Elam & Turkey

Chapter XVIII

The first born son of Shem is Elam. We have discussed his relationship with Japheth’s son Madai and his 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 that live adjacent is palpable in names and language, particularly on the Central Asian Republics descended from Madai

The Elamites were known as Persians and in the Bible, it is Elam that is being referred to and not the Persians of the nation of Iran which dwells in the region today. We have learned in the preceding chapter that Iran is Lud and Lud is associated closely with Phut, Cush and Persia in the Bible. The nations of Pakistan, India and Turkey today. The regional powers of Lud and Elam, Iran and Turkey have crossed swords. They are both descended from Shem and due to their location, have similarly intermingled with other people’s – from the Middle East for Iran and Central Asia for Turkey – to produce a complex ethnicity as shown by their Haplogroups. 

Iran with a son of Mizra from Ham and Turkey 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 and thus share the same Islamic faith, having one foot in two different worlds, geographically and philosophically. 

Dr Hoeh continues in his 1957 article – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold 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, map. page 4845) 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.

Israel a History of – emphasis & bold 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.’

The meaning of Elam in Hebrew is ‘hidden’, from the verb ‘alam ‘to be hidden.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold 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 splitor 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).

Cyrus descended from Achaemenes (born around 700 BC, or so the story goes) 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, the mean 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, meaning stable [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 break and divide in 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; the Persians also adopted a variety of military tactics from the Medes – as well as 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 using 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 Spartansimported Nisean horses and bred them with their native stock and many nomadic tribes, such as the Scythiansalso 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

We have studied earlier a number of scriptures regarding Elam, when we read verses on Madai [refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes]. The Turk and Turkic-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 the capital city [or fortress city] of Susa, in the area [province] of Elam. I was standing by the Ulai Canal [or Gate].

The capital of Elam was Susa or Shushan, where the first 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 wereShushan, 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. 

There were numerous city states in the region, though the first major empires were the Hittite Empire to the west and the Assyrians to the east. The Persian Empire followed, then Alexander the Great of Greece and Macedon and of course the Roman Empire. In 330 CE, Byzantium became the new capital of the Roman Empire under Roman Emperor Constantine I. The city was renamed Constantinople and was the capital of the Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years. 

In the eleventh century, the Turks began to migrate into 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 rule 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 war between Russia and Turkey initiated a series of Russo-Turkish conflicts that 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 86,609,150 people, almost exactly the same as Iran. 

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Turkish global shipments during 2021.

  1. Vehicles: US$25 billion 
  2. Machinery including computers: $20.8 billion 
  3. Iron, steel: $17.1 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $12 billion
  5. Gems, precious metals: $11 billion
  6. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $10.8 billion 
  7. Plastics, plastic articles: $10 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $8.8 billion 
  9. Mineral fuels including oil: $8.5 billion
  10. 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.

Turkish men

Oxford Bible Church, Derek Walker – emphasis & bold mine:

‘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 fostered close cultural, political, economic and industrial relations with the Eastern world, particularly with the Middle Eastand 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.’

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 the nations of Iran and Pakistan in particular. We will look at the Old Elamite period from 2700 to 1500 BCE, when we study a prominent Biblical Elamite king, Chedorlaomer in the next 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 – a 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 Persian dynasties. Susa’s power peaked during the Middle Elamite period between 1500 to 1100 BCE while 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 link 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 and their king, Ashur-Dan I.

A couple of decades later, the Elamites were defeated by Nebuchadnezzar I of Babylon [1125-1104 BCE] – not to be confused with Nebuchadnezzar II included in the scriptures [605-562 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. 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 Cimmeriansand caused 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 on 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 lasted 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 of Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan. 

We will now investigate the proposition, that the Persians of Elam are 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 of 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 [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America], overthrew the Ostrogoths [refer Chapter XXV Italy: mayor & the Chaldeans] and defeated the Visigoths [refer Chapter XXIV Aram & Tyre: Southern Italy, 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 their treaties with Rome, plunder and also 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 dominance 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 & bold 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 [Madai for instance], it is far more likely that they were of Turkic origin [descended from Elam]. 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. 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. 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/Turkic-Mongols] and Tartars [Madai/Turkic-Mongols] by using Jesuit missionaries’ translations. It was printed under the name of “General History of Turks, Tatars and Mongols.”

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



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 [Madai] always lived to the east of the lands in which the Huns [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 TurksBut 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 Turkic-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 their empire.

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 sites don’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 comments from forums on the general question: Who are the Huns Today? Emphasis & bold  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 the known 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 [Elam] and Mongols [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 [Turkey] and Mongols [Turkic-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 [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 [Elam] 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.

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 [Elam]. Most of the Avar… individuals carry east Asian Y haplogroups… and their autosomal loci indicate mostly unmixed Asian characteristics [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. 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 [490 CE] just 37 years after the death of Atilla [453 CE]. Bumin Qhagan was the first to refer to himself as a Turk which stems origins to the word ‘Combat helmet’ in Chinese. These early Turkic people spoke old Turkic dialect and believed in Tengri – 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 Elam 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’ are very 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 language between Mongolic 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, back up what we have learned about Elam and Madai and their close ties. They also support the assertion that the Huns were the precursors to the Turks and hence are descendants from Elam of the Bible. There is a connecting link between the Turkic Huns and the Ottoman Turks as mentioned and they are the Seljuks.

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: Southern Italy, 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 also fought twelve wars with the Russian Tsardom and its sprawling Empire. Primarily about Ottoman territorial expansion and consolidation in southeastern and eastern Europe, though 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 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 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 teamed up 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 as a powerful warrior chief and so 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 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 in 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 Mongols ruled only in China, Mongolia, southern Siberia, and Tibet.

In the Bible, the Persian Empire is represented by the chest and arms of silver in Nebuchadnezzar’s prophetic related vision of a man [Daniel 2:32, 39]. The silver reflects the lesser refinement and status of the previous Chaldean-Babylonian Empire 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 ram in Daniel 8:2-7 and 20-21, NET:

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. 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 [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 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 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 & bold 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 fits Elam’s identity equation]. 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 – such as anthropologists, archaeologists and historians – because the formation of a ‘biological construct of historical communities’, in part, repudiates their twentieth century scholarly, sometimes error-ridden discourses. Or more bluntly: there is a lot of egg on faces. 

Thus, the relatively new proposition of the Central Asiatic 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 scholarly history which is often theory or opinion-led and fact-based scientific genetic evidence will continue to challenge. As one academic states: ‘… [the] clash with modern human genetics researches 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 hypothesising control with their 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 history research, that is influential in the Biblical identity of nations movement. A new perception that is contrary to the orthodox position is more usually received as heretical, no matter how well documented – even with the solid unmoving evidence of science, underpinning it. Though, like 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%] –

T2 [4.3%] – U3 [3.7%] – U5 [3%] – T1 [2.8%] – H5 [2.4%] – U4 [1.9%] –

W [1.9%] – X [1.9%] – I [1.5%] – U2 [1.3%] – L [1.3%] – HVO + V [0.7%] 

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%]

As we did not consider the Tatar mtDNA Haplogroups earlier [refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes] and only cursorily looked at the Kazakh mtDNA Haplogroups, let’s include them in the comparison table.

Tatars: H [30.7%] – U5 [10.5%] – T2 [ 9.2%] – J [ 7.5%] –

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 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 H levels, bookend the mtDNA maternal Haplogroups in the Caucasus region. 

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 –

T1a – Q – O – I1 – R2 – H – C – I2a2 

Iran:     J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

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 more in eastern Europe and R1b in western Europe. Both J2 and G2a are found in the Caucasus region, southern Europe and the Middle East. Haplogroups J1 and E1b1b are associated heavily with the Middle East and North Africa and by degree with southern Europe. 

Turkey: J2 [24%] – R1b [16%] – G [11%] – E1b1b [11%] –

J1 [9%] – R1a [7.5%] – I2a1 [4%] – N [4%] – L [4%] –

T [2.5%] – Q [2%] – O [2%] – I1 [1%] – R2 [1%] – H [1%] –

C [1%] – I2a2 [0.5%] 

Iran: J2 [23%] – R1a [15.5%] – G [10%] – R1b [9.5%] – J1 [8.5%] –

E1b1b [6.5%] – L [6.5%] – Q [5.5%] – T [3%] – N [1%] – I [0.5%]

In Chapter IV on Madai, we compared only those Y-DNA Haplogroups which clearly derived from Japheth – such as C, O, K 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 – R1a, R1b, J2 and G2a – or Ham – J1 and E1b1b – are appropriate now. 

Tajikistan is included even though it is the least representative of Madai and bears a closer similarity with Pakistan or Afghanistan. 

                     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 that Iran as Lud has interacted considerably with the Arab world, as has turkey as 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 Haplogroups, albeit at fractional percentages, being added to their core DNA.

The pie charts show that the Turks are different from the Greeks and Bulgarians. The latter having more E1b1b, I2a and R1a, whereas the Turks have more R1b, J2, G2a and a considerable percentage of other additional Haplogroups from all their admixture. Turkey and Iran share a number of percentage similar Haplogroups, reflecting their status as brothers and the 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 and Tarshish – Korea and Japan – and there will be a handful more. 

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table begun with Lud and 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. Haplogroup G is an important component in the Turkish paternal heredity as is R1b and a lesser degree, R1a. We will discover that the remaining three sons of Shem have more in common with each other as they are either R1a or R1b dominant, with Haplogroups J2, J1, G2a and E1b1b all varying in lesser percentages. The focus will shift from J2 and G2a 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.

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. “

Booker T Washington 

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

Lud & Iran

Chapter XVII

The fourth son of Shem is Lud. His descendants are an elusive people in world history and next to impossible to locate by identity researchers and biblical historians 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 is in question – the one from Ham or the one from Shem? The answer, is that the descendants of Lud, even though primarily descended from Shem, are living nestled within the region of Ham. 

Dr Hoeh continues in Origin of the Nations – emphasis & bold 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] 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 and bold 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 to the firebrands: travailings (BDB). (The descendants of Lud, the fourth son of Shem, were supposedly the Lydians.)’

Recall, the definition for Lehab or Lubim, son of Mizra in Pakistan, is: ‘flames, to burn.’

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 see the confusion in trying to separate both Luds. This then causes 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 plainly read and understood.

Ezekiel 30:5

Young’s Literal Translation

Cush [India], and Phut [Pakistan], and Lud, and all 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,andthose 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

19 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 of China], Javan [Archipelago SE 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 too Assyria and again, Iran has close 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 or Turkey, Lud or Iran and Phut or 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, Kitti from Javan.

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 & bold 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 of 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 can not be ruled out particularly as its economy [19th], though marginally behind Indonesia [16th] and Saudi Arabia [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.

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 and bold 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. 

‘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 toturn 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), meaning to beget, bring forth: perhaps Lud… means something like [twisted] Productivity or Emergence.’

I cannot attest to the national character or approach of an Iranian, so do not know if the following is indicative or not. It is not too dissimilar to the definition of a Philistine

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 Shahs and Ayatollahs, were synonymous with a prominent ruler 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 and Haldi god relief compared to modern Persian symbols of a winged bull and the Golden Lion, 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 like 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 warfare 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 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.

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 quite smaller 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.

Ispuinis and his son Menuas built the empire to its height. 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 rule 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, from 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. The period of rule by Ispuinis and his son Menuas is recognised as the highpoint in Urartean history.

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 then 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 that ‘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 – by 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

An online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Iran… is a country in Western Asia with [86,676,540] 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 accompanyingParthian 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 Iran”(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.

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: 3,969,934], Armenia [population: 2,977,164]and [the] Republic of Azerbaijan [population: 10,368,999]),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 bases. 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 and Russia, reflects the war-like stature of Lud and 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 8,756to 25,000Jewish people live in Iran. Iran has the largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel.’

This is immensely ironicand will be apparent; when we study the State of Israel and the modern Jewish people.

‘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.

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$16.7 billion 
  2. Plastics, plastic articles: $4.7 billion
  3. Iron, steel: $4.2 billion
  4. Fruits, nuts: $2.9 billion 
  5. Organic chemicals: $2.4 billion 
  6. Vegetables: $941.2 million 
  7. Copper: $876.2 million 
  8. Fertilizers: $722.9 million 
  9. Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $512.3 million 
  10. 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 slow 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 [more 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, HV2, U7, J2 and T* in northern Iran, whereas M*, N*, R5, B, pre-HV1, U2*, U2e and U3 lineages 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 mutation, as illustrated by Wells et al., but also with [R1b] R-M269 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 DNA via Lud from Shem and also, via Ludim from Mizra and Ham which has intermingled over a very long period of time. 

‘In the MDS plot based on mtDNA, 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. 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 and to the North Africa and Levant/Anatolia assemblages. The Peninsular Arabs partition to the left of above mentioned groups of populations; 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] to 11.2% when Y-chromosomal data are examined.

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, no Y-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. Both central and southern Iran are more related to each other and are distinct; being relatively equally distant from say Egypt from Mizra and Turkey from Elam. 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. These nations are all descended from Shem and not from Ham.

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.’

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 Balkans, Caucasia and Anatolia.

‘The admixture analysis results indicate that the majority of Iran’s mitochondrial pool is derived from Arabia. 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–Anatoliaand 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. 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. 

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 areAryans[European or western as opposed to Hamitic or equatorial in origin] who migrated from the central Asian steppes around 4000 years before present.

The 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 people who have a higher concentration of R1b than all the other peoples of the Middle East or West Asia and South Asia. 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, that Pakistan is 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 are fundamentally a white, western people enriched with Hamitic, equatorial DNA comparable to that exhibited in their near neighbours; geographically and ethnically .

‘Although 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.’

(a) mtDNA haplogroup distributions (b)  Y-chromosomal haplogroup distributions.

Huge study on Y-chromosome variation in Iran – Viola Grugni [et al. 2012], posted online – emphasis & bold mine:


‘One of the most interesting finds is the presence of a few 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, North-African and Near Eastern Arab, European, Near Eastern and South Asian. The 1stPC 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 2ndPC 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 Slavs]. 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 eastern Iranians 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 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), 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 thatlanguage, 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 andmainly consist of a western Eurasian [European, western] component, accounting for about 90% of all samples, with a very limited contribution from eastern Eurasia [Oriental, eastern], South Asia [Hamitic, equatorial] 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 R2 and HV2) could be considered as having Southwest Asian origin, taking into account the relatively high frequency and diversity of those haplogroups in Iran.’

Persian men

We would expect to view a rather complicated Haplogroup structure for Lud. We will compare 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 from Japheth to the north and finally Lud’s brother Elam and Turkey on its northwestern frontier – [refer 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%] – HVO + 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 evident that Iran overall, has more in common with Azerbaijan and Georgia than Armenia; which we will learn, has more in common with Turkey.

Persian women

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for Iran:

Iran: J2 [23%] – R1a [15.5%] – G [10%] – R1b [9.5%] – J1 [8.5%] – 

E1b1b [6.5%] – L [6.5%] – Q [5.5%] – T [3%] – N [1%] – I [0.5%]

Iran:   J2 – R1a – G2a – R1b – J1 – E1b1b – L – Q – T1a – N1c2 – I

Iran has a higher percentage of J2 than J1 – meaning less J1 which is associated with Middle Eastern peoples and more Haplogroup J2 which is associated with Southern European countries. Haplogroup E1b1b shows its link either with Mizra and inherited Haplogroups from Ludim; and, or a genetic tie with south eastern Europe. Haplogroup G is indicative of peoples in the Caucasus region and beyond. The R1a and R1b Haplogroups are typically European Haplogroups and show Iran’s link with other sibling descendants of Shem. There are exceptions, like Pakistan, India [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut], and Central Asia [refer Chapter IV Central Asia  – Madai & the Medes], which possess different strands of R1a; as the Spanish descended nations of Central and Southern America carry R1b [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America].

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             

Armenia:      R1b – J2 – G2a – J1 – R1a – E1b1b – I – T1a – L – Q – N1c2

Azerbaijan: J [31%] – G [18%] – R1b [11.1%] – R1a [6.9%] – E1b1b [6%] –

I [3%] – L [1.5%]

Georgia: G [30%] – J2 [ 27%] – J1 [16%] – R1b [10%] – R1a [9%] –

E1b1b [ 2%] – I [2% ] L [1.5%] – T [1.5%] – Q [1%]

Armenia: R1b [30%] – J2 [22%] – G [11.5%] – J1 [10.5%] – R1a [5%] –

E1b1b [6%] – I [4.5%] – T [4%] – L [3%] – Q [1%] – N [0.5%] 

Iran is closest to Azerbaijan genetically and the fact that more Azerbaijanis live in Iran – approximately twenty million plus – as opposed to inside Azerbaijan – 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 predominantly with descent from Ham – as there are crossovers – are J1 and E1b1b. Haplogroups more common to descent from Shem, are R1b, I and G. The crossover Haplogroups are R1a and J2.

Y-DNA Haplogroups of Iran’s immediate neighbours to the Northeast, East and West.

Turkmenistan: R1b – J2 – K – P – R1a – R2

Pakistan:           R1a – J – L – R2 – H – G – Q – C

Iraq:                   J1 – J2 – E1b1b – R1b – R1a – I – T1a – G2a – E1b1a – L – Q – N

Turkmenistan: R1b [37%] – J2 [17%] – K [13%] – P [10%] – R1a [7%] –

R2 [3%]

Pakistan: R1a [37.1%] – J [20.2%] – L [11.6%] – R2 [7.8%] – H [6.2%] – 

G [6.2%] – Q [3.4%] – C [3%]

Iraq: J1 [43%] – J2 [19.5%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – R1a [5.5%] – 

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 the main or in part, we would expect them to be related to Lud-im within Iran. Not surprisingly, Iran does not have as much Y-DNA commonality with Pakistan from Phut or Turkmenistan from Madai, even though Turkmenistan is the closest of the Central Asian Republics.

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 though may be aware that Iran is not the same as Iraq and Pakistan would have assumed a similar linage with them instead of Turkey. Whereas Iran’s predominant lineage as Lud, is linked instead with Turkey who is Elam. The table shows the key Haplogroups of these nations and their relationships.

                                    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 Haplogroup clusters for Iran and Near Eastern peoples indicate that Azerbaijan does have a closer link with Iran than Georgia or Armenia. The Bible says that Lud and Ludim, with Phut and Lehab, are a mingled or 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 as is Iraq with its higher levels of the Hamitic Haplogroups, J1 and E1b1b. Using Haplogroups J1 and J2 as defining marker Haplogroups, it is Azerbaijan and Georgia who bookend the table. Georgia possesses the highest percentages in G and J2; Armenia in R1b; and Iran in R1a. All four nations possess Haplogroup L, normally associated with India and Pakistan; though the small amounts hint at admixture. 

The four nations reveal their commonality as well as a different lineage from the descendants of Ham in Pakistan and Iraq; in possessing lower levels of E1b1b and considerably higher levels of Haplogroup G.

Worthy of mention is that both Iran as Lud and Turkey as 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 Haplogroups, such as J1, E1b1b, L, Q, T, I and N being added to their core DNA and Haplogroup signature of  J2, R1a, G and R1b.

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.” 

Mokokoma Mokhonoana

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