The Ark of God

The recent article, The Top Ten Unexplained Mysteries of All Time, has proven popular with readers, even with adding in two extra mysteries. The arcane Ark of the Covenant or Ark of the Testimony could easily be number thirteen; for it is one of the most enduring famous historical artefacts. With considerably more superstition and myth embedded in the popular psyche than fact. A lingering aura of fascination surrounding the Ark of God, continues to haunt those with a preoccupation for a relic that seemingly vanished into thin air. As if it wasn’t already well-known, the acclaimed 1981 American action-adventure film, Raiders of the Lost Ark – directed by Steven Spielberg and based on a story by George Lucas and Philip Kaufman – catapulted interest to a much wider secular audience. 

The Ark of the Covenant as it appeared in Raiders of the Lost Ark

Even so, the significance of the Ark is profoundly misunderstood. This article follows on from the previous article, The Manna Mystery, in the hope of lifting the lid – no pun intended – on the Ark and its role in the lives of the Israelites and how its symbolism relates to us today. More interest has been invested in trying to discover the location of the Ark than what it represented in the lives of the Israelites or what lessons we can learn from its design, construction and use. 

The still above is from a clip at the very end of the film, Raiders of the Lost Ark, where the discovered Ark – unrealistically found in Canis, Egypt in 1936… or not? – is put into a Washington DC vault with myriad other treasures. A discovery of this magnitude, would not be relegated to such an ignominious fate. 

Indiana Jones with the lost Ark

Studying the biblical references will provide the backbone for this investigation, as it did for the article on manna. While manna is stated a handful of times in the Bible, the Ark of the Covenant is discussed frequently by comparison. To the degree that we will certainly endeavour to identify the key scriptures, in leaving ‘no stone unturned.’ 

The Book of Exodus is where we first learn of an ark for God. In chapter twenty-five, the Eternal instructs Moses to seek contributions from the Israelites which will be used for the construction of a movable temple called a Tabernacle, as well as for items associated with the establishment of a new priesthood descending from Moses’ elder brother, Aaron – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

This was long before King Solomon four hundred and eighty years later began the Temple in 966 BCE. Three integral items amongst others to be placed within the Tabernacle – listed in chapter twenty-five – were an Ark, a Table for Bread and a Lamp Stand. The first two were to be comprised of wood and overlaid with gold, while the Lampstand was to be made purely of solid gold.  

Exodus 25:1-22

English Standard Version 

1 ‘The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the people of Israel, that they take for me a contribution. From every man whose heart moves him you shall receive the contribution for me. 3 And this is the contribution that you shall receive from them:

gold [H2091 – zahab: ‘from an unused root meaning to shimmer, of brilliance, splendour, precious metal’], silver, and bronze,

4 blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, goats’ hair, 5 tanned rams’ skins, goat skins,

acacia [H7848 – shittiym: ‘acacia tree, acacia wood, meaning the sticks of wood, from H7850, scourge,  flog, to pierce’] wood [H6086 – ets: ‘tree, timber, plank, stick’]

6 oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense,

7 onyx stones, and stones for setting, for the ephod and for the breast piece. 

8 And let them make me a sanctuary [H4720 – miqdash: ‘a consecrated thing, hallowed, holy place, sacred, chapel’], that I may dwell [H7931 – shakan: ‘abide, settle down, rest, inhabit’] in their midst [H8432 – tavek: ‘among, within, between, therein, middle’].

9 Exactly as I show you concerning the pattern [H8403 – tabniyth: ‘construction, likeness, form’], of the tabernacle [H4908 – mishkan: ‘dwelling place, habitation, tents’], and of all its furniture [H3627 – kliy: ‘furnishing, vessel, article, utensil’], so you shall make it.’

The Lord God who had delivered the Israelite tribes from Egypt, incredibly, desired to have an abode with them when they camped and settled for a period of time – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? Up until this time: “… the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night. The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people” – Exodus 13:21-22. 

We will discover that the earthly tabernacle was a copy or mirror image of a celestial temple in the third Heaven where the Eternal dwells. Thus, His instructions were detailed and to be adhered to exactly. This means the items requested were significant and not randomly selected, including two principle elements: Acacia Wood and Gold. 

According to the article, The Purpose of the Wilderness Tabernacle, Tamarajo, 2024, there are seven types of temples recorded in scripture. 

  1. The Tabernacle of Moses
  2. The Tabernacle of David
  3. The Temple of Solomon
  4. Zerubbabel’s Temple
  5. The Temple of Herod
  6. The Temple of Ezekiel’s Vision
  7. The Temple, which is the Body of Christ 

It could be argued that King Herod’s restoration work was a continuation of that begun by Zerubbabel. As he was an Edomite Jew – not descended from the tribe of Judah – nor a righteous or holy man as his predecessors, it is questionable whether he would be a bonafide candidate on a list including holy sanctuaries for the Lord God. Coupled with this, is the fact that the Body of true believers would then be number five; with number six either Ezekiel bring shown an ideal for ancient Israel which was never met, or a vision during the millennial rule of the Kingdom of God after Christ’s return. After this period when there is a new Earth, God with Christ will dwell with man – Revelation 21:3. In fact, there will not be a temple structure all – Revelation 21:22.

These are holy temples of scripture, yet there is an unholy temple which will be dedicated to the False Prophet. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, ESV: “… For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God” – Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod

It is not the purpose of this article to discuss the Tabernacle at length, yet it is part of the discussion for its most important purpose was to house the Ark of God in the section of the Tabernacle known as the Most Holy Place or the Holy of Holies. For this was where the physical presence of the Lord God was manifested on Earth. Righteous people had walked and talked with the Eternal in the past, such as Noah and Abraham, yet here was an opportunity for a whole nation comprising the twelve tribes of Israel to dwell with the one who represented the Ancient of Days and thereby share in a relationship with the Son of Man, the mediator between them and the Creator. 

The Eternal did not choose the descendants of Jacob flippantly or because of an unfair bias of favouritism. Deuteronomy 7:6-8, NET: “For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. He has chosen you to be his people, prized above all others on the face of the earth. It is not because you were more numerous than all the other peoples that the Lord favored and chose you – for in fact you were the least numerous of all peoples. Rather it is because of his love for you and his faithfulness to the promise he solemnly vowed to your ancestors that the Lord brought you out with great power, redeeming you from the place of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt” – 2 Samuel 7:24. The ancestors in question were Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who were all loyal and obedient to the Eternal. The promises of national greatness and prosperity made by the Creator to Abraham, Issac and Jacob have been fulfilled in our modern age – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

The diagram above renders the arrangement of the twelve tribes – thirteen counting Levi in the centre – when the Israelites camped; setting up the Tabernacle and its furnishings. Each side had a leading tribe of the three as shown and it was the standards of Reuben, Judah, Dan and Ephraim which were flown. 

Exodus: 10 “They shall make an ark [H727 – ‘arown] of acacia wood. Two cubits and a half shall be its length, a cubit and a half its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height.” 

A cubit is recognised as eighteen inches, thus the ark was 45 inches long, 27 inches wide and 27 inches deep. The meaning for ark includes: ‘chest, coffin’ and from H717, ‘in the sense of gathering.’ It is the same word used for Noah’s Ark – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. It denotes something egg like, sealed, protected and enclosed. 

Exodus: 11 “You shall overlay [H6823 – tsaphah: ‘cover, plate, stud, garnish’] it with pure gold, inside and outside shall you overlay it, and you shall make on it a molding [H2213 – zer: ‘border, circlet, crown’] of gold around it. 12 You shall cast four rings of gold for it and put them on its four feet, two rings on the one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. 13 You shall make poles of acacia wood and overlay them with gold. 14 And you shall put the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark to carry the ark by them. 15 The poles shall remain in the rings of the ark; they shall not be taken from it.”

The Ark of God was constructed from Acacia wood and then gold plated with one imagines, more than just a thin layer of gold. Added to this was an extra covering or crown of gold placed around the Ark. The poles used to carry the ark were also made from Acacia wood and likewise overlaid with gold. The poles were never to be removed from the chest of the ark so as to remove the temptation of lifting the ark itself and thereby touching it directly. As the Ark of the Covenant contained God’s presence through His Holy Spirit, it was holy and no human – being impure by comparison – could touch the holy vessel and survive. It would be tantamount to irreverent contempt to do so and a case of the profane not able to touch that which was holy and expect to live.

Exodus: 16 “And you shall put into the ark the testimony that I shall give you. 17 “You shall make a mercy seat [H3727 – kapporeth: ‘place of atonement’] of pure gold. Two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth.”  

The mercy seat was a separate section to the chest underneath and was a lid the same dimensions as the chest of the ark. Unlike the overlaid ark and poles, it was a slab of solid gold and with the cherubim ‘constituted the throne of God.’ 

It was important that the lid was separate from the ark, still sitting on it, yet made entirely from solid gold without any Acacia wood. Thus while the ark was not to be touched, the mercy seat was another level up in importance. The ark housed three important items, whereas the lid represented the Divine.

This ‘golden plate of propitiation’ was where the ‘High Priest sprinkled the seat 7 times on the Day of Atonement’, symbolising reconciliation between the Eternal and His chosen people.

The testimony placed into the ark was one of three items – refer article: The Manna Mystery. The testimony is another name for the covenant agreement between the Eternal and the Israelites, embodied and encapsulated in the Law and codified by the Ten Commandments. 

Exodus: 18 “And you shall make two cherubim [H3742 – kruwb: ‘an angelic being’] of gold; of hammered work [H4749 – miqshah] shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. 19 Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end. Of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. 20 The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be. 21 And you shall put the mercy seat on the top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony that I shall give you.” 

The hammered work is translated from miqshah as ‘beaten work, beaten out of one piece, whole piece.’ It refers to ‘finely decorated cultic objects of gold and silver’ and ‘it signifies rounded work, moulded by hammering.’ The Mercy Seat was obviously the result of very skilled craftsmanship. 

One wonders if Aaron was involved in following the Eternals’ instruction given to Moses for the Ark’s design and construction? We have learned about his considerable metal working skills and creative ability previously. It is worth a reminder.

Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America:

Exodus 32:1-8, 19-24, 35

English Standard Version

1 ‘When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron and said to him, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” 2 So Aaron said to them, “Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. 

4 And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool [H2747 cheret – ‘a stylus, chisel’] and made a golden [H4541 maccekah – ‘molten metal, cast image’] calf [H5695 egel – ‘bull-calf, bullock, a steer’ a male calf nearly grown]. And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” 5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.” 

6 ‘And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. 7 And the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, for your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves. 8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way that I commanded them. They have made for themselves a golden calf [the Sun god, Ra] and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it and said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!”

19 And as soon as he came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, Moses’ anger burned hot, and he threw the tablets out of his hands and broke them at the foot of the mountain. 20 He took the calf that they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder and scattered it on the water and made the people of Israel drink it.’

Moses was so inflamed with anger, he made the rebellious Israelites drink the ground down gold as punishment, while at the same time ensuring they did not make another golden idol. Yet in so doing, was he inadvertently giving them something beneficial? Ancient Code: ‘Since ancient times, gold was used as medicine for thousands of years. Today, people pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to eat dishes adorned with edible 23-karat gold. Even so, it has no taste or nutritional value. However, it’s not known what, if any, value ingesting gold or nanoparticles of gold would have.’ 

21 ‘And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought such a great sin upon them?” 22 And Aaron said, “Let not the anger of my lord burn hot. You know the people, that they are set on evil. 24 So I said to them, ‘Let any who have gold take it off.’ So they gave it to me, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf.” 

35 Then the Lord sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf, the one that Aaron made.’

‘This is quite a scenario. There were people who were either oblivious or chose to ignore the leadership of Moses and that the Eternal was working through him or the fact that the Creator had delivered the Israelites from Egypt through a series of ten spectacular miracles and then again in a mind boggling act of parting the Red Sea to save them and then crashing down the thousands of tons of water to kill their enemies. The very people who had cruelly enslaved them for one hundred and forty-seven years – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Moses’s elder brother Aaron is a revelation; the man chosen to found the Levitical Priesthood for the ancient Israelites and temporarily replace the perpetual Melchizedek Order. Aaron put his artistic ability to use, fashioning the calf of gold and then he used his carpentry skills to build an altar to a pagan, false god. Aaron then ironically blames the people, for being set on evil and finally how does he think he can fool Moses, with: ‘I threw [the gold] into the fire, and out came this calf.’ Miracles had been so plenteous, it was worth a shot it would seem.’

Returning to the Ark, the instructions clearly state a. the cherubim were to be from the same piece of molten gold used for the lid; b. the cherubs were to be at either end; c. the cherubim’s wings were to be outstretched over the lid; d. the cherubs were to be facing each other; e. the cherubim’s faces were to have a downward slant looking towards the lid or Mercy Seat and not at each other. Thus in a pose of submission, deference or prayer with heads bowed. The passage does not say whether they were standing or kneeling; it does not reveal what kind of face they possessed; nor does it instruct for them to be touching. Thus some poetic licence is used in images and the construction of replica arks regarding the cherubim. 

To take the one used for Raiders of the Lost Ark above as an example, the Cherubim are not fully at each end of the Mercy Seat; they do not look like they are one piece with the lid, but added on top; and they do not have their wings fully outstretched. Their heads are bowed correctly. The designers have chosen to have the cherubim kneeling and touching. This writer is not convinced the wings would be touching, particularly as this was not stated. A further error by the designers of the ark above, is that the Mercy Seat lid is not flush with the chest of the ark. Yet we know its length and width dimensions were exactly the same. A further criticism is that the cherubim may well have been impressive in size. The ones on the ark above are too diminutive in this writer’s opinion. We will look at a few examples of the Ark as we progress, which all have merit and flaws. 

The ark above has perhaps oversized cherubim but it is more likely in keeping with the overall design.

A burning question which comes to mind, is what were the identities of the two cherubs – who were they? Constant readers will recall the nature of the cherubim was the subject of an investigation in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. A recap is presented later. 

Different sources provide differing details on the angelic realm pertaining to types and hierarchies. The Bible is perhaps the simplest in the information it provides, with many researchers reading their own interpretation into various verses. The Bible speaks of a. angels who are God’s messengers; b. one archangel who is named Michael; c. one other angel, named as Gabriel, who is not called an archangel but referred to as one outside the Bible; d. the Seraphim; and e. the Cherubim

Tradition and church writers such as Gregory and Thomas Aquinas maintain there are nine celestial orders or hierarchies of ‘angels’. Basing this supposedly on theological evidence by interpreting two verses in letters by the authors (not Paul, refer article: The Pauline Paradox) of the letters to the Ephesian and Colossae congregations as types of spiritual beings – Ephesians 1:21, Colossians 1:16.

They are ‘Virtue [dynameos: strength, mighty work, power],

Power [exousias: strength, jurisdiction, right],

Principality,

Dominion [kyriotetos: government, power, lordship, mastery] and

Throne [thronoi: seat, bench, tribunal].’

Yet these five english words used from the Greek are descriptions of rulership and government; with three of the five words all denoting power. One of the words, principality from G746 arche, meaning beginning is used for the Son of Man himself – Revelation 3:14.

Thus nine becomes four and as angel and archangel – meaning chief angel – are logically the same, there are perhaps only three types of angelic entities. To better understand the cherubim, we will look at the scriptures where they are described. 

Genesis 3:24

English Standard Version 

“He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim [H3742 – kruwb] and a flaming sword that turned every way [H2015 – haphak: ‘whirling’] to guard the way to the tree of life.” 

More than one Cherub presumably guarded the Tree of Life. The reference to a sword is about a weapon of supernatural origin, with the word flaming meaning ‘magical, enchanted.’ The definition of the Hebrew word kruwb is rather nebulous. Abarim Publications offer from the verb karabu – ‘to bless’ or ‘to approach’ – and its adjective, ‘to be mighty.’ These meanings would fit creatures who attend the throne* of the Ancient of Days.

Ezekiel 1:4-28

English Standard Version 

4 ‘As I looked, behold, a stormy wind came out of the north, and a great cloud, with brightness around it, and fire flashing forth continually, and in the midst of the fire, as it were gleaming metal. 5 And from the midst of it came the likeness of four living creatures [H2416 – chay: ‘live, life, alive’]. And this was their appearance: they had a human likeness, 6 but each had four faces, and each of them had four wings. 7 Their legs were straight, and the soles of their feet were like the sole of a calf’s foot. And they sparkled like burnished bronze. 8 Under their wings on their four sides they had human hands. And the four had their faces and their wings thus: 9 their wings touched one another. Each one of them went straight forward, without turning as they went. 

10 As for the likeness of their faces, each had a human face. The four had the face of a lion on the right side, the four had the face of an ox on the left side, and the four had the face of an eagle. 11 Such were their faces. And their wings were spread out above. Each creature had two wings, each of which touched the wing of another, while two covered their bodies. 12 And each went straight forward. Wherever the spirit would go, they went, without turning as they went. 13 As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches moving to and fro among the living creatures. And the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning. 14 And the living creatures darted to and fro, like the appearance of a flash of lightning.’ 

The prophet Ezekiel in a vision provides a detailed yet confusing description of the cherubim. They are both anthropomorphic yet animalistic. The cherubim have human like hands with bovine hooves and chimera type faces – each human, bovine, feline and avian.

We learn there are at least four cherubim – associated with the Throne of God – with four wings each. Two wings outstretched, with two folded down beside their bodies. It is interesting to note that their upper wings touched the wing of the cherub either side of them. Adding support perhaps that the cherubim on the Mercy Seat were touching wings. It may also mean that the Ark of God cherubim possessed four wings and not just two. The question remains: why were just two cherubs included on the earthly Mercy Seat, when there are four surrounding the celestial throne? 

Aside from three distinct categories of spiritual beings: Angels, Seraphs and Cherubs – it could alternatively be considered if all spirit beings are in fact Angels, that there are then just two types of angel: the order of mammalian and/or avian Cherubim and the order of the reptilian Seraphim. 

We will return to the Book of 1 Kings in connection with the Ark of God, when it was housed in the Temple built by King Solomon between 966 and 959 BCE. Solomon also had two upright cherubim crafted inside the Temple’s Most Holy Place. Which interestingly makes a total of four living creatures. In addition, numerous cherubim were engraved on the inner walls of the inner sanctuary of the Holy of Holies.

1 Kings 6:23-35

English Standard Version 

23 ‘In the inner sanctuary he made two cherubim of olivewood, each ten cubits high. 24 Five cubits was the length of one wing of the cherub, and five cubits the length of the other wing of the cherub; it was ten cubits from the tip of one wing to the tip of the other. 25 The other cherub also measured ten cubits; both cherubim had the same measure and the same form. 26 The height of one cherub was ten cubits, and so was that of the other cherub. 27 He put the cherubim in the innermost part of the house. And the wings of the cherubim were spread out so that a wing of one touched the one wall, and a wing of the other cherub touched the other wall; their other wings touched each other in the middle of the house.’ 

These two cherubim were impressively tall, standing 180 inches or fifteen feet high and a wingspan to match. The cherubs inner wings touched. One could safely assume this was in keeping with the cherubim on the Ark of God, who in turn were a reflection of the four cherubim beneath^ the Throne of the Eternal. Even so, they were not constructed from Acacia wood as used on the chest of the Ark and its poles, but from the wood of Olive Trees. While Acacia wood has an attractive grain compared to a number of alternative woods, Olivewood is stunningly beautiful.

Wood Assistant: “The olive wood, farmed from the trees of Olea europaea, is a hard… wood that is prized all around the world for its appearance, density, straight grain, and fine texture. Visually, olive wood has a strikingly rich and colorful appearance, which makes it perfect for use in decorative objects. Its structural features are highly contrasting brown lines and yellow streaks of sapwood, and even more importantly, the surface of olive wood can be easily polished to a high degree. While it can be a bit uncooperating during cutting, olive wood can easily be glued. It has a distinct, pleasant, and sweet odor during cutting, and this odor usually remains present in the finished product for several years.”

“The negative point of this wood is that lacks necessary natural oils that repel insects and rot. To achieve more extended durability, furniture made from olive wood needs to be treated so it can remain untouched by outside elements for years. Additionally, raw olive wood is hard to dry, and during this process, the lumber pieces can start to warp. To prevent this, olive wood must be very slowly dried using the Kiln-drying process at low heat levels.”

Compare the marked difference in grain and colour Olive wood has with other woods.

Inspire Uplift: “Being known as the hardest woods, Olive Wood is symbolized as peace, longevity, and sacredness… Its beautiful and messy grain patterns – straight, interlocked, or wild – is what makes it high-demanding.”

The aspect of Olive wood being prone to rot and termite infestation was remedied by Solomon in the following verse. 

28 ‘And he overlaid the cherubim with gold.’ 

Read that again. The stunning fifteen feet tall and fifteen feet wide beautiful Olive wood cherubim were plated in gold. As everything in the Temple was either gold or covered in gold, this perhaps is not surprising. What is, is the use of such a beautiful yet slightly uncooperative wood to work with. The assumption would have to be that a plainer wood such as maple did not suit as the inside of the cherubim. Not even the decorative Cedar Wood. Thus the use of Olive wood for these Cherubim must represent the internal integrity of the inside of these creatures, as gold symbolises the exceptional exterior of these magnificent beings. Both in their close physical proximity to the Ancient of Days and in their spiritual relationship with Him.

29 ‘Around all the walls of the house he carved engraved figures of cherubim and palm trees and open flowers, in the inner and outer rooms. 30 The floor of the house he overlaid with gold in the inner and outer rooms. 31 For the entrance to the inner sanctuary he made doors of olivewood; the lintel and the doorposts were five-sided. 32 He covered the two doors of olivewood with carvings of cherubim, palm trees, and open flowers. He overlaid them with gold and spread gold on the cherubim and on the palm trees. 33 So also he made for the entrance to the nave doorposts of olivewood, in the form of a square, 34 and two doors of cypress wood. The two leaves of the one door were folding, and the two leaves of the other door were folding. 35 On them he carved cherubim and palm trees and open flowers, and he overlaid them with gold evenly applied on the carved work.’

Throughout the Most Holy Place, cherubim were carved. Beautiful Olive wood and Cyprus wood – not unlike Cedar wood – fitted doors and posts, engraved with cherubim and all overlaid in gold. One must pause to imagine the sheer volume** of gold used in this endeavour, not to mention all the expensive wood beneath it all. The cost beyond comprehension. The visual impact of a golden sea of yellow. The furnishings of Versace would not have been out of place. 

The compiler of the 2 Book of Chronicles describes the Holy of Holies in Solomon’s Temple, providing supporting details. 

2 Chronicles 3:8-14

English Standard Version

8 ‘And he made the Most Holy Place. Its length, corresponding to the breadth of the house, was twenty cubits, and its breadth was twenty cubits. He overlaid it with 600 talents** of fine gold. 9 The weight of gold for the nails was fifty shekels. And he overlaid the upper chambers with gold. 10 In the Most Holy Place he made two cherubim of wood and overlaid them with gold. 11 The wings of the cherubim together extended twenty cubits: one wing of the one, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and its other wing, of five cubits, touched the wing of the other cherub… The cherubim stood on their feet, facing the nave. 14 And he made the veil of blue and purple and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and he worked cherubim on it.’ 

The width of the inner sanctuary was twenty cubits, matching the outspread wings of the two cherubim. According to the footnotes^^ of the ESV Bible, a talent** is equivalent to 75 pounds or 34 kilograms. Even the nails were made from gold. A shekel^^ equivalent to 2/5 ounces or 11 kilograms. The use of the colours blue, purple and crimson are indicative of royalty. The upright nature of the two cherubim is confirmed. Perhaps the universal rendition of the cherubim kneeling on the Ark of God is inaccurate and in fact they stood on their feet. 

This ark is perhaps too simple in design in that the chest does not have any ornate decoration. The Bible does not say one way or the other. Yet its lid is correctly flush with the chest, when most representations are not. Also, while the cherubim may be oversized, they are more reflective of their stature. The question of how many wings the cherubs had each, remains unanswered. Solomon used only two wings on his Cherubs. Though the design choice for these may have been purely a sculptural and spatial consideration within the inner sanctuary. 

At this point it may be interesting and helpful to learn the significance of two integral components for the Ark of God – the symbol of the Lord God’s presence on the Earth with the Israelites: Acacia wood and Gold

Compare the Acacia wood kitchen utensils with the other woods above 

Acacia Wood, Exploring This Gorgeous Material & Uses, Dara Brandt, 2023 – emphasis mine : ‘Acacia wood, known for its durability and visually appealing grain, is a popular choice for the construction of long-lasting furniture and household items. Originating in [its native] Australia, Acacia trees and shrubs have spread across Africa, America, Asia… boasting over 1,350 varieties. The wood derived from Acacia is revered for its high density, pliability, and multidirectional fiber orientation, which contribute to its remarkable strength and longevity. The rich reddish-brown color, dark veins, and varying shades of sapwood present in Acacia wood make it an attractive option for interior design.’

‘Acacia wood has been used for various purposes since ancient times. It is mentioned in various historical records, including religious texts, where it was used to construct sacred items due to its resilience and robustness. Acacia’s hardiness has stood the test of time… 

The distinctive features of acacia wood make it easy to identify compared to other hardwoods. A common characteristic is the presence of stripes on both sides of the wood grain, which typically occur parallel to each other. Additionally, acacia wood contains distinct pores or holes that extend from the tree’s bark into the center of its trunk, making it easily distinguishable from other types of wood. Acacia wood is valued for its high density, registering at 2,300 psi on the Janka scale. This density makes it 55% harder than European white oak, 23% harder than hickory, and 90% harder than carbonized bamboo.’

Adrian Tapu: ‘Acacia wood is not only hard and robust, it is also very flexible and easy to work with. The natural material is one of the few types of wood in resistance class 1 and can… be used outdoors without impregnation. Fungi, pests, weather will not affect furniture made of acacia… there are different types or species. Among all of them, two types of wood stand out. The first one known as black acacia (Acacia Melanoxylon) and native to Oceania, although it really is not entirely black and the second one known as the “false acacia” (Robinia Pseudoacacia)… is normal to find it in temperate climates.’ 

Brandt: ‘Blackwood… is highly sought after for its attractive, dark brown wood with a medium to coarse texture. It is commonly used in making furniture, cabinetry, and musical instruments due to its workability and beautiful finish.’ 

Tapu: ‘Robinia or “false acacia” is the… most common and which we usually refer to when talking about acacia wood. These trees belong to the Fabaceae family… Robinia originate from North America and were introduced as park trees. Since robinia is permanent and hardly needs any maintenance, the furniture industry soon became interested in it. There is hardly any real acacia wood on the North American and European market, which is why the false acacia, i.e. the robinia, has become the name of acacia wood.’ 

Tamarajo: ‘Trees or wood in Scripture are symbolic of human life and, in the case of the Tabernacle… represent Christ’s humanity. According to Glen Carpenter, in his book Connections, the shittim tree, sometimes called the Acacia, is a desert tree that can survive in the most barren and challenging conditions, as described by the prophet Isaiah. “I will plant in the wilderness the cedar and the acacia (shittim) tree, The myrtle and the oil tree…” – Isaiah 41:19-21. Shittim wood is resistant to decay and insect infestations, which speaks of the incorruptible Christ who became a man [refer Shittim, article: Belphegor]. No other type of wood was used in the Tabernacle’s construction, furnishings, or utensils. The boards, poles, and furnishings consisted of this particular wood and were also plated with gold… gold represents God and His glory.’ 

Thus the Acacia wood used for the chest of the Ark was both beautiful and robust. It was going to last a very long time, particularly with gold plating. The relation to Christ is very important, for the being who represented the Eternal One, His name YHWH, and whom tabernacled with the Israelites through the Ark was the Son of Man, who later manifested as the incarnated son of God – his name at that time, the Hebraic Yeshua. Which today would actually be closer to the anglicised name Joshua, rather than the commonly expounded Latinised Jesus. 

While water may be technically the most important commodity on the Earth – apart from oxygen and a breathable atmosphere – and diamonds the most expensive; it is gold which historically has been the most sought after precious metal on the Earth – Article: Wonder of Water. Gold is the everlasting symbol of luck, prosperity and wealth and is truly a fascinating element; being the 58th rarest on Earth, with many remarkable properties. 

Daniel Fisher: “Gold is considered rare due to its limited availability in the Earth’s crust compared to most elements, but it certainly isn’t the rarest. Rhodium is 35 times rarer to find than gold, with platinum and palladium 30 times rarer. Rarer still are metals such as osmium, iridium, and ruthenium.”

Gold is not reactive; doesn’t combine with oxygen; it doesn’t rust or tarnish easily; doesn’t react with halogens easily; or entirely dissolve with acids. 

Gold – Physical, Mechanical, Thermal, and Electrical Properties, Skyla Baily, 2010: – emphasis mine: 

‘Gold has an atomic number of 79, which means each gold atom contains 79 protons in its nucleus. Gold’s atomic mass is 196.967… The way the outer electrons are arranged around the gold nucleus is associated with the characteristic [lustrous] yellow color of gold. A metal’s color is based on the movement of electrons between energy bands.’ 

‘The conditions for the strong absorption of light at the wavelengths that are essential to creating the characteristic gold color are met by a transition from the d-band to vacant positions in the conduction band. The warm and attractive color of gold has led to its extensive use in ornaments alongside other precious metals. While the number of protons in a gold nucleus is fixed at 79, the number of neutrons can differ from one atom to the other, offering several isotopes of gold. However, there is only one stable non-radioactive isotope that makes up for all naturally found gold.’ 

Fisher: “It’s the very core of gold’s makeup that sets it apart from other elements. It possesses a set of fundamental characteristics that enable it to outperform every other metal for a number of important uses.”

“Gold is represented by the chemical symbol “Au,” derived from the Latin word “aurum,” meaning “shining dawn.” Positioned within the transition metals group on the periodic table… As a noble metal [as opposed to a base metal], gold exhibits remarkable resistance to corrosion and oxidation. While gold is an expensive option for use in jewellery and electrical connectors, its corrosion resistance means it offers more longevity, improving the overall value of selecting it as the material of choice.” 

Bailey: ‘Metallic gold has a crystal structure that is a face-centered cubic FCC. This crystal structure is responsible for the very high ductility of gold… Gold is ductile (the level of extension that takes place before the failure of a material in tension), and one ounce can be drawn into 80 km (50 miles) of thin gold wire (5-µm diameter), to create electrical contacts and bonding wire.’ 

‘The density of gold is 19.3 [grams per cubic centimetre – g/cm³]… this relies on its atomic mass as well as its crystal structure. This makes gold quite heavy… aluminum’s density is 2.7 gcm-3 and steel’s density is just 7.87 gcm-3.’ 

Fisher: “Worth its weight in gold”, is an expression referring to gold’s value. But its density and weight are also significant in their own right, which plays [important] roles in various practical applications and industries. Density refers to the amount of mass per unit volume of a substance… how heavy is something for its size. Gold is notably dense… [its] high density makes gold one of the densest naturally occurring elements, surpassed only by a few other precious metals such as platinum and iridium. If you’re ever lucky enough to pick up a kilo gold bar, it’s [surprisingly] heavy for its size.”

Bailey: ‘Pure gold has a melting temperature of 1064 °C [1947 degrees Fahrenheit]. The boiling point of gold, where gold changes from a liquid state to a gaseous state, is [2856] degrees Celsius or 5,173 degrees Fahrenheit.’ Fisher: “… gold’s relatively high melting point contributes to its enduring value and durability. It withstands the rigors of high-temperature environments, ensuring that gold-based products retain their structural integrity and aesthetic appeal over time.”’

Bailey: ‘Gold can efficiently transfer heat and electricity, and this ability is surpassed only by silver and copper, but unlike these metals, gold does not tarnish, making it crucial in electronics. The corrosion resistance of gold is possibly one of its most valuable properties.’ 

Fisher: “Tarnishing, which is the dulling or discoloration of metals due to chemical reactions with substances like sulphur or oxygen [rust], is a common issue with many metals, including silver and copper. This makes keeping gold coins far easier than silver coins, with the later prone to tarnishing if exposed to too much oxygen. Gold’s inert nature ensures that it does not tarnish or corrode even when exposed to elements that typically cause tarnishing in other metals. This property makes gold particularly valuable in applications where maintaining appearance and longevity are critical, such as in jewellery and electronics.”

Rare gold coins found beneath a theatre in Italy

“When exposed to heat, gold rapidly distributes thermal energy throughout its structure, making it valuable in applications where efficient heat dissipation is essential. This trait comes in very handy in electronics, where gold is used in components such as heat sinks to prevent overheating and ensure the reliable performance of devices. Additionally, gold’s high thermal conductivity makes it suitable for aerospace technology, where it helps regulate temperatures in spacecraft components. 

Electrical conductivity refers to a material’s ability to conduct electrical current. The official unit of measurement is Siemens per metre (S/m), named after the German physicist Ernst Werner von Siemen… Gold scores 48.8 compared to silver’s top of class 62.9. Silver ranks a perfect 100 on its self-administered scale, with copper scoring 97, and gold… in third at 76. Gold’s low resistance to the flow of electrons makes gold highly efficient in transmitting electrical signals. This property is exploited in various electronic devices, where gold is used in connectors, circuitry, and contacts to ensure reliable electrical connections. While silver is both cheaper and more conductive, gold’s corrosion resistance further enhances its utility in electronics, as it maintains conductivity over time without succumbing to oxidation or tarnishing.”

Bailey: ‘Gold is highly malleable (the degree to which a material can experience deformation in compression before failure). In the annealed state, gold can be hammered cold into a translucent wafer with a thickness of 0.000013 cm.’ 

Gold ranks amongst the most malleable of all metals. ‘Hardness can be defined as a material’s ability to resist surface abrasion. The relative hardness of materials was traditionally evaluated using a list of materials set in such an order that any material in the list will scrape any material below it. Thus, diamond, the hardest substance known, tops the list with a hardness index of 10, while talc is at the bottom with a hardness index of 1. On this scale, gold has a value of 2.5 to 3, meaning it is a soft metal.’ Though not as soft as tin or lead. 

Fisher: “Its softness allows gold to be easily shaped and moulded into intricate designs, making it a great choice for jewellery…” such as the golden calf fashioned by Aaron and the Cherubim atop the Mercy Seat. “Within industrial settings, gold’s malleability and ductility are harnessed in processes like gold leaf production, where thin sheets of gold are used for decorative purposes, and in aerospace technology, where gold foils are employed for thermal insulation.”

Gold Leaf

Bailey: ‘Gold exhibits superior biocompatibility within the human body (the key reason for its use as a dental alloy), and, consequently, there are several direct applications of gold as a medical material.’ Gold’s flexibility is demonstrated in dentistry, when dental restorations such as crowns and bridges utilise gold because it conforms to a precise shape ensuring a comfortable and durable fit. ‘Gold also has a high degree of resistance to bacterial colonization, and hence it is the preferred material for implants that are at risk of infection, such as the inner ear.’ 

Fisher: “One of the most intriguing properties of gold is its exceptional reflectivity. Gold does not absorb any light rays at all, reflecting light with remarkable efficiency, making it appear bright and radiant even in dim lighting conditions. This high reflectivity is not only aesthetically pleasing but also practical. Gold’s reflective properties find applications in various fields, including optics and electronics. In mirrors and reflective coatings, gold’s ability to bounce light back contributes to clarity and precision, making it invaluable in optical instruments and high-tech devices. 

Gold is inherently shiny and possesses a distinctive lustre that sets it apart from other metals. Its natural brilliance and reflective properties give it a shiny appearance, especially when polished or crafted into jewellery… gold typically maintains its shiny allure, making it a prized material for adornment and decoration.”

Features of gold having importance in the construction of the Ark include its ductility and efficient transfer of electricity and heat,* as well as its density and corrosion resistance. Some conclude the Ark was amongst other things, primarily a communication device, where these attributes would certainly be advantageous. As would its high melting point coupled with its reflective quality, allowing the ark to withstand the effects of the temperatures* inflicted by the pillar of fire – the manifestation of the power of the Holy Spirit – on the Mercy Seat. If gold is symbolic in bridging a gap between God and man, then gold’s electrical conductivity and biocompatibility with the human body may be of an unrecognised significance. 

Ancient Code – emphasis mine: ‘Interestingly, there are… researchers that suggest… the construction details of the Ark are those which… would basically resemble an electrical capacitor with two electrodes separated by insulator drivers. The ark… is very similar to other artifacts that have been found in Egypt; the ark was placed in a dry “room” where the natural magnetic field is usually 500 or 600 volts per vertical meter. According to several ancient alien theorists, this would have made it possible to charge it through the golden crown that surrounded it; suggesting that the Ark of the Covenant would have acted as a capacitor.’ 

Online Encyclopaedia: ‘In electrical engineering, a capacitor is a device that stores electrical energy [much like a battery] by accumulating electric charges on two closely spaced surfaces that are insulated from each other. The capacitor was originally known as the condenser… It is a passive electronic component with two terminals.’ 

Ancient Code: ‘… some believe the Ark of the Covenant was… a generator of unknown, uncontrollable and deadly force… it was something extremely powerful… Ancient Astronaut theorists believe that the Ark of the Covenant was… a power generator or part of a more complex system of energy production. Energy that could be used as a weapon (Jericho) as a means of telecommunication (dialogue between Moses and god) and other… uses, and theorists state that the proof of its power lies in reading the instructions for the assembly of the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, where the ark was guarded and the precise rules for accessing it inside in order to protect human lives.’

Tamarajo in the article, The Meaning of the Tabernacle Metals: Gold, Silver, and Copper, provides observations regarding the metals used in the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness, including gold used for the Ark. Only gold, silver and copper qualify as genuine noble metals based on their electron structure. They were each resistant to corrosion and oxidation. The Tabernacle’s purpose was to facilitate a connection with the Eternal via His Son and as such had to symbolise purity and incorruptibility. 

These three metals are ‘noted for their antimicrobial features that resist bacteria and viruses. Contact with God is cleansing and healing. Interestingly, when Moses destroyed the golden calf, he burnt it, ground it to powder, put it in water, and made the children of Israel drink it. Its germ-fighting qualities could have been a remedial prescription for possible infectious conditions that may have occurred when they “rose up to play” before their self-created god.

All three are ductile… and are malleable. Contact with God through His prescribed system will soften us and make us pliable in His hands. All three are excellent conductors of heat and electricity. Contact with God includes power that we cannot generate nor produce in and of ourselves.’ 

R A Boulay adds insightful details on the communication aspect of the Ark. Flying Serpents and Dragons, 1990 – emphasis mine: 

‘In Mesopotamia, reed huts were scattered throughout the land and appear quite often in paintings and engravings on cylinder seals and pottery. This is presumably the reed hut that was used by Utnapishtim when he was informed of the coming Deluge’ – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. ‘Not wishing to see his creation destroyed, Enki decided to forewarn Utnapishtim so that he could make preparations and build a ship. In the epic, Enki addresses the wall of the reed hut, “Reed-wall, reed-wall! Wall! Wall! Reed-wall, listen! Wall, pay attention! Man of Shuruppak, son of Ubaratutu, tear down the house. Build an Ark.” 

This verse of the epic has baffled scholars as to its meaning, of why the god would speak to the wall of a reed hut in order to pass information to the Sumerian Noah. Understandably, this was just not a pastoral reed hut. Enki would logically at this time be where the gods had just met in counsel to decide man’s fate, probably in [an] orbiting space ship. Utnapishtim was presumably listening to the broadcast at a reed hut or radio receiver below at his home city of Shuruppak in Mesopotamia. 

These reed huts which were scattered all over Mesopotamia and the adjacent lands are shown on numerous cylinder seals and paintings. They all have the strange feature in common of antenna-like projections on the roofs with round eye-like objects attached. These antenna later became stylized as gateposts with streamers and became a symbol of the goddess Ishtar who seems to have had some association with these reed huts or radio stations’ – Article: Lilith

‘These reed huts were also portable and could be moved from place to place when required, as shown on a cylinder seal depicting one being transported by boat.* Another example of the portable or mobile radio station was the Ark of the Covenant built by Moses specifically to contact Yahweh during the days of the Exodus.’ 

Ancient Code: ‘Another sacred object resembling the Ark is the Bark of Horus found in the sanctuary of the temple of Horus at Edfu. According to Global Egyptian Museum:

“… it is assumed that the so-called solar barks, found near Old Kingdom tombs, were designed to transport the king through the underworld. The best known is the boat* belonging to Khufu, now restored and open to the public where it was found, next to his pyramid at Giza. In addition, there was also another type: the bark used to transport the (statue of a) god in Egypt. This type resembled an ordinary Nile boat, but was decorated with an aegis [a shield, breastplate or statue symbolising majesty and a strong force of protection and support] at the prow or at both ends, and instead of a cabin had a shrine enclosing the statue. In most cases these barks also had carrying poles which rested on the shoulders of the priests carrying the bark.”

The holy bark in the sanctuary of the temple of Horus at Edfu

Boulay: ‘During the Exodus, Moses and the Israelites needed… a means of communication… to pass orders down when the deity was not among the Israelites in the Tent of Meeting. Moses was given instructions on how to build the Ark of the Covenant and schematic drawings as well. The fact that Moses built the Ark from drawings supplied by Yahweh on Mount Sinai is clearly stated in the Scriptures when he is told, “Note well and follow the patterns for them that are being shown you on the mountain.” The box itself was of acacia wood with gold plating. The cover, however, was the key to the device. The cover was to be fashioned of solid gold with a cherub at each end facing one another; solid gold was an excellent choice since it was a good conductor of electricity. It was also specified that the cherubs and the cover must be made in one piece, probably to ensure good electrical contact

The cherubim were to have wings outstretched, facing each other and shielding the cover with their wings, thus forming an antennae. There is no description of what these cherub looked like, but in view of the Egyptian origin of Moses and his associates, it must have looked something like a winged sphinx. 

The cover was to be placed on the box after depositing the tablets… It is significant that it was only after the Ark was constructed that the tablets were provided to Moses. The tablets presumably were an integral part of the device and contained the power source necessary to activate the receiver-transmitter. Moses is told then, “There I will meet you, and I will impart to you – from above the cover, from between the two cherubim that are on top of the Ark of the Pact.” 

This was the form of communication used as they travelled through the wilderness for the next 38 years. According to Numbers 7, Moses “would hear the Voice addressing him from above the cover that was on top of the Ark of the Pact between the two cherubim.” The power source and transmission device was incorporated into the two tablets of “stone” upon which was inscribed the Ten Commandments. When Moses broke the first set of tablets upon descending Mount Sinai because he was angry at the sight of the Israelites worshiping a golden calf, it defeated the whole purpose of the Ark. Moses had to go back a second time in order to have another set fashioned. Perhaps this explains the forty days he spent there – it may have taken that long to fabricate a second set or to get the replacement parts.

At first, only Moses, Aaron, and his… sons were allowed to approach the Ark because of its inherent dangers. This was demonstrated when an accident killed… two sons of Aaron. They were hit by a sudden and unexpected discharge of electricity from the Ark for as Leviticus states, “and fire came forth from the Lord and consumed them; thus they died before the Lord.” The Old Testament does not give the full story, however, and we must look to the Hebrew oral tradition for further details on this event. 

In the Haggadah, it relates how, “from the Holy of Holies issued two flames of fire, as thin as threads, then parted into four, and two each pierced the nostrils of Nadab and Abihu, whose souls were burned, although no external injury was visible.” This obvious electrical discharge proved to be a real threat to anyone who dared to enter the tent in order to service the deity. Thus in order to prevent further casualties, Moses was told in Leviticus to warn Aaron: “Tell your bother Aaron that he is not to come at will into the shrine behind the curtain, in front of the cover that is upon the Ark, lest he die.” This statement makes it clear that it is the Ark of the Covenant that is dangerous and not something else in the Tent of Meeting… 

Due to the inherent dangers of the Ark, it was decided to train a group of priests – the tribe of Levi – to care for and to handle all [contact] with the Ark. From thereon, only a fixed, clearly defined group of initiates, who wore protective clothing, and followed the proper safety procedures, were allowed access to the Ark. The instructions for fabricating these garments is very detailed and specific, allowing for no margin of error, indicative that its protective nature was woven into the fabric of the material. The Ark was extremely dangerous and even the Levites must have approached it with trepidation and a certain fear of not returning from the Tent alive.’

Regarding the symbolic properties of gold, Tamarajo comments: ‘In particular, silver and gold were used to fashion idols, the other “gods.” The idols of the nations are silver and gold, The work of men’s hands – Psalm 135:15.

Gold, silver, and copper are referred to as the “royal family” in the world of metals because they are considered currency metals and, therefore, can be attached to concept ideas regarding value. These are used in this respect in the New Testament when Jesus sends out His disciples. Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts – Matthew 10:9… currency implies transactions between parties, which this structure is about. Our spiritual condition concerns a transaction. Salvation, therefore, required a transaction. These metals… serve as tools… to illustrate value and transaction, considering that the price paid for our salvation was even more precious than these… you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot – I Peter 1:18-19.

The first of the three metals is gold, and its first occurrence is in Genesis chapter two… we see the temple pattern themes with their origins in Genesis. Gold is the only metal mentioned before the fall and stands alone as the last discussed metal in the Bible during the restoration of all things in the heavenly city. And the street of the city was pure gold, like transparent glass – Revelation 21:21. Gold’s connection with God’s pure, glorious, eternal, and holy characteristics is displayed in plan “A” of creation and restored in plan “B.” Gold is set apart (holy) from the others; it is the only metal that does not tarnish.

It remains virtually unchanged throughout time and exposure, hinting at the glorious eternal illustrations gold exhibits regarding faith. Faith is the currency of heaven. Gold in scripture is symbolic of tried and tested faith in the goodness of God. Faith finds its most exquisite exhibit in a life that glorifies Him. Gold and faith are both refined and purified by fire. In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ – I Peter 1:6-9.

In connection with this concept of gold, glory, and tested faith, the Hebrew word for glory means: heavy with substance. Gold is understood to be very dense and, therefore, [a] heavy metal. In his second letter to the Corinthian church, Paul discusses glory in terms of weight. For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, is working for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory – II Corinthians 4:17.

A characteristic of gold is that it is the most pliable and versatile metal. It is so soft that it can be scratched with a fingernail. One of the instructions for the high priest’s garment included a turban adorned with a plate of pure gold inscribed with “Holiness to the Lord” on it. “You shall also make a plate of pure gold and engrave on it, like the engraving of a signet: HOLINESS TO THE LORD – Exodus 28:36. As our faith comes forth as pure gold through test and trial, He will inscribe His holiness on our lives. May we be as pliable and malleable as gold in our faith as we trust him in everything?’ 

Two points which were invaluable and worth highlighting is first – which this writer had not been consciously aware – gold being stated at both the beginning of Genesis and at the end of Revelation. If one doubted the importance of the physical presence of gold to the Creator, then the street of the future dwelling of the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb made from gold, as well as gold’s presence in His former residence in the Garden of Eden, quells the idea – Article: The Eden Enigma. Of course, more impressive still is the fact that while the wall of the New Jerusalem is constructed of jasper, the whole city itself is made of gold; which is a staggering 1,372 miles foursquare – Revelation 21:15-16.

The second point, is if one wondered to what extent the symbolism of gold was important to the Eternal, it is answered by His likening faith produced through trials, to being even more precious than pure gold.

Returning to the Book of Ezekiel and the cherubim: 15 ‘Now as I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel [H212 – ophan: ‘to revolve, whirlwinds, spheres’] on the earth beside the living creatures, one for each of the four of them. 16 As for the appearance of the wheels and their construction: their appearance was like the gleaming of beryl. And the four had the same likeness, their appearance and construction being as it were a wheel within a wheel. 17 When they went, they went in any of their four directions without turning as they went. 18 And their rims were tall and awesome, and the rims of all four were full of eyes all around. 19 And when the living creatures went, the wheels went beside them; and when the living creatures rose from the earth, the wheels rose. 20 Wherever the spirit wanted to go, they went, and the wheels rose along with them, for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 21 When those went, these went; and when those stood, these stood; and when those rose from the earth, the wheels rose along with them, for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.’

The Second Book of Enoch equates the mysterious wheels – in Hebrew the ophanim – as a type of spiritual creature or the ‘many-eyed ones’ – 1 Enoch 20:1, 21:1. While the First Book of Enoch implies they are related to the ‘Thrones’ mentioned in the Letter to the Colossians, by listing the Ophanim with the Seraphim and Cherubim – 2 Enoch 61:10, 71:7. They are also described as never sleeping, guarding the throne of God. What does not fully persuade that they are heavenly creatures but rather a mechanism of movement in transporting the Eternal’s throne is the control the Cherubim have over the wheels. 

King Solomon added elements to the Temple, including the following. 

1 Kings 7:27-36

English Standard Version 

27 ‘He also made… ten stands of bronze. Each stand was four cubits long, four cubits wide [six feet], and three cubits high [four and a half feet]. 28 … they had panels, and the panels were set in the frames, 29 and on the panels that were set in the frames were lions, oxen, and cherubim. On the frames, both above and below the lions and oxen, there were wreaths of beveled work. 30 Moreover, each stand had four bronze wheels and axles of bronze… 32 And the four wheels were underneath the panels. The axles of the wheels were of one piece with the stands, and the height of a wheel was a cubit and a half. 33 The wheels were made like a chariot wheel; their axles, their rims, their spokes, and their hubs were all cast… and on the top of the stand its stays and its panels were of one piece with it. 36 And on the surfaces of its stays and on its panels, he carved cherubim, lions, and palm trees, according to the space of each, with wreaths all around.’ 

The ten stands made from bronze were of good size and decorated with cherubim symbolism: lions, oxen or bulls and cherubs. The exact nature of the artwork will be looked at later. The stands had supports and were stationary, yet had decorative wheels at the bottom. An obvious correlation between the cherubic imagery of the stand and its wheels with the cherubim and the ophanim of God’s throne. 

Ezekiel: 22 ‘Over the heads of the living creatures there was the likeness of an expanse, shining like awe-inspiring crystal, spread out above their heads. 23 And under the expanse their wings were stretched out straight, one toward another. And each creature had two wings covering its body. 24 And when they went, I heard the sound of their wings like the sound of many waters, like the sound of the Almighty, a sound of tumult like the sound of an army. When they stood still, they let down their wings. 25 And there came a voice from above the expanse over their heads. When they stood still, they let down their wings.

26 And above the expanse over^ their heads there was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like [dark blue] sapphire; and seated above the likeness of a throne* was a likeness with a human appearance. 27 And upward from what had the appearance of his waist I saw as it were gleaming metal, like the appearance of fire enclosed all around. And downward from what had the appearance of his waist I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there was brightness around him. 28 Like the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness all around.’

Above the Cherubim, the throne of the Eternal One is located, who we now discover has a human appearance with a waist. We have previously discussed the throne of the Ancient of Days – Daniel 7:9-10 – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Here, we learned only of His clothing being ‘white as snow’ and the hair of His head as white as ‘pure wool’ – refer Daniel 7:13, Revelation 1:14. This is quite a revelation, though an unsurprising one since man is made in the image of God – Genesis 1:26. 

Ezekiel reveals wheels move God’s throne and Daniel states the same, albeit a different word is used, the Aramaic inspired, ‘galgal.’ Daniel 7:9, ESV: “… the Ancient of Days took his seat… his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire.” 

 Also of interest, is the number of spiritual beings who are loyal to the Ancient of Days, which in turn may give a clue to how many serve the Adversary – Revelation 12;4, 9. Daniel 7:10, ESV: “… a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the court sat in judgment, and the books were opened.” A million angelic beings directly serve the Eternal from a total of one hundred million.  It is not clear if this is an original number or a future count. If past, the number 33 is revered amongst the Establishment’s luciferian cabals and societies, thus taking on a profound significance if there were 33,333,333 rebellious angels who fell with the Great Red Dragon – refer articles: 33; and Asherah. Alternatively, the number could be fifty million fallen angels if a future reference is implied.  

Later in the Book of Ezekiel the approaching of the sacking of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple by the Chaldeans is described. It may be a dual prophecy with a future application.

Ezekiel 9:1-10

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Then he cried in my ears with a loud voice, saying, “Bring near the executioners of the city, each with his destroying weapon in his hand…” 3 Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the [cherubim] on which it rested to the threshold of the house…’

Prior to the attack, the Holy Spirit of the Eternal lifted and departed from presumably, the Cherubim on the Ark. 

4 ‘And the Lord said… “Pass through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it.”’ 

This is reminiscent of the future sealing of the faithful 144,000 saints of which 12,000 are from the tribe of Judah – Revelation 7:5. The earth, sea and trees are not to be harmed until the sealing of the servants of God on their foreheads – Revelation 7:3. What was this mark? Revelation 14:1, ESV: “Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.” 

5 ‘And to the others he said in my hearing, “Pass through the city after him, and strike. Your eye shall not spare, and you shall show no pity. 6 Kill old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one on whom is the mark. And begin at my sanctuary.” So they began with the elders who were before the house. 7 Then he said to them, “Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain. Go out.” So they went out and struck in the city. 

8 And while they were striking, and I was left alone, I fell upon my face, and cried, “Ah, Lord God! Will you destroy all the remnant of Israel in the outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?” 9 Then he said to me, “The guilt of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great. The land is full of blood, and the city full of injustice. For they say, ‘The Lord has forsaken the land, and the Lord does not see.’ 10 As for me, my eye will not spare, nor will I have pity; I will bring their deeds upon their heads.”’ 

Continuing in the Book of Ezekiel.

Ezekiel 10:1-22

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then I looked, and behold, on the expanse that was over the heads of the cherubim there appeared above them something like a [dark blue] sapphire [H5601 – cappiyr], in appearance like a throne. 2 And he said to the man clothed in linen, “Go in among the whirling wheels [H1534 – galgal] underneath the cherubim. Fill your hands with burning coals from between the cherubim, and scatter them over the city.”

The Hebrew word for sapphire can also mean Lapis lazuli, a Persian word meaning blue. It is a pretty rock composed primarily of the minerals lazurite, pyrite and calcite and is a lighter shade of blue than the darker sapphire stone. As the lower atmosphere and sky is blue and the oceans are a blue-green, it is perhaps safe to assume the Creator likes the colour blue; for His throne is of the same hue. 

The same word used in the Book of Daniel for wheel is used here and not ophan used in chapter one of Ezekiel. As Ezekiel wrote both chapters, he must have had a reason in making a distinction. This word means ‘wheel, whirl, whirlwind, whirling.’ It stems from H1556, galal, meaning, ‘roll, roll away, roll down, roll together, roll up, to roll oneself.’

‘And he went in before my eyes. 3 Now the cherubim were standing on the south side of the house, when the man went in, and a cloud filled the inner court. 4 And the glory of the Lord went up from the cherub to the threshold of the house, and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was filled with the brightness of the glory of the Lord. 5 And the sound of the wings of the cherubim was heard as far as the outer court, like the voice of God Almighty when he speaks.’ 

We read earlier about the noise the wings of the cherubim made when they moved. Recall there are four cherubs and each have four wings. Again they are pictured standing and not kneeling. The Cherubim are clearly responsible for the transportation of God’s Throne. Psalm 18:10, 80:1 ESV: “He rode on a cherub and flew; he came swiftly on the wings of the wind.” “Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel… You who are enthroned upon the cherubim, shine forth.” Isaiah 37:16, ESV: “O Lord of hosts, God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, you are the God, you alone…”

6 ‘And when he commanded the man clothed in linen, “Take fire from between the whirling wheels [H1534], from between the cherubim,” he went in and stood beside a wheel [H212 – ophan; ‘to revolve, a wheel’]. 7 And a cherub stretched out his hand from between the cherubim to the fire that was between the cherubim, and took some of it and put it into the hands of the man clothed in linen, who took it and went out. 8 The cherubim appeared to have the form of a human hand under their wings.’ 

Ezekiel uses both words for wheel and continues to use ophan in the following verses. This writer’s view is that ophan is the prime word for wheel when it is stationary and galgal is used by Ezekiel when the wheel is in motion, whirling. 

9 ‘And I looked, and behold, there were four wheels beside the cherubim, one beside each cherub, and the appearance of the wheels was like sparkling beryl [H8658 – tarshiysh]. 10 And as for their appearance, the four had the same likeness, as if a wheel were within a wheel. 11 When they went, they went in any of their four directions without turning as they went, but in whatever direction the front wheel faced, the others followed without turning as they went. 12 And their whole body, their rims, and their spokes, their wings, and the wheels were full of eyes all around – the wheels that the four of them had.’

13 ‘As for the wheels [H212], they were called in my hearing “the whirling wheels [H1534].” 14 And every one had four faces: the first face was the face of the cherub, and the second face was a human face, and the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.’ 

The Hebrew word for beryl can mean a topaz stone. Each are a clear gem stone, though can exhibit other colours from impurities. The connotation here is that it is a yellow shade like yellow jasper – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan. The four wheels act as one in the direction they move. Mysteriously, they are described as possessing four faces like the cherubim. But unlike them, the face of an ox or bull is swapped for a cherub – who supposedly have four faces themselves?

15 ‘And the cherubim mounted up. These were the living creatures [Revelation 4:6-8] that I saw by the Chebar canal. 16 And when the cherubim went, the wheels went beside them. And when the cherubim lifted up their wings to mount up from the earth, the wheels did not turn from beside them. 17 When they stood still, these stood still, and when they mounted up, these mounted up with them, for the spirit of the living creatures was in them.

The Chebar Canal or river comes from hebar, meaning ‘far-off’ and likely was the ‘Habor or the Royal Canal of King Nebuchadnezzar.’ The cherubs are described as living creatures, whereas the wheels are not. Similarly, the wheels do not appear to have action of themselves unless the movement is coordinated from the Cherub. While endeavouring to maintain an open mind on the possibility the ophanim are subservient spiritual beings of the cherubim, it seems they are – either a part of the cherubim themselves or as this writer lean towards – a transportation mechanism controlled by the Cherubs. 

18 ‘Then the glory of the Lord went out from the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubim. 19 And the cherubim lifted up their wings and mounted up from the earth before my eyes as they went out, with the wheels beside them. And they stood at the entrance of the east gate of the house of the Lord, and the glory of the God of Israel was over them. 20 These were the living creatures that I saw underneath the God of Israel by the Chebar canal; and I knew that they were cherubim. 21 Each had four faces, and each four wings, and underneath their wings the likeness of human hands. 22 And as for the likeness of their faces, they were the same faces whose appearance I had seen by the Chebar canal. Each one of them went straight forward.’ 

The Prophet Ezekiel does not stop there, for he goes on to describe an infamous Cherub in chapter twenty-eight. We have investigated this chapter previously and so it is not the intention to repeat all the discussion on the subject, but there are some salient points in chapter twenty-eight – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. A mistake commentators make is equating this chapter with chapter fourteen of the Book of Isaiah. The individual discussed in Isaiah is not the same person. Added to this, is the fact that the Prince of Tyre in verses one to ten of Ezekiel twenty-eight, is not the same personality as that described incorrectly as the King of Tyre in verses eleven to nineteen. 

For this king is actually a queen. The difficulty is that the Hebrew word used, melek [H4428] is masculine for king. It stems from the same root word which can mean king or queen [H4427], literally, “to become queen or king”. The Hebrew does not have a specific word for queen, for it only recognises a queen as not a ruler in her own right, but as subsidiary to a king. Thus, there is the feminine of melek, in malkah [H4436] which is used invariably for a queen regent or wife of a king; for example Queen Vashti, the wife of Artaxerxes I (or Ahasuerus) – Esther 1:9: refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes.

Alternatively, shegal (H7694) for a queen consort (Psalm 45:9, Daniel 5:2-3), which simply means a ‘wife’ of the first rank, as distinguished from mere concubines; and gebirah (H1377) for a lady or queen mother – for example Tahpenes, wife of Pharaoh Hadad, 1 Kings 11:19 (1 Kings 2:19). McClintock and Strong: ‘Gebirdh… is expressive of authority; it means “powerful” or “mistress,” being the feminine of gebir, “master,” or “lord.” The feminine is to be understood by its relation to the masculine, which is not applied to kingly power or to kings, but to general authority and dominion.’ 

The one exception is the Queen of Sheba who visited King Solomon. She very obviously a female, was accorded the Hebrew word malkah – 1 Kings 10:1. Refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Otherwise there has been in Hebrew, a bias in the assumption a ruler was male and therefore a king and so in the case of typing this ruler against that of Tyre, the identity of Wisdom the once closest companion (Proverbs 8:22-31^) of the Ancient of Days turned His greatest Adversary (Job 1:6-12), has remained conveniently hidden for millennia… refer Article: Asherah.

Thus the crucial passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel pertain to three distinct rebellious beings. In error, they have all been ascribed to a Satan, yet only one of them actually identifies under not this name, but rather the descriptive title or rank Satan, meaning: an Adversary. This Satan, is only the subject of the latter verses in Ezekiel chapter twenty-eight and in perhaps one of the greatest plot twists in the entirety of the scriptures, is actually… a feminine supernatural entity and not an assumed masculine one. 

Ezekiel 28:12-19

English Standard Version

12 “Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king [H4428 – melek: ‘royal’] of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord God: 

While ostensibly this appears to be written to or more accurately about, a human king of Tyre, the subsequent verses leave no doubt that a powerful being residing in the spirit realm is being discussed – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Further, unlike the prophetic nature of verse one to ten for the Prince of Tyre, this passage is a paradoxical lamentation for one not dead, though will be. The word can be translated as a dirge or elegy. In other words, a mournful commemoration for one already dead. This being is such a one who has been close to the Creator and while deserving of the sentence of death, is of such high esteem, is remembered… 

Most Bible translations say king; only a couple use the correct contextual, ‘ruler.’ In the Hebrew, the word ‘him’ is not there and has been added in English translations, only misleading further regarding the true identity of this ‘ruler of Tyre.’ For the Hebrew word if it were included in the original, would be H1931 hu or hi, meaning either ‘he, she’ or ‘it’ depending on the context.

“You were the signet [or seal] of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty [H3308 – yophiy].” 

This individual was full of wisdom for she was the Wisdom^ of God – Proverbs 8:22-31. She was the first of God’s creation with the Word and perfect in every way – John 1:1-2. The Hebrew word used here for beauty is a word associated with females rather than for males and can mean from its root, ‘fair, to be bright, beautiful.’

13 “You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared.”

This being’s name is Asherah – 1 Kings 18:19, 2 Kings 23:6, Micah 5:14. It was she who was in Eden with God and after she turned away from Him, she is the enigmatic Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden – Deuteronomy 16:21, Judges 6:25, Jeremiah 17:2, 2 Kings 17:10. It was the fruit of her tree that the Serpent enticed Eve and Adam to eat from. The Ancient of Days had planned and prepared Asherah’s creation and adorned her with many precious gem stones in recognition of her beauty, perfection and wisdom. These presents, tantamount to jewellery were not given to a male being.

14 “You were an anointed [H4473 – mimshach: ‘outspread (with outstretched wings)’, root H4886: ‘consecrate’] guardian [H5526 – cakak: ‘cover, defend, overshadow, to screen, protector’] cherub [H3742 – kruwb]. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.” 

Eden was both a heavenly and earthly abode – refer article: The Eden Enigma. In the celestial abode with God, Asherah was an original Cherub. Though she is not any more. Was she one of the four cherubs who transport the Throne of the Ancient of Days and was then replaced? Probably not. Perhaps at least two cherubs guarded the Tree of Life in the Garden. With Asherah included too, there were at least seven cherubim. If Asherah was originally a consecrated cherub, she had four wings, of which at least two were outstretched and therefore covering something or someone. Was Asherah one of two Cherubs who covered the Eternal? Could the other have been the Word? Making at least eight cherubim? And how could this perhaps be related to the cherubim of the Ark of God?

A surprise answer to who may have been the second covering Cherub with Asherah is the mysterious leader of the Watchers who rebelliously descended to Earth in the endeavour to corrupt humanity during the time of righteous Enoch. His name was Samyaza, which tellingly means ‘covering’ or ‘that which covers’. The shocking true identity of Samyaza is revealed in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

15 “You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till unrighteousness was found in you. 16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned; so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you. 18 By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries; so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed you, and I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you. 19 All who know you among the peoples are appalled at you; you have come to a dreadful end and shall be no more forever.”

As discussed in The Manna Mystery, Asherah fell foul to the sin of ingratitude. She was summarily dismissed from the upper echelon of God’s government and was no longer welcome. Her fate is the same as all those in Heaven and Earth who reject the Tree of Life – Matthew 25:41, Revelation 20:10. 

Revelation 4:1-11

English Standard Version 

1 ‘After this I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven! And the first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” 2 At once I was in the Spirit, and behold, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne. 3 And he who sat there had the appearance of jasper [G2393 – iaspis] and carnelian [G4556 – sardios], and around the throne was a rainbow that had the appearance of an emerald.’ 

While jasper can be different colours, we have learned from other scriptural references that the Ancient of Days is clothed in white and has white hair. The most likely inference in this verse is white jasper, suggested by Knowing Jesus: “There is one kind called the Aeizusa, [likened] to air and another Crystallizusa, clear as crystal. So Pliny speaks of a white Jasper called Astrios, and which, he says is “crystallo propinquans”, near to crystal, found in India, and on the shores of Pallene.” 

Similarly, the word carnelian is the precious stone sardius, of which there are two types: a sard and the ‘flesh coloured’ carnelian. The sard is harder and darker. The carnelian ranges from a pale light orange on one hand to a reddish-orange or a deep reddish-brown on the other. 

4 ‘Around the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clothed in white garments, with golden crowns on their heads. 5 From the throne came flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder, and before the throne were burning seven torches of fire, which are the seven spirits of God, 6 and before the throne there was as it were a sea of glass, like crystal.’

The mysterious Elders are not mentioned outside of the Book of Revelation and are included in relation to the four living creatures of God’s Throne. The term elder signifies an office as well as great age. The Elders wear crowns of rulership. Their role appears to be one of co-rulership with the Eternal as a serving advisory Council. 

The number twelve symbolises a foundation, particularly in regard to power, authority and governance; as well as completeness in a nation, such as the Israelites. The number twelve is found throughout scripture. The word twelve, is recorded 189 times in the King James version; with most references in 1 Chronicles, 26 times; followed by Revelation with 22. The word twelfth is used 23 times.

Examples include:

  • Twelve sons of Jacob
  • Twelve sons of Ishmael 
  • Twelve sons of Canaan 
  • Twelve loaves of Bread in the Tabernacle 
  • Twelve officers appointed by King Solomon over all of Israel
  • Twelve chapters in the Books of Daniel and Ecclesiastes 
  • Twelve Minor Prophets 
  • Twelve gem stones embedded on the High Priest’s breastplate 
  • Twelve patriarchs descending from Noah: Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
  • Twelve names in the Bible with two letters according to Bible Study: ‘… Ai (Joshua 7:2), Ar (Numbers 21:15), Ed (Joshua 22:34), Er (Genesis 38:3), Ir (1 Chronicles 7:12), No (Jeremiah 46:25), Og (Numbers 21:33), On (Numbers 16:11), Pe (Psalm 119:129), So (2 Kings 17:4), Ur (Genesis 11:28) and Uz (Genesis 10:23).’
  • Twelve ‘people are specially noted in the Bible… being anointed for a unique task or responsibility… Aaron and his four sons to serve as priests (Exodus 29:7-9), Saul (1 Samuel 10:1), David (1 Samuel 16:13) and Solomon (1 Kings 1:39) to serve as kings over a united Israel. David’s son Absalom, who wanted to take the throne of his [father] David but was killed (2 Samuel 19:10), was also anointed by some to be king. The remaining three specially anointed are King Jehu of Israel (2 Kings 9:6) and Kings Joash (2 Kings 11:12) and Jehoahaz (2 Kings 23:30) of Judah’ – Bible Study
  • Twelve Passovers mentioned in the Bible, six in each Testament 
  • Twelve disciples who became apostles
  • Twelve stars on the Woman’s crown in Revelation Twelve
  • Twelve thousand people from the twelve Tribes – aside from Dan – sealed before the Great Tribulation
  • Twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem with the twelve names of the twelve apostles on them
  • Twelve gates in the New Jerusalem, with twelve angels and the twelve names of the tribes inscribed
  • Twelve thousand stadia foursquare equals the boundary size of the city of the New Jerusalem
  • Twelve multiplied by itself equals the 144 cubit height of the city’s walls

Thus the twenty-four Elders represent the added authority of twelve twice. The number twelve itself is comprised of the numbers 3 x 4. The number three signifying decision and finality, while the number four represents the Creator and a creative foundation – Article: 33.

Revelation: ‘And around the throne, on each side of the throne, are four living creatures, full of eyes [G3788 – ophthalmos: sight] in front and behind: 7 the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with the face of a man, and the fourth living creature like an eagle in flight. 

8 And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and within, and day and night they never cease to say, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come!” 9 And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to him who is seated on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall down before him who is seated on the throne and worship him who lives forever and ever. They cast their crowns before the throne, saying, 11 “Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created” – Revelation 11:16; 19:4.’ 

The living creatures may not literally possess many eyes but rather have keen sight beyond what is seen into what is known. A metaphor for ‘the eyes of the mind, the faculty of knowing.’ Not just literally but figuratively and ‘by implication’ visionary. These creatures exhibit the characteristics of cherubim, with each one being either feline, bovine, humanoid or avian. 

It is these same symbols which were used by the head tribes of each of the fours sides of the encampment. The Lion, the standard of Judah; the Bull, the standard of Ephraim; a Man, the standard of Reuben; and an Eagle, the standard of Dan – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

There appears to be an abrupt transition after verse 7 about the cherubim in verse 8, where six wings and crying aloud with praise for God, is a description of the Seraphim – Isaiah 6:2-7.

Thus these four new living creatures are not the cherubs spoken of earlier, who are ‘around’ and ‘on each side’ of the Throne. 

The Elders honour the fact that the Ancient of Days created all things and gave life to all living beings. A gross irony when held up against the rebellious angelic spirits who like the Adversary, Asherah, have chosen to dishonour the Eternal One. 

Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega:

‘The biblical prophet Ezekiel describes the cherubim as a tetrad of living creatures, each having four faces: of a lion, an ox, an eagle and of a man… this is symbolic in that they possess the four facets described and not a literal description of four faces… each Cherub may have a predominant personality so that one may look human, one birdlike… and… like a minotaur… They may have shape shifting ability in exhibiting them at will. 

One is reminded of the Egyptian gods with human bodies and [the] heads of animals, such as the… god Horus with the head of a falcon… Anubis had the head of a jackal… The goddess of war, Sekhmet had a lioness head; Heket the goddess of birth and fertility possessed a frogs head and her husband, Khnum had the head of a ram; Sobek, had the head of a crocodile; Thoth the head of an Ibis; and Kehpheri, the head of a scarab beetle’ – Article: Thoth.

‘The definition of Cherub is not clear, though the verb karabu means ‘to bless’ and the adjective form, is ‘to be mighty’ or Mighty Ones. It can also connote ‘to approach’ and to be ‘in the midst’ or ‘within.’ Hence, these mighty multi-faceted beings are blessed by attending to the Creator and are in the midst of His presence and throne.’

The Cherubim: Their Role on the Ark in the Holy of Holies, Dr Rabbi Zev Farber – emphasis mine: “Tradition has a rich history of interpreting the mythical cherubs in numerous ways. Nevertheless the extensive findings from the Ancient Near East make it clear that the Cherubs historically represented either frightening beasts used as guards, or the equivalent of flying horses drawing chariots; these images fit a number of biblical passages. In the Mishkan, however, they served either as God’s throne or as buffers surrounding the deity. 

Anciently karibu were depicted as colossal bulls. The Cherubs that are stationed by the Eternal’s throne-cum-transportation device appear to conduct a dual role of bodyguard, providing a protective covering with their wings; and flight attendants, including piloting of said craft or chariot – Psalm 18:10, 2 Samuel 22:11, Ezekiel 9:3. Engravings and paintings of chimera type creatures abound as do sphinx, gryphons and lamassu which are all cherubim inspired. 

The idea of a god or a king riding a chariot pulled by fantastic creatures exists in the Ancient Near East. Phoenician art depicts sphinx driven war chariots, for instance. The idea is most developed, and well known, in the ancient Greek and Roman worlds, where many different gods and goddesses are [pictured] with their own chariots. Apollo rides a gryphon, Poseidon a pair of Hippokampi (horse-fish). Helios’ chariot is carried by winged horses, Saturn by serpents, and Dionysius by centaurs. When seen in this context, the imagery of God riding a chariot in the Bible seems in keeping with ancient conceptions and poetic norms.” 

‘Cherubim are associated with the images of Lamassu, with a human head, the body of a bull or lion and eagle wings [see below]; the Sphinx, with a female human head, the body of a lion and the wings of a falcon; and the Griffin, with the body, tail and hind legs of a lion and the head, wings and front talons of an eagle.’

The dual role of the cherubim surrounding God’s Throne appears to be distinct yet similar to the role of other cherubim. For while the four cherubim of the Eternal uniquely transport his Throne, they are also protectors just as the cherubim who guard Eden for example. Asherah once was a protector who covered something or someone. Who or what did she guard? Perhaps it was the Tree of Life, before she established her own tree – the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

The other tree, the Tree of Life symbolises the Bread from Heaven – the Son of Man – Article: The Manna Mystery. The two cherubs on the Mercy Seat are symbolic protectors of the Ark of God. The Ark with the Tabernacle a representation in miniature, of the Eternal’s Throne on Earth. 

Exodus 25: 22 “There I will meet with you, and from above [H5921 – al: ‘upon, over, through’] the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you about all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel.” 

The Ark of God then, was not just the point where the Eternal resided with the Israelites on their epic forty year journey through the Sinai wilderness, but it was the conduit with which the Eternal manifested his presence when he met with and spoke with his righteous and humble servant Moses. This time the Holy Spirit of God in the column of cloud by day or the pillar of fire by night grounded or earthed in the Ark, just as it had done in the burning bush with Moses a few weeks previously – Exodus 3:1-5. 

Exodus 34:27-35

English Standard Version 

27 ‘And the Lord said to Moses, “Write these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.” 28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights. He neither ate bread nor drank water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments. 

29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand as he came down from the mountain, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone [H7160 – qeren: ‘to send out rays’] because he had been talking with God. 30 Aaron and all the people of Israel saw Moses, and behold, the skin of his face shone, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them, and Aaron and all the leaders of the congregation returned to him, and Moses talked with them. 32 Afterward all the people of Israel came near, and he commanded them all that the Lord had spoken with him in Mount Sinai. 

33 And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil over his face. 34 Whenever Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he would remove the veil, until he came out. And when he came out and told the people of Israel what he was commanded, 35 the people of Israel would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face was shining. And Moses would put the veil over his face again, until he went in to speak with him.’ 

For Moses to have fasted without water for forty days, meant he was given miraculous assistance from the Eternal. His time with God meant his face shone. The Hebrew word reveals that Moses did not just have a red face or a radiation burn but rather the Holy Spirit from God’s presence had transferred to him. This means they were physically close to one another when they spoke as two people chatting. In the Holy Place, one imagines Moses kneeled or sat facing towards the Ark behind the veiled curtain separating the Most Holy Place. His meetings with the Eternal were regular enough for Moses to be compelled to wear a veil. Moses undoubtedly looked like an angel and this must have caused both awe and consternation amongst the Israelites. 

In numbers 7:89, ESV, at the consecration of the Tabernacle we read: ‘And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with the Lord, he heard the voice speaking to him from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and it spoke to him.’ 

Thoth:

‘Moses did an about turn, radically changing his whole philosophy, belief system and the gods he had venerated. Moses already a unique individual, became the most humble man on the face of the Earth – Numbers 12:3. He was given – because of his faithfulness and belief – a special relationship with the Eternal. Exodus 33:9-11, The Voice: “When Moses entered the tent, the cloud pillar descended to the tent’s entrance, and the Eternal would talk with Moses. When people witnessed the cloud pillar standing at the meeting tent’s entrance, they would stand and bow in worship at the entrance of their own tents. The Eternal spoke with Moses face-to-face, just as a friend speaks to another friend.”

The next chapter, Exodus twenty six, explains in detail how the Tabernacle was constructed. The principle colours used being blue, scarlet and purple and the main components, Acacia wood, gold, silver and bronze. It says the following regarding the cherubim and the Ark. 

Exodus 26:1, 31-34

English Standard Version 

“Moreover, you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twined linen and blue and purple and scarlet yarns; you shall make them with cherubim skillfully worked into them. “And you shall make a veil of blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen. It shall be made with cherubim skillfully worked into it. And you shall hang it on four pillars of acacia overlaid with gold, with hooks of gold, on four bases of silver. And you shall hang the veil from the clasps, and bring the ark of the testimony in there within the veil. And the veil shall separate for you the Holy Place from the Most Holy. You shall put the mercy seat on the ark of the testimony in the Most Holy Place.” 

Exodus chapter thirty discusses the construction of the altar of incense and in chapter thirty-one the two men who led the construction of the Tabernacle are disclosed; eliminating Aaron as the head* of its design.

Exodus 31:1-11 

English Standard Version 

1 ‘The Lord said to Moses, 2 “See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah’ – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes, 3 ‘and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with ability and intelligence, with knowledge and all craftsmanship, 4 to devise artistic designs, to work in gold, silver, and bronze, 5 in cutting stones for setting, and in carving wood, to work in every craft. 6 And behold, I have appointed with him Oholiab, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan’ – Chapter XXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

‘And I have given to all able men ability, that they may make all that I have commanded you: 7 the tent of meeting, and the ark of the testimony, and the mercy seat that is on it, and all the furnishings of the tent, 8 the table and its utensils, and the pure lampstand with all its utensils, and the altar of incense, 9 and the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils, and the basin and its stand, 10 and the finely worked garments, the holy garments for Aaron the priest and the garments of his sons, for their service as priests, 11 and the anointing oil and the fragrant incense for the Holy Place. According to all that I have commanded you, they shall do” – Exodus 35:30-35; 36:1-2. 

Exodus 37:1-9

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Bezalel made the ark of acacia wood. Two cubits and a half was its length, a cubit and a half its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height. 2 And he overlaid it with pure gold inside and outside, and made a molding of gold around it.

3 And he cast for it four rings of gold for its four feet, two rings on its one side and two rings on its other side. 4 And he made poles of acacia wood and overlaid them with gold 5 and put the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark to carry the ark.

6 And he made a mercy seat of pure gold. Two cubits and a half was its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth. 7 And he made two cherubim of gold. He made them of hammered work on the two ends of the mercy seat, 8 one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end. Of one piece with the mercy seat he made the cherubim on its two ends. 9 The cherubim spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, with their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat were the faces of the cherubim.’

The cherubim on the Mercy Seat above are in proportion with the chest of the Ark. The wings are not touching but are very close together. They are in a raised kneeling position closer to an upright stance. Yet lacking two extra wings to make four. The lid of the Mercy Seat is oversized and not flush with the opening of the Ark. Additionally, the Ark incorrectly has legs; whereas it should just have the four pole hoops as it feet.

Exodus 38:21-31

English Standard Version 

21 ‘These are the records of the tabernacle, the tabernacle of the testimony, as they were recorded at the commandment of Moses, the responsibility of the Levites under the direction of Ithamar* the son of Aaron the priest. 22 Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, made all that the Lord commanded Moses; 23 and with him was Oholiab the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, an engraver and designer and embroiderer in blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen.’

Bezalel was responsible for the design and construction of the components of the Tabernacle made from metal and wood, while Oholiab for those made from fabrics including the yarn and linen.

24 ‘All the gold that was used for the work, in all the construction of the sanctuary, the gold from the offering, was twenty-nine talents [talent = 75 pounds / 34 kilograms] and 730 shekels [2/5 ounces ‘ 11 grams]…’ 

Exodus 40:1-3, 17-18, 20-21,

English Standard Version 

‘The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “On the first day of the first month you shall erect the tabernacle of the tent of meeting. 3 And you shall put in it the ark of the testimony, and you shall screen the ark with the veil. 17 In the first month [March/April] in the second year, on the first day of the month [New Moon], the tabernacle was erected. 18 Moses erected the tabernacle. 

20 He took the testimony and put it into the ark, and put the poles on the ark and set the mercy seat above on the ark. 21 And he brought the ark into the tabernacle and set up the veil of the screen, and screened the ark of the testimony, as the Lord had commanded Moses.’

The comments for the previous image of the Ark apply to the one pictured above.

34 ‘Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 36 Throughout all their journeys, whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the people of Israel would set out. 37 But if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out till the day that it was taken up. 38 For the cloud of the Lord was on the tabernacle by day, and fire was in it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel throughout all their journeys.’ 

Leviticus 16:1-16, 

English Standard Version 

1 ‘The Lord spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the Lord and died [Leviticus 10:1-2], 2 and the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat… 5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. 6 “Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house.’

Absolutely no one was to enter the Holy of Holies while encamped. Not even Moses. Only the High Priest could enter on the Day of Atonement on the 10th day of the seventh month – September/October. Aaron had to offer a bull first and wear the correct garments before he could enter.

7 ‘Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. 9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.’ 

For additional information on Azazel, refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. 

12 ‘And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from the altar before the Lord, and two handfuls of sweet incense beaten small, and he shall bring it inside the veil 13 and put the incense on the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is over the testimony, so that he does not die. 14 And he shall take some of the blood of the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the front of the mercy seat on the east side, and in front of the mercy seat he shall sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times. 

15 “Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, sprinkling it over the mercy seat and in front of the mercy seat. 16 Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.’ 

This process was performed once a year on the Day of Atonement, with the cleansing of the inner sanctuary and the Ark of the Covenant with the sprinkling of the sacrificial blood by the High Priest of the bull for himself and then the goat on behalf of the congregation of Israel. At-one-ment achieved between the Holy God and the unholy Israelites. 

Numbers 4:5, 15

English Standard Version

‘When the camp is to set out, Aaron and his sons shall go in and take down the veil of the screen and cover the ark of the testimony with it. And when Aaron and his sons have finished covering the sanctuary and all the furnishings of the sanctuary, as the camp sets out, after that the sons of Kohath shall come to carry these, but they must not touch the holy things, lest they die. These are the things of the tent of meeting that the sons of Kohath are to carry.’ 

When the Israelites broke camp, Only Aaron and his priestly sons could enter the Most Holy Place and cover the Ark of God with the curtain veil that separated the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. Once all the holy items had been covered, then the sons of Kohath could uplift them, but they were not to touch anything directly with their skin, body or hands. Levi originally had three sons. Kohath was the middle son between Gershon and Merari and the ancestor of Moses and Aaron – Genesis 46:11. 

Numbers 10:11-35

English Standard Version

11 ‘In the second year, in the second month, on the twentieth day of the month, the cloud lifted from over the tabernacle of the testimony, 12 and the people of Israel set out by stages from the wilderness of Sinai. And the cloud settled down in the wilderness of Paran. 13 They set out for the first time at the command of the Lord by Moses. 17 And when the tabernacle was taken down, the sons of Gershon and the sons of Merari, who carried the tabernacle, set out.

21 Then the Kohathites set out, carrying the holy things, and the tabernacle was set up before their arrival. 33 So they set out from the mount of the Lord three days’ journey. And the ark of the covenant of the Lord went before them three days’ journey, to seek out a resting place for them. 34 And the cloud of the Lord was over them by day, whenever they set out from the camp. 35 And whenever the ark set out, Moses said, “Arise, O Lord, and let your enemies be scattered, and let those who hate you flee before you.”

Boulay: ‘The Ark also appears to have emitted dangerous radioactivity. Numbers [twelve] relates the incident when [Miriam], the sister of Moses, was “stricken with scales” at the entrance to the Tent, an affliction that sounds very much like radioactive poisoning. Subsequent associations with the Ark seem to confirm the radioactive character of the instrument.’

Recorded in Numbers fourteen is an account where the people of Israel, incredibly, rebelled against Moses and Aaron, planning to stone them to death, desiring a new leader to take them back to Egypt. The Eternal in His anger said to Moses: “How long will this people despise me? And how long will they not believe in me, in spite of all the signs that I have done among them? I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you a nation greater and mightier than they.” 

Moses in his humility and wisdom replied, “Then the Egyptians will hear of it… [and] the nations who have heard your fame will say, ‘It is because the Lord was not able to bring this people into the land that he swore to give to them that he has killed them in the wilderness.’ Please pardon the iniquity of this people, according to the greatness of your steadfast love, just as you have forgiven this people, from Egypt until now.” 

The Eternal listened to Moses and relented. Yet he punished all those over twenty years of age by extending their journey to Canaan to last forty years, allowing for those over twenty to die. Only those under twenty were allowed to enter the promised land. There were two exceptions of the faithful men, Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh. The Lord said, “And none of those who despised me shall see it. But my servant Caleb, because he has a different spirit and has followed me fully, I will bring into the land into which he went, and his descendants shall possess it.” 

The Eternal warned the people about the Amalekites and the Canaanites and to change direction towards the Red Sea. Yet the people did not heed and hoped to bypass them. The Eternal removed his protection and predicted they would fall by the sword. Tellingly, they proceeded out of the camp with ‘neither the ark of the covenant of the Lord nor Moses… Then the Amalekites and the Canaanites who lived in that hill country came down and defeated them and pursued them, even to Hormah.’

The Israelites were aware of the potency of the Ark of God, the Eternal’s miracles and the faith of Moses, yet astoundingly chose to trust in themselves. 

Boulay: ‘In Numbers [chapter sixteen], the story is related of how a group of 250 members of the tribe of Korah were annihilated by the destructive power of the Ark. When the Israelites were resting near Kadesh after their second and final defeat in Canaan, 250 members of the tribe of Korah were directed to bring copper pans for presenting incense, and to appear at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. Suddenly, “a fire went forth from the Lord and consumed the two hundred and fifty men offering incense.” 

The victims appeared to have been completely incinerated for the priests were told to remove “the charred remains, and scatter the coals.” Ironically, their copper pans which had attracted the electrical discharge were hammered into sheets and used as plating for the altar. Since the incident happened right after their second defeat at Hormah, it may be, as the Haggadah seems to suggest, that the tribe was eliminated for showing cowardice at this battle.’ 

In Deuteronomy, the compiler of the first five books of the Bible, provides his version of events regarding the Ark and the second set of tablets after he had broken them in anger – Exodus 32:19. 

Deuteronomy 10:1-10

English Standard Version 

1 “At that time the Lord said to me, ‘Cut for yourself two tablets of stone like the first, and come up to me on the mountain and make an ark of wood. 2 And I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets that you broke, and you shall put them in the ark.’ 3 So I made an ark of acacia wood, and cut two tablets of stone like the first, and went up the mountain with the two tablets in my hand. 4 And he wrote on the tablets, in the same writing as before, the Ten Commandments that the Lord had spoken to you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly. And the Lord gave them to me. 5 Then I turned and came down from the mountain and put the tablets in the ark that I had made. And there they are, as the Lord commanded me.” 

Deuteronomy 31:1-7, 23-29

English Standard Version 

1 ‘… Moses… said… “I am 120 years old today. I am no longer able to go out and come in. The Lord has said to me, ‘You shall not go over this Jordan.’ 3 The Lord your God himself will go over before you. He will destroy these nations before you, so that you shall dispossess them, and Joshua will go over at your head, as the Lord has spoken… 6 Be strong and courageous. Do not fear or be in dread of them, for it is the Lord your God who goes with you. He will not leave you or forsake you.” 7 Then Moses summoned Joshua and said to him in the sight of all Israel, “Be strong and courageous, for you shall go with this people into the land that the Lord has sworn to their fathers to give them, and you shall put them in possession of it. 8 It is the Lord who goes before you. He will be with you; he will not leave you or forsake you. Do not fear or be dismayed.” 23 And the Lord commissioned Joshua the son of Nun and said, “Be strong and courageous, for you shall bring the people of Israel into the land that I swore to give them. I will be with you…” 

25 Moses commanded the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord, 26 “Take this Book of the Law and put it by the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against you. 27 For I know how rebellious and stubborn you are. Behold, even today while I am yet alive with you, you have been rebellious against the Lord. How much more after my death! 28 Assemble to me all the elders of your tribes and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears and call heaven and earth to witness against them. 29 For I know that after my death you will surely act corruptly and turn aside from the way that I have commanded you. And in the days to come evil will befall you, because you will do what is evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger through the work of your hands”.’

The Book of the Law was not the Ten Commandments writ by the finger of God on the tablets, known as the testimony, but rather the instructions the Eternal had given Moses regarding the seven annual Holy Day festivals. The Law was to be kept next to the Ark, not inside it. Moses did not withhold any punches in his address to the people just before his death. After the death of Joshua, the people did walk down an evil path, just as Moses had predicted for them. 

Joshua 3:1-17

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Then Joshua rose early in the morning and they set out from Shittim. And they came to the Jordan, he and all the people of Israel, and lodged there before they passed over. 2 At the end of three days the officers went through the camp 3 and commanded the people, “As soon as you see the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God being carried by the Levitical priests, then you shall set out from your place and follow it. 4 Yet there shall be a distance between you and it, about 2,000 cubits in length. Do not come near it, in order that you may know the way you shall go, for you have not passed this way before.” 5 Then Joshua said to the people, “Consecrate yourselves, for tomorrow the Lord will do wonders among you.” 6 And Joshua said to the priests, “Take up the ark of the covenant and pass on before the people.” So they took up the ark of the covenant and went before the people.’ 

Two thousand cubits represents 3,000 feet or over half a mile. This was some distance separating the trailing Israelites behind the Ark carrying Levitical priests. 

Boulay: ‘The Tent of Meeting containing the Ark was kept at a safe distance from the Israelite camp. When travelling, the Ark was carried by the Levites and preceded the body of people. In Joshua 3, they are instructed to keep a safe distance, “there shall be two thousand cubits, do not come near it.” Two thousand cubits is roughly one kilometer, the distance considered as a safety buffer zone.’

Joshua passing the River Jordan with the Ark of the Covenant – Benjamin West

7 ‘The Lord said to Joshua, “Today I will begin to exalt you in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that, as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. 8 And as for you, command the priests who bear the ark of the covenant, ‘When you come to the brink of the waters of the Jordan, you shall stand still in the Jordan.’ 9 And Joshua said to the people of Israel… 11 Behold, the ark of the covenant of the Lord of all the earth is passing over before you into the Jordan… 13 And when the soles of the feet of the priests bearing the ark of the Lord, the Lord of all the earth, shall rest in the waters of the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan shall be cut off from flowing, and the waters coming down from above shall stand in one heap.

14 So when the people set out from their tents to pass over the Jordan with the priests bearing the ark of the covenant before the people, 15 and as soon as those bearing the ark had come as far as the Jordan, and the feet of the priests bearing the ark were dipped in the brink of the water (now the Jordan overflows all its banks throughout the time of harvest), 16 the waters coming down from above stood and rose up in a heap very far away, at Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan, and those flowing down toward the Sea of the Arabah, the Salt Sea [the Dead Sea], were completely cut off. And the people passed over opposite Jericho. 17 Now the priests bearing the ark of the covenant of the Lord stood firmly on dry ground in the midst of the Jordan, and all Israel was passing over on dry ground until all the nation finished passing over the Jordan.’ 

Joshua, seen as a righteous man like Moses, meant the Eternal saw fit to cement his authority in the eyes of the people by performing a similar miracle to the parting of the Red Sea – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? Incorporating the Ark in the miracle, embellished its role in the lives of the Israelites as a symbol of Israel’s power – the power of God’s Holy Spirit and its presence leading them.

There is a third occurrence in the Bible of waters being parted and again it was the River Jordan.

‘Then a company of fifty of the sons of the prophets went and stood at a distance, facing Elijah and Elisha as the two of them stood by the Jordan. And Elijah took his cloak, rolled it up, and struck the waters, which parted to the right and to the left, so that the two of them crossed over on dry ground’ – 2 Kings 2:7-8, Berean Standard Bible.

Joshua 4:1-24

English Standard Version 

1 ‘… the Lord said to Joshua, 2 “Take twelve men from the people, from each tribe a man, 3 and command them, saying, ‘Take twelve stones from here out of the midst of the Jordan, from the very place where the priests’ feet stood firmly, and bring them over with you and lay them down in the place where you lodge tonight”… The people passed over in haste. 11 And when all the people had finished passing over, the ark of the Lord and the priests passed over before the people…

14 On that day the Lord exalted Joshua in the sight of all Israel, and they stood in awe of him just as they had stood in awe of Moses, all the days of his life.

15 And the Lord said to Joshua, 16 “Command the priests bearing the ark of the testimony to come up out of the Jordan”… 18 And when the priests bearing the ark of the covenant of the Lord came up from the midst of the Jordan, and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up on dry ground, the waters of the Jordan returned to their place and overflowed all its banks, as before. 

19 The people came up out of the Jordan on the tenth day of the first month [four days before Passover], and they encamped at Gilgal on the east border of Jericho. 20 And those twelve stones, which they took out of the Jordan, Joshua set up at Gilgal. 21 And he said to the people of Israel, “When your children ask their fathers in times to come, ‘What do these stones mean?’ 22 then you shall let your children know, ‘Israel passed over this Jordan on dry ground.’ 23 For the Lord your God dried up the waters of the Jordan for you until you passed over, as the Lord your God did to the Red Sea, which he dried up for us until we passed over, 24 so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the Lord is mighty, that you may fear the Lord your God forever”.’

Joshua 6:1-27 

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Now Jericho was shut up inside and outside because of the people of Israel. None went out, and none came in. 2 And the Lord said to Joshua, “See, I have given Jericho into your hand, with its king and mighty men of valor. 3 You shall march around the city, all the men of war going around the city once. Thus shall you do for six days. 4 Seven priests shall bear seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark. On the seventh day you shall march around the city seven times, and the priests shall blow the trumpets. 5 And when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, when you hear the sound of the trumpet, then all the people shall shout with a great shout, and the wall of the city will fall down flat, and the people shall go up, everyone straight before him.” 

6 So Joshua the son of Nun called the priests and said to them, “Take up the ark of the covenant and let seven priests bear seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark of the Lord.” 7 And he said to the people, “Go forward. March around the city and let the armed men pass on before the ark of the Lord.” 8 And just as Joshua had commanded the people, the seven priests bearing the seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the Lord went forward, blowing the trumpets, with the ark of the covenant of the Lord following them. 9 The armed men were walking before the priests who were blowing the trumpets, and the rear guard was walking after the ark, while the trumpets blew continually. 

10 But Joshua commanded the people, “You shall not shout or make your voice heard, neither shall any word go out of your mouth, until the day I tell you to shout. Then you shall shout.” 11 So he caused the ark of the Lord to circle the city, going about it once. And they came into the camp and spent the night in the camp.’ 

Can you imagine the cacophony created from the blaring trumpets with an eerie lack of voices until they all shouted, yet the foot falls of over six hundred thousand soldiers marching around the imposing walls of an impregnable city. The spectacle may have been humorous and ominous in equal measure for the inhabitants of the ancient city of Jericho. Added to this scenario, was the glimpse of the ghostly and gleaming golden Ark.

12 ‘Then Joshua rose early in the morning, and the priests took up the ark of the Lord. 13 And the seven priests bearing the seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark of the Lord walked on, and they blew the trumpets continually. And the armed men were walking before them, and the rear guard was walking after the ark of the Lord, while the trumpets blew continually. 14 And the second day they marched around the city once, and returned into the camp. So they did for six days.’

These days corresponded to the seven days of Unleavened Bread from the 15th to the 21st day, following the Passover on the 14th day of the first month.

15 ‘On the seventh day they rose early, at the dawn of day, and marched around the city in the same manner seven times. It was only on that day that they marched around the city seven times. 16 And at the seventh time, when the priests had blown the trumpets, Joshua said to the people, “Shout, for the Lord has given you the city. 17 And the city and all that is within it shall be devoted to the Lord for destruction…

19 But all silver and gold, and every vessel of bronze and iron, are holy to the Lord; they shall go into the treasury of the Lord.” 20 So the people shouted, and the trumpets were blown. As soon as the people heard the sound of the trumpet, the people shouted a great shout, and the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they captured the city. 21 Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword… 24 And they burned the city with fire, and everything in it. Only the silver and gold, and the vessels of bronze and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the Lord. 

26 Joshua laid an oath on them at that time, saying, “Cursed before the Lord be the man who rises up and rebuilds this city, Jericho. At the cost of his firstborn shall he lay its foundation, and at the cost of his youngest son shall he set up its gates.”

27 So the Lord was with Joshua, and his fame was in all the land.’ 

Word quickly spread about the spectacular victory – consternation for all the land of Canaan. 

Joshua 7:1-6, 19-26

English Standard Version 

1 ‘But the people of Israel broke faith in regard to the devoted things, for Achan the son of Carmi, son of Zabdi, son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took some of the devoted things. And the anger of the Lord burned against the people of Israel. 6 Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell to the earth on his face before the ark of the Lord until the evening, he and the elders of Israel. And they put dust on their heads. 

19 Then Joshua said to Achan, “My son, give glory to the Lord God of Israel and give praise to him. And tell me now what you have done; do not hide it from me.” 20 And Achan answered Joshua, “Truly I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel, and this is what I did: 21 when I saw among the spoil a beautiful cloak from Shinar, and 200 shekels of silver, and a bar of gold weighing 50 shekels, then I coveted them and took them. And see, they are hidden in the earth inside my tent, with the silver underneath.” 

24 And Joshua and all Israel with him took Achan the son of Zerah, and the silver and the cloak and the bar of gold, and his sons and daughters and his oxen and donkeys and sheep and his tent and all that he had. And they brought them up to the Valley of Achor. 25 And Joshua said, “Why did you bring trouble on us? The Lord brings trouble on you today.” And all Israel stoned him with stones. They burned them with fire and stoned them with stones. 26 And they raised over him a great heap of stones that remains to this day. Then the Lord turned from his burning anger. Therefore, to this day the name of that place is called the Valley of Achor.’ 

Achan’s sin was in keeping the cloak which should have been destroyed and for not giving the silver and gold to the treasury. This was not a battle, where spoils of war were acceptable. As the Eternal had provided the way to victory, it was His rules during this unique event and Achan lost his life in learning that lesson. 

Judges 20:24-28

English Standard Version 

24 ‘So the people of Israel came near against the people of Benjamin the second day. 25 And Benjamin went against them out of Gibeah the second day, and destroyed 18,000 men of the people of Israel. All these were men who drew the sword. 26 Then all the people of Israel, the whole army, went up and came to Bethel and wept. They sat there before the Lord and fasted that day until evening, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 27 And the people of Israel inquired of the Lord (for the ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, 28 and Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron, ministered before it in those days), saying, “Shall we go out once more to battle against our brothers, the people of Benjamin, or shall we cease?” And the Lord said, “Go up, for tomorrow I will give them into your hand”.’

This event occurred when certain men from the tribe of Benjamin raped and murdered a Levite’s concubine. All the other tribes united in opposition to mete out punishment – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. They stopped short of completely annihilating the tribe of Benjamin, when only 600 men remained. The Ark is mentioned in context of the Eternal still communicating through it and Phinehas was High Priest. This would have occurred after his grandfather Aaron died in 1402 BCE – his father Eleazar and then Joshua in 1354 BCE – circa 1351 BCE. 

1 Samuel 3:1-3

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Now the boy Samuel was ministering to the Lord in the presence of Eli. And the word of the Lord was rare in those days; there was no frequent vision’ – Psalm 74:9. 2 ‘At that time Eli, whose eyesight had begun to grow dim so that he could not see, was lying down in his own place. 3 The lamp of God had not yet gone out, and Samuel was lying down in the temple of the Lord, where the ark of God was.’

The time frame was well after Joshua, with the slow slide of Israel towards captivity well under way, though it accelerated after David’s death in 970 BCE. Samuel was born circa 1090 BCE and would have been about twelve in this story, circa 1078 BCE. If the word of the Lord was rare, it means communication via the Ark was still occurring, yet declining. This was a reflection on the people and also on the High Priests preceding Eli. 

Even so, it also signifies that the power of God was still present about the Ark, as we shall discover. Eli was both High Priest and Judge of Israel before Samuel and dwelt at Shiloh in Ephraim (the holy place in Israel well before Jerusalem succeeded to the same role). Eli was born in 1144 BCE and became Judge in 1086 BCE at 58 years of age. Eli died in 1046 BCE, when righteous Samuel became a Judge of Israel. Samuel judged until his death at age eighty-five in 1015 BCE – five years prior to David becoming king. 

1 Samuel 4:1-21

English Standard Version

1 ‘… Now Israel went out to battle against the Philistines. They encamped at Ebenezer, and the Philistines encamped at Aphek. 2 The Philistines drew up in line against Israel, and when the battle spread, Israel was defeated before the Philistines, who killed about four thousand men on the field of battle. 3 And when the people came to the camp, the elders of Israel said, “Why has the Lord defeated us today before the Philistines? Let us bring the ark of the covenant of the Lord here from Shiloh, that it may come among us and save us from the power of our enemies.” 4 So the people sent to Shiloh and brought from there the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, who is enthroned on the cherubim. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were there with the ark of the covenant of God.

5 As soon as the ark of the covenant of the Lord came into the camp, all Israel gave a mighty shout, so that the earth resounded. 6 And when the Philistines heard the noise of the shouting, they said, “What does this great shouting in the camp of the Hebrews mean?” And when they learned that the ark of the Lord had come to the camp, 7 the Philistines were afraid, for they said, “A god has come into the camp.” And they said, “Woe to us! For nothing like this has happened before. 8 Woe to us! Who can deliver us from the power of these mighty gods? These are the gods who struck the Egyptians with every sort of plague in the wilderness. 9 Take courage, and be men, O Philistines, lest you become slaves to the Hebrews as they have been to you; be men and fight.” 10 So the Philistines fought, and Israel was defeated, and they fled, every man to his home. And there was a very great slaughter, for thirty thousand foot soldiers of Israel fell. 

11 And the ark of God was captured, and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, died.’ 

Notice the Israelite army believed in not just the reputation of the Ark, but also its perceived power in saving them from defeat to the Philistines – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. Yet their faith in the Ark’s power to provide protection was not enough. Disobedience to the Eternal, as evidenced by the dwindling communication – a mark of a relationship breakdown – meant the Eternal was not listening. The Ark only had power when the Eternal spoke, not because the Israelites had spoken. In fact, the Philistines exhibited more faith, in their determination to beat the Israelites and their fearsome God, before they were beaten in turn. To the point that the most unforgivable act imaginable occurred, with the Ark being captured – for the first and only time in Israel’s history. 

12 ‘A man of Benjamin ran from the battle line and came to Shiloh the same day, with his clothes torn and with dirt on his head. 13 When he arrived, Eli was sitting on his seat by the road watching, for his heart trembled for the ark of God. And when the man came into the city and told the news, all the city cried out. 14 When Eli heard the sound of the outcry, he said, “What is this uproar?” Then the man hurried and came and told Eli. 15 Now Eli was ninety-eight years old and his eyes were set so that he could not see. 16 And the man said to Eli, “I am he who has come from the battle; I fled from the battle today.” And he said, “How did it go, my son?”

17 He who brought the news answered and said, “Israel has fled before the Philistines, and there has also been a great defeat among the people. Your two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead, and the ark of God has been captured.” 18 As soon as he mentioned the ark of God, Eli fell over backward from his seat by the side of the gate, and his neck was broken and he died, for the man was old and heavy. He had judged Israel forty years. 

Eli was far more concerned with the loss of the talismanic Ark than with the death of his own two sons. That was how grave the situation was – an unbridled calamity. How low the nation had sunk in faithlessness and how far the Israelites had traversed from a faith-believing, undefeated army sweeping through Canaan with victory after victory, to become a crippled military force losing the very earthly sanctuary of the Lord God. 

19 ‘Now his daughter-in-law, the wife of Phinehas, was pregnant, about to give birth. And when she heard the news that the ark of God was captured, and that her father-in-law and her husband were dead, she bowed and gave birth, for her pains came upon her. 20 And about the time of her death the women attending her said to her, “Do not be afraid, for you have borne a son.” But she did not answer or pay attention. 21 And she named the child Ichabod, saying, “The glory has departed from Israel!” because the ark of God had been captured…’ 

1 Samuel 5:1-12

English Standard Version

1 ‘When the Philistines captured the ark of God, they brought it from Ebenezer to Ashdod. 2 Then the Philistines took the ark of God and brought it into the house of Dagon and set it up beside Dagon.’

Dagon has associations with the Canaanite word for fish, with his depictions showing him as a half-fish half-man god. He was the god of all amphibious creatures of the ocean. An analogy for supernatural beings in space, or more correctly, dimensions beyond our own. His name also has connections to the root dgn, which had to do with the clouds and the weather. Much like the Storm god, Baal Hadad. He was a supreme god beneath the Creator and this would equate with the former Archangel, Samael – otherwise known as Baal (in the Old Testament) or Beelzebub (in the New Testament) – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. This same religion is practiced by the same peoples today – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. It would be interesting to know how the Philistines transported the Ark. As no deaths are recorded, it would appear they either used the poles attached, or an existing cart and did not directly touch the Ark or Mercy Seat. 

3 ‘And when the people of Ashdod rose early the next day, behold, Dagon had fallen face downward on the ground before the ark of the Lord. So they took Dagon and put him back in his place. 4 But when they rose early on the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen face downward on the ground before the ark of the Lord, and the head of Dagon and both his hands were lying cut off on the threshold. Only the trunk of Dagon was left to him. 5 This is why the priests of Dagon and all who enter the house of Dagon do not tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod to this day.’

The Eternal was not to be mocked in sharing a place in a temple dedicated to a fallen archangel. 

6 ‘The hand of the Lord was heavy against the people of Ashdod, and he terrified and afflicted them with tumors, both Ashdod and its territory. 7 And when the men of Ashdod saw how things were, they said, “The ark of the God of Israel must not remain with us, for his hand is hard against us and against Dagon our god.” 8 So they sent and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines and said, “What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel?” They answered, “Let the ark of the God of Israel be brought around to Gath.” So they brought the ark of the God of Israel there.’

There were five lords of the Philistines, representing the five major cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza and Gath. The Lord of Gath at this time was none other than a certain Elioud giant called Goliath – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

9 ‘But after they had brought it around, the hand of the Lord was against the city, causing a very great panic, and he afflicted the men of the city, both young and old, so that tumors broke out on them. 10 So they sent the ark of God to Ekron. But as soon as the ark of God came to Ekron, the people of Ekron cried out, “They have brought around to us the ark of the God of Israel to kill us and our people.”

11 They sent therefore and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines and said, “Send away the ark of the God of Israel, and let it return to its own place, that it may not kill us and our people.” For there was a deathly panic throughout the whole city. The hand of God was very heavy there. 12 The men who did not die were struck with tumors, and the cry of the city went up to heaven.’ 

It is mind boggling the Philistines persevered with the Ark as long as they did. It highlights how beautiful and prestigious a trophy it was. 

1 Samuel 6:1-21

English Standard Version 

1 ‘The ark of the Lord was in the country of the Philistines seven months. 2 And the Philistines called for the priests and the diviners [H7080 – qacam: ‘soothsayer, false prophet’] and said, “What shall we do with the ark of the Lord? Tell us with what we shall send it to its place.” 3 They said, “If you send away the ark of the God of Israel, do not send it empty, but by all means return him a guilt offering. Then you will be healed, and it will be known to you why his hand does not turn away from you.” 4 And they said, “What is the guilt offering that we shall return to him?” They answered, “Five golden tumors and five golden mice, according to the number of the lords of the Philistines, for the same plague was on all of you and on your lords. 5 So you must make images of your tumors and images of your mice that ravage the land, and give glory to the God of Israel. Perhaps he will lighten his hand from off you and your gods and your land. 

6 Why should you harden your hearts as the Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts? After he had dealt severely with them, did they not send the people away, and they departed? 7 Now then, take and prepare a new cart and two milk cows on which there has never come a yoke, and yoke the cows to the cart, but take their calves home, away from them. 8 And take the ark of the Lord and place it on the cart and put in a box at its side the figures of gold, which you are returning to him as a guilt offering. Then send it off and let it go its way 9 and watch. If it goes up on the way to its own land, to Beth-shemesh, then it is he who has done us this great harm, but if not, then we shall know that it is not his hand that struck us; it happened to us by coincidence”…’

The Philistine diviners and rulers were smart enough to realise an offering would appease the angry God of the Ark, as well as its return to the Israelite tribes.

12 ‘And the cows went straight in the direction of Beth-shemesh along one highway, lowing as they went. They turned neither to the right nor to the left, and the lords of the Philistines went after them as far as the border of Beth-shemesh. 13 Now the people of Beth-shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley. And when they lifted up their eyes and saw the ark, they rejoiced to see it. 14 The cart came into the field of Joshua of Beth-shemesh and stopped there. A great stone was there. And they split up the wood of the cart and offered the cows as a burnt offering to the Lord. 

15 And the Levites took down the ark of the Lord and the box that was beside it, in which were the golden figures, and set them upon the great stone. And the men of Beth-shemesh offered burnt offerings and sacrificed sacrifices on that day to the Lord. 16 And when the five lords of the Philistines saw it, they returned that day to Ekron.’ 

It must have seemed a long seven months and quite unexpected to find the Ark meandering its way home.

17 ‘These are the golden tumors that the Philistines returned as a guilt offering to the Lord: one for Ashdod, one for Gaza, one for Ashkelon, one for Gath, one for Ekron, 18 and the golden mice, according to the number of all the cities of the Philistines belonging to the five lords, both fortified cities and unwalled villages’ – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America. ‘The great stone beside which they set down the ark of the Lord is a witness to this day in the field of Joshua of Beth-shemesh.’ 

Boulay: ‘… in the days of Eli the Prophet, the Ark was captured by the Philistines and brought to their cities in the hill country of western Palestine. The First Book of Samuel describes how the Philistines suffered from plagues for seven months. Those who came too close to the Ark received sores and tumors and their hair fell out, classic symptoms of radioactivity poisoning. It was passed from one Philistine city to another until finally, in disgust, they returned it to the nearest Israelite community and abandoned it at Kireath Jearin.’ 

1 Samuel 6:19 ‘And he struck some of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they looked [H7200 – ra’ah: ‘inspect, observe, look intently’] upon [into] the ark of the Lord. He struck seventy men of them, and the people mourned because the Lord had struck the people with a great blow. 20 Then the men of Beth-shemesh said, “Who is able to stand before the Lord, this holy God? And to whom shall he go up away from us?” 21 So they sent messengers to the inhabitants of Kiriath-jearim, saying, “The Philistines have returned the ark of the Lord. Come down and take it up to you.”

The Hebrew words used clearly show the seventy men looked inside the Ark. They would have had to take the Mercy Seat off to do so and thereby touch it. Even if they had used a covering blanket, gloves or a utensil of some kind, they were not authorised to do so. Even the Levites who took down the Ark from the cart could not do so and live. Only the High Priest could have done so, if instructed by the Eternal. Presumably, the three items in the Ark – the tablets of the testimony, the omer of manna and Aaron’s rod – were still inside and had not been taken by the Philistines?

A twenty year period of peace ensued between Israel and the Philistines – 1 Samuel 7:9-13. Samuel became a Judge when Eli died at 98 years of age [1 Samuel 4:15-18] and the capture of the Ark of the Covenant was seven months before the ending of the Philistine oppression at the hands of the Judge Samson – 1 Samuel 6:1. The Ark was returned and spent some twenty years in Kiriath-jearim [1 Samuel 2:18-4:1; 6:21; 7:1-8:1] from 1046 to the year 1026 BCE when Saul was anointed king. When the Ark was captured, the Philistines burned Shiloh – 1 Samuel 4:12-17. Even though this is not stated in the bible, excavations confirm the city’s destruction. 

Did the Philistines destroy the Israelite Sanctuary at Shiloh? The Archaeological Evidence, Biblical Archaeology Review, June 1975:

‘Ms. Buhl, a Keeper of the National Museum of Denmark, recently wrote part of the final report on the Danish excavations at Shiloh… the… excavations had been carried out by a Danish expedition about 40 years earlier… under the direction of Hans Kjaer… Kjaer… [published] two preliminary reports on the excavations containing a major finding for students of the Bible: Shiloh had been destroyed in about 1050 B.C., about the time that the Philistines had captured the Ark of the Lord – after it had been taken from the central sanctuary at Shiloh to lead the Israelite forces in battle. It seemed reasonable to conclude that the Philistines had destroyed the Israelite sanctuary at Shiloh following the fateful defeat of the Israelite army near Aphek.’ 

Ancient Code: ‘Near the settlement of Beit El, archaeologists made important discoveries that are believed to be connected with the Ark of the covenant. They unearthed clay pots, stoves, buildings but most importantly, they found holes carved into solid rock. Based on the location, researchers believe that these holes may have once held the wooden beams that were actually used to support the Tabernacle at Shiloh.’

1 Samuel 7:1-4

English Standard Version 

1 ‘And the men of Kiriath-jearim came and took up the ark of the Lord and brought it to the house of Abinadab on the hill. And they consecrated his son Eleazar to have charge of the ark of the Lord. 2 From the day that the ark was lodged at Kiriath-jearim, a long time passed, some twenty years, and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord. 3 And Samuel said to all the house of Israel, “If you are returning to the Lord with all your heart, then put away the foreign gods and the Ashtaroth from among you and direct your heart to the Lord and serve him only, and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines.” 4 So the people of Israel put away the Baals and the Ashtaroth, and they served the Lord only.’ 

This was a highly unusual time in the history of Israel at the very end of the period of the Judges and prior to the coronation of King Saul in 1025 BCE. The Israelites had a dramatic change of heart for twenty years and followed the Eternal. This religious revival and turn around was sparked by the return of the Ark and the symbolic presence again of the Lord God within their midst. 

2 Samuel 6:1-22

English Standard Version 

1 ‘David again gathered all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand. 2 And David arose and went with all the people who were with him from Baale-judah to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the name of the Lord of hosts who sits enthroned on the cherubim. 3 And they carried the ark of God on a new cart and brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill. And Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, were driving the new cart, 4 with the ark of God, and Ahio went before the ark. 5 And David and all the house of Israel were celebrating before the Lord, with songs and lyres and harps and tambourines and castanets and cymbals. 

6 And when they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah put out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen stumbled. 7 And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah, and God struck him down there because of his error, and he died there beside the ark of God. 

8 And David was angry because the Lord had broken out against Uzzah. And that place is called Perez-uzzah to this day. 9 And David was afraid of the Lord that day, and he said, “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?” 10 So David was not willing to take the ark of the Lord into the city of David [Jerusalem]. But David took it aside to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite. 11 And the ark of the Lord remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite three months, and the Lord blessed Obed-edom and all his household’ – 1 Chronicles 13:1-14.

This was a big event, which had turned into a festival. Uzzah did what would come naturally to any normal person without thinking and stretched out his arm to steady the Ark when the oxen stumbled on their journey. But of course, this is where Uzzah came unstuck in not thinking first. The Ark was not to be touched by anyone, no matter how well intentioned. David let his emotions cloud his thinking and understandably feared the Lord and thought, “I don’t want the Ark anywhere near me.” 

Boulay: ‘… the Ark acquired a deadly reputation and due to its dangers remained untouched and unmoved until much later when David decided to return it to Jerusalem. In this attempt, one of the men tried to steady the Ark as it began to topple from the wagon carrying it. He was killed outright by a discharge from the Ark. This appeared to be the last activity of the Ark, and this last discharge probably neutralized the power source, for the Ark remained inactive in the days that followed.’

We do not know how Obed-Edom was chosen to house the Ark. In 1 Chronicles 15:18 he is described as a gatekeeper. No mean responsibility. Judging by his name, he may have been an Edomite, or even a Philistine if he was a Gittite from Gath. Either way, the Eternal blessed his family to make a point. 1 Chronicles 13:3-4 ESV: ‘David said to all the assembly of Israel… “let us bring again the ark of our God to us, for we did not seek it in the days of Saul.” All the assembly agreed to do so, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people.’

2 Samuel: 12 ‘And it was told King David, “The Lord has blessed the household of Obed-edom and all that belongs to him, because of the ark of God.” So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed-edom to the city of David with rejoicing. 13 And when those who bore the ark of the Lord had gone six steps, he sacrificed an ox and a fattened animal’ – Ezekiel 45:22; 46:6.

14 ‘And David danced before the Lord with all his might. And David was wearing a linen ephod [H464 – ephowd: ‘High Priest shoulder-cape or mantle, ornamented with gems and gold, woven of blue, purple, scarlet’]. 15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the Lord with shouting and with the sound of the horn.’ 

The festivities were renewed with great gusto. David didn’t do anything by halves. He also didn’t take any chances, with a sacrificial offering right at the beginning of the journey to the capital. The wearing of an Ephod is highly irregular. Not unlike when David ate of the Shewbread – 1 Samuel 21:1-6. 

In 1 Samuel 10:12, Saul is likened to a prophet and in Acts 2:29-30, ESV, Paul says: “Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne…”  

Thus David was a prophet, but even more, 1 Chronicles 15:27, ESV, records: ‘David was clothed with a robe of fine linen, as also were all the Levites who were carrying the ark…’ This coupled with wearing an Ephod means David was also a Priest. 2 Samuel 8:18, ESV confirms: “… David’s sons were priests.” David from the tribe of Judah, was not of the Aaronic Levitical priesthood but rather like Christ, after the order of Melchizidek, as intimated in Psalm 110:4. 

David Among the Priests: Seeing the Royal Priesthood of David in the Book of 1 Chronicles, David S Schrock, 2020 – emphasis mine: 

‘In Leviticus – a book given for the instruction of priests – the high priest is told to sprinkle [blood on the] altar on the mercy seat, which is on the ark of the covenant, once a year, on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16). Thus, priests served at… this altar. Which is to say in reverse, where the ark is, priests are. Yet, in 1 Chronicles 16 the ark is no longer found in the tabernacle where Zadok and the others sons of Aaron served. Rather, David puts the ark in his city under a tent, thus associating priesthood with Jerusalem (cf. Psalm 132). In fact, 1 Chronicles 16:37, 39 [goes] so far as to separate the ark from the tabernacle, placing the former in Jerusalem under David’s care and leaving the tabernacle in Gibeon under the care of Zadok. 

Does this not point to David’s superior priesthood over Zadok? I think so. And it goes even further, for when David praises God in 1 Chronicles 17, he does so, having received God’s covenant promise that his son would build the temple (the place where the ark would dwell). At the same time, his son would receive an eternal throne. 

In response, David praises God and takes courage to pray before him. Verse 25 says, “Therefore your servant has found courage to pray before you.” This is a strange phrase (“found courage to pray before [God]”), unless, it means something like the fact that David found courage to stand before the ark and pray like a priest. Remember, David has brought [the Ark] to Jerusalem, leaving the priests in Gibeon. Previously, it was the priests who stood before the ark and prayed before God. Anyone who forced their way to the altar, like Saul (1 Samuel 13:12), did so in violation of God’s rules for the altar. But now, based upon God’s divine word to David, he recognizes the gracious invitation to approach the throne of grace and offer prayer. 

As [per] Hebrews 5:1-4, no priest selects themselves. And every time a priest or Levite or servant seeks to exalt themselves and approach God without permission, they die (see Nabab and Abihu, Korah, and Uzzah). Therefore, approaching God takes courage – for it is a dangerous step to draw near to God. Yet, here in response to God’s grace, David does draw near to God in prayer, thus evidencing God’s favor on David and David’s priestly status. 

In 1 Chronicles 15-16, when he brings the Ark to Jerusalem, he acts like a priest in at least five ways. 

  1. David leads the procession of priests, who are carrying the ark (15:16-29). 
  1. David offers burnt offerings. These offerings certainly involve the Levitical priests (16:1), but v. 2 says, “when David had finished offering the burnt offerings and peace offerings,” thus indicating his leading role. 
  1. David blesses the people in the name of the Lord (v. 2), an unmistakable priestly action. In Numbers 6:24-26, God granted Aaron and his sons the role of blessing the people. Moreover, because blessing came from the altar, it was the priest’s place to mediate the blessing.
  1. David shares a meal with the people of Israel. We learn from Moses that only the priests could eat the sacrifices. When Israel, as a nation ate of the sacrifices (during the various festivals…), they functioned as a kingdom of priests. Thus, the eating and distribution of the bread, meat, and cakes of raisins suggests a priestly action by David. 
  1. Finally, but prior to bringing the ark to Jerusalem, David learns from the mistake of carrying the ark on a cart (see 13:5-14). Yet, in learning from the Law, he becomes a teacher of the Law – a priestly duty (see Leviticus 10:10-11; Malachi 2:1-9). 

All in all, these five actions, plus the previous three evidences – (1) David’s association with the priests, (2) his priestly attire, and (3) making his city (Jerusalem) the home of the ark, while leaving the tabernacle behind all point to the fact that in 1 Chronicles, David is identified as a priestly king. 

Certainly, this fact raises questions, for how can a son of Judah be a priest? But better than denying that question outright, we should see how 1-2 Chronicles develops the tension. Certainly, there is the promise of a new priest(hood) to replace the old priesthood in 1 Samuel 2:35. And I would suggest that in 1-2 Chronicles we have something of the history that stands beside the Psalm 110 promise of a royal priest like Melchizedek. In the fulness of time, we learn how this resolves in Christ. But in 1 Chronicles itself, we can begin to see the outworking of the royal priesthood – namely, the weakening/weakness of Levi, the promise of a better priest, and the ongoing story of Israel that leads to a better royal priest, who, like a previous Joshua, will bring the ark of the covenant into the presence of God.’ 

2 Samuel: 16 ‘As the ark of the Lord came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord, and she despised him in her heart. 17 And they brought in the ark of the Lord and set it in its place, inside the tent that David had pitched for it. And David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 18 And when David had finished offering the burnt offerings and the peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the Lord of hosts 19 and distributed among all the people, the whole multitude of Israel, both men and women, a cake of bread, a portion of meat, and a cake of raisins to each one. Then all the people departed, each to his house. 

20 And David returned to bless his household. But Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “How the king of Israel honored himself today, uncovering himself today before the eyes of his servants’ female servants, as one of the vulgar fellows shamelessly uncovers himself!” 21 And David said to Michal, “It was before the Lord, who chose me above your father and above all his house, to appoint me as prince over Israel, the people of the Lord – and I will celebrate before the Lord” – Ezekiel 46:4. 22 “I will make myself yet more contemptible than this, and I will be abased in your eyes. But by the female servants of whom you have spoken, by them I shall be held in honor” – 1 Chronicles 15:1-29; 16:1-7.’

It is difficult to know what was really getting underneath the skin of David’s wife, Michal. It may have been a combination of factors: 1. an arranged marriage at a very young age; 2. David’s popularity had eclipsed that of her father King Saul, as well as her own; 3. David as an extremely handsome man was very popular with other women – 1 Samuel 16:12; 18:7; 4. David was displaying greater enthusiasm for the Ark and worshipping God than he showed her; and 5. in David’s exuberance and celebration while dancing, he had inadvertently revealed more of himself than intended and this was the trigger for Michal’s anger and frustration to spill over.

This representation of the Ark has a lid correctly flush with the Chest and the Cherubim are in relative proportion, yet not standing or with four wings. The most interesting feature and only replicated on the earlier image of the Tabernacle in the wilderness, are the poles located parallel along the breadth of the Ark as opposed to its length. There is a certain amount of logic to this arrangement in this writer’s mind as it means both cherubs travelled in the same direction; with one not having its back facing a forward trajectory. The Ark is also situated in a more authoritative angle in this position. 

2 Samuel 11:11 

English Standard Version 

‘Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah dwell in booths, and my lord Joab and the servants of my lord are camping in the open field. Shall I then go to my house, to eat and to drink and to lie with my wife? As you live, and as your soul lives, I will not do this thing”.’

In this episode, David had already slept with Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba and gotten her pregnant. David endeavoured to have Uriah the Hittite* sleep with his wife while on leave orchestrated by David – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael* & Hagar. Uriah who was undoubtedly an officer and a honourable soldier, refused to go home while his men were still fighting the Ammonites – Chapter XVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. David then instructed the Head of his Army, Joab, to position Uriah in the front lines and then pull back, leaving him isolated and vulnerable to an inevitable death. It is incongruous that the Ark – which David had made such a fanfare of during its triumphant entry into Jerusalem – should be considered by a non-Israelite and good man who was soon to meet his death by the orders of the one who had so enthusiastically celebrated the Ark. 

In 2 Samuel chapter fifteen – discussed in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes – David’s son Absalom, conspires to seize the throne from his father David. David flees Jerusalem, where Absalom is heading and goes to the Mount of Olives. Meanwhile… 

24 ‘… and behold, Zadok came also with all the Levites, bearing the ark of the covenant of God. And they set down the ark of God until the people had all passed out of the city. 25 Then the king said to Zadok, “Carry the ark of God back into the city. If I find favor in the eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back and let me see both it and his dwelling place… 28 See, I will wait at the fords of the wilderness until word comes from you to inform me.” 29 So Zadok and Abiathar carried the ark of God back to Jerusalem, and they remained there.’ 

So the Ark remained until the reign of Solomon in the tent provided by David and not in the original Tabernacle constructed by Moses. 

1 Kings 3:1-15

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Solomon made a marriage alliance with Pharaoh king of Egypt. He took Pharaoh’s daughter and brought her into the city of David until he had finished building his own house and the house of the Lord and the wall around Jerusalem. 2 The people were sacrificing at the high places, however, because no house had yet been built for the name of the Lord. 3 Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father, only he sacrificed and made offerings at the high places. 4 And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there, for that was the great high place. Solomon used to offer a thousand burnt offerings on that altar’ – Articles: Belphegor; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 

5 ‘At Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night, and God said, “Ask what I shall give you.” 6 And Solomon said, “You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant David my father, because he walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart toward you. And you have kept for him this great and steadfast love and have given him a son to sit on his throne this day. 7 And now, O Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of David my father, although I am but a little child. I do not know how to go out or come in. 8 And your servant is in the midst of your people whom you have chosen, a great people, too many to be numbered or counted for multitude. 9 Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, that I may discern between good and evil, for who is able to govern this your great people?” 

10 It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. 11 And God said to him, “Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches or the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, 12 behold, I now do according to your word. Behold, I give you a wise and discerning mind, so that none like you has been before you and none like you shall arise after you. 13 I give you also what you have not asked, both riches and honor, so that no other king shall compare with you, all your days. 14 And if you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments, as your father David walked, then I will lengthen your days.” 

15 And Solomon awoke, and behold, it was a dream. Then he came to Jerusalem and stood before the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and offered up burnt offerings and peace offerings, and made a feast for all his servants.’ 

King Solomon is a contradictory character, in that while he ‘loved the Lord, walking in his statutes’, he was also ‘sacrificing’ to false gods at the ‘High places’ used for demonic idol worship – refer article: Na’amah and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Even so, the Eternal did not give up on Solomon, in part due to his love for his father David – Acts 13:22. When offered anything in the world, Solomon chose wisdom to discern – in reality, the Tree of Knowledge of – good and evil. While this was less selfless than riches and honour, it wound up with Solomon abusing the knowledge he gained from his wisdom and pursuing dark esoteric paths – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 

Perhaps a better choice would have been humility and better still, the Holy Spirit – as symbolised by the Tree of Life. Needless to say, Solomon did not follow the Eternal all his life and thus his days were not lengthened. Notice as with the Israelites when the Ark returned and when David brought the Ark to Jerusalem; Solomon’s interest in the Ark coincides with his increased fervour, after his dream sent from the Lord. 

1 Kings 6:1-21, 38

English Standard Version 

1 ‘In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt [1446 – 480 = 966 BCE], in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel [970 to 930 BCE], in the month of Ziv [or Iyar], which is the second month [April/May], he began to build the house of the Lord. 2 The house that King Solomon built for the Lord was sixty cubits long [90 feet], twenty cubits wide [30 feet], and thirty cubits high [45 feet]…’ 

7 ‘When the house was built, it was with stone prepared at the quarry, so that neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron was heard in the house while it was being built. 14 So Solomon… 15 lined the walls of the house on the inside with boards of cedar. From the floor of the house to the walls of the ceiling, he covered them on the inside with wood, and he covered the floor of the house with boards of cypress. 18 … All was cedar; no stone was seen. 19 The inner sanctuary he prepared in the innermost part of the house, to set there the ark of the covenant of the Lord.

20 The inner sanctuary was twenty cubits long, twenty cubits wide, and twenty cubits high, and he overlaid it with pure gold… 21 And Solomon overlaid the inside of the [rest of the] house with pure gold…  38 And in the eleventh year [659 BCE], in the month of Bul [or Cheshvan], which is the eighth month [October/November], the house was finished in all its parts, and according to all its specifications. He was seven years in building it.’ 

The Temple was a reasonable length and width and not overly ostentatious from the outside as it was constructed with quarried stone. Though it was tall compared with its length and supremely spectacular inside with every item being either made from pure gold or overlaid with gold. The Holy of Holies was a perfect cube, 30 feet by 30 feet by 30 feet. The number three representing decision and finality; and the number ten, judgement and completion. After Solomon completed the Temple, the Ark of God was transported from the tent of meeting to the new Temple.

1 Kings 8:1-21

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel and all the heads of the tribes, the leaders of the fathers’ houses of the people of Israel, before King Solomon in Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of the city of David, which is Zion. 2 And all the men of Israel assembled to King Solomon at the feast in the month Ethanim, which is the seventh month [September/October]. 

3 And all the elders of Israel came, and the priests took up the ark. 4 And they brought up the [1] ark of the Lord, [2] the tent of meeting, and all the [3] holy vessels that were in the tent; the priests and the Levites brought them up. 5 And King Solomon and all the congregation of Israel, who had assembled before him, were with him before the ark, sacrificing so many sheep and oxen that they could not be counted or numbered.’ 

Verse two, is the only instance in the Bible where the seventh month of Tishri is called by a different name. While King Solomon is dedicating a permanent House for the Eternal, its predecessor, the ‘Tabernacle or Mishkan, was a moveable tent-like dwelling. It moved, and the people followed.’ David spent seven years on the run from the age of 23 to 30, during the years 1016 to 1010 BCE. David felt guilt that he dwelt in a beautiful palace, when the Eternal symbolically lived in a simple tent for centuries. 

2 Samuel 7:1-17 

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Now when the king lived in his house and the Lord had given him rest from all his surrounding enemies, 2 the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwells in a tent”… the word of the Lord came to Nathan, 5 “Go and tell my servant David, ‘Thus says the Lord: Would you build me a house to dwell in? 6 I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent for my dwelling. 7 In all places where I have moved with all the people of Israel, did I speak a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, “Why have you not built me a house of cedar?”

Far from the Eternal being peeved, He like Abraham, had been a sojourner with the Israelites – Hebrews 11:9-10. A commentator states – capitals his: ‘The word translated… as “moving about” is the Hebrew word halak. This text literally says, “I have been walking in a tent and a tabernacle.” God is moving, even in the tent… a God and King that MOVES and WALKS. He is not like the deaf and dumb idols of darkness. Etanim is a significant term to use for the 7th month… Strong’s H388: A masculine noun indicating strength, permanence, endurance. Figuratively, it describes the usual, constant position of a stream or sea (Exodus 14:27)… King Solomon’s desire was for the House of YHWH to perpetually endure, just as God promised King David that his house (dynasty/throne) would continue or endure. Allusions to eternity begin to form with this one well placed word.’

1 Chronicles 28:2

English Standard Version 

‘Then King David rose to his feet and said: “Hear me, my brothers and my people. I had it in my heart to build a house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the Lord and for the footstool of our God, and I made preparations for building.’ 

Isaiah 66:1, ESV: 1 ‘Thus says the Lord: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest?’ 2 Chronicles 6:41, ESV: “And now arise, O Lord God, and go to your resting place, you and the ark of your might” – Psalm 132:8.

1 Kings 8: 6 ‘Then the priests brought the ark of the covenant of the Lord to its place in the inner sanctuary of the house, in the Most Holy Place, underneath the wings of the cherubim. 7 For the cherubim spread out their wings over the place of the ark, so that the cherubim overshadowed the ark and its poles. 8 And the poles were so long that the ends of the poles were seen from the Holy Place before the inner sanctuary; but they could not be seen from outside. And they are there to this day [at time of writing]. 

There was nothing in the ark except the two tablets of stone that Moses put there at Horeb, where the Lord made a covenant with the people of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt.’

We learn that tragically at some point, between 1446 BCE and 959 BCE, that Aaron’s rod which miraculously budded [Numbers 17:1-11], as well as the Manna have been taken and are now missing – refer article: The Manna Mystery. The omer of Manna was to be ‘kept safe’ within an urn inside the chest of the Ark. Somewhere between Moses and Solomon, these two items were either removed for safe keeping or stolen. It is easy to blame the Philistines perhaps, when they captured the Ark and held it for seven months. The Bible does not say one way or the other.

As both items were of an organic nature, they were prone to rot and then petrify. So there is no reason why they couldn’t still be in existence. If such is the case, the thieves who took them would obviously take great care in their survival and passing down through future generations. For it was the Ark which had supernatural power and dealt death to those who touched it. Whether this transferred to the items within it is open to speculation.  

10 ‘And when the priests came out of the Holy Place, a cloud filled the house of the Lord, 11 so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord. 12 Then Solomon said, “The Lord has said that he would dwell in thick darkness. 13 I have indeed built you an exalted house, a place for you to dwell in forever.” 14 Then the king turned around and blessed all the assembly of Israel, while all the assembly of Israel stood. 15 And he said, “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who with his hand has fulfilled what he promised with his mouth to David my father, saying, 16 ‘Since the day that I brought my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel in which to build a house, that my name might be there. But I chose David to be over my people Israel.’ 17 Now it was in the heart of David my father to build a house for the name of the Lord, the God of Israel. 

18 But the Lord said to David my father, ‘Whereas it was in your heart to build a house for my name, you did well that it was in your heart. 19 Nevertheless, you shall not build the house, but your son who shall be born to you shall build the house for my name.’ 20 Now the Lord has fulfilled his promise that he made. For I have risen in the place of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised, and I have built the house for the name of the Lord, the God of Israel. 21 And there I have provided a place for the ark, in which is the covenant of the Lord that he made with our fathers, when he brought them out of the land of Egypt” – 2 Chronicles 5:1-14; 8:1-18.’

Unfortunately, the Eternal was not able to dwell in either the Ark or Temple ‘forever.’ Only for approximately 350 years, until circa 607 to 587 BCE. David had desired to build the temple, but God had rejected him because of his violent lifestyle and penchant for bloodshed – 1 Chronicles 28:2-3. It is very sad irony that Solomon built the temple, when he later turned away from the Lord – 1 Kings 11:9. In time, the grandiose setting of the Temple proved fruitless in being the perpetual home of the Ark. 

This image of the Ark of God bears inconstancies like the former images – such as the poles being too short, thin; on the incorrect sides perhaps; the lid of the Mercy Seat overhanging the Ark, yet it is flush with the bevelled bottom of the chest; and the cherubim while in proportion with the Ark and exhibiting a realistic wing formation, are not on the far edges, or standing with four wings. Though that said, this ark radiates the most convincing aesthetic appeal and accuracy of construction in this writer’s view. 

2 Chronicles 35:1-6

English Standard Version 

‘Josiah kept a Passover to the Lord in Jerusalem. And they slaughtered the Passover lamb on the fourteenth day of the first month. 2 He appointed the priests to their offices and encouraged them in the service of the house of the Lord. 3 And he said to the Levites who taught all Israel and who were holy to the Lord, “Put the holy ark in the house that Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, built. You need not carry it on your shoulders. Now serve the Lord your God and his people Israel. 4 Prepare yourselves according to your fathers’ houses by your divisions, as prescribed in the writing of David king of Israel and the document of Solomon his son. 5 And stand in the Holy Place according to the groupings of the fathers’ houses of your brothers the lay people, and according to the division of the Levites by fathers’ household. 6 And slaughter the Passover lamb, and consecrate yourselves, and prepare for your brothers, to do according to the word of the Lord by Moses.” 

Josiah was the sixteenth king of the Kingdom of Judah and one of a select few to be called righteous, for most were deemed evil by the Eternal. Josiah stood out even amongst the righteous kings of Judah. Josiah reigned from 639 to 608 BCE, just prior to the fall of Judah during 607 to 587 BCE – 2 Kings 23:1-23. For whatever reason, the Ark of God had been moved from out of the Temple in Jerusalem between the end of Solomon’s reign in 930 BCE and the beginning of Josiah’s in 639 BCE.

2 Kings 23:2-3, 21-25

English Standard Version 

2 ‘And the king went up to the house of the Lord, and… all the people, both small and great. And he read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant that had been found in the house of the Lord. 3 And the king stood by the pillar and made a covenant before the Lord, to walk after the Lord and to keep his commandments and his testimonies and his statutes with all his heart and all his soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people joined in the covenant. 

21 And the king commanded all the people, “Keep the Passover to the Lord your God, as it is written in this Book of the Covenant.” 22 For no such Passover had been kept since the days of the judges who judged Israel, or during all the days of the kings of Israel or of the kings of Judah. 23 But in the eighteenth year of King Josiah [in 621 BCE] this Passover was kept to the Lord in Jerusalem. 24 Moreover, Josiah put away the mediums and the necromancers and the household gods and the idols and all the abominations that were seen in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, that he might establish the words of the law…

25 Before him there was no king like him, who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to all the Law of Moses, nor did any like him arise after him.’ 

The Prophet Jeremiah predicted a time when the Ark of God would no longer be remembered or revered – Isaiah 65:17. This epoch stretches into the future for Jeremiah describes the Israelite tribes coming from the North, where they presently dwell – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Jeremiah 3:16-18

English Standard Version 

‘And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the Lord, they shall no more say, “The ark of the covenant of the Lord.”

It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed; it shall not be made [H6213 – asah: ‘fashion, accomplish, produce’] again.

At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the Lord, and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem, and they shall no more stubbornly follow their own evil heart. In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage’ – Jeremiah 31:31-34. 

Hebrews 8:1-13

English Standard Version 

1 ‘… we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.

8 For he finds fault with them when he says: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt… I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.” 13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.’ 

The Old Covenant was flawed and temporary. The new Covenant is spiritual and eternal. A literal temple is no longer required, nor the tablets of the Law, or the Ark of the Covenant, for there is a heavenly tabernacle – 1 Corinthians 3:16, Hebrews 10:16. 

Hebrews 9:1-26

English Standard Version 

1 ‘Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness. 2 For a tent was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence. It is called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a second section called the Most Holy Place, 4 having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant. 5 Above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat… 

6 These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, 7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. 8 By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing 9 (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a [red] heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant… 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.’

Chad Napier: ‘Unlike the statutes of gods idolized by many of the Israelites, the Ark of the Covenant served as a religious symbol where the people could meet with God. He hovered over the Ark when the priests were present. If the priests were absent, the presence of the law tablets reflected God’s presence. Thus, the Ark of the Covenant was aptly named because of the commandments written on the tablets.’ 

Jack Zavada: ‘The Ark was an important foreshadowing of Jesus Christ as the sole place of atonement for sins. In the Old Testament, the Ark was the only place believers could go (through the high priest) to have their sins forgiven. In the New Testament, Christ replaced the Ark becoming the only way to salvation and the kingdom of heaven.’ 

We have encountered Athanasius previously. He was instrumental in replacing the truth about Jesus Christ’s human status when on Earth and replacing it with the false doctrine of the Trinity – whereby instead, Christ was decreed as both Divine and God – refer article: Arius, Alexander & Athanasius. Athanasius had the following to say regarding the Ark. Online Encyclopaedia: ‘Saint Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, is credited with writing about the connections between the Ark and the Virgin Mary:

“O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O (Ark of the) Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the Ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which Divinity resides” (Homily of the Papyrus of Turin).

The three errors in his statement are a. Mary the mother of Jesus as a physical human being, is no where in scripture, commanded to be venerated like God; b. The Word was and is not God – this is a mistranslation of the Greek in John 1:1; and c. while Jesus was in the flesh, he was not divine, he only represented Divinity as a mediator between the Father and ourselves. 

‘The Ark is referred to in the Quran (Surah The Heifer: 248): Their prophet further told them, “The sign of Saul’s kingship is that the Ark will come to you – containing reassurance from your Lord and relics of the family of Moses and the family of Aaron [the manna and Aaron’s rod], which will be carried by the angels. Surely in this is a sign for you, if you ‘truly’ believe.’

Above: Picture by Raizel Shurpin showing possibly the correct location for the carrying poles, as well as an accurate rendering of the cherubim standing upright. Below: While the cherubim are kneeling, it is the only image found so far which may represent the Cherubim accurately with four wings.

The Manna Mystery:

‘It is interesting that there is considerable effort expended into the present day whereabouts of the ark, yet in the mind of this writer, what happened to the three items inside its chest are just as worthy of attention.’ 

Did the tablets of the testimony go missing with the Ark? Or did they disappear after the Manna with Aaron’s staff, yet still prior to the Ark itself? We will return to this question.

There are two main scenarios regarding the Ark of God’s disappearance, prior to the fall of Jerusalem to the invading Chaldeans (2 Kings 25:8-9, 2 Chronicles 36:17-20, Jeremiah 52;12) and the destruction of the Temple at the hands of the Edomites – Psalm 137:7, Jeremiah 41:4-5, Obadiah 1:10. The first, is that the Ark was buried or hidden near or under the Temple. The second, is that it was smuggled out of Jerusalem and hence away from the Kingdom of Judah. Then within the first scenario, there are a further two options. 

First, the Ark remains buried and undiscovered, or second it was found – for instance by the Crusaders or the Templar Knights – and taken to a new location, such as the Vatican, or transported by the Templars when they fled France via Portugal to Scotland. From there, the Ark may have reached the inheritance of true Zion and Judah, or even been taken to the promised land of America – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

In the second scenario, the party which included Jeremiah, Baruch and King Zedekiah’s daughters may have carried the Ark with them out of Judah, to Egypt. Then possibly to Spain and finally to Ireland – a claim we shall investigate. Zedekiah was the last king of Judah before Jerusalem’s fall and though he was captured and died a prisoner in Babylon – with his sons all being killed – his daughters were spared by King Nebuchadnezzar II; for he was unaware of the legitimacy of succession through a monarch’s oldest daughter as well as an eldest son – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

One writer offers the following. Shurpin: ‘Aaron collected some manna and put it in a jar inside the Holy of Holies. The Midrash relates that it remained there for many years, and in the days of the prophet Jeremiah [who wrote between 626 and 586 BCE], when Jeremiah rebuked the Jews, saying, “Why do you not engage in the Torah [the law]” they answered, “Should we leave our work and engage in the Torah? From what will we support ourselves?” He brought out the jar of manna and said to them, “You see the word of the L‑rd” – reference Jeremiah 2:31.

The account in the Midrash is false if the Manna had been taken between the time of Moses and Solomon as the Bible seems to say. Alternatively, it could be true if the Manna* had not been lost and just not in the Ark, so that Jeremiah was able to lay his hands on it so readily. 

Shurpin: ‘… when King Solomon built the Holy Temple, knowing that it was destined to be destroyed, he built a place in which to hide the Ark, at the end of hidden, deep, winding passageways. Ultimately, [in 608 BCE] 22 years before the destruction of the First Temple [in 586 BCE], King Josiah hid the jug of manna* together with the Ark in that special hidden passage. Note: Talmud, Yoma 52b; Mishneh Torah, Laws of the Holy Temple 4:1.’ “According to tradition, it is still hidden there, waiting to be rediscovered…” 

It would be naive to think that secret passageways, tunnels and chambers were not built underneath the Temple, so as to safeguard sacred items during a time of calamity. There is a ring of truth in righteous King Josiah secreting the Ark away in advance before the fall of Jerusalem. The addition of the Manna being hidden is interesting in light of Jeremiah having access to the omer of Manna during the same time frame. It may also mean that the Ark was only hidden a short period of time, with Jeremiah in fact taking it with him either when he and his party fled to Egypt or to another location entirely. Jeremiah’s cryptic words recorded in Jeremiah 3:16-18, lend weight to Jeremiah being a. involved in transporting the Ark away from Jerusalem to safety; and b. one of, if not the last person, to know where its final secret resting place is… 

It appears the Babylonians took vessels associated with the Ark, but interestingly, not the Ark itself. “And they took all the holy vessels of the Lord, both great and small, with the vessels of the ark of God, and the king’s treasures, and carried them away into Babylon” – 1 Esdras 1:54. 

During times of crisis, the Ark was spirited away for safe keeping. Encyclopaedia: ‘In a noncanonical text known as the Treatise of the Vessels, Hezekiah is identified as one of the kings who had the Ark and the other treasures of Solomon’s Temple hidden during a time of crisis. This text lists the following hiding places, which it says were recorded on a bronze tablet: (1) a spring named Kohel or Kahal with pure water in a valley with a stopped-up gate; (2) a spring named Kotel (or “wall” in Hebrew); (3) a spring named Zedekiah; (4) an unidentified cistern; (5) Mount Carmel; and (6) locations in Babylon.’ While these locations may be viable, the last one in the city of Babylon is undoubtedly incorrect. Hezekiah was a righteous king as well as the thirteenth monarch of Judah, reigning from 720 to 691 BCE. 

Where is the Ark of the Covenant? Boniface, 2007 – except scripture verses, emphasis mine: 

‘After the dedication of the Temple by Solomon, there are only three references to the Ark in the entire Old Testament. The first comes from II Chronicles 35:3, where good King Josiah says to the Levites: “Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, built; you need no longer carry it upon your shoulders.” … in the time of Josiah, the Ark was… not in the Temple where it should have been. 

Josiah reigned from 640-609 BC… if we look to his predecessors, we find two of Judah’s wickedest kings, Amon (642-640) and Manasseh (697-642)… Manasseh was the wickedest king of Judah, in fact, the one because of whom the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon was decreed. 

His crime was that “he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the Lord. And he burned his sons as an offering in the valley of the son of Hinnom, and practiced soothsaying and augury and sorcery, and dealt with mediums and wizards” (II Chronicles 33:5-6). While normally we dwell on the sacrifice of children to Moloch in listing Manessah’s crimes, in this case we ought to focus on the fact that he “built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the Lord.” 

Now, knowing that the Ark was the holiest object in ancient Israel, is it likely that the priests and Levites would have allowed it to remain in the Temple in the midst of such sacriligious worship and abominations as those which Manessah was practicing? … the Levites and priests removed the Ark for safe-keeping during Manessah’s idolatrous and wicked reign… 

But did the priests ever return it? A verse from Jeremiah, written “in the days of King Josiah” (ie, prior to 609 and at least 25 years before the destruction of the Temple [circa 611 BCE]), seems to suggest that it was not… Jeremiah… 3:16… is an amazing verse. It suggests that at the time Jeremiah was writing… people were lamenting the fact that the ark was apparently gone.’ 

As stated earlier, it is this writer’s understanding that Jeremiah’s words were yet future. Written somewhere between 626 and 608 BCE, so that Jeremiah is saying the Ark will one day not be missed or replaced. It does not mean that it was already missing. But, if it were then it would have occurred between when Josiah instructed the priests to restore the Ark to the Temple for the Passover – in his 18th year of rule in 621 BCE – and when he is reputed in the Talmud to have hidden the Ark in the final year of his reign in 608 BCE. Thus, it was during this thirteen year window that the Ark possibly went ‘missing.’ Well before the destruction of the Temple in 586 BCE. 

Boniface – emphasis theirs: ‘There are four generally accepted theories on the whereabouts of the Ark of the Covenant. 

  1. The Ark was either destroyed or carried away to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar in the destruction of the Temple in 586 (the secular archaeological view). 
  2. The Ark is buried under the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (believed by many Protestant Evangelicals). 
  3. The Ark was hidden by Jeremiah on Mount Nebo shortly before the Babylonian conquest (Jewish tradition, adhered to by many Catholics over the ages). 
  4. The Ark rests in St. Mary of Zion Church in… Ethiopia (the claim of the Coptic Church in Ethiopia).

Each of these theories have merit… the “Secular Archaeological View”… the [disappearance] of the Ark is traceable to the Babylonian destruction of the Temple of Solomon in 586. The Ark was either (a) captured, or (b) destroyed. 

It seems unlikely that the Ark was captured and carried away as booty for three reasons. 

First, the book of Jeremiah lists all the items that were carried away to Babylon: “The Babylonians broke up the bronze pillars, the movable stands and the bronze Sea that were at the temple of the LORD and they carried all the bronze to Babylon. They also took away the pots, shovels, wick trimmers, sprinkling bowls, dishes and all the bronze articles used in the temple service. The commander of the imperial guard took away the basins, censers, sprinkling bowls, pots, lampstands, dishes and bowls used for drink offerings – all that were made of pure gold or silver” (Jeremiah 52:17-19). It seems that if the Bible lists even the “wick trimmers” and “sprinkling bowls” that were taken, [Jeremiah] would have mentioned the Ark… which was certainly more important… 

Second, in the book of Daniel, chapter 5, we see the feast of Belshazzar, where the Babylonian king orders all of the vessels taken from the Temple to be brought out to him so that he and his lords could drink from them. The miraculous hand appears on the wall and decrees that the kingdom of Belshazzar will come to an end, because “the vessels of… (God’s) house have been brought in before you, and you and your lords, your wives, and your concubines have drunk wine from them” (Daniel 5:23). It seems that if the Babylonians had possessed the Ark, this would have been mentioned… If the kingdom of Belshazzar could be destroyed for [sacrilegious] use of the Temple vessels, how much more for [sacrilegious] possession of the holy Ark, which devastated the Philistines in the time of Saul? 

Third, the Ark is not among the list of items returned to the Jews by King Cyrus of Persia for the rebuilding of the Temple. The Bible says: “Moreover, King Cyrus brought out the articles belonging to the temple of the LORD, which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem and had placed in the temple of his god. Cyrus king of Persia had them brought by Mithredath the treasurer, who counted them out to Sheshbazzar the prince of Judah. This was the inventory: thirty gold bowls, one thousand silver dishes, one thousand silver pans, twenty-nine censers, two thousand four hundred ten bowls of silver, and a thousand other vessels. In all, there were five thousand four hundred sixty-nine articles of gold and of silver. Sheshbazzar brought all these along when the exiles came up from Babylon to Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:7-10). Surely, in this minute inventory, the Ark of the Covenant would have been mentioned were it present. 

What about the possibility that it was destroyed by the Babylonians, as the Romans destroyed much of the Temple… in the year 70 AD? This seems unlikely… because it was not mentioned or even alluded to anywhere; it seems that the Jews would have written about it had it been destroyed, since it was the inner sanctum of their sanctuary. 

… the Secular Archaeological View fails in a very important area… the Ark went missing before the Babylonians ever came to Jerusalem… Therefore, the Babylonians never saw the Ark. The only way the Secular Archaeological View can hold water is if we assert that the prophecy of Jeremiah 3:16 was written [retroactively] after the Temple destruction to look like a prophecy (similar to the way modernists interpret the prophecies of Daniel). But such an [interpretation] depends on anti-supernatural bias and is [inadmissible] to any Catholic exegete. I think we can say with confidence that not only did the Babylonians not take or destroy the Ark, but that it was missing long before they ever showed up.’ 

This writer concurs with the author’s conclusions. The Ark went missing prior to the Edomites successfully desecrating and destroying the Temple after the fall of Jerusalem. Therefore, neither had opportunity to either destroy or capture the Ark. Such a momentous event would surely have been gloated upon and recorded? As an aside, one could argue that the Ark was demolished, for Jeremiah clearly says the Ark would not be ‘made or fashioned again.’ This could be seen to imply that it was destroyed. Not by the hands of the Babylonians or Edomites, but from a decision made by the High Priest, the King or even Jeremiah?

What is key in our investigation regarding its possible current whereabouts, is who at the time may have been involved in its disappearance and whether it was either successfully hidden, or taken to safety. What is of most interest thus far, is the fact that two people appear to have been involved in the Ark’s fading from view in the pages of the Bible. King Josiah might well have been a. the last monarch of Judah to have seen the Ark; and b. the one to order its removal from the Temple and for it to go into hiding. The Prophet Jeremiah speaks confidently that the Ark will not be replaced and ultimately not missed. While this alludes to the coming Messiah, it may mean Jeremiah knew more than he could let on.  

Ancient Code: ‘Scholars do not know for sure what occurred to the Ark after the Babylonian conquest… Most historians agree that the Ark of the Covenant is found in Ethiopia in the town of Aksum [Axum]; the Cathedral of St. Mary of Zion.’ A theory made popular in 1992 by investigative journalist, Graham Hancok. ‘According to church authorities [of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church], only one man; the Guardian of the Ark can see it. Church authorities have never permitted the “Ark” to be studied for authenticity.’ 

Benito Cerino: The Ark ‘has been fiercely guarded by a succession of virgin monks who dedicate their lives to keeping watch over the Ark in the chapel and are forbidden to step foot outside once anointed to this duty [till the day they die]. The Ethiopian chronicle known as Kebra Negast (“The Glory of Kings”) records when the Queen of Sheba (i.e., Ethiopia) went to visit Solomon… she got pregnant with his son, named Menelik. When Menelik later visited his father, some Israelite nobles accompanied him on his return trip. Unknown to Menelik, these nobles had stolen the Ark and replaced it with a fake. Since Menelik had borne the Ark all the way to Ethiopia without being destroyed, he knew it had to have been God’s will… Since no one but the Ark’s guardian is allowed to see it, who can dispute it?’

The Chapel of the Tablet at the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion in Axum allegedly houses the original Ark of the Covenant.

John D Keyser – capitalisation his: ‘In the September, 1935 issue of the National Geographic magazine, an article… stated that when the Queen of Sheba visited King Solomon in Jerusalem, she had a child by him called Menelik I… Solomon educated the young boy in Jerusalem until he was nineteen years of age… King Solomon wanted to give Menelik a REPLICA of the Ark to take with him since the distance between Jerusalem and Ethiopia was such that Menelik would be prevented from ever again worshipping at the Temple. “However, Prince Menelik was concerned with the growing APOSTASY of Israel and the fact that his father, Solomon, was now allowing idols to be placed in the Temple to please his pagan wives. King Solomon gave the prince a going-away banquet and after the priests were filled with wine, Menelik and his loyal associates SWITCHED ARKS AND LEFT THE REPLICA in its place in the Holy of Holies. 

“A group of priests with some representatives from several of the tribes of Israel reverently took the TRUE ARK OF THE COVENANT to Ethiopia for safekeeping until Israel should turn from idol worship and return to the pure worship of God. Unfortunately, Israel never wholly returned to following God exclusively and suffered a succession of mostly evil kings until both Israel and Judah were finally conquered four hundred years later. Thus, the Jewish descendants of Menelik I of Ethiopia NEVER RETURNED the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem” (Armageddon: Appointment with Destiny, by Grant R. Jeffrey, page 115).’ 

One source states: ‘It was taken to Elephantine Island in the River Nile south of the Valley of the Kings, where it was protected for about 200 years. Then it was moved down the Nile to Khartoum and from there down the Blue Nile River to Lake Tana, Ethiopia, where it was housed on an island in the lake. Later a temple was built at Axum, Ethiopia, home of the Queen of Sheba, to permanently house the Ark. Supposedly it is still there to this day. This editor has visited the Mariam Church of the Ark of the Covenant. Then, there was nothing but a locked door preventing access to the Ark and its official caretaker-priest. Today, there is a chainlink fence around that church, and the church yard is patrolled by armed guards wielding machine guns.’

Encyclopaedia: ‘In a 1992 interview, [Edward] Ullendorff [a British scholar of Semitic languages] says that he personally examined the ark held within the church in Axum in 1941 while an officer in the British Army. Describing the ark there, he says, “They have a wooden box, but it’s empty. Middle-to late-medieval construction, when these were fabricated ad hoc.” 

On 25 June 2009, the patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia, Abune Paulos, said he would announce to the world the next day the unveiling of the Ark of the Covenant, which he said had been kept safe and secure in a church in Axum. The following day, he announced that he would not unveil the Ark after all, but that instead he could attest to its current status.’

There is an additional assertion for the Ark’s location on the African continent, though it perhaps lacks as much convincing credibility as the aforementioned claim. Encyclopaedia: ‘The Lemba people of South Africa and Zimbabwe have claimed that their ancestors carried the Ark south, calling it the ngoma lungundu or “voice of God”, eventually hiding it in a deep cave in the Dumghe mountains, their spiritual home. On 14 April 2008, in a UK Channel 4 documentary, Tudor Parfitt… says that the object described by the Lemba has attributes similar to the Ark. It was of similar size, was carried on poles by priests, was not allowed to touch the ground, was revered as a voice of their God, and was used as a weapon of great power, sweeping enemies aside. 

In his book The Lost Ark of the Covenant (2008), Parfitt… suggests that the Ark was taken to Arabia following the events depicted in the Second Book of Maccabees, and cites Arabic sources which maintain it was brought in distant times to Yemen. Lemba tradition maintains that the Ark spent some time in a place called Sena, which might be Sena in Yemen. Later, it was taken across the sea to East Africa and may have been taken inland at the time of the Great Zimbabwe civilization. According to their oral traditions, some time after the arrival of the Lemba with the Ark, it self-destructed. Using a core from the original, the Lemba priests constructed a new one. This replica was discovered in a cave by a Swedish-German missionary named Harald von Sicard in the 1940s and eventually found its way to the Museum of Human Science in Harare.’

Ancient Code: ‘According to historians, the other possibility is that the Ark of the Covenant is located in a hidden chamber beneath the first temple of Jerusalem before being destroyed by the Babylonians. This claim cannot be verified because this site is where the Dome of the Rock shrine is located; sacred to… Islam…’ 

It is remarkable that historians agree the lost Ark is in Ethiopia with no proof to substantiate the sensational claim. It is convenient in the same way it alternatively might be buried underneath the Dome of the Rock, where no excavation work can be carried out; or that the Ark was in Zimbabwe, but self-destructed.  

Diana Bocco: ‘In 1909, British aristocrat Captain Montagu Brownlow Parker embarked on what would become the biggest and most bizarre archeological search for the Ark of the Covenant ever attempted. According to Smithsonian Magazine, Parker’s team consisted of a psychic, a poet, a cricket player, and a somewhat experienced steamboat pilot. No historians, no archeologists. Parker arrived in Jerusalem (which was at the time under the rule of the Ottoman Empire) hoping to find the Ark as well as a number of other objects from the time of King Solomon. After securing an excavation permit, Parker intended to dig on a nearby hill to find a secret tunnel that he’d been told ran under the Dome of the Rock and would lead him to the Ark. And while the hired local workers found ancient passages here and there over a period of almost two years, none truly led anywhere or held any treasures. In a last desperate attempt, Parker illegally entered the cave right under the holy shrine and started to dig. He was caught by locals and had to flee the country, but not before he almost caused a holy war.’ 

Where Parker failed, another man claims to have met with success in tracking down the Ark. Kerry Sullivan: ‘… Ron Wyatt – an amateur researcher, adventurer and Seventh Day Adventist – claimed he had found the Ark of the Covenant and its ten Commandments buried under the remains of the old city of Jerusalem. Indeed, his version says that the Ark of the Covenant was situated exactly beneath the spot where Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and that the event was foretold by prophecy’ – by Ellen G White in 1901. ‘Wyatt and his team dug… eventually stumbling upon a network of ancient caves. It is in one of these that… He described his discovery in a 1999 interview with AnchorStone International, made shortly before his death from cancer.’ 

“Once we found that place, I knew that, well basically, that I needed to get inside that escarpment, because there were several indications that it was just a system of tunnels and chambers, and that I needed to, basically, just go chamber by chamber, tunnel by tunnel, and whatever, systematically go through there, until I found the Ark of the Covenant, or until I didn’t find it. 

And so, anyway, we found it on January 6th, 1982 at approximately 2 o’clock in the afternoon. And so, when I found it, it was in a situation that I had not anticipated or expected, that was that it was in a chamber that was totally filled with what appeared to be debris. And what turned out to be a bunch of materials of furnishings of the first temple, covered first by animal skins, then that covered by boards, and then these covered by stone, just whatever they could get their hands on, looked like. It looked like it had been done in a hurry, looked like they just grabbed everything, whatever they could get to fill the place, and I was still a little fuzzy on why that would be done, but I don’t see that I need to know everything. When God does something I just know it’s done perfectly, so.” 

Very conveniently, ‘Wyatt claimed that divine interference prevented any of the pictures or videos he took of the Ark of the Covenant to show. Upon returning to the site to gather further evidence it is said that, “Four angels stood before him and he was told that the time is not yet for the world to see this discovery with their own eyes, but the time is coming when the inhabitants of the world will have a universal, religious law enforced upon them.” Well, he is right on the last score – Revelation 13:15-17 (Article: Is America Babylon). 

‘The Ark of the Covenant is not the only startling discovery that Ron Wyatt claimed to have made. Among more than 100 Biblical-related discoveries, Wyatt said he found Noah’s Ark [refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla], anchor stones used by Noah, his post-flood house, tombs of Noah and his wife, the Tower of Babel site, the site of the Crucifixion of Jesus, and the blood of Jesus in an earthquake crack, which he said had 24 chromosomes instead of 46. His discoveries have been dismissed by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, other Creationists and by leaders in his own Seventh-day Adventist Church. Nevertheless… his work continues to have a following and has been preserved by Wyatt Archaeological Research (W.A.R.).’ Hmmm… 

John D Keyser: ‘According to Grant R. Jeffrey: “A respected source told me in confidence that Jewish archaeologists had in fact seen the Ark at a distance in one of these tunnels but were prevented from examining it because the Muslim authorities immediately sealed up the tunnel entrance” (Armageddon: Appointment with Destiny, page 122).’

Ark of the Covenant: Under the Temple Mount? Boniface, 2007 except scripture verses, emphasis mine: 

‘… that the Ark is buried beneath the Temple Mount in Jerusalem… is adhered to primarily by Zionists, extremely pro-Israel Evangelical Protestants and certain orthodox Jews. According to this theory, the Ark has rested in a secret vault beneath the Temple [Mount] (in fact, beneath the exact spot of the Holy of Holies) since the days just before the Babylonian capture of Jerusalem in 586 BC. 

The evidence for this theory is that the Ark was the holiest object in the ancient world, and could only therefore rest in a [holy] place. It’s proper place was the Holy of Holies. However, knowing the Babylonians were coming to destroy the Temple, the Jews decided to hide it. However, wherever they hid it had to be sacred, consecrated ground. Now, according to Jewish theology, the sacredness of a space extends not only to its two-dimensional borders but to its ultimate spatial extent. Thus, all of the air and sky directly above the Holy of Holies and all the ground beneath it down to the center of the earth are just as holy as the sanctuary. Thus, the theory goes, the priests (or some say Solomon) had a chamber dug under the Holy of Holies in the event that someday the Ark would need to be hidden there. 

Shortly before the Babylonian captivity, the Ark was removed and hidden in this chamber. Then, all of the priests who knew of its whereabouts were slain or died in exile, leaving the entrance to the secret chamber a mystery. Jeremiah 52:24 mentions that Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard captured “Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the threshold… and brought them to the King of Babylon at Riblah. And the king of Babylon struck them, and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath.” Now, if the chief priests and the keepers of the threshold were all executed, would anybody be left to know where the Ark was taken? 

The idea that the Ark is under the Temple Mount… found support in the work of two Israeli archaeologists, Shlomo Goren and Yehuda Getz, also Rabbis. They were digging secretly in a tunnel beneath the Temple Mount when they noticed some water seeping through a wall. The wall was removed, revealing a [vaulted] chamber with the sealed entrance to another chamber below it. This chamber, the rabbis [believe], held the Ark. However, when the Moslems discovered that there were diggings being conducted under the Dome of the Rock, they threatened a general riot and the diggings were stopped. The rabbi explains that, for the sake of maintaining peace with their Moslem neighbors, the Israelis had to reseal the entrance to the tunnel, and it remains blocked up to this day. 

Another reason Rabbi Getz said that no attempt was made to remove the Ark was that there was no one in the proper state of ritual purification able to move it, especially since the Temple Mount was dominated by Gentiles; ie, they had no one who could touch it without being struck dead. Thus they are content to leave it sit until the coming of the Messiah. 

This theory… I find problematic for several reasons. 

  1. As… discussed… the Ark was missing… years before the Babylonian captivity. 
  2. It is based on theological reasoning: that the Ark must be in a place as sacred as the Holy of Holies. There is no historical evidence that the Ark was ever taken to any underground chamber. 
  3. Furthermore… it is not necessarily true that the Ark has to be somewhere sacred. We know that it rested in the house of Obed-Edom the Gittite for three [months]… Not only was nobody cursed or struck dead for it, but “the Lord blessed Obed-Edom and all his household” (2 Samuel 6:11). The Scriptures never said that the [Ark] could not touch the dirty ground, only that it could not touch sinful flesh. 
  4. The Templar Knights, when the Temple Mount was in their exclusive possession during the Crusades, did a series of excavations beneath the site of the Temple and found nothing. 
  5. Rabbi Getz and Rabbi Goren have not said how they knew that the Ark was in the chamber, only that they were “certain.” Furthermore, their work is tied up with Israeli-Palestinian politics and the desire to build a Third Temple. Thus, it is in their political best interest to have the Ark located beneath the Temple Mount. 
  6. The excuse of Rabbi Getz as to why they didn’t make more of an effort to retrieve the Ark (that there was no one holy enough to move it) seems suspect. There exists the modern technology to dig the Ark out and transport it without any human having to touch it.

This theory, which I call the Zionist Theory, is very controversial because, if it were true, it gives Jews a strong claim to parts of the Temple Mount. Most adherents of this view support the idea of building a Third Temple on the Mount and [re-instituting] animal sacrifice according to Old Testament regulations. Zionist Jews and Protestants are among these supporters; on the other hand, Catholic tradition has always seen the rebuilding of the Temple as a sign of antichrist (as in the well known story of Julian the Apostate’s attempt to rebuild it in the mid-4th century). This theory’s main weakness is that it is based on a series of theological assumptions with little history to back them up, and even the assumptions themselves are questionable.’ 

This writer shares agreement with the author’s conclusions. It remains a theory until the finding of the Ark buried under the Temple Mount is excavated and it becomes fact. This happening is unlikely it would seem. If the Templar Knights truly found nothing, then this is damming. We will look at the Templars in a moment. Of course, an over whelming spanner in the works is the fact that the Jews are not the legitimate inheritors of the Ark, whether it is found or not, let alone any claim of rights to the Temple Mount area or building a ‘third’ temple there, or not – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Ancient Code: ‘Some have proposed that the Ark of the covenant made its way to Japan and that it was buried in Mount Tsurugi. Japanese historian Takane Masanori even performed [excavations] on Mount Tsurugi in search of the Ark, but these were canceled years after due to environmental reasons… the Ark wasn’t located.’

Cerino: ‘One of the most recent claimants to being the location of the Ark of the Covenant is the alleged tomb of Alexander the Great on the Greek island of Thasos. According to the Huffington Post, in 2012 an… archaeological outfit announced they’d uncovered the final resting place of one of history’s greatest conquerors, and… they found the Ark of the Covenant inside. Bulgaria’s Focus Information Agency, [was] the [unreliable] source of the story… [obtaining] their story from the [dubious] Russian website Grekomania [fake news]. 

Thasos, which is near Macedonia, where Alexander was from, has long been rumored to be where… [he] was buried… But why would the Ark of the Covenant be there? … according to the Jewish historian Josephus, Alexander did in fact go to Jerusalem, where he was shown a copy of the Book of Daniel, which prophesied a great Greek leader would conquer the Persians… Seeing this, he was satisfied and left Jerusalem alone. Definitely no mention of him taking one of the holiest items of the Jews along with him… as a souvenir… [and] which had been missing for centuries… It seems like Josephus would have mentioned that…’ 

Encyclopaedia: ‘The Ark of the Covenant was said to have been kept in the Basilica of St. John Lateran, surviving the pillages of Rome by Alaric I and Gaiseric but lost when the basilica burned. “Rabbi Eliezer ben Jose stated that he saw in Rome the mercy-seat of the temple. There was a bloodstain on it. On inquiry he was told that it was a stain from the blood which the high priest sprinkled thereon on the Day of Atonement.”

Regarding the Templar Knights – formed in 1119 – they were best placed to ever locate the Ark if it was buried or hidden by King Josiah under or near Solomon’s Temple. That is, if it hadn’t been retrieved before the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem. The issue with the Templar stories is that they remain theories at best. Though of interest is the fact that while ostensibly France is claimed as the resting place for the Ark – even over the Vatican – it is the destination of Britain where rumours of its final travels are strongest. This is significant, for the true descendants of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and Levi – are today to be found in the British Isles – refer Chapters XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Cerino: ‘There’s no biblical artifact so famous someone won’t claim it was recovered by the Knights Templar and taken from the Holy Land back to Europe somewhere. As Crusader History explains, French author Louis Charpentier argues the Templars, not satisfied with having attained the Holy Grail [which is likely fictional], apparently removed the Ark of the Covenant from the ruins of Solomon’s temple and took it back to the French Cathedral of Our Lady of Chartres. The theory is the Templars, in their roles as master stonemasons (on top of being bodyguards for Crusaders), were the ones to rebuild Chartres Cathedral as an exquisitely carved Gothic cathedral after it had burnt down, with the intention of it being a great storehouse for holy relics and wisdom. The evidence of this can be found in reliefs depicting the transportation of the Ark.’ 

Other legends say the Ark is buried in the Languedoc region. The Knights Templars are also credited with smuggling the Ark out of Jerusalem and taking it to Oak Island, Nova Scotia, Canada. Ancient Code: ‘If so, it remains hidden, protected by a curse… like the Curse of the Pharaohs at King Tut’s tomb, where the Anubis shrine was found. There are clues that the Templars did bury a well-protected treasure on the island, and many people have died trying to get it.’

Cerino: ‘The Leamington Courier reports, however, that British author Graham Phillips argues the Templars took the Ark not to France, but to – wait for it – Britain. In Phillips’s reconstruction of events, the Templar leader Ralph de Sudeley found the Ark among the hidden stash on Mount Nebo and carried it back to his estate in Warwickshire. Phillips asserts among the rubble of a church there was found a tablet inscribed with strange symbols he believes to be one of Moses’s tablets.’ 

Further legends state that the Knights Templar took the Ark of the Covenant to Scotland to the Rosslyn Chapel but as with other theories, this has not been corroborated. While The Templars in France suffered persecution between 1307 to 1312 from King Philip IV and Pope Clement V, with many leaving France via Portugal and then onwards to Scotland, where they were given safe homage by Robert the Bruce (1306-1329); the Templars in England did not suffer to the same degree. 

If the Templars did recover the Ark, it is possible – because it is often linked with France – that it was taken to and kept in Frankish lands for some time, before being taken from France to safety in Scotland. As feasible, is the account of it being taken to England. We will return to the significance of both Scotland and England as destinations for the Ark. Of interest, is de Sudeley finding the Ark not in Jerusalem but on Mount Nebo

In the non-canonical Book of 2 Maccabees, written circa 100 BCE we learn the following: 

2 Maccabees 2:1, 4-8

Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition

‘One finds in the records that Jeremiah the prophet… having received an oracle, ordered that the tent and the ark should follow with him, and that he went out to the mountain where Moses had gone up and had seen the inheritance of God. And Jeremiah came and found a cave, and he brought there the tent and the ark and the altar of incense, and he sealed up the entrance. Some of those who followed him came up to mark the way, but could not find it. When Jeremiah learned of it, he rebuked them and declared: “The place shall be unknown until God gathers his people together again and shows his mercy. And then the Lord will disclose these things, and the glory of the Lord and the cloud will appear, as they were shown in the case of Moses, and as Solomon asked that the place should be specially consecrated”.’

Did Jeremiah Hide the Ark on Mt. Nebo? Boniface, 2007 – emphasis mine: 

‘This theory is… supported by… archaeological finds in the mid-1980’s by an American archaeologist named Tom Crotser who carried out excavations on Mount Pisgah (the highest point in the Mt. Nebo range) in 1981. In his excavations, Croster reportedly discovered “a large object covered with blue material”, which they measured to be “62 inches long, 37 inches high and 37 inches deep.” Crotser, however, who runs the Institute for Restoring Ancient History in Kansas, also claims to have found Noah’s Ark and the Tower of Babel and has little professional credibility. Though Crotser claims to have not only discovered the Ark but even photographed it, he for some reason refused to attempt to bring the Ark out or tell anybody else where it was. He said, “God sent me only to locate the Ark. I was not to open it; neither was I to bring it out.” Indeed, he believed his very expedition was ordained by God: “I knew that God had chosen us to find this most sacred box that belongs to the Almighty. It belongs to Him for this specific purpose: the Regathering of His People Israel for the receiving of the Kingdom of God on earth.” 

This second quote demonstrates another weakness in Crotser’s credibility: that his “discovery of the Ark” is related directly to his messianic-political beliefs about the State of Israel. Though Crotser did not move or touch the Ark, he claimed to have photographed it. When asked for the photographs, he replied that he would not release them until he had first shown them to London banker, and Jew, David Rothschild, who Crotser believed would fund the building of a new Temple in Jerusalem (incidentally, Rothschild referred to the claim as a “pure joke”)’ – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? ‘Thus, the photos never surfaced and Crotser quietly went away. 

But what were his plans following the Ark debacle? Crotser says, “In 1985, I will be moving to Jerusalem. In ’86, I will witness the mark of the beast. In ’87 I will be one of God’s Chosen 144,000 sent by Christ to preach the Word. In ’88 I will meet Jesus Christ on Mount Sion which is 125 miles north of Jerusalem. And then, from Revelation chapter 11, I will be in Jerusalem when the two witnesses are assassinated. For three and a half days they will be dead, then rise and go into the city of Petra where the 144,000 will be. Soon after the Battle of Armageddon will be fought. And Christ will establish his Kingdom on earth and rule and reign as King for 1,000 years of peace.” 

This should be enough to discredit him. 

But on a more serious note, what about this verse from Maccabees? Since this is from Sacred Scripture, does this not prove irrefutably that the Ark is on the summit of Pisgah in Mount Nebo? As the Catholic Encyclopedia points out, the answer is no, for a very simple reason relating to Scriptural infallibility. 

Regarding the passage from Maccabees cited above, the Encyclopedia notes that: “[The] letter from which the above-cited lines are supposed to have been copied cannot be regarded as possessing Divine authority; for, as a rule, a citation remains in the Bible what it was outside of the inspired writing; the impossibility of dating the original document makes it very difficult to pass a judgment on its historical reliability.” 

If we re-read Maccabees carefully, we see that indeed, the account is said to be transcribed from a letter, and letters and outside writings which are quoted in the Bible do not therefore gain canonicity, but retain their original authority. Therefore, the fact that this citation appears in 2 Maccabees does not give it any infallible authority, though, as the Encyclopedia says, neither ought it to be discarded automatically. 

In my opinion, the argument that the Ark is on Mt. Nebo fails for the following reasons: 

  1. No constant, historical tradition of the Ark being there, even in the Franciscan Church that sits on Mt. Nebo. Though the Church claims to be the resting place of Moses (which I think is a tenuous claim), there is no tradition of anything to do with the Ark here. 
  1. Archaeological expeditions, like Crotser’s, have turned up no promising evidence. 
  1. It is unlikely that Jeremiah, who was at such odds with the Jerusalem priesthood in the period before the destruction of the Temple, would have been permitted by them to simply take the Ark away. Remember, the Jerusalem priesthood of Jeremiah’s time did not believe his prophecies about the destruction of the city, and thus would have no incentive to move the Ark, let alone give it to Jeremiah, whom they despised. 
  1. Scripture seems to attest that the Ark was gone by the reign of King Josiah (see II Chronicles 35:3), at least 25 years before the coming of Nebuchadnezzar. 
  1. Like the assertion that the Ark is under the Temple Mount, this one seems to be tied up with political-Zionist aspirations that have little to do with true, objective archaeology. 
  1. As we have seen, the Scriptural reference to the Ark being on Mt. Nebo is taken from a quotation and thus is not inerrant. 

These factors seem to indicate that the Ark of the Covenant is not on Mt. Nebo.’

This writer agrees with points one, two, five and six. Regarding point four, we have noted the likelihood King Josiah hid the Ark in a secret underground location associated with the Temple. This leads to point three in which Jeremiah may not have met resistance from the priesthood hierarchy if the Ark was no longer in the Temple. Added to this is that if Jeremiah fled with King Zedekiah’s daughters, he may have had royal decree not just for transferring the princesses to safety but also for the Ark. Regardless, if the Eternal sanctioned the Ark’s removal by Jeremiah’s hand, then a way of doing this would have been provided. 

After Boniface wrote the article, he stated the following after receiving comments from a reader. “UPDATE! I am now a bit more uncertain about some propositions in this article. Please read the comments for more info.” It is worth including the comments to see if there is any foundation in their counter claims. 

Confitebor: ‘Most fascinating, but I’m afraid you’re mistaken on several points here.

1) The old Catholic Encyclopedia occasionally gets things wrong, and one can trace the faint influence of “Higher Criticism” in its treatment of the Old Testament at times. This is one of those instances. 

It is difficult to see how The Catholic Encyclopedia’s claims… can be reconciled with Leo XIII’s Providentissimus Deus 20-21

(“But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred… For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true… It follows that those who maintain that an error is possible in any genuine passage of the sacred writings, either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make God the author of such error.”),

Pius XII’s Humani Generis 38

(“If, however, the ancient sacred writers have taken anything from popular narrations (and this may be conceded), it must never be forgotten that they did so with the help of divine inspiration, through which they were rendered immune from any error in selecting and evaluating those documents.”), and

Vatican II’s Dei Verbum 11

(“the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself. In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted. Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation.”).

In light of what the Church believes about the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, we must reject any attempt to suggest that some parts of the Scripture are not canonical or not infallible. If it is a part of a scriptural book, then it is canonical, and if it asserts anything, then the assertion is true. In this case, we have only to determine if the inspired author/compiler of II Maccabees intended to assert that Jeremiah concealed the Ark of the Covenant on Mt. Nebo. If he quoted that letter with the belief that what the letter says is true, then because he was the Holy Spirit’s inspired instrument, what the letter says about the Ark is true. 

At the very least, the fact that the letter was included in Scripture proves that the letter is authentic and was written when it claims to have been written… It seems unlikely that the author would have included the letter if he thought it contained counterfactual statements: the author is presumed to have believed what the letter says, which would mean he asserted the contents of the letter, which under the Catholic doctrine of biblical inerrancy would mean the letter’s story of Jeremiah’s concealment of the Ark is true, vouched for by the Holy Spirit.’

This writer’s response to the argument above is that they are only correct regarding scripture which has not only been inspired by the Eternal, but included through the Eternal’s guidance in the finalised Canon. Though this is not the whole Bible consisting of 66 Books, but rather the 49 which are the inspired Word of God – refer article: The Pauline Paradox.

As the author of 2 Timothy writes:

2 Timothy 3:14-17

J.B. Phillips New Testament 

‘Yet you must go on steadily in all those things that you have learned and which you know are true. Remember from what sort of people your knowledge has come, and how from early childhood your mind has been familiar with the holy scriptures, which can open the mind to the salvation which comes through believing in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching the faith and correcting error, for re-setting the direction of a man’s life and training him in good living. The scriptures are the comprehensive equipment of the man of God and fit him fully for all branches of his work.’ 

Conversely, while value can be gleaned from non-canonical works such as 2 Maccabees, it has not been divinely directed for inclusion in the scriptures for a reason. The Catholic Church does not have the authority to say it holds the same status as the Bible. Only God’s inspired Word is set apart in this way. The words and actions purported to Jeremiah may be true or they may be false. As such, they cannot be relied upon as proof of the whereabouts of the Ark of god.  

Confitebor:

2) ‘You say there is no constant, historical tradition of the Ark being hidden somewhere on Mt. Nebo. I can’t speak to that, because I haven’t made a comprehensive survey of the relevant literature of the past two millennia. To my knowledge, however, no ancient Christian author contradicted the II Maccabees account, that would counter one argument from silence with another. We should not expect the Church on Mt. Nebo to claim to be the location of the unknown cave where Jeremiah is said to have hidden the Ark, since the caves location is supposed to remain unknowable until the general conversion of the Jewish people to Catholicism at the end of time.’

This is a non-argument as who can contradict a belief if no one knows the answer. Plus, no persistent rumour within the area of the Ark’s presence is odd, if it has been held to be there for two and a half thousand years. It is presumptuous to say Jews will convert to Catholicism. It is more likely to be the other way around if anything; but that said, the strong deception perpetrated on humanity at the end of the age, will be a compelling new religion which will completely take the world by surprise with its persuasive appeal.

3) ‘We should not expect any archaeological expeditions on Mt. Nebo to find the cave, since Jeremiah is said to have pronounced that it would remain hidden until the time when the scattered Israelites are regathered and God has mercy on them, something the Church Fathers say won’t happen until the Last Days.’

This falls under the umbrella of a convenient and weak assertion which does not prove or disprove the Ark’s location on Nebo; in addition to a mis-interpretation of prophetic scripture.

4) ‘You say that it’s not likely that Jeremiah would have been permitted by them to simply take the Ark away. 

True, the unfaithful priests of Jerusalem would not likely have given him the Ark or allowed him to take it – but after Nebuchadnezzar’s vizier Nebuzaradan had sacked Jerusalem and the high priest Seraiah had been put to death, with the other leading priests dragged off in shackles to a Babylonian dungeon, those priests would not have been in any position to stop Jeremiah from taking the Ark. We know that Jeremiah was on reasonably good terms with Nebuzaradan, and we know from the Book of Baruch that Jeremiah’s secretary Baruch managed to obtain some silver Temple vessels in Babylon, intending to take them back to the ragtag group of Jews still living in or near the desolate, ruined city of Jerusalem so they could resume sacrifices there. In that light, it’s not hard to believe that the Babylonians could have given the Ark to Jeremiah before they set fire to the Temple. Again, in IV Kings’ catalogue of items looted from the Temple, the Ark is not mentioned: unless the Ark had already left the Temple years before the time of the fall of Jerusalem, the absence of the Ark from that catalogue would suggest that somehow it had been removed from the Temple just before, during, or just after the sack of Jerusalem.’

This writer does not believe for one second that Nebuchadnezzar would have allowed the Ark to be taken by Jeremiah, if he had somehow gotten his hands on it first.

4) ‘II Chron. 35:3 does not say that the Ark was gone by the reign of King Josiah. On the contrary, after cleansing and repairing the Temple and reconstituting the priestly worship, Josiah issued a decree to the Levites to return the Ark to the Temple. If the Ark was gone before Josiah’s reign, its absence would have been noticed when the Temple renovation project began. If the Levites had not been carrying the Ark on their shoulders, Josiah would not have told them, “It shall no longer be a burden on you shoulders.” So he issued his decree, and we are not told that the Levites failed to obey it: the usual meaning in such cases is that the King’s edict had gone into effect and had been obeyed. Far from attesting that the Ark was gone by Josiah’s reign, II Chron. 35:3 shows that the Ark was still in Jerusalem in his day.’

The reader has misunderstood, going off on a tangent, as Boniface did not say the Ark had disappeared, but that it had been removed from the Temple – likely during the reign of evil King Manasseh – to another secure location in Jerusalem.

5) ‘Some “Christian Zionists” or evangelical Protestants… like Crotser, suffer from fevered delusions of the imminent return of Christ, and they hope that the prophecy of II Macc. 2:7 will be fulfilled – so Crotser tries to find the Ark on Mt. Nebo, thereby ushering in the Second Advent of Christ. But the truth or falsity of this biblical tradition cannot be established through well poisoning or guilty by association. There are a lot of kooks who believe things the Bible says: that doesn’t mean what the Bible says is wrong.’

There is agreement with point number five. The reader does not include a point six, or perhaps point seven is a mistake and should be point number six. 

7) ‘You reiterate that “the Scriptural reference to the Ark being on Mt. Nebo is taken from a quotation and thus is not inerrant.” I have already addressed that point above, but here is a further example. At the Areopagus, St. Paul quoted two pagan Greek poets, Epimenides of Knossos and Aratus of Soli (Acts 17:28). Does the fact that verse 28 is made up of two quotations of pagan poets establish that what they said is not inerrant, and therefore could be false? As Leo XIII said, it is forbidden to limit inerrancy only to certain passages of Scripture: inerrancy applies to all of Scripture, even the quotations.’ 

Yes, this certainly holds true to what Paul says in the Book of Acts in the Holy Bible. The words written in 2 Maccabees are not part of holy writ and thus this point is not a valid argument, like their point number one.

‘All things taken together, I say the scenario that must hold pride of place is that recounted in II Macc. 2: Jeremiah concealed the Ark somewhere on Mt. Nebo, and the location of that cave will remain unknown until Christ comes again in glory to judge the living and the dead. Anyone trying to find that cave is wasting his time… Jeremiah prophesied elsewhere, the time will come when the Ark of the Covenant will no longer be of [importance] to God’s People: that time came 2,000 years ago… when… the Ark of the New Covenant… [was] assumed into heaven. As I’m sure you agree, that is the Ark we should really be focusing on.’

It is unfortunate that Boniface should succumb to the authoritative approach of Confitebor and allow a seed of doubt to grow in his mind. For though Confitebor appears to offer valid points in counter to Boniface’s reasons; this is a classic example of a detractor not really knowing what they are speaking about, while at the same time disagreeing with a well reasoned and thought out argument based on their own prejudice. For Confitebor is upholding the very biased Catholic tradition which Boniface has already admitted to regarding the Ark’s location on Nebo. Yet Boniface provides sufficient evidence – perhaps not to rule out Mount Nebo completely, but – to realise something does not quite sit right with the theory. 

Further, the Talmud states that the Ark was never included in the second Temple built after the Babylonian captivity. If Jeremiah really did take the Ark to a secret cave on Mount Nebo, would it not have – if it had remained intact – been returned to the second Temple? As a final thought, a comment online states: “Jeremiah and a few priests hid the ark in some kind of “hollow” which he closed up… afterward, the location was lost, hence why it was not recovered for the second temple. There is a tradition that the two priests who hid the ark volunteered to be hidden with it so that its location would be forever lost… it would explain why others could not find the hiding place after the ark was hidden – no one was alive who knew!”

If a ruler were entrusted to protect the Ark at this time, such as righteous King Josiah, he acted according to logical common sense. Josiah recognised the ominous warning signs of a strengthening Babylon and its encroaching armies drawing ever closer to Jerusalem. Even so, hiding the Ark near or underneath the Temple was too obvious and potentially dangerous. If the Chaldeans did not find it, then someone else eventually would do so. Thus, someone like Jeremiah reasoned the only way to properly protect the Ark was to spirit it away from Jerusalem. But, wouldn’t it make sense that in so doing, a region of historical significance could be chosen and purposely leaked to distract from where the Ark actually went?

Mount Nebo was where Moses looked down upon the predestined Israelite homeland in Canaan, the inheritance for the sons of Jacob as promised by the Eternal to Abraham – Deuteronomy 32:48-52; 34:1-5. As can be observed on the map above, Mount Nebo is thirty miles east of Jerusalem and requires going slightly around the northern tip of the Dead Sea. The issue with this location as the resting place for the Ark, is that it was heading towards the enemy. Any travelling north or east was a dangerous idea during this phase of Judah’s history. 

But, with that said, there is the possibility that the Ark of God may have been hidden on Mount Nebo temporarily, with Jeremiah either collecting it en route to Egypt or for an entirely different destination. Perhaps the precise manoeuvring of the Ark, as well as its destiny, will never be known for certain. There is reason to consider the Ark found its way to the British Isles and if it wasn’t at the time of the Crusades and the Knights Templar, then during the flight of Jeremiah to Egypt is the only other feasible time period. Fleeing south by land to Egypt or west to the Mediterranean Sea were the only viable escape routes. Yet, Jeremiah and his entourage heading to a port in Israel would arouse attention and suspicion, as his passengers – the king’s daughters – were even more important than the precious cargo containing the Ark of God. A route to Egypt was the safest option in successfully disappearing. Once in the busy environs of Egypt, Jeremiah and his important band were able to briefly lie low until they set sail for ostensibly the Iberian Peninsula and then on to Ireland. 

Recall the Prophet Jeremiah predicted a time when the Ark of God would no longer be remembered or revered – Jeremiah 3:16-18. This is a definite clue that Jeremiah knew more about the Ark than he was letting on. In the Book of Jeremiah – to cut a long story short – we learn that he was treated worse in being imprisoned by his own King Zedekiah of Judah, than he was by the conquering Chaldean King Nebuchadnezzar. Wherever the Ark was at that time, Jeremiah was part of a select group of people who left Jerusalem. 

Jeremiah 43:5-7 

English Standard Version

‘But Johanan the son of Kareah and all the commanders of the forces took all the remnant of Judah… the men, the women, the children, the princesses, and… also Jeremiah the prophet and Baruch the son of Neriah. And they came into the land of Egypt… And they arrived at Tahpanhes.’ 

We know for sure that Jeremiah and Zedekiah’s daughters arrived in Egypt. It has to be considered they did not journey further and that the Ark may have ended up in Egypt. The producers of Raiders of the Lost Ark, certainly thought so. As the tribes of Israel and Judah who had been taken captive by the Assyrians and Chaldeans respectively, later reconvened in the British Isles as a fulfilment of prophecy; so too earlier migrations of the descendants of Jacob travelled to Albion and Erin. It would seem that even if the Ark had a perilous and winding journey through the ages, it would eventually end up where the so-called Lost Tribes are located today – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

There are a considerable number of detractors against any idea that Jeremiah or royal princesses from Judah ever journeyed to, or stepped foot on Irish or British soil. We will follow this line of enquiry regardless, for what if ‘where there is smoke there is fire?’  

Jeremiah was a special prophet and selected by the Eternal before he was conceived. He was also one of a select band of men who received the Holy Spirit prior to his birth, with John the Baptist and Jesus – Luke 1:15, Matthew 1:18. One could say no other person at the time was better placed to not only secure the safe passage of King Zedekiah’s daughters out of Jerusalem but also if required, the Ark.

Jeremiah 1:1-10 

English Standard Version 

‘The words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, one of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, to whom the word of the Lord came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign [in 626 BCE]. It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, and until the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah [in 586 BCE], the son of Josiah, king of Judah, until the captivity of Jerusalem in the fifth month [July/August of that year]. 

Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Behold, I do not know how to speak, for I am only a youth.” But the Lord said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am only a youth’; for to all to whom I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak. Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you, declares the Lord.” 

Then the Lord put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the Lord said to me, “Behold, I have put my words in your mouth. See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” 

Notice, Jeremiah was to be prophet to nations and peoples in the plural and to be sent to them and speak the Eternal’s words. He was told not to be afraid of them. The reason being he was going to peoples he did not know. The context of the Book of Jeremiah shows it didn’t mean a gentile nation such as Egypt, but to his kith and kin in the isles to the northwest of the Kingdom of Judah – Jeremiah 31:8-10. In the process, was Jeremiah given the role in being instrumental in restoring the breach of the Pharez line of Judah with that of Zarah? 

Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

The final king of Judah, Zedekiah was also known as Mattaniah. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, The Sceptre and the Davidic Covenant, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine: 

‘Jeremiah records the downfall of Zedekiah and his sons, the royal princes, as follows: 

“In the ninth year of Zedekiah, king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged it. And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month [June/July], and the ninth day of the month [the day following the Sabbath], the city was broken up. And all the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal-sharezar, Samgar-Nebo, Sarsechim, Rabsaris, Rabmag, with all the residue of the princes of the king of Babylon.” 

“And it came to pass, that when Zedekiah, the king of Judah, saw them, and all the men of war, then they fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the king’s garden, by the gate betwixt the two walls; and he went out the way of the plain. But the Chaldeans’ army pursued after them, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and when they had taken him, they brought him up to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, to Riblah, in the land of Hamath, where he gave judgment upon him. Then the king of BabyIon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes; also the king of Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah. Moreover he put out Zedekiah’s eyes, and bound him in chains, to carry him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king’s house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem,” (Jeremiah 39:1-8). 

‘In the fifty-second chapter of Jeremiah there is a statement of these events, to which, after recording the fact concerning the king’s being carried to Babylon in chains, there is added the following: “And the king of Babylon… put him in prison till the day of his death,” (Jeremiah 52:11). When those events occurred which resulted in the overthrow of the Zedekiah branch of the royal house, a climax was reached…’ “Then Ishmael carried away captive all the residue of the people that were in Mizpah, even the King’s Daughters…” 

‘Baruch, the scribe, was the companion of Jeremiah in prison, when the Lord took them out and hid them. He was also his companion in persecution and affliction and accusation. Now, since we find his name mentioned as one of this company which Johanan compelled to go to Egypt against the direct command of God, there is just one prophecy concerning him which we need to mention before we proceed further. It is as follows: 

“Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, unto thee, O Baruch: Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up, even this whole land… but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey (booty or reward) in all places whither thou goest,” (Jeremiah 45:2, 4, 5). 

  1. We have in this company, which has come down into Egypt from Judea, “the King’s daughters.” Since the plural form of speech is used there are at least two of them – history says there were three [1]. These are the royal seed of the house of David [2], who are fleeing from the slayers of their father, Zedekiah, the last King of the house of Judah, and the slayers of their brothers, the sons of Zedekiah and princes of Judah. 
  1. In company with these princesses is Jeremiah, their grandfather [3], whom also the Lord has chosen to do the work of building and planting. In the princesses the prophet has royal material with which to build and plant. 
  1. In company with Jeremiah and his royal charge we have Baruch, his faithful scribe, whom expert genealogists prove to have been uncle [4] to the royal seed. 
  1. God has promised that the lives of this “small number,” only five or six at most [5], shall be to them a prey (reward) in all lands whither they shall go. 
  2. Prior to this, at a time when Jeremiah was greatly troubled, when in his great distress and anguish of heart he cried unto the Lord, saying: “Remember me, visit me, and revenge me of my persecutors”; then the Lord said, “Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction… And I will make thee to pass with thine enemies into a land which thou knowest not,” (Jeremiah 15:11-14).’

The contention amongst identity adherents is that Jeremiah took Zedekiah’s daughters to Ireland, whereby they married into the royal line already established in Ireland from ancient times; when descendants of the family of Zarah, namely Heman, Calcol and Dara or Darda, migrated to the British Isles. As Zedekiah’s daughters were descended from Pharez, the line of King David, it is maintained that the two royal lines were joined together in the Irish High kings and that the original breach at birth of the twins had been healed. 

The five points listed by Allen are all valid in regard to them being based on scripture. The five fascinating, yet uncorroborated pieces of information Allen includes, have been numbered; for they are not substantiated with references, sources or biblical accuracy. The same applies with the following pivotal paragraph.

Allen: ‘About 585 B.C. a “notable man,” an “important personage,” a patriarch, a saint, an essentially important someone [1]… came to Ulster [2], the most northern province of Ireland, accompanied by a princess [3], the daughter of an eastern king, and that in company with them was one Simon Brach, Breck, Brack, Barech, Berach, as it is differently spelled [4]… This eastern princess was married [5] to King Herremon [6] on condition, made by this notable patriarch, that he should abandon his former religion, and build a college for the prophets. This Herremon did [7], and the name of the school was Mur-Ollam, which is the name, both in Hebrew and Irish, for school of the prophets. He also changed [8] the name of his capital city, Lothair – sometimes spelled Cothair Croffin – to that of Tara… it is a well-known fact that the royal arms of Ireland is the harp of David, and has been for two thousand and five hundred years.’ 

The following article concisely draws upon the legend surrounding Jeremiah going to Ireland as well as delineating the key scriptural prophecies on the kingly line of Judah. As with Allen, anything open to conjecture is numbered for the readers benefit.

Zedekiah’s Daughter Tamar Tephi of Pharez Married Eochaidh Heremon of Zarah in Ireland, unknown author, 2000 – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine: 

‘The THRONE of BRITAIN is the oldest in Europe and it has preserved the same fundamental coronation service as far as records go back from Egferth in 785 A.D. That is for [1239] years. It is identical to the Bible’s coronation service: The anointing with oil (1 Kings 1:34), the crown of pure gold (Psalm 21:3), sitting on or: at his pillar” (stone) (2 Chronicles 23:13), presented with a Bible (Deuteronomy 17:14), given bracelets of St. George (2 Samuel 1:10) [1], the shout, “God save the king” (1 Samuel 10:24) and an oath between king and people to obey [God] (2 Chronicles 23:16). This is proof the British are the HOUSE of ISRAEL [and specifically England, the house of Judah]. 

In Jeremiah 52:11 we… read that Zedekiah was beginning, in 585 B.C., seven times of national punishment and Jeremiah was commanded to “root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down” (Jeremiah 1:10) the royalty of the Pharez line in Judah. Why Jeremiah? Because Josiah “married Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah” [2] (Jeremiah 1:1). Their son was Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17). But after this “went Jeremiah… to Mizpeh” (Jeremiah 40:6) where King Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS were (41:10). 

Apparently Nebuchadnezzar didn’t know that Hebrew law permitted the PRINCESS to inherit the throne when there were no male descendants (Numbers 27:8). He didn’t harm Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS or take them to Babylon. Now “the king’s DAUGHTERS… and Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch… came into the land of Egypt” (Jeremiah 43:5-7). When they arrived in Tahpanhes (meaning “secret flight”), the Eternal warned Jeremiah that Babylon’s king would soon overrun Egypt also, and destroy the remnant of Judah there…” (Jeremiah 44:28). “To this day Tahpanhes or modern Tell Defneh (the [fortress] mound) is called the PALACE of the JEW’S DAUGHTER” (The History of Egypt by Sir Flinders Petrie) – Qasr Bint el Yehudi. 

After tearing down the throne of PHAREZ Judah, Jeremiah was commissioned “to build, and to plant” (Jeremiah 1:10) as the prophecy said, “the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward; For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and they that escape out of Mount Zion” (Isaiah 37:31-32). This remnant was the royal DAUGHTERS (2 Kings 19:30-31). In Ezekiel 21:25 we read that the royalty would CHANGE. The Eternal says, “take off the crown: this (crown) shall not be the same: EXALT him that is LOW, and ABASE him that is HIGH.” So Judah’s son PHAREZ was ABASED and ZARAH was EXALTED. The nation of JUDAH had been HIGH and ISRAEL LOW (Hosea 3:4). Now the positions were REVERSED.’ 

The unusual circumstance surrounding the twins birth caused controversy as to which child was truly the firstborn. The rights of the firstborn were at stake. The twins were born circa 1705 BCE prior to Jacob relocating his family to Egypt in 1687 BCE. Once in Egypt, it would be another seventeen years before Jacob would proclaim his prophecy of Genesis chapter forty-nine. When the boys were born, it was ordained yet not yet given that Judah’s offspring would inherit the rights of rulership – Genesis 49:10. 

Due to this unique inheritance and the privilege of royal lineage, the Pharez and Zarah controversy became supremely significant, for the right of regal rule was paramount. As Pharez was born first literally and second by a technicality, he was blamed for and even named for the breach. A passionate brotherly rivalry was a foregone conclusion. There is no doubt that Zarah and his subsequent line believed that they had been deprived of the firstborn position and the right to rule over Israel. 

This family breach, could be resolved through a royal marriage, such as the one proposed of ‘Eochaidh’ of Zarah and ‘Tamar’ of Pharez. 

Unknown: ‘The daughters were planted “In the mountain of the height of ISRAEL” (Ezekiel 17:24). But where was LOST ISRAEL? We know that Jeremiah was sent to “the kings of the ISLES which are beyond the sea” (Jeremiah 25:15-22; 31:10). Just as the prophecy said, “I will appoint a PLACE for my people Israel, and will plant them” (2 Samuel 7:10). Not only the tribes, but also the royalty. The parable of Ezekiel 17 (encoded so no Babylonian spy could understand) describes this whole episode.

Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh were the two “EAGLES.” The “HIGH CEDAR” is the royal house of David. The “HIGHEST BRANCH” was Zedekiah. The “TENDER ONE” of the “YOUNG TWIGS” was the young crown princess. 

The Hebrew word here used for “tender” is feminine, in contrast to the masculine form of the same word in Isaiah 53:2. After the transplanting to a “HIGH MOUNTAIN” which was Israel (verse 23) in IRELAND, this feminine twig would “bring forth boughs, bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar” which means that many royal descendants would come from it. Through his grandmother, Matilda of Scotland, descent is claimed from the daughter of Zedekiah for Henry the Second, Henry Plantagenet of England [3]. His surname means “a twig.” 

The ancient Chronicles of IRELAND (Leabhar Gabhala; Keating’s History of Ireland) inform us [4] that a sage named “Ollam Fodla” (“Wonderful Prophet”) came from Egypt by way of Spain about six centuries B.C., and that he landed on the northeast coast of IRELAND where Carrickfergus is now. He brought with him a princess called “Tamar Tephi” (“Beautiful Palm”) and a secretary/scribe named “Simon Brug” or “Bruch.” 

Also a massive, strongly secured, and mysterious chest which they regarded with utmost reverence and guarded with zealous care (Ark of Covenant) [5] and a large, rough stone [6] and golden banner with a red lion on it [7]. Perhaps the Ark and the two tables of stone lie buried in the Hill of Tara (2 Maccabees 2:7) [8]. Irish poetry and folklore [9] identify Ollam Fodla as JEREMIAH and Tamar Tephi as the DAUGHTER of ZEDEKIAH.’ 

This is a dramatic admission as to the whereabouts of the Ark of God circa 580 BCE. While disputed, it is the best or only record for explaining where the Ark may have mysteriously departed after King Josiah’s reign. If the Ark arrived in Ireland, did it stay there, or was it moved again? The Hill of Tara is an ancient ceremonial location for the coronation of the high kings of Ireland and a burial site near Skryne in County Meath.

Encyclopaedia: ‘Between 1899 and 1902, the British-Israel Association of London carried out limited excavations of the Hill of Tara in Ireland looking for the Ark of the Covenant. The Irish nationalists including Maud Gonne and the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland (RSAI) campaigned successfully to have them stopped before they destroyed the hill [the seat of High Kings and the capital of ancient Ireland]. A non-invasive survey by archaeologist Conor Newman carried out from 1992 until 1995 found no evidence of the Ark. The British Israelites believed that the Ark was located at the grave of the Egyptian princess Tea Tephi, who according to Irish legend came to Ireland in the 6th century BC and married Irish King Erimon. 

Mairead Carew: “British Israelites wanted to present the Ark to Queen Victoria as they believed that Tea Tephi was the ancestor of the English Kings and Queens. Victoria was interested in Tara herself and had in her possession two replica Tara brooches for her wardrobe (she wasn’t to know that the original brooch wasn’t found at Tara!).”

Encyclopaedia: ‘Because of the historical importance of Tara, Irish nationalists like Douglas Hyde [later Irish President; Arthur Griffith, founder of Sinn Fein; novelist, George Moore] and W. B. Yeats [Nobel prize-winning poet] voiced their protests in newspapers and in 1902 Maud Gonne [muse to Yeats] led a protest [with hundreds of children] against the excavations at the site.’ 

Carew: “The landlord, [and Freemason] Gustavus Villiers Briscoe, who had given permission for the British-Israelites [Walton Adams and Charles Groom, also Freemasons] to dig at Tara had prepared a bonfire to celebrate the coronation of Victoria’s son, Edward VII. Maud Gonne lit the fire and sang the rebel song ‘A Nation Once Again’ in honor of an independent Ireland.”

Supposing Jeremiah did bring the Ark to Ireland, what reason would Jeremiah have for burying the Ark at Tara or anywhere else for that matter? Particularly as it had been brought thousands of miles already. Things buried have an uncanny knack of eventually being found. While the Ark had likely lost the Holy presence of the Eternal by this time, it still was an artefact of incredible importance, beauty and value. One could imagine Jeremiah entrusting its safe keeping to someone loyal and faithful. The big question is what happened to the Ark after that and who’s hands did it fall into? Would the Eternal have allowed this scenario in the first place? There is also the lingering question of the tablets of the testimony.

Unknown: ‘Ancient Irish poetry [10] is full of praises for Tamar Tephi and tells of her lofty birth, her stormy life in Jerusalem and at Tahpanhes in Egypt, her voyage to Spain and from there to Ireland. It is also claimed that Tamar Tephi’s younger sister SCOTTA, who was with JEREMIAH on the first lap of the journey, never reached Ireland because she married a Celto-Scythian MILESIAN prince in Spain. Tamar Tephi married the Irish king called Eochaidh Heremon of ZARAH JUDAH after he agreed to give up Baal idolatry and worship Yahweh according to the two tables of law and provide a school for ollamhs.’ 

Regarding Eochaidh, Walsh writes: “One of Ireland’s rulers was a man named Eochaidh Heremon. Eochaidh is Irish for the Greek name Achaios, and the term Heremon is a title meaning Chief of the Landsmen, a king. He was a Milesian living among the Tuatha de Danann… His genealogy traces back to Chalcol [I Chronicles 2:6; I Kings 4:31], the Zarahite founder of Athens, who is said to have planted a royal dynasty in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. Tephi, heiress to the Pharez Davidic throne, married into an existing  Zarah royal line going back hundreds of years. As the newly crowned Queen of Ireland, Tephi contributed the authority of the throne of David to Eochaidh’s kingship. Eochaidh’s coronation is recorded taking place in 580 BCE, six years after the fall of Jerusalem. Through their children the tender twig grew to become a majestic cedar – a new royal dynasty in its own right, through which the Davidic throne would be perpetuated.” 

‘When Jeremiah reached Tara Ireland, about 580 B.C., he established the “Mur-ollamain” (Hebrew: “School of the Prophets”). Also the Iodhan Moran was created (Hebrew: “Chief Justice”) and the Rectaire (Hebrew: “the Judge”). On the Four Courts at Dublin (the Supreme Court of Ireland) is a statue of the Prophet JEREMIAH [11].’

‘To this very day, JEREMIAH’S burial place is pointed out on Devenish Island, in Lough Erne, two and a half miles below Enniskillen, Co. Fermanagh. The tomb is hewn out of solid rock. It has been known through the centuries as “JEREMIAH’S TOMB.” He was the real SAINT PATRIARCH – a name later corrupted to “St. Patrick” by Catholics.’ 

Jacob’s Pillar, E Raymond Capt: “The other [site proposed for Ollamh Fodhla], and best authenticated is located in Schiabhla-Cailliche, near Oldcastle, County Meath, in Ireland, not far from Tara. A huge cairn of stones marks the spot [known as Cairn T], and a large carved stone is still pointed out as Jeremiah’s judicial seat.”

For further information:

https://jahtruth.net/jere.htm

Unknown: ‘From the union of Heremon and Tea Tephi came a long line of IRISH monarchs extending over a period of more than one thousand years. The SCOTCH monarchs were descended from the Irish kings. The last Scottish king, James VI of Scotland, became James I of ENGLAND, and from him the [former] Queen of Great Britain is descended. King Heremon and Queen Tamar Tephi were crowned at TARA (Hebrew. “TORAH”) upon the Lia Fail, (Hebrew: STONE of DESTINY) of Israel, just as the kings of Judah had been for centuries. It was as this time that the “HARP of DAVID” became part of the royal heraldic symbolism on family crests and flags since David was the Pharez line.’ 

According to Jah Truth: ‘Teia Tephi arrived in Ireland at Howth, then called Pen Edair (Binn Eadair), on the 18th June of 583 B.C. and the Mound of The Hostages (Teamur) [see previous photo] was built between then and the death of Jeremiah on the 21st of September of 581 B.C., as is recorded and carved in stone inside Jeremiah Tomb (Cairn T) at Loughcrew.’

There is energetic debate regarding the person of Zedekiah’s daughter. Whether she really existed or is a myth. The Tea-Tephi tradition is a great story, a legend which is shrouded in myth. This does not mean the account should be dismissed. As with all tales, the kernel of truth is within to extract. Her name appears to be a composite, which has aided the weakening of her credentials as a real person. Some call her Tea or Tamar. Tephi appears to be the common denominator in each case. But which name if any is correct and why the confusion? 

Quoted earlier with regard to the Ark being hidden on Mount Nebo, Confitebor adds: 

“Old Irish documents refer to an ancient legendary Irish king named Ollamh Fodhla, another ancient legendary Irish kin[g] named Siomon Breac, and an Egyptian princess named Tephi (NOT “Tamar Tephi”), daughter of Pharaoh (supposedly the eponym of Teamhuir or Tara, ancient cultic seat of the Irish high kings in County Meath), but there is no old Irish text that ever mentions these three individuals living at the same time or arriving in Ireland together with [a] mysterious box or stone. There’s just no such story in the ancient Irish Gaelic legendarium – it’s a concoction of the British Israelists, wholly unknown to anybody before it appears in their literature during the Victorian age.” 

By their own admission, these three personages are recorded as ‘real’ legendary people. Though as we shall uncomfortably learn, their comment raises an issue of a misunderstanding between the identities of different people. The legend alleges Tephi was Egyptian and not Hebrew. This could be a mix up in her origin, for she had set sail from Egypt and likely knew the Egyptian royal family, being a guest while staying there. 

Ark Files: ‘… Egypt and Jerusalem were… allied against Babylon. The pharaoh and Zedekiah knew were acquainted. The normal thing in those days when a people enter a country is for the ruler… to be notified and… it’s very likely that Pharaoh would invite the princesses… to dwell with him as a protest against Babylon. It would be a status to have the remaining children of the king their enemy had just destroyed. Being a beneficiary to the survivors from the monarchy would help the call for more allies against Babylon. If Pharaoh had taken the daughter of Zedekiah into his palace she would be known as an adopted daughter of the Pharaoh. And so it is not impossible for a [Judean] princess to also have been called a daughter of Pharaoh…’ 

Jah Truth: ‘There they stayed in a palace that was given to Teia Tephi by Pharaoh Hophra after he adopted her as his own daughter. The palace, although now in ruins at Tel Defneh, is still known today as “Quasr Bint el Jehudi” which means “Palace of the Daughter of Judah”.’

Ark Files: ‘However, God had given a message to Jeremiah saying that Nebuchadnezzar would soon conquer the ruler of Egypt… Pharaoh and Egypt would suffer a similar fate as Jerusalem… If the daughter of Zedekiah, at least one of the daughters as there was more than one according to the biblical record, took Jeremiah’s warning seriously, it meant that she would have to leave Pharaoh’s protection to seek refuge elsewhere. The legend of this story says Jeremiah was the one who took Zedekiah’s daughter and traveled with her first to the Iberian Peninsula and from there to Ireland. 

One of the primary Irish chronicles, The Annals of the Kings of Ireland by the Four Masters, mentions “Tea, daughter of Lughaidh, son of Itha, whom Eremhon married in Spain” (1636, Volume 1, page 31). At first glance, this would seem to rule out her being the daughter of Zedekiah. However, Lughaidh may not refer to an actual person. The Irish are referred to as the “race of Lughaidh” and Ireland as “the land of Lughaidh” – “one of the many arbitrary bardic names for Ireland” (Annals of the Four Masters, Volume 6, appendix). Lughaidh in old Gaelic could mean “House of God” – broken down as Logh, “God,” and aidhe, “house, habitation, fortress” (Edward O’Reilly, An Irish-English Dictionary, 1821, 1864).’

A ballad composed by a celebrated Bard, and one time Regent of Ireland, Cu-an-O’Cochlain in 1024 CE, includes the following verses:

“Where, after her death was Tea’ monument, Which structure perpetuated her fame. Bregia of Tea was a delightsome abode, On record as a place of great renown, It contains the grave, the Great Mergech [Hebrew, meaning ‘resting place’], A sepulchre which has not been violated. The daughter of Pharaoh of many champions, Tephi, ‘the most beautiful’ that traversed the plain, Here formed a fortress circular and strong Which she described with her breast-pin and wand. It may be related without reserve That a mound was raised over Tephi as recorded, And she lies buried beneath this unequalled tomb, Here formed for this mighty Queen.”

The actual answer may relate to an earlier arrival of indeed a ‘daughter of Pharaoh’ – a princess named Scota. Not to be confused with ‘Tea’ or ‘Tephi’, the daughter of Zedekiah; though she obviously is. Her son was Gaodhal Glas, credited as the progenitor of the Gaels and the Gaelic speaking Q-Celts who settled* in Ireland – the Hiberi Scotti – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Confitebor continues: “… this spurious legend identifies the stone that “Ollamh Fodhla”/Jeremiah supposedly brought to Ireland not as the Ark of the Covenant, but as the Lia Fail, or Stone of Destiny. Late medieval legend claims that the Lia Fail was moved from Tara to Scone in Scotland, where it became the coronation stone of the Scottish kings. Modern research has determined, however, that the Lia Fail never left Tara, and that the Stone of Scone, also called Jacob’s Pillow Stone, is of Scottish origin, not Irish or Near Eastern. Even if the Stone of Scone originally came from Ireland…” 

This is a pivotal point, for the Stone of Scone has been deemed of sandstone origin which is prevalent in Scotland and yes, not from the Middle East. All this means is that the Scottish stone is a copy. Where the original Stone of Destiny is, is by the bye. What is certain, is the Stone of Scone on public display and used in the coronation of each new monarch is a duplicate. This writer’s opinion is that the original Lia Fail was taken to Scotland by the Milesian** Scots and subsequently lost there on purpose for safe keeping. 

Prior to the Gaels and their arrival* in Ireland in 1046 BCE, there is an important point to consider. Firstly, descendants of the tribe of Judah and the royal line of Zarah arrived in the Emerald Isle in 1404 BCE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. King Heremon – a title not a name was a descendant of the Zarah line of royal** Milesian kings and it was he who purportedly married ‘Tephi’, one of the princess daughters of Zedekiah from the royal Pharez line circa 580 BCE. 

Another vital point of great significance in this discussion is an occurrence not long after 1046 BCE and which involves David who was king of Judah between 1010 and 970 BCE – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology. For David is the key to the riddle of how Ollamh Fodhla actually lived prior to Jeremiah yet is still equated with the prophet Jeremiah over four hundred years later. John Keyser presents a compelling argument for Ollamh Fodhla, meaning “Sage of Ireland” was none other than King David. For ‘he proved himself to be an “Ollamh” in wisdom and in intellect…’ 

The achievements credited to this man are true, they just don’t apply to Jeremiah. Ollamh Fodhla was a king, warrior, poet, legislator, who kept the Feast of Tara [Tabernacles] and reigned the exact same forty years as David, dying in his sleep – 1 Kings 2:10. The significance of the Harp of David as a prominent Irish symbol is more than a coincidence – 1 Samuel 16:16, 23. 

John D Keyser – capitalisation his: ‘The Four Courts of Dublin, which is the seat of the high courts of Ireland, at one time had a large dome decorated with life-like medallions of the world’s greatest lawgivers. Unfortunately, this dome was destroyed by fire some years ago. These medallions however, constructed in “basso relievo,” included the likenesses of King Alfred, Solon, Confucius, Moses and Ollamh Fodhla. Who was this Ollamh Fodhla, memorialized in the great dome of the Four Courts? According to the Irish annals, the name Ollamh Fodhla, pronounced “Ollav Fola,” means the “Ollamh” or chief POET of “Fodhla” or Ireland… 

Thomas Moore, in his book The History of Ireland, outlines some of the enlightened institutions King Ollamh Fodhla established: “Among the numerous kings that, in this dim period of Irish history, pass like shadows before our eyes, THE ROYAL SAGE, OLLAMH FODHLA, is almost the ONLY ONE who, from the strong light of tradition thrown round him, STANDS OUT as being of historical substance and truth.” 

The article, Was Ollamh Fodhla King David of Israel? can be found at: 

https://www.hope-of-israel.org/i000118a.htm

We learned previously that David was not just a king but also a priest and most importantly in this instance a prophet. While Jeremiah was not Ollamh Fodhla, he may well have been viewed as a wise man and called Ollamh. Keyser in his article, Jeremiah In Ireland – Fact Or Fabrication? raises issues undeniably showing Jeremiah was not the Ollamh Fodhla and how British Israelites have created a mish-mash of a story which it is agreed, is ostensibly not true. Though one does not concur with all of Keyser’s points, this writer agrees the Stone of Destiny or Lia Fail was not taken to Ireland by Jeremiah. 

Keyser convincingly explains that there was a Tea recorded in the Irish Annals as well as another woman called Tephi. There is no such person as Tea Tephi and this woman is a fabrication. 

Afterword on British-Israelism, Greg Doudna – emphasis mine: 

“In 1861, a British-Israel expositor named F. R. A. Glover combined ‘Tea’ and ‘Tephi’ into one person, in the first book to promote the ‘Tea-Tephi’ theory. Glover is the inventor of the story of ‘Tea-Tephi’ and Jeremiah, et al. Glover’s slipshod scholarship was adopted by other British-Israelites, including C. A. L. Totten’s first five volumes of Our Race (1890-92), followed by W. M. H. Milner, The Royal House of Britain an Enduring Dynasty (1902), J. H. Allen (1902)… The story of Glover’s origination of ‘Tea-Tephi,’ with documentation, is told in Filmer, Nithsdale, Price, and Stough, ‘Tea-Tephi or Scota,’ The Message, Issue 5 (London: Covenant Publishing Co.,).”

It occurs then that perhaps Zedekiah’s princess daughter’s name may have been Tamar after all. As this was a Hebrew name, it is a plausible identity. For it was a family name in the line of Judah and Pharez. Tamar the mother of Pharez and Zarah, Genesis 38:6; Tamar the daughter of David, 2 Samuel 13:14; and Tamar the grand daughter of David, 2 Samuel 14:27.  

Regarding Jeremiah’s scribe Baruch, Doudna states: “In the first place, nothing in the annals links Ollam Fodla with Simon Brach. Second, Simon Brec is identified in the annals, according to Britannica (11th edition), as a famous ancient warrior BEFORE the Milesians ever arrived in Ireland. 

Keyser: ‘Geoffrey Keating, in The History of Ireland, verifies the existence of the early Simon Breac, who was the grandson of Neimheadh and the “sea-robber” mentioned in the eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. (See Volume I, pages 179-191. The Irish Texts Society.) The second Simon – called Symon Brek – is verified by Hector Boece in The Chronicles of Scotland as being a later king of Ireland and far removed from the time of Jeremiah. (See Volume I, pages 27-30. William Blackwood & Sons, Ltd. Edinburgh. MCMXXXVIII).’ 

Greg Doudna: “Is there a ‘third Breac’ in the annals answering to the biblical companion of Jeremiah named Baruch? Absolutely not! The story of Jeremiah bringing Zedekiah’s daughter over to Ireland is an obvious cut-and-paste job, taking prominent names in the Irish annals separated by many centuries and making the most superficial, gullible identifications. If anyone checks the story of the annals themselves and stumbles across these things, the… explanation is that there were ‘second’ Ollam Fodlas, Heremons, Tea-Tephis, and Brachs – these ‘second’ personalities all just happening to have such famous names and of whom, strangely, the Irish legends know nothing and all conveniently at the right time, unlike their inconveniently dated famous namesakes” (Afterword on British-Israelism, pp. 125-126). 

Keyser: ‘All of this research into Jeremiah and the so-called Tea-Tephi is actually made superfluous by one core truth – only a SON, NOT A DAUGHTER, could perpetuate the royal line of David! If you study the genealogies in the Bible, you will find that they pass down through the MALE LINE without exception. The only time females are named in the genealogies is when there is something remarkable about them that needs to be recorded. Examples of this are found in Genesis 11:29; 22:23; 25:1-4; 35:22-26; Exodus 6:23 and Numbers 26:33. This is why Josephus could say: “And after this manner have the kings of David’s race ended their lives, being in number twenty-one, until THE LAST KING, who altogether reigned five hundred and fourteen years, and six months, and ten days: of whom Saul, who was their first king, retained the government twenty years, though he was not of the same tribe with the rest” (Antiquities of the Jews, chap. VIII, 4).’ 

This is not correct as it runs counter to the Mosaic Law enumerated in Numbers 27:8, ESV: And you shall speak to the people of Israel, saying, ‘If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter’ – 11 Kings 11:1-3.

Keyser: ‘During an interesting dissertation on the anointing oil used by certain royal lines, Roderic O’Flaherty comments “that David and his posterity were anointed with the same oil that is used in the ordination of priests: the Rabbis unanimously believe it: and they also confirm, by traditions which they hold in the highest veneration, that the blessed oil, with which Aaron was anointed priest, was providentially and miraculously preserved without the smallest diminution, UNTIL THE LINE OF DAVID WAS EXTINCT….” (Ogygia, or, a Chronological Account of Irish Events. Vol. I. W. M’Kenzie, Dublin. 1793, p. 71). This is not to say that DESCENDANTS of David no longer carried on the line, but that descendants of David sitting on the throne IN JERUSALEM came to an end. David’s blood-line continued and there are people today, on this earth, descended from David… O’Flaherty, a leading authority on the Irish annals, KNOWS NOTHING of David’s line being transferred to Ireland by Jeremiah!’ 

The obvious disappointment for those believing a false version of events surrounding Jeremiah is compounded when realising the overlooked nature of Jeremiah’s true commission according to Les Aron Gosling. 

Gosling – capitalisation & emphasis his: ‘Thus is recorded the major reason why Jeremiah went to Gedeliah at Mizpah, and that was to grant the protection of God to the daughters of the deposed Zedekiah. There is biblical and secular evidence that Jeremiah later left Egypt on a worldwide commission to the nations, and that he took the daughters of Zedekiah with him for at least part of the journey.’ 

At the end of the day, it cares not whether Jeremiah went to Ireland or not. Though it would make sense if he took Zedekiah’s daughters to the British Isles, for this was where previous waves of migrating Israelites had sojourned and they housed prominent colonies of the tribes of Israel. Most of the tribes had departed from Canaan and it was no longer safe to stay even in Egypt. The likelihood Jeremiah dropped them off in Ireland or Britain is strengthened by the fact there was Irish and British royalty for the princesses to marry into. This highlights a further issue with the Tea Tephi version of events in that Zedekiah’s daughters were but young girls and not adult women. 

Gosling: ‘Zedekiah was just 32 years of age when his little sons were so cruelly despatched (2 Kgs 24.18) and we have the testimony of Josephus that his children were still under the care of their mothers at the time of the Babylonian invasion and seige of Jerusalem (Josephus, Antiquities, X, VIII, 2).’ 

Gosling continues regarding Jeremiah’s remarkable misson: ‘As a result of this commission men in various nations were raised up teaching social reform, under Jeremiah, leading to the rise of powerful societal paridigms and completely novel religious systems of worship… Jeremiah’s commission to overturn existing social systems during what has now been termed “the Axial Period of History” did not fail to produce fruit for the religious and philosophical wisdom that suddenly blossoms forth in Asia and the ancient Orient around 500 BCE, and the cultural revolution that took place worldwide at that time, came as the direct result of Jeremiah’s commission from God (Jer 1.10). 

He was to “root out,” “pull down,” “destroy,” and to overthrow nations and kingdoms, as well as to institute entirely new systems – “build” and “plant.” And God’s prophet obeyed God’s Word implicitly (25.15ff). As a result of his efforts the world as we know it now emerged. Historians claim it as a miracle! “The Axial Period is in the nature of a miracle, in so far as no really adequate explanation of it is possible within the limits of our present knowledge” (Karl Jaspers, The Origin and Goal of History, 1949, 18). 

But happen it did! It is no coincidence that during Jeremiah’s travels Zoroaster, Lao Tzu, Confucius, Gautama (the Buddha), king Numa of Rome, and the philosophers in Hellas “made their appearances… SIMULTANEOUSLY as reformers of the national religion” (Lasaulx, quoted in Jaspers, ibid., 8).’ 

Gosling correctly refutes Jeremiah’s blood relationship with Zedekiah ‘… British-Israelites… insist that Jeremiah was actually the father of Hamutal, the mother of Zedekiah, continuing the line through one of his daughters. We have demolished the “Tea party” story, but has this forceful claim concerning Jeremiah’s bloodline any merit? Or is it yet another Anglo-Israel myth? … There were eight Jeremiah’s in the biblical record.

  • Jeremiah the prophet.  
  • Jeremiah, a high ranking priest of the second or third Temple courses (Nehemiah 10.1-8; 12.1,12).  
  • Jeremiah, head of a house in the transjordanic half-tribe of Manasseh and one of the “mighty men of valor” (1 Chronicles 5.24).  
  • Jeremiah, a Benjamite, who came with others to David in Ziglag when he retreated from Saul (1 Chronicles 12.1-4).  
  • Two Gadite warriors named Jeremiah, also in David’s army (1 Chronicles 12.10,13). 
  • Jeremiah of the house of the Rechabites (Jeremiah 35.3).  
  • Jeremiah of Libnah, the father of Hamutal wife of Josiah and who mothered Jehoahaz and Zedekiah (2 Kings 23.31; 24.18; 52.1).  

Jeremiah of Anathoth was the prophet of God not Jeremiah of Libnah! Indeed, Jeremiah himself plainly states that there was absolutely no connection between himself and Zedekiah. He was decidedly NOT Zedekiah’s grandfather (see Jeremiah 1.1)… Zedekiah was not an heir to the throne of David. Further, he could not convey the throne to any of his descendants, including a mythical “Tea.” 

The powerful prophet Ezekiel denounced him as an appointed stooge of Nebuchadnezzar and as a Davidic would-be king (Ezekiel 21.25-27). The last legitimate king of Israel was Jeconiah, who was also called Coniah and Jehoiachin.

Jeremiah did not languish through his final years enjoying the green tranquility and safety of Irish shores and a debauched life of economic prosperity. In fact, most biblical historians believe he was finally stoned to death in Egypt. Considering his horrendous prophetic mission, and the character of the man, it begs intellectual assent to accept the highly questionable proposition that he personally preferred to spend his final years in comparitive peace and comfort.’ 

And so it would seem this is a fitting last word on Jeremiah not setting foot in Ireland – apart from the proposed evidence at Cairn T of his tomb – but, the plot of Jeremiah’s life is still open according to John E Wall. Who confidently asserts: “Contrary to the doubting opinions of some, Jeremiah is mentioned in the Irish annals, under another name.” Yet he aptly admits: “This of course is not the total answer to all the mystery surrounding Jeremiah in Ireland. The question of Ollam Fodhla, variously called a prophet and a king in Irish history, needs to be explored. There are also questions that need to be answered concerning King Zedekiah’s daughters allegedly taken to Ireland by Jeremiah, the identity of Eochaidh the Heremon, the whereabouts of the wondrous stone, harp, and ark which were also carried to Ireland by Jeremiah according to legend. But that is for further research and/or revelation.” 

Jeremiah in Ireland, Proof from the Bible and the Irish Annals – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Historian Geoffrey Keating, writing of the expedition of Nemedh to Ireland in “thirty-four ships, with a crew of thirty in each ship” said that this party of colonisers was led by “Nemedh and his four sons, Starn, Iarbanel the Prophet, Anind and Fergus Leth-derg (Fergus of the Red Side)” – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

In all the genealogies of Nemedh’s descendants, one name is met with consistently: Iarbanel the Prophet. Iarbanel is clearly stated to be a descendant (“son of”) Nemedh, the Hebrew chieftain. This obviously makes Iarbanel also a Hebrew. Furthermore, Iarbanel is also unique in that he is called a prophet, the only one of Nemedh’s descendants so called… Keating, in his account of founders of a sort of school established by Fenius Farsa in Egypt after the Tower of Tahpanhes was abandoned. He writes, “The three sages that held the chief direction of this great school were Fenius Farsa from Scythia; Gaedal, son of Ethor… from Greece; and Caei, the Eloquent (or the Just), from Judea, or Iar[Iarbanel], son of Nemha [Nemedh], as others call him …”

‘… the name Tahpanhes… should be familiar to Bible students. The name is found in the book of Jeremiah… (Jeremiah 43:7)… according to legend, Jeremiah, his scribe, and the king’s daughters left that place to continue their journey to Ireland. 

Keating, quoting from the Leabhar Gabhala, gives us the following lines from a poem: “The Fair Iarbanel, a prophet true, / Was son of Nemedh, son of Ardnaman – / To this gray hero, mighty in spells…” 

‘Iarbanel is called “fair” (which may refer to lightness of skin or a mild… temperament or a man of sympathy, deep feeling and justice), a “prophet true” (as opposed to a false prophet); a “gray hero”; and, “mighty of spells”, i.e., a miracle-worker. What do we know about Jeremiah? Firstly, he was a Hebrew, a true prophet (Jeremiah 1:5) coming from a priestly family (Jeremiah 1:1); he came from Judea (Anathoth in Judah, a town northeast of Jerusalem – Jeremiah 1:1). He spoke the word of the Lord often and eloquently, rising early (Jeremiah 7:13, 25; 25:3; 35:14), speaking of justice (Jeremiah 22:15; 23:5; 31:23; 50:7). 

His eloquence, given to Jeremiah by God Himself (Jeremiah 1:7, 9) is revealed in his words and in this admission from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia that, “As far as the form of his poetic utterances is concerned, Jeremiah is of a poetical nature… He often speaks in the meter of an elegy”. As for “fair” (in the temperamental sense) and just, the ISBE says that Jeremiah “was, by nature, gentle and tender in his feelings, and sympathetic”. 

‘The name Jeremiah in Hebrew is Yirmeyahu, abbreviated to Yirmeyah. It means “the Lord establishes”. The beginning letters in the name are yod and resh… the letters “Iar” in “Iarbanel” are simply an abbreviation for the name Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah), a transliteration into the Irish tongue of the yod and resh of the prophet’s name. “Ban” is simply the Hebrew ben, meaning “son of”; “el” is the Hebrew El, meaning “God”… Iarbanel, translated from Hebrew to English is Iar ben El, or “Jeremiah, the son of God”! As a true prophet of God, who had God’s Holy Spirit within him, Jeremiah could legitimately be called a son of God… a “sanctified one”, i.e., one set apart for holy use and having the Spirit of God, Jeremiah certainly qualified as a saint. 

It is interesting to note that the Irish word for saint is namh (pronounced “nav”), and that Iarbanel is said to be a son of Nemedh, also spelled Nemha. Is there a philological connection between Nemedh/Nemha and namh? More light on this question will be shed later, but for now let us note the opinion of Yair Davidy, a respected Israeli Lost Ten Tribes researcher, who points out that, “Nemha [Nemedh] (i.e. in ‘Iar son of Nemha’ above) is from the same root as ‘Nemedian’ and means sanctified” (emphasis mine). A sanctified person is a saint! 

Jeremiah was the “son of of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin”. Anathoth was a priestly town. E. W. Bullinger in a note to Jeremiah 1:1 in his Companion Bible, in comparing the priestly lines of Eleazar and Ithamar says that “Anathoth belonged to that (line) of Ithamar”. This is not a common name in Scripture and only one man bears it. Ithamar is the fourth son of Aaron who founded a line of priests (I Chronicles 24:3, 6). It is obvious that if Jeremiah’s father, Hilkiah, who lived in Anathoth, was of the line of Ithamar, son of Aaron [from Levi], then this makes Jeremiah a [Levitical] descendant (“son of”) Aaron as well.

The evidence presented… leads to only one conclusion: that Iarbanel was Jeremiah. If one does not believe that Iarbanel was Jeremiah, then one is forced to believe that an amazing thing has happened. It has happened that a Hebrew prophet, a true prophet… in whom God’s Holy Spirit dwelt… who lived in Judea, who fled to Tahpanhes in Egypt… who was an eloquent speaker and a gentle man who preached justice, who was an old man and a worker of miracles, disappeared from the face of the earth. 

At the same time in history there appeared in Ireland, a Hebrew prophet… a true prophet, who was considered a saint, who lived in Judea, who fled to Tahpanhes in Egypt…who was an eloquent and a just man, who was an old man and “mighty in spells”, appeared on the scene, fully formed, literally out of nowhere. If one does not believe that Iarbanel was Jeremiah, one must believe that this is all a coincidence.’ 

The Nemedians arrived in Ireland in approximately 1714 BCE, ruling Ireland for two hundred and seventeen years, to circa 1497 BCE. The Nemedians are claimed ‘to be descendants of Sru, Sera and Isru. These names… are all forms of the name Israel.’ Aside from the fact the Nemedians invaded Ireland some eleven centuries before Jeremiah’s arrival – but if Iarbanel is a descendant of Nemedh and not a literal son – this writer finds little to fault in Wall’s argument. For if there is a case for Ollamh Fodhla being David, then Iarbanel as Jeremiah is equally as tenable in this writer’s view. 

Ark Files: ‘Jeremiah is the person most traditions say had something to do with the Ark’s disappearance, however, Jeremiah had been given this prophecy: “For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.” (Jeremiah 29:10-11) 

So Jeremiah knew very well that the kingdom would continue in Jerusalem after 70 years, and that God would still regard the hills there as His special place. Jeremiah would have no reason to panically bring the Ark out of its hiding place and drag it all the way to Ireland. Jeremiah still believed and prayed for the future of Jerusalem and pleaded with the people to not leave Jerusalem. He said their future was still there. If God’s people were faithful after the Babylonian captivity they would have been the chosen people and city forever.’ 

This was certainly true about Jerusalem in 586 BCE, for the second Temple was completed seventy years later in 516 BCE. But by 70 CE, the Temple was destroyed and the true descendants of Judah departed from a land which had been dominated by Edomite Jews for many decades – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Finding the Ark of the Covenant, Philadelphia Trumpet, Gerald Flurry, December 2013: 

‘Remember the prophecy in Jeremiah 3:16, because God tells us that the ark is going to be found! And Scripture and Irish history even tell us, in general, where it will emerge!’ 

Here we have one person presenting the valid point of why would Jeremiah go through the massive undertaking of traipsing the Ark across the world, when a second Temple was to be built in the Holy land? A Temple which importantly, did not include the Ark. A second reason to consider, is why would Jeremiah transfer the Ark thousands of miles, when the Eternal did not speak through the Ark any longer and His presence had departed from it.

On the other hand, Flurry subscribes to the continued importance of the Ark and its necessary transfer from the Middle East, where Jacob’s descendants no longer remain to the British Isles – where they are now. Flurry believes in its symbolic prophetic importance and relies on perhaps a misinterpretation of Jeremiah 3:16. 

There are three vital points to consider. 

The first, is that if the Ark was transported to Ireland, it makes no sense to bury it there at Tara. In that case, it would have been easier to leave it buried in Jerusalem or on Mount Nebo. 

The second, is that if Ireland is the tribe of Dan as Flurry and the majority of Bible students believe, then of all places, the Ark would not be residing there, under any circumstances – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. The truth is, Ireland is the tribe of Gad – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. Even so, the likelihood of the Ark being in Ireland is slim if based on historic precedent.

For after the conquest of Canaan during 1406 to 1400 BCE, the Ark was kept at Shiloh in the land of Ephraim. Later, we learn the Ark was in Bethel in Benjamin’s territory. This was at the time of the brutal rape and murder of the Levite’s concubine, circa 1351 BCE. Israel gathered to attack Benjamin in retribution and this occurred while Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron was High Priest. After that, it was returned to Shiloh, where we learn it was later cared for by Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phinehas. After the capture of the Ark and its return by the Philistines in 1046 BCE, the Ark never left the tribe of Judah for 460 years until circa 586 BCE.

Why is this significant? Because the modern day nations comprising the descendants of Benjamin, Judah and Ephraim respectively, are: Scotland, England and the United States of America – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Thus, it would not be a surprise or unexpected to learn the Ark was held securely in one of these countries. 

Whatever is eventually revealed to be the truth, it would appear that all roads for the Ark of God – if it still exists – lead to its finding a place of safety, after wending its way to the home of the relocated peoples of Judah in present day England, the true Zion and non-coincidently, located in its at once literal capital, London and symbolic chief city, Jerusalem.

The third, is that in Revelation 11:19, ESV it reveals: ‘… God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant…’ Very obviously, there is a spiritual Ark in Heaven and the one on Earth was a replication of the celestial one. If such is the case, then what need or requirement would the resurfacing of the earthly one merit? 

At the end of the day, the Bible is the beginning and the end of any matter, question, teaching or doctrine. As interesting, helpful or unhelpful as the case may be, all other non-canonical information is bluntly, irrelevant. Thus, the answer must be in the Bible and it would seem Jeremiah has answered the question. 

Jeremiah 3:16

Living Bible 

Then, when your land is once more filled with people, says the Lord, you will no longer wish for “the good old days of long ago” when you possessed the Ark of God’s covenant. Those days will not be missed or even thought about, and the Ark will not be reconstructed, for the Lord himself will be among you.’ 

While some may wish to interpret Jeremiah’s words as meaning the Ark is hidden and will one day be found or revealed, he is actually saying the Ark once had its purpose, but no more and so there is no need to replace it with another one. And therein lies the answer, there, all along. Why would anyone need to reconstruct a new Ark? The only reason to do so, would be because the original one was no longer in existence. But then, this would be redundant also, for the veil between us and God – where the Ark of the Covenant was located – was torn in two and we have access to the Father, through Christ who represents a new covenant – Hebrews 6:19;  9:12; 10:20. 

It is very unfortunate that writers within British-Israelism combined fact with fiction, resulting in discrediting a story which may actually have happened. The lingering hints of Jeremiah’s presence in Ireland as evidenced by certain references to him alive and dead, as well as his quite possible identity under another name and the unique commission given to him, support his travelling there. It was not safe to leave the princesses in Egypt, so taking them to Ireland does not seem unreasonable. One daughter known as Tamar in Judah, to be subsequently known as Tea or Tephi in Ireland is not difficult to accept either. This would have been responsibility enough for Jeremiah and as it is almost certain he did not carry the Stone of Destiny; it seems transporting the Ark was similarly not part of his remit. 

Remember the omer of manna; Aaron’s staff which budded; and the tablets of the testimony? The Testimony remained with the Ark, but the manna and rod had apparently disappeared between the time of Moses and Solomon according to the Bible, yet we read later that King Josiah hid the Ark and the manna together. We can only assume that the manna and the tablets containing the ten commandments writ on them, suffered the same fate as the Ark. Unless any further evidence surrounding the tablets and manna reveals otherwise. Aaron’s rod is another matter, as that is not mentioned by the Bible or any non-canonical work. Perhaps it was buried with Aaron in 1402 BCE, when he died – four years after Moses and his sister Miriam – during the seven years it took Israel to conquer Canaan and divide the land amongst the twelve tribes.    

It is very probable that Jeremiah was the last person to see the Ark of God – Jeremiah 3:16. 

There are four options which are viable solutions to the conundrum of what happened to the Ark. 

One: Jeremiah daringly smuggled it out of Jerusalem, to Egypt and then on to Ireland. After considering all that we have learned, this seems the least likely course of action – Deuteronomy 4:23-24. The Ark would have eventually fallen into the hands of unrighteous people. A secret society would have ultimately taken possession of the Ark. This would not be something the Eternal would allow to happen when it had been representative of his presence and power on Earth; even though it was now defunct.

Two: Jeremiah left the Ark exactly where King Josiah had hidden it in a secret chamber near the Temple originally constructed by King Solomon. This also appears unlikely for the reason: Jeremiah knew that Judah and Jerusalem would be subsumed into Idumea and ruled by the Edomites at the time of Christ and eventually become completely un-Israelite as it is today – Jeremiah 31:4, 8, 10: 44:14, Lamentations 1:3. Neither the Jews or the Arabs are Israelite descended peoples and it is questionable whether the Eternal would let it fall into the hands of gentiles in the latter days – 2 Thessalonians 2: 3-4 (Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia). 

Three: Jeremiah really did move the Ark to a location such as Mount Nebo, as recorded in the Book of 2 Maccabees. This writer believes this is getting warmer to what may have happened, but not exactly as imagined. This leads to the final option. The one Jeremiah cryptically alludes. 

Four: The Ark was taken by Jeremiah, albeit reluctantly, to a secure and symbolic location. Mount Nebo was where Moses was able to view the land promised to the Israelites and where one day in the distant future they will once again dwell – Ezekiel 38:14, 18. Jeremiah understood that a New Covenant would be enacted, one which did not necessitate or require the physical Ark of the Old Covenant. 

Jeremiah 31:31-34 

English Standard Version 

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke… I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people… for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

As the Ark was not under any circumstance – the Philistines excepted, as an object lesson and wake up call – to fall into the hands of enemies and unbelievers or to be mocked and desecrated, the Eternal would have sensationally told Jeremiah to decommission the Ark; by melting it down and disposing of it, burying its residue (for the want of an alternative location) on Mount Nebo. 

For all can agree, the Ark has seemingly disappeared from the face of the Earth.

Manhatten Gold & Silver, Can Gold be Destroyed?

‘As it stands, it is not possible to destroy gold on a molecular level with any naturally occurring substance on earth. Pure gold is virtually indestructible. It will not corrode, rust or tarnish, and fire cannot destroy it. This is why all of the gold extracted from the earth is still melted, re-melted and used over and over again. A great example of this is the Perth Mint in Australia… They host a public gold pour multiple times a day. Since 1993, they have melted and recast the same gold bar over 65,000 times. Throughout this time, none of the recast gold has been irrecoverably destroyed. 

The only way gold could truly be destroyed is through nuclear reactions. However, there does exist a way to dissolve gold using “Aqua Regia,” which is a mix of hydrochloric and nitric acids. Even so, this does not mean the gold is destroyed after exposure. After dissolving, it exists as gold particles in a more widely dispersed form.’

Jeremiah, devastated, would have had churning emotions aghast with horror in performing such an awful act. Imagine having to destroy the most awe inspiring device in history, at once stunningly beautiful with deadly potency. Yet, its symbolic destruction pre-figured the momentous event involving Christ offering himself as a sacrifice so that the distance between all humankind and God was bridged, with Jesus as the intermediary – 1 Timothy 2:5. 

Matthew 27:50-52 

New International Version 

‘And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.’

The Eternal through His Holy Spirit now dwells permanently in the hearts of believers instead of the temporal Ark – 1 Corinthians 3:16, 2 Timothy 1:14. The Ark of God will never re-appear and will never be re-made. Instead, the glorious Heavenly Ark will one day be made manifest. May that day be soon…

Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple

Revelation 11:19 English Standard Version 

And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb

Revelation 21:22 English Standard version 

“In this regard – and only this regard – God is kind of like Sheldon from Big Bang Theory: they’re both very territorial about where they sit.”

Benito Cerino 

© Orion Gold 2024 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Chapter XXXI

In the previous chapter, we summarily mentioned the identity of Simeon as Wales. Wherever Judah is, Simeon will not just be next to them, but part of them. Only one nation and former Principality, could fulfil this role. Occupied since 1292, Wales was annexed into England by an Act of the English Parliament in 1535. While Wales ceased being a Principality by 1543, it was only in 2011 that its status as a country was made official by the ISO – International Organization for Standardization.

Scotland has its own law, distinct from English law, its own issued bank notes – though the same currency of pound sterling – and its parliament has law making powers beyond that of the Welsh Parliament, which became a Devolved National Assembly in 1999 and renamed Senedd (Parliament) in 2020. The Welsh have the same law as England and as we learned in the preceding chapter, since 1542 they constitute with England, the Kingdom of England – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The ‘lost ten tribes’ is a misnomer as all thirteen tribes were lost. The separating of the tribes into ten for the Kingdom of Israel and two for the Kingdom of Judah is misleading, as not just the House of Benjamin were united with the House of Judah, but many from the family of Kohath a son of Levi, as well as the tribe of Simeon were integral to the United Kingdom of Judah. As these four are remarkably yet without coincidence the core of the United Kingdom of Great Britain today. Presently, Northern Ireland is part of that United Kingdom, though for how long? For its destiny is to join its Israelite brothers. 

It is ironically, ten tribes if we include Joseph as split into three: Ephraim; the half tribe of West Manasseh; and the half tribe of East Manasseh. If we don’t split them, as identity researchers would, then it would technically be the ‘eight’ lost tribes: Joseph, Reuben, Issachar, Zebulun, Gad, Asher, Dan and Naphtali. 

As Judah is typically ascribed to the Jews and Benjamin either to the Jews or to Abraham and Keturah’s children in Norway (or Iceland); Simeon is subscribed to either Scotland or rightfully, Wales. One identity expert presents a case for the American Irish. In this investigation, Northern England was also considered for Simeon. 

Reuben and Gad maintained a close historical relationship, which we will see replicated by other brothers; in that half brothers invariably formed closer relationships and dwelt adjacent to each other instead of with a full blood brother. In this case, Gad from Leah’s handmaid Zilpah and Reuben the firstborn of Leah both crossed the River Jordan to settle in the eastern border lands of Israel in Canaan. They lived in close proximity with East Manasseh, Ammon and Moab. Today, they live next to each other and share the land of the Emerald Isle. They are in juxtapostion with the three nations on the British mainland and to the (far) west is the half tribe of East Manasseh as would be expected. 

Gad is the Republic of Ireland and Reuben is located within Northern Ireland, dominated by the historical Province of Ulster. As the brothers Reuben, Simeon and Levi with their half brother Gad are all intertwined in their histories and sharing the British Isles, it is logical to discuss them within the same chapter. We will probably revert back to Benjamin and the Picts at times because of their common past living in Northern Ireland, prior to settling in Alba – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Genesis 29:31-34; 30:9-11

English Standard Version

31 ‘When the Lord saw that Leah was hated [loved less than Rachel], he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren. 32 And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben [see a Son], for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”

33 She conceived again and bore a son, and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon [heard].

34 Again she conceived and bore a son, and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi [attached]…

9 When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Then Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son. 11 And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad [good fortune].’

Reuben’s name derives from the verb ra’a, ‘to see’ or ‘understand’ and the noun ben, ‘son’ meaning ‘behold a son, son of vision, a son who’s seen.’ Reuben was Jacob’s first son, born in 1752 BCE (according to an unconventional chronology) and the first with wife Leah.

Recall that the prefix Reu is a family name for Arphaxad’s descendants. Reu was a son of Peleg; there is Reuel, a son of Esau; a Reuel associated with the family name of Moses’s father-in-law (refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia); a Benjamite (1 Chronicles 9:8); and interestingly, a chief of Gad, Eliasaph, had a father who was called Reuel – Numbers 2:14. 

Simeon was the second son born to Jacob and Leah in 1750 BCE and his name comes from the verb shama’, ‘to hear.’ Levi was Jacob and Leah’s third son, born in 1748 BCE and his name stems from the verb lawa, ‘to join’ or ‘connect.’

Gad meanwhile, was born in 1744 BCE to Leah’s handmaid Zilpah. Gad was Jacob’s seventh son, Leah’s fifth including Zilpah’s sons and Zilpah’s eldest of two – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Gad’s name derives from the verb gadad, ‘to cut, invade’ and ‘expose.’ Jones’s Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names says: ‘Good luck.’

Everyone has heard of “the luck of the Irish.” This saying is applicable to the Irish of the Republic.

The people in Ireland are the descendants of Gad. Gad is invariably ascribed to Switzerland and one identity expert offers Sweden while another, Germany. Reuben is unanimously identified incorrectly as France. We have discussed the Swiss descended from Haran; and the French and their ancestors Moab and Ammon; as well as the Swedes who descend from Keturah – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Reuben’s descendants equate primarily to the Protestant peoples of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has a unique status, for he is ‘a son who’s seen, or behold a son’, as in a people… not a sovereign state; not a province, as it comprises six of the total nine counties of Ulster; not a nation; though it is both a region and constituent country of the United Kingdom. 

Genesis 34:1-31

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the women of the land. 2 And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humiliated her. 3 And his soul was drawn to Dinah the daughter of Jacob. He loved the young woman and spoke tenderly to her. 

4 So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, “Get me this girl for my wife.”

5 Now Jacob heard that he had defiled his daughter Dinah. But his sons were with his livestock in the field, so Jacob held his peace until they came. 6 And Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him. 7 The sons of Jacob had come in from the field as soon as they heard of it, and the men were indignant and very angry, because he had done an outrageous thing in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter, for such a thing must not be done.’

Shechem had a strange way of showing his love for Dinah, through rape. Afterwards, Shechem became obsessed with Dinah. Dinah must have been alluring in personality as well as in looks.

Dinah

One wonders what seeing ‘the women of the land’ means. Did Shechem mis-read Dinah and then realise she was unique and that he wanted her as his wife. We have discussed the fact that Dinah was Zebulun’s twin. This means she was Leah’s last of seven children. Leah was thirty-four in 1740 BCE when she gave birth to Dinah. 

After Jacob had left his father-in-law, Laban and reconciled with Esau in 1720 BCE, he settled in Shechem. Thus Dinah visiting the women of the land, would have been locally where they were living. In the article: Job, we study the possibility his second wife was a descendant of Dinah.

Genesis: 8 ‘But Hamor spoke with them, saying, “The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him to be his wife. 9 Make marriages with us. Give your daughters to us, and take our daughters for yourselves.

10 You shall dwell with us, and the land shall be open to you. Dwell and trade in it, and get property in it.” 11 Shechem also said to her father and to her brothers, “Let me find favor in your eyes, and whatever you say to me I will give. 12 Ask me for as great a bride-price and gift as you will, and I will give whatever you say to me. Only give me the young woman to be my wife.”

We have studied the Hivites and the different peoples who went by that name: the original Hivites from Canaan’s son Hiv (refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa**); Nephilim related Elioud giants (refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega); and the fact that certain descendants of Shem also became known by Canaanite names after the original sons of Canaan had migrated to North Africa – refer Chapter XXVI Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.*

These Hivites fall into the third category and their link with the Midianites* and Kenites was explored earlier. What is also interesting is that these circumstances of the Israelites living adjacent to the Hivites and the Hivite’s willingness to share has been replicated in South Africa – modern day Sidon* (refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil**) – between the Afrikaners and the British. We will also find that Dinah’s connection with the Hivite, Shechem and the fact her twin brother is Zebulun, much more than a passing coincidence – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. 

Genesis: 13 ‘The sons of Jacob answered Shechem and his father Hamor deceitfully, because he had defiled their sister Dinah. 14 They said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us. 15 Only on this condition will we agree with you – that you will become as we are by every male among you being circumcised. 16 Then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters to ourselves, and we will dwell with you and become one people [a boldfaced lie]. 17 But if you will not listen to us and be circumcised, then we will take our daughter, and we will be gone.”

18 ‘Their words pleased Hamor and Hamor’s son Shechem. 19 And the young man did not delay to do the thing, because he delighted in Jacob’s daughter [they may have been married at this point]. Now he was the most honored of all his father’s house. 20 So Hamor and his son Shechem came to the gate of their city and spoke to the men of their city, saying, 21 “These men are at peace with us; let them dwell in the land and trade in it, for behold, the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters as wives, and let us give them our daughters. 22 Only on this condition will the men agree to dwell with us to become one people – when every male among us is circumcised as they are circumcised. 

23 Will not their livestock, their property and all their beasts be ours? Only let us agree with them, and they will dwell with us.” 24 And all who went out of the gate of his city listened to Hamor and his son Shechem, and every male was circumcised, all who went out of the gate of his city.

25 On the third day, when they were sore, two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s [elder] brothers, took their swords and came against the city while it felt secure [at night] and killed all the males. 26 They killed Hamor and his son Shechem with the sword and took Dinah out of Shechem’s house and went away. 27 The [other] sons of Jacob came upon the slain and plundered the city, because they had defiled their sister.’ 

The incident reminds of David’s mission given to him by Saul for the hand of his daughter, Michal. Whereby David killed two hundred Philistines for their foreskins – 1 Samuel 18:27.

It was a cruel trick which began with a lie and ended in murder; though none less than Shechem deserved. For Shechem had abused his position of authority to do as he liked, assuming Jacob’s family would accept his whims. It would have been enough to stop there, particularly as Shechem wished to make amends and do right by Dinah. It is here that we learn more about Simeon and Levi. If Dinah was about twenty-five – it may have happened earlier – it would have been 1717 BCE and Simeon would have been thirty-three and Levi, thirty-one. 

Levi and Simeon

It is apparent that Simeon and Levi were very similar, they were both emotional and impetuous and they acted in one accord, believing a savage act of retribution was moral. It is admirable that they sought justice for Dinah’s shame, though it was a step too far. It circumnavigated the future that the Creator may have preferred for Shechem, Dinah and not forgetting Simeon. Note that Simeon’s brothers supported him and Levi in following up what they had started. Intriguingly, it did not seem to deter the Eternal from giving Levi’s descendants the responsibility of the priesthood.

Genesis: 28 ‘They took their flocks and their herds, their donkeys, and whatever was in the city and in the field. 29 All their wealth, all their little ones and their wives, all that was in the houses, they captured and plundered. 30 Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, “You have brought trouble on me by making me stink to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites. My numbers are few, and if they gather themselves against me and attack me, I shall be destroyed, both I and my household.” 31 But they said, “Should he treat our sister like a prostitute?”

The chapter ends abruptly, with Simeon and Levi unrepentant. Though the trouble Jacob envisioned either didn’t happen or didn’t amount to much. As they were living near the Hivites, it makes sense Jacob was concerned. Jacob is displaying his customary worry; a trait of his which we have witnessed previously and his not always relying on the Eternal as much as he could. The Hivites and their allies may have deemed the Israelites too dangerous and decided to let it lie. 

Previously, we read the Genesis account about Joseph in Egypt when his brothers visited in 1687 BCE during the seven years of famine which lasted between 1689 to 1682 BCE. We have discussed Jacob’s, Judah and Benjamin’s involvement. Reuben and Simeon are also expounded upon in the narrative. 

Genesis 42:18-37; 43:16-23

English Standard Version

18 ‘On the third day Joseph said to them, “Do this and you will live, for I fear God: 19 if you are honest men, let one of your brothers remain confined where you are in custody, and let the rest go and carry grain for the famine of your households, 20 and bring your youngest brother [Benjamin] to me. So your words will be verified, and you shall not die.” And they did so. 21 Then they said to one another, “In truth we are guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the distress of his soul, when he begged us and we did not listen. That is why this distress has come upon us.”

22 And Reuben answered them, “Did I not tell you not to sin against the boy? But you did not listen. So now there comes a reckoning for his blood.” 23 They did not know that Joseph understood them, for there was an interpreter between them. 24 Then he turned away from them and wept. And he returned to them and spoke to them. And he took Simeon from them and bound him before their eyes. 25 And Joseph gave orders to fill their bags with grain, and to replace every man’s money in his sack, and to give them provisions for the journey. This was done for them.

35 As they emptied their sacks, behold, every man’s bundle of money was in his sack. And when they and their father saw their bundles of money, they were afraid. 36 And Jacob their father said to them, “You have bereaved me of my children: Joseph is no more, and Simeon is no more, and now you would take Benjamin. All this has come against me.”

37 Then Reuben said to his father, “Kill my two sons [Hanoch and Pallu were the eldest and second born of four sons] if I do not bring him back to you. Put him in my hands, and I will bring him back to you.” 

16 When Joseph saw Benjamin with them, he said to the steward of his house, “Bring the men into the house, and slaughter an animal and make ready, for the men are to dine with me at noon.” 17 The man did as Joseph told him and brought the men to Joseph’s house. 18 And the men were afraid because they were brought to Joseph’s house, and they said, “It is because of the money, which was replaced in our sacks the first time, that we are brought in, so that he may assault us and fall upon us to make us servants and seize our donkeys.” 

19 So they went up to the steward of Joseph’s house and spoke with him at the door of the house, 20 and said, “Oh, my lord, we came down the first time to buy food. 21 And when we came to the lodging place we opened our sacks, and there was each man’s money in the mouth of his sack, our money in full weight. So we have brought it again with us, 22 and we have brought other money down with us to buy food. We do not know who put our money in our sacks.” 23 He replied, “Peace to you, do not be afraid. Your God and the God of your father has put treasure in your sacks for you. I received your money.” Then he brought Simeon out to them.’

Recall that Reubens’s secret plan was to release Joseph so that he wouldn’t die. Judah resorted to a plan that also meant Jospeh wouldn’t die, but unlike Reuben’s plan it meant pretending he had died and making money from selling him at the same time. 

Reuben again, feels honour bound to make a bad situation better by offering at that time, both his sons. It is not clear why Simeon is selected to be held as a prisoner. It poses a series of questions. The only matter we know about Simeon is his act of vengeful violence. Could this have been on Joseph’s mind? Dinah is never spoken of again after Simeon and Levi’s atrocity. Some offer that Dinah may have died with her husband during the chaos of that night. If so, circa 1717 BCE meant Joseph would have been nine or ten years of age. Joseph may have held Simeon accountable if Dinah had been lost. If Job married a descendant of Dinah (refer article: Job) as alleged, did she have a child by Shechem? 

Genesis 48:5

English Standard Version

5 ‘And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.’

Jacob is speaking to Joseph and in a dramatic turn of events, takes or adopts his two grandsons as his very own sons. This means they would inherit (share) in the birthright blessings promised to Joseph. The birthright if you will, skipped a generation, or, Manasseh and Ephraim were each elevated as actual sons of Jacob. Twelve sons became thirteen. What is very interesting is that Reuben and Simeon are stated together. Was the original intention to split the birthright blessing? 

Recall the sceptre of rulership and royalty was given to Jacob’s fourth son Judah. The Priestly line of service was to be given to Levi, Jacob’s third born son. It appears credible that Reuben and Simeon were to be the recipients of a split blessing. If so, this means one of the peoples who became the Welsh and the Northern Irish would have instead become a great nation and the other would have become an even greater nation comprising many peoples – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. All four sons were born to Jacob’s wife Leah and all four sons were caught out in compromising acts of weakness of character. Judah’s were discussed in length in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The descriptions of Jacob’s sons, including future prophecies are addressed by Jacob, Moses and the fourth Judge of ancient Israel, Deborah.

Genesis 49:5-7

English Standard Version

5 “Simeon and Levi are [close] brothersweapons of violence are their swords

The Message: ‘Simeon and Levi are two of a kind, ready to fight at the drop of a hat.’

Simeon and Levi were joined at the hip as they say and were obviously very close siblings. Being inseparable, they like many brothers and sisters ‘brought out the worst in each other.’ The King James version says that the brothers were ‘instruments of cruelty.’

Historically, a sword is one of the symbols for Simeon as are fortifications (or castles). Interestingly, there are far more castles in Wales than any other country in the world per square mile; approximately six hundred, with some being inhabited for over a thousand years.

Genesis: 6 ‘Let my soul come not into their council [their discussions]; O my glory, be not joined to their company [their plans]. For in their anger they killed men, and in their willfulness [H7522 ratsown: ‘pleasure, desire, self-will’] they hamstrung [H6131 aqar: cut] oxen. 

Counsel should not be sought from people with quick tempers rising to uncontrolled anger, for they are unstable due to their lack of self-control. The Hebrew word aqar means to hobble a creature. Simeon and Levi took pleasure in maiming animals for sport.

7 ‘Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce, and their wrath, for it is cruel! I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel.’

Clearly, these were not men to trifle with and exhibited what could be politely called a fiery (Celtic) temperament. The Eternal was not impressed with their actions, though in the case of Levi at least a measure of forgiveness was granted in choosing his male descendants for the levitical priesthood. It would seem that Levi expressed a penitent attitude. Prominent descendants of Levi include the judges, Eli and Samuel; the scribe and priest, Ezra; the prophet, John the Baptist; and the brother-in-law of Peter, Barnabas.

The punishment for the brothers actions was to diminish their standing as sons of Jacob and strip them of tribal status, absorbing them into the remaining eleven tribes. The key reason for this was because Simeon and Levi misused the circumcision rite, which was an act of setting people apart as sanctified before the Eternal. The brothers had misused it as a weapon of war and revenge.

The Creator relents for both* brothers and lessens their sentences. In the last chapter it was mentioned that Levi and his descendants were given the role of the Priesthood and ministration as well becoming in today’s parlance, the teachers, lawyers and civil servants of society. Though, they were still to be scattered amongst the Israelite nations. The majority of which as Levi means, attached themselves to the tribes associated with the Kingdom of Judah – Simeon and Benjamin. Today they equate to the nations of England, Wales and Scotland.

In Judges chapter five, Deborah addresses eleven of the fourteen Tribal splits. The three not mentioned, are Simeon, Levi and Judah who did not take part in the war against the kings of Canaan. In Deuteronomy chapter thirty-three, Moses adds additional prophecies to Jacob’s. The only omission, is Simeon. This is because they were going to be closely aligned with the tribe of Judah. Levi on the other hand, has a more lengthy discourse than some of his brothers.

Joshua 19:1, 9

English Standard Version

‘The second lot [first lot: Benjamin] came out for Simeon  according to their clans… The inheritance of the people of Simeon formed part of the territory of the people of Judah. Because the portion of the people of Judah was too large for them, the people of Simeon obtained an inheritance* in the midst of their inheritance’ – Judges 1:3.

In dual parallelism, the Welsh people today form a separate nation that is yet also, still part of and within the geo-political entity, the Kingdom of England.

Deuteronomy 33:8-11

English Standard Version

8 ‘And of Levi he said, “Give to Levi your Thummim, and your Urim to your godly one, whom you tested at Massah, with whom you quarreled at the waters of Meribah…’

The account of Massah and Meribah is given in Exodus 17:1-7. The people were thirsty from lack of water when they camped at Rephidim in the wilderness of Sin. Rephidim was Nephilim territory. It is ironic symbolism that the land had no water [Jude 1:12, “… waterless clouds…”]. They quarrelled with Moses and tempted the Eternal by saying: “Is the Lord among us or not?” Hence Massah means ‘tempted’ and Meribah, ‘quarrel’. The Eternal did provide water, through a miracle of water gushing from a large rock, after Moses struck it with his staff. 

The Urim and Thummim was a priestly device for obtaining oracles on decisions. The high priest’s ephod, an apron-like garment had a breast piece, which was an inlaid pouch with twelve precious stones engraved with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel – Exodus 28:15–30; Leviticus 8:8. 

Finding the Will of God, Dr Bruce Waltke, page 62-64 – emphasis mine: 

‘The priest could use the urim and thummin to determine God’s will in a particular situation… the priest carried in his breastplate perhaps two… stones, one white and the other black, that would give a yes or no answer to a specific question’ – refer article: The Christ Chronology.

‘Should Israel be preparing for battle, they would somehow shake or toss the [stones]. If they turned up black the Israelites would not go to battle, and if they turned up white they would proceed into battle with the knowledge that they were in the will of God. We read in Exodus 28:30, “Also put the Urim and the Thummin in the breastpiece, so they may be over Aaron’s heart whenever he enters the presence of the Lord. Thus Aaron will always bear the means of making decisions for the Israelites over his heart before the Lord.”

‘1 Samuel 28:6 makes clear a definite answer was not always obtainable, so it may not have been as simple as tossing two stones on [the] ground. Moses never used them; they were given for the high priest in aiding those who could not find God’s guidance any other way. Some translate the words urim and thummin to mean “curse” and “blessing,” others simply “dark” and “light,” although the literal translation [from the Hebrew is]… “light” and “perfections.” 

‘The Old Testament seems to indicate that the urim and thummin faded from use during the early days of Israel’s monarchy, and are only referred to once after the Babylonian exile. This may be so because the institution of monarchy God inaugurated the office of prophet. The prophets now participated in God’s heavenly court and communicated God’s messages to the courts in Jerusalem and Samaria. Apparently prophets who revealed God’s word to the king replaced the urim and thummin, through which He revealed His mind to the priest. Nevertheless, we still find Ezra using this device to determine the ancestry of the priests who returned from the exile in Ezra 2.63. After this the Bible never mentions the urim and thummin again.’ 

Deuteronomy: 9 ‘who said of his father and mother, ‘I regard them not’; he disowned his brothers and ignored his children. For they observed your word and kept your covenant.’

This appears to be speaking of Levi, yet it is ultimately Aaron who would have the responsibility for carrying the Urim and Thummim on his breast plate and of casting them in decisions. We have read about this ceremony in connection with the sacrificial goat named Azazel on the Day of Atonement – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod.

Deuteronomy: 10 ‘They shall teach Jacob your rules and Israel your law; they shall put incense before you and whole burnt offerings on your altar.’

Many Levites and all the priests did not have an easy task. It was hard work maintaining the Tabernacle in their forty odd year trek through the wilderness during the years 1446 to 1400 CE – and then beyond until the first Temple from 959 to 586 BCE and the second Temple from 516 BCE till its destruction in 70 CE – including the sacrificing of animals on a daily basis as well as the ceremonial seven times a year for the annual festivals. It was both burdensome and bloody.

This is a significant reason why the Son of Man’s sacrifice was liberating. It ended all the ritualistic statutes, judgements and laws that pertained to the levitical sacrificial system. It wasn’t so much a blessing to Levi and his descendants, but a burden of responsibility. Even so, Moses calls for the Creator to bless* and protect Levi and his descendants, in a statement remarkably echoing the one given to Judah regarding his enemies.

Deuteronomy: 11 ‘Bless, O Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands; crush the loins of his adversaries, of those who hate him, that they rise not again.”

In the Book of Jubilees, we previously read of Isaac’s blessing for Judah. Issac also blesses Levi, separately from Jacob.

Book of Jubilees 31:12-17

12 ‘And the spirit of prophecy came down into [Isaac’s] mouth, and he took Levi by his right hand and Judah by his left. 13 And he turned to Levi first, and began to bless him first, and said to him:

May the Almighty of all, the very Yahweh of all the ages, bless you and your children throughout all the ages. 14 And may Yahweh give to you and to your seed greatness and great splendor, and cause you and your seed, from among all flesh, to approach Him to serve in His sanctuary… 15 And they shall be judges and princes, and chiefs of all the seed of the sons of Jacob; They shall speak the word of Yahweh in righteousness, And they shall judge all His judgments in righteousness. And they shall declare My ways to Jacob And My paths to Israel. The blessing of Yahweh shall be given in their mouths To bless all the seed of the beloved. 

16 Your mother has called your name Levi, And justly has she called your name; You shall be joined to Yahweh And be the companion of all the sons of Jacob [scattered in Israel]; Let His table be yours, And do you and your sons eat thereof; And may your table be full unto all generations, And your food fail not unto all the ages. 17 And let all who hate you fall down before you, And let all your adversaries be rooted out and perish; And blessed be he that blesses* you, And cursed be every nation that curses you.’

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950 – emphasis mine: 

‘Simeon received no blessing from Moses. In fact, he does not even mention the tribe! Jacob said God would scatter them throughout Israel. How? Take a map of Palestine for the time of the division of the land. Notice that Simeon did have an inheritance South of Judah. When Judah separated from Israel, Judah occupied that territory, yet Simeon went with Israel! The only explanation is that Simeon migrated into Israel generally, but no new territory was assigned to Simeon. This tribe became scattered. It is possible that the small scattered tribes in Western Europe, variously called the Senones or Semaones or Sennones, represented the fragments of the tribe of Simeon.’ 

It isn’t the only explanation as we have learned. Simeon didn’t go with Israel immediately; instead, the tribe was an integral part of Judah alongside Benjamin.

Hoeh: ‘Levi, the priestly tribe, was to be scattered in Israel (Genesis 49:5-7). God never gave them land to inherit as the other tribes. Therefore, we should not expect them to be given territory today. Nothing is said in Deuteronomy 33 about inheriting land. Among the Jews today we find many bearing the names: Levi, Levy, Levine. Others bear the name “Cohen” and its variations. The Hebrew word “Kohen” means priest and is so translated 725 times in the King James version. Here then, we have the great bulk of Levi scattered among Judah because they left their priestly functions in Israel almost totally (I Kings 12:31).’ 

Agreed, that the priestly Levites of Kohath, from Aaron were associated with the true tribe of Judah and not the Jews – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Though they are not to be equated with ‘the great bulk of Levi.’ Levi was scattered amongst all the tribes, as all priests were Levites, but not all Levites were priests. 

Certain Simeonites are named who went up against Sier and the Amalekites and defeated them, living in part of their land. 1 Chronicles 4:42-43 ESV:  ‘And some of them, five hundred men of the Simeonites, went to Mount Seir, having as their leaders Pelatiah, Neariah, Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi. And they defeated the remnant of the Amalekites who had escaped…’ Numbers 13:5 ESV gives the name of the Simeonite sent with others to spy out Canaan before they invaded: ‘… from the tribe of Simeon, Shaphat the son of Hori [remarkably similar to Sier’s forbear Hor, as in Horite].’

A selection of verses supporting the close bond Judah and Simeon shared geographically and politically, just as England and Wales exhibit today.

1 Chronicles 6:65

English Standard Version

‘They gave by lot out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin these cities that are mentioned by name.’

Joshua 21:9

English Standard Version

‘Out of the tribe of the people of Judah and the tribe of the people of Simeon they gave the following cities mentioned by name…’

Judges 1:3, 17

English Standard Version

‘And Judah said to Simeon his brother, “Come up with me into the territory allotted to me, that we may fight against the Canaanites. And I likewise will go with you into the territory allotted to you.” So Simeon went with him… 17 And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they defeated the Canaanites who inhabited Zephath and devoted it to destruction…’

In the Book of Jubilees we learn of the names of the wives of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Gad, with the Book of Jasher offering further details.

Book of Jubilees 34:20-21

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives.

The name of Reuben’s wife is ‘Ada;

and the name of Simeon’s wife is Adlbaa, a Canaanite;

and the name of Levi’s wife is Melka, of the daughters of Aram, of the seed of the sons of Terah [the same as Benjamin]…

and the name of Gad’s wife, Maka

And Simeon repented, and took a second wife from Mesopotamia as his brothers.’

As the Book of Jasher tends to be a more reliable source than the Book of Jubilees, its details are favoured in this instance – except perhaps for Levi.

Book of Jasher 45:1-3, 5-6, 9-10

1 ‘… Reuben the son of Jacob went to Timnah and took unto him for a wife Eliuram, the daughter of Avi the Canaanite, and he came to her. 2 And Eliuram the wife of Reuben conceived and bare him Hanoch, Palu, Chetzron and Carmi, four sons…

2 … Simeon his brother took his sister Dinah for a wife, and she bare unto him Memuel, Yamin, Ohad, Jachin and Zochar, five sons. 3 And he afterward came to Bunah the Canaanitish woman, the same is Bunah whom Simeon took captive from the city of Shechem, and Bunah was before Dinah and attended upon her, and Simeon came to her, and she bare unto him Saul.*

5 … Levi… went to the land of the east, and… took… for [a wife a daughter] of Jobab the son of Joktan, the son of Eber; and Jobab the son of Yoktan had two daughters; the name of the elder was Adinah… 6 And Levi took Adinah, and… came to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house, and Adinah bare unto Levi, Gershon, Kehath and Merari; three sons.

9 … Gad… went to Haran and took… [a daughter] of Amuram the son of Uz, the son of Nahor… 10… and the name of the [youngest daughter] Uzith… and Gad took Uzith; and brought [her] to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house. 11… Uzith bare unto Gad Zephion, Chagi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi and Arali, seven sons’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

It is not clear who the identity of Reuben’s wife is. As his brothers, Judah and Simeon had a propensity for marrying Canaanite women, a women of Black descent cannot be ruled out.

It seems unlikely that Simeon took his sister Dinah as a wife, though the question would remain who his first wife was if his second Canaanite wife gave him only his son Saul (Shaul).*

Whereas, Levi plausibly either took a wife from Joktan’s family, which equates to the predominantly Slavic speaking peoples of Eastern Europe today – and of whom Keturah was related – or from the same line that his half-brother Benjamin had married.

Gad is stated as marrying from the line of Nahor, similar to that of Isaac and Jacob.

In Numbers chapter one, census numbers for the tribes two years after they left Egypt are listed. The Levites are not included in the census figures. These are the numbers for the tribes we have covered this far, including Judah and Benjamin which weren’t included in the previous chapter.

1 ‘The Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting, on the first day of the second month [New Moon, April/May], in the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt [in 1444 BCE], saying, 2 “Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, by clans, by fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, every male, head by head. 3 From twenty years old and upward, all in Israel who are able to go to war, you and Aaron shall list them, company by company. 

21 those listed of the tribe of Reuben were 46,500 [4th highest].

23 those listed of the tribe of Simeon were 59,300 [2nd].

25 those listed of the tribe of Gad were 45,650 [3rd].

27 those listed of the tribe of Judah were 74,600 [1st].

37 those listed of the tribe of Benjamin were 35,400 [5th].

47 ‘But the Levites were not listed along with them by their ancestral tribe. 48 For the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 49 “Only the tribe of Levi you shall not list, and you shall not take a census of them among the people of Israel. 50 But appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all its furnishings, and over all that belongs to it. They are to carry the tabernacle and all its furnishings, and they shall take care of it and shall camp around the tabernacle… And if any outsider comes near, he shall be put to death. 52 The people of Israel shall pitch their tents by their companies, each man in his own camp and each man by his own standard. 53 But the Levites shall camp around the tabernacle of the testimony… And the Levites shall keep guard over the tabernacle of the testimony.”

Notice that Judah is by far the biggest tribe of these five, as England has a sizeable population today and note Simeon is second. The respective sons and clans of the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Gad.

Genesis 46:8-16

English Standard Version

8 ‘Now these are the names of the descendants of Israel, who came into Egypt, Jacob and his sons.

Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn, 9 and the sons of Reuben [4]:

Hanoch [inaugarated], Pallu [distinguished], Hezron [enclosure], and Carmi [vinedresser]. 

10 The sons of Simeon [6]:

Jemuel [God’s day], Jamin, Ohad [to praise], Jachin [established], Zohar [tawny], and Shaul, the son of a Canaanite woman* [Exodus 6.15]. 

11 The sons of Levi [3]:

Gershon [exiled], Kohath [congregation], and Merari [bitter]. 

16 The sons of Gad [7]:

Ziphion [hidden], Haggi [festive], Shuni [silence], Ezbon [undertsand], Eri [focused], Arodi, and Areli [lion of God]. 

Gad’s son Eri may have an etymological link with the names Eri-n and Ire for Ireland. Hanoch was also the name of one of Midian’s five sons, a son of Abraham and Keturah – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Another census was taken as they were entering Canaan some forty years later, circa 1404 BCE.

Numbers 26:1-65

English Standard Version

1 ‘After the plague, the Lord said to Moses and to Eleazar the son of Aaron, the priest, 2 “Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers’ houses, all in Israel who are able to go to war.” 3 And Moses and Eleazar the priest spoke with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho… 

These are the clans of the Reubenites, and those listed were 43,730 [-2,770]. 8 And the sons of Pallu: Eliab. 9 The sons of Eliab: Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. These are the Dathan and Abiram, chosen from the congregation, who contended against Moses and Aaron in the company of Korah [a descendant of Kohath (Levi)], when they contended against the Lord 10 and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up together with Korah, when that company died, when the fire devoured 250 men, and they became a warning. 11 But the sons of Korah did not die.

14 These are the clans of the Simeonites, 22,200 [-37,100].

18 These are the clans of the sons of Gad as they were listed, 40,500 [-5,150].

51 This was the list of the people of Israel, 601,730.’

Did the reader spot the marginal decrease in Reuben’s numbers; slightly more in Gad’s population between the two censuses; and more importantly, the sizeable decrease in the Simeon’s numbers? They went from the second biggest tribe to the second^ smallest. We will look at this anomaly shortly.

Numbers: 58 ‘These are the clans of Levi: the clan of the Libnites, the clan of the Hebronites, the clan of the Mahlites, the clan of the Mushites, the clan of the Korahites.

And Kohath was the father of Amram. 59 The name of Amram’s wife was Jochebed the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt. And she bore to Amram Aaron and Moses and Miriam their sister. 60 And to Aaron were born Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. 61 But Nadab and Abihu died when they offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. 62 And those listed were 23,000^, every male from a month old and upward. For they were not listed among the people of Israel, because there was no inheritance given to them among the people of Israel. 

63 These were those listed by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who listed the people of Israel… 64 But among these there was not one of those listed by Moses and Aaron the priest, who had listed the people of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai. 65 For the Lord had said of them, “They shall die in the wilderness.” Not one of them was left, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun.’

The extended family and clans for Simeon are listed in the Book of Chronicles.

 1 Chronicles 4:24-43

English Standard Version

24 ‘The sons of Simeon: Nemuel [Jemuel], Jamin [the right hand], Jarib [he contends], Zerah, Shaul [jackal, fox]; 25 Shallum [retribution] was his son, Mibsam his son, Mishma his son. 26 The sons of Mishma: Hammuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimei [famous] his son.

27 Shimei had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his brothers did not have many children, nor did all their clan multiply like the men of Judah. 28 They lived in… five cities, 33 along with all their villages that were around these cities as far as Baal. These were their settlements, and they kept a genealogical record.

34 Meshobab, Jamlech, Joshah the son of Amaziah, 35 Joel, Jehu the son of Joshibiah, son of Seraiah, son of Asiel, 36 Elioenai, Jaakobah, Jeshohaiah, Asaiah, Adiel, Jesimiel, Benaiah, 37 Ziza the son of Shiphi, son of Allon, son of Jedaiah, son of Shimri, son of Shemaiah – 38 these mentioned by name were princes in their clans, and their fathers’ houses increased greatly. 39 They journeyed to the entrance of Gedor, to the east side of the valley, to seek pasture for their flocks, 40 where they found rich, good pasture, and the land was very broad, quiet, and peaceful, for the former inhabitants there belonged to Ham [Canaan].’

Three of Simeon’s six sons have had a name change between the Book of Genesis and the Book of Chronicles. Either that, or they have died and Simeon had another three sons. Ohad, Jachin and Zohar are the original names and the new names are Jarib, Zerah (a family name of Judah) and Shallum.

1 Chronicles 5:1-26

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (for he was the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s couch, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, so that he could not be enrolled as the oldest son; 2 though Judah became strong among his brothers and a chief came from him, yet the birthright belonged to Joseph), 

3 the sons of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel: Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi. 4 The sons of Joel: Shemaiah his son, Gog [high] his son, Shimei his son, 5 Micah his son, Reaiah his son, Baal [Lord, possessor] his son, 6 Beerah his son, whom Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria carried away into exile; he was a chief of the Reubenites.

10 And in the days of Saul they waged war against the Hagrites [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of  Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar**], who fell into their hand. And they lived in their tents throughout all the region east of Gilead.’

Two of Reuben’s descendants are worth noting. The first is Gog and the second is Baal. Both formidable names. We touched on the giants in British history named Gog and Magog – or it may have been one giant – and the record of giants in Northern Ireland, in the preceding chapter. The name Gog therefore is quite a coincidence. The name Baal is associated with worship of the Prince of Darkness. It is of even more interest because as we have covered in other chapters, Baal is the storm god and his symbol includes the Bull from the constellation Taurus – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Northern Ireland has a plethora of names which include the prefix Baal. Two that standout are Bel-fast and Bal-lymena. Others include: Belleek, Belalt, Ballycastle, Ballygowen and Ballyward. Reuben has left many such names throughout Ireland as well: Ballyshannon, Ballina, Balbriggan and Ballybunnion for example.

1 Chronicles: 11 ‘The sons of Gad lived over against [Reuben] in the land of Bashan… 12 Joel the chief, Shapham the second, Janai, and Shaphat… 13 And their kinsmen according to their fathers’ houses: Michael, Meshullam, Sheba [family name of Abraham, Joktan and Cush], Jorai, Jacan, Zia and Eber [family name of Arphaxad], seven.

14 These were the sons of Abihail the son of Huri, son of Jaroah, son of Gilead [family name of Manasseh], son of Michael, son of Jeshishai, son of Jahdo, son of Buz [family name of Nahor]. 15 Ahi the son of Abdiel, son of Guni [family name of Naphtali], was chief in their fathers’ houses, 16 and they lived in Gilead, in Bashan and in its towns, and in all the pasturelands* of Sharon [great plain]* to their limits.

The words sharon and shannon may be linked, as shannon in Hebrew means fertile plain* and in Irish it means ‘old river’. A plain is fertile because it is close to a river or water. Ironically, there is a renowned Irish musician called… Sharon Shannon.

1 Chronicles: 18 ‘The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war… 19 They waged war against the Hagrites [sons of Hagar**], Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. 20 And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried out to God in the battle, and he granted their urgent plea because they trusted in him. 21 They carried off their livestock: 50,000 of their camels, 250,000 sheep, 2,000 donkeys, and 100,000 men alive.

… 26 the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan… [in Media].’

A significant number from the tribes of Reuben and Gad were taken into captivity together, after living next to each other for some six hundred and seventy years. It is no surprise if they migrated across Europe following each other and if they are now living adjacent to one another, across an expanse of water (the Irish Sea), from Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, who had also shared a geographical proximity. Replicated today in England, Wales and Scotland.

In Luke 3:23-38 we read of Christ’s adoptive Father’s lineage, from Judah to David and included are men who are called related tribal family names:

29 ‘… Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David…’ 

In Ezekiel chapter forty-eight, the Prophet Ezekiel describes a visionary city and the portions the twelve tribes occupy; with Manasseh and Ephraim included together. Four gates on each of the four sides are described:

Ezekiel 48:30-35

English Standard Version

30 “These shall be the exits of the city:

On the north side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, 31 three gates, the gate of Reuben, the gate of Judah, and the gate of Levi, the gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel.

32 On the east side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Joseph, the gate of Benjamin, and the gate of Dan.”

We will discover that the grouping of Joseph, Benjamin and Dan is no coincidence. Their historical and genetic link a profound part of the Israelite story, coupled with prophetic outcomes of magnitude.

33 On the south side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, three gates, the gate of Simeon, the gate of Issachar, and the gate of Zebulun.

34 On the west side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Gad, the gate of Asher, and the gate of Naphtali. 35 The circumference of the city shall be 18,000 cubits. And the name of the city from that time on shall be, The Lord Is There.”

Returning to the dramatic decrease in the Simeonite tribe between censuses, leading identity researcher, Steven Collins provides a logical answer. He also concluded that the Simeonites were the historical Spartans, though we have ascertained an alternative identity in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Simeon

The Missing Simeonites, Steven M Collins – emphasis mine:

‘In the book of Numbers, we find that the Israelites under Moses undertook a first and second census of the tribes of Israel while they were in the Wilderness. The results of those enumerations of the tribes of Israel reveal some surprising results. In Numbers 1:1-3 and verse 18, we see that the census tallied the number of males “twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.” Therefore, we should keep in mind that the entire population of Israel’s tribes in the Wilderness consisted of far more than the tally in Numbers 1. 

As a guideline, one would ordinarily double the numbers to allow for one wife per man of military age. Given the polygamous culture at that time, some of the men may have had a number of wives. It is difficult to make an estimate of the number of children, but we should keep in mind that large families were very common at that time. Numbers 1:46 records that 603,550 adult males were numbered in the census. Based on some of the above rough methods of estimating the number of the entire nation of Israel at that time, we can see that the Israelites can be conservatively estimated to be body of approximately 3,000,000 people. For American readers, that number would equal the approximate population of Oregon. The actual number of Israelites was likely higher as the tribe of Levi wasn’t included in this census, nor were the people of the “mixed multitude” which accompanied the Israelites out of Egypt (Exodus 12:38).

Listed below are the populations of adult males per tribe, given in the order listed in Numbers 1.’

TRIBEPOPULATION
Reuben46,500
Simeon59,300
Gad45,650
Judah74,600
Issachar54,400
Zebulon57,400
Manasseh32,200
Ephraim40,500
Benjamin35,400
Dan62,700
Asher41,500
Naphtali53,400

‘Modern readers will notice that the tribe of Judah was, at that time, the largest tribe. The three smallest tribal figures are the three tribes which descended from Jacob and Rachel: Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin. 

However, when the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are totalled together, they numbered 72,700, showing the actual total of Israelites descended from Joseph constituted the second largest grouping in Israel. Notice that the tribe of Simeon was the third largest tribe in this census…

Now, let’s examine the census taken approximately 40 years later… For purposes of comparison, listed below are the totals from each census and the change in the total of adult males in each tribe. The second census is listed in Numbers 26. Numbers 26:2 confirms that it is the sum of males “twenty years old an upward… all that are able to go to war in Israel,” so each census was conducted with the same criteria.’

TRIBE1st Census2nd CensusChange
Reuben46,50043,700-2,800
Simeon59,30022,200-37,100
Gad45,65040,500-5,100
Judah74,60076,5001,900
Issachar54,40064,3009,900
Zebulon57,40060,5003,100
Manasseh32,20052,70020,500
Ephraim40,50032,500-8,000
Benjamin35,40045,60010,200
Dan62,70064.4001,700
Asher41,50053,40011,900
Naphtali53,40045,400-8000
TOTALS603,550601,730-1,820

‘The national totals indicate the number of Israelites enumerated under Moses had dropped very slightly, but the tribal totals reveal something very different had transpired. The most evident change is that over half the tribe of Simeon inexplicably “disappeared” from the census totals. What happened? Simeon, the third largest tribe in Israel in the first census, had plummeted to be the smallest tribe of all in the second census! Another anomaly leaps out at the reader.

The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh shared the birthright blessing of the Abrahamic covenant, which included being blessed with large population growth. Manasseh had, indeed, risen dramatically in population, going from 32,200 to 52,700, a gain of 20,500 people, by far the largest increase in any tribe.’

Close to the timing of the second census, the tribe of Manasseh split into two tribes. With half renaming with Ephraim on the West side of the River Jordan and the other half dwelling on the East side of the river with Reuben and Gad.

Collins: ‘However, its brother tribe which shared this birthright blessing, Ephraim, dropped 8,000 people to join Simeon at the bottom of the population totals of the tribes in Israel. Even the tribe of Benjamin outnumbered the Ephraimites at that time. Judah was still the largest tribe, but Manasseh’s explosive growth resulted in the tribe of Joseph being the largest tribe if Manasseh and Ephraim were added together. 

As many readers might observe, something “doesn’t add up” in these figures. As commentator Paul Harvey says here in America, let’s examine what happened to determine “the rest of the story.”

I believe the key to what happened in Numbers 26 is found in the previous chapter. In Numbers 25, we learn that Phineas, a Levite, executed “a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites” (verses 7-14)’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘Phineas leaped to execute this Simeonite prince for his audacity in rebelling against God by taking a Midianite woman into his tent at a time when god was punishing Israel for such deeds. Indeed, God sent a plague among the Israelites which killed 24,000 people, and that plague was stayed by the action of Phineas.’

More violence from the explosive brothers Simeon and Levi and this time it is between themselves. 

‘The Bible does not record which tribes suffered the most from that plague. Even if one assumes the Simeonites bore the brunt of this plague, it does not begin to account for the drop in population of approximately 56,000 males of 20 years and older among the tribes which lost population between the two censuses. Also, Numbers 25:9 records that 24,000 people died in the plague, it does not state that all those slain were “males 20 years of age and older.” This indicates that 24,000 men, women and children of all ages died in the plague, and that perhaps 6,000 of that total were males 20 years and older. Where did the rest go?

It is my belief that after the execution [of] a Simeonite prince by a Levitical priest, there was… great dissension in the camp of Israel. We know from the accounts in the Torah of their wanderings in the Wilderness that the Israelites were very prone to revolting against Moses over various provocations. We know from Genesis 34:25 that Simeon and Levi were the two most impulsive sons of Jacob, the two most likely to settle a matter “by the sword.” To put it in modern American terms, they were the kind who “shot first and asked questions later.” Genesis 49:5-7 prophesies that impulsive wrathfulness leading to violence would characterize both Simeonites and Levites through all the millennia up to and including the “latter days.”

In the episode of Phineas the Levite unilaterally executing a Simeonite [prince], the two most violent tribes were likely at [loggerheads], and a civil war among the tribes was not improbable. God usefully directed the Levites’ propensity to violence into becoming a tribe of butchers, killing, cutting up and sacrificing innumerable animals under the system of animal sacrifices established in ancient Israel. Simeon had no such outlet.

I believe a logical explanation for the sudden drop in several tribes’ population is that most of the tribe of Simeon and varying contingents of the other tribes literally “walked out” of the camp and left the main body of Israelites to strike out on their own. The huge drop in the number of Simeonites indicates that the Simeonites led this partial “exodus” from the Israelite camp. The Simeonites were impulsive and the execution of one of their chieftans (however just) could easily have provoked such an action. 

The census figures indicate that the tribes of Ephraim and Naphtali contributed most of the remaining Israelites who accompanied most of the tribe of Simeon as it left the Israelite encampment. The census data indicates that the entire tribes of Manasseh, Asher, Issachar and Benjamin stayed with Moses as their second census totals reflect normal demographic growth.

Would God or Moses have allowed so large a mass of Israelite to leave the camp? I think the answer is yes. Indeed, they may have encouraged it as a way to end the dissension in the camp. There was no commandment of God that forbade any Israelites to leave the camp in the Wilderness, so the only penalty that exiting Israelites would bear would be that their children would not enter the Promised land with the children of those who stayed. Remember that every adult (except Caleb and Joshua) were under a death sentence in the Wilderness. For their rebellion, they would wander till the entire generation who refused to go into the Promised Land at first was dead! Under such circumstances, many could have thought: “If my choice is stay and die in this desert or leave and trust to my wits and sword to make a living, I’ll choose the second option.”

The tribe of Simeon… likely… led such a mini-exodus. The fact that Manasseh grew greatly between the censuses and that Ephraim dropped dramatically argues that this can only be explained if a large number of Ephraimites left the camp. Both tribes were the birthright tribes, and they shared the same promises. If no one had left the camp, the population figures of Ephraim and Mansseh should have reflected the same growth.

If we limit our number of exiting Israelites to only those tribes who had net reductions in their tribal totals, we have about 50,000 males above age twenty and all their wives and children (perhaps 200,000 people). The tribes whose populations stayed static indicates that some of the natural growth of those tribes was deleted from the census because contingents of their tribes also joined the exodus. The total of those leaving the camp may have been larger than 200,000. If such an event occurred, there would have been a powerful stimulus to conduct the second census to “see who we have left.” Indeed, Numbers 26:1-2 shows that right after the events described above, God told Moses to take a census of all the tribes.

Where did the departing Israelite go?’

Members from the tribes of Reuben, Gad and Ephraim were early arrivals in Ireland, though there were two other tribes who were the very first to arrive in the British Islands: Erin and Albion. Those two tribes were Dan and Simeon. Both would then enter Britain to explore it, with Simeon making their permanent home there instead of Ireland. It was the Simeonites who moved completely to Britain and were the first Britons with the distinction of the status as the first tribe to settle there, known as Cymry and later as the Welsh. 

Whereas the Danites were likely the first tribe to explore Britain, they like the tribe of Benjamin and unlike Simeon had a foothold in both Britain and Ireland before Benjamin moved entirely to the northern reaches of Britain. Known at different times as Pictavia; Caledonia, Alba and Scotland – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The Tribe of Dan’s story is somewhat more complicated – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Origin, Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Sennacherib recorded having exiled more than 200,000 people from Judah. The Bible mentions him having captured all of the unfenced cities in Judah (2 Kings 18:13) and Midrashim also [speaks] of Sennacherib deporting vast numbers from Judah and Simeon. These exiles joined the deported Tribes of northern Israel and shared their destiny. Sennacherib… intermittently besieged Jerusalem over a number of years but his army was stricken by an angel and 185,000 Assyrians died. Sennacherib returned to Nineveh where he was assassinated by two of his sons who fled to Ararat (Urartu) [refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran] (2 Kings 19:37). 

The Ten Tribes before their exile had been called by the Assyrians, “Khumri”. This term* in Assyrian could also be rendered “GUMRI”. A similar name, “Gimiri” in Babylonian can connote “tribes” and a related term “gamira” can mean mobile exiles. At all events most authorities agree that the Cimmerians of history were composed of several peoples of differing origins. All signs indicate that at least some of these peoples were Israelite! 

The Cimmerians had first been reported… by the Assyrians at the earliest in 714 though the more accepted date is ca.707 BCE. The Scythians though originally part and parcel with the Cimmerians had separated from the main body and were acting independently. Cimmerians and Scythians essentially consisted of the same elements though in different proportions. The king of the Cimmerians was referred to in an Assyrian inscription as “King of the Amurru”. The name “Amuru” was sometimes applied to Israelites and geographically the land of “Amurru” had encompassed the former Israelite areas of “Syria and Palestine”. 

The Celts were believed to have come from the east and to have advanced via the Danube Valley. Welsh Legend stated that their ancestors, the Cymry, had been led by Hu Gadarn* from Drephane opposite Byzantium (on the Bosporus) across the sea to Britain. The Welsh call themselves “Gomeru”. In Welsh tradition, they (i.e. Cimmerians) were led by Hu from Drephrobane… across the sea to Defene in Wales. The name Defene is sometimes rendered as “Daphne” and there was a port named Daphne opposite Byzantium. Daphne of Antiochea was one of the places to which the Ten Tribes were taken into exile.’ 

Britain’s Trojan History, Bernard Jones – emphasis mine:

‘Homer, in his epic the Iliad, tells us that Aeneas led the Dardanians in the war against the Greeks whilst Hector led the Trojans. Aeneas was a cousin to Hector, who was killed by the great Achilles. It was said that Hector was the ‘heart’ of Troy whereas Aeneas was its ‘soul’. Aeneas survived the war and led his people in exile to found a new Troy. The voyage of Aeneas had taken seven years when, eventually, he brought his fleet to rest’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Jones: ‘Here, he was received honourably by Latinus the king who, because of an oracle, pledged his daughter in marriage to the Trojan prince. His daughter, however, was already betrothed to a king of the Rutuli and he immediately went to war against the Trojans because of the insult. The war was a bloody affair but ended when the king of the Rutuli was killed by the Trojan prince. Aeneas had a son by his first wife, Creusa, and they called him Ascanius. Sadly, Creusa had perished at Troy on the night that the city fell. In due course Aeneas married Lavinia, the daughter of king Latinus and the Trojans built a city and it was called Lavinium, after her.

Brutus* the Trojan was the great grandson of Aeneas of Troy. He accidentally killed his father when they were both out hunting and, as a result, was exiled for committing such a crime. He ended up in a certain part of Greece where he discovered descendants of Trojan captives, taken there by the Greeks after the Trojan War. Brutus stayed in the country for quite a time and became known for his skills, his courage and wisdom. 

In due course Brutus was prevailed upon to become the leader of all the Trojans, in order to free them from thralldom under the Greek king. After a number of battles, and against all odds, Brutus captured the Greek king. To save himself from being killed the king agreed to give his daughter to Brutus as his wife, and to let the Trojans depart in peace for another country. The Greeks supplied Brutus with a large number of ships and the Trojans departed, landing eventually in Totnes, in Devon.’

Welsh men

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 469 – 471 – emphasis mine:

‘… ancient Britons migrated from Troy, from tribes led by a Trojan hero named Britu, one of many nomatives from which Britain derived… legends suggest London’s Celtic name from antiquity was Lloegress, which owned an even more mystical name dating even further back into antiquity, documented as Troja Newydd, or New Troy.

Brutus of Troy was the grandson of Aeneus, founder of the Romans in Greek mythology. Brutus was the hero of legend who rebelled against the Greeks three generations after the fall of Troy, escaping the wrath of the Greeks by sailing with his people past the Pillars of Hercules to an island known today as Britain. They freed Britain from a race of giants led by Gog, Magog, and Albion… Brutus and his victorious followers settled along the banks of the Thames River, naming it Troia Nova (New Troy), or Trinovantum. Brutus’s ancient kingdom of Britain became identified as Albion… the earliest name by which Britain was known… 

Ancient Welsh legends… record three waves of… immigration that were made up first of the tribe of Cymrey… second invasion came from the tribe of the Lloegrians, and the third invasion derived from the Brython tribe of Llydaw. All three were of the same language, culture, and race. Lloegres was the ancient appellation for southern and central England, while Cymrey was the name given for Wales, northern England, Cornwall and the Scottish border region. After the death of Brutus, Britain split into three kingdoms under the rule of his three sons. The names of those three kingdoms became known as Lloegres, Cymry, and Albyne.’

For further information on the story and identity of Brutus and his entourage, refer Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

Wayne: ‘… the region of Troy, was known in antiquity as Galatia… the Black Sea region is the originating home of the Celts… and home of the Scythians and Sarmatians. The Greeks knew the Celts as Keltoi or Galatia, while the Romans… knew the Celts as the Celtae and Galatai. Julius Caesar… referred to the Celts first as Gauls… they referred to themselves in their own language as Celts.

Some scholars think Celt derived from the root key, the Old Irish celim, meaning “hidden,” suggesting they were the hidden people or people that concealed things. Celt, in another version, is thought to have derived from the European root quel, meaning “elevated,” which then evolved to Old Irish as Celthe.

The Celts regarded themselves as the elevated or noble race. The noble Celt was… blond, blue-eyed [including] the Irish, British, Welsh, and Scottish…[Celts, who] had red hair and pale green eyes… [possessing] strikingly similar characteristics to the Tuatha Denaan… Galatea translates as “milky white”… The Celts of Galatia were the very same people to whom… Paul preached.’

Identity scholar and author Raymond McNair, offers an explanation for the original derivation for the term Celt.

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

‘… the Gauls, Cimmerians, Cymry and the Celts are all simply different offshoots of the CIMMERIAN branch of the great SCYTHIAN people. The ancient writers spoke of all the GAULS as CIMBRI and identified them with the CIMMERIANS of earlier date. 

… the word “Galatae” was also spelled as “Geltae” or “Keltae.” This is seemingly according to Lysons, the derivation of the word Celt or Kelt. It is possible that this name “Kelt” is derived from the name of a rivulet or a brook just northeast of Jerusalem, very near Jericho. The Encyclopedia Britannica speaks of this brook and calls it “Wadi Kelt” (11th edition, Volume XIX, Article Palestine, page 602). This same Wadi is mentioned a number of times in the Rand McNally Bible Atlas, but it speaks of it as the “Wadi el Qelt” (Chapter XIX, page 395). 

It is highly possible that this name comes from “Wadi Kelt.” The Ten Tribes of Israel would have been familiar with this Wadi since many of them from Northern Israel would have passed near it on their way to observing the annual festivals in Jerusalem. Kelts have never in modern times lived in the area of Jericho, but it is now abundantly evident that the ancestors of the present-day Kelts did once live in the vicinity of the “Wadi Kelt.”

McNair highlights the origin and similarity of early religious practices in Britain with that of the Israelite homeland in Canaan, coupled with the striking similarity between the Hebrew and Welsh languages.

McNair: ‘… Lysons made this confession: 

“I confess that but for the universal tradition which assigns our (the British) descent to Japhet [Chapter II Japheth Orientalium; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan], I should have been rather inclined to attribute to the British Celts a Semitic origin, both on account of the relics of worship which we find in Britain, and also on account of the language…” (Our British Ancestors, page 18). 

‘Lysons then shows that there are literally thousands of words in the English language which come from the Hebrew language (ibid., page 21 ff.). He says: 

“Thus I propose to show in the course of these pages when we come to the relics of British worship remaining in the country, and retaining with little variation or corruption their aboriginal names, the remarkable similarity between those names and the HEBREW and CHALDEE languages” (ibid., page 21). 

‘He then points out that many of the “old British families” have Hebrew names. “Now, whatever may be the historical value of the Welsh poems, it is undoubted that Talies in his Angar Cyfyndawd, says that his lore had been ‘DECLARED IN HEBREW, Hebraig…'” (ibid., page 22). 

On page 93 of this same work, Lysons says: 

“Yet this we gather from the names attaching to the British monuments still remaining among us, when divested of modern corruptions, that there is a strong affinity between these British names and that language of which HEBREW is either the original or one of its earliest off-shoots; and that therefore HEBREW, CHALDEE or some other very near cognate, must have been the language of the first inhabitants in this island” (ibid., page 93). 

‘Lysons then proceeds to show the similarity between many ancient British and Hebrew words, and between the corrupted religion of the Palestinian Israelites and that of the ancient British people. Lysons finally makes this startling statement: 

“We cannot avoid the conclusion that our British ancestors were devoted to that kind of worship which they brought with them from the East, whence they came at a very early period, even close upon the Patriarchal times of Holy Writ” (ibid., pages 93, 94). 

‘… the early British ancestors said they came from Armenia in the area of the Caucasus Mountains; and we know that many of them arrived in the British Isles centuries before Christ’s birth. Robert Owen also substantiates this view by the following statement: 

“Most Welsh scholars have employed their time on the production of grammars and dictionaries. The Hebrew learning of Dr. John Davies of Mallwyd seems to have influenced his countrymen to accept the Puritan atavism of referring Welsh to the language of Moses as its fountain” (The Kymry, pref. v., vi.). 

‘For any who still might have any lingering doubts regarding the similarity between the Hebrew and the early British languages which were used by its ancient peoples, one need only study the present-day Welsh language. There are many strong similarities between modern Welsh and Hebrew. Even one who is unskilled in the science of languages cannot fail to detect a close similarity between the spoken Hebrew language when contrasted with modern Welsh. Many Welsh words are almost devoid of any vowels whatsoever, just as the ancient Hebrew language was written without any vowels.’

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

“… the people of Wales call themselves, in ancient Welsh, ‘Bryth y Brithan,’ or ‘Briths of Briton,’ which means ‘The Covenanters’ of the ‘land of the Covenant.’ The first form of this phrase is almost vernacular Hebrew.” The fact that these “Brythonic Celts” who migrated to the British Isles bore the Hebrew B­R­T root word for “covenant” confirmed their Israelite origin. 

It is also unmistakably recorded in British history that the earliest settlers in Wales and southern England were called Simonii. They came by the way of the sea in the year 720 B.C. At this time there was the greatest influx of the Tuatha de Daanan to Ireland, and this synchronizes with the deportation of the Israelites of the commonwealth of Ephraim to Assyria, and the flight of Dan and Simeon from the seaports and coast country of Palestine. That Simonii is the plural of Simeon we need scarcely mention. 

Omri, the sixth king of Israel, built the city of Samaria, the third and permanent capital of Israel, and that eventually the entire country, formerly called “All Israel,” became known as Samaria, because that was the name of its capital also that Samaria became one of the national names of Israel, and is so used in some prophecies concerning them. Hence Omri is regarded as the real founder of the kingdom of Samaria, and Samaria-Israel was often referred to by other nations as the House of Omri. 

When Shalmanesar, the king of Assyria, who led Israel into captivity, made a record of that captivity on the tablets of Assyria, he called them the House of Omri (Beth Khumree); also when Israel was confederate with Resin, king of Syria, and went against the Jews, and the Jews besought Tiglath-Pilesar, who was at that time king of Assyria, to become their confederate, he also in his records referred to Israel as the Beth-Khumree. In the annals of Sargon, who was also a king of Assyria (Isaiah 20:1), successor of Shalmanesar, and predecessor of Senacharib, Israel is called Beth Khumree (House of Omri), and their capital city Khumree. On the Nimroud obelisk, “Jehu, the son of Omri,” is written “Yahua-abil-Khumree.” 

Professor Rawlinson, who does not believe this truth we are enforcing, says: “Jehu is usually called in the Bible the son of Nimshi – although Jehosaphat was his actual father (2 Kings 9:20), but the Assyrians, taking him for the legitimate successor to the throne, named as his father, or rather ancestor, “Omri,” the founder of the Kingdom of Samaria – Omri’s name being written on the obelisk, as it is in the inscriptions of Shalmanesar, where the Kingdom of Israel is always called the country of “Beth Omri.” Dr. Hincks also says: “The title, ‘Son of Omri,’ is equivalent to that of King of Samaria, the city which Omri built, and which was known to the Assyrians as Beth Omri, or Khumri.” 

The tribes of both Dan and Simeon belonged, of course, to the Beth Khumree, when used as meaning the Kingdom of Omri, or Samaria. Simeon seems to have clung to this name far more tenaciously than did Dan, for they still call themselves and their country Kymry [Cymru]. Saville says: “This name Kymri, or Cymry, as it is more commonly written, is in reality the plural of Kymro, meaning a Welsh-man, and the country of the Kymry is called by themselves Khymru, which has been Latinized into the well-known name of Cambria.

The letter V in the Welsh language has two powers, and both these powers are active in the word Kymry. This letter V sounds as U, except when it stands in the last syllable of [a] CL word, and then it has the sound of the Italian i or the English ee! Hence, the correct pronunciation of the country of Wales, or land of the Cymry, in its ancient tongue would be as near as possible to the names Kumree, Khumree, or Kumri.” 

Thomas Stephens, in the preface to his “Literature of the Kymry,” says: “On the map of Britain, facing St. George’s Channel, is a group of counties called Wales, inhabited by a people distinct from, and but very imperfectly understood by, those who surround them. Their neighbors call them Welsh-men. Welsh or Walsch is not a proper name, but a Teutonic term signifying ‘strangers,’ and was applied to all persons who were not of that family: but the proper name of these people is Kymry. They are the last remnant of the Kimmerioi of Homer, and of the Kimry (Cimbri) of Germany.

From the Cimbric Chersonesus (Jut-land) a portion of these landed on the shores of Northumberland, gave their name to the county of Cumberland, and in process of time followed the seaside to their present resting-place, where they still call themselves Kimry, and give their country a similar name [Cymru]. Their history, clear, concise and authentic, ascends to a high antiquity. Their language was embodied in verse long before the languages now spoken rose into notice, and their literature, cultivated and abundant, lays claim to being the most ancient in modern Europe.” 

Thus we find that the Khumree, Kumri, Kimry, Cumbre, Cimbri, or Cambrians, as the name is variously called in different tongues, were strangers and wanderers among the nations until they settled in the isles of the sea with the rest of their brethren, the Brith-ish or covenant people. 

“Herodotus, the ‘Father of History,’ tells us much about the Khumbri, a people who, in his day, dwelt in the Crimean peninsula and thereabout. He particularly notes that they had come into that territory from Media, which he remarks was not their original home or birthplace.” – Our Race. 

We have thus conclusively followed the word Khumree, for the reason that the people who are known as Angles, Saxons, Danes, Celts or Kelts, Jutes, Scots, Welsh, Scyths (or Scythians), or Normans can trace themselves back to Media-Persia, but no further, and find their ancestors in the Khumree, at the place, and at the very time, when Israel was losing her identity and was actually known in the history of that country as the Beth Khumree.’

Cardiff, capital city of Wales

Raymond McNair outlines a summary for the words Omri, Ghomri, Gimiri, Kymry and Cimmerian.

‘If we carefully piece together all of the various points which are clearly brought out by the different historians concerning the Cimmerians, the Gimiri and the Kymry, we are brought to the following conclusions: 

(1) The Cimmerians appear in history in the same general vicinity to which Israel had been taken captive. 

(2) They appear about one century after the first tribes of Israel were deported into the regions south of the Caucasus Mountains, near the Black and Caspian Seas – about 741 B.C. 

(3) All of these peoples are closely related i.e. the Cimmerians, Gimiri, and the Kymry. 

(4) They leave the area of Armenia, or the Caucasus regions, and arrive in North-west Europe. In fact… branches of these Cimmerians penetrated into Central Europe, North Italy, Spain, and into many countries of Europe, as well as into Britain and Scandinavia. 

(5) … these Cimmerian or Kymric peoples are also closely related to the Gauls and Kelts…

(6) All of these peoples were sprung from the Scythian hoard, and mixed freely with them. The fact that they fought with the Scythians does not mean they were not close relatives of the Scythians. We have previously observed that the tribes of Israel even while still living in the Promised Land were continually warring among themselves, as is also mentioned in James 1:1; 4:1. 

(7) The Cimmerians were the same as the Gimiri who were also the same as the Ghomri or the people of Omri. These peoples were different branches of Dispersed Israel.’

A tangible line is clearly and undeniably drawn along the dots which join Simeon, King Omri, the Cymry and in turn the Welsh. The relationship of these terms with the word Gaul is worth noting. First, the origin of the name Gaul is offered by Raymond McNair in his thesis Key to Northwest European Origins.

‘Spier mentions the name by which the exiles of Israel were known, at the time of the Second Temple. He says: 

“The second holidays were adopted by the entire GOLAH, the communities living beyond the confines of Israel (meaning the exiled Ten Tribes)” (The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar, page 11). This Jewish author uses the word “Golah” when referring to the dispersed Israelites who were living beyond the confines of the Promised Land. Note the similar pronunciation of the words “Golah” and “Gaul.” 

Speaking of the territory east of the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee, Hurlbut says, “Decapolis… embraced no less than five sections as may be seen upon the map [not shown]: (1) Gaulonities, the ancient Golan now Jaulan, east of the Jordan” (A Bible Atlas, page 94). 

‘This is speaking of New Testament Palestine. The city which was anciently called “Golan” had by New Testament times given its name to the district called “Gaulonities.” (Encyclopaedia Biblica, Article Golan, pages 1747, 1748). The word “Golan” had been slightly changed in spelling to Gaulon-itis, the land of the Gaulon, meaning the land of the dispersed. On pages 100, 101, 104, and 105 of Hurlbut’s A Bible Atlas are maps illustrating this area lying immediately to the east of the sea of Galilee. The… Jewish historian, Josephus, speaks of a territory in the inheritance of Israel known as Gaulonitis. “He also gave Gaulonitis… to Philip, who was his son…” (Antiquities Book XVIII, Chapter VIII paragraph I). 

We now know that the people of Israel who lived in the area of GAUL-on-itis or Golan went into their captivity in 741 B.C. Those “Gaulonites” from Gaulonitis were the first to be dispersed among the nations. Since they spoke Hebrew at the time of their exile, they must have called themselves “Golah” or Gauls meaning “Captives.” These East-Jordanic Gauls, the exiles, or captives, who had been taken out of their land by the Assyrians, had probably ceased to pronounce the “h” sound by this time.’

Welsh women

McNair continues with the link between the term Gaul, its Greek equivalent Galatia and the migrations of these peoples to the British Isles. 

McNair: ‘The Gauls conquered Rome in 390 B.C. They conquered Great Britain, France except the Rhone basin, the whole of Spain except its Mediterranean coast, and north of Italy, parts of Germany, Russia, Switzerland, Hungary, Romania, and Silesia. Their empire was greater than either that of Charlemagne or of Napoleon – reaching from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Black Sea at the time when Alexander the Great was engaged in his conquest of Asia in 334 B.C. (ibid., 46, 47). 

“They (the Gauls) loved bright and varigated colours in their clothes, coloured stripes and checks” (ibid., page 67). Here we can see the tartan or “Scotch Plaid” which is still used by some of the present-day descendants of the Kelts who now live in Scotland. 

There were two Roman Gauls: (1) Gallia Cisalpina (Hither), included North Italy between the Alps and Apennines, and (2) Gallia Transalpina (Further), encompassed modern France, Belgium, and parts of Holland, Germany, and Switzerland. 

“The Greek form of GALLIA was GALATIA, but Galatia in Latin denoted another Celtic region in Central Asia Minor, sometimes styled Gallograecia” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 11th edition Volume XI, Article Gaul page 532). 

It is interesting to note that Livy and the elder and younger Pliny were Celts. 

Julius Caesar in his Commentaries says that Gaul in his day was divided into three peoples – (1) Aquitani, (2) Gauls or Celts and (3) Belgae.

… these same people afterward bore the name “Gauls” in Europe and some of their kindred brethren also bore the name “Galatians,” and lived in Central Asia Minor – in the heart of modern-day Turkey. The true Galatians (or Gauls) only comprised about one-tenth of the population of the territory of “Galatia.” 

Speaking of the Gauls and Kelts, Funck-Brentano in his work, The Earliest Times, states that the Celts came from the north – from Jutland, Friesland and from the coasts of the Baltic. He says: “They were the Normans of the century before our era” (ibid, page 27). They called themselves “CELTS,” but they were also known by the name of “GALATES,” and the Romans called them “GALLI.” To the ancients, the designations, Galli, Galates, and Celts were synonymous. But he says that these three names may have designated three different branches of the same race originally (ibid, pages 27, 28). A fourth branch was the Volcae-Walah, Wallachians, Wallons, and Welsh, all being derived from this Celtic name Volcae. The Celtic branch were tall and fair with pink and white skin. The Greek artists in the third century B.C. used the Gauls or Kelts as their ideal in sculpture and paintings (ibid., pages 27,28).’

In support of the convincing research quoted already, the following etymological associations are worth either recapping, or adding as further weight. Ancient Gaul or Gallia in Latin, was a vast region of western Europe which spread far beyond the modern borders of France. The Greek term Galatia is the same as Gallia. The Greeks connected the word Galatai to the ‘milk white’ skin of the Gauls and Galatians, as gala means milk. In turn, the word is related to the Welsh word gallu which means ‘to be able (can)’. 

Even so, Gaul is not related to Gallia, but rather stems from the French Gaule or Waulle, which derives from the Old Frankish word Walholant, meaning ‘land of the foreigners.’ The Old English word Wealh, or Wealas derives from the Proto-Germanic, walhaz, meaning an outlander, foreigner, Celt. An exonym applied by Germanic speakers to Celts and Latin speaking people indiscriminately. It is cognate with the names Wales, Wallonia of Belgium and Wallachia of Romania. Whereas the Irish word Gael – formed from Goidel and Gaidheal – superficially similar with Gaul, are two distinct words and not derived from one another. 

Interestingly, an old Welsh name for Wales was Gwalia and the modern French name for Wales is Pays de Galles; matching the similar Romanian translation of ‘country of the Gauls’. Germanic peoples called the Gauls, Volcae and the Old English word for native Britons was Vahls, which in time become Wales. It must be remembered, these are descriptions of the Welsh by others. The Cymry always called their land (country) Cymru and in Gaelic, Gymru.

A little out of context – as it relates to subjects in the article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega – but because it is Welsh focused, interesting aspects relating to dragons have been included. Dragons being akin to Seraphim which are themselves, described in the scriptures as fiery flying serpents. The dragon is a powerful symbol of rebellion and is also representative of the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis mine:

‘The early Britons, from whom the modern Welsh are descended, provide us with our earliest surviving European accounts of reptilian monsters, one of whom killed and devoured king Morvidus (Morydd) in ca 336 BC. We are told in the account translated for us by Geoffrey of Monmouth, that the monster ‘gulped down the body of Morvidus as a big fish swallows a little one.’ Geoffrey described the animal as a Belua. Peredur, not the ancient king of that name (306-296 BC), but a much later son of Earl Efrawg, had better luck than Morvidus, actually managing to slay his monster, an addanc (pr. athanc: var. afanc^), at a place called Llyn Llion in Wales. At other Welsh locations the addanc is further spoken of along with another reptilian species known as the carrog. The addanc survived until comparatively recent times at such places as Bedd-yr-Afanc near Brynberian, at Llyn-yr-Afanc above Bettws-y-Coed on the River Conwy (the killing of this monster was described in the year 1693), and Llyn Barfog. A carrog is commemorated at Carrog near Corwen, and at Dol-y-Carrog in the Vale of Conwy. 

Moreover, ‘dinosaurs’, in the form of flying reptiles, were a feature of Welsh life until surprisingly recent times. As late as the beginning of the present century, elderly folk at Penllin in Glamorgan used to tell of a colony of winged serpents that lived in the woods around Penllin Castle. As Marie Trevelyan tells us: 

‘The woods around Penllin Castle, Glamorgan, had the reputation of being frequented by winged serpents, and these were the terror of old and young alike. An aged inhabitant of Penllyne, who died a few years ago, said that in his boyhood the winged serpents were described as very beautiful. 

They were coiled when in repose, and “looked as if they were covered with jewels of all sorts [Ezekiel 28:13]. Some of them had crests sparkling with all the colours of the rainbow”. When disturbed they glided swiftly, “sparkling all over,” to their hiding places. When angry, they “flew over people’s heads, with outspread wings, bright, and sometimes with eyes too, like the feathers in a peacock’s tail” – refer articles; Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. He said it was “no old story invented to frighten children”, but a real fact. His father and uncle had killed some of them, for they were as bad as foxes for poultry. The old man attributed the extinction of the winged serpents to the fact that they were “terrors in the farmyards and coverts.”

‘This account is intriguing in many respects, not the least being the fact that it is not a typical account of dragons. The creatures concerned were not solitary and monstrous beasts, but small creatures that lived in colonies. Not at all like the larger species of winged reptile that used to nest upon an ancient burial-mound, or tumulus, at Trellech-a’r-Betws in the county of Dyfed, for example. 

But whilst we are in Wales, it is worth noting that at Llanbardan-y-Garrag (is Garrag a corruption of carrog?), the church contains a carving of a local giant reptile whose features* include large paddle-like flippers, a long neck and a small head. Glaslyn, in Snowdon, is a lake where an afanc^ was sighted as recently as the 1930s. On this occasion two climbers on the side of a mountain looked down onto the surface of Glaslyn and they saw the creature, which they described as having a long grey body, rise from the depths* of the lake to the surface, raise its head and then submerge again. 

One could multiply such reports by the hundred. In England and Scotland*, again until comparatively recent times, other reptilian monsters were sighted and spoken of in many places. The table at the end of this chapter [not shown] lists eighty-one locations in the British Isles alone in which dinosaur activity has been reported (there are, in fact, nearly 200 such places in Britain), but perhaps the most relevant aspect of this as far as our present study is concerned is the fact that some of these sightings and subsequent encounters with living dinosaurs can be dated to the comparatively recent past.’ 

‘… in the 15th century, according to a contemporary chronicle that still survives in Canterbury Cathedral’s library, the following incident was reported. On the afternoon of Friday, 26th September, 1449, two giant reptiles were seen fighting on the banks of the River Stour (near the village of Little Cornard) which marked the English county borders of Suffolk and Essex. 

One was black, and the other ‘reddish and spotted’. After an hour-long struggle that took place ‘to the admiration of many [of the locals] beholding them’, the black monster yielded and returned to its lair, the scene of the conflict being known ever since as Sharp fight Meadow.

In 1867 was seen, for the last time, the monster that lived in the woods around Fittleworth in Sussex. It would run up to people hissing and spitting if they happened to stumble across it unawares, although it never harmed anyone. Several such cases could be cited, but suffice it to say that too many incidents like these are reported down through the centuries and from all sorts of locations for us to say that they are all fairy-tales. 

For example, Scotland’s famous Loch Ness Monster* is too often thought to be a recent product of the local Tourist Board’s efforts to bring in some trade, yet Loch Ness is by no means the only Scottish loch where monsters have been reported. Loch Lomond, Loch Awe, Loch Rannoch and the privately owned Loch Morar (over 1000 ft deep) also have records of monster activity in recent years. Indeed, there have been over forty sightings at Loch Morar alone since the end of the last war, and over a thousand from Loch Ness in the same period. – refer article: The Top Ten Unexplained Mysteries of all Time*. ‘However, as far as Loch Ness itself is concerned, few realise that monstrous reptiles, no doubt the same species, have been sighted in and around the loch since the so-called Dark Ages…

As recently as the 18th century, in a lake called Llyn-y-Gader in Snowdon, Wales, a certain man went swimming. He reached the middle of the lake and was returning to the shore when his friends who were watching him noticed that he was being followed by: ‘... a long, trailing object winding slowly behind him. They were afraid to raise an alarm, but went forward to meet him as soon as he reached the shore where they stood. Just as he was approaching, the trailing object raised its head, and before anyone could render aid the man was enveloped in the coils of the monster…’ It seems that the man’s body was never recovered.’

The Flag of Wales

Leading into Levi and an important identifying sign of the sons of Jacob, is the fact that the Creator gave ancient Israel dietary guidelines – Leviticus 11:1-8.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning clean and unclean meat has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Red or Green?’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

We find considerable evidence of the Levitical influence in ancient Britain. There has also been much written linking the Levitical system with the early Druids, who practised a combined pagan and Hebrew tradition. 

Yair Davidy put together a number of quotes showing historical documentation adapted from his work The Israelite Origin of the Celtic Races, 1996 – emphasis mine. Beginning with Donald MacKenzie, whom in 1935 examined historical food prohibitions in Scotland.

“There are still thousands of Highlanders and groups of Lowlanders who refuse to keep pigs or to partake of their flesh”. MacKenzie quotes from Sir Walter Scott (“The Fortunes of Nigel”): “Sir Munko cannot abide pork, no more than the King’s most sacred majesty, nor my Lord Duke Lennox, nor Lord Dalgarno… But the Scots never eat pork strange that! Some folk think they are a sort of Jews.” “The Scots till within the last generation disliked swine’s flesh as an article of food as much as the Highlanders do at present”. Also from Sir Walter (“The Two Drovers”) we have an account of execration in Gaelic of a Highlander cursing some Englishmen who had been ridiculing him: “A hundred curses on the swine eaters, who know neither decency nor civility!” 

‘James VI of Scotland “hated pork in all its varieties”. In the English Civil War, a song against Scottish partisans of the Rump Parliament (1639-1661) went: “The Jewish Scots that scorns to eat The Flesh of Swine, and brewers beat, ’twas the sight of this Hogs head made ’em retreat, Which nobody can deny.” Dr. Johnson (1773): “The vulgar inhabitants of Skye, I know not whether of the other islands, have not only eels but pork and bacon in abhorrence; and accordingly I never saw a hog in the Hebrides, except one at Dunvegan”. Dean Ramsay (1793-1872): “The old aversion to the ‘unclean animal’ still lingers in the Highlands… I recollect an old Scottish gentleman who shared this horror, asking very gravely, ‘Were not swine forbidden under the law and cursed under the gospel?’ – Matthew 8:30-32.

‘John Toland (1714): “You know how considerable a part of the British inhabitants are the undoubted offspring of [Judah and Levi] and how many worthy prelates of this same stock, not to speak of Lords and commoners, may at this time make an illustrious figure among us… A great number of ’em fled to Scotland which is the reason so many in that part of the Island have a remarkable aversion to pork and black puddings to this day, not to insist on some other resemblances easily observable.” 

‘D. A. MacKenzie… claimed that the taboo preceded Christianity and that the coming of Christian missionaries to Scotland actually weakened the prohibition. Mackenzie stated that after examination it appeared to him that in ancient Scotland there were two different cults or attitudes, one of which regarded the pig with abhorrence while the other revered it [perhaps reflective of two different tribes: Benjamin and Dan]. Ancient pictures of wild boars have been found engraved on rocks. A first century BCE grave in Scotland contained what appears to have been a pig offering and other finds indicate the consumption of swine. 

MacKenzie connects the pig taboo with the Galatians… These were a small group of Galatians (also called “Galli”) who had gravitated to Anatolia (modern Turkey), conquered Phrygia and formed their own kingdom called Galatia in which they ruled over the natives. 

Lucian (“De Dea Syria”) wrote concerning the Galli of Galatia: “They sacrifice bulls and cows alike and goats and sheep; pigs alone which they abominate, are neither sacrificed nor eaten. Others look on swine without disgust, but as holy animals”. Mackenzie brings numerous sources showing that in Gaul, in Ireland, in other parts of Britain, pigs were both plentiful and respected. The boar was a favorite symbol. Pigs were reared for meat all over the Celtic area and the Continental Celts [not the same people as the British Celts] even had a developed industry curing swine meat which they sold to the Romans and were famous for. 

Eels, hare, and pike are also forbidden by the Mosaic code and the Scots had prejudices against all of these and refused to eat them though they are popular foods amongst the neighboring English. The obvious place to look for the source of these prohibitions is in a past exposure to and acceptance of the Mosaic Law and this was the source to which observers in the past usually traced them. It is interesting to note that from time to time certain fish and fowl which the Mosaic Code (of Ancient Israel) does permit came under a ban but only in the case of those expressly prohibited by the Law of Moses did the taboo last or become widely accepted.’ 

“Julius Casar found that the ancient Britons tabooed the hare, the domestic fowl and the goose. The hare is still taboo to many Scots”. 

‘It should be noted that abstaining from foods prohibited by the Mosaic Law may have physiological advantages conducive to long-term physical and emotional stability. Our examination of the religious practices of the early Christian Celts revealed that not only food taboos but also a large number of other practices were taken directly from the Mosaic Law and also that there existed a conscious identification with the Jews and ancient Levis. Some of these practices had proven parallels in ancient Druidical pre-Christian custom which taken together with other facts proves that at least a portion of these people were of Israelite descent. 

When the Celts became Christian they carried over into Christianity some of the customs of the Druids. There were Biblical Laws among the customs of the Druids that the British and Irish Celts continued to practice after becoming Christians. This explains in part why the original Celtic Christians of Britain adopted many “Old Testament” practices of the Law of Moses.

Concerning the Druids: Julius Caesar (in his book “The Conquest of Gaul”) wrote: 

“The Druidic doctrine is believed to have been found existing in Britain and thence imported into Gaul; even today those who want to make a profound study of it generally go to Britain for the purpose… It is said that these pupils have to memorize a great number of verses so many, that some of them spend twenty years at their studies. The Druids believe that their religion forbids them to commit their teachings to writing, although for some other purposes, such as public and private accounts, the Gauls use the Greek alphabet”. 

‘The Romans persecuted the Druids and many Druids fled to Scandinavia according to Welsh tradition and this has been confirmed by archaeological finds… Those Druids who remained in West Britain and Ireland founded colleges and communal settlements… When the Celts were converted to Christianity… [these] were transformed into monasteries.’ 

‘T. W. Rolleston, (“Myths And Legends of the Celtic Race”, 1911, London) quotes from Bertrand (“L’Irlande Celtique”) – The Druids like the Hebrews… had an Oral Law that it was forbidden to write. They gave tithes and first fruits. Their sacrificial modes were similar to Biblical ones. They practiced ritual purity in ways that are reminiscent of Laws in the Bible about purification. Traditions exist that some of the Celts of Britain and Ireland practiced the Mosaic Law before the coming of Christianity. 

Leslie Hardinge says that the Celtic Christians of the British Isles placed a “strong emphasis on the legal aspects of the Old Testament”. An Irish work (“Liber ex Lege Moisi”) from ca. 800 CE uses Old Testament Law as “a prime directive, for the proper conduct of everyday life”. It is said that the Celtic Church was closer to Judaism than any other branch of Christianity. Harding says: 

“The shared elements include the keeping of the Saturday Sabbath, tithing, the definition of “first fruits” and offerings… inheritance of religious office, and fasting and dietary restrictions. It also appears that the Celts kept Easter by older methods of reckoning, one of which caused Easter to coincide with the Passover. Other scholarship suggests that Irish Churchmen of the seventh and eighth centuries actually considered themselves to be Priests and Levites, as defined under Old Testament law”. 

MRS. Winthrop Plamer Boswell, (“The Roots of Irish Monasticism”, California, 1969) adds to the above listed Jewish features of Celtic religion: 

“… the prominence of Hebrew features in Irish canon law collections (including Biblical cities of Refuge and Jubilee Years) together with Mosaic prohibitions on diet and injunctions on tithes… There was also a Hebrew treatment of the sanctuary… and finally there were many Hebrew words occurring in cryptographic monastic Irish works such as Hisperica Famina”. 

‘… the Celtic Church kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day’ – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. ‘Incidentally, John Brand (“Observations on the Popular Antiquities of Great Britain”, London, 1841) describes the great lengths the Church went to, to extinguish all possible traces of 7th-day Sabbath keeping amongst the English.

An article tracing the early observance of Saturday as the Sabbath noted:

‘[In the 500s CE Scotland]: “In this latter instance they seem to have followed a custom of which we find traces in the early monastic church of Ireland, by which they held Saturday to be the Sabbath on which they rested from all their labours” Columba specifically referred to Saturday as the Sabbath and this was the custom of that early church on Iona, an island off the coast of Scotland. [Scotland and Ireland 600s CE]: “It seems to have been customary in the Celtic Churches of the early times in Ireland as well as Scotland, to keep Saturday as a day of rest from labour.

They observed the fourth commandment (that you should not work on the seventh day) literally on the seventh day of the week.” [In the 900s CE Scotland]: “They worked on Sunday, but kept Saturday in a Sabbatical manner.” [In the 1000s CE Scotalnd]: “They held that Saturday was properly the Sabbath on which they abstained from work.” During the 11th century the Catholic Queen of Scotland, Margaret, tried to stamp out those that kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day and who refused to honor Sunday as the Sabbath Day.’

W M Stukeley, in his book Abury, affirms after a close study of the evidence: “I plainly discerned the religion professed by the ancient Britons was the simple patriarchal faith.” Cited in The Drama of the Lost Disciples, G F Jowett, 2009, page 44. 

It is important to recognise that while the Celts in Ireland and Scotland may have held onto the Mosaic Law as specified under the Old Covenant – thereby in the process giving evidence of their Israelite roots – certain aspects of the Law had been either annulled, amended or amplified by Christ’s death – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.

The Book of Chronicles records the main clans from the three sons of Levi.

Levi

1 Chronicles 23:1-32

English Standard Version

1 ‘When David was old and full of days, he made Solomon his son king over Israel.

2 David assembled all the leaders of Israel and the priests and the Levites. 3 The Levites, thirty years old and upward, were numbered, and the total was 38,000 men. 

4 “Twenty-four thousand of these,” David said, ‘shall have charge of the work in the house of the Lord, 6,000 shall be officers and judges, 5 4,000 gatekeepers, and 4,000 shall offer praises to the Lord with the instruments that I have made for praise.” 6 And David organized them in divisions corresponding to the sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.

7 The sons of Gershon were Ladan and Shimei.

8 The sons of Ladan: Jehiel the chief, and Zetham, and Joel, three. 9 The sons of Shimei: Shelomoth, Haziel, and Haran [family name of Abraham], three. These were the heads of the fathers’ houses of Ladan. 

10 And the sons of Shimei: Jahath, Zina, and Jeush and Beriah. These four were the sons of Shimei. 11 Jahath was the chief, and Zizah the second; but Jeush [family name of Esau] and Beriah did not have many sons, therefore they became counted as a single father’s house.

12 The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, four.

13 The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses.

Aaron was set apart to dedicate the most holy things, that he and his sons forever should make offerings before the Lord and minister to him and pronounce blessings in his name forever.

14 But the sons of Moses the man of God were named among the tribe of Levi. 

Readers seeking a comprehensive survey on the spiritual giant that was Moses, may be interested in the following – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

15 The sons of Moses: Gershom and Eliezer.

16 The sons of Gershom: Shebuel the chief.

17 The sons of Eliezer: Rehabiah the chief. Eliezer had no other sons, but the sons of Rehabiah were very many. 18 The sons of Izhar: Shelomith the chief. 19 The sons of Hebron: Jeriah the chief, Amariah the second, Jahaziel the third, and Jekameam the fourth. 20 The sons of Uzziel: Micah the chief and Isshiah the second.

21 The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi.

The sons of Mahli: Eleazar and Kish [family name of Benjamin]. 22 Eleazar died having no sons, but only daughters; their kinsmen, the sons of Kish, married them.

23 The sons of Mushi: Mahli, Eder, and Jeremoth, three.

24 These were the sons of Levi by their fathers’ houses, the heads of fathers’ houses as they were listed according to the number of the names of the individuals from twenty years old and upward who were to do the work for the service of the house of the Lord. 25 For David said, “The Lord, the God of Israel, has given rest to his people, and he dwells in Jerusalem forever. 26 And so the Levites no longer need to carry the tabernacle or any of the things for its service”

28 For their duty was to assist the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord, having the care of the courts and the chambers, the cleansing of all that is holy, and any work for the service of the house of God. 29 Their duty was also to assist with the showbread, the flour for the grain offering, the wafers of unleavened bread, the baked offering, the offering mixed with oil, and all measures of quantity or size. 30 And they were to stand every morning, thanking and praising the Lord, and likewise at evening, 31 and whenever burnt offerings were offered to the Lord on Sabbaths, new moons, and feast days, according to the number required of them, regularly before the Lord. 32 Thus they were to keep charge of the tent of meeting and the sanctuary, and to attend the sons of Aaron, their brothers, for the service of the house of the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.

The Book of Chronicles also records which Levite families settled in various cities, of the various tribes throughout ancient Israel. The sons of Levi being Gershon, Kohath and Merari. Most of the Kohathites, of which Aaron descended lived in the territories of Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, the tribes that later constituted the Kingdom of Judah.

1 Chronicles 6:54-64

English Standard Version

54 ‘These are their dwelling places according to their settlements within their borders: to the sons of Aaron of the clans of Kohathites, for theirs was the first lot, 55 to them they gave Hebron in the land of Judah and its surrounding pasturelands, 56 but the fields of the city and its villages they gave to Caleb the son of Jephunneh. 57 To the sons of Aaron they gave the cities of refuge: Hebron, Libnah with its pasturelands… 

60 and from the tribe of Benjamin, Gibeon, Geba with its pasturelands… All their cities throughout their clans were thirteen. 61 To the rest of the Kohathites were given by lot out of the clan of the tribe, out of the half-tribe, the half of [West] Manasseh, ten cities. 62 To the Gershomites according to their clans were allotted thirteen cities out of the tribes of Issachar, Asher, Naphtali and [East] Manasseh in Bashan.

63 To the Merarites according to their clans were allotted twelve cities out of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Zebulun. 

64 So the people of Israel gave the Levites the cities with their pasturelands. 65 They gave by lot out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin these cities that are mentioned by name.’

The Prophet Malachi proclaims a powerful prophecy about the time of the end and the Messianic return; with the majority of people who doubt and the few who exhibit faith. Included, is a return by the Levites to Godly worship. Maimonides stated that during this time each Israelite would be informed of which tribe he belongs to.

Malachi 3:1-18

New Century Version

1 ‘The Lord All-Powerful says, “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way for me. Suddenly, the Lord you are looking for will come to his Temple; the messenger of the agreement, whom you want, will come.”

2 No one can live through that time; no one can survive when he comes. He will be like a purifying fire and like laundry soap. 3 Like someone who heats and purifies silver, he will purify the Levites and make them pure like gold and silver. Then they will bring offerings to the Lord in the right way. 4 And the Lord will accept the offerings from Judah and Jerusalem, as it was in the past. 5 The Lord All-Powerful says, “Then I will come to you and judge you. I will be quick to testify against those who take part in evil magic, adultery, and lying under oath, those who cheat workers of their pay and who cheat widows and orphans, those who are unfair to foreigners, and those who do not respect me.

6 “I the Lord do not change. So you descendants of Jacob have not been destroyed.Since the time of your ancestors, you have disobeyed my rules and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord All-Powerful.

13 The Lord says, “You have said terrible things about me.

“But you ask, ‘What have we said about you?’

14 “You have said, ‘It is useless to serve God. It did no good to obey his laws and to show the Lord All-Powerful that we were sorry for what we did. 15 So we say that proud people are happy. Evil people succeed. They challenge God and get away with it.’

This is highly reflective of our modern age. Many people, not just the world’s elite, use their wealth to take an unfair advantage of the majority of the world, in keeping them impoverished. It certainly looks like they are all getting away with their selfishness and cruelty; particularly as each century passes by without retribution. But, their own day of reckoning beckons and justice will be served. 

Malachi: 16 Then those who honored the Lord spoke with each other, and the Lord listened and heard them. The names of those who honored the Lord and respected him were written in his presence in a book to be remembered. 17 The Lord All-Powerful says, “They belong to me; on that day they will be my very own. As a parent shows mercy to his child who serves him, I will show mercy to my people. 18 You will again see the difference between good and evil people, between those who serve God and those who don’t.”

An odd story concerning Reuben, is his giving mandrakes to his mother Leah, when he was still very young and likely only ten years of age.

Genesis 30:14-23

English Standard Version

14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes [H1736 – duwday: basket, mandrake] in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 

16 ‘When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” 

So he lay with her that night. 17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar.

19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.

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

Reuben may or may not have known that the mandrake contains aphrodisiac and fertility properties. As he was a child, probably not; though what led him to find the mandrakes for Leah? Did Leah have a liking for them? Was Reuben inspired by the Eternal to look for them? Leah had a temporary barren period after the birth of Judah in 1746 BCE until Issachar’s birth in 1742 BCE. It is ironic that she gives the mandrakes to Rachel and conceives herself that night, yet Rachel who likely takes the plant root does not bear Joseph until 1726 BCE. Some versions incorrectly call the plant a love apple, or in other words, a tomato. 

The Mandrake is common in Palestine and flourishes in the spring, ripening at the time of the wheat harvest as Genesis states. The mandrake, also known as Satan’s apple, is the fruit, a potent root that somewhat resembles the human form of the Mandragora officinarum, a member of the Solanaceae or potato order. 

There is also a British version, the Bryonia Alba. They are said to have mystical and magical properties. It is a member of the Nightshade family, used primarily for its anaesthetic properties and closely allied to the Atropa belladonna or deadly nightshade of southern Europe. 

If ingested in sufficient quantities it can cause delirium and hallucinations. It is native to the Mediterranean and tellingly, the Himalayas – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

The next time we read again of Reuben is in Genesis thirty-five, in one small verse sandwiched between the death of Rachel and the death of Isaac. Isaac died in 1697 BCE and Rachel died giving birth to Benjamin circa 1699 BCE. Assuming it is 1698 BCE, Reuben is fifty-four years of age. Reuben is still young, not even middle aged; for he dies at the age of one hundred and twenty-five in 1627 BCE.

Genesis 35:21-22

English Standard Version

21 ‘Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder. 22 While Israel lived in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine. And Israel heard of it.’

Bilhah was Rachel’s handmaid and someone who Reuben would have known very well. Further details are given in the Book of Jubilees.

Book of Jubilees 33:1-9

1 ‘And Jacob went and dwelt to the south of Magdaladra’ef. And he went to his father Isaac, he and Leah his wife, on the new month [New Moon the 1st] of the tenth month [January/February]. 2 And Reuben saw Bilhah, Rachel’s maid, the concubine of his father, bathing in water in a secret place, and he loved [lusted after] her.

3 And he hid himself at night, and he entered the house of Bilhah, and he found her sleeping alone on a bed in her house. 4 And he lay with her, and she awoke and saw, and behold Reuben was lying with her in the bed, and she uncovered the border of her covering and seized him, and cried out, and discovered that it was Reuben. 5 And she was ashamed because of him, and released her hand from him, and he fled. 

6 And she lamented [mourned as if one had died] because of this thing exceedingly, and did not tell it to any one. 7 And when Jacob returned and sought her, she said to him: ‘I am not clean for you, for I have been defiled as regards you; for Reuben has defiled me, and has lain with me in the night, and I was asleep, and did not discover until he uncovered my skirt and slept with me.’

8 And Jacob was exceedingly wroth [vengeful, resentful, fierce anger] with Reuben because he had lain with Bilhah, because he had uncovered his father’s skirt. 9 And Jacob did not approach her again because Reuben had defiled her [well after the births of Dan (1746 BCE) and Naphtali (1744 BCE)]. And as for any man who uncovers his father’s skirt his deed is wicked exceedingly, for he is abominable before Yahweh.’

Bilhah

A tragic experience involving the rape of Bilhah; coupled with not being able to be close to Jacob ever again. The condemnation against Reuben is severe because of his evil act and one realises the prophecy’s regarding his offspring are a punishment, just as Canaan’s children were punished even though it was Canaan’s sin – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa

It is curious that this incident is a sexual act after the sexual aspect of the mandrake story. It is in part because of this, that identity adherents have labelled France as Reuben. Though we have already discovered their rightful identity – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Reubens Ravishing of Bilhah: A Parallel Account, Dr Rabbi David Frankel – emphasis his:

‘We may compare the short original story [refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator] of the son (Canaan or Ham) molesting his father (Ham or Noah) [in reality it was Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk* who slept with Noah] and being cursed with the similarly curt story of Reuben’s sin with his father’s concubine, Bilhah, as related in Genesis 35:21-22.’

Rachel gave Bilhah to Jacob as a substitute wife. After Rachel’s death, her status reverts to a concubine as she was not married to Jacob.

Frankel: ‘… we have a brief story about a son who sexually disgraces his father, though in this case it is the eldest son rather than the youngest son, and the disgrace to the father is done indirectly through incest with the father’s concubine, an act that the incest laws in the Torah call “revealing your father’s nakedness”:

Leviticus 18:8 Do not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is the nakedness of your father. Leviticus 20:11 If a man lies with his father’s wife, it is the nakedness of his father that he has uncovered… Deuteronomy 27:20 Cursed be he who lies with his father’s wife, for he has revealed what his father has covered…

Many have noted that the ending of the Reuben and Bilhah story is truncated. What happened when Israel “heard about it”? The story could hardly have simply ended there! The parallel with the Noah story suggests that the original continuation may be found in the “blessings” of Jacob before his death in Genesis 49:3-4…

Just as Noah immediately cursed his youngest son for taking sexual advantage* of him, so Jacob, upon hearing about the act of his oldest son with his concubine, immediately pronounced the demotion of his status vis-a-vis his brothers. If this conjecture is accepted, the similarity between the two stories is even greater. Note that brothers play no active role in the story of Reuben’s sin just as they play no active role in the reconstructed story of Ham and Canaan. And, at least if we follow the reconstruction of that narrative suggested above, it too ended with the father’s denunciation of the sinful son alone.   

Incidentally, another parallel between the narratives should not be missed: just as the biblical editor sought to “sanitize” the sexual sin in the Noah story so did the Rabbis suggest that Reuben did no more than move his father’s bed from Bilhah’s tent to his mother Leah’s tent.’

Genesis 49:3-4

English Standard Version

3 “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the firstfruits of my strength [H202 – ‘own: vigour, generative power], preeminent in dignity [loftiness, exaltation] and preeminent in power. 4 Unstable [H6349] as water [H4325], you shall not have preeminence [H3498], because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it – he went up to my couch!”

This is the only time when Jacob inserts his own opinion or feelings amongst the oracles concerning his sons – “he went up to my couch.”  It cost Reuben dearly, as the birthright or at least the lions share, if it was to be split with Simeon, was lost, forever – just as Esau had also lost his birthright. Today, Northern Ireland as a country (which is not a nation), is caught in a no-mans-land, between the lions of Judah and Gad… England and Ireland respectively. It’s checkered past, violent and unstable as predicted. Like water that is never truly calm or still, so has the volatile history of Northern Ireland been embroiled between Catholic, Republican Irish and Protestant, Northern Irish Loyalists who reside in the majority of Ulster’s nine Counties.

The Hebrew word for unstable is pachaz, meaning, as in ‘recklessness, wantoness, unbridled license, frothiness’ – to froth. The Hebrew word for water is mayim and has the connotation for ‘danger, violence, transitory.’ It can mean ‘water of the feet’, literally: urine. The word preeminence is the Hebrew word yathar, meaning ‘excel.’ Reuben was not going to have an excess, say like Joseph, but rather a considerably minute inheritance. 

Northern Irish man and woman

It is interesting to note that the Northern Irish are staunchly loyal and royal in their mindset and policy. Only Canada apart from obviously the English, rivals them for their patriotism towards the Monarchy and its figurehead that was Queen Elizabeth II. It is as if they are over-compensating for what might have been as the eldest and even possibly the recipient of the sceptre and orb of regal rulership. In Northern Ireland the reminder of this is in the practice of the frequent use of the word ‘royal as in the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the title for the Northern Irish police force from 1922 to 2001.

Deuteronomy 33:6

King James Version

‘Let Reuben live, and not die [H4191 – muwth: put to death]; and let not his men [H4962] be few [H4557 – caphar: small, numbered].’

Moses predicts that Reuben would have a lot of descendants… or did he. The King James version with many others, misleadingly says Reuben would have many offspring. This is in part why identity researchers have unanimously taught Reuben as France. The Interlinear shows that the word not is added. 

The Hebrew word in question H4962 math, is translated as men (14 times), few (2), number (1) and small (1). The connotation is having less sex and subsequently less males.

The English Standard version translates this verse accurately: “Let Reuben live, and not die, but let his men be few.” 

Other translations with the correct context and meaning include:

HCSB: Let Reuben live and not die though his people become few.

CEV: Tribe of Reuben, you will live, even though your tribe will always be small.

MSG: Reuben: “Let Reuben live and not die, but just barely, in diminishing numbers.”

It is clear that Reuben though severely punished, in that he would be a very small tribe; he would still exist and not cease to live. France – aside from its predominant Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b-U152 which does show they are related to the Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples of Britain (R1b-U106) and Ireland (R1b-M529)… they are still not the same – possess a large population and a preeminence of power.

Thus France does not fulfil the prophecies for Reuben. Northern Ireland does… and its intricate relationship with Gad from Ireland, makes it the only plausible biblical answer.

Belfast, capital city of Northern Ireland

Judges 5:15-16

Common English Bible

15 ‘… Among the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [1]. 16 “Why did you stay back among the sheep pens, listening to the music for the flocks?” For the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [2].’

The Reubenites were reluctant to get involved in the combined tribes of Israel war against the Canaanites during Deborah’s judgeship. In fact, they didn’t participate at all. The other tribe that declined involvement, was the tribe of Dan. This is a strange coincidence as we will discover when we study Dan. The word used for soul-searching in verse sixteen is different from the one in verse fifteen. The idea is said twice, so the strength of their reticence has been underlined for it to be stated in such a way. 

The first Hebrew word is (H2711), cheqeq meaning ‘thoughts, decrees, resolve, statute, action prescribed, an enactment, a resolution.’ It looks like they took so long to deliberate and make an official decision that the war was begun and finished before they could make up their minds. This is indicative of the Northern Irish government’s policy making, as it is not known for its decisiveness.

The second word is (H2714), cheqer meaning ‘a search, investigation, enquiry, examination, enumeration, deliberation.’ Just the definitions of the word sound painful. Therefore the procrastination of the Reubenites in making a decision, meant they did not get involved at all. 

Gad

Genesis 49:19

Amplified Bible

‘As for Gad [H1410 – gad: a troop] – a raiding troop [H1416 – gduwd: band, army, company] shall raid [H1464 – guwd: overcome, invade (with troops)] him, But he shall raid [H1464] at their heels and assault them (victoriously).’

NLV: “A group of soldiers [the English] will go against Gad [Ireland]. But he will go against them at their heels [in Northern Ireland].”

Gad would be attacked but will have the last word. In this verse and context, Gad’s name means a ‘raiding troop’, yet in Genesis 30:11, his name means ‘good fortune’ from H1409 gad. Both definitions are correct and in the Hebrew definition of the name Gad in Genesis chapter forty-nine, there is a play on the word Gad, as in ‘Gad, a Gad shall Gad.’ The mentioning of raiding at the heels of their enemies is another interesting coincidence, as in the preceding verses, Jacob speaks of Dan as a venomous serpent that with its fangs will bite a ‘horses heels so that his rider falls backward.’

Worth noting is that the tribe of Dan has a primary relationship with Ephraim; a secondary one with Reuben; a tertiary one with Benjamin and subsidiary connections with both Simeon and Gad – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

In Judges five and the war against the Canaanites, we observed that Judah, Simeon and Levi were not involved and Reuben and Dan did not participate. Gad, like Judah and company is not mentioned either. These tribes all have one thing in common and that is that they were on the periphery of the action and the war zone so-to-speak. The exception being Machir of the half-tribe of East Manasseh, who also dwelt on the east side of the River Jordan with Reuben and Gad. In Moses’s prophecy Gad chose the best land for himself.

Deuteronomy 33:20-21

English Standard Version

20 ‘And of Gad he said, “Blessed [H1288 – barak: ‘bless oneself, be adored’] be he who enlarges [H7337 – rachab: ‘grow wide, grow large, make room’] Gad! Gad crouches like a lion; he tears off arm and scalp [guerrilla and terrorist warfare].

21 He chose the best of the land for himself, for there a commander’s portion was reserved; and he came with the heads of the people, with Israel he executed the justice of the Lord, and his judgments for Israel.”

It could be argued that the Emerald Isle is the best of the land of the British Isles and even of all the Israelite nations. The identifications of Switzerland or Sweden as Gad fall short in two ways. Arguably, they both have great landscapes and countryside. It is not impossible but rather more difficult to assign a. specific armies (or invaders) for either one which so indelibly affected the Irish conscience; and b. their chances of enlarging their territories is highly unlikely. 

Ireland on the other hand had to endure extreme measures while the English occupied their land. The saga of the English interaction and treatment of the Irish is brutal and uncomfortable reading. English Lordship began in 1172, with Ireland subordinated to the English (later British) Crown in 1541. Ireland was merged with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom in 1801.

The Irish eventually won back their country and became independent from the United Kingdom in 1922 and finally a Republic in 1949. As a Lion themselves, they stood up to the powerful Lion of Judah – Genesis 49:9. With regard to enlarging their territory: first considered was the massive Irish immigration to the United States of America. Many millions fled the potato famine (1845-1852), which was in large part induced by the English. Only English and German descended Americans outnumber those of Irish descent in America. 

A more accurate interpretation, which in the past may have seemed unlikely, though with the United Kingdom having withdrawn from the European Union and Scotland sabre rattling its intention to leave the union; a Northern Ireland separating itself from England, Wales and Scotland and forming an agreement with Ireland does not seem so far fetched. A federated Ireland with either the two capitals of Dublin and Belfast, or a new neutral location working together would be seen as a victory for the Republic.

Dublin, capital city of Ireland

The religious divide of the Northern Ireland populace could be evidence of a genetic split; in that the Protestants are primarily from Reuben and the Catholics are not Reuben at all, but actually reflective of Gad. This could be another interpretation of Gad ‘enlarging his territory.’ 

Irish men

As the tribes of Israel are all in the process of distancing themselves from Judah and the hold its monarchy exerts; a Northern Ireland forsaking the United Kingdom could be inevitable. And before Scotland or Wales would still be a sensational political event. The big question of course is whether Scotland or Wales would actually leave the United Kingdom as historically they were the integral tribes constituting the Kingdom of Judah; comprising Judah, Benjamin and Simeon. 

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

‘Reuben, unstable as water and [not] having the excellency of greatness, we have recognized as France. Southern France, settled by the descendants of Javan* (the Greeks), is gentile … is unstable, yet sets the styles for the world, has the form of real excellency, and has the same sex weakness as Reuben, is France… And is it not significant that the very country at war with England around 1800 should be France (Reuben), who would lose the birthright in the Napoleonic war? (Napoleon was Italian.)’ 

This identification appears to fit quite well, superficially. Though it unravels when we understand who the French are and that Reuben was to be the smallest tribe – refer* Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Hoeh: ‘Gad, which means “the troop” certainly designates Switzerland the only Israelite nation in which every man is mobilized for defense. Against Gad would come the foreign troops, said Jacob, but he will “trod upon their heel.” Moses declared that Gad does NOT “leap,” a characteristic of the colonizing or pillaging tribes. Gad “teareth the arm, yea, the crown of the head” of the Holy Roman Empire [or in reality, Catholicism], in whose territory “he chose a first part for himself, and there a portion of a ruler was reserved.” To Gad come “the heads of the people” as they do today to Geneva. 

No other nation on earth so perfectly fits this description of a nation of troops. Switzerland, Geneva particularly, has had a history of being an “international lawgiver.” Note: Even though the migrations of some of the ancestors of Switzerland and Germany are similar, while some have erroneously taught that Germany is Gad, Germany has no history of being a recognized lawgiver – but instead primarily descended from Assyria’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Irish women

Hoeh offers no example in evidence of the Swiss being tread upon in fulfilment of prophecy; yet a leap is taken for Gad in assigning the Holy Roman Empire a role. A misinterpretation of scripture is applied by assigning a meaning of Gad as having many troops; rather than the ordeal of being invaded and ruled relentlessly, as Ireland endured. Also missed, is the close relationship between Reuben and Gad in dwelling together across the River Jordan.

We will find that all the sons of Jacob had a close relationship with one other tribe. It is a startling coincidence, yet all the sons of Jacob paired off, though not always with a full brother, more times it was with a half brother. The exception is Dan, who from the get go was a lone wolf, a maverick, unlike his brothers and more attune with his cousin Esau or even his uncle Ishmael. So far, we have witnessed the close ties between Judah and Benjamin; between Simeon and Levi and between Reuben and Gad. 

The antiquity of Ireland’s history is shrouded in a mist of mystery and myth. What is apparent is that there has been an overlapping of various waves of people. We will endeavour to sift through the legendary and mythical history and glean what is relevant for Reuben and Gad. In so doing, we will bump into Benjamin and Zarah from Judah which we have investigated already (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes) as well as the tribe of Dan, who will be studied separately in a later chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Ireland’s early history is ‘based largely upon the pseudo-historical Lebor Gabala Erenn, translated into English as the “Book of Invasions”; and Cath Maige Tuired, or the “Second Battle of Maige Tuired.” One of the first peoples recorded in Ireland – following the Flood – are the Partholonians, named from their leader Partholon.

An intriguing word as it is remarkably similar to the Israelite empire of the Parthians*, discussed in Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. They are alleged to have ruled in Ireland for some three hundred years and then became extinct due to a disease. A gap of thirty years may have transpired separating them and the next people to arrive, the Nemedians. 

In the Annals of Clonmacnois, written circa 1408 CE, Bartholome is mentioned arriving in Ireland during the time that Abraham was alive. Geoffrey Keating proposes the Partholonians arrived in Ireland circa 2061 BCE, which is amended in the unconventional chronology to 2044 BCE. Meanwhile, Abraham lived between 1977 BCE and 1802 BCE. An Old English version by Roberts of this same tradition said that the people who were led by Bartholome, sailed to Ireland from the Middle East via Spain. As Bartholomaeus is etymologically linked with Partholomus, this is likely a representation of the Partholonians.

Partholon was the son of Sera, who was the son of Sru a king of Greece. Partholon had fled from Greece, after murdering his own father and mother. In the process, Partholon had lost his left eye – Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. Accompanied by his wife Dealgnaid (Delgnat); three sons, Slanga, Rudraige, Laiglinne, their wives; and a group of a thousand followers, they sailed via Sicily and Iberia before landing at Inber Scene – Kenmare in County Kerry. The Partholonians lived on a small island near the head of the estuary of the River Erne. In their third year, the settlers encountered the giant Fomorians; where they fought in the Battle of Mag Itha – Slemna of Mag Itha. In this reputed first battle on Irish soil, they defeated the Fomorians, led by a Cichol Gricenchos.

David Hughes in The British Chronicles, 2007, says: ‘the Partholonians were prominent in Ulster and in Scotland where they were referred to as “Parthi.”* An erroneous tradition says they descended from Noah’s son Japheth. Due to the timing of Jacob being born in 1817 BCE, the Partholonians could not be from the sons of Jacob. Though the later Nemedians do appear to have a connection with Jacob. 

It is possible Partholon was a Hebrew, descended from Eber like Abraham. Sru may be the same as Reu, the grandson of Eber and Sera could be his son Serug, the great grandfather of Abraham – Genesis 11:16-26.

The Nemedians arrived in Ireland in approximately 1714 BCE, ruling Ireland for two hundred and seventeen years, to circa 1497 BCE. Their journey to Ireland began seemingly from Spain with a fleet of thirty-four ships and a thousand and twenty people – much like the Partholonians who preceded them. 

Only one ship with about thirty people is said to have survived the journey, which included Nemed and his four sons. The name Nemed in Hebrew means ‘sanctified’ or ‘separated’ and is synonymous with the Hebrew name Peresh, given to the son of Machir from the half tribe of East Manasseh – 1 Chronicles 7:16. The Nemedians are also coincidently claimed by one source ‘to be descendants of Sru, Sera and Isru. These names… are all forms of the name Israel.’ Sera-[li] is how the Assyrians rendered the name Israel in at least one inscription.

An ancient indigenous people in Ireland, were the Fomorians. The Fomorian origins are supposed to be from North Africa. They worshipped a goddess, Domnu and their leader was Balar (or Balor), a form of the word Baal, meaning ‘lord’ or ‘possessor’ – Article: Belphegor. They were in essence, sea-going pirates and possibly female dominated. They are not considered as Celtic or permanent for they were a strange race of ugly, misshapen giants who lived on Tory Island off the coast of Donegal in Northwest Ireland. 

The ancient Annals of Clonmacnois records that the Fomorians were: “descended from Cham, the sonne of Noeh, and lived by pyracie and spoile of other nations, and were in those days very troublesome to the whole world.” Previously mentioned, the Giant’s Gateway in Ireland – Cloch-an-na-bh-Fomharigh: ’causeway or stepping-stones of the Fomorians’ – was associated with giants and hence is commonly called the Giant’s Causeway – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

The Fomorians were cruel and violent and they would repeatedly raid the mainland. The Fomorians had once fought the Partholonians. Once the numbers of the Nemedians had grown, they were at first successful against the Fomorians, with four decisive victories; but a pestilence decimated the population so that less than two thousand Nemedians survived. Thus the Fomorians ruled over the Nemedians for a period and then later also over the Dananns, extracting heavy tributes and taxes from them. 

The Fomorian giants were undoubtedly Elioud descendants of the Nephilim – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II. They were an ancient inhabitant of the land and very possibly the first. The Irish Province of Ulster derives its name from them. For they would have been known as the Ulaid (or Ulaidh) and singularly as the Ulad (or Uladh). This is the old Irish spelling for the Hebrew word Elioud also transliterated Eljo; being the second generational offspring and beyond, of the Nephilim. The Irish name Uladh is pronounced as Ulla, which would then become Ula-ster and hence Ulster. 

A commentator adds – emphasis mine:

The etymology of the… word Elioud is composed of the words, El, Io, and Ud. You will also find this name in Welsh charters, which it is clear it is not originally a Welsh word, but it was Hebrew and taken to the Welsh. The Welsh etymology is also very similar, where it is said the meaning of el is many and iud is lord. I believe that this is a mistranslation, and it has the same meaning as the Hebrew.

The word El is a generic name for God… found in the word Elohim. The word Io is related to the words wisdom and knowledge. Sir Godfrey Higgins had written, “in Syriac Io, was the God of Wisdom or Knowledge… The God of Wisdom was the spiritual fire…” The meaning of the word Ud is “brand or branded.” Therefor, the meaning of Elioud would be something like “branded with the spiritual fire of Godly wisdom, or wisdom branded by the spirit fire of God.”

Hence, they were [like] the sons of Cain, the accursed and branded by God as it is said in the scriptures when God confronted Cain about Abel’s death; God responded, “Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over”, and God “set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him” (Genesis 4:15) – refer article: Na’amah.

The original Wisdom of God who walked in the midst of fire, was the companion of the Eternal – Ezekiel 28:11, 14, 16-17, Proverbs 8:22-36 – Article: Asherah.

As an aside, in the genealogy of Christ through his mother Mary, one of His ancestors is a certain Eliud (Matthew 1:14–15), the great-great-grandfather of Joseph, the father of Mary – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The name Eliud is (G1664), Elioud and means: ‘God his Praise’ or ‘God of Majesty.’ 

Three Nemedian chieftains led their people in revolt; attacking the Fomorian stronghold of Tory Island, with the Nemedians managing to kill one of the Fomorian kings and capturing one of their towers.

In the process, the Nemedians were again almost totally annihilated, with purportedly only thirty Nemedians surviving the battle. These survivors fled from Ireland. 

According to legend, one branch of the Nemedians under Fergus Lethderg, fled with his son Briottan (Britain) Maol to Alba (Scotland), where the whole island was named after him. This is more convincing than Britain being named after Brutus some four hundred years later. These were related peoples to the British peoples who became known as Britons and the Cymry descended from Simeon. A second branch of the Nemedians were led by a Semeon (Semion) or Simon Brec, a son of Erglan son of Beoan son of Starn son of Nemed. They supposedly fled to Greece, where their descendants would later return to Ireland after being slaves for a long time; now known as the Fir Bolg

According to some versions, Semeon had never been in Ireland and only his descendants were there. The name Semeon equates to the name Simeon, the son of Jacob. Though it is not the same person, rather a shared family name. For this branch of the Nemedians are the tribe of Reuben, who were known as the Fir Bolg, one and the same as the Belgae* on the continent. The Fir Bolge or sons of Bolge are also referred to as ‘Ffirvolge.’ Related names include: Firvolgian, Firbolgian, Belgarian and Belgian.* 

Ptolemy describes the Tribe of Semoni on the southeast coast of Britain. They adjoined the Iceni whose name according to Yair Davidy “may be understood to be a Phoenician (or North Israelite) form of the appellation Jachin [the fourth] son of Simeon (Genesis 46:10). The Welsh in their own and in Irish Literature were referred to as Semoni.” This is an important point, for the Semoni as Simeonites, were to become known as Cymry. 

Five sons of Dela, a descendant of Semeon brought their people out of slavery from Greece and Thrace. This was two hundred and thirty years later in 1267 BCE, after they had departed Ireland in 1497 BCE, prior to the tribe of Zarah-Judah’s arrival in approximately 1404 BCE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The sons of Dela divided Ireland into their original five provinces: Ulster, Connacht, Leinster, Munster and Meath.

Their rule was short lived; lasting a mere thirty-seven years and succession of nine kings, until the Tuatha de Danann – the tribe of Dan – arrived circa 1230 BCE. The Fir Bolg were perceived ‘as inferior people, and strangely, quite primitive in comparison to the Tuatha De Danann…’ Some versions record that the tribe of Dana’s ancestor was Bethac who had left Ireland with the other Nemedians and later returned. The Hiberi Scotti or Gaels arrived in 1046 BCE to find the Tuatha de Danann had been ruling for one hundred and seventy-four years after the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE.

The ancient Book of the Genealogies by MacFirbis states – emphasis mine: 

“Every one who is white (of skin) and brown (of hair), bold, honourable, daring, prosperous, bountiful in the bestowal of property, wealth, and rings, and who is not afraid of battle or combat: they are the descendants of Milesius in Erinn… Every one who is black-haired, who is a tattler, guileful, tale-telling, noisy… the disturbers of every council and every assembly, and the promoters of discord among the people, these are the descendants of the Firbolgs” – aka the tribe of Reuben in Northern Ireland.

The Fir Bolg did not seem to have any trouble with the Fomorians, however they did not like the Tuatha de Danann and fought the First Battle of Moytura against them, where they were defeated, circa 1230 BCE. 

The Story of the Irish Race – emphasis mine:

“The Irish race of today is popularly known as the Milesian Race [the (Hiberi Scotti) Gaels and not the Royal Milesian (Scots) from Zarah-Judah nearly 400 years previously], because the genuine Irish (Celtic) people were supposed to be descended from Milesius of Spain, whose sons, say the legendary accounts, invaded and possessed themselves of Ireland a thousand years before Christ [in 1046 BCE]. 

The races that occupied the land when the so-called Milesians came, chiefly the Firbolg [Tribe of Reuben] and the Tuatha De Danann [Tribe of Dan], were certainly not exterminated by the conquering Milesians [Gad, not Zarah-Judah]. Those two peoples [Reuben and Dan] formed the basis of the future population [in Ulster], which was dominated and guided, and had its characteristics moulded, by the far less numerous but more powerful Milesian [Zarah-Judah] aristocracy and soldiery.

All three of these races, however, were different tribes of the great Celtic family, who, long ages before, had separated from the main stem, and in course of later centuries blended again into one tribe of Gaels [Irish] – three derivatives of one stream, which, after winding their several ways across Europe from the East, in Ireland turbulently met, and after eddying, and surging tumultuously, finally blended in amity, and flowed onward in one great Gaelic stream. 

The possession of the country was wrested from the Firbolgs, and they were forced into partial serfdom by the Tuatha De Danann (people of the goddess Dana), who arrived later. Totally unlike the uncultured Firbolgs, the Tuatha De Dannann were a capable and cultured, highly civilised people, so skilled in the crafts, if not the arts, that the Firbolgs named them necromancers, and in course of time both the Firbolgs and the later coming Milesians [Hiberi Scotti] created a mythology around these. 

In a famed battle at Southern Moytura (on the Mayo-Galway border) it was that the Tuatha De Danann met and overthrew the Firbolgs. The Firbolgs noted King, Eochaid was slain in this great battle, but the De Danan King, Nuada, had his [red] hand cut off by a great warrior of the Firbolgs named Sreng. The battle raged for four days. So bravely had the Firbolgs fought, and so sorely exhausted the De Dannann, that the latter, to end the battle, gladly left to the Firbolgs, that quarter of the Island wherein they fought, the province now called Connaught. And the bloody contest was over. 

The famous life and death struggle of two races is commemorated by a multitude of cairns and pillars which strew the great battle plain in Sligo – a plain which bears the name (in Irish) of “The plain of the Towers of the Fomorians”. The Danann were now the undisputed masters of the land. So goes the honoured legend.”

The Fir Bolg lost the battle because the Danann had superior ‘technological’ weapons. Tailtiu was the daughter of the King of the Mag Mor, “Great Plain”, from the Land of the Dead, which was a poetic name for Spain. Tailtiu married the last Fir Bolg king, Eochaid Mac Eirc, who died at Moytura. At her husband’s death, she married Eochaid Garb Mac Duach, a Danann warrior. Eventually, Lugh Lamfada led the Danann to overthrow the Fomorian tyranny and oppression and annihilate them, circa 1220 BCE in the Second Battle of Moytura. Balor was their last leader and Lugh killed him. Since Tailtiu was the foster mother of Lugh, she was held in honour by the Tuatha de Danann. The Tribe of Dana subsequently intermarried with the Fomorian giants – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Fir means ‘man or men’ and Bolg is thought to have derived from the Hebrew Bela(gh) from either the son of Benjamin (Genesis 46:21); or more likely, a family head in the tribe of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5:8), who interestingly hailed from Aroer, near Baal*-meon. A symbol of Reuben is a Man, which is linked to the water carrier (water from Jacob’s oracle in Genesis 49:4) and the zodiacal sign of Aquarius – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Yair Davidy comments – emphasis mine: 

‘The Fir Bolg are identified by researchers with the Belgae who in the 100s BCE sent colonists from their base in North Gaul into southern Britain where they were reported by Ptolemy. T.F. O’Rahilly idenfitied the Belgae in Ireland with the Erain (Iverni in the southwest) [and the] Ulaid (Ulster)… The Belgae gave their name to Belgium.

Within the Land of Israel the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half Menasseh at an early stage had formerly expanded their territories up to and perhaps even beyond the Euphrates River. Sections of other Israelite tribes, including Benjamin, were also to be found in the Israelite areas between the Jordan and Euphrates Rivers. Ptolemy in his map of “Arabia” records the existence of Israelite [clans] and territorial names in areas adjoining the Euphrates. Amongst these names are Balagea and Belginaea which appellations relate to the Belgae descendants of Bela(g)h from Benjamin and/or Reuben.’

As both Benjamin [Cruithni Picts] and Reuben [Fir Bolg] lived in Northern Ireland, the link to Bela could relate to either or both of them. Ultimately, it was the tribe of Reuben who finally settled there, appropriating the ancient name of the Ulaid, becoming the modern word Ulster. 

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

‘Israel, as we know, was cast out of her land for idolatry, and Baal-ism was one of her chief idolatries. Before she was cast out she seems to have acquired the habit of attaching the name of the god Baal to places and cities, for on the ancient maps of Palestine we find Baal*-meon, Baal-gad, Baal-ath, Baal-shalisha, Baal-Tamar, Baal-peor [Article: Belphegor], Baal-hazor, Baal-zephon, Mt. Baalah, and others. 

But surely these people carried that same proclivity with them to the islands, for in Ireland this name of the god Baal is found just as frequently, if not more frequently, a circumstance which shows that this idol was honored and worshipped by her eastern colonists. 

The Rev. T. R. Howlett furnishes us with the following list of Baal-it-ish names found in Ireland: Baa-y-Bai, Baal-y-gowan, Baal-y-Nahinsh, Baal-y-Castell, Baal-y-Moni, Baal-y-ner, Baal-y-Garai, Baal-y-nah, Baal-y-Con-El, Baal-y-Hy, Baal-y-Hull-Ish, Baal-NahBrach, Baal-Athi, Baal-Dagon. 

Regarding the evidence given by these names, Howlett says: 

“These certainly are memorials of the Baal worship once prevailing in Ireland. In them we have not only the name of Baal, but its conjunction also with other Hebrew names. How can this be accounted for, except as they were so called by emigrants from Phoenicia and Palestine? One thing that particularly marks the Hebrew origin of these names is their attachment to places but not to persons.

The Canaanites and Phoenicians, attached the names of their gods, Baal, Bal, Bel to persons, as Eth-Baal, Itho-bal, Asdru-bal and Han-i-bal. These were family names among the heathen nations surrounding Israel. In like manner, we find among the chosen people the names of their God associated with and forming a part of family and personal names; as “El” and “Jah,” in Isra-el, Ishma-el, Lemu-el, Samu-el, Ezeki-el, El-isha El-ijah…

Baal never found favor among the Hebrews as a personal name, though used freely for localities. They gave it to their towns, but not to their children. Its use in Ireland is proof of the Israelitish origin of the earliest settlers – philological evidence of racial unity.”

Linked with the Fir Bolg time frame are the Galioin, also associated with the Lagin and Domain and all part of the Gabair peoples who arrived from Brittany (or Amorica) in France. Their name is considered a cognate to that of the Galli and Gauls. Yair Davidy states: ‘these names in Hebrew connote both “Exile” (“Goli”, “Gali”) and [the Sea of] Galilee.’ The Domain may be linked to the tribe of Dana and or the Fomorians and their goddess Domnu. As the Tuatha de Danann and Fomorians intermarried it is highly likely. The related Dumnonii were a British tribe found in Devon, Cornwall and also as far north as Cale-don-ia in Scotland. 

The migration of the Dal Riata, the Dalriada Scots to the West coast of Scotland is presented in the following article (also refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes). 

The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE – emphasis mine:

Linguistic and genealogical evidence associates ancestors of the Dál Riata with the prehistoric Iverni [rather Simeon] (Erainn) and Darini, suggesting kinship with the Ulaid [actually Reuben] of Ulster and a number of Belgic [probably Reuben] kingdoms in Munster. 

The bulk of the inhabitants in County Antrim would have been the Cruthinic Robogdii [from Benjamin**], relatives of the Epidian Cruthin [Picts**] across the Sea of Moyle. Ultimately the Dál Riata over-lords [from Zarah-Judah], according to the earliest genealogies, are descendants of Deda mac Sin, a prehistoric king or deity of the Belgic Érainn [probably Reuben].

Dalriada was founded by Gaelic-speaking people from Ulster, including Robogdian Cruthin, who eventually Gaelicised the west coast of Pictland, according to the Venerable Bede, by a combination of force and treaty. The indigenous Epidian [Caledonian Picts from Benjamin] people however remained substantially the same and there is no present archaeological evidence for a full-scale migration or invasion.

The inhabitants of Dalriada are often referred to as Scots (Latin Scotti), a name originally used by Roman and Greek writers for the Irish who raided Roman Britain. Later it came to refer to Gaelic-speakers in general, whether from Ireland or elsewhere. The name Dál Riata is derived from Old Gaelic. Dál means “portion” or “share” (as in “a portion of land”) [Genesis 49:27, Deuteronomy 33:6] and Riata or Riada is believed to be a personal name. Thus, Riada’s [possibly Reuben’s] portion.’

Adamson: ‘The kingdom reached its height under Áedán mac Gabráin (r. 574–608), but its growth was checked at the Battle of Degsastan in 603 by Æthelfrith of Northumbria. Serious defeats in Ireland and Scotland in the time of Domnall Brecc (d. 642) ended Dál Riata’s “golden age”, and the kingdom became a client of Northumbria, then subject to the Picts (Caledonian Cruthin). There is disagreement over the fate of the kingdom from the late eighth century onwards. 

Some scholars have seen no revival of Dalriada after the long period of foreign domination (after 637 to around 750 or 760), while others have seen a revival of Dalriada under Áed Find (736–778), and later Kenneth Mac Alpin (Cináed mac Ailpín, who is claimed in some sources to have taken the kingship there in c. 840 following the disastrous defeat of the Pictish army by the Danes). Some even claim that the kingship of Fortriu was usurped by the Dalriadans several generations before MacAlpin (800–858). The kingdom’s independence ended in the Viking Age, as it merged with the lands of the Picts to form the Kingdom of Alba.’

The salient points include: a. the similarity between Robo-gdii and possibly Reube-n. Even so, the link between the Cruthin and Picts is stronger b. the indigenous Cruithnic Epidians of Caledonia remained unchanged because they were the larger body of people, the Picts from Benjamin c. the Riada’s portion was either small, with the kingdom not lasting long as is fitting with the small tribe of Reuben. Or alternatively and perhaps more likely, it is applicable to Benjamin being the ‘son of the right hand’ and ‘sharing the spoil’.

The Dal Riada Scots, were an amalgamation of invaders primarily composed of the tribe of Benjamin. They assimilated with the Picts to form the new nation of Scotland. The Dal Riada included a number of people who migrated back to Ulster during its plantation by England. We will investigate the identity of these people in a subsequent chapter. The ruling class of the Dal Riada Scots were those of the Red Hand of Zarah [Milesian Scots] – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

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

The settlements of the Phoenicians in Spain were originally named after several Hebrew names. One principal settlement was named Gades, Gadir or Gadeira, and today this city is known as Cadiz. Located on the Atlantic Ocean, it surely served as a major port for Phoenician expeditions to [Britain] and North America. The prominent historian, George Rawlinson, cites the Phoenician word for “enclosure” or “fortified place” as the source for the name of this ancient port city . He could just as easily have credited ancient Hebrew as the source of its name as the Hebrew word “gadar” means “enclose,” “fence up” or “make (a wall).” Since the Hebrew word “gadar” would have been written without vowels at that ancient time, its consonants G­D­R serve precisely as the root word for the names Gadir or Gadeira. 

Another historian, L.A. Waddell, states Gades could be rendered “House of the Gads.” Gad was the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, and could easily have given its name to the colony of Gades. The tribe of Gad was prophesied by Moses in Deuteronomy 33:20 to “be enlarged”… historian, Philip Hitti, cites that Gades was founded as a colony of the Phoenicians around 1000 B.C. , while the Encyclopaedia Britannica states that Cadiz was founded “as early as 1100 B.C.” This time frame for Cadiz’s founding is in the era of Israel’s rise to empire status under Kings David [1010-970 BCE] and Solomon [970-930 BCE], when we would expect to see Israel’s dominance in what is traditionally called the “Phoenician” Empire. That “Gades” bore the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel (Gad) strongly indicates that it was given that name by Israelites rather than by inhabitants of Tyre or Sidon. 

… an ancient name of Ireland was Ibheriu or Iberiu, and ancient Gaelic histories record that the ancestors of the Gaelic settlers of Ireland came from Iberia (“Phoenician” Spain). Ancient Ireland was also called Hibernia, a name which also preserved the Hebrew root word “Eber.” Note how closely the words Ibheriu and Iberiu coincide phonetically with the pronunciation of the word Hebrew. One other possibility exists for these early names in the British Isles… that early histories of [Britain] record that the tribe of Asher operated the ancient mines in Cornwall. One of the clans of Asher was named the Heberites (Numbers 26:45), and this Hebrew name also serves as a precise root word for such names as Hibernia and the Hebrides

As this large group of Israelites resettled in the Black Sea region, they assumed new identities, but many key factors made them readily identifiable as Hebrews. The region to the east of the Black Sea (and north of Armenia) came to be known as Iberia, confirming the presence of Hebrews from the ten tribes in that region. The Hebrews had given the old Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain the name Iberia (after Eber, the namesake of the Hebrews), and it has long been called the Iberian Peninsula. The name of a modern Spanish river (the Ebro) still preserves the name of Eber, and is a reminder of the Hebrew (“Phoenician”) presence in the ancient Iberian Peninsula. The appearance of the same Hebrew name (Iberia) in the region north of Armenia verifies that this region became an area of Israelite resettlement for those who escaped Assyrian captivity by voluntary flight.’ 

The Goidels derived from Gaed-hals as Gaels, were similarly known as Hiberi or Scotti. One legend of their coming to Ireland is that the leader was called Gad-elus* and they arrived based on the tradition that it was some four hundred years after the Exodus, in 1046 BCE. Their story mirrors and entwines with the arrival of the earlier Milesians from Zarah, Judah in 1404 BCE – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. In this instance, Niul married an Egyptian princess named Scota and their son’s name was Goid-el Glas a contemporary of Moses and the Israelites who were still living in slavery in Egypt. Moses had healed the infant Goidel Glas from a snakebite and foretold that Goidel’s descendants would one day live in a land with no serpents. Few nations have no snakes at all; though Ireland is notably one, with Iceland and New Zealand. Notice the name Glas, is the same as the prefix glas, for the city of Glasgow. 

The name Scotti (or Scot) is linked to the Hebrew word Succoth which means a dwelling or booth, as in a temporary shelter. Gael is similar to the word Gaul, though does not derive from it. Portugal, is a word that is broken down into port-of-the-Gal (Gael); just as H-iber-nia is linked to the Iber-ian Peninsula. The Gaels gave Ireland its name Hibernia from their name the Hiberi, which is derived from the name Hebrew, which stems from Eber, the grandson of Arphaxad. The Gaels also gave their name Gaeli, to their language, Gael-ic. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902:

‘It is a remarkable fact that Young in his “Analytical Concordance” gives us the word Leag, as the original Hebrew word, while Strong in his “Exhaustive Concordance” gives us the equally correct word Gael, from the same Hebrew word. But be it Leag to the Hebrew or Gael to the Saxon, it is the same word to the same people, which they have reversed and given to their newer language, which is called the Gael, or Gael-ic tongue… spoken in its primitive simplicity in many places in Wales, Scotland and the north of Ireland. Wa-els is only another form of Gaels…’

Genesis 10:24

English Standard Version

‘Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber.

‘Similar to Eber, the name Shelagh is popular in Ireland. According to the website Celtic Female Names of Ireland other derivations are: “Sile – [Shee-la]… Sheela, Sheelah, Sheila, Shelagh, Sheelagh, Shiela, Sheilag, Cicily, Celia, Selia, Sissy.” 

Genesis 46:16

English Standard Version

‘The sons of Gad [7]:

Ziphion, Haggi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi, and Areli [7].’

Numbers 26:35-36

English Standard Version

‘These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans: of Shuthelah, the clan of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the clan of the Becherites; of Tahan, the clan of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the clan of the Eranites.’

Anciently, Ireland was called Erin, Eran and Aran. A number of Ephraim’s and Manasseh’s descendants migrated to Ireland and from there, nearly five million ‘Irish’ travelled to America between 1820 and 1930. For four decades the Irish constituted one third of all immigrants to the United States. In 2019, thirty-two million Americans identified as having Irish ancestry; ten percent of the total population. The link with Gad’s sixth son Eri is difficult to ignore with the name E-ire or Eir-e and the prefix ire. To this day, the Republic of Ire-land is called Eire.

Yair Davidy:

“Roberts” in what is described as “one of the oldest histories in the English language” speaks of Israelites led by a certain Bartholome (Numbers 23:36, Eran son of Ephraim son of Joseph) who were driven from Spain and settled in Ireland: “Gwrgan(r)t….directed them (Bartholomew and company)… to go to Ireland, which at that time lay waste and uninhabited… and there they settled…” “He Bartholome… had his name from a river of Spain called Eirinnal, on the banks of which they had lived… they had arrived from Israel their original country and… their ancestors dwelt in a retired part of Spain, near Eirnia, from whence the Spaniards drove them to sea…”

One Gaelic tribe was known as the Syths and the Welsh historian Gildas, records ‘the Skythic Vale’ from which the Clyde and Forth rivers originate. An area they occupied is the Isle of Skye which became known as Sgia or Syiath. In Gaelic it is called ‘Ant-Eilean Sgiathanach’ and later as Scotia. The Scots were also known as Scithae, Scitae, Scuitae and Scotae to the writers of old, with the Greeks calling the Scythians, Skuthes. 

Ireland enjoyed a long period of peace and prosperity after the Danite, Lugh Lamfada defeated the Fomorians. Lugh ruled Ireland for forty years from 1220 to 1180 BCE. One of his four wives was called Eri-u. A different wife had an affair with Cermait, the son of Dagda. Lugh killed Cermait for seducing his wife and Dagda is said to have wept tears of blood over the death of his son. Cermait had three^ sons: Sethor MacCuill, Cethor MacCecht and Tethor MacGreine. At Uisnech, the sons of Cermait ambushed and killed Lugh to avenge their father. Dagda succeeded Lugh as king of Ireland. Though Dagda had received a near mortal wound from Caitlin, the wife of the Fomorian King Balor, during the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE, he did not die until he had reigned for a further eighty years till 1100 BCE. 

Next, the reign of Delbaeth lasted for ten years, before his son Fiachna succeeded him, also ruling for ten years. Fiachna died fighting Eogan of Inber Mor. Fiachna was succeeded by the sons^ of Cermait and they ruled Ireland for twenty-seven years. The three Danite brothers married the daughters of Fiachna. 

The brothers then divided the land between themselves. Some seven years later in 1046 BCE, a man named Ith arrived in Ireland with some of his companions. Ith was the son of Breogan and the brother of Cualnge and Fuat. Ith was most notably, the uncle of a certain Mil* Espaine, again reminiscent of the earlier Milesians, yet in the time frame occupied by the later Gaels. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Breoghan (or Brigus) was king of Galicia, Andalusia, Murcia, Castile, and Portugal – all which he conquered. He built Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia in Galicia, and the city of Brigansa or Braganza in Portugal – called after him; and the kingdom of Castile was then also called after him Brigia. It is considered that “Castile” itself was so called from the figure of a castle which Brigus bore for his Arms on his banner. Brigus sent a colony into Britain, who settled in that territory now known as the counties of York, Lancaster, Durham, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, and, after him, were called Brigantes; whose posterity gave formidable opposition to the Romans, at the time of the Roman invasion of Britain. Bilé was king of those countries after his father’s death; and his son Galamh [Galav] or Milesius succeeded him. This Bilé had a brother named Ithe.’ 

These Milesians were the sons of Mil (or Miled). His ancestors had originally come from Scythia, but Mil had brought them out of Scythia and later Egypt, before they settled in Spain, which was known as the Land of the Dead. From this point, legendary history and myth are noticeably blurred. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 455-456, 458:

‘Mils… known also as Millessius died in Spain, but his… descendants later conquered Ireland… [including] Hyber and Hymec, that later… [claimed] the land for themselves, renaming the island the land of Scota… a son named Eire-Ahmon… became the ancestral forbearer of the [Scot] kings of Ireland… Ireland… was derived from Hyber land, which in Latin was Hibernia and in old English was Iberland, which eventually changed to Iverland and then Ireland. The Irish heritage of Scota eventually migrated to Scotland, with Mor McErc of Dalriada as their leader in the fifth century CE… until 843 CE, when Kenneth McAlpin won and united the Scots with the Picts… [reuniting] two related but separate strains of bloodlines… the Picts migrated to Scotland in 600 BCE. Ireland is additionally the land where the lost eleven tribes of Israel were whispered to have migrated after their defeat at the hands of the Assyrians around 721 BCE.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Milesius, in his youth and during his father’s life-time, went into Scythia, where he was kindly received by the king of that country, who gave him his daughter in marriage, and appointed him General of his forces. In this capacity Milesius defeated the king’s enemies, gained much fame, and the love of all the king’s subjects. His growing greatness and popularity excited against him the jealousy of the king; who, fearing the worst, resolved on privately despatching Milesius out of the way, for, openly, he dare not attempt it. 

Admonished of the king’s intentions in his regard, Milesius slew him; and thereupon quitted Scythia and retired into Egypt with a fleet of sixty sail. Pharaoh Nectonibus, then king of Egypt, being informed of his arrival and of his great valour, wisdom, and conduct in arms, made him General of all his forces against the king of Ethiopia then invading his country. Here, as in Scythia, Milesius was victorious; he forced the enemy to submit to the conqueror’s own terms of peace. By these exploits Milesius found great favour with Pharaoh, who gave him, being then a widower, his daughter Scota in marriage; and kept him eight years afterwards in Egypt. During the sojourn of Milesius in Egypt, he employed the most ingenious and able persons among his people to be instructed in the several trades, arts, and sciences used in Egypt; in order to have them taught to the rest of his people on his return to Spain. 

The original name of Milesius of Spain was… “Galamh” (gall: Irish, a stranger; amh, a negative affix), which means, no stranger: meaning that he was no stranger in Egypt, where he was called “Milethea Spaine,” which was afterwards contracted to “Milé Spaine” (meaning the Spanish Hero), and finally to “Milesius” (mileadh: Irish, a hero; Latin miles, a soldier). At length Milesius took leave of his father-in-law, and steered towards Spain; where he arrived to the great joy and comfort of his people, who were much harasssed by the rebellion of the natives and by the intrusion of other foreign nations that forced in after his father’s death, and during his own long absence from Spain. With these and those he often met; and, in fifty-four battles, victoriously fought, he routed, destroyed, and totally extirpated them out of the country, which he settled in peace and quietness. 

In his reign a great dearth and famine occurred in Spain, of twenty-six years’ continuance, occasioned, as well by reason of the former troubles which hindered the people from cultivating and manuring the ground, as for want of rain to moisten the earth; but Milesius superstitiously believed the famine to have fallen upon him and his people as a judgment and punishment from their gods, for their negligence in seeking out the country destined for their final abode, so long before foretold by Cachear their Druid or magician… the time limited by the prophecy for the accomplishment thereof being now nearly, if not fully, expired. 

To expiate his fault and to comply with the will of his gods, Milesius, with the general approbation of his people, sent his uncle Ithe, with his son Lughaidh (Luy), and one hundred and fifty stout men to bring them an account of those western islands; who, accordingly, arriving at the island since then called Ireland, and landing in that part of it now called Munster, left his son with fifty of his men to guard the ship, and with the rest travelled about the island. 

Informed, among other things, that the three sons of Cearmad, called Mac-Cuill, MacCeacht, and MacGreine, did then and for thirty years before rule and govern the island, each for one year, in his turn; and that the country was called after the names of their three queens – Eire, Fodhla, and Banbha, respectively: one year called “Eire,” the next “Fodhla,” and the next “Banbha,” as their husbands reigned in their regular turns; by which names the island is ever since indifferently called, but most commonly “Eire,” because that MacCuill, the husband of Eire, ruled and governed the country in his turn the year that the Clan-na-Milé (or the sons of Milesius) arrived in and conquered Ireland. And being further informed that the three brothers were then at their palace at Aileach Neid, in the north part of the country, engaged in the settlement of some disputes concerning their family jewels, Ithe directed his course thither; sending orders to his son to sail about with his ship and the rest of his men, and meet him there.’

Ith with his nephew’s blessing, had decided to travel and explore this beautiful, new land Erin, which he had been told much about. Ith arrived peacefully in Ireland with his followers. The tribe of Dan welcomed Ith to Erin at first, though became suspicious of Ith’s motives for coming to Erin. Through misunderstanding of Ith’s comment about the land, the Danite kings murdered Ith and his two brothers. The Milesians escaped with Ith’s body. 

When his body was brought back to his family in Spain, the sons of Mil sought to avenge their great uncle’s death. They embarked with their warriors and families to Erin in sixty-five ships. A bard named Amairgin who was the son of Mil, led the warriors to Erin. The Danites chose to avoid a confrontation with the Milesians, so they used magic to hide Erin in a fog. The Danites also cast a spell of straying on the Milesian fleet. Amairgin then used magic to dispel the Danite spells. Eber Donn, a son of Mil, planned to exterminate all the tribe of Dan. In retaliation, the Danites sent a magical storm against the Milesian ships; whereby Eber Donn fell overboard and drowned in the raging sea. Amairgin managed to guide his ships to safety and eventually land in Ireland. 

The three wives of MacCuill, MacCecht and MacGreine: Banba, Fodla and Eri-u sought out the Milesian leaders. Each queen asked the Milesians to name Ireland after her. It was Eriu who won the honour. Ireland became known as Erinn. All three Danite kings and their three queens lost their lives in the Battle of Tailtiu. Resulting in the defeat of the Tuatha de Danaan and forcing their retreat. The Danites did not leave Erin, continuing to dwell in Northern Ireland. Mythic legend continues with Manannan placing a powerful spell of invisibility over many parts of Ireland, with magical palaces hidden under mounds. These places were called Sidh (or Sidhe). 

With their magical abilities, the Danites were believed to be able to appear or vanish from sight at will; as well as being considered immortal. We will return to this aspect of the Danites in Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. Two further sons of Mil, Eber Finn (Heber) and Eremon (Heremon) partitioned Ireland into north and south and became their respective kings. Heremon ruled northern Ireland and Heber the south. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

‘When Ithe arrived where the (Danan) brothers were, he was honourably received and entertained by them; and, finding him to be a man of great wisdom and knowledge, they referred their disputes to him for decision. That decision having met their entire satisfaction, Ithe exhorted them to mutual love, peace, and forbearance; adding much in praise of their delightful, pleasant, and fruitful country; and then took his leave, to return to his ship, and go back to Spain. 

No sooner was he gone than the brothers began to reflect on the high commendations which Ithe gave of the Island; and, suspecting his design of bringing others to invade it, resolved to prevent them, and therefore pursued him with a strong party, overtook him, fought and routed his men and wounded himself to death (before his son or the rest of his men left on ship-board could come to his rescue) at a place called, from that fight and his name, Magh Ithe or “The plain of Ithe” (an extensive plain in the barony of Raphoe, county Donegal); whence his son, having found him in that condition, brought his dead and mangled body back into Spain, and there exposed it to public view, thereby to excite his friends and relations to avenge his murder. 

And here I think it not amiss to notify what the Irish chroniclers, observe upon this matter… that all the invaders and planters of Ireland, namely, Partholan, Neimhedh, the Firbolgs, Tuatha-de-Danans, and Clan-na-Milé, [were] originally Scythians… who had the language called Bearla-Tobbai or Gaoidhilg [Gaelic] common amongst them all; and consequently not to be wondered at, that Ithe and the Tuatha-de-Danans understood one another without an Interpreter – both speaking the same language, though perhaps with some difference in the accent. 

The exposing of the dead body of Ithe had the desired effect; for, thereupon, Milesius made great preparations in order to invade Ireland – as well to avenge his uncle’s death, as also in obedience to the will of his gods, signified by the prophecy of Cachear, aforesaid. But, before he could effect that object, he died, leaving the care and charge of that expedition upon his eight legitimate sons by his two wives… 

Milesius was a very valiant champion, a great warrior, and fortunate [recall meaning of Gad] and prosperous in all his undertakings: witness his name of “Milesius,” given him from the many battles (some say a thousand, which the word “Milé” signifies in Irish as well as in Latin) which he victoriously fought and won, as well in Spain, as in all the other countries and kingdoms he traversed in his younger days.

The eight brothers were neither forgetful nor negligent in the execution of their father’s command; but, soon after his death, with a numerous fleet well manned and equipped, set forth from Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia (now Corunna) in Galicia, in Spain, and sailed prosperously to the coasts of Ireland or Inis-Fail, where they met many difficulties and various chances before they could land: occasioned by the diabolical arts, sorceries, and enchantments used by the Tuatha-de-Danans, to obstruct their landing; for, by their magic art, they enchanted the island so as to appear to the Milesians or Clan-na-Milé in the form of a Hog, and no way to come at it (whence the island, among the many other names it had before, was called Muc-Inis or “The Hog Island”); and withal raised so great a storm, that the Milesian fleet was thereby totally dispersed and many of them cast away, wherein five of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius, lost their lives. 

That part of the fleet commanded by Heber, Heremon, and Amergin (the three surviving brothers), and Heber Donn, son of Ir (one of the brothers lost in the storm), overcame all opposition, landed safe, fought and routed the three Tuatha-de Danan Kings at Slieve-Mis, and thence pursued and overtook them at Tailten, where another bloody battle was fought; wherein the three (Tuatha-de-Danan) Kings and their Queens were slain, and their army utterly routed and destroyed: so that they could never after give any opposition to the Clan-na-Milé in their new conquest; who, having thus sufficiently avenged the death of their great uncle Ithe, gained the possession of the country foretold them by Cachear, some ages past…’

An additional myth with recognisable details yet conflicting chronology which explains the origins of the Milesians allegedly begins some four hundred and forty years earlier with a Scythian named Phoeniusa Farsaidh (or Fennius Farsa), who was a King in Scythia and a wise and learned man. Phoeniusa Farsaidh erected a school in the valley of Senaar, near the city of Æothena (Athens).

Having continued there with his younger son Niul for twenty years, he returned home to his kingdom, which, at his death, he left to his eldest son Nenuall; leaving him no other patrimony other than his learning and the benefit of the school. Niul, after his father returned to Scythia, continued some time at Æothena, teaching the languages and other laudable sciences, until upon report of his great learning he was invited into Egypt by Pharaoh. The king gave him the land of Campus Cyrunt, near the Red Sea to inhabit and his daughter Scota in marriage. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart: 

‘Gaodhal [Gathelus], the son of Niul, was the ancestor of the Clan-na-Gael, that is, “the children or descendants of Gaodhal.” In his youth this Gaodhal was stung in the neck by a serpent, and was immediately brought to Moses, who, laying his rod upon the wounded place, instantly cured him: whence followed the word “Glas” to be added to his name, as Gaodhal Glas (glas: Irish, green; Latin glaucus; Greek glaukos), on account of the green scar which the word signifies, and which, during his life, remained on his neck after the wound was healed.’

If Gaodhal the leader of the Gaels (Gad) who would enter Ireland in 1046 BCE knew Moses, this would mean he was living four hundred years early – a conflict in the timeline – and during the time of the Milesian (Zarah-Judah) arrival into Ireland circa 1404 BCE.

O’Hart: ‘And Gaodhal obtained a further blessing, namely – that no venemous beast can live any time where his posterity should inhabit; which is verified in Creta [Crete] or Candia, Gothia or Getulia, Ireland, etc. The Irish chroniclers affirm that from this time Gaodhal and his posterity did paint the figures of Beasts, Birds, etc., on their banners and shields, to distinguish their tribes and septs, in imitation of the Israelites; and that a “Thunderbolt” was the cognizance in their chief standard for many generations after this Gaodhal.’ 

‘The following is a translation of an extract from the derivation of this proper name, as given in Halliday’s Volume of Keating’s Irish History, page 230.’ 

“Antiquaries assert that the name of Gaodhal is from the compound word formed of ‘gaoith’ and ‘dil,’ which means a lover of learning; for, ‘gaoith’ is the same as wisdom or learning, and ‘dil’ is the same as loving or fond.”

Some versions of these legends also state that they kept the Laws of Moses, including abstaining from eating unclean meats. The Goidels wandered for forty-two years in North Africa, the land of the Philistines, Syria and onwards to Spanish Galatia in northwestern Iberia. Some records also include ‘Miletus in ancient Caria on the west coast of Anatolia and Messina in Sicily’ as locations of their sojourn.

‘Heber Scut (scut: Irish, a Scot), after his father’s death and a year’s stay in Creta, departed thence, leaving some of his people to inhabit the Island, where some of their posterity likely still remain; “because the Island breeds no venemous serpent ever since.” He and his people soon after arrived in Scythia; where his cousins, the posterity of Nenuall (eldest son of Fenius Farsa…), refusing to allot a place of habitation for him and his colony, they fought many battles wherein Heber (with the assistance of some of the natives who were ill-affected towards their king), being always victor, he at length forced the sovereignty from the other, and settled himself and his colony in Scythia, who continued there for four generations. (Hence the epithet Scut, “a Scot” or “a Scythian,” was applied to this Heber, who is accordingly called Heber Scot.) Heber Scot was afterwards slain in battle by Noemus the former king’s son.’ 

Regarding Joshua’s friend Caleb, Yair Davidy states:

‘Historically the Kings of Egypt very rarely gave their daughters to outsiders but it is recorded that Solomon king of Israel married a daughter of Pharoah. Also Moses the deliverer and Lawgiver of Israel as a child had been adopted by a daughter of Pharoah. In Talmudic tradition the foster-mother of Moses was the same “Batya” daughter of Pharoah who later married Mered (1 Chronicles 4:18) from the Tribe of Judah.’ 

1 Chronicles 4:13-18

English Standard Version

13 ‘The sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah… and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: KenazThese are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite [not Jewish] wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah.’

Davidy: ‘According to Talmudic tradition “Mered” is another name for Caleb, son of Yefunei, the Kenazzi, a Prince of Judah (Numbers 13:6). Caleb, says the Talmud, married “Batya” the daughter of Pharoah who had rescued and raised Moses.’ 

Recall we studied Caleb in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Davidy has additional details of interest. The account of Caleb being Mered or marrying Pharaoh’s daughter is difficult to align, as Moses was born in 1526 BCE and Caleb was born in 1478 BCE. Moses flees Egypt in 1486 BCE, some eight years before Caleb is born. Caleb was also perhaps a slave at the time; his marrying Moses adoptive mother, Queen Sobeknefru is unlikely – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Davidy: ‘Some descendants of Caleb, the “Chelubai” (1 Chronicles 2;9) are traceable to Chalybonitis and to the “Chalybe” people. Chalybonitis was in northwest Syria. Chalybonitis in northern Syria was in an area associated with the Iari descendants of Yair who himself (1 Chronicles 2:22) was a son of Segub son of Hezron ancestor (or “father”) of Caleb (Chaleb): The eponymous ancestor IAR was later recalled in place-names of Ireland and Scotland.

The family name of Caleb was “Kenazi” which name connotes “metalworker”. In the Pontus (on the southeast shores of the Black Sea) and Caucasus the Chalybes were famous metallurgists. The Chalybes were considered as of Cimmerian origin. They are recalled by Greek Chroniclers such as Xenophon. A people of similar name (i.e. the “Calybes”) who were also famous as metal-workers were later reported of in the Galatian area of northwest Spain. Justin (44:3) said that the Calybes were skilled metallurgists. From Galatia (“Galacia”) in Spain Celts identified with the Milesian-Hiberi migrated to Ireland and from there to Britain. The legend of the Milesians that one of their ancestors had been married to the daughter of Pharoah may be connected with the presence of “Chalybes” (or “Calybes”) descendants of Caleb from Judah amongst them.’ 

An interesting point raised by Davidy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

Gildas said that the British Celts were “Truly Israel of the Exodus”. Gildas wrote about 540 CE. He lived in Britain at the time that it was being conquered by the pagan Angles, Jutes, and Saxons [Frisians]. As a Christian priest and a Celt he was horrified by what he saw. He attributed the calamity to the sins of the native British people and upbraided them. He used Biblical expressions and several times addressed the British princes as Israel and referred to Britain as “a treacherous lioness of Gad” though why he chose Gad out of all the 12 Tribes of Israel is unknown.’

A curious thing for Gildas to say, seeing as the tribe of Gad were well ensconced in Ireland at this time. Yair Davidy: ‘In 1581 Vincenzio Galilei (father of the astronomer, Galileo Galilei) wrote that the Irish [Royal Milesians] believed themselves descended from David, King of Israel, and that was why they used a harp as their symbol.   

Davidy: ‘Ptolemy listed numerous place and historical ethnic names proving that Israelite tribes once ruled over all the area of northern Syria reaching at least to the Euphrates. Examples are the areas called RAHABENI (i.e. Reuben), MASANI (Menasseh), CAUCHABENI (i.e. Sons of Chauchi, i.e. of Haggi son of Gad), BATHANAEI (Bashan in Aramaic), CHALYBONITIS (Chalybes of Judah), and the cities of Belginaea and Belagaea (Belgae from Bela-g-h) [Reuben (or Benjamin)], and GABARA from Geber in the region of Bashan (Bathanaei) close to Masani (Menasseh). 

The “House of Gabbar” were the ruling dynasty of “Yadi”. Yadi was a Judaean enclave in northwest Syria (“Hamath which belonged to Judah” 2 Kings 14:28) known as “Yadi” (i.e. “Judah” in Assyrian) and also garrisoned by the “Dananu” from the Tribe of Dan and somehow associated with the neighbouring Tribe of Gad since its other name “Smal” is synonymous with Zephion a clan of Gad.

The Lagin people gave their name to Leinster in east Ireland. They were also known as GABAIR. After being conquered by the Milesian Goidels, the Lagin Gabair joined forces with them and participated in raids on, and settlement in, Scotland. They have been equated with the Gailian or Galioin, which names may well derive from the Golan in the Land of Israel since GEBER or GABAR appears to have once been an important family name in that general area. To the northeast of Eboracum (York) and the Parissi in Britain were the GABRANTOVICES. Further north in the Caledonian region (of Scotland) of the Gadeni (Otadeni) was the settlement of Gabrosentas. 

From Gilead (“Galaad”) of Israel emerged the Galatae or “Galadi” of northern Gaul, the Galadon of northern Wales and southern Britain, and the Caledonians of Scotland. These groups had ethnic migratory connections with the Gaels of Ireland. An example of genuine Historical tradition mixed with literary additions and imaginations is found in the Chronicles of Eri. ‘The Chronicles of Eri, being the history of the Gaal Sciot Iber, or the Irish People, translated from the Phoenician dialect of the Scythian language’, by Roger O’ Connor were published in London in two volumes in 1822. 

The Chronicle says that the Gaali had been in Armenia, and the Caucasus. They were traders and metallurgists, and archers. They were oppressed by the Assyrians and fled via Hamath in northern Syria. Hamath adjoined ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ which in effect was a suburb of Hamath. Hamath in Northern Syria or rather ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ was considered by the Talmud as one of three regions through which the Lost Ten Tribes were taken into exile.

The Chronicles tells how the Gaali sailed to Spain which was then ruled by the Phoenicians who in turn were directed from Hamath. In Spain the Galli moved from the southern area of Tartessos to Galatia in the northwest. They shook off Phoenician control. Together with the Phoenicians from their base in Spain they had established mining operations in Cornwall, in Britain. Some of them moved to Aquitaine in Gaul. Due to war and famine, those of the Galli who were in Spanish Galatia emigrated to Ireland. Though not Phoenicians they worshiped God under the form of baal, received instruction in Phoenician ways, bore Hebrew-sounding names and they had Israelite-values such as an aversion to images and other characteristics. 

The Chronicles connect up with a verse in Isaiah: ‘They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD. They shall cry aloud from the sea. Wherefore, glorify the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea’ (Isaiah 24:14-15).

‘Cry aloud from the sea’: In Hebrew the word ‘from the sea’ (‘me-yam’) also means ‘from the west’. The major sea was to the West. The Aramaic Translation and Commentators say it means the exiles who will be in the West in the Last Days. Then it goes on to speak of the isles of the Sea meaning Britain. 

According to “The Chronicles of Eri” the Gaali of Sciot (the people he is speaking of) had the custom of lighting beacon fires on the coasts.’

“All the headlands and promontories belonging to the Gaal of Sciot on the northwest coast of Spain were called in the Phoenician language Breoccean, that is, The Land of Flaming Fires, because of the blaze that was kept up and could be seen at a great distance out to sea. The same custom was observed on the coast of Cornwall and Devonshire after the Gaal of Sciot joined with the Phoenicians in their mining operations there, and that land was called Breotan, Breo meaning Flaming Fire’ (‘BIAR’ = burn in Hebrew).”

‘We thus find that the people known as the Gaal of Sciot, the people whom the Chronicles claim were the ancestors of the Irish and Scots… had the custom of lighting fires that could be seen out to sea. They practiced this custom when they were in northwest Spain and later on the southwest coast of [England] when they set up mining operations in that area. We find elsewhere that this practice was known throughout Britain. 

A Polish Linguist named Piotr Gasiorowski reports that the ancient British were in the custom of lighting fires on the hilltops that could be seen out to sea: 

“I think the tradition of erecting hilltop cairns and mounds as orientation marks, and of using beacon fires for long-distance communication was very strong in Celtic (also Roman) Britain; the landscape of much of the country is as suitable for this purpose as could be. One trace of that is the occurrence of the Brythonic element tan – ‘fire’ (Welsh tan) in hill names (there are many Tan Hills in England) not only in ancient times but all through history down to the invention of the telegraph. For example, a network of beacons set up on hilltops was used in England in 1588 to signal the approach of the Spanish Armada, and once it was spotted off the Scillies (islands southwest of Cornwall in southwest Britain) the news reached the English commanders in no time at all.”

King Heremon was the seventh son of Milesius (or Mil); though only the third of the three sons who left any issue. From him were descended the kings and nobility of the Connaught and Dalriada Kingdoms. Heremon with his eldest brother Heber were the joint first ‘Milesian’ Gael monarchs of Ireland. The date given in the Library of Ireland, Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart, 1892, is that they began to reign in 1699 BCE.

This is too early, for Judah and Gad were born in circa 1746 and 1744 BCE respectively and it does not take into account the period of the Nemedians for 217 years; the gap until the Fir Bolg returned of 230 years; their rule of 37 years; the approximate time the Fomorians ruled the Danites for 10 years; and finally, the Tuatha de Danann’s 174 (or possibly 197) years of kingship in Ireland. 

Heber is recorded as being killed a year later. In an unconventional chronology this equates to 1045 BCE. Heremon then reigned for fourteen years until 1031 BCE. ‘During which time a certain colony – called by the Irish, Cruithneaigh, in English “Cruthneans” or Picts (from the Tribe of Benjamin) – arrived in Ireland and requested Heremon to assign them a part of the country to settle in, which he refused; but, giving them as wives the widows of the Tuatha-de-Danans, slain in battle, he sent them with a strong party of his own forces to conquer the country then called “Alba,” but now Scotland; conditionally, that they and their posterity should be tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Heber and Heremon, the chief leading men remaining of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius aforesaid, divided the kingdom between them (allotting a proportion of land to their brother Amergin, who was their Arch-priest, Druid, or magician; and to their nephew Heber Donn, and to the rest of their chief commanders), and became jointly the first of one hundred and eighty-three Kings or sole Monarchs of the Gaelic, Milesian, or Scottish Race, that ruled and governed Ireland, successively, for two thousand eight hundred and eighty-five years from the first year of their reign, Anno Mundi three thousand five hundred, to their submission to the Crown of England in the person of King Henry the Second; who, being also of the Milesian Race by Maude, his mother, was lineally descended from Fergus Mor MacEarca, first King of Scotland, who was descended from the said Heremon – so that the succession may be truly said to continue in the Milesian Blood from before Christ one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine years down to the present time. 

Heber and Heremon reigned jointly one year only, when, upon a difference between their ambitious wives, they quarrelled and fought a battle at Ardcath or Geshill (Geashill, near Tullamore in the King’s County), where Heber was slain by Heremon; and, soon after, Amergin, who claimed an equal share in the government, was, in another battle fought between them, likewise slain by Heremon. Thus, Heremon became sole Monarch, and made a new division of the land amongst his comrades and friends, viz.

… the south part, now called Munster, he gave to his brother Heber’s four sons, Er [family name of Judah] , Orba, Feron, and Fergna; allotting a part of Munster to Lughaidh (the son of Ithe, the first Milesian discoverer of Ireland), amongst his brother Heber’s sons…

the north part, now Ulster, he gave to Ir’s only son Heber Donn;

the east part or Coigeadh Galian, now called Leinster, he gave to Criomthann-sciath-bheil, one of his commanders;

and the west part, now called Connaught, Heremon gave to Un-Mac-Oigge, another of his commanders…’

‘From these three brothers, Heber, Ir, and Heremon (Amergin dying without issue) [Three crowns of Munster], are descended all the Milesian Irish of Ireland and Scotland, viz.: from Heber, the eldest brother, the provincial Kings of Munster (of whom thirty-eight were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and most of the nobility and gentry of Munster, and many noble families in Scotland, are descended.

From Ir, the second brother, all the provincial Kings of Ulster (of whom twenty-six were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and all the ancient nobility and gentry of Ulster, and many noble families in Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, derive their pedigrees; and, in Scotland, the Clan-na-Rory – the descendants of an eminent man, named Ruadhri or Roderick, who was Monarch of Ireland for seventy years (viz., from Before Christ 288 to 218). 

From Heremon, the youngest of the three brothers, were descended one hundred and fourteen sole Monarchs of Ireland: the provincial Kings and Hermonian nobility and gentry of Leinster, Connaught, Meath, Orgiall, Tirowen, Tirconnell, and Clan-na-boy; the Kings of Dalriada; all the Kings of Scotland from Fergus. Mor MacEarca down to the Stuarts; and the Kings and Queens of England from Henry the Second down to the present time’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘The issue of Ithe is not accounted among the Milesian Irish or Clan-na-Milé, as not being descended from Milesius, but from his uncle Ithe; of whose posterity there were also some Monarchs of Ireland, and many provincial or half provincial Kings of Munster: that country upon its first division being allocated to the sons of Heber and to Lughaidh, son of Ithe, whose posterity continued there accordingly. 

Milesius of Spain bore three Lions in his shield and standard [Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal tribes], for the following reasons; namely, that, in his travels in his younger clays into foreign countries, passing through Africa, he, by his cunning and valour, killed in one morning three Lions; and that, in memory of so noble and valiant an exploit, he always after bore three Lions on his shield, which his two surviving sons Heber and Heremon, and his grandson Heber Donn, son of Ir, after their conquest of Ireland, divided amongst them, as well as they did the country: each of them bearing a Lion in his shield and banner, but of different colours; which the Chiefs of their posterity continue to this day: some with additions and differences; others plain and entire as they had it from their ancestors.’

The thirteenth monarch of Ireland was Tigernmas ot Tiernmas and he reigned seventy-seven years; though according to Keating, he reigned only fifty years; of which he fought twenty-seven battles with the family of Heber Fionn, all which he won. It was during his reign that gold was mined near the Liffey and skilfully worked by Inchadhan. Tigernmas also ‘made a law that each grade of society should be’ ranked and ‘known by the number of colours in its wearing apparel.’ It is believed to have been the origin of the Scottish plaid.

‘According to Keating, one colour was used in the dress of a slave; two colours in that of a plebeian; three, in that of a soldier or young lord; four, in that of a brughaidh or public victualler; five, in that of a lord of a tuath or cantred; and six colours in that of an ollamh or Druid, or chief professor of any of the liberal arts, and in that of the king and queen.’ 

Tigernmas died in 890 BCE ‘on the Eve of 1st of November or Halloween, with two-thirds of the people of Ireland, at Magh Sleaght [Field of Adoration], in the county of Leitrim, as he was adoring his Sun-God idol, Crom Cruach [the crooked heap].’ Tigernmas was the first to introduce image worship in Ireland. This idol was worshipped up to the time of St. Patrick, by whom it was destroyed. The sun worship was a throwback to the Magi (or wise men) from the East – the empire of Parthia – who were led to Bethlehem by divine inspiration to witness the infant Messiah. 

During his son Smiomghall’s reign, the Picts in Scotland were forced to abide by their oath, and pay homage to the Irish Monarch. Later, King Fiacha Labhrainn, slew Eochaidh Faobharglas, of the line of Heber at the battle of Carman. During his reign all the inhabitants of Scotland were brought in subjection to the Irish Monarchy, and the conquest was secured by his son the twentieth Monarch, Aongus Olmucach. In 796 BCE, the Picts had again refused to pay the tribute originally imposed on them by Heremon, but the Monarch went with a strong army into Alba and in thirty pitched battles overcame them and forced them to pay the required tribute. 

Crimthann-Niadh-Nar was the one hundredth Monarch of Ireland, and styled ‘The Heroic.’ It was in his reign that the Saviour was born in 3 BCE. Tuathal Teachtmar was the 106th Monarch of Ireland. ‘When Tuathal came of age, he got together his friends, and, with what aid his grandfather the king of Alba gave him, came into Ireland and fought and overcame his enemies in twenty-five battles in Ulster, twenty-five in Leinster, as many in Connaught, and thirty-five in Munster. And having thus restored the true royal blood and heirs to their respective provincial kingdoms…’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

1. Partholan and his followers, called in Irish Muintir Phartholain, meaning “Partholan’s People.” 

2. The Nemedians [Tribes of Reuben, Simeon and Dan]. 

3. The Fomorians [Elioud giants], 

4. The Firbolgs or Firvolgians, who were also called Belgae or Belgians [tribe of Reuben (Northern Ireland)]. 

5. The Tuatha-de-Danans [Tribe of Dan]. 

6. The Milesians or Gaels [(Hiberi) Tribe of Gad]. 

7. The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin (Scotland)]. 

8. The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [Vikings]. 

9. The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah]. 

10. The Anglo-Saxons (or English) [(Jutes) tribe of Judah]. 

11. The Scots [led by the Royal Milesians from Zarah of Judah; accompanied by the residue of the tribe of Benjamin] from North Britain. 

John O’Hart: ‘The Nemedians came from Scythia in Europe, and were located chiefly in Ulster at Ardmacha (or Armagh), and in Derry and Donegal; and in Leinster at the Hill of Uisneach, which is situated a few miles from Mullingar, in the county Westmeath. 

The Fomorians are represented as a race of giants, and were celebrated as having been great builders in stone’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘They were located principally along the coasts of Ulster and Connaught, mostly in Antrim, Derry, Donegal, Leitrim, Sligo, and Mayo, and had their chief fortress (called Tor Conaing or Conang’s Tower) on Tor Inis or the Island of the Tower, now known as “Tory Island,” which is off the coast of Donegal; and another at the Giants’ Causeway, which in Irish was called Cloghan-na-Fomoraigh or the Causeway of the Fomorians, as it was supposed to have been constructed by this people, who, from their great strength and stature, were, as above mentioned, called giants: hence the term “Giants’ Causeway” – a stupendous natural curiosity of volcanic origin, situated on the sea-coast of Antrim, and consisting of a countless number of basaltic columns of immense height, which, from the regularity of their formation and arrangement, have the appearance of a vast work of art; and hence were supposed to have been constructed by giants. 

After the Fomorians became masters of the country, the Nemedians (neimhedh: Irish, dirt, filth of any kind), were reduced to slavery, and compelled to pay a great annual tribute on the first day of winter – consisting of corn, cattle, milk, and other provisions; and the place where these tributes were received was named Magh Ceitne, signifying the Plain of Compulsion, and so called from these circumstances. 

This plain was situated between the rivers Erne and Drabhois (drabhas: Irish, dirt, nastiness), between Ballyshannon and Bundrowes, on the borders of Donegal, Leitrim, and Fermanagh, along the sea-shore. – See Connellan’s “Four Masters.” Three bands of the Nemedians emigrated with their respective captains: one party wandered into the north of Europe [Dan]; others made their way to Greece [Reuben], where they were enslaved, and obtained the name of “Firbolgs” or bagmen, from the leathern bags which they were compelled to carry; and the third section took refuge in England [Simeon], which obtained its name Britain, from their leader “Briottan Maol.” – See Miss Cusack’s “History of Ireland.” 

The Firbolgs [Reuben] or Firvolgians, who were also Scythians, divided Ireland amongst the five sons of their leader Dela Mac Loich: “Slainge [slane] was he by whom Teamor (or Tara) was first raised.” (Four Masters). One hundred and fifty Monarchs reigned in Tara from that period until its abandonment in the reign of Diarmod, son of Fergus Cearrbheoil, who was the 133rd Monarch of Ireland, and King of Meath.

The Firvolgians ruled over Connaught down to the third century, when King Cormac Mac Art, the 115th Monarch of Ireland, attacked and defeated the forces of Aodh or Hugh, son of Garadh, King of Connaught, who was the last King of the Firbolg race in Ireland; and the sovereignty of Connaught was then transferred to the Milesians of the race of Heremon – descendants of King Cormac Mac Art. The Firbolg race never after acquired any authority in Ireland, being reduced to the ranks of farmers [indicative of Northern Ireland, with food and live animals the country’s second biggest export] and peasants; but they were still very numerous, and to this day a great many of the peasantry, particularly in Connaught, are considered to be of Firbolg origin. 

The Tuatha de Danans [Tribe of Dan], also of the Scythian family, invaded Ireland thirty-six years after the plantation by the Firbolgs. According to some annalists, they came originally from Persia, and to others, from Greece; and were located chiefly at Tara in Meath, at Croaghan in Connaught, and at Aileach in Donegal. The Danans being highly skilled in the arts, the Round Towers of Ireland are supposed to have been built by them. The light, gay, joyous element of the Irish character may be traced to them. They were a brave and high-spirited race, and famous for their skill in what was then termed Magic: hence, in after ages, this wonderful people were considered to have continued to live in hills or raths, as the “good people” long so commonly believed in as fairies, in Ireland. But their “magic” consisted in the exercise of the mechanical arts, of which those who had previously invaded Ireland were then ignorant.

It is a remarkable fact, that weapons of warfare found in the carns or gravemounds of the Firbolgs are of an inferior kind to those found in the carns of the Tuatha-de-Danans: a proof of the superior intelligence of the latter over the former people. 

The inventor of the Ogham [owam] Alphabet (ogham: Irish, “an occult manner of writing used by the ancient Irish”) was Ogma, father of one of the Tuatha-de-Danan Kings. In McCartin’s Irish Grammar it is stated that there were no less than thirty-five different modes of writing the Ogham, which has hitherto defied the power of modern science to unravel its mysteries. But the truth of our ancient history is strangely confirmed by the fact that the letters of this Alphabet are all denominated by the names of trees and shrubs indigenous to Ireland! According to the “Book of Leinster,” it was “Cet Cuimnig, King of Munster, of the royal line of Heber, that was the first that inscribed Ozam [or Ogham] memorials in Erinn.” This extract gives a clue to the period when Ogham stones were first erected, and why… most of them are to be found in the Province of Munster; for, according to the Septuagint system of chronology, that King of Munster reigned about the year 1257 before the birth of Christ! 

The Milesians invaded Ireland one hundred and ninety-seven years later than the Tuatha de Danans; and were called Clan-na-Mile [meel], signifying the descendants of Milesius of Spain.’

The term Milesian is complicated as in this instance and time frame it accurately refers to the tribe of Gad; the peoples who are deemed the last tribe to invade Erin, summarily known as Hiberi, Scotti, Goidel, Gael and Milesian. The word Milesian is also used to describe the inclusion of the clan of Zara from the tribe of Judah; as in the Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.

O’Hart: ‘The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin] were also Scythians, and, according to our ancient historians, came from Thrace [refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian] soon after the arrival of the Milesians; but, not being permitted by the Milesians to remain in Ireland, they sailed to Scotland and became the possessors of that country, but tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland. In after ages colonies of them came over and settled in Ulster; they were located chiefly in the territories which now form the counties of Down, Antrim, and Derry. 

The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes], a Teutonic race of Scythian origin, came to Ireland in great numbers, in the ninth and tenth centuries, and were located chiefly in Leinster and Munster, in many places along the sea-coast: their strongholds being the towns of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, and Limerick. 

The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah] came to Ireland in the twelfth century, and possessed themselves of a great part of the country, under their chief leader, Richard de Clare, who was also named Strongbow. They were a Teutonic race, descended from the Normans of France, who were a mixture of Norwegians, Danes, and French, and who conquered England in the eleventh century. The English invasion of Ireland was accomplished ostensibly through the agency of Dermod MacMorough, King of Leinster; on account of his having been driven from his country by the Irish Monarch for the abduction of the wife of Tiernan O’Ruarc, Prince of Breffni. For that act, Roderick O’Connor, the Monarch of Ireland, invaded the territory of Dermod, A.D. 1167, and put him to flight. King Dermod was obliged, after many defeats, to leave Ireland, in 1167; throw himself at the feet of King Henry the Second [1154-1189], and crave his assistance, offering to become his liegeman. 

Henry, on receiving Dermod’s oath of allegiance, granted by letters patent a general license to all his English subjects to aid King Dermod in the recovery of his Kingdom. Dermod then engaged in his cause Richard de Clare or Strongbow, to whom he afterwards gave his daughter Eva, in marriage; and through his influence an army was raised, headed by Robert Fitzstephen, Myler Fitzhenry, Harvey de Monte Marisco, Maurice Prendergast, Maurice Fitzgerald, and others; with which, in May, 1168, he landed in Bannow-bay, near Wexford, which they reduced, together with the adjoining counties – all in the kingdom of Leinster. 

In 1171, Earl Strongbow landed at Waterford with a large body of followers and took possession of that city. He then joined King Dermod’s forces, marched for Dublin, entered the city, and made himself master. King Dermod died in his castle at Ferns, county Wexford, A.D. 1175, about the 65th year of his age. Of him Holingshed says – “He was a man of tall stature and of a large and great body, a valiant and bold warrior in his nation. From his continued shouting, his voice was hoarse; he rather chose to be feared than to be loved, and was a great oppressor of his nobility. To his own people he was rough and grievous, and hateful unto strangers; his hand was against all men, and all men against him.” 

The Anglo-Saxons or English, also a Tuetonic race, came from the twelfth to the eighteenth century. The Britons or Welsh came in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. These English colonies were located chiefly in Leinster, but also in great numbers in Munster and Connaught, and partly in Ulster.’ 

These ‘English’ and ‘Welsh’ represented the ‘Irish’ who emigrated to America and Canada; being a separate and distinct set of people – different tribes, as we will discover.

O’Hart: ‘The Scots, who were chiefly Celts of Irish descent, came in great numbers from the tenth to the sixteenth century, and settled in Ulster, mostly in Antrim, Down, and Derry; but, on the Plantation of Ulster with British colonies, in the seventeenth century, the new settlers in that province were chiefly Scotch [Scots Irish], who were a mixture of Celts and Saxons.’

These peoples known as Scots Irish (Ulster Scots) and as Scotch-Irish in America, are a distinct people, whom we will address in a later chapter. Needless to say, they are not descended from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon, Levi, Reuben or Gad.

O’Hart: ‘Thus the [first seven] colonies that settled in Ireland were a mixture of Scythians, Gaels, and Phoenicians; but the four last were mostly Teutons, though mixed with Celts; and a compound of all these races, in which Celtic blood is predominant, forms the present population of Ireland.’ 

Song of Inisfail, Irish Melodies, Thomas Moore”

‘They came from a land beyond the sea And now o’er the western main
Set sail, in their good ships, gallantly, From the sunny land of Spain. 

“Oh, where’s the isle we’ve seen in dreams, Our destined home or grave?”
Thus sang they, as by the morning’s beams, They swept the Atlantic wave. 

And lo! where afar o’er ocean shines A spark of radiant green, As though in that deep lay emerald mines, Whose light through the wave was seen.

“Tis Innisfail – ’tis Innisfail!” Rings o’er the echoing sea; While, bending to heaven, the warriors hail That home of the brave and free.

Then turned they unto the Eastern wave, Where now their Day-god’s eye A look of such sunny omen gave As lighted up sea and sky.

Nor frown was seen through sky or sea, Nor tear o’er leaf or sod, When first on their Isle of Destiny Our great forefathers trod.’

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the early Irish chroniclers were most emphatic in their insistence that the Irish were of Scythian stock. And there is good etymological evidence for this. 

The Irish were long referred to as Scots even before some of them migrated to the country that today bears their name, and as Brewer tells us: 

“Scot (is) the same as Scythian in etymology; the root of both is Sct. The Greeks had no c, and would change t into th making the root skth, and by adding a phonetic vowel we get Skuthai (Scythians), and Skodiai (Skoths). The Welsh disliked s at the beginning of a word, and would change it to ys; they would also change c or k to g, and th to d; whence the Welsh root would be Ysgd, and Skuth or Skoth would become ysgod. Once more, the Saxons would cut off the Welsh y, and change the g back again to c, and the d to t, converting the Ysgod to Scot.”

Cooper: ‘It would be no strange thing to find Scythian peoples as far west as Ireland. After all, the land in Asia Minor known of old as Galatia, was populated by a migrating colony of Gallic Celts from whom the country got its name. St Paul wrote his famous epistle to their descendants. Many other examples from history are known of nations seemingly popping up in places where one would normally not expect to find them, so it requires no great stretch of the imagination to accept what the early Irish chroniclers so often insisted upon, namely their descent from the Scythian races. 

Of added interest are certain details that have been handed down to us by Geoffrey of Monmouth. We are told by him how Partholan’s colony consisted of thirty ships. Interestingly, Nennius makes no mention of the number of ships, but does tell us that the colony consisted of 1000 souls, which indicates that he and Geoffrey were working from different sources. 

However, Geoffrey also tells us that the colony had recently been expelled from the Spanish mainland, and moreover that they were called ‘Basclenses’, or Basques. Now, we know that the present-day Basques of northern Spain are of an entirely mysterious origin, and we also know that they speak a language that is quite unrelated to any known Indo-European tongue’ – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

‘In which context, it is interesting to note what Professor Mackie has written concerning the language of the early Picts who had more than a passing influence on both the early and later history of the Irish: 

“The Picts certainly used a form of P-Celtic (the mother of Welsh, Cornish and Breton), with traces of Gaulish forms. However, it is clear, from the few scraps of evidence which survive, that the Picts also used another language, probably unrelated to any “Indo-European” tongue and therefore so different from modern European languages as to be incomprehensible to us.”

‘Presumably, this information would not have been available to that allegedly incorrigible forger, Geoffrey of Monmouth, but it is instinctive to compare Mackie’s remarks with a comment by Cusack, when she says: “… those who have maintained the theory of a Gaulish colonisation of Ireland, have been obliged to make Spain the point of embarkation.”

‘The next recorded invasion (or settlement) of Ireland… was led by Nemedius… or Nemedh, and it is recorded that the people of Nemedh were credited with having built certain types of fort as well as clearing the land for a particular method of cultivation. A later outbreak of plague took its toll on the population, the remainder of whom are recorded as having fought off an invasion of Ireland by the Formorians… we know from the chronicles of the early Britons that the British mainland was… settled by Brutus and his people in ca 1104 BC… although Brutus is said to have been the first coloniser of Britain, the chronicles do emphatically state that he had to displace an indigenous race of ‘giants’.

Whether physical giantism is here intended cannot be certainly resolved, as the early British word ‘gawr’ (like the Hebrew gibbor) could mean simply a great warrior as well as a giant man. The Formorians, it seems, were the displaced natives of Britain who were trying to seek a foothold on the Irish mainland only to be repelled by the Nemedians, thereafter having to live, like many other displaced peoples, by scavenging and piracy. 

After the repulsion of the Formorians, the few Nemedian survivors settled further inland, presumably for safety while they consolidated their numbers. They are then recorded as subsequently dividing themselves into three ‘bands’, each with their respective leaders. One of these groups migrated to northern Europe, where they founded a nation known later to the Irish as the Tuatha de Danann [the tribe of Dan].

A second group settled, intriguingly, in the northernmost parts of Britain, apparently the first Pictish settlement [of the tribe of Benjamin] of what is now Scotland. This settlement of Picts from ‘Scythia’ (so states the British record – note etymological derivation given above of Scot from Scythian) into Albany, is recalled in the early British chronicles as having taken place under the Pictish king Soderic. The British chronology seems to have slipped somewhat at this point, but the event is real enough and accurately portrayed [circa 1030 to 1000 BCE]. 

The third group are named as the Firbolgs [the tribe of Reuben], who migrated to Greece and then returned to Ireland which they subsequently divided up into five provinces.

The last colonisation of Ireland is then recorded…

“The fleet of the sons of Milidh came to Ireland at the end of this year, to take it from the Tuatha de Danann, and they fought the battle of Sliabh Mis with them on the third day after landing.”

‘The children of Milidh, known to us as the Milesians, had landed unobserved in the mouth of the river Slaney in what is today the county of Wexford, from where they marched to Tara, the central seat of government. The word Milesian is still used (though with increasing rarity) to denote the Irish people themselves, or things pertaining to Ireland. And of further interest to our enquiry is the fact that the Milesians… arrived (via the Spanish peninsula) from the city of Miletus, whose ruins still stand on the Turkish mainland, and which was finally destroyed by the Persian army in the year 494 BC.

Moreover, with regard to the… often stated Phoenician element of Irish descent, we should… note that the ancient Greeks once held that Phoenicia was founded by one Phoenix, whose brother Cadmus had invented the alphabet. Likewise, the early Irish recalled the time when they lived under a king named… Phenius, ‘who devoted himself especially to the study of languages, and composed an alphabet and the elements of grammar.’ So it is clear… the early Irish chroniclers were passing on an account… of authentic historical events and personages, and of the equally historic descent of their own race from Phoenician and Scythian stock. And on the subject of that descent, Cusack adds yet again to our store of knowledge: 

“As the Milesians were the last of the ancient colonists … only their genealogies, with a few exceptions, have been preserved. The genealogical tree begins, therefore, with the brothers Eber and Eremon, the two surviving leaders of the expedition…

The great southern chieftains, such as the MacCarthys and O’Briens, claim descent from Eber;

the northern families of O’Connor, O’Donnell, and O’Neill, claim Eremon as their head. 

There are also other families claiming descent from Emer, the son of Ir, brother to Eber and Eremon;

as also from their cousin Lugaidh, the son of Ith.

From these four sources the principle Celtic families of Ireland have sprung…”

‘As we see in the genealogy, Eber and Eremon were able to trace their own descent from Gadelas, the father of the Gaels and the Gaelic languages, but just how seriously did the early Irish take the question of pedigree? Were they serious enough to take the trouble to keep accurate records over long periods of time? Once more, Cusack answers the question for us: 

“The Books of Genealogies and Pedigrees form a most important element in Irish pagan history. For social and political reasons, the Irish Celt preserved his genealogical tree with scrupulous precision. The rights of property and the governing power were transmitted with patriarchal exactitude on strict claims of primogeniture, which claims could only be refused under certain conditions defined by law… and in obedience to an ancient law, established long before the introduction of Christianity, all the provincial records, as well as those of the various chieftains, were required to be furnished every third year to the convocation at Tara, where they were compared and corrected.”

The Flag of Ireland

The white in the centre signifies a lasting truce (peace); between the orange – which stands for William of Orange, the Orange Order and Ireland’s Protestant minority – and the green, which represents Irish nationalism, the Irish Catholic and the Irish people.

The beginning of Gad’s ordeal, involving enduring ‘troops’ treading on them as per biblical prophecy was with the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in 1169 CE. Since then, it was an endless cycle of political resistance to English rule and military campaigns to rid the Isle of their oppressors; who’s aim seemed to be to turn the Irish into the English. Most of Ireland gained independence following the Anglo-Irish war from 1919 to 1921, as the Irish Free State in 1922. Achieving full independence as the Republic of Ireland in 1949, with Northern Ireland part of the United Kingdom as a ‘constituent country.’

Irish history can be broken down into periods of a. invasion by England and the Lordship of Ireland from 1171 to 1542; b. the Kingdom of Ireland from 1542 to 1800; c. being conquered by England during 1536 to 1691; d. the period known as the Protestant Ascendancy lasting from 1691 to 1801; until e. the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland when Ireland merged with Britain from 1801 until 1922.

Though the Normans had invaded Britain in 1066, it was a century later when they landed in Ireland. As quoted earlier, in 1169, Anglo-Norman mercenaries set foot in Ireland at the request of Diamait mac Murchada (Dermot MacMurragh), the deposed King of Leinster; who sought their help in regaining his kingship. The Normans achieved this within weeks as well as raiding neighbouring kingdoms. This military intervention was sanctioned by King Henry II of England. In return, Diarmait swore loyalty to Henry, promising land to the Normans and in turn altering the course of Irish history forever. 

During much of the Middle Ages Ireland was ruled as a separate kingdom under the British Crown. Not the whole country, just an eastern portion. The English ‘knew that the best way to defeat the cunning Irish was to suppress the entire country, which would have cost a fortune… or they could just build a big wall around the greater Dublin area… they decided on the less painful latter option and called the walled area The Pale.’ It was not till 1603, with victory over the Irish in Ulster that Britain gained complete control of Ireland. 

True(ish) History of Ireland, Garvan Grant:

“When Elizabeth I ascended to the English throne in 1558, she took a more lenient attitude towards Ireland. She even let the people of Ireland carry on being Catholic, speak their own language and live, which was dead nice of her. In return, all she wanted from the various chieftains who had divided the country up between them was ‘unconditional loyalty’, the swearing of an odd oath and bucket-loads of cash. This suited everyone – until some of the Irish fellas got greedy and started scrapping with their neighbors over bits of land. This led to Elizabeth showing her not so lovely side and coming down quite hard on the Irish. 

Tired of fighting, the English then decided the best way to ‘civilize’ the Irish were to send some nice English, Scottish and Welsh people to live on their lands, so the Irish could see just how brilliant being British was. These ‘Plantations’ might have worked too, except that a lot of the planters weren’t very brilliant – or very nice. They hadn’t signed up for it because they loved the Irish and wanted to make them better people; they came because they were given free land with free peasants (or ‘slaves’) to work on it. It was lovely in theory, but probably not a recipe for success on the ground.” 

The province of Ulster was troublesome, thus land was confiscated from members of the Gaelic nobility of Ireland – who then fled Ulster – and given to Scottish small farmers, so that they remained and did not sell the land back to the native Irish. Thus Scots migrated to Ireland in large numbers under the government sanctioned Plantation of Ulster and its planned process of colonisation during the reign of James I. The success of this policy was the foundation of the problems Northern Ireland faced until 1998 and in reality till this day. Cromwell after the English Civil War was short of cash to pay his troops, so he confiscated eighty percent of the land for his troops in lieu of money. The dispossessed landowners were offered poor quality land in Connaught in exchange. 

Grant: “Until the seventeenth century war in Ireland had been mainly about unimportant things such as land, money, and power, but after the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, it became more about good, old-fashioned religion. How God felt about this change was anyone’s guess. In 1649, when the latest war in England ended and Charles I lost his head and couldn’t find it anywhere, the English sent over a lovely chap by the name of Oliver Cromwell. He was only in Ireland for nine months but managed to get in more violence than many other English people had done in decades. His theory of how to win a war – and it has yet to be proved wrong – was to kill everybody. He and his army – they were originally going to call it the New ‘Slaughter Everybody’ Army but eventually decided on the much catchier New Model Army – basically attacked anyone they met who wasn’t one of their soldiers.” 

The British attempt to solve the ‘Irish Problem’ by creating the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801, was a solution that pleased nobody in Ireland; for the protestant ruling class did not want to lose their independence and the Catholics felt betrayed when George III refused to grant Catholic emancipation.

Within a United Kingdom, Ireland started to struggle for reform. O’Connell and his Catholic Association founded in 1823 led the struggle for Catholic emancipation. The Potato Famine in the years 1845 to 1852 caused enormous upheavals as the population of Ireland fell from nine Million to three million through famine and emigration. No doubt, a London government would not have let this tragedy happen in mainland Britain.

The Easter Rising of 1916 was put down quickly by Westminster. Crass mishandling by the British resulted in many of the leaders of the Easter Rising being shot by firing squad, with the extremists acquiring the status of martyrs. In the 1918 election, seventy-three of the one hundred and six Irish seats went to Sinn Fein. They refused to go to Westminster and set up a provisional government in Ireland. Three years of bitter guerrilla warfare with atrocities on both sides ensued; before a truce was finally signed in 1921. The ‘final solution of the Irish Problem’ was partition. The Irish stalemate continues: Northern Protestants feel they have a right to determine their own future democratically on the basis of being in the majority. Northern Catholics feel they have the right to be part of a united Ireland. 

There are a number of flags associated with Northern Ireland and the larger province of Ulster, comprising nine counties. The only official flag is the Union Flag of the United Kingdom. The Ulster Banner (Red Hand Flag, Ulster Flag) used officially by the government, from 1953 until the parliament was abolished in 1973 – first receiving a royal warrant for use in 1924 – has no sanctioned status since then, though some loyalists, unionists and sports team have adopted it. It is not to be confused with the similar flag with a yellow background, which is the provincial flag of Ulster (below). 

The Saint Patrick’s Saltire (below) represents Northern Ireland indirectly in the Union Flag. It is flown during St Patrick’s Day parades in Northern Ireland and some northern Irish royal events.

The Republic of Ireland is the 26th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $598 billion in 2025.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Irish global shipments during 2024.

  1. Pharmaceuticals: US$89.7 billion
  2. Organic chemicals: $46.3 billion
  3. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $21.1 billion
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.4 billion
  5. Perfumes, cosmetics: $12.2 billion
  6. Machinery including computers: $11 billion
  7. Aircraft, spacecraft: $6.6 billion
  8. Other chemical goods: $4.7 billion
  9. Dairy, eggs, honey: $4.6 billion
  10. Meat: $4.2 billion

Ireland’s top 10 export product categories generated 89.3% of the overall value of total Irish shipments. Electrical machinery and equipment [represented] the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 37.1% from 2023 to 2024.’

The term Ulster Scots is used for those peoples residing in Northern Ireland with a Scottish connection, while those who emigrated to North America are known as the Scotch-Irish. We will learn that the peoples who departed from Ulster for America were not descended from the tribe of Reuben – nor are the Ulster Scots who remain in Northern Ireland. Their ancestors were mostly Protestant Presbyterian Scottish colonists originating from principally Galloway and then Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Ayrshire, the Scottish Borders and parts of Northern England (which were once part of Scotland and incorporated into England), which bordered Scotland. A minority came from further north in the Lowlands or from the Highlands. 

The Scots Irish emigrated onwards from Ireland in considerable numbers to what is now the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. It was just a few generations after arriving in Northern Ireland that sizeable numbers of Scots Irish emigrated to Great Britain’s North American colonies. Between 1717 and 1775, an estimated two hundred thousand migrated to the United States. Scots Irish also travelled to Britain’s acquisition of New France, becoming Scotch-Irish Canadians. 

In the United States 2000 Census, ‘4.3 million Americans (1.5% of the population of the United States) claimed Scotch-Irish ancestry. Author and former United States Senator Jim Webb suggests that the true number of people with some Scots-Irish heritage in the United States is [more likely over 27 million people;] possibly because contemporary Americans with some Scotch-Irish heritage may regard themselves as either Irish, Scottish, or simply American instead.’

This is an important point as these Scots Irish are the same as the Ulster Scots remaining in Northern Ireland. They are not the same as Americans and Canadians of simply standard Scottish and Irish stock, or even from English, Welsh and German descent. 

Not only does Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales possess a very different genetic make-up from each other, they are also different – in the main – from the rest of England. Proving that the four constituent nations comprising the United Kingdom are four distinct and separate peoples – England from Judah; Scotland from Benjamin; Wales from Simeon; and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben.

The population of the Republic of Ireland is 5,312,460 people and comparable with Scotland. Yet it remained considerably smaller for decades at approximately 3.5 million, until experiencing accelerated growth from the year 2000. The population of Northern Ireland grows slowly and is approximately 1,910,500 people – where Reuben’s people are few. Its composition will be discussed in a later chapter. While Wales has 3,307,856 people; also exhibiting slow growth. Simeon shares a larger territory with Judah – within the Kingdom of England – in proportion to its population size.

Tests reveal that the Welsh carry the most DNA of the original settlers in the British Isles. Or in other words, the Welsh have the most undiluted DNA in the British Isles, reflecting their status as one of the first Israelite tribes to permanently settle in Britain. 

This is underscored by three reasons. First, as we learned from the two census records of the Israelites during their forty year sojourn; the vast majority of Simeon departed and struck out on their own. Second, we also know that even if they spent time in Ireland very early on, the tribe of Simeon were primarily based in Britain. Only the tribe pf Dan shared the island with them, for Benjamin arrived later and Reuben and Gad remained in Ireland. Third, due to its westerly location and mountainous landscape, few invaders including even the Romans, Saxons and Vikings ventured into Welsh lands.

An article described the Welsh as “the true pure Britons, according to the research that has produced the first genetic map of the UK. Scientists were able to trace their DNA back to the first tribes that settled in the British Isles… This means the DNA of people living there has not experienced the influx of ‘foreign’ genes like other parts of Britain. The research found that there is no single ‘Celtic’ genetic group.”

The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish really are all different tribes and definitely not from the same one. The term Celtic, is clearly a cultural and historical time frame reference and only broadly an ethnic one. 

The research confirmed that the people of Orkney are the most distinct, “a result of 600 years of Norwegian rule” and “the Welsh are the next most distinct. But even within Wales there are two distinct tribes, with those in the north and south of the principality less similar genetically than the Scots are to the inhabitants of Kent.” This is and isn’t a surprise, as Scotland and Kent share the same father Jacob, yet different mothers. Rachel for Scotland and Leah for Kent.

If the southern Welsh have the same mother as Judah of England, that is Leah because they are Simeon, then north Wales must have a different mother. This would lend itself to the northern Welsh possibly having one of the Handmaids as their mother. Or it could be explained by Simeon’s other wife (of Canaanite extraction) – Genesis 46:10. We will return to this conundrum.* 

Khazaria, Welsh, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Bryan Sykes, professor of human genetics at the University of Oxford and founder of Oxford Ancestors, showed that people from North Wales and Mid-Wales are more genetically interlinked with each other than either are with people from South Wales. Y-DNA haplogroups carried by members of “The Wales Cymru DNA Project” include [E1b1b] (E-L117)… (E-V13)… (E-M34), G1a1a1, G2a1, I1 (I-M253), [I2a1]… (I-M223, I-P37, etc.), J1, J2, R1a1a (R-M512, R-M198, R-M173, R-Z280), R1b1a (R-M269, R-M173, R-L21), and… (R-P312), among others.

The SNP subclade Z138+ (also known as Z139+) of the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 is found at low frequencies in Germanic-speaking populations including England and Wales, but also in Portugal, southern Italy, and Romania. STR (short tandem repeats) analysis reveals a western subgroup of I1 where GATA-H4 ≥ 11 that’s most common in Wales that exists at lower frequencies in English and other European populations.’

Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration, Molecular Biology and Evolution, multiple authors, 2002, pages 1008-1021:

‘They studied English, Welsh, Norwegian, and Frisian men and genetically compared them to each other. Samples included males from 2 towns in North Wales (Abergele^ and Llangefni) and 5 towns in England as far east as North Walsham in East Anglia. The sampled men from Central English towns genetically resembled each other closely, in contrast to the North Welsh men who “differed significantly both from each other and from the Central English towns.” They found common Germanic roots of the English and Frisian males in the study, confirming that the Anglo-Saxons (but not the Welsh) are largely descended from people not indigenous to the British Isles. Excerpts from the article:

“Our results indicate the presence of a strong genetic barrier between Central England and North Wales and the virtual absence of a barrier between Central England and Friesland… The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent. Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity…

Anglo-Saxon settlements and culture appeared throughout England but, importantly, did not extend into North Wales, where many of the original Celtic Britons living in England are thought to have fled…”

‘Extraordinary’ genetic make-up of north east Wales men, BBC News, July 19, 2011: 

‘Dr. Andy Grierson of the University of Sheffield comments on the finding of E1b1b1 in a large percentage (the article states approximately 30 percent) of men from northeast Wales (the town of Abergele^). 

(Most of the men specifically carry E1b1b1a2, also known as E-V13). This is found in a much higher frequency than populations in the rest of the United Kingdom, which average 1 percent [see map above]. The sample size was 500 people. Grierson said, 

“This type of genetic makeup is usually found in the eastern Mediterranean which made us think that there might have been strong connections between north east Wales and this part of Europe somewhere in the past. But this appears not to be the case, so we’re still looking to find out why it’s happened and what it reveals about the history of the region.”

Whatever the reason, the presence of such a high percentage of Haplogroup E1b1b, indicates admixture with an African line of male descent in the past – whether it be Berber as in North African, or Black as in sub-Saharan African – with the resulting mutation of V13 found only in Europeans.

Recall in Genesis 46:10 that Simeon had six sons and his youngest son Shaul, was born to a Canaanite woman. While this doesn’t explain the Y-DNA Haplogroup directly, it may be linked if this branch of Simeon maintained a proclivity to marry Canaanites – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Khazaria: ‘The fine-scale genetic structure of the British population, Nature 519, multiple authors, 2015, pages 309-314: Welsh form part of this intensive evaluation of autosomal DNA. Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… We use haplotype-based statistical methods to analyse genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data from a carefully chosen geographically diverse sample of 2,039 individuals from the United Kingdom… The regional genetic differentiation and differing patterns of shared ancestry with 6,209 individuals from across Europe carry clear signals of historical demographic events… in non-Saxon parts of the United Kingdom, there exist genetically differentiated subgroups rather than a general ‘Celtic’ population.”

Welsh people could be most ancient in UK, DNA suggests, BBC News, June 19, 2012:

‘This is another article about Professor Donnelly’s team’s research. Excerpts from the article:

“… DNA samples were analysed at about 500,000 different points. After comparing statistics, a map was compiled which showed Wales and Cornwall stood out. Prof Donnelly said:

‘People from Wales are genetically relatively distinct, they look different genetically from much of the rest of mainland Britain, and actually people in north Wales look relatively distinct from people in south Wales.’

While there were traces of migrant groups across the UK, there were fewer in Wales and Cornwall. He said people* from south and north Wales genetically have ‘fairly large similarities with the ancestry of people from Ireland on the one hand and France [Moab and Ammon] on the other…’ He said it was possible that people came over from Ireland to north Wales because it was the closest point, and the same for people coming to south Wales from the continent, as it was nearer. However he added: ‘We don’t really have the historical evidence about what those genetic inputs were…’

Because of its westerly position and mountainous nature, Anglo-Saxons who moved into central and eastern England after the Romans left did not come that far west, and neither did the Vikings who arrived in around 900AD… The mountains were also the reason why (Welsh) DNA may have remained relatively unchanged, as people would have found it harder to get from north to south Wales or into England compared with people trying to move across the flatter southern English counties, making them more likely to marry locally and conserve more ancient DNA… ”

DNA links Welsh men to Scotland, Helen McArdle, Herald Scotland, November 24, 2014: 

‘The team of Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales and Scotland’s DNA discovered that 1 percent of Welsh males carry a Y chromosome variety that descends from ancient Picts from Scotland and is related to the modern Scottish variety of this lineage. Excerpts from the article:

“Some 10 per cent of all Scottish men belong to this ‘Pictish’ lineage compared to just 0.8 per cent of Englishmen. It is particularly concentrated in Perthshire, Fife, Angus and Grampian, regions of Scotland with known Pictish heritage. The discovery of shared ancestral ties between men in Scotland and Wales is at the centre of a new theory that this one per cent of Welsh men are direct descendents* of a small band of ancient Scottish aristocrats, who fled the Old Welsh-speaking kingdom of Strathclyde in the ninth century to escape a Viking invasion. They are thought to have headed south, by sea, to find refuge in north Wales after the Viking kings Ivar and Olaf led their dragonships up the Clyde in 870, laying siege to the fortress on Dumbarton Rock and eventually capturing Artgul, the king of Strathclyde.”

DNA survey reveals 25% of Welsh men directly descended from ancient kings and warlords, Nathan Bevan, Wales Online, December 18, 2014: 

‘Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales is interviewed as saying 25 percent of Welsh men whose grandparents were all Welsh inherited their Y chromosomes from about 20 medieval Welsh royals, nobles, and warlords who had many descendants. Moffat also spoke about what the team learned so far about the earliest immigrants to Wales, thousands of years ago. He said, 

“We all suspected that Wales was a Celtic country but no-one was prepared for just how much – the classic Celtic Y chromosome marker R1b S145 [L21] being carried by a whopping 45% of Welsh men, as opposed to just 15% over on the other side of Offa’s Dyke. We have always known that Wales [Simeon] is different from England [Judah], but now here is a statistic that shows there is no question about it.” 

In the previous chapter we discussed the defining marker paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup for the descendants of Abraham being R1b-U106 (S21). It is prevalent in England, as well as the downstream sub-clade U198. In Wales, it is R1b-L21 (M529) which is predominant. M529 is a defining marker R1b Haplogroup in Ireland and the British Celtic nations. R1b-S116 (P312) derives from L11 (which is downstream from M269) as does U106, with L21 deriving from R1b-S116.

As intimated previously, this writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). This is not the chapter to elaborate on this contention, though at some point it is hoped it can be addressed more fully, with input from geneticists welcome. 

Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either adjacent to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or even deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would seem better placed deriving from L11 directly and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

While it is not a surprise that Simeon and Judah are different; as blood brothers their different R1b Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations is puzzling. This extends to the Scots and Irish, not just for the Welsh, as all share the same father. The Scots and Irish have different mothers – Rachel and Zilpah respectively – yet Reuben-Northern Ireland, Simeon-Wales and Judah-England all have the same mother in Leah. Why these five sons don’t share the same R1b mutation; or why the three sons from Leah at least do not; and why the four Celtic sons with different mothers do and the Saxon son doesn’t, will have to remain an enigma for the time being.

(A further thought to this question after time of writing, is the idea that Y-DNA Haplogroups can be affected by geography and chronology. Though this seems an unrealistic proposition, surely.)

Khazaria: ‘The Welsh television presenter Angharad Mair had her DNA tested by CymruDNAWales [in 2015]. Upon examining her mitochrodrial DNA, they found that her maternal lineage came from the Levant region (eastern Mediterranean) thousands of years ago. Excerpts:

“… These particular mitochrodrial DNA markers… appear with very high frequency in Wales at around 11%… However, they are most commonly found among Ashkenazi Jews of Europe, where a third of all maternal bloodlines are Levantine… ‘I was very excited to discover that I had Jewish ancestry – which might’ve only developed in the last two centuries…’

This interesting revelation hints at a link between Edom and Simeon in the past. The Bible reveals when this may have occurred in one instance. 1 Chronicles 4:42-43, ESV: ‘And some of them, five hundred men of the Simeonites, went to Mount Seir…  And they defeated the remnant of the Amalekites who had escaped, and they have lived there to this day.’

Khazaria, Irish, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The “Celtic” Irish people of the emerald isle of Ireland are closely related to the Scottish people of nearby Scotland, and Irish and the partly Frisian-Anglo-Saxon English people from England are also significantly related. This shows the limitations of assuming we know everything about somebody’s ancestry merely based on what language their ethnic group traditionally spoke (in this case, Irish Gaelic versus English). Also, some Irish people moved to Iceland and are thus partly related to modern Icelanders.

R1b, which originated in western Europe, is the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Irish men, at a frequency of about 81.5%.

I1 is the second most common with 6%, followed by [I2a2] at 5% [I1 and I2 older mutations related to though predating R1b (and R1a)],

R1a at 2.5% [Eastern European origin through admixture, Shem], and E1b1b at 2% [North African origin… Canaan].

G2a is found in only about 1% [Caucasus… Shem]. Also rare are [I2a1] (1%) [Southeastern European… Shem] and J2 (1%) [Southwest Asian… Ham].

According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 8.4% of the 226 Irish people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. That isn’t the only red hair allele that Irish people sometimes carry. Between 4-6% of 23andMe’s Irish customers carry the T red hair allele on the R160W (rs1805008, Arg160Trp) gene, while 4-6% of their Irish customers carry the C red hair allele on the D294H (i3002507) gene… Irish people carry red-hair gene variants including Arg151Cys, Arg160Trp, and Asp294His. There are also correlations between these and light skin.

The Irish DNA Atlas: Revealing Fine-Scale Population Structure and History within Ireland, multiple authors, Scientific Reports 7, December 8, 2017, article number 17199:

‘The “Irish DNA Atlas” project is run by the Genealogical Society of Ireland, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and the University of Leicester. They sought people whose 8 great-grandparents were all born in Irish towns within 30 kilometers of each other. This major autosomal DNA study includes 194 Irish people who told 4 generations of their ancestry and linked their ancestors to specific regions within Ireland. They were compared to 2,039 people from the “Peoples of the British Isles” (PoBI) dataset, to 6,760 people from throughout Europe, and to two ancient Irish individuals.

The scientists managed to divide the Irish population into “10 distinct geographically stratified genetic clusters; seven of ‘Gaelic’ Irish ancestry [Ireland], and three of shared Irish-British ancestry [Northern Ireland].”

They also “demonstrate high levels of North-West French-like and West Norwegian-like ancestry within Ireland.” It has long been known that Norse (Viking) people settled in Ireland during the Middle Ages so this makes sense. They did not, however, interpret the French-like DNA to be a signal of medieval Norman French ancestry since people in northwestern France are related to other Celtic peoples.

They also detected some Scottish ancestry that came into Ulster in northern Ireland in the 16th-17th centuries. This again conforms to what we know about the religious and ethnic divide between the substantially Protestant and British communities of Northern Ireland [Reuben] and the traditionally Catholic Republic of Ireland [Gad].’

The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles, multiple authors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, September 3, 2019:

‘Irish people were among those who participated in this autosomal DNA study of 2,544 people. The Irish people from County Donegal in northwestern Ireland are shown to represent “the most genetically isolated region of Ireland observed to date. This isolation shows little evidence of the migrations that have impacted the rest of Ulster.”

Using admixture analysis, the researchers concluded that “Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates”. It is no surprise that the researchers determined that Irish, Welsh, and Scottish people inherited a majority of their ancestry from the ancient “Celts”.

This is answered by the simple fact that the Viking element are contributions from two separate sons of Jacob – not from the descendants of Abraham and Keturah – two different and distinct tribes of whom then departed from Ireland (and Britain)** to migrate to lands in the New World – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. 

Khazaria: ‘… researchers studied the Y-DNA of Irish men with surnames considered to be of Norse origin. They examined both unique event polymorphisms and short tandem repeat (STR) markers. They found that these Irish men actually didn’t usually have paternal roots from Scandinavia, nor do Irish men in the general population of modern Ireland… “the findings are consistent with a relatively small number of Norse settlers (and [descendants]) migrating to Ireland during the Viking period (ca. AD 800-1200) suggesting that Norse colonial settlements might have been largely composed of indigenous** Irish…”

Those peoples who have remained** in Scotland and Ireland are the tribes of Benjamin and Gad respectively, with principally Reuben in Northern Ireland.

Insular Celtic population structure and genomic footprints of migratiuon, PLoS Genetics, January 25, 2018:

‘…structural clustering for the autosomal DNA of 1,035 Irish individuals. The authors found 23 Irish clusters. The abstract says that these clusters “segregate with geographical provenance.” Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… Cluster diversity is pronounced in the west of Ireland but reduced in the east where older structure has been eroded by historical migrations. Accordingly, when populations from the neighbouring island of Britain are included, a west-east cline of Celtic-British ancestry is revealed along with a particularly striking correlation between haplotypes and geography across both islands. A strong relationship is revealed between subsets of Northern Irish and Scottish populations, where discordant genetic and geographic affinities reflect major migrations in recent centuries.

Additionally, Irish genetic proximity of all Scottish samples likely reflects older strata of communication across the narrowest inter-island crossing. Using GLOBETROTTER we detected Irish admixture signals from Britain and Europe and estimated dates for events consistent with the historical migrations of the Norse-Vikings, the Anglo-Normans and the British Plantations. The influence of the former is greater than previously estimated from Y chromosome haplotypes…”

A Y-Chromosome Signature of Hegemony in Gaelic Ireland, multiple authors, American Journal of Human Genetics 78, February 2006, pages 334-338:

‘The researchers used 17-marker simple tandem repeat (STR) analysis on the Y chromosomes of samples obtained from Irish men. They discovered that 16.9% of men from northwestern Ireland, and 8.2% of men from Ireland as a whole, descend from a single male ancestor from early-medieval times from the family dynasty of the Uí Néill, since the haplotype is often found in people holding surnames associated with this dynasty. Their abstract calls this a “modal haplotype”.

Population structure and genome-wide patterns of variation in Ireland and Britain, multiple authors, European Journal of Human Genetics 18, 2010, pages 1248-1254:

‘The researchers studied the genetics of 3,654 including people from Ireland, the United Kingdom (including Aberdeen, Scotland), Sweden, Portugal, Bulgaria, and the American state of Utah (whose people are largely of English descent). Haplotype diversity was found to be lower in Ireland and Scotland than in southern Europe.

Also, Irish people have higher levels of linkage disequilibrium and homozygosity compared to other Europeans. The results showed that the population of Ireland has been relatively isolated throughout the millennia. The article notes that Scottish people are “intermediate between the Irish and English cohorts” in principal component analysis. British and Irish people are predominantly “Northwestern” European in origin but also partly “Scandinavian” (more so for English people than Irish people) and have relatively small amounts of “Iberian” and “Balkan” ancestry.

Admixture results based on the Dodecad Ancestry Project showed, at K=11, that Irish are mostly “Northwest European” (as we’d expect), also partly “Northeast European” and “Basque”, with a small slice of “Sardinian”, and a little bit of “West Asian”.

The Irish are very similar to British, which is also shown by their clustering together in two main groups.’

Genome-Wide Association Studies of Quantitatively Measured Skin, Hair, and Eye Pigmentaion in Four European Populations, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 7, October 31, 2012): 

‘As expected, Irish people were found to have overall lighter skin pigmentation than continental Europeans. The article also confirmed that, on average, the hair colors of Irish and Polish people (northern Europeans) are lighter than Italian and Portuguese people (southern Europeans). Within Ireland, Irish females have a pronounced tendency toward lighter hair than Irish males; a sexual dimorphism of this magnitude wasn’t detected in the Poles. Northern Europeans also have, on average, lighter eyes than southern Europeans. Furthermore, both Irish males and females tend to have lighter eyes than even Poles do.

DNA blueprint of the Irish revealed, Damian Corless, Irish Independent, September 11, 2010 – emphasis mine:

‘This article is based on research by Brendan Loftus of University College Dublin, whose “research team… mapped the complete genetic code of an Irish person for the first time.” Researchers hope that analysis of the Irish genome will help to explain why Irish people are susceptible to particular disorders and try to find preventative measures and cures for those disorders. Excerpts from the article:

‘… Ireland’s geography has had a huge part to play in shaping the nature of our society and our closest family ties. According to Loftus: “The geographic isolation of Ireland over generations would affect the size of the gene pool by limiting the type and number of potential mating partners.” Major genetic surveys of Ireland and Britain have established that the gene pool of both islands is amongst the least diluted in Europe. The genetic evidence shows that three quarters of the ancestors of the Irish and British people were the pioneering settlers…’

So much for the widely held, propagandised belief that the British and especially the English are a mongrelised, hybrid people.

Corless: ‘The inescapable upshot of this is that the Irish are not Celts, any more than the English are Anglo-Saxons. In fact, both the Irish and the British are Basques, with the Irish significantly more Basque than our neighbours across the pond, who’ve absorbed more migrations from Europe over the centuries. The dilution rate for Ireland is estimated at a tiny 12%, against 20% for Wales and Cornwall, 30% for Scotland and 33% for England… 

Ancient Irish legends say that there were six invasions or migrations from the south many generations before the Celts arrived around 300BC. The evidence suggests that the Celtic language, fashions and technologies which are supposed to define our Irish heritage, were acquired as cultural accessories… The Irish and Basques share by far the highest incidence of the R1b gene in Europe, which has a frequency of over 90% in Basque country and almost 100% along parts of Ireland’s western seaboard. 

If further proof were needed, there’s the physical fact that the Basques are distinguished by a very high incidence of fair (and some reddish) hair, pale skin, blue eyes, and, apparently, sticky-out ears. Sound like anyone you know?’ – Refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Recall from the previous chapter, how Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France (Brittany), the North coast of Spain (Basque) and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.

English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest, Nicholas Wade, The New York Times, March 5, 2007:

‘Geneticist Stephen Oppenheimer of the University of Oxford used genetic evidence to disprove the traditional historical narrative that the Irish people are mainly Celts and that they’re very distinct from Englishmen. Oppenheimer suggested, rather, that most of the ancestors of Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English [that is early English, known as Britons and hence related to the Welsh] peoples came from Spain and that their original language was related to Basque. Excerpts:

“… In Dr. Oppenheimer’s reconstruction of events, the principal ancestors of today’s British [Cymry and the Picts, but does not include the Jutes and Normans] and Irish populations arrived from Spain… speaking a language related to Basque… Although the Celtic immigrants may have been few in number, they spread their farming techniques and their language throughout Ireland and the western coast of Britain. 

Later immigrants arrived from northern Europe [who] had more influence on the eastern and southern coasts. They too spread their language, a branch of German… As for subsequent invaders, Ireland received the fewest; the invaders’ DNA makes up about 12 percent of the Irish gene pool, Dr. Oppenheimer estimates, but it accounts for 20 percent of the gene pool in Wales, 30 percent in Scotland, and about one-third in eastern and southern England…”

In the previous section (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes), we looked at the top mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and compared them with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot. The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups showed that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to frequency similarity. 

It was Germany, which mirrored their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian. 

From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture was portrayed, where the English and Scottish were most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.

England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]

Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] – 

T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%] 

Wales: H [59.8%] – J [15.3%] – K [7.6%] – U5 [4.4%] – 

HV0+V [4.3%] – I [3.3%] – T1 [2.2%] – T2 [1.1%] – X [1.1%] 

Ireland: H [44.1%] – K [12%] – J [10.7%] – U5 [8.4%] – 

HV0+V [5.7%] – T2 [5.4%] – I [3%] – W [2.3%]

England:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Scotland:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Wales:       H – J – K – U5 – HV0+V 

Ireland:     H – K – J – U5 – HV0+V 

Adding Ireland, which includes Northern Ireland, with Wales reveals a similarity of sequence which pairs them together rather than with either England or Scotland. The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall for England, Scotland, France, the Flemish, Dutch and Germans are H, J, U5, K and T2. For both Ireland and Wales, Haplogroup T2 is edged into sixth by Haplogroup HV0+V.

Noticeable is the fact that both Ireland and Wales who have been isolated compared with England and Scotland, have very low levels of T2 (and T1). Haplogroup mtDNA T is a relatively recent mutation compared with say H or even J and U. Ireland also stands out in having a high level of Haplogroup K, like the Dutch and Flemish. Haplogroup K is also found in very high levels amongst the Ashkenazi Jews.

Specific sub-clades for the most common and widespread Haplogroup H found in Ireland, include: H1i, H2a5, H3i, H14a, H17b, H24, H26a, H27a, H39, H44, H45b, H46, H47, H48, H53, H59 and H76.

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2      U4       U5        T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Ireland            44            6            11        12           5          1          8          1

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England           45            3           12          8          6          2          9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6          2         6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

Wales               60           4            15          8           1                     4          2

The addition of Ireland and Wales with their near and extended family members is highly revealing. When we study the percentages of the most frequent mtDNA Haplogroups more closely, we observe the Irish have as close an affinity with their French cousins, as their half-brothers England and Scotland on the maternal side. 

The Welsh Haplogroups prove categorically that they are the most ancient of Britons and have the least maternal dilution in the British Isles as all the studies have shown. 

The Welsh mtDNA Haplogroup snap shot is a great glimpse into the distant past for what probably all the other nations on the table may have once looked like with a very high majority percentage of H and then perhaps possessing J, U, K and T building from 5% or less of their total mtDNA inheritance as the centuries passed. Other older Haplogroups possibly additions in the gene pool from admixture and inter-marriage. It is the Welsh similarity with the Sephardim from Esau which also stands out.

Ireland shares percentage similarity with England and Scotland in the maternal Haplogroups H, J, U5 and T2. Wales shares similarity with England and Scotland in Haplogroups J and K and not much with the Irish, except possibly Haplogroup J. What has to be accounted for is that Ireland’s Haplogroups are for both countries. Separating Ireland and Northern Ireland would perhaps provide a different picture.

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Gad (Reuben).

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HV0+V

Wales                60    15        1        8                      4            4

Sephardim       56      5                  8         8                         9

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.4          7            5

Bel-Lux             47       6       9      12      0.7           3            3

Denmark          47      13      6        9                       6            4

Norway             46      11      8        5      0.2          11            4

Sweden             46       8      4        6      0.5          12            5

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8            8

Germany           45      9       8        7     0.5            9            4

Austria              45      9       8        9     0.8            9            2

England            45    13       6         8                      9            3

Scotland           44    13       6         7     0.2            8            3

Ireland              44    11       5        12        1            8            6

France               44     8       6         9         3           8            5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                         11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7             5

Spain                 44      7       6        6      0.7           8            8

Poland               44     8       7         4         1          10            5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2         10            4

Greece               41     10       7        5          3           5         1.8

Italy                  40      8        8       8           3           5            3

Ukraine            39      8        8        5          4         10            4

Iceland             38    14      10      10          4           8            2

Romania          37     11        5        8          2           7            4

Finland            36      6        2        5                      21            7

Turkey              31      9        4        6          5           3         0.7

Ashkenazim    23      7        5      32          5           2            4

Iran                   17     14       5         7          7           3         0.6

Adding Ireland and Wales to our growing table of European nations is revealing. The Sephardim who have recently bookended the western side of the mtDNA Haplogroups are now replaced by the Welsh. It is an extreme westerly position as akin to Iran who bookend the eastern end of the table with fascinatingly, the Ashkenazim. 

Discussed previously, a pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of three more of Jacob’s sons, Gad (Reuben) and Simeon, places Ireland next to Scotland. Again, the combined Haplogroups for Ireland mean the connection between Northern Ireland and Scotland influences the figures, for it would be Northern Ireland which would sit nearer to Scotland. We will explore the Northern Irish and Scottish connection further in a later chapter.

Thus, Ireland unlike Wales joins Scotland and England in going against the pattern of increasing levels of Haplogroup H as one heads westwards. Wales replaces the Sephardim as the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 60%. The Welsh also replace England, Scotland, Denmark, Iceland and Iran with the highest frequency of Haplogroup J at 15%. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

Notice that Ireland (1), Wales (2), Scotland (3) and England (5) are in the top five nations for men exhibiting the highest percentage of Haplogroup R1b.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            M269   14%  –  U106   0.4%

Russia             M269   21%  –  U106   5.4%

Slovenia          M269   17%  –  U106      4%

Poland             M269   23%  –  U106     8% 

Ukraine           M269   25%  –  U106     9%

Czech               M269   28%  –  U106   14% 

Austria             M269   27%  –  U106  23%

France              M269   52%  –  U106     7%

Italy                  M269   53%  –  U106    6%

Swiss                 M269   58%  –  U106   13%

Denmark         M269   34%  –  U106   17%

Germany          M269   43%  –  U106   19%

Netherlands    M269   54%  –  U106  35%

England           M269   57%  –  U106   20%

Ireland             M269   80%  – U106      6%

When we added England (a) we saw that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively, all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree. Now with the addition of Ireland and Gad, we can see the result of less mixing over the millennia with an incredible percentage of R-M269 for the Republic. 

Notice the more Germanic, Central European R-U106 percentage for Ireland is closer to those nations of Eastern and Southern Europe, rather than Ireland’s western neighbours. Again highlighting Ireland’s ancient and isolated position in Europe. R1b clades associated with Ireland apart from M529 include: M37, specific to the Irish; L226/S168 in Central and Western Ireland; and M222 in Northwestern Ireland and associated with the Scots Irish. We will study M222 in more depth in a later chapter. R1b clades associated with the Welsh include: M167, shared with the Cornish and Basque and L371 specific to the Welsh. 

Paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups for Ireland, Wales and Northern Ireland:

Wales: R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – E1b1b [4%] – 

I2a2 [3%] – G2a [2.5%] – R1a [1%] – I2a1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – J2 [0.5%] 

Ireland: R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%] – 

R1a [2.5%] – E1b1b [2%] – I2a1 [1%] – J2 [ 1.5%]  – G2a [1%] 

Northern Ireland: R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] – 

R1a [ 1.5%] – J2 [1.5%] – I2a1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Wales:         R1b – I1 – E1b1b – I2a2 – G2a – R1a – I2a1 – T1a – J2

Ireland:       R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b1b – I2a1 – J2 – G2a 

N Ireland:   R1b – I2a2 – I1 – R1a – J2 – I2a1 – Q

There is a subtle yet clear difference between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. They are two different peoples and ethnically divided, not just by nationality or religion. It is interesting to note that Wales and Ireland are similar in percentage for Haplogroups, I2a1, I2a2, E1b1b and G2a; whereas Ireland and Northern Ireland have a closer match only in J2. All these are admixture groups and it is in the principal Haplogroup, that the full blood brothers of Wales from Simeon and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben have a closer match in R1b levels.

Comparing the defining marker northwestern European Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Irish and Welsh with their related near neighbours.

Ireland:         R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%]

N Ireland:     R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] 

Wales:            R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [3%]

Scotland:       R1b [72.5%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [4%] 

England:       R1b [67%] – I1 [14%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Flanders:       R1b [61%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

France:           R1b [59%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [3.5%] 

Netherlands: R1b [49%] – I1 [17%] – I2a2 [7%] 

Germany:       R1b [45%] – I1 [16%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Italy:               R1b [39%] – I1 [4.5%] – I2a2 [2.5%]

Sephardim:    R1b [29.5%] – I [11.5%] 

Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s male descendants as well as that of his two brothers – Nahor and Haran. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Wales and Northern Ireland, though not in Ireland. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2 and is relatively high in the Republic, while it is highest in Northern Irish men. 

Comparing the Welsh and Irish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German, Jewish cousins and brothers Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                           R1b      R1a       I1       I2a1    I2a2      E1b1b     J2      J1     

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Sephardim        30          4       [12]                                    9        23       20

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Germany            45        16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3         3            6            5          8          3       

Flanders             61         4         12          3            5            5          4          1         

England             67          5         14          3           5             2         4          

Scotland            73           9          9           1           4            2          2            

Wales                 74           1         12          1           3             4      0.5       

N Ireland           77           2          9       0.5         10                        2              

Ireland               81           3          6          1           5             2          2          

The five countries comprising Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the continent. We learn a number of things. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. Though England’s R1b frequency is lower because of this, notice the higher percentage for Haplogroup I, similar to its full brothers Simeon in Wales and particularly Reuben in Northern Ireland, while higher than its half brothers Benjamin in Scotland and Gad in Ireland.

Men with Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have had a male ancestor who was not from the line of Abraham, though still related to the older Haplogroup I lineage descending from Arphaxad and Peleg.

Scotland’s higher percentage of R1a stands out due to its Nordic admixture – and before that Nordic intermixing with northern Slavs. Wales has a higher percentage of the Canaanite E1b1b, already touched upon. Ireland considerably, then followed by Northern Ireland, reveals a purer paternal Haplogroup identification, if the principle R1b is observed bearing out their isolation. Followed by Wales, Scotland and lastly England. Northern Ireland’s percentage of Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 is high, similar with England. The unique genetic status of Northern Ireland will be investigated in a subsequent chapter.      

Continuing with our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Reuben, Simeon and Gad.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9        [8]       4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23        21         6        12        16       28

Italy                19        3       16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16        45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6        52

England           4                   4         2           2        5        67       72

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15        33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16        22       38

Wallonia          2                   2         6           6        7        60       67

N Ireland         2                   2                                2         77       79

Scotland          2                    2         2        0.5      9         73       82

Ireland             2                   2         2            1       3         81       84

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7         55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26       32       58

Iceland                                                                    23       42       65

Wales            0.5               0.5         4          3           1        74       75

Finland                                         0.5                       5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.

Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. The Welsh and Irish join England and Scotland in carrying the highest percentage of combined R1 and Ireland replaces Scotland with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe. 

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Ireland is an additional example supporting this fact. We have now investigated thirty-three peoples, ranging from Russia and Iran in the East to Ireland and Iceland in the West; Italy and Greece in the South to Norway and Finland in the North. 

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                         R1a       R1b        I1      I2a1       I2a2     N1c

Wales                  1         74         12           1          3

N Ireland         1.5        77           9       0.5         10

Portugal          1.5         56           2       1.5           5          

Spain                  2         69        1.5          5           1

Ireland               3         81           6          1           5

Luxembourg     3         61           3          3           6              

France                3         59          9           3          4            

Switzerland       4         50        14           2          8          1

Netherlands      4         49        17            1          7               

Flanders            4          61        12            3          5

Brazil                  4         54                      [9]            

Italy                    4         39          5            3          3         

Sephardim         4        30         [1]                             

Finland               5          4         28                    0.5       62

England              5        67         14           3           5        

Frisians               7        55       [34]           

Wallonia             7        60         11           2           5

Scotland             9         73          9           1           4         

Turkey                8         16           1            4     0.5         4  

Ashkenazim     10         12        [4]                              0.2

Greece               12         16          4          10      1.5      

Denmark          15         33        34            2        6         1

Sweden             16         22        37            2        4         7

Germany          16         45        16             2        5         1

Iran                   16         10                      0.5                    1           

Romania          18         16          4           28        3         2

Austria             19         32        12              7        3      0.5

Iceland             23        42        29                        4         1

Norway             26       32        32                         5        3

Ukraine            44          8         5             21     0.5        6

Russia               46         6          5             11                 23

Poland              58        13          9              6         2        4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Northern Ireland replaces Switzerland with the highest levels of I2a2 and Ireland replaces Scotland as the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b. Finland remains at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.

Though Haplogroup R1b may fluctuate markedly amongst Abraham’s descendants, it is Haplogroup I1, which remains consistently higher compared with other European nations. A case in point, is a nation descended from Aram such as Spain, whose men in turn have high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b but not in Haplogroup I1 – for R1b is a defining western European marker. Conversely, Swedish males exhibit high Haplogroup I1 levels but far less R1b.

Paternal Haplogroup I1 is a much older male lineage – one of Abraham’s ancestors – from which the downstream R1b Haplogroup mutation ultimately descends and is palpably a north western European Haplogroup marker. Yet today the two combined, decidedly form a British and Irish identity. One that distinguishes the sons of Jacob from their own near relatives: Ishmael-Germany; Midian-Netherlands; Medan-Denmark; Haran-Switzerland and Moab and Ammonite, France.

This chapter almost completes the sons of Jacob who dwell in the United Kingdom and Ireland. One more tribe to go. Prior to tackling the enigmatic tribe of Dan, we will turn our attention to the six tribes who bravely departed the shores of the British Isles and headed across the world’s oceans seeking adventure and better fortune as they explored forgotten lands and formed new nations.

These people were more willing to listen than the people in Thessalonica. The Bereans were eager to hear what Paul and Silas said and studied the Scriptures every day to find out if these things were true…

Acts 17:11 New Century Version

Most of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in the Scriptures ever comes from the prophet’s own interpretation. No prophecy ever came from what a person wanted to say, but people led by the Holy Spirit spoke words from God.

2 Peter 1:20-21 New Century Version

“Most of the time, we see only what we want to see, or what others tell us to see, instead of really investigate to see what is really there. We embrace illusions only because we are presented with the illusion that they are embraced by the majority… And like obedient schoolchildren, we do not question their validity… Because since the earliest days of our youth, we have been conditioned to accept that the direction of the herd, and authority anywhere – is always right.” 

Suzy Kassem 

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