespread across MSEA, especially northern Vietnam, northern Thailand, and Taiwan. However, B4 subhaplogroups that are relatively frequent in Taiwan… are absent in the Vietnamese AN groups… while haplogroup B4 has the highest frequency in northern Vietnam and Taiwan, there is very little overlap of B4 subhaplogroups between Vietnam and Taiwan… Overall, there is remarkably little sharing of sequences between groups from different language families or countries… haplogroup B5 reaches the highest frequency in northeastern Thailand. Haplogroup B6a is distributed mostly in northern Thailand.
Haplogroup C is widespread across East Asia and is one of the five founder haplogroups among native American populations… Haplogroup C5 is represented by a single haplotype belonging to subhaplogroup C5d*… and is present only in Vietnamese HM groups, while C4 is distributed in Vietnamese, Thai, and S. Chinese groups…
Haplogroup F is one of the most common haplogroups throughout Asia…Haplogroup F1a is at high frequency in northern Vietnam and northeastern Thailand…
Haplogroup G is one of the most common mtDNA haplogroups among Japanese, Ainu, Mongol and Tibetan populations, and is also found at a lower frequency across East Asia, Central Asia and MSEA…The G2a1* sequence is from a TK group… Among MSEA populations, haplogroup G reaches the highest frequency in northern Vietnam.
M is a macro-haplogroup found at high frequency all across Asia (including MSEA)…Haplogroup M7 reaches the highest frequency in eastern Thailand and northern Taiwan…
Haplogroup M71 is found in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam… haplogroup M71 has the highest frequency in central Vietnam…
N9a, one of three major sub-clades of haplogroup N, is found in East Asia, Southeast Asia and Central Asia… Haplogroup N9a reaches the highest frequency in southern peninsular Malaysia…’
The mtDNA macro-haplogroup M, is indicative of all oriental Asians. What is significant, is that M71 bonds the five continental southeast Asian nations, revealing a common maternal ancestry and a shared status as brothers.
Large-scale mitochondrial DNA analysis in Southeast Asia reveals evolutionary effects of cultural isolation in the multi-ethnic population of Myanmar, multiple authors, 2014 – emphasis mine:
‘… we sequenced the mtDNA control region of 327 unrelated donors and the complete mitochondrial genome of 44 selected individuals…
Population genetic analyses of Burmese control region sequences combined with population data from neighboring countries revealed that the Myanmar haplogroup distribution showed a typical Southeast Asian pattern, but also Northeast Asian and Indian influences. Analyzing mtDNA data from Myanmar is of great genetic interest, because in spite of accumulating knowledge in recent years the resolution of the mitochondrial haplogroup phylogeny in SEA, especially in macrohaplogroup M, is still very low compared to West-Eurasian haplogroups…
Myanmar is subdivided into more than 100 ethnic groups amongst them the Bamar represent 68% of the population. Other important minorities are Shan (10%), Karen (7%), Arakanese (4%), Chinese (3%) and the ethno-linguistically related Mon and Khmer (2% each).
F1a1a** with 15.9% of all sequences was by far the most frequent haplogroup in this study, followed by C4b1 (7.0%), B6 (6.4%) and A4 (5.2%). R9b1a1a, D4 and G2b1a reached 4.6% each. The 78 individuals actually belonging to M split into 50 different haplogroups, 29 of them with only a single representative. The most common haplogroup in M was M21a (1.8%)…
The Myanmar sample was typical for Southeast Asian populations with a high percentage of R9’F and B lineages as well as a variety of M haplogroups. The minor contribution of N lineages (without A, B and R9’F) to the gene pool also turned out to be characteristic for Southeast Asia. Noticeable was a relatively high percentage of A and C lineages in Myanmar compared to the neighboring countries…
A distinct geographic pattern appeared in the multi-dimensional scaling plot of pairwise Fst-values: The Myanmar sample fitted very well within the Southeast Asian cluster, the Central Asian populations formed a second cluster, the Korean sample represented East Asia, the Afghanistan population was representative for South Asia and Russia symbolized Western Eurasia. The main haplogroup distributions are displayed as pie charts. The size of the pie diagrams corresponds to sample size.
The proportion of N-lineages (without A,B and R9’F) increases from very low percentages in Southeast and East Asia over 50% in Central Asia to more than 75% in Afghanistan and 100% in the sample of Russian origin. The proportion of the American founding haplogroups A, B, C and D displayed an interesting pattern: from nonexistent in Russians it increased to more than 50% in East Asian Korea.
The mitochondrial haplogroup distribution in Myanmar showed a typical Southeast Asian pattern, confirming earlier findings but also adding new information: the population sample of Myanmar displayed quite a few parallels to North and Northeast Asian and also to South Asian populations. No traces of European or African influence to the maternal gene pool of Myanmar were detected. The description and dating of eight new mitochondrial haplogroups and the detection of three further basal M lineages shed more light on the population history of Southeast Asia.’
An in-depth analysis of the mitochondrial phylogenetic landscape of Cambodia, multiple authors, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘A total of 224 unique haplotypes were identified, which were mostly classified under haplogroups B5a1, F1a1, or categorized as newly defined basal haplogroups or basal sub-branches of R, N and M clades. The mtDNA data presented here increases the phylogenetic resolution in Cambodia significantly, thereby highlighting the need for an update of the current human mtDNA phylogeny. As a result of the historic expansion of the Khmer Empire in the twelfth century, the majority (96%) of Cambodia’s present-day population belongs to Khmer…
Haplogroup distribution in different populations/data sets.
(A) Frequency plot of macrohaplogroups in different populations, including 1000 Genome Project data. The super populations are given for African ancestry, European ancestry, South Asian ancestry and admixed American ancestry.
East Asia is reported individually as Vietnam (KHV = Kinh in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam), China (CDX = Chinese Dai in Xishuangbanna, CHB = Han Chinese in Beijing, CHS = Southern Han Chinese) and Japan (JPT = Japanese in Tokyo).
(B) Haplogroup distribution by publication… Bodner (Laos), Duong (mostly Vietnam), Kutanan (mostly Thailand), Summerer (Myanmar), Zhang (Cambodia).
“This study” indicates the present work’s data set. Macrohaplogroups represent M (yellow), N (green) and R (blue) groups.’
An article, Mitochondrial DNA control region variation in a population sample from Thailand, multiple authors, 2020, found that, ‘the [mtDNA] haplogroup composition [for Thailand] is comparable with other Southeast Asia population samples…’
The most frequent Haplogroups being B5a (9.4%), F1a1a (8.9%) and M (8.9%).**
Haplogroup B is a common mtDNA denominator thus far on our journey; as descendants of Tiras, Madai and now Gomer all exhibit the evidence of a shared maternal ancestor through this Haplogroup.
While the Amerindian includes other Haplogroups as do the Central Asians and the South East Asians – with F and M also prevalent amongst Central Asians – it is Haplogroup B which unifies these three sons maternal descent.
Haplogroup B is an intermediate to recent mutation like F and derives from super sub-Haplogroup R. Whereas the remaining mtDNA Haplogroups associated with Japheth’s descendants derive from earlier and older mutations from firstly super Haplogroup M, such as C, Z and D. And secondly for super Haplogroup N, they include Haplogroups A and X.
Vietnamese man
It depends how one chooses to group these five peoples, whether linguistically, historically, geographically or biblically. The Vietnamese are somewhat separated from the others genetically. Linguistically and historically, they are grouped with Cambodia, while Laos is linked with Thailand linguistically and historically. Myanmar is separated from the others linguistically. Thailand has a thriving economy which sets them apart. Historically, Myanmar and Thailand share a common heritage, as both were British colonies; whereas Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos were French colonies.
Biblically, Riphath and Diphath are not specifically mentioned in scripture, whereas Ashkenaz is, with Ararat and Minni. From this, one could logically expect the latter three to equate to the three larger nations and the former two to the two smaller nations. Thus, Riphath and Diphath are Cambodia and Laos. Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz are in order, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam. Myanmar the mountainous nation; Thailand located in the middle, with a significant portion of blessings; and Vietnam the nation with a history of fire and blood soaked warfare.
The final determining factor is their genetic variance or similarity from their respective Y-DNA Haplogroups. All five nations share O-M122, or O2 (formerly O3) as their predominant Haplogroup. The principle O2 lineage in mainland southeast Asia is M7 (O2a2a1a2).
In lesser quantities, O1a or M119 (formerly O1) and O1b (formerly O2) are found with the other indicative Asian paternal Haplogroups constituting C and D. Recall, Haplogroup C2 is the defining marker Haplogroup for Central Asia. The primary O1b lineage in continental southeast Asia is M95 (O1b1a1a).
Both Cambodia and Laos have a strikingly similar sequence percentage consisting of: O2, O1a, O1b, C, D and K. Each also have traces of Haplogroups associated with South Asia or West Asia, such as J2, H and R1a all through admixture. Thailand exhibits a similar sequence and is the closet to Cambodia and Laos. Myanmar has a higher percentage of Haplogroup D than any of the others; whilst Vietnam has Haplogroup Q, which is the principle Haplogroup for the Amerindian – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.
Myanmar: O2 – D – O1b – O1a – C
Thailand: O2 – [O1b] – O1a – C – D
Vietnam: O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D – N – J2
The distinctiveness of the other three nations suggests they are not offspring of Ashkenaz or derived from the Vietnamese but lean heavily towards being the direct lineage of Gomer. This would support their separate listed status in the Book of Jeremiah. The three peoples combined were obviously powerful enough to cause a threat and this is supported by Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam having sizeable populations today, with the potential to capably wage a future military campaign.
Vietnam’s paternal Haplogroups listed above – and the percentages for each – plus partially for Thailand.
C O K D Q
NA Amerindian 6 77
Kazakhstan 40 8 10 2
Vietnam 4 79 3 7
Comparing Vietnam, with a representative from the preceding chapters: Kazakhstan from Madai and the North American Indian from Tiras, highlights two points.
First, the clear marker Haplogroups for Japheth’s male descendants – aside from N – are represented by C, D, K, O and Q.
Two, even so, it can be seen already just how wide the variation is between related siblings.
Each of the three so far, Tiras, Madai and Gomer though having groups in common, each demonstrate the individuality each possesses in having a prime Haplogroup distinct from one another – Q, C and O respectively.
In contrast, we will discover in the next few chapters that the severity of the divide reduces considerably with Japheth’s remaining four sons. One could say, it is a case of some brothers being more like each other than others.
So far, all carry Y-DNA Haplogroup Q, which was passed through Japheth’s line via the earlier connecting mutations comprising F, K and P. Yet, it is the sons of Tiras who exhibit the relatively recent Q as their prime Haplogroup.
All carry Haplogroup C, again passed via Japheth’s descendants; but it is the most undiluted sons of Madai in Kazakhstan after Mongolia, where the ancient group C is dominant. Though the number one principle Haplogroup for Japheth’s sons overall is O, it is devoid in the sons of Tiras and rare in the sons of Madai. For the male descendants of Gomer, Haplogroup O2a2a (M188) followed by O1b (M268) are the prime defining marker Haplogroups.
All five nations on the Southeast Asian mainland, include the core Y-DNA Haplogroups: O2, O1b, C and D. The primary significance, is that these five nations ultimately comprise the collective body of Gomer’s two eldest sons Ashkenaz and Riphath, with the additional offspring from Diphath, Ararat and Minni.
In the next chapter, we will investigate Gomer’s intriguing third and youngest son, Togarmah.
These are the people I am pleased with: those who are not proud or stubborn and who fear my word.
Isaiah 66:2 New Century Version
“I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”
Japheth’s third son Madai, is mentioned more frequently in the Bible than most of his brothers. This is due to a close relationship with a certain cousin from Shem.
Herman Hoeh discusses Madai in his 1957 article, Origin of the Nations – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘Herodotus mentions that the “Matienians” from the land of Rosh were associated with the people of Meshech and Tubal! (Thalia, 94.) And Pliny the Roman natural historian speaks of the “Matiani” as moving into Russia through the Caucasus (BooK VI, section xviii of NATURAL HISTORY). Not all Russians are Great Russians and White Russians. Some are called “Little Russians”. They live – in the Ukraine and the eastern parts of Romania and Poland. They are often called Ukrainians or Ruthenians. There are about 50 million of them! Who are these people? The MEDES! The sons of Madai! Here is the proof!
In Genesis 10:2 we have Madai, the son of Japheth listed. Now check in an exhaustive concordance. You will find the original Hebrew word translated into English as “Mede” or “Median” is always Madai. Madai is the father of the Medes. The Medes used to be associated with the Persians. You will read about them especially in the book of Daniel. But by the time of Nehemiah the Persians were much more prominent. Today there are no Medes left in Persia [Iran]. The Medes are gone. Certainly a great branch of the human family could not suddenly vanish from the earth!
Indeed they did not. Throughout South Russia – in the Ukraine – four centuries before Christ the Medes were beginning to settle. Here is what the historian Herodotus wrote of these people: “They say that they are a colony of the Medes. How they can have been a colony of the Medes I cannot comprehend; but anything may happen in course of time” (Terpsichore, 9). Herodotus, like many moderns, was prone to believe that the people who inhabited Mesopotamia and the”Bible lands” must be living there today.But they are not. The Arabs have taken their place! The fact that the Medes are the Little Russians today is further amplified by Pliny in his NATURAL HISTORY, Book VI, section xi. He mentions “the river Don, where the inhabitants are… said to be descended from the Medes”!
While Hoeh enthusiastically concludes the northeastern Slavic speaking nations, lead by Ukraine are descended from Madai, we will learn that the sons of Madai the Medes, are of an Asian line of descent – albeit with European admixture – and not living in eastern Europe – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, page 45:
‘Madai are the Medes, the Mada of the Assyrians. We first hear of them in the cuneiform records under the name of Amada, about B.C. 840, when their country was invaded by the Assyrian monarch. They were at that time settled in the Kurdish mountains, considerably to the east of Lake Urumiyeh. Some fifty years later, however, we find them in Media Rhagiana, where they are called no longer Amada but Mada. It was from the latter form of the name that the Greeks took the familiar Mede.’
Amazing Bible Time Line – emphasis mine:
‘According to the Book of Jubilees [10:35-36], [Madai] married the daughter of Shem and pleaded with the three brothers of his wife [Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad] to let him live on their land instead [of] occupying an area in Japheth’s land[!] They gave him a spot to dwell on with his family and it was later… named Media. The capital city of Media was Ecbatana [Ezra 6:2]… Media flourished in the trade industry and was… blessed in the field of agriculture. Its lands were fertile…’
Recall Genesis 9:27 in Chapter II Japheth Orientalium – the prediction of Japheth dwelling with Shem – where, Madai has intermingled with Shem in extraordinary fashion and has been blessed with fertile soil and mineral wealth in its modern location.
The Book of Jubilees 8:5 states that a daughter of Madai named Milcah [Aramaic: Melkâ] married Canaan, Ham’s youngest son.
The Book of Jasher 7:5
And the children of Madai were
Achon, Zeelo, Chazoni and Lot
We will meet another, well-known Lot, later – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.
A selection of verses – in chronological order – regarding the Medes of Media in the Bible and revealing their intricate relationship with not only Elam of Persia, but also Asshur of Assyria.
2 Kings 17.6
English Standard Version
‘[Shalmaneser V]… the king of Assyria captured Samaria, and he carried the Israelites away to Assyria and placed them in Halah, and on the Habor, the river of Gozan, andin the cities of the Medes.
This occurred during 721 to 718 BCE – 2 Kings 18:11. Media while a powerful people, found themselves in the shadow of the Babylonian Empire and subject to the Assyrian Empire. The Persian Cyrus or Darius the Great, became King of Persia in 559 BCE. His father was King Astyages of Media, against whom he rebelled and desiring to remove Media’s dominance over Persia, annexed Media to the Persian Empire in 549 BCE.
Cyrus was the first ruler of the Achaemenid Empire, which lasted for over two hundred years. The Medes though conquered, continued to be honoured in the new empire and were invariably referenced together with the Persians – Acts 2:9.
Isaiah 21:2
New Century Version
‘… Elam, attack the people! Media, surround the city and attack it! I will bring an end to the pain the city [of Babylon] causes.’
Cyrus conquered the Chaldean Empire in 539 BCE. This event was foretold long before by the prophets Isaiah (13:17) and Jeremiah (25:25; 51:11, 28) and it occurred one year before Cyrus/Darius issued the decree which allowed remnants of the Kingdom of Judah to return to Jerusalem – Ezra 1:1-4.
Daniel 5:28
English Standard Version
‘Peres, your kingdom [of the Chaldeans] is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”
Daniel 5:31
New Century Version
‘So Darius the Mede became the new king when he was sixty-two years old.’
Cyrus ruled until 530 BCE. There were two interim kings and then Darius came to the throne of the Medes and Persians in 522 BCE, ruling until 486 BCE. Darius was not a son of Cyrus, being a Mede and not a Persian.
Daniel 6:15
New Century Version
Then those men went as a group to the king. They said, “Remember, O king, the law of the Medes and Persians says that no law or command given by the king can be changed.”
Daniel 6:28
New Century Version
‘So Daniel was successful during the time Darius [the Mede] was king and [later] when Cyrus the Persian was king.’
Daniel had found favour and was a key figure in the Court of both kings for half a century or more. In 485 BCE Xerxes I, the son of Darius the Mede became king, ruling until 465 BC. His son Artaxerxes I or Ahasuerus, ascended to the throne, when his father was murdered, at the age of twenty-six in 465/464 BCE. This was the apex of the empire, inherited from his father and when we are introduced to the biblical character Esther.
The second chapter of the Book of Esther reveals Esther’s rags to riches story. She was part of the returned captives originally from the Kingdom of Judah in 458/457 BCE. Esther descended from the tribe of Benjamin and was beautiful in countenance and spirit – Esther 2:7. She was placed in the King’s palace…
Esther 1:1-4
New Century Version
‘This is what happened during the time of King Xerxes, the king who ruled the one hundred twenty-seven states from India to Cush.’
Literally from present day India all the way west, to the nation in east Africa now known as Ethiopia.
‘In those days King Xerxes ruled from his capital city of Susa [or Susan]. In the third year of his rule [482 BCE], he gave a banquet for all his important men and royal officers. The army leaders from the countries of Persia and Media and the important men from all Xerxes’ empire were there. The banquet lasted one hundred eighty days. All during that time King Xerxes was showing off the great wealth of his kingdom and his own great riches and glory.’
Esther 2:16-18
English Standard Version
‘And when Esther was taken to King Ahasuerus, into his royal palace… in the seventh year of his reign [458/457 BCE], the king loved Esther more than all the women, and she won grace and favour in his sight more than all the virgins, so that he set the royal crown on her head and made her queen instead of Vashti.’
Esther 1:19
English Standard Version
‘If it please the king, let a royal order go out from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes so that it may not be repealed, that Vashti is never again to come before King Ahasuerus. And let the king give her royal position to another who is better than she’ – Daniel 6:12.
‘Then the king gave a great feast for all his officials and servants; it was Esther’s feast. He also granted a remission of taxes to the provinces [including Jerusalem] and gave gifts with royal generosity.’
About a third of the references to the name Madai, including Media and the Medes in the Bible, occur in the Book of Esther.
The Medo-Persian Empire contained 44% – about 50 million people – of the world’s population within its borders, according to Ehsan Yarshater in The Cambridge History of Iran – the highest such percentage for any empire in history.
To fully appreciate Madai’s identity, we will briefly touch upon Shem’s sons Elam and Asshur – with a selected identifying defining biblical verse for each – before returning in detail to each in their own chapters.
The modern day descendants of Elam or ancient Persia, are the Turks and the nation of Turkey – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Jeremiah 49:36
New English Translation
‘I will cause enemies to blow through Elam from every direction like the winds blowing in from the four quarters of heaven. I will scatter the people of Elam to the four winds. There will not be any nation where the refugees of Elam will not go.’
Footnote:
‘Or more simply, “I will bring enemies against Elam from every direction. / And I will scatter the people of Elam to the four winds.” Or more literally, “I will bring the four winds against Elam / from the four quarters of heaven./ I will scatter…” However, the winds are not to be understood literally here. God isn’t going to “blow the Elamites” out of Elam with natural forces. The winds must figuratively represent enemy forces that God will use to drive them out.’
We are provided an intriguing clue with regard to Elam’s location. It is vulnerable to attack from all sides: north, south, east and west. These are four points on a compass and represented by the direction of four winds, northerly, easterly and so forth. Turkey is literally at the crossroads of the Earth. It sits between the continents of Europe, Asia and the region of the Middle East geographically, politically and culturally – not quite a full member of any one.
Cyrus the Persian, the Elamite King, was known as:
‘The Great King, King of Kings, King of Anshan, King of Media, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the Four Corners of the World.’
Elam or Persia historically was geographically near Madai (or Media). Following points one, three and four in the introduction (primus verba), we should expect to find a European and Asian peoples not only in geographic proximity today but also connected through history, language and inter-marriage, revealed by their respective Haplogroups and autosomal DNA.
The reader is highly recommended to read Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey in conjunction with this chapter.
Meanwhile, the modern day descendants of Asshur and Assyria, dwell in Russia – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.
Zephaniah 2:13
English Standard Version
‘And he will stretch out his hand against the north [H6828 – tsaphown: northward, northern, (direction of), north side, north wind] and destroy Assyria, and he will make Nineveh [the capital] a desolation, a dry waste like the desert.’
If one studies a world map, Russia is as far north as you can travel. There it is; exactly where the Bible says. The Assyrians historically used their neighbour Media, as a foot stool. We will find a similar relationship has continued into modern times.
One can hear those readers with more than a cursory knowledge, gasping incredulously. Edward Hine first proposed Germany was Assyria in the 1870s – with people influenced by its adversarial relationship with Great Britain in following decades – and the idea proceeded to cement firmly in people’s minds like reinforced steel concrete. When Edom was first linked with Turkey is not exactly clear; though the arguments used hang by tenuous threads for both identities, with genetics providing the knock out blow, as it shall be discovered.
Many will be thinking: then who are the Germans and where is Edom? We will look more closely at these two influential peoples in later chapters – including the intricate relationship between Madai and Elam – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
It would be very convenient if Madai and or Elam still lived in present day Iran… since Iranians call themselves Persian – but this does not mean they are Madai or Elam. Please refer to point number one and two in the introduction (primus verba).
The cumulative evidence leads to Madai being the Turko-Mongol peoples of the Central Asian Republics; including the Tartars of Russia and the Mongols in Mongolia – namely, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan,Turkmenistan, partially Tajikistan and possibly including the Sami and Lapps of Russia, Finland and Scandinavia.
Madai from the verb madad, means: ‘measure, sufficient, enough’ or ‘judging’ and ‘as often as’, as well as ‘middle land’, and ‘out of the abundance of’. It could also be interpreted as: ‘My Measure[ment].’
For now, we will only introduce the relationship Madai has with Elam; detailing a comprehensive study later when we discuss Elam in Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. We will see support for the subservient relationship of Madai towards Asshur, present day Russia and the abundance Madai has been given in fulfilment of their name. If one looks at a map of the world, it is evident just how in the middle of the world, Madai truly is.
The five nations comprising Central Asia are former Soviet Republics, from the modern incarnation of the Assyrian Empire. They are referred to as ‘the stans’ – the Persian (Iranian) suffix meaning: land of.
The region historically connected the Silk Road, standing as the intersection for the movement of people, trade and philosophies between all parts of Asia and Europe. The population of the four principle nations is approximately 67 million people; not far off the Amerindian population of the Americas – Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian.
The people of Turkmenistan are known as Turkmen or Turkmen Turks.
Arlen Seitbatkal:
‘The word Turkmen stems from “Turk” and the intensifying suffix “men,” meaning true Turk. The word Trkmen is also mentioned in Mahmud al-Kashgari’s 11th-century dictionary, “Dīwān Lughāt al-Turk,” where it refers to an ethnic group and carries the meaning of Turk or Turkish person.’
Turkmen also live in Uzbekistan, Kazakstan, Iran and Afghanistan. They speak the Turkmen language; classified as part of the Eastern Oghuz branch of the Turkic languages – see map below.
Examples of other Oghuz languages include Turkish and Azerbaijani. In the early Middle Ages, Turkmen originally called themselves Oghuz and then later as Turkmen.
Flag of Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan – the nation with the largest population of the four – mines 80 tons of gold yearly; 7th highest in the world. Uzbekistan’s copper deposits rank 10th in the world, its uranium deposits 12th and the country’s uranium production ranks 7th globally. The Uzbek national gas company, Uzbekneftegas ranks 11th in the world in natural gas production and the country has significant untapped reserves of oil and gas.
What’s in Name of Central Asian Nations, Aibarshyn Akhmetkali , 2025:
‘Scholars link the origin of the term Uzbek to the name of Uzbek Khan, the ruler of the Golden Horde in the 14th century. When the horde began to disintegrate, the nomadic tribes within his ulus began to call themselves Uzbeks.’
Arlen Seitbatkal:
“In the nomadic tradition, a strong leader has always been identified with the people. If someone had power and authority, people followed them, and their name became fixed after the group.”
Turkic influence in Central Asia during the first millennium CE brought Turkic culture and language to the lands now known as Kazakhstan.
Orexca:
‘Written sources of the 6th century register the term “Tyurk” which is pronounced as “Tutszyue” by the Chinese and as “Turk” by the Sogdians. Archeological studies of Turkic monuments make it possible to somehow compare “these” Turks with certain Turkic tribal associations. In the Sayano-Altai region they have identified certain archeological cultures which might well be likened to early Kyrgyz, early Kypchaks or early Oguzes.
In the course of not infrequent internecine wars, tribal discord, and struggles for power and pasture, a part of the Turkic tribes which inhabited the steppes and valleys of Kazakhstan moved southwards – to Central Asia (… Tyurgeshes, Karluks, Kypchaks, Uzbeks, Oguz, and Turkmens-Seldzhuks), to Asia Minor… [and] to the Caucasus (Turkmen and Seldzhuks)…
Starting from the 4th century up to the beginning of the 13th century, the territory of Kazakhstan was the seat of West-Turkic, Tyurgesh, Karluk Kaganates, of the state made by the Oguz, Karakhanides, Kimeks and Kypchaks. All of them successively replaced one another right up to the Mongol invasion.’
These states contributed to the spread of Islam and the development of urban culture.
Mongol influence occurred in the thirteenth century when Genghis Khan conquered the region (1219-1224), incorporating it into the vast Mongol territories – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. The region then became part of the Golden Horde, a Mongol successor state.
Orexca: ‘After the invasion, [that is] in the beginning of the 13th century, uluses of the Mongol Empire of Zhuchi-Khan and Zhagatai were formed, which later gave birth to Ak-Orda, Mongolistan and finally to the Kazakh Khanate’ in about 1465.
The Kazakh Khanate was established by Jani Beg (Janibek) and Karay (Kerei) Khan. Various nomadic Uzbek tribes were unified under a single political entity and subsequently developed a distinct Kazakh identity.
Britannica:
‘[For these] separatist Uzbeks became known as Kazakh (“Independent” or “Vagabond”) Uzbeks, and over time a significant differentiation developed between them and the [non-separatist] Uzbeks in their respective ways of life: that of the Kazakh was more nomadic, that of the Uzbeks more sedentary.’
Online Encyclopaedia:
‘According to the latest research of population genetics, mainly of autosomal markers and Y-chromosome polymorphism, it is believed that during the 13th to 15th centuries that the Kazakh ethnicity emerged.’
The Kazakh Khanate reached its peak in the sixteenth century with a golden age under the leadership of Kasym Khan (1509-1518), who expanded its territory and influence.
Britannica: ‘… the Kazakhs were the masters of virtually the entire steppe region, reportedly able to bring 200,000 horsemen into the field and feared by all their neighbours. The prevailing view is that the rule of Kasym Khan marked the beginning of an independent Kazakh polity. Under his rule Kazakh power extended from what is now southeastern Kazakhstan to the Ural Mountains.’
The Kazakh Khanate conducted wars with neighbouring states; the Uzbek Khanate and the Tsardom of Moscow (1547-1721). In the early sixteenth century, the Kazakhs faced an increasing threat from first the Mongols and then from Russia which was expanding its borders to the East.
Kazakhstan became part of the Russian Empire in the eighteenth century. Its colonisation was accompanied by significant changes in the traditional lifestyle of the Kazakh people. Russia sought to actively develop land resources and introduce new administrative structures.
History Central:
‘The situation worsened after 1861 when Russian and Ukrainian peasants flowed into Kazakhstan after the freeing of the serfs and were given Kazakh lands. (This influx of Russians and Ukrainians was not limited to this period – it continued throughout the first seven decades of the [twentieth] century as well such that by 1979, there were more Russians than native Kazakhs in the region.)
Simmering resentments [following repeated revolts] led to a major rebellion in 1916′, sparked by the forced mobilisation of Kazakhs to the Russian front during World War I. ‘In suppressing the uprising, the Russians killed thousands. The Communist revolution the next year [in 1917] plunged Kazakhstan into civil war. Defeated, Kazakhstan became part of Russia as an autonomous entity, eventually attaining the status of one of the Soviet Union’s republics [Kazakh SSR in 1936].’
Britannica:
‘From 1927 the Soviet government pursued a vigorous policy of transforming the Kazakh nomads into a settled population and of colonizing the region with Russians and Ukrainians.’ This period in its history was marked by industrialisation, collectivisation of agriculture and cultural repression.
Britannica: ‘Despite their nomadic rural existence, the Kazakhs were the most literate and dynamic Indigenous people in Central Asia. But the collectivisation brutally imposed by the Soviet regime resulted in a shocking decrease in the Kazakh population: between 1926 and 1939 the number of Kazakhs in the Soviet Union fell by about one-fifth. More than 1,500,000 died during this period, the majority from starvation and related diseases, others as a result of violence. Thousands of Kazakhs fled to China, but fewer than one-fourth survived the journey; about 300,000 fled to Uzbekistan and 44,000 to Turkmenistan.’
In 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan became an independent country and a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States (with Russia); under the leadership of the first President Nursultan Nazarbayev. The new state began to implement economic reforms and political changes aimed at integrating into the international community.
History Central:
‘Non-Muslim ethnic minorities departed Kazakhstan in large numbers from the mid-1990s through the mid-2000s and a national program has repatriated about a million ethnic Kazakhs (from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Mongolia, and the Xinjiang region of China) back to Kazakhstan. As a result of this shift, the ethnic Kazakh share of the population now exceeds two-thirds.’
This checkered history replicates the intertwined historical relationship between the descendants of Asshur (Assyria) and Madai (the Medes); the ancestors of the Russians and Central Asians respectively.
Today, the transcontinental Republic of Kazakhstan, the nation with the biggest land area of the four within Central Asia, has an additional smaller portion west of the Ural Mountains in Eastern Europe. It is the world’s largest landlocked country and the 9th largest country in the world, with an area of 1,052,100 square miles. Kazakhstan is the dominant nation of Central Asia economically, generating 60% of the region’s GDP, mainly through its oil and gas industries. It also possesses vast mineral resources.
The Kazakh language is a member of the Turkic language family, with Uzbek, Kyrgyz, Tatar, Uyghur, modern Turkish, Azeri, Turkmen and numerous other languages spoken in Eastern Europe, as well as Central and Eastern Asia.
Arlen Seitbatkal:
“In the works of academician Abduali Kaidarov and professor Telkozha Januzakov, it is explained that the word ‘qazaq’ can be associated both with ‘qas saq’ (true Sakas) and with the combination of the words ‘qaz’ (goose) and ‘aq’ (white). But most researchers agree that the concepts of yerkin (free) and batyr (warrior) are at the core. The people who broke away from Khan Abulkhair called themselves free, i.e. qazaq.”
Kazakhstan has the 2nd largest uranium, chromium, lead, and zinc reserves; the 3rd largest manganese reserves; the 5th largest copper reserves; and ranks in the top ten in the world for coal, iron, and gold. It is also an exporter of diamonds.
Flag of Kazakhstan
Most significantly for its economic future, Kazakhstan has the 11th largest proven reserves of both petroleum and natural gas in the world. There are three refineries in the country and not being capable of processing the total crude output, much of it is exported to Russia.
Russian Proton launch vehicle with the Granat high-energy astrophysics observatory, prior to launch on December 1, 1989, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan.
Kazakhstan, while part of the Soviet Union was instrumental in the Russian Space Program; providing the launch sites for CCCP rockets.
Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan since 1997 and renamed from Aqmola in 1998
The Tatars are a collective of Turkic-speaking groups – nearly 7 million people – living in the Russian Federation. The Chinese referred to these nomadic tribes as Ta-Ta or Da-Da – meaning dirty or barbarian. During the early thirteenth century, Ghenghis Khan united the nomadic tribes then living in Mongolia. One of his grandsons Batu Khan, led the Mongol invasion of Eastern Europe – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Tatar man
Web source:
‘The… Tatars were conquered by imperial Russian forces during the reign of Tsar Ivan IV in 1552… When the Russian Empire collapsed in 1917, the Tatars… formed their own home-land, the Idil-Ural State. The Soviet government… instead formed the Bashkir Autonomous Republic (Bashkortostan) and the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (Tatarstan) on the same soil. When the Soviet government took over these regions, it redrew the boundaries and gave neighboring Russian provinces the best lands. By changing the boundaries, about 75 percent of the Tatar population found itself living outside the borders of Tatarstan.
Tatar culture was… affected… through the policy of Russification, where the Russian language and culture were legally forced on the Tatars and other ethnic groups… Tatars, of whom about 26 percent live in Tatarstan… is about the size of Ireland or Portugal.
About 15 percent of all Tatars live in Bashkortostan, another ethnic homeland in the Russian Federation that lies just east of Tatarstan. There are also smaller Tatar populations in Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan… In 922, the Tatars’ predecessors, the Bulgars, converted to Islam, and the old Turkic script was replaced by the Arabic alphabet.
A famous old Tatar… proverb is Tuzga yazmagannï soiläme, which means, roughly, “If it’s not written on salt, it’s wrong to even mention it.” The proverb refers to the ancient method of keeping records on plaques made of wood and salt, and commends the practicality of keeping written records.’
Recall ‘the Law of the Medes and Persians’, where a proclamation stood fast and could not be altered as discussed in the Books of Esther and Daniel.
Top 14 Tribes of Ancient Central Asia, Mahesh Shant – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Before the Turks entered the arena of history the Awars occupied the regions which later came under the sway of the Turks. After the destructions of the Huns, Syan Pi took over Manchuria, Mongolia and some parts of China. One of the dynasties descended from them, the To-Ba dynasty, was founded in 315 A. D. and continued till the 5th Century. This Hunnish tribe lived in the areas near Lake Baikal… and north of the Gobi desert [Mongolia].
At first the Chinese name for the Awar tribe was Ju-Jun but it was later (in 451 A. D.) changed to Jvan–Jvan by the To-Ba Emperor Tai-Hu-Ti (425-452 A.D.)…
She Lun, a powerful chieftain, who conquered the Kao She tribe and, consolidating his military strength, took the title of Kagan (Khan). The kingdom of the She Lun, which spread from Korea to the Altai, included a part of China as well as a section of the trade route of Central Asia. The Awars relations with the Chinese were not unlike those of their Hunnish ancestors. At times they plundered the border regions of China, at others they gave military aid to the Chinese Emperor. The Turks put an end to the military might of the Awars in 546 A. D.’
Of interest is the remarkable coincidence of the To-Ba dynasty – who were related to descendants from Madai (just as the Huns were from Elam) – should take on the name of their long distant uncle, Japheth’s fourth son, Javan (Jvan-Jvan).
Shant: ‘The Selzuks were a nomadic people inhabiting the regions north of the Sir Darya [Syr Darya River]. They were also known as Turkmans and the region once inhabited by them now forms part of the Soviet Socialist Republic. A branch of the Aguz, they spread in the course of their wanderings to the northern banks of the Sir Darya.
The Guz or Aguz [Oghuz] Turks were divided into three branches – Kipchiaks, Kankalis and Karluks. The Selzuk dynasty, which ruled over Central Asia and Iran for a long time, was descended from the Kipchiaks, and the Turks of modern Turkey are descended from the Osmanali branch of this tribe.
The similarity in language points to the Uzbeks, Turkmans, Khirgiz and Kazaks having sprung alike from Turkish stock.
They can be divided into three parts:
(i) The Northern Turks – the Yakuts of Siberia,
(ii) The Eastern Turks – the Sinkiang Turks, Uzbeks, Kazaks are Kufa Tatars
(iii) The Western Turks – Osman Ali, Azerbaijanians and Turkmans.
A branch of the Turks left its original homeland in the Altai mountains and advanced into Turkestan, driving out or absorbing the Scythian and Sogdhian tribes inhabiting these regions. Among these Turks were the Selzuks and the Chingiz Mongols.
The Sulzuks acquired that name from Selzuk Turk their first Muslim Chief, although they were equally well-known as Turkmans. The Western Turks, of whom Turkmans were the majority, brought Asia Minor and Armenia under their control, while another branch of the Western Turks, the Osmani Turks, brought about the downfall of the Byzantine Empire, made Constantinople their capital in the 15th century and later extended their rule over Eastern Europe.’
The entwined relationship between Madai (Mongols) and Elam (Turks) – the Medes and Persians of old – has endured through the cyclic phases of their history. The label Turk, used interchangeably for Uzbeks, Kazakhs and Turkmen of Central Asia as well as for the Turkish in Asia Minor – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Facts and Details, People of Central Asia:
‘The people of Central Asia are basically divided into two types: the traditional nomads and semi-nomads (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Mongols and Turkmen) and the settled people (the Uzbeks and Tajiks). According [to] DNA studies, Tajiks, Uzbeks and Turkmen have retained their “ethnic purity.”
There has traditionally been a lot of intermarriage between the ethnic groups of Central Asia. Uzbeks and Tajiks have traditionally been difficult to distinguish from one another. The same is true with Kyrgyz and Kazakhs. Up until the 20th century… [the Uzbeks and Tajiks] were regarded as essentially the same people except that Uzbeks spoke a Turkish language and the Tajiks spoke a Persian language.
Tajiks are… distinguished from other Central [Asians] by their traditional Islamic-Iranian culture [and ethnicity]. Uzbeks consider themselves the [dominant] people of Central Asia by virtue of their numbers and their historic links to… Genghis Khan. Other ethnic groups in Central Asia dispute this claim.
Kazakhs and Kyrgyz are close relatives. They look similar, have many similar customs and speak similar languages. Many believe they are [essentially] the same people with Kazakhs traditionally residing in the steppes and Kyrgyz living in the mountains. The Kyrgyz, however, have a longer and more coherent history than the Kazakhs. Clan and regional ties have historically been more important than ethnic identity.
Central Asia is a meeting point of Turkic, Persian and Mongol cultures.’
The Analysis of the Genetic Structure of the Kazakh Population as estimated from mitochondrial Dnapolymorphism, Scientific Centre of Obstetrics, Genecology and Perinatology, Galina Berezina, Gulnara Svyatova & Zhanar Makhmutova, 2011:
‘The most closely related populations are the Kazakhs and Uighurs, they are accompanied by the Uzbeks and the nation(s) of the southern Altai on one level. The Kyrgyz and Bashkir [Tatar] nations formed an independent taxonomic group in this cluster. The contribution of [European] and [Asian] components in the formation of the anthropological type of the Kazakhs was proved… by Ismagulov (1970) on the basis of a comprehensive study of paleoantropological and craniological materials.’
The land of Kazakhstan has been a place of interaction comprising many ethnic layers during a historically long period. Mongolian tribes, Turkic-speaking populations from Siberia and Altai, Indo-Iranians from the Near East, as well as Slavs from Eastern Europe took part in the formation of the Kazakhs. Thus, it is possible to explain a high level of genetic variability of mtDNA, with a complicated ethnic history.
Khazaria, Kazakh Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis mine:
‘Kazakhs (Qazaqs, Kazaks) are a Turkic-speaking people living in several modern countries including (but not limited to) Kazakhstan, China, and Mongolia. They are approximately 70% [Asian] and 30% [European] and this admixture explains why some Kazakhs have light European physical features in contrast to the majority who have black hair, brown eyes, and epicanthic eyefolds.
The Kazakhstan DNA Project‘s Y-chromosome records show that among its male members are the Y-DNA haplogroups C3, C3*, C3c, G… O2, Q1a3, E1b1b1, N1c1, R1a1, R1b1b1, R2, J2a1, J2a, and J2.’
The paternal Haplogroups in bold are indicative of lineages from Japheth; with the ancient C Haplogroup the defining marker for descendants from Madai.
Brook: ‘C3 [C2] (M217, P44) is not only common among Kazakhs but also frequent in Mongolia [and the Kyrgyz].
The analysis shows that Western Europe… and Eastern Europe… mtDNA lineages exist in the Kazakhs population. A high genetic diversity was observed in the Kazakhs population (h=0.996). “We have studied the relation between East Eurasian and West Eurasian lines in the gene pool of the Kazakhs using the data on polymorphism HVSI of mtDNA (frequencies of haplogroups). It was found out that the main contribution of East Eurasian lines (55% of the total gene pool) to the modern gene pool of mtDNA of the Kazakhs make haplogroups D, C, G and Z (36.2%), A and F (6.9%) and other haplogroups of Asian origin (11.9%) [B].’
The complexity of the Kazakh genetic make up is due to their Haplogroups being split between Asian (64-70%) and European lineages (30-35%); with their European genealogy being split further, between western (41%) and eastern European (55%) gene pools.
Brook: ‘West Eurasian lines (41% of the total gene pool) in the Kazakh gene pool are most frequently represented by the haplogroups H (14.1%), K (2.6%), J (3.6%), T (5.5%), U5 (3%) and others (12.2%).” We found that more than 64% of mtDNA lineages belong to Asian-specific haplogroups (M, C, Z, D, G, A, B, F, N9). Supercluster M was found with most high frequency (45%).’
Japheth’s son Tiras possesses the mtDNA Haplogroups in common with Madai: C, D, A and B – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. Haplogroups C and D derive from super sub-Haplogroup M, itself from L3 while Haplogroup A derives from super sub-Haplogroup N and B from super sub-Haplogroup R.
Brook: ‘Western-Eurasian specific haplogroups were observed in 35% (H, V, HV, J, T, U1, U2, U4, U5, U7, K, W, X)… the lineage of Hg U7, typical for all Levant, including Iran, was revealed in Kazakhs… East Asian hgs – A, B, F, N9 – make up about 18% in Kasakhs, like in all Central Asian populations, Altaics, Tuvinians and Bashkirs…
While those Kazak people who reside in China are mostly [Asian], just like Kazakhs in Kazakhstan, this study showed that 30.2% of their ancestry is western Eurasian. “In this study, we also find that all Turkic and Mongolic groups possess a common set of maternal haplogroups (C, D, G2a, H)…*
Kyrgyz (Kirghiz, Kirgiz) are a Turkic-speaking people living mostly in Kyrgyzstan but also in neighboring Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and China. They are descended from multiple different ancient peoples. Mongoloid (East Eurasian)ancestry represents between half and two-thirds of Kyrgyz ancestry.
Kyrgyz living in Tajikistan and western areas of Kyrgyzstan have less Mongoloid ancestry and more Caucasoid ancestry than other Kyrgyz. Central and South Asian ancestry is the next most important element representing about one-fourth. West Eurasian (including European) represents about one-eighth. Ancestry from West Asia [Arab, Persian] is not significant in any Kyrgyz person and many have none of it.
The Kirgiz DNA-Project’s Y-chromosome records show that among its male members who are Kyrgyz from Kyrgyzstan are the Y-DNA haplogroups C-M217 (C3) [C2], I-M253 (I1), J-M172 [J2], N-M232, O-P201, R-M198 (R1a1a), R-M269 (R1b1a2), and R-M343 (R1b1a1). R1a1 (and its subtypes) is also found among Kazakhs, eastern Siberians, South Asians, East Slavs, and West Slavs.’
‘This study of Y-DNA includes Kyrgyz samples as well as samples from other Central Asian peoples like Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Karakalpaks, plus many other populations from elsewhere. M17 [R1a1] is suggested to be “a diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker”… [resulting from admixture with European lineages]. “The exceptionally high frequencies** [63%] of this marker in the Kyrgyz, Tajik/Khojant, and Ishkashim populations are likely to be due to drift, as these populations are less diverse, and are characterized by relatively small numbers of individuals living in isolated mountain valleys.”
The most prevalent mtDNA Haplogroups for the Kyrgyz, in order are: D, H and C.* D, C and G are indicative of Asian ancestry and H is reflective of European admixture in the maternal line. The main Y-DNA paternal Haplogroups for the men from half of the seven million Kyrgyz are in descending percentage order:
R1a [63.5%] – C2 [13.5%] – O [5.8%] – K [1.9%] – O2 [1.9%] – N1c1 [1.9%] –
P [1.9%] – R1b [1.9%] – I1 [1.9%] – J2 [1.9%]
The Haplogroups, R1a, R1b and I1 are indicative of European admixture. The Haplogroups C2, K, O2 and N1c1, are the main Asian lineages for the Kyrgyz men, with C2 the principle defining Asian paternal Haplogroup. The very high frequency of R1a** is somewhat of an anomaly and reveals considerable admixture. For R1a is mainly associated with either the Eastern European peoples of Slavic descent; from eastern Siberia; or from mixed Indian ancestry in northern India.
J2 is typically a west Asian Haplogroup and particularly associated with Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. R1b is the main identifying Haplogroup for western European men and Haplogroup I1 originates with northwestern Europeans. What is important, is that Haplogroups C, K, N and O are key Asian Y-DNA Haplogroups.
The main Amerindian mtDNA Haplogroups – in order – are A, B, C and D. The Kyrgyz and the Kazakhs have the same Haplogroups, though with different variations and percentages. Similarly, the American Indian has Y-DNA Haplogroups Q and C, of which they share C with the Kyrgyz and both C2 and Q1a3 with the Kazakhs.
Kazakhstan Soldiers
The following prevalent Asian mtDNA Haplogroups are found in the Kazakh population of nearly twenty million people: D, C, G, Z, followed by A, F and also B and N9. The supercluster M is found with the highest frequency of 45%. The main European mtDNA Haplogroups include, H at 14%, K, J, T and U5. These two sets are very similar to the Kyrgyz people.
This is where they differ, with the Kazakh’s showing less European admixture as shown by the predominant and distinct C, K and O Asian Haplogroups. It also highlights how principle admixture has passed from the maternal^ line, with Madai males taking Elamite wives, or in other words, Turko-Mongol males marrying primarily Turkish women. J2 is the most prevalent Y-DNA Haplogroup of Turkish men with R1b and a lesser extent R1a and so the Kazakh and Kyrgyz males possessing the same is not a coincidence.
‘We present the whole genome sequence and thorough genetic variant and admixture analysis of a Central Asian, Kazakh MJS. We found several SNVs associated with drug toxicity, metabolism, diseases, phenotypic features and identified recent and ancient admixtures. Both PCA and phylogenetic analyses confirm closer MJS and other Kazakh similarity to modern East Asians than Europeansandshowed the overall closest genetic affinities are with other Central Asian populations, namely, Kalmyk, Uzbek and Kyrgyz. All populations with significant similarity to MJS genome could be backed up by historic migration events involving the Kazakh population and the major fraction of genomic variation could be attributed to fairly recent admixture with geographically close populations.
However, MJS’s mitochondrial^ DNA [maternal] haplogroup is of European [Turkish] or Near Eastern (West Asian) [Iranian] ancestry. It corresponds to the heterozygous SNPs associated with European phenotypic features and confirmed by admixture f3 statistics and all other Kazakh autosomal data showed very similar ancestral compositions to MJS’s. This highly heterozygous and admixed Kazakh genome provides insights into complex admixtures and can serve as a reference for mapping complex heterogeneity in Central Asian populations.’
The males from the total eight million Tajiks exhibit these main Y-DNA Haplogroups:
R1a [44.7%] – J2 [18.4%] – R2 [7.9%] – C2 [2.6%]
Tajikistan shows only a slim oriental link with their near neighbours and could have either mixed heavily or more likely, have more in common paternally with their southern Asian neighbours in Afghanistan and Pakistan – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
The males from the six million people of Turkmenistan carry the following Y-DNA Haplogroups:
R1b [37%] – J2 [17%] – K [13%] – P [10%] – R1a [7%] – R2 [3%]
The Haplogroup R2a (M124) is typically associated with the southern Asian men of particularly India with 10%; Pakistan with 8%; Western Asia; plus the Central Asian nations.
The Turkmen on the other hand show strong admixture with the Turks (and related peoples) as revealed by their R1b and to a lesser extent J2 Haplogroup levels. The K and P Haplogroups are indicative of their Oriental ancestry. Haplogroup P derives from K and Q descends from P. Even though Y-DNA Haplogroups P and Q can be associated with Europeans in trace quantities due to admixture, they are sourced originally from and consistently found in, Asiatics .
Kazakh Women
The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the men of half of the thirty million plus people in Uzbekistan:
Uzbekistan like the smaller Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan has obviously mixed with a people not descended from Japheth but rather from Shem, though not as heavily and thus retains more of their core Oriental Haplogroups such as C, K and O. Their R1a, J2 and R1b Haplogroups again link them as we will learn, with primarily Turkey.
Uzbek man
Seen together, their respective Y-DNA Haplogroups appear as the following:
Tajikistan: R1a – J2 – R2 – C2
Turkmenistan: R1b – J2 – K – P – R1a – R2
Kyrgyzstan: R1a – C2 – O – K – O2 – J2 – N1c1 – P – R1b – I1
Uzbekistan: R1a – J2 – C2 – R1b – K – P – O2 – R2 – I1 – N1c1
On the one hand they are all similar and on the other, there are differences highlighting the extent of the admixture experienced by Madai with principally Elam. Kazakhstan, the furthest north remains the closest to its genetic Asian roots. It is the nations of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan tucked underneath Kazakhstan to the south who are more mixed and it is Kyrgyzstan further east which remains purer than Uzbekistan in its core Asian Haplogroups.
Meanwhile it should be no surprise that the nation the most southwards – Turkmenistan which is the closest to Turkey – exhibits the most genetic influence with higher frequencies in Haplogroups J2 and R1b. Tajikistan is the most distant and has more in common with southern Asia than it does with Central or East Asia. Of the two bigger populated nations, Uzbekistan reveals intermarriage levels similar to the others and only Kazakhstan is the nation that has mixed the least, thus retaining a truer Central Asian identity.
Turkmen woman
Within the Haplogroup sequencing, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are more eastern in orientation, while Turkmenistan the most western oriented. Turkmenistan is geographically, linguistically and culturally more connected to Turkey – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. Uzbekistan bridges the gap between the other three.
The Haplogroups C2, O2 and major sub-Haplogroups K and P are all indicative of these nations descending from Japheth and their close genetic relationship with northern and eastern Asians.
A comparison table below for the principle Y-DNA defining marker Haplogroups for the North American Indian and Central Asian men.
C O K P Q
NA Amerindian 6 77
Kazakhstan 40 8 10 3 2
Kyrgyzstan 14 8 2 2
Uzbekistan 12 4 7 6
Turkmenistan 13 10
What does this table tell us? Noah would have carried Y-DNA Haplogroup A, which later mutated to C, D and F in his descendants descending principally from his eldest son Japheth. Japheth in carrying the proto-type C (and F) Haplogroup, gave his sons the mutations which would eventually derive into C, D, K, N, O1, O2 and Q.
Coincidentally totalling seven principle Y-DNA Haplogroups and thereby equaling the same number of sons descending from Japheth. Overall, the predominant oriental Haplogroups for Central Asia chronologically being C, followed by K, P and finally O.
It is Haplogroup C2 which is the defining marker Haplogroup for the male descendants of Japheth’s third born son Madai.
Tiras the Amerindian likely received Haplogroup C from admixture rather than inheriting it; thus proving interaction with either Madai or perhaps other sons of Japheth in the distant past. Some Native Indian tribes possess none and others varying levels of Haplogroup C.
More importantly, what we do know is that Japheth passed on the mutation which would eventually form Haplogroup Q. In this, the descendants of Tiras stand out with their relatively recent and unique Y-DNA Haplogroup marker. For other Asian peoples only carry Q in small quantities. Those European men who carry it, also possess it in small percentages, signifying admixture.
The table from Decoding a Highly Mixed Kazakh Genome, shows the genetic markers in comparing Asian populations. AM = America, CA = Central Asia, EA = East Asia, EUR = Europe, NA = North Asia, OC = Oceania, SA = South Asia, SEA = Southeast Asia and WA = West Asia.
Interestingly as expected, Tajikistan is not represented. The closeness between Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan is confirmed as it is between Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan following their westernisation and particularly Turkmenistan’s proximity to West Asia – Turkey and Iran. Both Tiras the Amerindian, and more so Madai in Central and North Asia, have experienced varying degrees of admixture as evidenced by the table.
We will confirm that Japheth’s remaining five sons are all grouped in the bottom right hand corner of the table, incorporated within East Asia and Southeast Asia.
These findings correlate to what we should expect to find if the Turko-Mongol peoples are descended from Madai… an Asian people descended from Japheth, which have absorbed European DNA from Shem’s line at different times in their history. The variety of admixture may be accounted for by the following:
A historical alliance with the children of Elam in ancient Persia, and the intermarriage between the two peoples over a number of centuries.
The Assyrian* removal of captive Israelites to Media. There may have been relationships formed between the two peoples – with possibly the subsequent original introduction of the R1a* Y-DNA Haplogroup.
The Medes were in a unique position of migrating across the vast Asiatic continent, yet they did not remain and become far removed from their original homeland. The circuitous route via East Asia and Mongolia, meant the bulk of Madai ultimately returned to the middle of the world, merely settling a little northwards from their ancestral home in ancient Persia, now modern Iran – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
This central position meant they were also exposed to travellers travelling east and west and therefore the recipients of the resultant impact on their racial diversity and identity. Only the surface has been scratched regarding Madai; their place in the world; and their historical impact. We will revisit Madai, when we study Elam – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.
Chapter five discusses two of the three sons of Gomer. A surprise for a number of researchers will be the fact that the descendants from Gomer are not located in Europe. A further revelation is that the third born son of Gomer, did not dwell near his brothers and this geographic patten is replicated today.
Words come again and again to our ears, but we never hear enough, nor can we ever really see all we want to see.
Ecclesiastes 1:8 New Century Version
“… being wrong can be dangerous, but being right, when society regards the majority’s falsehood as truth, could be fatal.”
Tiras is the seventh and youngest son born to Japheth. This writer had read Herman Hoeh’s article, Origin of the Nations, July 1957, in the 1980s while at University. When looking at the identities more closely in the 1990s, it was not clear who Tiras was definitively until all of Japheth’s other sons had been studied; for Tiras is next to impossible to identify solely from the Bible, as he is listed just twice in the genealogies of Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One.
It was therefore a process of elimination and once the other six sons of Japheth were conclusively identified, it cemented Tiras as the Indigenous Amerindians of North America, Central America and South America.
Ultimately, agreement was reached with Dr Hoeh’s findings on the Native American Indians – though not with the conclusion that Polynesians descend from Tiras – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia& Polynesia.
During the course of researching Tiras, the insight of Daniel Garrison Brinton (1837-1899) an American surgeon, historian, archaeologist and ethnologist was encouragingly stumbled upon. Brinton accurately identifies Tiras as the progenitor of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
The descendants of Tiras are unusual, in that they are uniquely scattered throughout two vast continents and not identifiable in just one nation.
Tiras is mentioned in the Book of Jubilees 9:16
‘And For Tiras there came forth the seventh portion, four great islands in the midst of the sea, which reach to the portion of Ham…’
The islands at the time of writing would have been the Greek Isles and beyond in the Mediterranean Sea – refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium. Remaining sons of Japheth also migrated to the Grecian Archipelago before moving further into Southern Europe and then migrating in a wide arc eastward towards central Asia – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The portion of Ham mentioned would have been dwelling in North Africa.
A H Sayce in The Races of the Old Testament, 1891, confirms the difficulty in tracing Tiras, for he confesses on page 48:
‘Tiras is the only son of Japhet whose name continues to be obscure. Future research can alone be expected to settle the question.’
Herman Hoeh’s invaluable research regarding Tiras – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:
‘The word “Tyrus” used for the city of Tyre in Palestine has no relationship with Tiras, the son of Japheth. Tiras journeyed to Asia Minor… there is more historical evidence concerning the migrations of Tiras than of any other son of Japheth. Yet the world has never guessed to what land the descendants of Tiras finally migrated!’
Tyre was southward, on the coast of present day Israel and in the opposite direction from that travelled by Tiras.
Hoeh: ‘The river Dniester, which flows into the Black Sea near the border of Romania was anciently called Tiras.’
There is a city called Tiraspol in Moldova, near the Romanian border in the region once known as Thrace. Though it was built in 1792, the city name recalls the ancient name of the Tearus or Tyras River as Hoeh acknowledges.
Hoeh: ‘That was the main seat of the people of Tiras for many centuries [later known as the Tyragetae]. These people migrated along the shores of the Black Sea, the Aegaean and the Mediterranean Seas – before the coming of the Greeks. The Greeks finally displaced them. Where were the people of Tiras driven to?
Before we can answer these questions we must first learn the tribal names into which the family of Tiras subdivided. Here are some of their names: Dyras, Teres, Tauri, Carians, Calybes, Thyni, Amazons, Maias, Milyaes, Mauri, Gasgars… (See SMITH’s CLASSICAL GREEK AND ROMAN DICTIONARY for most of these names.) Where, today, do we find these same people located among the nations? In the NEW WORLD: where the American Indians are!’
Regarding the Milyaes, Mauri and Gasgars. We will find that they are Malays and Polynesians and not the same as Amerindians, or descended from Tiras.
Additional interesting Indian tribal names include: Teyas in Texas; Tiwa in New Mexico; Tarahumara, Terocodane and Teroodane in Mexico; Terraba in Central America; Tairona in Colombia; Taruma in Guiana; and Tariano, Tariana and Terena in Brazil.
Hoeh: ‘The Amazons… in South America who gave their name[…] to the Amazon River. The Mayas live in Mexico and Guatemala. The Tinné Indians – the Greeks called them Thyni… live… in [Alberta] Canada. The Tarascan Indians of Mexico are called after “Taras, the name of a tribal god”, wrote Daniel G. Brinton in THE AMERICAN RACE… In South America live the Dures Indians, the Doraqsques, and the Turas, the Tauri and the Dauri; the Trios and Atures. In the Caribbean live Calybes – the same tribe that once lived by the Black Sea.
The people of Tiras are painted on the earliest monuments of the Mediterranean. The (colour) of their skin? – of “… reddish-brown complexion with their long black hair done up into a crest!” (quoted from THE SEA-KINGS OF CRETE, by James Baikie, [1926], page 74). From page 212 we read: “Judging from the surviving pictures, the Minoan men [the descendants of Tiras settled on the island of Crete prior to the Minoans – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America] were bronzed, with dark hair and beardless faces.”
Interestingly, the Minoans were allied with the Amazon tribes in the Aegean; so that the name Amazonia later appearing in South America is of little surprise. Murals of the temple in Medinet Habu in Egypt, depict people with features akin to the American Indians; while certain peoples related to the Minoans wore plumes. ‘The tufts of feathers offer incontrovertible evidence, because no other people have worn them’ – The True Origin of the American Indian, B Rea, 1968, page 14.
Hoeh: ‘The Mexicans called their temple Teocallis. This word is directly related to the Greek, meaning “place of worship of God”. The Greeks called the sons of Tiras, “sea people”. The native Indian name Anahuac, which the Indians of Mexico apply to the Valley of Mexico, means “around the water”.
Further evidence of Tiras in the Mediterranean is provided by words from the Aegean finding their way to the Americas.
Xious – Sioux
Andros – Androa tribe in Oregon; both names mean the same: “One which lives amongst trees”
Piraeus – Piros of Chihuahua
Anafi – Anafes of Brazil
Karpathos – Karpazos of Colorado
One commentator observes how ‘Mayan hieroglyphics show affinity with those of Egypt and also to Cretan scripts. Even certain Mayan names of days resemble the names of letters in the Phoenician alphabet. Stone scripts with markings and language similar to the Minoan has also been found at Fort Benning, Georgia. The main streets of the Mayans were bordered by fountains from which sprung hot and cold water. Similar installations of like design have been found beneath the ruins of Minos’s palace in Crete.’
This is noteworthy, for it is an example of the American Indian sharing a past history with the peoples who would also later populate the Americas – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
Hoeh: ‘An analysis of the ancient Indian traditions points universally to “an eastern origin” – across the Atlantic, not the Pacific. (See THE AMERICAN RACE, pages 98-99.) In fact, the word Atlantic was used 2000 years before Columbus discovered America… it is an American Indian word. Its root is atlan meaning “water”. Only a slight migration may have taken place across the Pacific from Asia to America. The overwhelming movement has been out of the Mediterranean to the new world!’
Hoeh raises a significant point regarding the migratory direction of the descendants of Tiras. Japheth’s remaining six sons travelled eastwards, predominantly across the vast Eurasian land mass. There were exceptions amongst the sons of Javan. Japheth’s grandson Tarshish sailed, travelling westward; establishing trade routes and ports along the Mediterranean Sea all the way to the Iberian Peninsula, before doubling back eastwards.
There is considerable conjecture and discussion from historians and scientists alike, regarding the Indians in the Americas. Most maintain they approached from the West via Russia passing over the Bering Strait – which is just 50 miles across – while others maintain a westerly direction from Europe and traversing the Atlantic Ocean as Herman Hoeh proposed.
Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews, held with other ancients that Tiras was the founder of the Thracians. The original Thracians were descended from Tiras. The 1946 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica describes the people who anciently inhabited the region.
‘The name Thrace, because it has been used as a geographical term as well as an ethnic description, has added to the confusion. Thrace was inhabited by indigenous tribes, as well as by Celtic Tribes such as the Getas. The aboriginal inhabitants were the red-skinned Thracians mentioned by the Greek writers and they differed from the Celtic tribes not only in complexion but also in customs and religion (Herodotus, V. 14.)… The most outstanding archaeological monuments of this prehistoric period are the mound-like tombs, that were generally located in the outskirts of the ancient cities…’ and later found in the civilisations of the Mississippi and Mexico.
‘There is no well-defined difference between the aboriginal Thracians and the native Illyrians. All of the Thracian tribes and the Illyrian tribes practiced tattooing, which distinguished them from the Celtic tribes that had from time to time dominated them.’ The Universal Encyclopedia: ‘A custom unique to the Thracians was tattooing. The nobles painted the hair of their head blue.’
Whereas, later Thracians included red headed people who had the same name ascribed to them. Please refer to point number two in the introduction (primus verba). While other scholars consider Tiras as the founder of an ancient race of Pelasgian pirates and sea peoples called the Tursenich or Tursenioi, who once roamed the islands and coasts of the Aegean Sea. The name Thrusa or Turusha has been seen among Egyptian records, showing that they terrorised and invaded Syria and Egypt about 1250 BCE. They are referred to as Tursha in an inscription of Ramesses III and as Teresh of the Sea on the Merneptah Stele.
Regardless, the descendants of Tiras would have likely departed from the Mediterranean Sea prior to 1250 BCE, as would have all the sons of Japheth centuries before. Others have connected Tiras with the cities of Tarsus, Tarshish and even Troas, the city of Troy.
Some researchers link Tiras to the Etruscans of Italy – who had been living in Lydia as the Tyrsenoi, before emigrating via Greece to Italy in the Eighth century BCE. We will discover the Etruscans are not descended from Tiras at all – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.
Tiras in Hebrew means: ‘desire, desirable’ or ‘moisturiser’ The verb rasas means ‘to moisten’ and the noun rasis means a ‘drop (of dew)’ or ‘fragment.’
A Chickasaw Woman
The Bible does not mention any sons for Tiras, yet the Book of Jasher 7:9 and 10:14 records the sons of Tiras as:
Benib, Gera, Lupirion and Gilak
While asserting that Rushash, Cushni, and Ongolis are also among his descendants.
The name Cushni is interesting as it is similar to Cush, a son of Ham. We will refer back to this when investigating Cush – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.
An earlier rabbinic compilation, the Yosippon claims the descendants of Tiras to be the Rossi of Kiv or the Kievan Rus, listing them together with his brother Meshech’s supposed descendants as ‘the Rossi; the Saqsni and the Iglesusi.’
The linking of Tiras with Meshech – a son of Japheth – and the Russians is an incorrect tangent though an understandable one, as we will find when studying Meshech – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
A mediaeval Hebrew compilation, the Chronicles of Jerahmeel, provides an alternative tradition for the sons of Tiras, naming them as Maakh, Tabel, Bal’anah, Shampla, Meah, and Elash. These names were based on Pseudo-Philo circa 75 CE, which lists the sons of Tiras as Maac, Tabel, Ballana, Samplameac, and Elaz.
The Persian historian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari circa 915 CE, states a tradition that Tiras had a son named Batawil and his daughters Qarnabil, Bakht, and Arsal, became wives for two of the sons of Ham: Cush and Phut – as well as for Canaan respectively.
Cush is mentioned again and we will return to this relationship. It is interesting Tiras may have had four to six sons, for though his descendants are not prolific, they are scattered over a vast section of the earth with a variety of ethnic characteristics; including Native American Indians stretching from Canada all the way to Argentina. If Tiras had three grand daughters, who married Cush, Put and Canaan, then his descendants in part, are innumerable. This is certainly plausible, as Noah’s grandsons would have had to take wives from their cousins when repopulating the earth.
Native American men
Genesis 9:1, 7
New Century Version
Then God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Have many children; grow in number and fill the earth. “As for you, Noah, I want you and your family to have many children, to grow in number on the earth, and to become many.”
The nation with the most Amerindians is Mexico. We will study Mexico and its combination of people in more depth, though for now concentrating on its Indian population. They are known as Mexican Native Americans; Native Mexicans; or the Indigenous peoples of Mexico. These peoples trace their communities back to the population existing in Central America prior to the arrival of the Spanish.
Interestingly, The 2nd article of the Mexican constitution classifies and numbers Indians not according to racial-ethnicity but rather cultural-ethnicity of ‘indigenous communities that preserve their indigenous languages, traditions, beliefs, and cultures.’
The INEGI or official census institute, reported in 2015 that 25,694,928 people in Mexico self-identified as being indigenous of many different ethnic groups; which constitute 21.5% of Mexico’s population.
At the time of the Spanish conquest in the late fifteenth century, the indigenous population of Mexico had been estimated at about twenty-five million people and has only reached this figure again, over five hundred years later. A remarkable statistic and a tragic indictment of one peoples actions against another family member – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.
The Amerindian population of other nations in the Americas include 9.8 million in Bolivia the second highest; 5.2 million in the United States; 2.13 million in Canada; 997,000 in Brazil and 955,000 in Argentina; with a total of approximately seventy million people throughout the Americas.
Flags of the Indian Nation
Historically, the Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints has taught that the American Indian are the descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel.
Following are the opening remarks in an article by William Lobdell, a Times staff writer, 2006 – emphasis mine:
‘From the time he was a child in Peru, the Mormon Church instilled in Jose A. Loayza the conviction that he and millions of other Native Americans were descended from a lost tribe of Israel that reached the New World more than 2,000 years ago.
“We were taught all the blessings of that Hebrew lineage belonged to us and that we were special people,” said Loayza, now a Salt Lake City attorney. “It not only made me feel special, but it gave me a sense of transcendental identity, an identity with God.”
A few years ago, Loayza said, his faith was shaken and his identity stripped away by DNA evidence showing that the ancestors of American natives came from Asia, not the Middle East.’
We will study the unique lineage of the apparent ‘lost’ tribes of Israel. They are not related directly with the Amerindian descended from Tiras. The DNA evidence highlights the American Indians origin in common with the people of East Asia, but is not wholly accurate regarding their true origin of location.
Native American women
The Diego antigen, a blood group system composed of 21 blood factors or antigens are inherited through alleles. The Diego antigen is common in Indigenous peoples of the Americas and in East Asians, but very rare or absent in most other populations, reflecting that the two groups share common ancestry – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III& IV; and Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
The Amerindians from Tiras are a lineage of the East Asian family of peoples who have sprung from Japheth. The Diego antigen discovered in 1953, is found in all the peoples of East Asia in varying percentages.
Conversely, the Dia antigen is very rare in African and European populations and the Dia antigen is either very rare or absent in Aboriginal Australians, Papuans, natives of New Britain and surprisingly, Polynesians – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.
Whereas, the incidence of Diegoa+, relatively high in Siberian Eskimos and Aleut people (the levels of Diegoa+ in Aleuts is comparable to South American Indians), occurs at a much lower frequency (less than 0.5%) among Alaskan Eskimos and has not been found in the Inuit of Canada.
Retina, Fifth Edition, M Cristina Kenney & Nitin Udar, 2013:
‘Haplogroups are mtDNA sequence polymorphism variations that have occurred over [thousands of] years and correlate with the… origins of populations traced through the maternal lineages. The oldest haplogroups [originate] from [African peoples]… [of which]… European, Asian, and Native American haplogroups have evolved.
Each haplogroup has related patterns of mtDNA sequences (haplotypes) that represent that population. [Y-DNA] Haplogroup Q is found in Asia, the Americas, Europe, and the Middle East. One of its sub-clades, group Q3 [Q1a3] is almost exclusively associated with the Native Americans…’
The mtDNA Haplogroups for the Indigenous Amerindians of North, Central and South America
Regarding the genetic history of the Indigenous peoples of America, the occurrence of the mtDNA (maternal) Haplogroups A, B, C and D among the eastern Asian and Amerindian populations has been recognised for some time. Unlike Haplogroup X, that is not strongly associated with East Asia, yet is the fifth most frequent mtDNA Haplogroup in the Indigenous Amerindian peoples. Rather, Haplogroup X is more strongly present in the Near East, the Caucasus region and Mediterranean Europe.
Ninety-five percent of all Native Americans possess the sub-Haplogroups A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, and D1. Haplogroup A being the predominant group overall in North America (and Central America); while Haplogroup C is most widespread throughout South America.
A study in 2009, A great diversity of Amerindian mitochondrial DNA ancestry is present in the Mexican mestizo population, found that in Mexico the ‘frequency of the Amerindian haplogroups A2, B2, C1 and D1 was 51.1, 17.8, 18.5 and 5.9%, respectively.’ The remaining five percent possess the sub-Haplogroups X2a, D2a, C4c, and D4h3a. As these four sub-Haplogroups are rare, studies tend to exclude them.
Whenever the results for any particular Amerindian population do not equal one hundred percent, it is because the remaining percent belongs to these rare sub-Haplogroups. This means that all Native Americans are descended from a small group of people, exhibiting a low genetic diversity, because they possessed only five mtDNA Haplogroups. A 2005 study conducted by Rutgers University, ‘concluded that the entire [Native American Indian] population of North America descended from just 70 individuals who arrived there about 14,000 years ago [after the global flood cataclysm]…’
In other words, the five principle mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups of the Indigenous Amerindian, are part of a single founding East Asian population. The link with East Asians, means scientists have assumed that migration had to be eastwards across the Bering Strait, based on the geography of similar related peoples. It does not seem to have occurred to the same scientists, that just because the Native American Indians are genetically related to East Asians, that it means they traveled together, or in the same direction – or even that it was the only migratory path.
Scientists base their theory heavily on the X2a and C4c lineages having a parallel genetic history, using this as proof that an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America is untenable; as C4c is a key Haplogroup in the East Asian portion of the mtDNA phylogeny.
Everything You Know Is Still Wrong, Lloyd Pye, 1997 & 2017, page 68:
‘Folsom points were supplanted in the 1930’s by an earlier, very distinctive type that came to be called “Clovis” points because the first were found near Clovis, New Mexico. These presented another unwanted mystery because they had no precedent in either Alaska or anywhere in Asia. The only precedent anyone could find was the Solutrean point culture of southwestern Europe.’
The Solutrean hypothesis is an alternative theory, that the Amerindians approached the Americas from Europe.
Pye: ‘By then every scientist in the world was wedded to the idea that the indigenous populations of the Americas came by the land bridge connecting Russian and Alaska (Beringia) during the tail end of the last Ice Age, so this was another one of those inconvenient facts that had to be swept under the rug and kept there.’
There is support for Amerindians once living in the British Isles, who were the original Picts. They painted and tattooed their bodies, which was copied by the fair-skinned Caledonian peoples, who later were also known as Picts by the Romans – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.
They had travelled from Spain in Western Europe – originating in Illyria and Thrace – as a warrior people who had been employed in the armies of Barbarians. They were ‘fierce, swarthy, half-naked, tattooed and painted.’ In Britain, they were called Attacotti, meaning the “very old ones”. They even used the totem-pole in Scotland.
The Attacotti were ruled over by a Pictish warrior aristocracy. The Attacotti were seen as aichechthúatha, meaning “client people”. The Caledonian Picts in Scotland adopted the matrilineal system of the Attacotti – like the Ohwachia Iroquois – and their reverence for a mother-goddess.
Sources refer to the original inhabitants of Scotland ‘as very dark, wild people with prominent cheek bones, living in the islands off Scotland.’ Another states: ‘Some were as Black and wild in their appearance as any American savages… like wild Indians, that a very little imagination was necessary to give one an impression of being upon an American river.’
Voltaire tellingly describes these early tribes in Britain:
“The inhabitants scarcely covered their nudity with a few skins of beast… and their ornaments were shapes that the men and women imprinted on the skin by pricking it and pouring on to it the juice of herbs, as the savages of America still do.”
In Scotland geographical place names resembling Tiras, included the River of Thurso, Tharsuinn Mountain and the Tarras River.
An interesting coincidence involves Tiras and another people descended from Japheth, discussed in the following chapter: Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. Anthropologists and historians refer to a Turanid people which once populated Scotland.
A commentators asks: ‘Who are the Turanid or Turanian peoples today? These are the Turkic peoples which occupy Central Asia and the territory north of the Caspian to the Black Sea, bordering on Thrace. This is mentioned because certain Turkic or Turanid tribes of Central Asia claim descent from Tiras. If so, the small Tirasian element would be totally absorbed by now into the Turkic masses…’
Another scholar writes: “Close to the Black Sea are the Kabards and Abkasians, who speak a curious agglutinative speech. Its nearest allies are in far-off North America, though Basque is slightly akin in structure… These Caucasus people might be related to the North Amerinds… It may be noted that Roland Dixon finds the same type of skull in those two regions.”
‘John Beddoe, famous anthropologist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, wrote in the classic work The Anthropological History of Europe, that a Mongoloid race once occupied Scotland as its earliest inhabitants. Further, he mentioned that traces of Turanian speech are still evident in the Scottish Gaelic language.’
An additional source adds, ‘most of the Attacotti suddenly disappeared in 503 AD with the arrival of the Scots (Gaels)… They left behind mounds of flint knives, stone-hewn tombs, and carvings. They were driven out of Britain and settled in Greenland for a time’ before migrating to Central America. ‘Toltec tradition say that they arrived in c. 503 AD to the already settled areas where Mexico City stands today.’
The base or core Y-DNA (paternal) Haplogroups for the Native American Indians are Q and C. There are a number of Indian tribes which also carry R1. This is somewhat of a mystery and thought to be the result of European colonisation at different stages of their history – refer Chapter XV The Philistines:Latino-Hispano America.
Notably, Haplogroup C is a key Haplogroup for Central Asians, yet for the American Indian, the ancient Haplogroup C is secondary to the far more recent Q mutation and can be rare. Therefore, Y-DNA Haplogroup Q,is the defining marker Haplogroup for male Amerindians.
Added to this, is the fact that only some branches of both Haplogroup Q and C are Native American. Specifically, subgroups Q1a3a and C3b (P39) alone, are found among the Native peoples of North America and South America. Other subgroups of Haplogroup Q and C are found elsewhere in the world, such as in Europe and Asia. This makes it very easy to determine if your direct paternal ancestor was or was not, Native American.
The Algonquian men of northeastern North America possess the following Haplogroup frequencies:
R1 [38%] – Q [34%] – C [8%],
while the Apache of the southwestern United States possess:
Q [78%] – C [15%] – R1 [5%].
The Cherokee of the eastern United States carry:
Q [50%] – R1 [47% ] – C [2%];
the Navajo of the southwestern United States:
Q [92%] – R1 [3%] – C [1%];
and the Sioux men of central North America have:
R1 [50%] – Q [25%] – C [11%].
Native North Americans overall, have the following paternal Haplogroup frequency:
Q [77%] – R1 [13% ] – C [6%];
and in the United States specifically:
Q [58%] – R1 [22%] – C [9%].
In contrast, the Inuit men of the Artic have: Q [80%] – R1 [11%];
while the Canadian Inuit have: Q [55%] – R1 [34%] – C [2%].
The Mixe of Mexico are untouched by western influence with remarkably:
Q [100%];
whereas the Mixtec have: Q [93%] – R1 [7%];
and the Zapotec: Q [75%] – R1 [6%].
As research and understanding of the relatively new field of Haplogroups advances, refinements in the myriads of clades continues to evolve. Subsequent studies have highlighted that Q1a3a now includes both Native American and European members. Q1a3a1 is now deemed a Native American only Haplogroup. There is also another recently discovered Haplogroup Q1a3a4, that has likewise been designated a purely Native American group.
It is worth noting that as Tiras is the seventh and youngest son of Japheth, the male descendants of Tiras also carry – relatively speaking – the very young Haplogroup, Q. The fact some men carry C-P39, shows a distant link with an early and ancient Haplogroup – in Japheth’s line – and the many subsequent generational mutations arriving at Q. Thus, unlike Central Asian men who carry Haplogroup C2 as their defining marker, the sons of Tiras are identified by Haplogroup Q, which while very common, is somewhat rare outside of the Americas.
Prior to 1952 and the use of DNA in hereditary research, scientists used blood proteins to study human genetic variation. The ABO blood group system is credited to the Austrian Karl Landsteiner, who found three different blood types in 1900 – refer article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor. Blood groups are inherited from both parents and the ABO blood type is controlled by a single gene – the ABO gene – with three alleles: i, IA and IB.
Research by Ludwick and Hanka Herschfeld during World War I, found that the frequencies of blood groups A, B and O differed markedly around the world. The O blood type – resulting from the absence of both A and B alleles – is very common, with a rate of sixty-three percent in all human populations.
Type O happens to be the primary blood type among the indigenous populations of the Americas, in particular within Central and South American populations, with a frequency of nearly one hundred percent. In contrast, in indigenous North American populations the frequency of type A ranges from sixteen to eighty-two percent. This data supports the initial Amerindians descending from an isolated population with a minimal number of individuals.
Map showing the dominance of blood type O amongst Native American Indians
There are two main hypotheses for the exceptionally high rate of type O blood amongst the Amerindians.
One is Genetic drift, in which the small number of Native American populations meant the almost complete absence of any other blood gene or type being passed down through the generations.
The other theory is the Bottleneck explanation, which proposes that there were high frequencies of blood type A and B among Native Americans but severe population decline during the sixteenth and seventeen centuries, caused by the introduction of disease from Europe resulted in a massive death toll of those with blood types A and B; leaving a large amount of type O survivors.
Chapter four investigates Japheth’s third son, Madai. Researchers have searched vainly for Madai’s descendants in Europe. Yet ironically, while they do not dwell in Europe, they have had historical ties with Europeans.
The mind of a person with understanding gets knowledge; the wise person listens to learn more.
Proverbs 18:15 New Century Version
“Rejecting God’s truth because of mankind’s hypocrisy is like rejecting mathematical truth because of mankind’s incompetence.”
Japheth is the eldest son of Noah and we learn important aspects about him in Genesis 9:27, English Standard Version:
“May God enlarge [H6601 – pathah] Japheth, and let him dwell [H7931 – shakan] in the tents [H168 – ‘ohel] of Shem…”
Israel a History of – emphasis theirs:
‘The word “enlarge” is an unusual translation of the Hebrew word Pathah. Pathah is not the word normally used for “enlarge”, and in this instance, “enlarge” does not signify a geographical enlargement. Rachab would be the word used to convey a geographical enlargement. Instead, Pathah typically is translated as “entice”, or “persuade”. It is derived from the Hebrew word Pathach, which means “to make open”. However, this verse is the only instance in the Bible where the form Pathah occurs, and it has been agreed upon by linguists and scholars to be translated as “enlarge.”
The Hebrew word Pathah means: ‘to entice, deceive, persuade or seduce.’ The wider application includes: ‘to be spacious, open, be wide.’ The King James Version principally translates the word as entice, ten times; deceive, eight times; and enlarge, only once.
The New English Translation:
May God enlarge Japheth’s territory and numbers! May he live in the tents of Shem…
Footnotes:
‘The words “territory and numbers” are supplied in the translation for clarity. There is a wordplay (paronomasia) on the name Japheth. The verb (yaft, “may he enlarge”) sounds like the name (yefet, “Japheth”). The name itself suggested the idea. The blessing for Japheth extends beyond the son to the descendants. Their numbers and their territories will be enlarged, so much so that they will share in Shem’s territories… it is not clear what it would mean for Japheth to live in Shem’s tents… there is no reason in this context to expect Japheth to be blessed at the expense of Shem and occupy his territory… it would make more sense for it to mean that Japheth would participate in the blessings of Shem, but that is not clear for this phrase.’
The root of Yepheth or Japheth is pathah, ‘to make wide.’ Thus the verse could read: ‘May God enlargeenlarged and let him dwell…’
Abarim Publications explain Japheth’s meaning in Hebrew as: ‘formless expansion, enlarged, magnified, may he expand.’ It derives from the verb pata, ‘to grow bigger…’ and ‘appears to describe the process of slowly but surely growing wider… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes Enlargement [and the] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Wide Spreading.’
The Hebrew word for dwell is shakan, meaning: ‘to settle down, abide, reside, establish’ – the idea of lodging. The KJV uses the word dwell the most: ninety-two times.
The word for tents is ‘ohel, translated as: tabernacles, 198 times; tents, 141 times; and dwelling, two times.
A selection of Bible translations state the verse as follows:
Amplified Bible: ‘May God enlarge [the land of] Japheth…’
Easy to read version: ‘May God give more land to Japheth…’
International Standard Version: ‘May God make room for Japheth…’
The Message: ‘God prosper Japheth, living spaciously in the tents of Shem.’
New Life Version: ‘May God make Japheth great…’
The Voice: ‘May God make plenty of room for Japheth’s family and give them homes among Shem’s tents.’
This writer’s preference for best describing the intent, is the Good News Translation:
“May God cause Japheth to increase! May his descendants live with the people of Shem!”
As pathah is used in a unique context in this verse, it is difficult not to ascribe a geographical aspect to its intention – as it is associated with the second part of the verse – in dwelling within Shem. It would seem that the word is conveying more than just an enlargement and hinting at the method of that growth, through some form of deception or stealth.
This verse references Japheth’s posterity enlarging in population and though not intimating geography specifically it is indirectly, as Japheth is to encroach on Shem’s descendant’s territories via immigration. Japheth is increasing in prosperity – giving them the opportunity to share the economic benefits afforded – by dwelling in the prosperous nations descended from Shem – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.
Thus Genesis 9:27 is a remarkable prophecy, as it succinctly describes Japheth’s descendants accurately, in our very age. They are enlarging within the borders of Shem’s descendants at a phenomenal rate. So much so, that the demographic status of certain nations is changing rapidly before our very eyes. We will look at figures to support this trend when we study Shem and certain of his son’s descendants.
Noah’s eldest son Japheth, represents the vast array of peoples of eastern and oriental descent; the Asiatics of Central, Eastern and South East Asia; Polynesia; as well as the Indigenous Amerindians of the Americas.
A number of people interested in the biblical identity of nations have been led astray in accepting the T and O map identification for Noah’s sons Japheth, Ham and Shem. The first printed version of Isidore’s Etymologiae is shown below.
The map identifies Cham or Ham, partially correctly as the peoples of Africa; Sem or Shem, incorrectly as Asia; and Iafeth or Japheth again incorrectly, as Europe. ‘In the seventh century, archbishop Isidore of Seville wrote his noted encyclopaedic-historical work, in which he [traced] the origins of most of the nations of Europe back to Japheth. Scholars in almost every European nation continued to [incorrectly] repeat and develop Isidore of Seville’s assertion of descent from Noah through Japheth into the nineteenth century.’
The far reaching consequence of this inaccurate scholarship has for example, resulted in the confusion exhibited on the map below.
Where would one start? For the map is wrong on numerous levels.
Shem is blue, with the exception of South West Asia. While Iran is part of Shem (in the main), Pakistan is not and is Hamitic.
The brown in Africa is not from Shem and rather a mix of Canaan and Ham. The brown in the Middle East is Ham and not Shem, though the yellow is from Shem.
The red in Africa is not Hamitic, but rather Canaanite.
The red of the Americas is a mix of primarily Japheth (indigenous) and Shem from colonial migration.
While the red of Central Asia, East Asia and South East Asia is from Japheth; the red of South Asia represents Ham and the red of Australasia is mainly Japheth and partially Ham.
If one were to entertain that the map above was correct, can the reader appreciate the disparity in geographic areas. An anomaly which does not parallel the division of the planet after the deluge amongst Noah’s ostensibly three sons (actually four) and sixteen grandsons (really twenty-one) – Genesis 10:1-32.
The map above is a closer interpretation of the truth. Even so, Shem does not extend into the Middle East (above Africa); and Africa is partially descended from Ham and principally from Canaan – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
The Book of Jubilees provides information on the early settlement – after the flood cataclysm – of Southern Europe, West Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.
Book of Jubilees chapter eight:
10 ‘And it came to pass… that they divided the earth into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth, according to the inheritance of each…
11 And [Noah] called his sons, and they drew nigh to him, they and their children, and he divided the earth into the lots, which his three sons were to take in possession, and they reached forth their hands, and took the writing out of the bosom of Noah, their father…
25 And for Japheth came forth the third portion beyond the river Tina to the north of the outflow of its waters, and it extends north-easterly to the whole region of Gog, and to all the country east thereof. 26 And it extends northerly to the north, and it extends to the mountains of Qelt towards the north, and towards the sea of Ma’uk, and it goes forth to the east of Gadir [Iberia] as far as the region of the waters of the sea.
27 And it extends until it approaches the west of Fara and it returns towards ‘Aferag, and it extends easterly to the waters of the sea of Me’at. 28 And it extends to the region of the river Tina in a north-easterly direction until it approaches the boundary of its waters towards the mountain Rafa, and it turns round towards the north.
29 This is the land which came forth for Japheth and his sons as the portion of his inheritance which he should possess for himself and his sons, for their generations forever [as in a very long time]; five great islands* [in the Mediterranean Sea], and a great land in the north [Central Asia].
30 But it is cold, and the land of Ham is hot [North Africa and the land of Canaan], and the land of Shem [Mesopotamia and Arabia] is neither hot nor cold, but it is of blended cold and heat.’
The sons of Japheth and particularly those descended from his son Javan – Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodan – migrated to the Mediterranean Sea and dwelt on the major islands* of Cyprus, Crete (and Rhodes), Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica. Today, these same peoples dwell on the great island chains comprising Japan; the Philippines; Malaysia (and Singapore); Indonesia; and Polynesia – including related peoples in Micronesia, Melanesia, Taiwan, Australia and New Zealand.
Of course, Japheth had the same DNA as his brothers and resembled them. Even so, the Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations indicative of Japheth’s descendants found their source in their paternal ancestor Japheth, inherited from his father Noah.
It was his wife ‘Adataneses, who carried the distinctive mitochondrial DNA possessed by the Asiatic peoples today – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: TheGenesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens.
In the antediluvian age there were three principle bloodlines as discussed in Chapter I Noah AntecessorNulla. One descending from Cain (Genesis 4:1); another from Abel’s ‘replacement’, Seth (Genesis 4:25; 5:3); and the third being the people who came into existence in what the Bible calls the Sixth Day, or rather the sixth epoch of creation – Genesis 1:26-31. For it was not a literal day – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Biblically and historically, the people of Day Six dwelt on the Earth before Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:7), who were created on Day Eight if you will; and it was with these inhabitants east of Eden where Cain settled, built a city and ruled over them – Genesis 4:16-17.
Scientifically, the people of Day Six are closely related to the modern human, Homo sapiens of the eighth epoch and they equate to Neanderthal man – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, II & IV.
It was from this third – and chronologically first – bloodline whom Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses (below) descended.
This explains why on one hand, many people possess genetic material of Neanderthal origin in small percentages. More importantly on the other hand, it reveals why it is people in East Asia who can exhibit high percentages of Neanderthal DNA – Articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.
The principal mtDNA (mitochondria) maternal Haplogroups associated with Japheth’s descendants include:
Haplogroup A – found in Indigenous Americans (1) as well as Asians.
Haplogroup B – one of the primary East Asian lineages as well as one of five mitochondrial lineages identified among Indigenous Americans (2).
Haplogroup C – a descendant of super Haplogroup M, one of the two major lineages – with Haplogroup N – that derive from L3 – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. It is currently found in northeast Asia and it is also considered one of the founding lineages of the Indigenous American (3) population.
Haplogroup D – the principal East Asian lineage. Notable subgroups include D4, which is prevalent amongst Central Asian peoples; and D1, which is one of the five Haplogroups represented among Indigenous Americans (4).
Haplogroup E – located throughout the isles in Southeast Asia.
Haplogroup F – one of the primary mitochondrial lineages in East and Southeast Asia. Its greatest frequency and sequence diversity is found among coastal Asian populations.
Haplogroup K – certain lineages are found in Central Asia.
Haplogroup L3 – a daughter of mitochondrial Eve. Asian and European Haplogroups trace their ancestry to L3.
Haplogroup M – members were among the first humans to apparently migrate east along the southern coasts of Asia.
Haplogroup R – ancient and complex; today its members can be found all over the world, including Central and South Asia.
Haplogroup X – distributed worldwide with a subgroup X2, one of the founding lineages of Indigenous Americans (5).
Haplogroup Y – associated with Siberian populations. Also found in the Japanese, Koreans and certain Southeast Asian populations.
Haplogroup Z – located throughout Asia, with higher levels exhibited in Tibet and Siberia and lower levels in Japan. A subgroup Z1, is also found among the Finnish Saami, who have both European and Asian ancestry.
The global distribution of Y-DNA (Y sex chromosome) paternal Haplogroups associated with Japheth’s descendants are summarised in Retina, Fifth Edition, 2013:
‘Clade C [is] found in Central Asia, South Asia, and East Asia. C1 [C1a1] lineage is found exclusively in Japan. C2 [C1b3a] is found in New Guinea, Melanesia, and Polynesia. C3 lineage is … [found] in Southeast [and] Central Asia… [as well as] northern Asia, the Americas and Central Europe. C4 [C1b3b] appears to be restricted among aboriginal Australians and is dominant in that population. C5 [C1b1a1] has a significant presence in India.
Haplogroup D appears in Central Asia [D1a1b], Southeast Asia [D1], and in Japan, showing the highest frequencies in Tibet [D1a1a] and Japan [D1a2a] (50% and 35%, respectively).
Haplogroup K is the ancestral haplogroup of major groups L to R, but, in addition, also includes the minor K and K1 to K5 [K2] haplogroups, which are present at low frequencies in dispersed geographic regions all around the world, [including South East Asia].
The Y-DNA haplogroup N has a wide distribution, primarily in northern Eurasia…
Lineage O [M175] represents nearly 60% of chromosomes in East Asia. The O3 [O2a1 – M122] haplogroup has the highest frequency, being absent outside East Asia. The O1 [O1a – M119] and O2 [O1b – M268] haplogroups appear in Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, South China, Japan, and Korea.
Haplogroup Q is found in Asia, the Americas, Europe, and the Middle East… its sub-clades, [groups Q1a3a1, Q1a3a2 and Q1a3a3 are] exclusively associated with the Native Americans.’
It is interesting to note concerning mtDNA Haplogroups, that some of the ones highly indicative of Japheth’s descendants are considerably older in the phylogenetic tree and not shared with Ham or Shem’s descendants, such as C, Z, D and E. Similarly, more recent mutations – though still not the newest – are also unique to his sons, such as Haplogroups A, Y and B.
With regard to Y-DNA Haplogroups, early original Haplogroups unique to Japheth’s descendants prior to admixture, include C and to a large degree, D. More recent Haplogroups, include K, N and Q and between these is the Haplogroup most commonly associated with Japheth’s male descendants, Haplogroup O-M175.
While some may consider it just a synchronism of happenstance that the name Jap-heth and the nation Jap-an share the same first syllable; for others, it is a remarkable connection that transcends time and language beyond a mere coincidence.
Chapter Three concentrates on Tiras, the seventh and youngest son of Japheth.
And the man said to me, “Son of man, look with your eyes, and hear with your ears, and set your heart upon all that I shall show you, for you were brought here in order that I might show it to you…”
Ezekiel 40:4 English Standard Version
“No great discovery was ever made without a bold guess.”
“If I have ever made any valuable discoveries, it has been due more to patient attention, than to any other talent.”
For the purpose of this work, we will begin with Noah and his family as our starting point and the family tree or Table of Nations, listed in Genesis 10:1-32 and 1 Chronicles 1:1-20.
Professor Aaron Demsky comments in Reading Biblical Genealogies, The Table of Nations, Humanity as an extended Family:
‘Genesis 10, known as the “Table of Nations,” describes mankind after the Flood; it is a veritable storehouse of ethnographic and geographical information regarding the biblical period. The chapter divides humanity into the descendants of the three sons of Noah: Japheth, Ham and Shem in that order according to their increasing numbers and according to their ethnic closeness to the unmentioned Israel, whose Patriarch Abraham was not yet born. This chapter expresses the ideal brotherhood of humanity, implying an innate equality and collective responsibility. This ideal is expressed in the use of segmented genealogies creating a world of one big family: the Sons of Noah.’
Continuing in Genesis, English Standard Version:
1 These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood.
2 The sons of Japheth:
Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.
6 The sons of Ham:
Cush, Egypt [Mizra], Put, and Canaan.
7 The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan…
13 Egypt [Mizra] fathered Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 14 Pathrusim, Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim.
20 These are the sons of Ham, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations.
15 Canaan fathered Sidon his firstborn and Heth, 16 and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, 17 the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, 18 the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. Afterward the clans of the Canaanites dispersed…
21 To Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber… children were born.
22 The sons of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, and Aram.
23 The sons of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash.
24 Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber. 25 To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided, and his brother’s name was Joktan…
31 These are the sons of Shem, by their clans, their languages, their lands, and their nations.
32These are the clans of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, in their nations, and from these the nations spread abroad on the earth after the flood.’
Dr Herman Hoeh’s Introduction in Origin of the Nations – capitalisation his:
‘Let us first turn to Genesis 10 and 1 Chronicles 1. Here is the place to start. Yet here is the place from which almost no one begins. To begin here is looked upon as “unscientific.”
These two chapters hold THE KEY NAMES… The whole human family sprang from the three sons of Noah. But their descendants turn up today in the least expected places! Now read Genesis 10:32: “These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations; and OF THESE were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.” Did you notice the wording of this verse! “of these” were the nations divided – not after some other families, but OF THESE VERY FAMILIES MENTIONED IN GENESIS 10. The nations today are descendants of these family names.
All nations and races sprang from Japheth, Ham and Shem, the three sons of Noah. From the three sons sprang 16 grandsons of Noah. These 16 family names illustrate all the general types of people extant today. All these sons had children, but their names are not recorded in Scripture. We did not need to know their names in order to understand the Bible.
Historian Arthur Kemp explains race versus ethnicity and the importance of understanding the second point raised in the introduction, discussing migration.
March of the Titans, 1999 & 2016, pages 1, 8:
‘A race is defined as a group of individuals sharing common genetic attributes which determine that group’s physical appearance and, more controversially, their cognitive abilities. Ethnicity is defined as the creation of groups by individuals (most often within racial groups but also possible across racial divides) of certain common traditions, languages, art forms, attitudes, and other means of expression. A culture is the name given to the physical manifestations created by ethnic groups – the actual… religion, social order, and achievements of a particular group… ethnicity and culture – are directly dependent upon each other, and flow from each other in a symbiotic relationship.
… If all [of a specific nation of] people on earth had to disappear tomorrow, then fairly obviously, [their] civilization and culture would disappear with them. It is this startlingly obvious principle which determines the creation and dissolution of civilizations – once the people who create a certain society or civilization disappear, then that society or civilization will disappear with them. If the vanished population is replaced by different peoples, then a new society or culture is created which reflects the culture and civilization of the new inhabitants of that region… That this should happen is perfectly logical. It has nothing to do with which culture is more advanced, or any notions of superiority or inferiority. It is merely a reflection of the fact that a civilization is a product of the nature of the people making up the population in the territory.’
Regarding Haplogroups – the fourth point mentioned in the introduction (primus verba) – Eupedia explains:
‘Mitochondrial DNA is found outside the cell’s nucleus, inside the mitochondria – organelles that provide energy to the cell. It consists of only 16,569 base pairs, or 0.000005% of the human genome. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited only through one’s mother. As it does not recombine like chromosomes, it can be used in population genetics to trace back ancestry on the matrilineal side and to divide populations into haplogroups. The same can be done on the patrilineal side using the Y-chromosome (Y-DNA), which is inherited exclusively from father to son and does not recombine with the X chromosome. Only a few mutations distinguish the Y chromosome of a man and his father. These mutations are cumulative from generation to generation, so it is easy to trace the family tree of humanity by analyzing these mutations (SNPs) [single nucleotide polymorphism] on the Y chromosome and mtDNA.’
Humanity have two lineages, the Y-DNA Haplogroups traceable via their fathers and mtDNA Haplogroups traceable from their mothers. Maternal Haplogroups are determined from mitochondrial DNA information passed down from mothers to all of her offspring; whereas paternal Haplogroups are determined from the Y sex chromosome passed down only from fathers to sons. Every single human being belongs to or has, a Haplogroup. However, males have input from two Haplogroups and females have only one. Thus males inherit a maternal Haplogroup from their mother and a paternal Haplogroup from their father; while females only inherit a maternal Haplogroup.
A brief summary of Mitochondrial DNA analysis by John M Butler, Defining mtDNA Haplogroups in Advanced Topics in Forensic DNA Typing: Methodology, 2012:
‘Over the course of typing mtDNA samples from various populations, researchers have observed that individuals often cluster into haplogroups that can be defined by particular polymorphic nucleotides… These haplogroups were originally defined in the late 1980s and 1990s by grouping samples possessing the same or similar patterns when subjected to a series of restriction enzymes that were used to separate various mtDNA types from diverse populations around the world…
Haplogroups A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and M are typically associated with Asians while most Native Americans fall into haplogroups A, B, C, and D. Haplogroups L1, L2, and L3 are African, and haplogroups H, I, J, K, T, U, V, W, and X are typically associated with European populations…’
Scientific discovery in the decade beginning the late 1980s has corroborated the table of nations in Genesis Ten. Ostensibly, we can be confident as we progress, that Noah’s three sons and their wives represent the main racial strands on the Earth today.
As we progress, we will make a startling discovery in that there are actually four lineages in the world – East Asian and South Eastern Asian (1); African (2); Middle Eastern and South Asian (3); and European (4).
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 3:
‘Research carried out by L.L. Cavalli-Sforza and two colleagues, P. Menozzi and A. Piazzia, in their work The History and Geography of Human Genes (1994), has revealed an astonishing 2,288 genetic point difference between whites and black Africans… the English differ from the Danes, Germans, and French by a mere 21-25 points of genetic difference, whereas they differ from North American Indians by 947 points…’
During the course of this research it became imperative that an improved chronology was devised. It is impossible to have a wholly complete chronology for the very distant past. Conversely, it is possible to form a reasonably accurate time frame much further back than one would first anticipate. It has involved considerable effort to create a reliable timeline from before Adam through to the present day. A whole different jig-saw puzzle and a significant challenge in its own right. A chronology based on a re-interpretation of the Old Testament chronology prior to the Great Flood, combined with the Sumerian sexagesimal numerical counting system for the postdiluvian age to Abraham, has contributed to a pragmatic timeline of Earth’s ancient history. As there are already conventional and revised chronologies, it is an unconventional chronology – refer Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.
Everything You Know Is Still Wrong, Lloyd Pye, 2009 & 2017, pages 375-376:
‘Sumerians… created an efficient system of mathematics based on the number 60 (called sexagesimal). It enabled them to easily divide into tiny fractions and to multiply with equal ease into the millions, to calculate roots and raise numbers by any power. The 60-second minute and the 60-minute hour are two vestiges that remain from their original system. So are the 360-degree circle, the 12-inch foot, and the dozen’ – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy.
‘They had accurate calendars fashioned around the mind-boggling timeframe of 25,920 years, the “Great Year” based on a sophisticated celestial phenomenon known as precession (the time Earth’s polar axis needs to circle the sky and point again at the same North star)’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
There is considerable support in dating the biblical flood to coincide with when the Last Glacial Maximum ended approximately 13,000 years ago, coinciding with the Younger Dryas event; or precisely, 10,837 BCE – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. A growing number of scientists and historians – outside of the mainstream institutions which deliberately support an erroneous agenda of either no flood at all, a localised Middle Eastern flood, or that it occurred about 2400 BCE – concur with the dating of circa 11,000 BCE.
For instance, though humans were eating cereal-based foods well before the flood, wheat was only domesticated since the last ice age; created from a still-living ancestor plant known as emmer. Wheat is a grain crop with some 25,000 different cultivars in the world today and most of these 25,000 different forms of modern wheat are varieties of two broad groups, called common wheat and durum wheat. Common or bread wheat, Triticumaestivum, accounts for some 95 percent of all the consumed wheat in the world today – the other 5 percent is made up of durum or hard wheat, Turgidum durum, used in pasta and semolina products.
Lloyd Pye, pages 517-519, 523:
‘In The Twelfth Planet Zecharia Sitchin calls Sumeria “The Sudden Civilisation”… it blossomed out of nowhere nearly 6,000 years ago… its roots extend back twice that far… The first official traces of domesticated plants and animals appear… around 12,000 ya, which scientists acknowledge was the time and point of origin for virtually all the domesticated agriculture and animal husbandry that has subsequently spread around the world.
… the first farmers… chose to begin cultivation in highlands… a terrible choice because they are subject to extreme variations in weather, they possess thin, less-than optimally-fertile soil, and they require construction of labour-intensive terraces to hold the poor soil in place… After the Flood, the plains were covered with soggy mud and silt that could not dry out or be washed away until new riverbeds provided drainage by carving their way down from the mountains above, which would have required many centuries.
In the Wars of Gods and Men, Zecharia Sitchin points out:
“Scholars are agreed that agriculture began… with the harvesting of ‘wild ancestors’ of wheat and barley some 12,000 ya (10,000 BCE), but (they) are baffled by the genetic uniformity of those early grains grasses; and they are totally at a loss to explain the botano-genetic feat whereby – within a mere 2,000 years (8,000 BCE) – such wild emmers doubled, trebled, and quadrupled their chromosome pairs to become the cultivable wheat and barley of outstanding nutritional value (and) with the incredible ability to grow almost anywhere, and with the unusual twice-a-year crops.”
We first read of the patriarch Noah in Genesis 5:28-29, English Standard Version:
28 … Lamech… fathered a son 29 and called his name Noah [H5146 – Noach: rest], saying, “Out of the ground that the Lord has cursed, this one shall bring us relief [comfort] from our work and from the painful toil of our hands” – Genesis 3:17-18.
During the antediluvian epoch the terrain was affected by the worsening ice age, making agricultural farming in particular extremely difficult. The deluge in effect, ended the ice age so that the process of crop growing began as we recognise it today.
Noah is referred to in Sumerian texts as ZI.UD.SUD.DRA and in separate Akkadian accounts as Atra-hais, meaning ‘exceedingly wise’ and in the Epic of Gilgamesh, as Ut-napishtim. The Greco-Roman account, records the name Duecalion for Noah. Noah means rest or quiet. Noah being saved from the impending doom of a worldwide flood meant mankind could continue and therefore we are alive today; a testament to the Creator’s promise to spare Noah.
Ezekiel 14:14
English Standard Version
‘… even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness, declares the Lord God.’
Noah was one of the three most righteous men to live, listed with Daniel and Job. When this was written, Daniel was still alive. Even though Noah’s righteousness didn’t save humanity; it was in part because of his very righteousness, that ultimately mankind was spared.
2 Peter 2:5
King James Version
‘And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly…’
It is of note that Noah is counted as the eighth person of eight. For the number 8 is simply a vertical symbol for infinity (∞) – derived from the last letter of the Greek alphabet omega (Ω ω) – representing something which is ongoing and eternal. In this case, Noah was the progenitor for the preservation and continuation of humankind.
Book of Enoch Chapter Ten:
1. ‘Then said the Most High, the Holy and Great One spake, and sent Uriel’ [Ariel the Archangel] – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega – ‘to the son of Lamech, and said to him: 2. and tell him in my name “Hide thyself!” and reveal to him the end that is approaching: that the whole earth will be destroyed, and a deluge is about to come upon the whole earth, and will destroy all that is on it. 3. And now instruct him that he may escape and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world.’
The world in Noah’s day had grown evil beyond compare. Corrupted by fallen Angels who had interfered with the creation on Earth and humankind in particular. The Creator planned to cleanse the Earth and start anew.
The account is explained in Genesis 6:1-22, New Century Version:
‘The number of people on earth began to grow, and daughters were born to them. 2 When the sons of God saw that these girls were beautiful, they married any of them they chose. 3 The Lord said, “My Spirit will not remain in human beings forever, because they are flesh. They will live only 120 years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days and also later.* That was when the sons of God [angels] had sexual relations with the daughters of human beings. These women gave birth to children, who became famous and were the mighty warriors [giants] of long ago. 5 The Lord saw that the human beings on the earth were very wicked and that everything they thought about was evil. 6 He was sorry he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy all human beings that I made on the earth. And I will destroy every animal and everything that crawls on the earth and the birds of the air, because I am sorry I have made them” [note: marine life was not included].
8 But Noah pleased the Lord. 9 This is the family history of Noah. Noah was agood [H6662 – tsaddiyq: ‘just, lawful, righteous’ – spiritual] man, the most innocent [H8549 – tamiym: ‘complete, healthful, without blemish, undefiled’ – physically] man of his time, and he walked with God.
10 He had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 11 People on earth did what God said was evil, and violence was everywhere. 12 When God saw that everyone on the earth did only evil, 13 he said to Noah, “Because people have made the earth full of violence, I will destroy all of them from the earth.
14 Build a boat of cypress [H1613 – Gopher: meaning ‘to house in’] wood [H6086 – ets: meaning ‘tree’ from H6095 – atsah: meaning ‘firmness, shut’] for yourself. Make rooms in it and cover it inside and outside with tar [H3722 – kaphaph: meaning ‘to cover over’ (with bitumen [pitch]) or ‘to make an atonement, to cleanse’]…”
We will return to the Ark and examine its exact composition and design.
17 “I will bring a flood of water on the earth to destroy all living things that live under the sky, including everything that has the breath of life. Everything on the earth will die. 18 But I will make an agreement with you [Genesis 9:8-17] – you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives will all go into the boat. 19 Also, you must bring into the boat two of every living thing, male and female. Keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, animal, and crawling thing will come to you to be kept alive. 21 Also gather some of every kind of food and store it on the boat as food for you and the animals.”
22 ‘Noah did everything that God commanded him.’
The Nephilim will be repeatedly encountered during our journey and they will be discussed in more detail – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin and Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II; Monoliths of the Nephilim; and Na’amah. Various sources which recount a global flood, mention other survivors apart from Noah’s family; consequently, Nephilim presence in the post-flood world is mentioned repeatedly in the Old Testament.*
Not only does Noah receive high praise about his character from his Maker, these verses also describe the physical purity of his genealogy. An unarguable reason why Noah was the ideal candidate to continue the human race. Noah’s ancestors going back to Adam and his son Seth, are listed in Genesis chapter five.
Author Alan Alford says the following regarding Noah in his first book, Gods of the New Millennium, 1996:
‘Noah’s birth was far from normal. According to the Book of Enoch, when Noah was born, his father Lamech was extremely perturbed to find that, “his body was white as snow and red as the blooming of a rose”. Lamech was so shocked that he asked his father Methuselah to make enquiries of Enoch who was staying among the sons of the Gods (the Nephilim), because: “I have begotten a strange son, diverse from and unlike man, and resembling the sons of the God of Heaven and his nature is quite different, and he is not like us… And it seems to me that he is not sprung from me but from the angels.” Enoch’s response was to assure Lamech that Noah was indeed his son, but his unusual disposition was part of a plan to save Noah and his family in a coming deluge.
It would seem that Noah’s father may have become known as Lamech, meaning “He who was Humbled”, as a result of this rather embarrassing accusation against his wife. Lamech’s hope for better times was not to come true, for mankind’s problems were only just beginning. According to the Atra-Hasis, some time before the Flood… God…decided to punish… man with infectious diseases and a series of droughts… and the Biblical reference to the ground which had been cursed by the Lord may well refer to the beginning of the last ice age…’ – which gradually began about 27,000 BCE, reaching its greatest advance some 21,000 years ago and ending with the flood almost 13,000 years ago.
This description is not necessarily saying Noah was an albino, though this is a plausible scenario. It could be referring to Noah being pale, with very fair skin. We find a remarkably similar description, of the Son of Man in Revelation 1:14-15, New Century Version:
‘His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyeswere like flames [G5395 – phlox: ‘a flash or blaze’] of fire. His feet were like bronze [G5474 – chalkolibanon: superficially ‘fine brass’, though could be a ‘metal like gold if not more precious’] that glows in a hot furnace…’
The description is not saying the Son of Man has red or orange eyes. He could have blue eyes which are radiant and piercing. The colour of a pure oxygen rich, high temperature flame is blue-white. People can be described as having flaming eyes or smouldering blue eyes – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message to the Church of God in the Latter Days.
Similarly, it is not necessarily correct to assume bronze or brass means brown or coppery, as the Greek word chalkolibanon derives from a compound of G5475 and G3030, which mean ‘whiteness’ or ‘brilliancy.’ When fine brass is burnt in a furnace it becomes white hot. When it cools, it remains white with a golden hint to it.
In Daniel 7:9-10, New English Translation:
9 “While I was watching, thrones were set up, and theAncient of Daystook his seat. His attire was white like snow; the hair of his head was like lamb’s wool. His throne was ablaze with fire and its wheels were all aflame. 10 A river of fire [the Holy Spirit] was streaming forth and proceeding from his presence.”
The Ancient of Days and source of all life is similarly described as the Son of Man. Some translations say the Ancient One. The CEV translates as, the Eternal God and the TEV as, One who had been living for ever.
The Book of Enoch corroborates the biblical description of the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days.
Book of Enoch 46:1-4
1 At that place, I saw the One to whom belongs the time before time. And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of splendor like that of one among the kodesh [holy] malakim [angels]. 2 And I asked… “Who is this, and from whence is he who is going as the prototype of the Before-Time?” 3 … “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells… for Yahweh [Lord] of Hosts has chosen Him, and He is destined to be victorious before Yahwehof Hosts… 4 “This Son of Man whom you have seen is the One who would remove the kings and the mighty ones [rulers of this world] from their comfortable seats and the strong ones [the unseen rulers of this world] from their thrones…” – refer articles: The Establishment:Who are they… What do they want? and Principalities & Potentates: What they want… Who they are.
The Bible states that Noah was ‘perfect’ in his ‘generations’. The word generations, is the Hebrew word Toledah, and means ‘descent.’ The Hebrew word Tamim means ‘without blemish’ in his generations and is the technical word for bodily and physical perfection; not a reference to Noah’s righteousness. It is the same word used for the purity of sacrificial animals. Noah was without blemish physically because – in his pedigree from Adam and Seth – his lineage had not mixed with any other human line or more crucially, been tainted by the Nephilim.
The Genesis Apocryphon parallels the birth of Noah in the Book of Enoch:
‘… behold I thought then without my heart that conception was due to the watchers [fallen dark Angels] and the holy ones [righteous Angels] and to the giants [Nephilim], and my heart was troubled within me because of this trial. Then I, Lamech approached Bathenosh my wife in haste and said to her, ‘… by the Most High, the Great Lord, the King of all the world and Ruler of the Sons of Heaven, until you tell me all things truthfully… Tell me… and not falsely… Then Bathenosh my wife spoke to me with much heat [and mastered her anger]…’
Though she cryptically replies: ‘… O my brother, oh my lord, remember my pleasure… the lying together and my soul within its body. [And I tell you] all things truthfully… I swear to you by the Holy Great One the King of the heavens, that this seed is yours and this conception is from you, whose spirit was planted by you and by no stranger or watcher or son of heaven.’
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 31 – emphasis mine:
‘Lamech mistook the holy nature of Noah as possessing the startling physical characteristics of [a] baby Nephilim… the first book of Enoch:
“… Methuselah, took a wife for his son Lamech, and she became pregnant by him and bore him a son. And his body was white as snow and as red as a rose; the hair of his head as white as wool and his demdema (long curly hair) beautiful; and as for his eyes, when he opened them the whole house glowed like the sun… And his father, Lamech, was afraid of him and fled and went to Methuselah his father; and he said to him, “I have begotten a strange son. He is not like [an ordinary] human being, but [he] looks like the children of the angels of heaven to me, his form is different and [he is] not like us… It does not seem to me that he is of me, but of angels.”
‘So too, did Atlantean giants, according to Frank Joseph, author of the Destruction of Atlantis, possess ruddy, white skin, with blond and red hair and glowing eyes… other ancient giants… also possessed fair skin and were known as lucent, or “shining gods”…’
Something was strikingly evident immediately upon Noah’s birth, reflected in his unique physical appearance. The description again, could refer to albinism, with a white, pinkish skin and white hair; or pale skin with platinum blond hair. If the Nephilim, being angelic-human hybrids had white skin, with blond or red hair, and Noah stood out like one of them, this would imply that humans naturally possessed darker shades of skin tone rather than lighter up to this point. Lamech’s reaction signifies that he saw something special in Noah’s ‘miraculous’ birth aside from the colour of his skin and hair. One chosen by the Creator before birth, as were Jeremiah, John the Baptist and Christ after him.
Jeremiah 1:5
English Standard Version
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
Lamech is afraid of Noah, and runs to his father Methusaleh with his concern. Methusaleh contacts his own father Enoch, who responds in calming their fears; revealing to them Noah’s role as the saviour of humanity in the upcoming Flood cataclysm, as well as actually giving Noah his name.
Book of Enoch 106:6-8, 10, 12, 16, 18-19
“… and [Lamech feared] that a wondrous phenomenon may take place upon the earth in [Noah’s day]. So I am beseeching you now, begging you in order that you may go to his grandfather Enoch, our father, and learn from him the truth, for his dwelling place is among the [angels].” When Methuselah heard the words of his son, he came to us at the ends of the earth; for he had heard that I [Enoch] was there… [Methuselah says:]
“my father, hear me: For unto my son Lamech a son has been born, one whose image and form are not like unto the characteristics of human beings; and his color is whiter than snow and redder than a rose, the hair of his head is whiter than white wool, and his eyes are like the rays of the sun”… Lamech, became afraid and fled, and he did not believe that he the child was of him but of the image of the [angels] of heaven…
“There shall be a great… deluge and a great destruction for one year… Now, make known to your son Lamech that theson who has been born is indeed righteous; and call his name Noah, for he shall be the remnant for you, and he and his sons shall be saved from the corruption, which shall come upon the earth on account of all the sin and oppression that existed, and it will be fulfilled upon the earth in his days. After that there shall occur still greater oppression than that which was fulfilled upon the earth the first time[yet future]; for I do know the mysteries of the [holy] ones; for He, Yahweh, has revealed them to me and made me know; and I have read them in the heavenly tablets.”
By having Enoch name his great-grandson, it intensifies a connection that is already found in the Bible; in their typological location in the primeval genealogy; seventh – the number symbolising perfection and applicable to Enoch – and tenth – the number symbolising completion or judgement and highly applicable for Noah – from Adam.
Enoch and Noah are kindred spirits, as the same phrase is applied to both of them and to them alone: they walked with God – contrast with Abraham in Genesis 17:1, Genesis 6:9 and 5:24, ESV.
‘When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless.‘
‘Noah was a righteous man; he was blameless in his age; Noah walked with God.’
‘Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, for God took him.’
It would appear that the Nephilim – and likely their fallen angelic fathers, based on the description of the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days – were not white as in a typical European, but rather they were white like an albino. For those who have watched the Matrix trilogy, the second film features twin dreadlocked characters who exhibit exactly the kind of white skin we are speaking of.
Serious consideration must be given to Noah being the first truly light skinned human. His father’s description of him in the Book of Enoch, would explain Noah’s seemingly other-worldliness. It may well be more than coincidental that Albinism affects the production of the pigment melanin, which colours skin, hair and eyes – Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis.
While it is a lifelong condition from birth, it does not worsen with age. People with albinism have a reduced amount of melanin, or no melanin at all. This affects albinos colouring and eyesight. Albinism is caused by for the want of a better word, ‘faulty’ genes a child inherits from its parents.
One in 17,000 babies in Europe and the USA are born with either Oculocutaneous albinism (OCA), which involves the eyes, hair and skin, or Ocular albinism (OA), which is much less common and affects only the eyes.
Dr Mary Lowth clarifies – capitalisation theirs:
‘People presume that all people with albinism have white hair and white skin; however, this is not usually the case. A common myth is that they have red eyes; however, this is also not true. Most people with albinism have blue eyes and some have hazel or brown eyes. However, in certain light conditions there is a reddish tint reflected through the iris and pupil from the retina and the eyes appear red (similar to the ‘red eye’ in flash photography). Albinism results from inheriting an albinism gene from both the mother and the father (who often have normal pigmentation themselves, as their OTHER gene is normal). When both parents carry the albinism gene (and neither parent has albinism) there is a one in four chance at each pregnancy that the baby will be born with albinism. If a parent has albinism then they will pass on one affected gene to their child. The child will still only develop albinism if they also inherit an albinism gene from the other parent.’
There are seven types of Oculocutaneous albinism. We will look at the main condition.
‘OCA1 results from a genetic defect in an enzyme called tyrosinase. This enzyme helps the body to make melanin pigment. There are two subtypes of OCA1. In OCA1A, the enzyme is completely inactive and absolutely no melanin is produced, leading to white hair and very light skin. In OCA1B, the enzyme is minimally active and a small amount of melanin is produced. This leads to hair that may darken to blond, yellow/orange or even light brown, as well as slightly more pigment in the skin.’
Noah’s whiteness may or may not have been a faulty gene or defect, but he does seem to be the melanin absent or reduced, Ancestor Zero and fulcrum in the equation on either the actual origination of the different races or more likely, the increased diversity of races after the flood. Thereby impacting their characteristics and the varying amount of melanin skin pigmentation exhibited by a variety of skin tones, that would ultimately differentiate the descendants from his three (four) sons and sixteen (twenty-one) grandsons from one another – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis; and Chapter XI HamAequator.
Alan Alford’s comments on this question, in Gods of the New Millennium – emphasis mine:
‘The Flood thus acted as a gateway or bottleneck through which the genes of man were transmitted to the post-Flood generations. According to the Bible, the three sons of Noah – Shem, Ham and Japheth – took separate territories and fathered everyone in the world alive today. Did these three sons represent three distinct races? Modern studies of human racial diversity are unfortunately few and far between. As Jared Diamond notes:
“The subject of human races is so explosive that Darwin excised all discussion of it from his famous 1859 book On the Origin of species. Even today, few scientists dare to study racial origins, lest they be branded racists simply for being interested in the problem.”
‘Genetic scientists, however, have projected backwards from all of the human racial diversity which exists today and found a common point, known as mtDNA Eve (Mitochondrial Eve)… These findings suggest that racial diversity must have been preserved on Noah’s Ark if the Flood occurred only 13,000 years ago. Biblical scholars would (agree) with this conclusion.
A major clue lies in the names of Noah’s sons, particularly the name Ham which literally means “He who is Hot”, implying a dark coloured skin. Furthermore, the location of the Hamitic tribes in the Table of Nations (Genesis 10) has been clearly identified by Biblical scholars as the African lands. The Koran, too, is explicit in referring to separate nations on board Noah’s Ark, when it states “blessings upon thee and on the nations with thee”. The scenario of preserving mankind’s racial diversity on Noah’s Ark is entirely consistent with the Biblical record that all living creatures were saved.
Unfortunately, most people have regarded the tale of the Ark as a myth, due to the logistical problems of confining so many types of animals and birds in such close proximity, added to the practical difficulties of gathering together so many different species.
However, if we were to be forewarned of a Flood tomorrow, we would, with the benefit of modern scientific knowledge, not round up the animals themselves but theirgenes. And there are two clues which suggest that this is exactly what happened 13,000 years ago. The Utnapishtim legend of Noah states that Utnapishtim loaded aboard whatever he had of “the seed of all living creatures”. And in the Atra-Hasis (Fragment III)… God… (says) “game of the field and beasts of the field, as many as eat herbs, I will send unto thee”. An echo of this is found in Genesis 6:20 which states that “two of every kind… will come to you”. If the seed or genes of all living animals were kept alive in the Ark, why not also the genes representing human diversity? However, the problem of human races goes much further back in time, prior to Noah’s Ark, for no-one can explain how the races evolved. As Jared Diamond points out, all of the current theories on the origin of racial characteristics have fundamental weaknesses. In my view, the key to the mystery is genetic science. Here is my theory on how (it was done).
The unusual birth of Noah, discussed earlier, was the first step in (a) far-sighted strategy… (before) selecting… three women from three diverse races of mankind… the eggs of each of these women were fertilized by Noah’s sperm, and implanted into three surrogate mothers. Nine months later, Noah became the father of three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, as recorded in the Bible… the three ethnic mothers of Shem, Ham and Japheth were to marry their own sons.
These, then, were the three women who accompanied Noah, his unnamed wife and his three sons onto the Ark. Using this strategy… caused a further significant dilution of Noah’s “pure” genes and a significant increase in the proportion of “ethnic” genes in the next generation. Whilst Shem, Ham and Japheth had retained 50 per cent of the pure seed. Their sons and daughters became 25 per cent pure seed and 75 per cent ethnic… three separate races emerged…
There are several further factors which tend to corroborate the above theory… the independent account in the Book of Enoch of Noah’s unusual white/red pigmentation describes a deliberate step… for obtaining a greater range of colour variation in the three new lines of mankind. Without Noah’s whiteness… could only have blended three shades of black. Is it possible that Lamech’s fathering of Noah was really subject to genetic intervention?
A fragment from the Book of Noah, discovered at Qumran, records an ambiguous response from Lamech’s wife, when questioned about the conception of Noah. She implored her husband to “remember my delicate feelings” – perhaps a sign that she was keeping a secret of the Gods. (Another) corroborating factor is the apparent birth of all Noah’s three sons in the same year. The King James Versionof the Bible (KJV) translates the original Hebrew literally: And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japheth.
The New International Version of the Bible (NIV), on the other hand, has attempted to conceal the impression of three sons in the same year by altering the translation: After Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth. The deliberate vagueness of the word “after” suggests a fudge. However, in order to make the illusion succeed, it is also necessary to disguise the fact that all three sons were 100 years old when the Flood occurred 100 years later. Therefore the NIV states: Two years after the Flood, when Shem was 100 years old, he became the father of Arphaxad. However, the KJV retains the original and literal meaning of the Hebrew: Shem was a hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the Flood.
Whilst the NIV fudge conveniently allows 24 months for the birth of three separate children, the reality is that all of Noah’s sons were born in the same year. Why did the NIV Biblical revisionists find this idea so offensive that they tried to hide it? Could it have implied to them that Noah’s three sons came from three different wives within the same year?’
A thought provoking hypothesis which certainly gives pause for consideration. The origin of the races is a complete mystery to researchers and theologians alike. Alan Alford’s theory offers an original and plausible solution. As the introduction of the variety of racial branches from sixteen (twenty-one) grandsons strongly appears to have been new, how many races before the flood were there? Just the one from Adam and Eve’s son Seth; two including Cain; or perhaps three? As we shall later investigate – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
It has been entertained that the mark of Cain introduced in Genesis 4:15, relates to Cain’s skin changing from white to black. An alternative explanation would be required, if Cain was already dark skinned. Regarding Adam, it states in Genesis 2:7, English Standard Version:
‘… then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.’
There is an anomaly in that we will learn that Adam was not Cain’s biological father – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Nor did Adam start as ‘dust from the ground’ but became dust from the ground; this was not his original beginning. The incident in the Garden of Eden led to his and Eve losing their spiritual status in exchange for a composition that was physical. This was the core of the Serpents’s trick played on Eve.
The name Adam in Hebrew from the root, dmm means ‘to begin, to produce.’ Adam had a beginning, asone from the soil. The name Adam is the same as the noun, ‘adam, which means man[kind] in [the] sense of ‘a creature made from earth,’ or likeness-made-from-soil. The verb dama, describes making an ‘image’ and the noun dimyon means ‘likeness.’ Adama means ‘arable soil’ or ‘clay-red earth’.
Adam does not mean red as in colour or complexion. Verbs adom and adem mean red, as do the adjectives adom and admoni, as well as the noun edom, used for Abraham’s Grandson, Esau – Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. The ubiquitous noun, dam means ‘blood, the seat of life.’
Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:
‘The name Adam… means Acre Man, but since the word for acre is distilled from the action of producing agricultural crops, the name Adam really means Produce… But that root that covers the action of producing is also the same as the root that covers redness. That means that Adam is also Red Man. Since red is the color of blood (2 Kings 3:22) and also since the nameAdam is the word (dom), meaning blood, with an aleph in front of it, and alephs sometimes appear in front of words without essentially altering the meaning, Adam also means Blood Man. And since blood is the seat of the breath (or life), Adam is also Life Man. All in all, the name Adam is probably best interpreted as Living Creature or rather the corporeal part of a living creature. The name Adam simply means Corporeal One or Dustling; prior to receiving breath, Adam was quite literally a corpse (Genesis 2:7).’
Some have incorrectly surmised that Adam’s redness – from red-clay earth – meant he was white with a ruddy complexion. One commentator says: “Adam means ruddy complexioned, to show blood (in the face), flush or turn rosy.” Later, we will learn that King David of Judah and Jacob’s brother Esau are described in this manner. Adam is not. For Adam, it is accentuating his coming alive and beginning as the first of his kind – with different genetic DNA, symbolised by his blood – for indeed, their were other humans created prior to Adam – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
The line of Cain in Genesis chapter four is fascinating, because we learn that another Lamech – different from the father of Noah – is a progenitor of polygamy, having two wives. They are only the second and third women after Eve to be recorded in the Old Testament, implying significance. Adah means ‘ornament’ and has the connotation of beauty.Zillah means ‘dark’ or ‘to be dark’. So some have conjectured that Adah was light skinned and Zillah dark skinned; or, it could be referring to Zillah possessing a proclivity towards the dark arts – Article: Na’amah.
Intriguing, are the two sons born of Adah and especially the son from Zillah and their very Japheth-like names. There is the primogenitor of Cain’s line, Cain and on Seth’s family tree, a Cainan – of which a derivative becomes a Hamitic name. The Book of Jasher in chapter two says that Cainan, the Grandson of Seth was the father of three sons and two daughters, who are none other than Adah and Zillah. The book also says that Zillah was barren when she was old, until towards the end of her life.
In Genesis chapter four, we learn there were other humans – not descended from Adam and Eve – in the Land of Nod, where Cain went to dwell.
Genesis 4:16-17
New Century Version
16 ‘So Cain went away [not just physically but also spiritually] from the Lord and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. 17 He had sexual relations with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. At that time Cain was building a city, which he named after his son Enoch.’
Cain already had a wife – a sister according to some sources, a fallen Angel in others – before sojourning to Nod and building a city.
Book of Jubilees 4:9
‘And Cain took Awan his sister to be his wife and she bare him Enoch… And… houses were built on the earth, and Cain built a city, and called its name after the name of his son Enoch.’
Cain would not build a city, if it were not for an already large population of people living in Nod – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. Genesis 1:27 reveals man was created on the Sixth Day or era, whereas, Genesis 2:7 shows Adam was created on the ‘Eighth Day’, the day or era after the Seventh Day rest. If there were inhabitants prior to Cain’s arrival, they were not descended from Adam and Eve. We will return to this question in a later chapter – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Cain didn’t waste any time, in becoming the first person in endeavouring to establish and consolidate centralised power – a precursor for a one world government. The Way of Cain has survived many millennia right through to our present day and age – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.
When Adam’s son Seth is born, we learn in Genesis 5:3 NCV:
‘When Adam was 130 years old, he became the father of another sonin his likeness [H1823 – dmuwth: ‘similitude’] and image [H6754 – tselem: ‘resemblance’], and Adam named him Seth.’
Seth was in other words, the spitting image of his biological father. The line of Seth, his sons and their wives is amplified in the Book of Jubilees.
Book of Jubilees 4:11-28
11 ‘… Seth took Azura his sister to be his wife, and… she bare him Enos. 13 … Enos took Noam his sister to be his wife, and she bare him a son… [calling] his name Kenan. 14 And… Kenan took Mualeleth his sister to be his wife, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Mahalalel. 15 … Mahalalel took unto him to wife Dinah, the daughter of Barakiel the daughter of his father’s brother, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Jared, for in his days the malakim of Yahweh descended on the earth, those who are named the Watchers, that they should instruct the children of men, and that they should do judgment and uprightness on the earth.
16 And… Jared took to himself a wife, and her name was Baraka, the daughter of Rasujal, a daughter of his father’s brother… and she bare him a son… and he called his name Enoch. 20 And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was Edna, the daughter of Danel, the daughter of his father’s brother, and… she bare him a son and he called his name Methuselah. 27 And… Methuselah took unto himself a wife, Edna the daughter of Azrial, the daughter of his father’s brother… and he begat a son and called his name Lamech. 28 And… Lamech took to himself a wife, and her name was Betenos the daughter of Baraki’il, the daughter of his father’s brother, and… she bare him a son and he called his name Noah, saying, ‘This one will comfort me for my trouble and all my work, and for the ground which Yahweh has cursed.’
Let’s ask the question: was the consternation exhibited by Lamech toward his son Noah due to everyone – Cain, Seth and the inhabitants of Nod, the people of Day Six – in the antediluvian world, having darker shades of skin, black or brunette hair and brown eyes. The Earth then – during the antediluvian epoch – whether it be human beings, flora and fauna or the climate, was not exactly the same as today – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial:Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.
This is partly why the conundrum of the origin of the races exists. If there were only one, two or three races and they ranged between dark to medium brown skin, with dark hair and brown eyes, then Lamech’s shock of seeing Noah so completely and utterly white skinned and fair, with platinum blond hair and blue eyes would not be surprising at all. Instead, it would have been very disturbing.
The names of Japheth, Ham and Shem’s wives are not stated in the bible, though they are mentioned in the Book of Jubilees (dated between 160 to 150 BCE) as ‘Adataneses the wife of Japheth; Na’eltama’uk the wife of Ham; and Sedeqetelebab, Shem’s wife. The Syriac Targum, a similar work, states the wives names as Arathka for Japheth’s wife, Zedkat Nabu for Ham’s wife and Nahalath Mahnuk as Shem’s wife.
Noah’s wife is mentioned five times in Genesis, without her name being revealed. Some believe she could be Naamah, the sister of Tubal-Cain in Genesis 4.22. As she is from the already imperfect line of Cain, it would seem to be a contradiction for Noah to marry Naamah, mixing the two genetic lines – refer article: Na’amah. With that said, if there is any merit in Alan Alford’s theory or a version of it, Noah may have had three wives from which three sons were born; taking only one wife on board the Ark.
The Book of Jubilees 4:46-47, supports the Bible and states Noah had one wife and that she bore all three sons:
‘… Noah took to himself a wife, and her name was Emzara, the daughter of Rakeel, the daughter of his father’s brother [a brother of Lamech]… And in the third year thereof she bore him Shem, in the fifth year thereof she bore him Ham, and in the first year… she bore him Japheth.’
Genesis 11:10 states Shem is two years younger than Japheth, yet Genesis 10:21 says Shem is the eldest. Comparing all the Bible verses where the three sons are mentioned, it establishes their order of birth as Japheth first, then Shem and lastly Ham. Shem is sometimes placed first in order because from him, the patriarch Abraham would later be born. If Noah only had one wife and Alford’s theory is not applied, then Japheth, Shem and Ham very likely had wives with different genetic characteristics.
The Book of Tobit – dated between 225 to 175 BCE – does not name Noah’s wife, though does say she was one of his ‘own kindred’. An Arabic source with Islamic tradition links Noah’s wife descended from either his own family bloodline from Methuselah or less accurately, Mehujael from Cain’s line, giving her name as Haykel or Amzurah respectively – Amzurah being similar to Emzara.
Unknown source:
‘[Noah’s] family were probably mid-brown, with genes for both dark and light skin, because a medium skin colour would seem to be the most generally suitable (dark enough to protect against skin damage and folate destruction, yet light enough to allow vitamin D production). Adam and Eve would most likely have been mid-brown as well, with brown eyes and brown (or black) hair. In fact, most of the world’s population today is mid-brown.’
There is genetic evidence supporting the premise that the world’s inhabitants before the flood were darker skinned and medium brown in tone – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
We will investigate this question in a later section, as Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups support such a conclusion – refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve:The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens. Noah would have been the carrier of the genes that were passed on to his three sons, while combining with the DNA of their wives and producing sixteen (twenty-one) grandsons now ranging from dark to light, black to white, who had not existed previously.
If Noah did possess a DNA mutation or variation which introduced racial distinction and produced numerous ethnicities, he must have either inherited recessive genes, passed down from Adam, Eve and Seth, or his genetic code was manipulated prior to his birth.
Albinism seems to be a throwback to when humans were dark and the mutated gene* that causes reduced melanin and white skin appeared. Research supports the introduction of light skin in our more recent past – an acknowledgment that earlier humans did possess brown skin.
White Skin Developed in Europe Only As Recently as 8,000 Years Ago Say Anthropologists, Liz Lea Floor, 2015 – emphasis mine:
‘The myriad of skin tones and eye colors that humans express around the world are interesting and wonderful in their variety. Research continues on how humans acquired the traits they now have and when, in order to complete the puzzle that is our ancient human history. Now, a recent analysis by anthropologists suggests that the light skin color and the tallness associated with European genetics are relatively recent traits to the continent.
An international team of researchers as headed by Harvard University’s Dr. Iain Mathieson put forth a study at the 84th annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists recently. Based on 83 human samples from Holocene Europe as analyzed under the 1000 Genomes Project, it is now found that for the majority of the time that humans have lived in Europe, the people had dark skin, and the genes signifying light skin only appear within the past 8,000 years.This recent and relatively quick process of natural selection suggests to researchers that the traits which spread rapidly were advantageous within that environment, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
This dramatic evidence suggests modern Europeans do not appear as their long ancient ancestors did.
Previous research published in 2008 found thatthe earliest mutations in the eye-color genes that led to the evolution of blue eyes probably occurred about 10,000 years ago in individuals living in around the Black Sea. The surprising aspect of the findings is that while it is fundamental to natural selection that advantageous genetic attributes spread, it is not often a speedy process. The study shows that these genetic pale skin traits swept across Europe speedily, andthatphenomenon is of particular interest to researchers.’
Humans are not from Earth – A Scientific Evaluation of the Evidence, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 27, 42 and 278 – emphasis mine:
‘Until about 7,700 years ago, all humans had brown eyes… Since blue eyes offer more protection against cataracts, it’s surprising that they didn’t evolve much sooner. And it’s bizarre that they’re rarely found in climates where the sunlight is strongest… Everyone with blue eyes has a single, common ancestor who lived about 7,700 years ago and had a genetic mutation – a single switch that turns off or limits the eye’s ability to produce melanin. Researchers have found that if this gene is completely destroyed it leads to albinism.* Around the time that blue eyes first appeared, so did white skin…
… light skinned people appeared on Earth more recently than most of us realize… when the allele associated with light skin first originated in the SLC24A5 gene… lighter skin, like blue eyes, might simply have been a genetic anomaly rather than a necessity.The Caucasian did first appear around 7,700 years [ago], and we don’t know why. We’d been living in temperate regions including Scandinavia for tens of thousands of years before that time, yet we retained our dark skin, hair, and eyes. And it seems we hadn’t succumbed to vitamin D deficiency. So the sudden switch to white skin, blond hair, and blue eyes is both unexpected and unexplainable. Most mainstream biologists say it was a simple genetic mutation that people found attractive. But another explanation is that the Caucasians were hybrids…’
White skin, blond and red hair with blue and green eyes, suddenly came out of nowhere, springing out of the genetic gene pool, much like Noah. A recent study has offered alternative dating for this genetic mutation, between 11,000 to 19,000 years ago. We will learn that this dating is especially accurate.
The dating of nearly 8,000 years ago is still highly relevant, as that takes us back to the time of Peleg and the Tower of Babel, at which time one of Shem’s sons had a pronounced divisional split in his descendant’s line. This was represented by the major Y-DNA paternal mutations of the European R1a and R1b Haplogroup strains. R1a being one of the principle Haplogroups for Eastern European men – aside from mutations found in Central and South Asia as the result of admixture – and R1b, the primary Haplogroup of Western Europeans, including the Latino-Hispano peoples of the Americas.
The Genetic Origin of the Nations, 2006 & 2020:
‘The scientific evidence indicates that there were seven so-called “Eves” to the genetic mtDNA pool in the Caucasian [line] but that there are 26 female lines overall.
Noah was understood to be pure in his generations. The Bible also maintains that the people in the Ark were all the family of Noah. Thus, to properly account for the genetic diversity, Noah must have maintained the capacity to throw genetically distinct offspring, and this offspring had the characteristics of the line from which it came, but not the entire sequence that Noah had originally. For Noah to be the father of the human structure he is held to have had the capacity for the… YDNA substructure, as all humans are descended from him. Any male on the planet will have only the mutations that signify his branch and path.Noah held the base YDNA that was able to mutate into… other subgroups [that is, Haplogroup A].
… when we examine the tree of mtDNA we find some interesting group derivatives. The so-called “supergroups” are really only in three basic groups. In other words, they came from three main female lines. That is what we would expect to find if we assume there were only three females that bred on from the Ark, namely the wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth. These Haplogroups are all descended from a single female supergroup, namely Haplogroup L. So in reality, all females are descended from one female line, Hg L. That is super L. This line then split into L1, and then L2 and L3. The line L3 diverged and from L3 came the other mtDNA mutations. Thus, all females came from one Eve whose mtDNA line was L.
The supergroups M and N were next to diverge or mutate. From a biblical point of view we can argue easily that L was formed with Eve and the other groups were pre-Flood divisions that came on to the Ark. Thus, we could correctly argue that L, M, and N came on to the Ark within the accepted biblical account.All mtDNA Haplogroups are subdivisions of L, then M and N and subsequently R, which itself is a mutation of Hg N.
Thus, we can assume that Eve produced the line L and the three wives of Shem, Ham and Japheth are at least the three groups L, M and N. There may have been further divisions given the fact that Noah may have had daughters not mentioned and their mtDNA line may have been L, or M or N. It may have even been R, if we assume that the entire L line came in through the wife of Ham, as the L line is almost confined to the sub-Saharan tribes. We also have to address the fact that Eve was dark skinned and the fact that Adam means the one who was red. Thus the capacity for the development of skin colour was an original trait [even if recessive] of the human creation.
M produced three subdivisions… including C [and Z, which split from each other], and D and G… [with subdivisions] E and Q… [all associated with East Asian peoples].
We might thus also deduce that the wives of the sons of Noah were taken from the one family lineage, maintaining purity in the generations in the female line also. The L2 and L3 split may have come from the family structure before the Flood. [Any] daughters of Noah and the wives of the sons could have carried all three of the L subdivisions and the basic core sub-groups of M, N and perhaps R. It is therefore possible that the women of the Ark… could easily have contained the basis for the modern mtDNA diversity.
The supergroup N… split… [including] Haplogroups I and W… The R supergroup split into the following: B; F; HV, which split into H and V; P; The J and T subdivision; and U, from which came K… [all associated with European peoples].’
According to the author, the mtDNA super Haplogroup L originated with Eve and split into L0, L1, L2 and L3. All mtDNA L haplogroups from L0 to L6 are primarily associated with sub-Saharan African people and to a lesser extent, Berbers (and Arabs). The remainder of the mtDNA Haplogroups then derived or mutated from L3. L3 gave rise to the super subgroups M and N.
Broadly speaking, L3 relating to African peoples, M with East Asian and N for Europeans. The author states that Japheth, Ham and Shem’s wives would have carried these new mutations. Though in reality, it would have been the potential for them to be realised in their descendants.
For the three wives of Noah’s sons to each represent these three core racial strands in the future, the connecting dots not suggested by the author are that these wives could have also been daughters of Noah by his wife Emzara. Though there is reason to believe this is not the case.
More probable and advanced by this writer, is that Noah would have passed on to each son the paternal genetic Y sex chromosome represented by Haplogroup A. First to Japheth and his subsequent seven sons, then Ham and his three sons; Shem and his five sons; and finally Canaan* and his six sons with each of the twenty-one grandson’s male descendants forming the Haplogroup mutations presently today of B through to T.
While Ham, Shem and Japheth resembled each other, it would be their descendants who would exhibit the mutations which would arise respectively in the darker equatorial peoples, dwelling from Africa to India; the lighter skinned peoples inhabiting Europe; and the eastern peoples of Asia and the Americas.
Noah’s wife would have received the maternal recessive genes consisting of Mitochondria DNA, originating in the L line from Eve, which included the future Haplogroup M and N mutations. Thus, L3, M and N were new mutations that had not existed during the antediluvian epoch.
The new racial characteristics carried by Noah’s daughters (in law), ‘Adataneses, Na’eltama’uk and Sedeqetelebab and possessed by Japheth, Ham and Shem, would eventually reveal two further racial strands: yellow from Japheth (C, D) and ‘Adataneses (M); and white from Shem (G) and Sedeqetelebab (N, R); to add to an original brown skin tone. The latter now carried a new mutation too; creating extra diversity in Ham (H, J) and Na’eltama’uk (L0, L1-L6). Canaan* (A, B, E) is a separate line again and is discussed in depth in Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.
What is of fascinating interest is that while the white line when it mutated long after the Flood was new; the yellow line of descent was a throwback to the people of Day Six – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV; and Chapter II Japheth Orientalium.
It is understandable why these eight people were saved and that not just Noah was genealogically pure, but so was his wife. They then had (probably) three to (possibly) six children prior to the flood who received the three (actually four) new core racial lines, which then mutated into the sixteen (in reality twenty-one) new sub-racial strands through their children after the flood – Noah’s and Emzara’s grandchildren.
This leaves the L and specifically the L0 pre-flood line from Eve. The simple answer is that L was passed to Cain and his family line and what became L0 was passed to Seth and his line of descent which later included Noah and his wife. L3 with M and N, being the later mutations from Seth’s line L0 after the Flood. The L and L0 lines were mid-toned skinned lines, with the darker and lighter shades of skin and racial diversity included in the L3 line we presently have now, deriving from Noah’s descendants. The undeniable scientific support for this argument, is that a black couple can have white children, but a white couple cannot have a black child.
Recent research has found incredible evidence to corroborate the Genesis account regarding humankind descending from at least three original fathers.
Finding Ham, Shem, and Japheth via the Y-Chromosome, Genesis and Genetics, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… we have examined [paternal] Y-chromosome genomes searching for Noah and his three sons, Ham, Japheth, and Shem. They were easy to find. According to our analysis, if you have the rs17306671 Y-chromosome mutation nucleotide A you are from Shem. If you have the rs9786139 Y-chromosome mutation nucleotide A you are from Ham. If you have the rs3900 Y-chromosome mutation nucleotide G you are from Japheth. The following presents the easy-to-follow logic and analysis… [and] Our findings are consistent with the Bible and modern science raw data.
…Y-chromosome DNA is exclusively found in males; it is inherited from one’s father. The Y-chromosome has approximately 60 million base pairs, each of which is subject to mutations. Mutations develop in the Y-chromosome, typically at the rate of 2 mutations per generation. This is based on a mutation rate of 1.0*10^-9 mutations /nucleotide/year (Reference 1) and 30 years per generation.
These mutations allow us to track ancestry. If one man populated all the earth, all males would have his Y-chromosome, and if this man had two sons, one would expect that roughly half of the world would have one son’s mutations and the other half would have the other son’s mutations. Furthermore, if our original ancestor had 10 grandsons, one would expect that each grandson would have mutations that would each exist in approximately 10 percent of the male population. Successive generations would continue to generate new mutations that would form a human family tree, known as a phylogenetic tree to geneticists.
In our research, we used the above principles in tracking our most ancient ancestors. We made no assumptions and shelved our preconceived ideas. We wanted to see where the data led us. Our strategy was simple; we gathered the Y-chromosome mutations, which are seen in more than 5 percent of human males, and entered them into a spreadsheet. We looked for patterns and color-coded the resulting groups. The data used in this research came from the 1000 genomes project and retrieved using the Ensembl browser. The data appeared to be correct with no errors. No data was eliminated due to suspect errors, and no data was “cherry-picked” to suit any preconceived ideas. Our thanks to the great effort of those who did the sequencing and publishing of the raw data. We also greatly appreciate that it was made available to the public.
We started by taking 57 Y-genomes of diverse people (Americas, East Asia, Europe, South Asia, and Africa). Next, we gathered mutations that were in at least 5 percent of the world’s male population. The technical term for this is those with a Mean Allele Frequency (MAF) greater than or equal to 0.05 (5 percent). These mutations are the most interesting; any smaller MAF mutation is a subset of those greater than 5%.’
‘The spreadsheet… provides 57 rows (individual male humans) and 30 columns (mutations over 5 percent of the population). Each column element of the matrix was color-coded to show us whether the individual had the mutation or not. We noticed patterns beginning to form… Next, we switched columns and rows to form groups. The groups were obvious. We also took each group and moved the columns so that the columns for each group with the largest MAF were on the left. Now we can see a clear pattern in the figure below. We see that each individual fits into just one group and had no mutations in any other group. Also, we see that every individual in the group has the mutation with the greatest MAF; this is the mutation of the most ancient ancestor of that group.
Looking at the matrix… we see that each group has one maximum MAF. The yellow is .38, the red is .52, and the green is .10. They add up to 100 percent. Now that we have shown that our most ancient ancestor had three sons, we can state that this finding is consistent with the Bible. The three groups are consistent with the three sons of Noah: Ham, Shem, and Japheth. Therefore, one could easily conclude that Ham is the yellow group, Shem is the green group, and Japheth is the red group.
Note: Noah’s Y-chromosome is also known since it would be that of the three sons with all mutations removed.
Bible in Genesis 10, the Table of Nations, states that all humanity came from these three sons:
Genesis 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.
Genesis 10:32 These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.
This means that roughly 1/3 of the earth’s male population came from each son, but, since Japheth had 7 sons, Ham had 4 sons, and Shem had 5 sons; therefore, the worldwide distribution should be closer to the following:
Patriarch Number of sons % Projected World Population Observation
Japheth 7 sons 43.75 52
Ham 4 sons 25 38
Shem 5 sons 31.25 10
The chart above shows that both the Ham and Japheth results were higher than expected, and Shem was lower than expected. However, this can be explained in at least two ways:
The Ham and Japheth offspring are in the world’s heavily populated areas, namely South and East Asia.
The Thousand Genomes Project did not provide representatives of the Near East, the Mid-East, or Northern Africa, all of which would increase the Shem percentage, thereby decreasing Ham and Japheth’s percentages.
The above two issues are not meant as criticism but offered as an explanation.’
The percentage is lower for Shem, compared with Japheth and Ham because the descendants from Shem only include those people who are of European descent. The grey area includes the Latino-Hispano peoples of Central and South America who are in part either Hamitic or descend from Japheth. While primarily descended from Shem’s fifth son Aram, considerable intermixing means only a minority are deemed fully white.
As well as the fact and a surprise for many, that the Arabic peoples of North Africa and the Middle East, are related to the equatorial people of Ham and not Shem. Adding the White western populations of Europe with those in the New World equals approximately eight hundred million people, or a tenth of the approximate eight billion people on the planet – therefore confirming the figures above.
A further vital element to consider in the above figures is that the percentage for Ham comprising 38% is in fact shared with Canaan (who is not Ham’s son) – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. So that Canaan’s descendants reflect 19% to 20% of the world’s population, with Ham’s three sons – Cush, Mizra and Phut – constituting the remaining nineteen percent.
‘Our findings are consistent with the Bible, secular ancient history, and genetic diversity:
The Bible documents Noah and his family to be the only ones spared from the deluge which flooded the entire earth, and the earth was repopulated through Noah’s three sons.
The historical period began when the Sumerians began writing cuneiform tablets. These early writings documented the kings before and after the flood.Also, the Sumerian legends are consistent with the world being populated by the three sons on the Ark.
According to the Bible and Sumerian history, all humanity came from one family. As they migrated throughout the world, the genetic diversity would be lost from those who separated from the core population; therefore, the most genetic diversity should be where Noah’s family settled, the Near East. Those who migrated to the Americas, Australia, and southern Africa lost some genetic diversity. We can consider two levels of observing genetic diversity, first, what we see and, second, what DNA tells us. We can easily see eye color, skin color, and hair color. Looking at a globe, it is apparent that those with the most visual diversity meet in the Near East, the place of disembarkation from Noah’s Ark. From a DNA standpoint, one can look at the diversity of haplogroups, both Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial. The extremities are South Africa, Australia, and the Americas, which have only a few haplogroups. The location with the most haplogroups is, again, in the Near East.’
Rather, the reason being that the Middle East was not the disembarkation from Noah’s Ark, but where the prime settlement of human beings some time after the Flood was located. Coupled with the fact, that the Middle East has been the region where the greatest number of migrations and changes in resettlement have taken place.
‘To summarize our findings:
(1) From a Y-chromosome perspective, it appears that all humanity came from three male humans.
(2) Item (1) is not proof of the Biblical narrative concerning Noah’s three sons, but it is consistent with it. To prove it, one would have to sequence every human male ever born and analyze his genome. If anyone can trace an individual human Y Chromosome back to some basal mutation other than the three given, please let us know…
(3) We can now project Noah’s DNA; it is that of his three sons with no mutations.
(4) Our findings are consistent with the Bible, Sumerian history, and our current state of human diversity.
Future analysis: It is now possible to know the Y-chromosome DNA of each of Noah’s grandchildren. This is in our job jar.’
Noah’s epoch prior to the Flood comprised major centres of civilisation and futuristic alien-like advancements – Article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis. Staggeringly further ahead than our current technology – though we ourselves are rapidly progressing to that point. We read in Matthew 24:37-38, English Standard Version:
‘For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark…’
These verses reveal that mankind will be living life as usual and acting as if the Son of Man is not coming. As the Flood caught the world unawares in the past, so too will the return of the Son of Man in the future.
Alan Alford comments on the literal boarding of every animal species – presumably some plant species as well – on to the Ark, has left the credibility of the account vulnerable. The exception, would be the seven of each kind of clean or domesticated animals taken on board and the birds stated; these would have been literal animals.
The world was an impressive, yet tragic dystopia, so for Noah to protect and continue each species primarily via DNA, may explain how an improbable event becomes a very plausible one. The word ark in Hebrew [H8392 – tebah] can mean a ‘box, basket or chest’. It has the connotation of a protective egg. A safe place which is enclosed; offering a nourishing environment. Given the superior technological capability of the age, we can begin to appreciate the length of time it took to build the ark – in reality, either a submersible vessel such as a submarine, an aircraft like a space ship, or combination of the two. For we learnt in Genesis 6:14 that the Ark was hermetically sealed.
The cataclysm of the Flood was so violent and severe, a literal wooden ship – incorrectly translated gopher wood, but not a wood from timber at all, but an unknown substance, perhaps like titanium – would have easily been destroyed. Descending down very deep – or possibly into Earth’s orbit – would have been the only way to survive.
If the ark contained primarily DNA samples, seven pairs of clean animals – see Leviticus 11:1-46 and Deuteronomy 14:3-21 – birds and vegetation to eat, with just eight people, then it would have been a realistic, controllable size to manoeuvre. It corroborates the dimensions of the vessel in Genesis 6:15-16, New Century Version, that would have been too small for every animal species to be included.
‘This is how big I want you to build the boat: four hundred fifty feet long, seventy-five feet wide, and forty-five feet high. Make an opening around the top of the boat that is eighteen inches high from the edge of the roof down. Put a door in the side of the boat. Make an upper, middle, and lower deck in it.’
R A Boulay in his first published version of Flying Serpents and Dragons, printed in 1990, devotes a chapter to Noah’s Ark; yet in later additions the original chapter thirteen is intriguingly omitted. Boulay discusses the only two descriptions of the Ark, one in the scriptures and the second a Sumerian account. Zecharia Sitchin confirms the Flood occurred circa 11,000 BCE and the god Enki instructed Ziusudra (Noah) to build a submersible ship.
Boulay says the dimensions of the Ark, reveal it would ‘displace 43,300 tons.’ He adds: ‘In his study The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels, the noted scholar Aleksander Heidel brought up the problem of interpretation where certain scholars believe that a circular design of [a submersible] ark would be much more practical and that the text lends itself easily to this interpretation. Their views, however, have been summarily dismissed by other scholars.’
Of special interest is Boulay’s comments on the Sumerian description of the craft having ‘punting poles’. Where he states: ‘Apparently these were of paramount importance for they were loaded while the construction was going on and before the Ark was finished. Only then were the food, supplies, and personnel brought aboard. This was a closed and sealed craft and… [so a] traditional translation and interpretation [is] illogical. This strange item also appears earlier in the epic at the time that Gilgamesh had to cross a dangerous area called the “sea of death,”… While this dangerous “sea” which he had to cross has been interpreted as a watery area, it may very well have been a metaphor for a journey through that vast sea of air called the atmosphere, that had to be traversed to reach the gods.
For this trip, Gilgamesh had to procure 120 of these punting or thrusting poles. These could be used only once and were consumed as they were used. Each pole was good for only one thrust and then became contaminated and had to be thrown away. For want of a better name, they have been called “punting poles,” no doubt influenced by modern day river craft, but the meaning is not clear and basically the term means a thrusting stick or rod. In modern terms we would describe them as fuel rods since they were associated with the propulsion system of a ship. In this sense, they could be either fuel rods inserted into a nuclear reactor in order to control its energy output or, more probably, tubes or rods filled with solid propellant used in some sort of rocket propulsion system.’
Genesis and Genetics, delve deeper into the logistics of the Ark and its inhabitants and the actual housing of the Earth’s primary species.
The Genetics of Kinds – Ravens, Owls, and Doves, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The basic dilemma concerning the voyage of Noah’s Ark is: how did Noah keep so many kinds of animals alive on the Ark for a year?’ – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy. ‘Since there are so many birds species presently living on earth (Sibley, Charles G., and Monroe, Burt L.), the tendency for creationists is to speculate that the Biblical kinds were only a portion of the present-day species, and that the Ark contained possibly only the “genus,” “family,” or “order.” The problem with this speculation is that it is in conflict with the Biblical, fossil, and DNA evidence. The Bible clearly states that every kind and sort of bird was taken on the Ark (Genesis 6:19, Genesis 7:14); and, the fossil record shows that before the flood there were multiple species of each genus, family, and order. Then, the most daunting task encountered by this speculation is explaining how the reduced number of kinds expanded into the numerous species living today.This dilemma has placed creationists in the position of having to decide between the Bible and evolution.
Many have chosen a euphemistic version of evolution and used terms such as microevolution, natural selection, speciation, etc., However, it is still evolution. This means that if evolution could produce these species in such a short time, there would be much available proof of evolution; however, this is not the case and evolution is not observable; theonly reason evolutionary theory has survived is by expanding the time frame to millions of years and by adding the multiple, fictitious common ancestors.
John Woodmorappe addressed these problems of lodging large numbers of animals in a book called “Noah’s Ark: a Feasibility Study” (Woodmorappe, John. 1996). He went into great detail in discussing the problems of space, feeding, cleanliness, ventilation, air quality and all the other problems associated with the Ark.
His feasibility study resulted in the conclusion that if only a portion of the present-day species (fewer than 16,000) were onboard, it would be possible, although difficult, to keep them alive on the Ark for approximately one year. This book did a very good job of defining the problems involved with lodging so many animal[s] and keeping them alive; however, in all practicality, it would take a miracle to survive the work, the environment and the predator/prey instincts.
Anyone who has kept one horse in a stall knows what a Herculean task it would be to keep thousands of animals on the Ark.’
Woodmorappe: “Our conclusion would necessitate that on the order of 6000 amphibia, 10,000 bird, 6,000 mammals, and 8,000 reptile kinds/species were aboard the Ark. Accounting for pairs, sevens of clean animals, and those that have gone extinct since the flood, the total number aboard the Ark would be on the order of 100,000. This would be no problem for the very large Ark with all of the animals in Biblical “deep sleep”.
Genesis and Genetics: ‘Genetic resets are documented in the Bible…
The First Genetic Reset
As a result of the original sin, God reset the creation genetics. The DNA was necessarily changed in humans in that they became mortal and women’s pain was multiplied in childbirth (Genesis 3:16).Other DNA changes included the serpent who lost his legs (Genesis 3:14);and,all of the livestock and beasts of the field were cursed (Genesis 3:14), “but not as much as the serpent.” This implies… DNA changed in all the livestock and beasts of the field. Concerning plants, the earth brought forth “thistles” and “thorns” (Genesis 3:18) implying new and different DNA and a new ecosystem to accommodate the new genetics.
The Second Genetic Reset
The second DNA reset occurred at the time of the flood. Man’s life span was greatly reduced from 900[0] plus years (Genesis chapter 11) implying a DNA change; the concept of clean and unclean animals appeared in the scriptures (Genesis 7:2) ; and, the authorization of eating meat was introduced (Genesis 9:3). The flood changed the entire ecosystem implying significant DNA changes to all life forms. The fossil record bears out that the ecosystem was very different before the flood, e.g. massive dinosaurs with small nostrils, dragonflies with 2 foot wingspans, and tropical vegetation near the poles.
Twice, God gave the command to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth”. The first occasion was in the beginning on day six… (Genesis 1:28). The second occasion was after the departure from the Ark (Genesis 8:17,9:1). So, it is evident that His purpose did not change in the new ecosystem; He wanted the new world to be filled; this required man and animals to be equipped for survival and reproduction in the new world, including its new ecosystem. There was no time for natural processes (i.e., multiple accidents and accidental selection of accidents) to prepare the creation for the new world…
It is evident that God reduced lifespan immediately [long] after the flood down to approximately 120 years at the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 34:7) and 70 years at the time of David (Samuel 5:4, 1 Kings 2: 10-12).
This is a transition that is probably coincident with the ice age which was initiated [ended] by the flood… And, the entire ecosystem was changing to what we have today. These facts render the question, “what mechanism did God use to accomplish this?” – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial:Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.
DNA is a language (Collins, 2006) and God possibly spoke the genetic reset… and it appears that mitochondrial heteroplasmy is a possible [tool] that he used for this task.
In human reproduction, the mature oocyte contains 100,000 to 750,000 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copies and is fertilized by the sperm which generates a blastocyst containing approximately 483,000 copies of the mtDNA in the Inner Cell Membrane (ICM); which in turn develops and harbors the Primodial Germ Cells (PGM) each of which contains approximately 200 copies of the mtDNA (St. John, Justin C., 2010); and each of the embryonic stem cells used in this construction contain approximately 20 copies of mtDNA (Rivolta MN, 2002). The processes involved with replication and inheritance of mtDNA are not well understood, but show what varied genetic information is available for transmission of mitochondrial DNA from generation to generation.
This transmission of mtDNA is quite different than nuclear DNA in that with nuclear DNA, only one copy is transferred to the next generation. It is a shuffled mixture of ovum haploid and sperm haploid DNA, but once it is determined the resulting embryo is defined by only one nuclear DNA. This method of transmission of mtDNA is of great interest concerning the inheritance and possible prevention of mitochondrial diseases, but also of interest from a genealogy standpoint. It has been found that it is common to have mitochondria that are heteroplasmic, meaning that it contains more than one mitochondrial genome. From a creationist standpoint, this is very interesting in that this heteroplasmic mitchondria could explain why the genetic reset took several generations to establish as documented in Genesis chapter 11. If there are only a few copies of a certain variation of mtDNA in the oocyte, they can be latent for several, or even many generations.
Mitochondrial heteroplasmy is somewhat common in humans. The American Journal of Human Genetics reported in 2010 that 37 heteroplasmies at 10% frequencies or higher at 34 sites were found in 32 individuals (Li, M., et. al. 2010). It would be tempting to use this heteroplasmic attribute coupled with a stocastic modeling to explain speciation after the flood; but, it wouldn’t fit the general theme of the Bible. There is a difference between natural variation which gives us our uniqueness and mutations which have developed due to the original sin. Mutations result in disease and shorter life span. Heteroplasmy, is most probably a result of sin.
The subject species examined in this paper [Raven, Owl, Dove] are genetically distinct, meaning the species do not have a genetic overlap, but all demonstrated a genetic void between species. The data show that within species the natural variation, genetic distance, is approximately one percent of cytb [Great Owl to great Owl 1% or less] and between species the variation is much greater: between 4.1 percent and 25.3 percent. This means that if one species varies from another by 10 percent of cytb, there is a void of 9 percent (10-1/2-1/2). There is no known mechanism that can bridge this void to produce a new species, especially in the short, young earth, timeframe. This is true for all our subjects as shown by the data presented in section 3.0 of this paper [not shown].
Any variation of [a] bird displaying this genetic void is assumed to be a unique kind and most probably was represented on the Ark.
Tables 5a. and 5b. [not shown] show that even owls of the same genus have diversity commensurate with the human compared to chimpanzee variation[of] (11%) [Great Owl to Eagle Owl, 11%; Spotted Eagle Owl to Barn Owl, 25.3%]. So, considering that speciation was involved in generating these owls is tantamount to saying that the ark not need carry a chimpanzee since they could evolve from Noah, or worst yet that Noah was a chimpanzee and evolved to modern humanity. This is a severe logic problem.’
Other comparisons include Pig to Mouse, 20.3%; African Lion to Domestic Cat, 12.9%; Horse to Cow, 19.3% and Cow to Zebra Fish, 29%.
‘It appears from this owl analysis that it is not possible to decide which creatures were on the Ark without having DNA.
Another tool God uses to control His creation is that of “deep sleep.” Here are three Biblically documented examples of God using “deep sleep”:
To make physiological changes – When God created Eve, he put Adam into a “deep sleep” so Adam would not feel the pain of the surgery in which Adam’s rib was removed (Genesis 2:21).
To establish a new covenant – When God established the covenant with Abram (Abraham), he, Abraham, was put into a deep sleep. While Abraham was in this “deep sleep” the Lord dealt with him and prepared Abraham for a new covenant (Genesis 15:12).
To separate enemies – When Saul wanted to kill David and had the opportunity, God put Saul and his entire army of 3000 into a “deep sleep” (1 Samuel 26:2,12) so that David would be spared.
The tool of “deep sleep” may very well have been employed on the Ark providing the perfect solution to all the problems: it would provide the anesthetics for the physiological changes required to reset the DNA; it would give God an opportunity to establish His new covenant with all flesh; it would protect the prey from the predators; and, of course, it would solve all the problems of space, food, waste, and air quality.
The design of the Ark is obviously not suited to keep the creatures alive in the full metabolic state, but well suited to the “deep sleep” state. The exact mechanism for “deep sleep” is not known, but it is logical to assume that it shares some similarities with the various mechanisms that we observe in nature: hibernation, comas, aestivation, brumation, and dormancy. Each of these mechanisms is different and serves the purpose for which it was designed.
We know that God… masterfully designed the Ark to accommodate the safe and peaceful transportation of the creation from one eco-system to another. It is a point of interest that all mammals have the ability to hibernate and that mammalian metabolic rates can be reduced to as little as 1% of normal rates (Carey HV, et. al, 2003).
The results of this investigation support the Biblical statement of Genesis 7:14 “… and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.”
All of the birds in this investigation were distinct and differed from one another sufficiently to secure a birth on the Ark. Also, these results support the long held stance of creationists that the species are distinct with no intermediate forms (Morris, 1974).
There is no known mechanism that could explain the genetic diversity of the post-flood birds; even evolution, if it did exist, could not function quickly enough to explain the genetic diversity in the Biblical time frame. Any attempt to explain this genetic diversification by natural processes, such as speciation, is indefensible faced with the DNA evidence.
The following hypotheses are submitted which are in tune with the DNA evidence and the Bible, requiring no reliance on evolutionary principles.
1. The DNA of the original creation was reset to accommodate the new ecosystem.
This is in agreement with the fossil record, the cytochrome b genetics presented in this paper and the Bible. The fossil record is clear, many existing species lived before the flood, but they were somewhat different: usually in size or small differences in bone structure. The genetic reset hypothesis explains this and can be generalized as follows: the genetics of pre-flood creatures are different than the genetics of modern creatures; this was accomplished by God’s voice, speaking the required changes into the creation preparing it for the new covenant and the new eco-system. One of the best examples of this is in pre-flood [Homo neanderthalensis] man (Genesis and Genetics, 2011).
2. The occupants of the Ark were generally in a deep sleep.
The Ark’s design is perfectly suited to the deep sleep scenario and in God’s own words the goal was to “keep them alive” ( Genesis 6:19). There are examples of God using deep sleep in the Bible… all of which apply to the state of affairs on the Ark. Contrary to common perception, life on the Ark may have been very peaceful with all of the animals asleep; this presents a comforting picture: all the reset animal DNA necessary to replenish the world with its new eco-system, in one peaceful… Ark.
3. Divine wisdom and creativity
God created all things in six days [epochs], it should not be difficult to accept that He had the perfect design for the Ark and made the perfect provisions for those on it; He is not only a divine creator, but He is also full of mercy (Psalm 100:5)… the Bible implies that not one animal was lost, during the voyage of Noah’s Ark (Genesis 8:19). Just looking at the Ark design should be enough to lead one to believe the animals, and [possibly] Noah, were in a deep, merciful sleep.
4. Defining “Kinds” – Rule of Thumb
From this very limited research, it appears that a kind will vary in cytochrome b from its own kind by generally one percent or less; if the variance is 4 percent [or] more, the subjects are different “kinds”; and any variance between 1 percent and 4 percent are in a gray area and would need more investigation using additional genes.’
Lloyd Pye discusses the incredible aspects and implications of the Great Flood, offering his theory on its cause, in Everything You Know Is Still Wrong 2009 & 2017, pages 495, 497-498, 501-503, 505-507 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… a remarkable number of cultures past and present believe a worldwide inundation did occur within human history, though they tend to be hazy on its details. The Sumerians are not. They state emphatically that a Great Flood surged up from the south… a sudden, overwhelming event… They say it occurred around 11,000 BCE [within 163 years of 10,837 BCE according to an unconventional chronology] at the end of the last Ice Age.
Ironically, their contention is strongly supported by conventional science, which has determined that the last interglacial warming trend began slowly, at around 13,000 BCE in the northern hemisphere, and gradually moved south until around 11,000 BCE, when something happened to accelerate full global warming to warp speed – in perhaps as little as twenty years.
Because so many sources around the world forcefully assert that a Great Flood did cause widespread death and destruction, we need to explore the kinds of actual events that might have created one. And guess what? There is a genuinely legitimate candidate in the Antarctic icecap – refer article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis. Today it covers 5.5 million square miles, it contains 7.0 million cubic miles of ice, and it has an average thickness of over a mile. A ridge of mountains under it divides it into two sections: the West Antarctic Ice Sheet [WAIS] (about 1/4 of the total), and the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (3/4 of the total).
The WAIS slants from the mountain range division toward the Pacific Ocean. The much larger East Sheet points opposite, toward the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. At the South Pole the ice is two miles thick and flows slowly toward Africa. All that was quite different…[in] 11,000 BCE. Earth was coming out of the last ice age that had gripped Earth for the previous 90,000 years [probably closer to between 8,000 to 16,000 years], and world sea levels were more than 300 feet lower than today.
Today those 330-plus feet are covered by 3.5 million cubic miles of water, but during the ice age much of that water was trapped in ice swirled across the polar ice caps. Even today, the Antarctic continent at the South Pole holds over 60% of the fresh water on Earth, and if it were all to melt, sea levels would rise by over 190 foot (58 metres).
… a strong earthquake could rattle the continent to its foundations… [caused by] a large celestial body passing in the vicinity… with enough gravitational force to create geophysical disturbances on any other planet it passes near. A planet like… Nibiru, for example?’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity.
‘As it happens, Sumerian texts claim Nibiru did indeed pass through the solar system at around 11,000 BCE, which makes it a prime candidate to shake a badly cracked icecap off of its foundations on Antartica… [after] 90,000 [16,000 years of icecap build up and] 2,000 years of warming… [causing] huge cracks to develop along the shelf edges where the unstable water-supported ice adjoined the far more stable land-supported ice.
Now imagine the size of waves that would be kicked up by icebergs with volumes from hundreds of thousand to perhaps a million or more cubic miles! Walls of water as high as a mile (over 5,000 feet) or more might surge forward! Apart from disrupting worldwide weather patterns, the tsunamis would strike every ocean, sea, and coastal plain on earth. The planet would slosh for days (the text says six), until equilibrium was reached at some greatly elevated sea level… the new level… is where it would stay, because as any iceberg melts, it only changes its form, not its volume.
In 2010, researchers at the University of Sheffield in England announced that they had found evidence of a catastrophic flood at approximately 13,000 ya (exactly when the Sumerian tablets place the flood), which created such havoc that it temporarily shut down the Gulf Stream (the constantly circulating current of warm water that keeps global temperatures as steady as they are)… a sudden influx of cold water into the North Atlantic… temporarily impaired the current’ – Article: The Younger DryasStadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.
An alternative theory was published… [by]… the National Academy of Sciences in May 2012, proposing that some sort of celestial body entered Earth’s atmosphere at roughly 12,900 ya [within a mere 38 years of 12,862 years according to an unconventional chronology], but broke up before it could make a large, easy-to-find impact crater (although thousands of smaller impact craters may have been produced by the debris). Nonetheless, the force of its passage through the atmosphere could have initiated tidal waves… new evidence collected from Greenland ice core samples in 2013, combined with evidence from soil samples in North America published in 2017, shows that right about 13,000 ya… there was suddenly an “abundance” of platinum at surface level in these areas. This precious metal is extremely rare on Earth, but it is common in asteroids. The new results fit perfectly with a large, platinum-laden asteroid crumbling on entry into Earth’s atmosphere and spraying fine debris over a huge area’ – refer article: The Younger DryasStadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World.
Outside the Genesis account, the Flood is mentioned in the following Bible verses:
Psalm 29:10
English Standard Version
‘The Lord sits enthroned over the flood…’
Isaiah 54:9
English Standard Version
“This is like the days of Noah to me: as I swore that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth…”
1 Peter 3:19-20
English Standard Version
‘… when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.’
New Zealand born actor Russell Crowe in the 2014 film, Noah.
Added to the scenario presented by Lloyd Pye, there would have been the following dramatic influences.
Genesis 1:6-8
New English Translation
‘God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters and let it separate water from water.” So God made the expanse [H7549 – raqiya: ‘firmament, vault (arch) of heaven supporting waters above’] and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. It was so. God called the expanse sky. There was evening, and there was morning, a second day [or epoch].’
Footnotes
The Hebrew word refers to an expanse of air pressure between the surface of the sea and the clouds, separating water below from water above. It is called “sky.” An expanse. In the poetic texts the writers envision, among other things, something rather strong and shiny, no doubt influencing the traditional translation “firmament” (NRSV “dome”). Job 38:18 refers to the skies poured out like a molten mirror. Daniel 12:3 and Ezekiel 1:22 portray it as shiny. The sky or atmosphere may have seemed like a glass dome.Though the Hebrew word can mean “heaven,” it refers in this context to “the sky”.
The atmosphere was different on the antediluvian Earth. It was an important component in the added longevity of humans before the flood, an explanation for the lengthy Ice age and an additional puzzle to the production of Vitamin D.
The expanse or sky, divided the oceans, seas and land from a vault or canopy of water surrounding the Earth raised above the sky, in the Earth’s atmosphere. A cloudier sky would have positively affected the climate, generating less distinction between seasons; levelling out both temperate and tropical regions so that the whole planet was highly habitable – until the Ice age hit. Another difference would have been the decreased rays of UV radiation from the Sun to safer levels than today.
Genesis and Genetics, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The early atmosphere was different from what we have now. The fossil evidence shows us that there were giant dragonflies, mammoth millipedes, and huge cockroaches, just to name a few. These insects could not survive in our present atmosphere and would have required 30 to 50 percent more oxygen than we have presently.
This early atmosphere would affect the vitamin D production in humans… Increased oxygen, by itself, would not significantly reduce the amount of ultraviolet radiation on the surface of the Earth, but ozone which does filter ultraviolet radiation is a product of oxygen. The assumption being that a higher percentage of oxygen in the atmosphere would result in a more protective ozone layer.’
Vitamin D is required for healthy bones, teeth and muscles. As it is contained in only a few seafoods, our bodies can produce it through certain cholesterols in other foods, which are converted into Vitamin D from exposure to the Sun’s radiation. The liver and kidneys then turn the vitamin into an active form we can use called D3. Dark skinned people can be prone from deficiency as the higher percentage of melanin in their skin, blocks the suns rays more effectively. This is a factor in our present climatic conditions.
Reliance on the Sun may not have been the primary option; or human skin tone was dark enough to protect against skin cancer, yet light enough to receive the necessary UV rays. Did the inhabitants of the early Earth have an alternative way of procuring Vitamin D, or did they have different food? Genesis 3:18 reveals the world before the flood – specifically, the agrarian line of Seth – had a plant based diet and it was only later after the flood that enigmatically, meat – including Vitamin D rich seafood – was introduced into the diet: Genesis 9:3-4 – Article: Red or Green?
The passing of a celestial body, whether a rogue planet and or, an accompanying comet, meteorites or asteroids would have undoubtedly impacted on this firmament dome of water – Article: The YoungerDryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. The plunging of this vast volume of water downwards to the earth would have been seismic and added with the huge tidal waves sweeping the Earth, could have easily and literally covered the entire planet and left no one alive, unless protected.
Genesis 7:4-24
New English Translation
“For in seven days I will cause it to rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the ground every living thing that I have made.”
Genesis and Genetics – emphasis mine:
‘Noah was… old when the floodwaters engulfed the earth. Noah entered the ark along with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives because of the floodwaters. And after seven days the floodwaters engulfed the earth.
In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month [April/May, Hebrew calendar], on the seventeenth day of the month – on that day all the fountains [springs] of the great deep [underneath the ocean] burst open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And the rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. The flood engulfed the earth for forty days. As the waters increased, they lifted the ark and raised it above the earth.
The waters completely overwhelmed the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the waters. The waters completely inundated the earth so that even all the high mountains under the entire sky were covered. The waters rose more than 20 feet above the [tallest] mountains. And all living things that moved on the earth died, including the birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth [insects], and all humankind. The waters prevailed over the earth for 150 days.’
The heavens were opened, in that the vast canopy of water dropped onto the earth – for forty days and nights – so that even the top of Mount Everest was covered. The verses are very specific even, of the level the waters reached; leaving no doubt that the Great Flood was a global catastrophic event, smothering the earth for five months.
Noah and the Deluge Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis mine:
‘The sudden disappearance of many animal species as well as moving erratic blocks would fit better with the biblical explanation of the Flood. The flood story is presented as an authentic history in the Gospels (Matthew 24:37-39, Luke 17:26-27).
According to the Bible there was at the origin some waters upon the earth (sea and ocean) and waters above the earth in the form of a vault of water (Genesis 1:7). At the time of the Flood… the vault of water fell to earth…
The disappearance of the vault of water (2 Peter 3:5-6) resulted in anew climate (Genesis 8:22) and its collapsing on the earth’s crust led to the emergence of big mountains (Psalm 104:6-8), which is consistent with the model of Pangaea in the plate tectonics.
In the past the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, as is evidenced by river channels extending far out under the oceans. It should also be noted that scientists have stated that mountains were much lower than at present, and some mountains have even been pushed up from under the seas.’
Pangaea: a scientifically proved supercontinent which broke up and resulted in the seven continents we know today… North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia and Antarctica – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.
Gertoux: ‘As to the present situation, it is said that: there is ten times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles [2,400 metres] deep (National Geographic, January 1945, page 105). With the sudden opening of the ‘springs of the watery deep’ and “the floodgates of the heavens,” untold billions of tons of water deluged the earth (Genesis 7:11). This may have caused tremendous changes in earth’s surface.
The earth’s crust is relatively thin (estimated at between 30 km and 160 km thick), stretched over a rather plastic mass thousands of kilometres in diameter. Hence, under the added weight of the water, there was likely a great shifting in the crust. In time new mountains evidently were thrust upward, old mountains rose to new heights, shallow sea basins were deepened, and new shorelines were established, with the result that now about 70 per cent of the surface is covered with water. This shifting in the earth’s crust may account for many geologic phenomena, such as the raising of old coastlines to new heights. It has been estimated by some that water pressure alone was equal to “2 tons per square inch”, sufficient to fossilize fauna and flora quickly.
The concentration of [Carbon-14] during the last glaciation was much lower than at present, this fact has been highlighted by dendrochronology (measure of age by the rings of a tree). Scientists suppose that the long-term variation correlates with fluctuations in the earth’s magnetic field strength (the geomagnetic moment). The geomagnetic moment affects C-14 production because cosmic rays are charged particles and are therefore deflected by a magnetic field. If the magnetic moment is high, more cosmic rays are deflected away from the earth and production of Carbon will fall; if low, the production rises.
According to the biblical account, the earth was surrounded by a vault of water before the Deluge (perhaps in the stratopause where the temperature is at present around 0°C) – Article: The YoungerDryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. Now water has the remarkable property of stopping neutrons very effectively since a screen of 23 mm thick stops 90% of neutrons (and a screen of 46 mm thick stops 99%), as demonstrated by nuclear pools. If there was water, Carbon production could not take place, which would explain the decrease in C-14 before 1000 BCE…’
Above: the Okotoks Erratic in Alberta, Canada, where ‘according to geologists, this enormous quartzite block, weighing about 16,500 tonnes and measuring about 41 x 18 x 9 metres, was carried here on the surface of a glacier. It came from the Rocky Mountains (Canada) in the Jasper area (a location 450 km away), probably between 18 and 10 thousand years ago. That means that Canada was completely under a sheet of ice 10,000 years ago (a deluge of ice).’
In Genesis chapter seven, all physical life ended that was not aboard the Ark. The Bible uses the word humankind instead of humans or people. It does not include all the Nephilim-kind with those destroyed. It was noted earlier that the Nephilim were on the Earth following the Flood. A number of post-flood Nephilim, included survivors – Article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I.
The flood was decreed to halt the corruption of humanity by rebellious dark spirits and so these fallen angels were put in restraint. Presumably, they did not produce further offspring this side of the deluge. Though we will find this is not entirely true – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. As this matter has wider repercussions in explaining biblical identities, this topic will be returned to in later sections. The Book of Jubilees also records the Flood narrative, with additional details.
Book of Jubilees Chapter Five:
22 ‘And Noah made the ark in all respects as He commanded him, (on the new month [moon] of the first month) [1st of Abib/Nisan – March/April]… 23 And he entered in the sixth (year) thereof… in the second month [Iyar – April/May], on the new month [new moon] of the second month, till the sixteenth [first day of the week]; and he entered… and Yahweh closed it from without on the seventeenth evening [2nd day of the week].
24 And Yahweh opened seven flood-gates of heaven, And the mouths of the fountains of the great deep, seven mouths in number. 25 And the flood-gates began to pour down water from the [heavens] forty days and forty nights, And the fountains of the deep also sent up waters, until the whole world was full of water. 26 And the waters increased upon the earth: Fifteen cubits did the waters rise above all the high mountains, And the ark was lift up above the earth, And it moved upon the face of the waters. 27 And the water prevailed on the face of the earth five months – one hundred and fifty days.’
28 ‘And the ark went and rested on the top of Lubar,* one of the mountains of Ararat. 29 And (on the new month [moon]) in the fourth month [Tammuz – June/July] the fountains of the great deep were closed and the flood-gates of heaven were restrained; and on the new month [1st day – Feast of Trumpets] of the seventh month [Tishri – September/October] all the mouths of the abysses of the earth were opened, and the water began to descend into the deep below.
30 And on the new month of the tenth month [Tevet – December/January] the tops of the mountains were seen, and on the new month [new moon] of the first month [1st day of Abib/Nisan – March/April] the earth became visible [almost one year to the day]. 31 And the waters disappeared from above the earth in the fifth week in the seventh year… [seven years since Noah began to build the Ark] thereof, and on the seventeenth day [2nd day of the week] in the second month [Iyar – April/May] the earth was dry. 32 And on the twenty-seventh** [5th day of the week] thereof he opened the ark, and sent forth from it beasts, and cattle, and birds, and every moving thing.’
As the worst of the flood effects dissipated, the ark would have risen to the oceans surface or perhaps descended down onto the surface as explained in Genesis 8:1-5, New Century Version:
‘But God remembered Noah and all the wild and tame animals with him in the boat. He made a wind blow over the earth, and the water went down. The underground springs stopped flowing, and the clouds in the sky stopped pouring down rain. The water that covered the earth began to go down. After one hundred fifty days it had gone down so much that the boat touched land again. It came to rest on one* of the mountains of Ararat on the seventeenth day of the seventh month. The water continued to go down so that by the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains could be seen.’
Kashmir above and below
A salient point is that when the early part of Genesis was compiled, many thousands of years had elapsed. It states ‘mountains’, not Mount Ararat, so that the location is a mountain range not a specific peak – Book of Jubilees excepted. There is reason to consider that the Ararat Mountains in Asia Minor drew their name from a more ancient location: the Himalayan Mountain range to the East and North – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Searchers for Noah’s Ark may well have been looking in entirely the wrong place, when heading to Mount Ararat in present day Turkey.
Heading westward from Turkey leads to southern Europe, not Mesopotamia or Sumer – Genesis 11:2. Please refer to point number two in the introduction (primus verba). It is worth noting Roman author Pliny the Elder in 50 CE, recorded the ancient Atlantean civilisation had fled to the Himalayas after catastrophic events had destroyed their homeland – Article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis.
A persistent belief is that the Garden of Eden was located below the Hindu Kush in present day Kashmir – Article: The Eden Enigma. What is not considered, is that Kashmir may be the re-beginning of civilisation after the flood.
When the Ark could safely navigate the surface of the oceans, it is credible that the first observed land to appear would be amongst the now highest mountains on the earth. If the Ark rested on one of these peaks in the original mountains of Ararat, it would explain how civilisation after the Flood appeared first in the Indus Valley, present day Pakistan. There are numerous mountains – all plausible sites for landing, including K2 – which are over 8,000 metres in height, such as Mount Everest.
It would be logical that after the passengers on the Ark eventually disembarked, they found a suitable region to live, right where they were. Kashmir is stunning with its majestic mountains and lakes and is located in one of the four Himalayan Mountain ranges, the Karakoram range in the north west. Below is the Western Himalayan range. To the east is the Great Himalayan range, where Everest is located and then the Eastern range – Brahmaputra. Its climate was likely quite different 13,000 years ago and would account for:
Genesis 9:20
New Century Version
‘Noah became a farmer and planted a vineyard.’
Book of Jubilees Chapter Seven:
1 ‘And in the seventh week** [late in the 4th month Tammuz – early July] in the first year [after the flood] thereof… Noah planted vines [today, ideal planting is from October to March] on the mountain on which the ark had rested, named Lubar, one of the Ararat Mountains, and they produced fruit in the fourth year [it takes a grapevine from rootstock, four to five years to mature]… and he guarded their fruit [by pruning in the ninth and tenth months (November) – and ensuring roots are not damp through adequate drainage and the soil is nutrient rich], and gathered it in this year in the seventh month [end of summer harvest, September/October – usually from August to October]. 2 And he made wine… and put it into a vessel, and kept it…’
Remember, the lower lands and plains were water soaked, soggy and boggy for many years. According to Zecharia Sitchin, the god Enlil granted the remnants of mankind implements and seeds, with agriculture indeed beginning in the highlands.
Legend holds that Noah was rather reclusive and dwelt near where the Ark came to rest; with the Book of Jubilees stating in 10:15: ‘And Noah slept with his fathers, and was buried on Mount Lubar in the land of Ararat.’ Possibly, remaining in Kashmir was as far as Noah travelled after the flood.
The Epic of Gilgamesh – part of the plot summary repeated below – alleges the King of Urek, Gilgamesh (normally attributed to Nimrod – Noah’s great great grandson – though possibly Nimrod’s son instead) begins a quest and journeys very far to the solitary Utnapishtim (or Noah). He seeks immortality and apparently meets with Utnapishtim to learn his secret, as he has lived longer than any other mortal man after the Flood – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.
Spark Notes: ‘… Gilgamesh, king of Uruk [south of Babylon]… was two-thirds god and one-third man. He built magnificent ziggurats, or temple towers, surrounded his city with high walls, and laid out its orchards and fields. He was physically beautiful, immensely strong, and very wise. Although Gilgamesh was godlike in body and mind, he began his kingship as a cruel despot. He lorded over his subjects, raping any woman who struck his fancy… He accomplished his building projects with forced labor, and his exhausted subjects groaned under his oppression… Gilgamesh… traveled to the edge of the world and learned about the days before the deluge and other secrets of the gods, and he recorded them on stone tablets’ – refer article: Thoth.
‘… Gilgamesh hopes that Utnapishtim can tell him how he might avoid death… After a harrowing passage through total darkness, Gilgamesh emerges into a beautiful garden by the sea… Gilgamesh [journeys] across the sea and through the Waters of Death to Utnapishtim.
Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh the story of the flood – how the gods met in council and decided to destroy humankind. Ea, the god of wisdom, warned Utnapishtim about the gods’ plans and told him how to fashion a gigantic boat in which his family and the seed of every living creature might escape. When Gilgamesh insists that he be allowed to live forever, Utnapishtim gives him a test. If you think you can stay alive for eternity, he says, surely you can stay awake for a week. Gilgamesh tries and immediately fails. So Utnapishtim orders him to… return to Uruk where he belongs… When Gilgamesh returns to Uruk, he is empty-handed but reconciled at last to his mortality…’
Gilgamesh eventually found the reclusive Utnapishtim, though was left frustrated as access to the Tree of Life had been withdrawn and there was no way to cheat death.
Noah’s family would have grown quickly and with sixteen (twenty-one) grandsons all jockeying for position, they would later travel south along the Indus River, populating it as they travelled. Mankind continued migrating westward and civilisation eventually re-emerged in the fertile crescent of the Middle East. The family groups now substantially larger, stamped their names throughout the Middle East, North Africa, West Asia, Asia Minor (Anatolia) and the Greek Archipelago, and it is from these records that Genesis Ten’s geography is derived. Well after the initial, early smaller groupings along the Indus River.
A possible reason the bulk of Noah’s family travelled west and not east, is that either a. the grandchildren knew civilisation had once been important in that location before the Flood and were keen to re-visit so-to-speak – yet we do not know where Noah and his sons had dwelt previously, perhaps Lemuria or even Atlantis (refer article: Antartica: Secrets of the Lost Continent of Atlantis) – or b. the Middle East might have actually been their original homeland.
The Races of the Old Testament, A H Sayce, 1891, pages 39-42:
‘… the tenth chapter of Genesis is ethnographical rather than ethnological. It does not profess to give an account of the different races of the world and to separate them one from another according to their various characteristics. It is descriptive merely, and such races of men… are described from the point of view of the geographer and not of the ethnologist.’
Sayce’s stance is peculiar, for it would seem the converse would be more logical, since a genealogical family tree is being listed. This writer proposes the account in Genesis Ten is both ethnological and ethnographical. That is, the family groups are listed in a certain order and described living next to each other in a particular fashion because they are family. Families stay together and the listing of Noah’s son’s grandchildren is to help us understand who is more related to who. Please refer to point number one in the introduction (primus verba).
Sayce: ‘… when it is said that Elam and Assur were the children of Shem, it is to geography, and not to ethnology, that we must look for an explanation. Assyria, Elam, and Babylonia, or Arphaxad as it seems to be called in the Ethnographical Table, all bordered, at one time, one upon the other. They constituted the three great monarchies of the eastern world, and their three capitals, Nineveh, Susa, and Babylon, were the three centres which regulated the politics of Western Asia. They were brethren not because the natives of them claimed descent from a common father, but because they occupied the same quarter of the world.’
Sayce is claiming geography is the key element in their positioning, yet the land they occupy is secondary and merely reflects their relationship as brothers from the same father. Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad are three of the five sons of Shem. The remaining two sons, Aram and Lud, migrated further afield. We will discover that Elam, Asshur and Arphaxad’s descendants today live in a similar pattern as they did in the past – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.
They each dwell closer to one another and more than their mere geographical histories have been entwined. Aram and Lud are located on the periphery of Shem’s children today, as they were in the past – Chapter XVII Lud & Iran; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Please refer to point number one in the introduction (primus verba).
Sayce: ‘Attempts have been made to explain the names of the three sons of Noah as referring to the colour of the skin. Japhet has been compared with the Assyrian ippatu white, Shem with the Assyrian samu olive-coloured while in Ham etymologists have seen the Hebrew kham to be hot. But all such attempts are of very doubtful value. It is, for instance, a long stride from the meaning of heat to that of blackness a meaning, indeed, which the Hebrew word never bears. Moreover, the sons of Ham were none of them black-skinned, with the possible exception of a part of the population of Cush. [Professor] Virchow has shown that the Egyptian, like the Canaanite, belongs to the white race, his red skin being merely the result of sunburn.’
We will endeavour to show that Japheth’s children can be light skinned, though others are not; that some of Shem’s children are olive-coloured and that Ham’s children do in fact live in the hottest parts of the world, in relation to the equator. We will find, that all very dark skinned people have descended from either Ham or Canaan – though not all of Ham’s children are dark – and that the original children of Canaan were dark skinned, not red or sunburned and that in time, white people became known as Canaanites because they lived in the same land after the original Canaanites had migrated south-west. Please refer to point number two in the introduction (primus verba).
A H Sayce comments regarding our origin, page 38:
‘Great as may be the diversity between race and race under the microscope of the ethnologist, the unity which underlies it is greater still. God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth. Black or white, [brown] red or yellow, we are all bound together by a common nature ; we can all alike claim a common ancestry, and recognise that we have each been made in the image of the Creator.’
Sayce is quoting from the Book of Acts, where Paul in the midst of the Areopagus, addressed the men of Athens.
Acts 17:26
King James Version
“And hath made of one blood [from Adam] all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation…”
In the English Standard Version it says in verses 24-25:
‘The God who made the world and everything in it… nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind lifeand breath and everything.’
New Century Version, verse 26:
‘God began by making one person, and from him came all the different people who live everywhere in the world. God decided exactly when and where they must live.’
Daniel 7:13-14
New English Transaltion
“I was watching in the night visions, And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him. To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty. All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him. His authority is eternal and will not pass away. His kingdom will not be destroyed.”
We really are one, not as in ‘one human race’ – for we are a variety of ethnicities – but rather one humankind; containing family groups grown large, now called peoples and nations. Most scientists now agree that all humans are genetically extremely similar – unexpectedly so, for evolutionists to adequately explain why.
The biological differences between races are small. The DNA differences are minute. The DNA of any two people in the world typically differs by just 0.2%. Of this, only 6% – a minuscule 0.012% – can be linked to racial categories – the rest is within race variation. Most evolutionists would concur that the various races did not have separate origins and evolve from different groups of animal primates. They would reluctantly agree with the biblical creationist, that all peoples have come from the same original ancestor.
There is a false perception that different racial characteristics like skin colour are due to remarkably different genetic configurations. An understandable but incorrect premise. For example, it is easy to think that since different groups of people have yellow skin (red skin), black skin, white skin, and brown skin, there must be many different skin pigments and therefore different chemicals for colouring, involving numerous codes in the DNA for each ethnicity.
Rather, we all have the same colouring pigment in our skin: melanin. It is a dark-brown pigment that is produced in varying amounts in unique cells in our skin. If we had none as previously discussed, then we would exhibit a very white or pinkish skin colouring of an albino. If we produce small amounts of melanin, we are white. If our skin produces a lot of melanin, we are black and in between, all the shades of brown.
Races of People, William C. Boyd PhD [Geneticist], 1955, pages 43-45:
‘The color of normal human skin is due to the presence of three kinds of colored chemicals, or pigments. The most important of these pigments is melanin, a dark-brown substance…
The second of the three pigments is carotene. This is a yellow substance which is present in carrots (from which it gets its name) and egg yokes as well as human skin…
The third pigment is haemoglobin, which is the red coloring matter of blood… the haemoglobin occurs in the blood vessels beneath the skin, so that very little can show through.
The presence of fair amounts of either melanin or carotene in the skin covers it up completely. Haemoglobin does show up however in the skin of white men, particularly in those of light complexion. It is the haemoglobin that accounts for pink cheeks and the ability to blush.’
From an untitled article:
‘Other substances can in minor ways affect skin shading, such as the coloured fibres of the protein elastin and the pigment carotene… we all share these same compounds… Factors other than pigment in the skin may influence the shade perceived by the observer in subtle ways, such as the thickness of the overlying (clear) skin layers, and the density and positioning of the blood capillary networks.
In fact, ‘melanin’, which is produced by cells in the body called melanocytes, consists of two pigments, which also account for hair colour. Eumelanin is very dark brown, phaeomelanin is more reddish. People tan when sunlight stimulates eumelanin production. Redheads, who are often unable to… tan, have a high proportion of phaeomelanin.’
We will encounter individuals on our journey who are red. An article on Eupedia elaborates – emphasis mine:
‘Red hair is a recessive genetic trait caused by a series of mutations in the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R), agene located on chromosome 16′ – refer Chapter XVI Shem Occidentalis. ‘As a recessive trait it must be inherited from both parents to cause the hair to become red. Consequently there are far more people carrying the mutation for red hair than people actually having red hair. In Scotland, approximately 13% of the population are redheads, although 40% carry at least one mutation. There are many kinds of red hair, some fairer, or mixed with blond (‘strawberry blond’), some darker, like auburn hair, which is brown hair with a reddish tint.
This is because some people only carry one or a few of the several possible MC1R mutations. The lightness of the hair ultimately depends on other mutations regulating the general pigmentation of both the skin and hair. Skin and hair pigmentation is caused by two different kinds of melanin: eumelanin and pheomelanin. The most common is eumelanin, a brown-black polymer responsible for dark hair and skin, and the tanning of light skin. Pheomelanin has a pink to red hue and is present in lips, nipples, and genitals.
The mutations in the MC1R gene imparts the hair and skin more pheomelanin than eumelanin, causing both red hair and freckles. Redheads have very fair skin, almost always lighter than non-redheads. This is an advantage in northern latitudes and very rainy countries, where sunlight is sparse, as lighter skin improves the absorption of sunlight, which is vital for the production of vitamin D by the body. The drawback is that it confers redheads a higher risk for both sunburns and skin cancer.
Studies have demonstrated that people with red hair are more sensitive to thermal pain and also require greater amounts of anesthetic than people with other hair colours. The reason is that redheads have a mutation in a hormone receptor that can apparently respond to at least two different hormones: the melanocyte-stimulating hormone (for pigmentation) and endorphins (the pain relieving hormone).
Folk wisdom has long described redheads as hot-tempered and short-tempered. Red hair has long been associated with Celtic people. Both the ancient Greeks and Romans described the Celts as redheads… red hair is an almost exclusively northern and central European phenomenon…these people share a common ancestry that can be traced back to a single Y-chromosomal haplogroup: R1b.
… the frequency of red hair is highest in Ireland (10 to 30%) and Scotland (10 to 25%), followed by Wales (10 to 15%), Cornwall and western England, Brittany, the Franco-Belgian border, then western Switzerland, Jutland [Denmark] and southwest Norway. The southern and eastern boundaries, beyond which red hair only occurs in less than 1% of the population, are northern Spain, central Italy, Austria, western Bohemia, western Poland, Baltic countries and Finland.
The question that inevitably comes to many people’s minds is:did red hair originate with the Celtic or the Germanic people? Southwest Norway may well be the clue to the origin of red hair. It has been discovered recently, thanks to genetic genealogy, that the higher incidence of both dark hair and red hair (as opposed to blond) in southwest Norway coincided with a higher percentage of the paternal lineage known as haplogroup R1b-L21, including its subclade R1b-M222, typical of northwestern Ireland and Scotland… It is now almost certain that native [predominantly women] Irish and Scottish Celts were taken (probably as slaves) to southwest Norway by the Vikings, and that they increased the frequency of red hair there.
What is immediately apparent to genetic genealogists is that the map of red hair correlates with the frequency of haplogroup R1b in northern and western Europe. It doesn’t really correlate with the percentage of R1b in southern Europe, for the simple reason that red hair is more visible among people carrying various other genes involved in light skin and hair pigmentation.’
‘Mediterranean people have considerably darker pigmentations (higher eumelanin), especially as far as hair is considered, giving the red hair alleles little opportunity to express themselves. The reddish tinge is always concealed by black hair, and rarely visible in dark brown hair. Rufosity being recessive, it can easily stay hidden if the alleles are too dispersed in the gene pool, and that the chances of both parents carrying an allele becomes too low. Furthermore, natural selection also progressively pruned red hair from the Mediterranean populations, because the higher amount of sunlight and strong UV rays in the region was more likely to cause potentially fatal melanoma in fair-skinned redheads.
At equal latitude, the frequency of red hair correlates amazingly well with the percentage of R1b lineages. The 45th parallel north, running through central France, northern Italy and Croatia, appears to be a major natural boundary for red hair frequencies. Under the 45th parallel, the UV rays become so strong that it is no longer an advantage to have red hair and very fair skin. Under the 41th parallel, redheads become extremely rare, even in high R1b areas.
The 45th parallel is also the traditional boundary between northern European cultures, where cuisine is butter-based, and southern European cultures, preferring olive oil for cooking. The natural boundary probably has a lot to do with the sun and climate in general, since the 45th parallel is exactly halfway between the Equator and the North Pole.’
We will investigate further the Celts, the British Isles, the significance of red hair and its correlation with the Y-DNA, R1b Haplogroup.
It is unimaginable how anyone, could hate, torture, or kill their fellow human being because of the colour of their skin. Skin is only skin deep – just seven layers of tissue, coloured by a pigment we all possess in varying degree. An African and a European could have two children. One has dark skin and straight hair, thin lips, a smaller nose and narrower, blue eyes. The skin may be dark, the features European. Whereas, the other child has light skin, curly hair, fuller lips, a broader nose and larger brown eyes. The skin may be light, the features African. The physical features are more racially characteristic than the skin tone.
1 Samuel 16:7
New Century Version
“… God does not see the same way people see. People look at the outside of a person, but the Lord looks at the heart.”
The Bible laid bare, is simply an incredible story about a family. That family has grown exceptionally large, comprising multiple billions. At the heart of that extended family, there is one particular family which was given certain responsibilities and in turn had certain expectations required of them. They were to be blessed regardless if they measured up or not, as a promise had been made by the Creator, bound by his word to an ancestor who proved himself faithful beyond measure. The Bible is written in essence from this family’s perspective and the messages, warnings, events and circumstances in the scriptures, pertain to them. Other family members – people and nations – are mentioned either directly or indirectly in proportion to their interaction with this one central family.
Acts 10:34-35
New Century Version
Peter began to speak: “I really understand now that to God every person is the same. In every country God accepts anyone who worships him and does what is right.”
There are a number of subjects we have touched upon in this chapter which deserve continued consideration and so we will return to these topics in later sections. Chapter Two focuses on the Table of Nations in Genesis chapter ten, beginning with the eldest son of Noah, Japheth and his seven sons.
God gave the people a dull mind so they could not understand. He closed their eyes so they could not see and their ears so they could not hear. This continues until today.
Romans 11:8 New Century Version
“There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know.”
A sensational Investigation into Ancient Peoples and Empires – revealing the hidden Identities of their Descendants – as our Modern Nations and Powers
My life long enthusiasm for the diversity of peoples and their cultures on our shared home, the singularly solitary and beautiful watery blue orb we call Earth, was sparked around the age of ten when my father gave me a number of overflowing envelopes filled with postage stamps. He had kept every stamp from every letter from about the time I had been born. This included countless that he had received from his work. We had lived in Morocco for the first five years of my life and there were many from there as well as other exotic sounding nations for me, including Persia now Iran; Arabic writing I couldn’t understand, though fascinated with its artistry on stamps from Egypt; and similarly Greek on stamps from Hellas otherwise known as Greece. I spent hours over many weeks soaking them in the bath tub to remove their paper-backing and then diligently sorting them into countries and finally into albums.
This patient process led me to studying atlases and procuring a world map to see where exactly, all these exciting new countries were located. Little did I know, there were in fact some two hundred nations in the world. My eventual passion for ancient history, geography and vexillology has combined over the years to include valuable research into heraldry, geo-politics, anthropology, ethnology, philology, etymology, archaeology, legend and myth. All this through stamp collecting and my father unwittingly sending me on a journey I could not have imagined; following a trail which grew in intrigue and drama the further along I ventured.
As a child, I had begun to question who really were the previous great nations and their empires of old and… thrillingly, who and where might they be now: Ancient Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, the Phoenicians, the Chaldeans, the Medes and Persians, the Greeks, Romans, Byzantium, the Goth and Frankish kingdoms, the Ottoman Empire.
A crucial development was a prominent teaching of the church we had begun attending when I was nine years old. I cannot recall when I became fully aware – though it was while I was young – of the belief that the family tree of nations listed in the Bible, as well as other other non-canonical books is in fact an account of the ancestors of the descended nations in existence today.
Though our church’s material was a valuable springboard, it fell short in answering my now all-consuming questions on the aforementioned great empires and peoples. I had been accepting of the identifications as expounded and that they were accurate. It was years later in my twenties, when I challenged the teachings of our church one by one, that I began to look at the biblical identity of nations much more closely to check their authenticity.
This began about 1991, an in-depth study into the doctrine and thus a formerly casual acceptance and interest now began to evolve into a serious passion and probably more honestly, an obsession. For when I studied each identity one by one, I was struck aghast that only a small handful made sense and the vast majority did not. Either I was heading off on a tangent, or the foundational premise I had thought to be sound needed to be questioned and it-would-seem, rebuilt. A thirty year quest ensued to fully understand the subject and endeavour to fit the pieces together more accurately.
A couple of serious points. Firstly, the subject of nations identities from the Bible divides like no other doctrinal teaching. Either one is enthusiastically receptive to the subject or vehemently opposed and sitting squarely in team scepticism. Those in opposition are themselves, likely in one of two camps. There are sincere believers in the Bible, who see no sense or place for this knowledge in their paradigm of beliefs. That is, it is not essential for salvation, so it does not have any relevance in their personal lives. Then there are others who do not believe the Bible is inspired and that it is rather just a collection of fables, platitudes, proverbs and the such that may be interesting, though not something to place serious value upon.
My purpose is not to try to win over either or to change their views. I would be surprised if they should even wish to read this work or sacrifice the time and energy on it. As Dale Carnegie said: “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.”
There are readers whom hopefully are more receptive as they may have either a surface knowledge, or possibly conducted considerable research after years of interest. The issue they may have with this work, is that it will fly contrary to the majority of teachings they are familiar with – from the preceding past one hundred and fifty years, as it has gained popularity – and it might be asking too much to shift preconceived and pre-heard ideas that have become comfortable and well-intrenched. I am fascinated to find that people will often clutch onto the first explanation of a nation’s identity that they read or hear and it is then held close to their heart in a vice-like grip and woe to the person who tries to loosen that clasp.
To the constant and faithful readers who with me, share a reciprocal interest and desire to grow in knowledge and understanding… I trust that you will enjoy the journey we are about to embark on as much as I have. I would be very glad to hear from anyone, who has a similar passion and desire to share, so that we can all further our understanding. I am continually learning and revising and open to teaching from others of like mind, welcoming helpful input.
I will aim to be non-dogmatic in my approach – be patient if I forget myself and am over zealous. I am not trying to prove emphatically necessarily, but rather, present my thoughts and submit my findings. A theory one could say and a springboard for further study and understanding. I have read numerous articles and books – especially on the Lost Tribes of Israel – and I believe there is much confusion on the subject.
It is a colossal irony of enormous magnitude that those who dismiss the Bible outright, or those who place little value on the Old Testament verses that describe peoples and nations past and future, use this teaching as proof to satisfy in their own minds, that either the Bible is not true or that vast sections of the Old Testament are of little value. Whereas the actual converse is applicable. The more one can identify peoples in the Bible who equate to modern nations today, the more compelling and incontrovertible the veracity of the Old Testament verses becomes – offering the most profound proof there is, that the Bible is actually inspired to reveal what is true.
The Bible has endured a sizeable proportion of editing as well as suffering censoring at the hands of those who compiled each Testament. Whether the scriptural verses which discuss peoples and nations have been or not, I am presently unaware. I do not believe there is any impediment to understanding them, as they are presented. There is helpful supplementary material in two books that did not make the biblical canon: the Book of Jasher and The Book of Jubilees. Many subjects that are Bible based or incorporate the Bible as part of their research can be supported by a variety of extra-biblical sources and secular material. The identity of nations is no different, though I trust as we progress, that the credibility of the written word of the Old Testament becomes overwhelmingly evident as the bedrock foundation in unlocking biblical identities.
The second serious point, is that it is next to impossible to cover this topic without a detractor crying racist or anti-Semite. One can speak of anthropology or ethnicity and little issue. Mention race and you are potentially in a hot seat. Anyone who knows me, can attest I am the least racist person. My interest in people and their origins and identity would make no sense otherwise. I sincerely mean no offence to anyone and apologise unreservedly if anything is inadvertently said that could be construed to be anything other than entirely respectful to all peoples included and discussed throughout.
Some may be thinking: what are my credentials? Well, you may be disappointed if you value intellectual scholarship. I do not have a masters or a doctorate. I took Geography at High School and passed as well as History, achieving second place in my High School. I completed two semesters of History at University, gaining an Associate of Arts in Theology and the Fine Arts. I have been fortunate to have experienced a myriad of cultures and peoples, while visiting some forty countries and have been blessed to have lived in six different nations.
I believe what has held me in better stead, has been my willingness to accept what I have come to understand, yet be willing to be flexible enough to modify my view if I see the pieces are not smoothly interlacing. Also, through a thorough examination of every scripture in the Bible on the families and their subsequent descendants, many times over; while cross-referencing the verses, studying them word by word and checking original Hebrew definitions of key words and relevant people’s names.
This process has been quite literally a gigantic jig-saw puzzle with thousands of pieces. Working with so many pieces wasn’t easy, as I didn’t know which pieces were missing. Statistically, I still don’t have them all. If others have missing pieces, I would be fascinated to continue learning. We are by our very nature prone and limited at times to perceiving ideas and even facts from our own individual perspective. I have endeavoured throughout to approach, what has been tantamount to an investigation, with integrity and impartiality as much as humanly possible.
Before we begin in earnest, I have noticed researchers who have relied quite heavily on etymology, heraldry symbols and sometimes superficial connections. I think they are important and lend interesting support. It can be easy to place possibly, over credence on them, which can then be mis-leading and less constructive than helpful.
I have taken a different approach in four main areas, which I believe have been invaluable in unlocking the enigma of the nations identities.
a. As the original nations of the world began as families grown large, they understandably lived in close proximity to other families that were closely related. A geographic proximity and closeness that I believe has been replicated today. In other words, nations generally migrated in similar lines or paths, whether parallel or in tandem from the Middle East region and have ended up in Europe, Asia and so forth living next to those exact same people who are more closely related to themselves.
b. An area that has tangled up many researchers is that of names used for peoples in one area and then those people migrate and move under a different name – because languages kept evolving and also friends or foes would use different names or labels for people. We will strike this phenomena repeatedly, but to use one quick example. The people of Ham’s son Cush moved into an area of land in East Africa – below and to the south of present day Egypt and the Sudan – and it became known as Ethiopia, a translation of Cush. Cush’s descendants have long gone from the area, now lived in by the modern nation of Africans with that same name. The people who live there now are not from Cush. We will find that Cush’s people migrated first to the Arabian peninsula, continuing eastward. Therefore in the Bible when it mentions Cush – past or future – or is translated as Ethiopia, both being inter-changeable, it means the people of Cush and where they reside now. Not the people currently living in the modern nation called Ethiopia. This is very important to understand and completely alters the meaning of certain verses that have been interpreted in error.
The map above identifies the peoples and nations during the biblical epoch as recorded by the numerous prophets who authored (under inspiration) the books of the Old Testament. From a logical standpoint, would it not be naive to think the exact same peoples are still in the same locations millennia later? Similarly, would prophetic prophesies apply to merely names of countries of the past or to the peoples who once lived there and who have now migrated further into Africa, Asia, Europe and beyond to the Americas?
c. Relating to point b: language changes and evolves continually. Compare an English or American English dictionary from fifty years ago with one from the present day. The amount of new and changing words is vast. Hence how nations can have very different identifying names over the course of two hundred years, let alone two thousand years. Similar to point one: Languages spoken today, are a major clue to who is related to whom and is similarly linked to geographic location. Related languages do not stand alone, but added with other evidence lends weighted support.
d. I happened on Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups, with autosomal DNA and my research was profoundly impacted from that day forward. To receive genetic confirmation of humanities present locations worldwide was monumental – pivotal evidence in supporting the proposition that humankind is one family grown large and distinct family groups are identifiable through our DNA. Certain peoples are clearly more related to some than others and therefore match the ancestral groups listed in the Old Testament.
I am indebted to the following two men and their research: The Origin of the Nations, 1957, by Dr Herman Hoeh and Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, 1902, by J H Allen.
Most importantly, I wish to give grateful appreciation to my wife. Tirelessly, she has listened to me go on and on with my findings and theories. I ran everything on this subject past her for thirty years and still counting. On walks, sharing a drink in the garden, sitting on the sofa or last thing at night in bed as she struggles to stay awake and then can resist no more. Me still talking until I realise she is asleep. To have a sounding board, who countless times helped me refine a point or a new line of enquiry is of incalculable value. She is a sizeable part of this work – thank you.
To whom will he teach knowledge, and to whom will he explain the message…
Isaiah 28:9 English Standard Version
“What we know is a drop, what we don’t know is an ocean.”
Isaac Newton 1643 – 1727
“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
George Orwell 1903 – 1950
“All iconoclasts have to swim upstream against a relentless tide of opposition… the fate of all rebels…”
Lloyd Pye 1946 – 2013
“I challenge anyone to assert that they have done more than simply parrot the words of the official anonymous or generally accepted superficial sources. And I ask does that satisfy one who is truly looking for an answer?”
The Lightkeeper 