The most damaging aspect of the Biblical identity doctrine has been the element of whatever someone new to the subject first hears, reads or learns of any given identity, it is this knowledge that becomes firmly entrenched and invariably never shifted. As Proverbs 18:17 ESV says, the first case heard always has the advantage, whether right or wrong by virtue of being first.
‘The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.’
Any secondary information has an uphill battle to gain attention, let alone replace the previously incorrect knowledge if such is the case.
Yet, the accurate definition and explanation of the nations’ identities in the Bible in our modern age is crucial in understanding prophecy and by extension history. The credibility of the Bible has been at stake and those who have taught erroneous identities have been unwittingly holding the Eternal’s word to ransom. Now is the time for the truth to go out to those who truly seek wisdom and understanding – for the latter days are upon us. J H Allen understood the foundational basis of this knowledge in proving the veracity of the Bible, as written under inspiration by holy men and not the ramblings of eccentric or fanatical prophets.
‘We have been moved by the Holy Spirit to thus write concerning the earthly history of God’s chosen race, because so very little of it is known by the masses of our people, and yet it is the foundation upon which the entire structure of Christianity must rest.A knowledge of these earthly things not only renders the claims of Christianity impregnable, but they are also the basis upon which we must rest our faith for better things. For Jesus has said, “If I have told you of earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” The truth… as set forth in this book – that is, the realization of the promises made to ISRAEL… has… [brought] more skeptics to the light of his truth, than in all our previous ministry… [and]… We are… sure… that the faith of those who have made shipwreck could not have failed, if they had known these things.’
Dictionary.com:
‘Genetic evidence has undermined the idea of racial divisions of the human species and rendered race obsolete as a biological system of classification. Race therefore should no longer be considered as an objective category… There are times when it is still accurate to talk about race in society. Though race has lost its biological basis, the sociological consequences of historical racial categories persist. While the scientific foundation for race is now disputed, racial factors in sociological and historical contexts continue to be relevant. First recorded in 1490–1500; from Middle French race “group of people of common descent,” from Italian razza “kind, species”…’
We can say, Scottish people or the English nation rather than calling them what they are. The scientific community has imposed a politically correct use, or rather less use of the word race. It would make sense if the word was banned outright, yet it is still allowable for social or historical definitions, just not for the actual aspect it is defining – our biological inheritance. Whether we use other words such as ethnicity or ancestry, it does not make the physical, biological differences between peoples less obvious or disappear.
Following are synonyms: tribe, clan, family, stock, line, breed, blood, colour, culture, nation, people, offspring, progeny, seed, stock, strain, ethnicity. Some of these words could have a more inflammatory impact than the word race in my opinion. There is an agenda to attack the White race. The expression, Black lives matter, could be better expressed as ‘all lives matter.’ There is pressure to make white people uncomfortable and to do away with a concept of white people. It is blatant discrimination. Will black, brown, red and yellow people also come under fire?
The term race is unhelpful in relation to all humanity. I prefer mankind, or if you will, humankind; not the human race. We are a kind, as there are animal kinds. The races are like species within the kind. It is very hard to do away with genetic lines of people that make them common to each other and different to other racial lines. They are simply, different races.
With this in mind, Greg Doudna reflects the frustration and division this issue causes, in the questions he poses. The division, confusion and strength of emotion it arouses exist in part, because people do not appreciate the differences in people. This is heightened due to the fact people do not know who they are. Yet, I observe online, mammoth interest in tracing family ancestry and forming a sense of self-identity; particularly with the breakthrough with Haplogroups. People want to understand their own race or racial heritage. Ironically, Haplogroups have also contributed to people becoming even more scathing, condemning and incorrect in their summations.
Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989, 2006, pages 143-144 – Italics his:
‘…consider three questions. Think:
(1) Is there any biblical basis to such a notion of classification as a “white race” in history?
Are Italians part of the “white race”? Why? Are Russians? What about Assyrian Christian Iraqis who descend from the Assyrians of old [not correct – refer Chapter XIV Mizra & Chapter XX Asshur]? What about Jordanians? Are Arab tribes who claim descent from Ishmael? Are Spaniards part of the white race? Are Portuguese? Are Greeks? Are Poles? How about Muslim Shi’ite Azerbaijanis from the Caucasus? How about Armenians and Georgians and Chechens from the Caucasus area, otherwise known as Caucasians, or in Russia known negatively as blacks (because their skin is typically darker and more “ethnic” looking than that of Russians)? Are these Caucasians, who are Russia’s blacks, members of the “white race”? (Remember, historically Armenians and Georgians from the Caucasus started out defining the so-called Caucasian/white race). Are Hungarians part of “the white race”? Rumanians? Czechs? Gypsies (Roma)? Albanians? Serbs? How about the Persians of Iran, Iran’s largest ethnic group, who descend from the ancient Aryan Persians [not correct – refer Chapter XVII Lud]?’
A resounding Yes to nearly all. Yes, they are white. They do descend from Shem. In the main, the author has selected the descendants from Shem’s sons Lud, Elam in part, Asshur and Aram in part, as well as a handful from Arphaxad in Eastern Europe. The exception above is the true Arab who descends from Mizra and Ham. It was white peoples living in the Caucasus Mountain area that were classified as Caucasian; not the Armenians or Georgians specifically, who came to dwell later. The Iranian Persians are Lud and not the original Persians from Elam, as we have studied [refer Chapter XVIII, Elam].
‘(2) What is the actual basis for such a notion of a “white race” in history?’
Again, a resounding yes. Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups support the Bible record – of a major three way split as evidenced by Noah’s sons and the sixteen lines of variation represented by Noah’s grandsons – and provide the scientific data, for all those with a stubborn, ‘prove it to me with scientific facts only, and not all this Bible nonsense.’ [refer Chapter I Noah]
The author’s use of the word notion three times is insightful as notion means: a general understanding; vague or imperfect conception or idea of something, an opinion, view, or belief, a fanciful or foolish idea; whim. The reality of the peoples of the earth being all one blood and from one source, yet each possessing a variety of physical, mental and emotional characteristics, is so much more than a notion.
1 Corinthians 3:18-20
New Century Version
18 Do not fool yourselves. If you think you are wise in this world, you should become a fool so that you can become truly wise, 19 because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.
It is written in the Scriptures, “He catches those who are wise in their own clever traps.” 20 It is also written in the Scriptures, “The Lord knows what wise people think. He knows their thoughts are just a puff of wind.”
‘ Same questions as above, repeated. How did some of these groups get to be members of “the white race.” while others did not? Who decided, and why? And finally,
(3) Has this notion done more good or harm?
I leave these questions open, to encourage reflection. ‘
The constant reader knows the supreme Creator in His wisdom separated the races for His purpose. The powers that be, have separated peoples according to their self-serving agenda and yes, created more harm than good.
The Creator planned the different races. The Creator must be racist? The Creator chose to work more closely with one family. The Creator must be playing favourites? If both are true… deal with it. Or, if both are not true, then why do people think they are wiser than the Creator?
March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 224-225, emphasis his, bold mine:
‘… Benjamin Disraeli… [British] prime minister… was a Christianised Jew whose writings on race are so profound that they are today largely ignored by politically correct present-day historians. In his book Tancred… 1868, Disraeli wrote: “All is race – there is no other truth”… and in his book Endymion… he wrote: “No man will treat with indifference the principle of race. It is the key to history and why history is so often confused is that it has been written by men who were ignorant of this principle and all the knowledge it involves… Language and religion do not make a race – there is only one thing which makes a race, and that is blood”…’
In academic and scientific fields of research whether private or public, the key for support is monetary funding, sponsorship and donations. Hence, in the main there is pressure to only research, publish findings and to teach that which follows a curriculum or agenda as per the ones holding the purse strings. Independent research is thus few or far between or most often non-existent.
‘Scientists [Anthropologists, ethnologists, geneticists, theologians, ministers] joining an organization have to follow their managers’ orders. Those managers will have been through the same school of indoctrination, and probably additional levels of it too. So they know what’s at stake [if] they try to investigate something that’s even slightly outside the mainstream. The penalties include:
loss of credibility
loss of funding
loss of tenure
ridicule from their peers
refusal by their peers to review their work
refusal by mainstream publications to review or publish their work
As a result, mainstream scientists refuse to have anything to do with these things, even if you provide them with irrefutable evidence. They don’t want to be associated with it. They see it as potentially career-damaging, and, as we’ve seen, they label it “pseudoscience” or “yet another stupid hoax” to emphasize their dismissal of it, usually without even looking at it. Another problem with scientific teaching [doctrinal belief] is that it follows a single, rigid pathway [creed]. Anything that isn’t on that pathway “can’t possibly be true.”’
The reason this work and its findings, has been collated together and why many could and would, not. Though in so doing, this writer has unintentionally and reluctantly, become a contrarian and an iconoclast.
‘Contrarian: a person who takes an opposing view, especially one who rejects the majority opinion.
Iconoclast: a person who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional institutions, etc., as being based on error or superstition. A breaker or destroyer of images, especially those set up for religious veneration.’
Lloyd Pye, pages 64-65 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘[There is] resistance to change within any status quo of the mainstream scientific [and scholarly] community. Truth has nothing to do with it; proof has even less to do with it than truth; and forget logic – logic is wasted on people with a sharp axe to grind.
What counts in such disputes is usually about 50 years, two generations, which have to retire before any controversial new reality will be fully accepted. First is the status quo crowd at the time of discovery [or proposal]. They reject it because to them it means three very bad things:
being wrong on a major issue;
having to rewrite a large portion of their purview; and
a ripple effect of doubt cast on everything else they have achieved or profess to know.
The next generation spawns two groups: those who cling to the old status quo, and those who accept the new reality. As a whole they never fully embrace it, but they produce enough converts to grant it limited acceptance, allowing it to be openly supported without committing career suicide.
The converts then teach their views to the next generation, and when they take over they see to it that what had been a “heresy” is accepted wisdom. It always requires time, but time and the truth invariably win out.
For as harsh as criticism is toward dissent from outside the scientific [or the historic research] establishment, dissent from within [identity adherents] is often worse.’
Why it may take decades for this work to be even remotely valued or viewed as credible. And, how long for any would be detractors or academic intelligentsia in desisting from impugning or assailing the material contained herein. It is of little consequence; they will not inherit the last word, but ultimately the truth and those precious souls that embrace it will. If this work impacts only a handful of people, or even just finds one – you; it will have been worth every hour of the thousands invested over the past thirty years.
1 Kings 19:18
Complete Jewish Bible
“… Still, I will spare seven thousand in Israel, every knee that hasn’t bent down before Ba’al…”
Luke 12:32
Common English Bible
“[and] little flock… your Father delights in giving you the kingdom.”
Treasured reader, you have in your hands a seminal work. Not because of its author or writing; rather for its profound revelation, submitted humbly and solemnly. When we read to the end of the book that is called the Holy Bible; right through to the last chapter and on the very final page, it is the aspirants of truth and the followers of Him who declares it, that win…
Revelation 22:14-15
New Century Version
“Blessed are those who wash their robes so that they will receive the right to eat the fruit from the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside the city are the evil people, those who… love lies and tell lies.
Dedicated with heartfelt encouragement and admiration to those faithful and true sojourners some three centuries hence; who will complete the good work of the way to the One who gives life eternal and whom will value what is yet concealed herein, for today’s generation will not; for they look, but do not see, read, but do not comprehend, listen, but do not hear.
… “Go, and say to this people:
“‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”
Isaiah 6:9–10 ESV
“The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise – with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.”
Abraham Lincoln [1809-1865]
“About the times of the End, a body of men will be raised up who will turn their attention to the prophecies, and insist upon their literal interpretation, in the midst of much clamor and opposition.”
Isaac Newton [1643-1727]
“… To the righteous and the wise shall be given books of joy, of integrity, and of great wisdom. To them shall books be given, in which they shall believe… and all the righteous shall be rewarded, who from these shall acquire the knowledge of every upright path.”
The identity of Ishmael became complicated by the subterfuge of an incorrect ancestral claim addressed previously [refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia]. When Mohammed captured Arabia in 620 CE, he used passages from the Book of Genesis to claim the Arabs were ‘God’s people’ Ishmael; while establishing the Islamic religion. Added to this, Ishmael’s position as firstborn son to Abraham, yet to his wife’s handmaiden – for Hagar was not a concubine – meant that he would not be the recipient of the firstborn blessings. We can make a strong assumption that Hagar and Keturah were from similar stock, though probably not of Nahor; possibly Haran; quite likely from a line of Peleg; or most probably, from another son of Arphaxad, Anar or Ashcol [refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia]. The evidence for this, is that Ishmael not only lived to the east in the Arabian wilderness, between Keturah’s sons and Joktan’s sons; but crucially, is more closely related to Keturah’s than Isaac’s children, as supported by Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups and autosomal DNA.
Today, the true descendants of Ishmael comprise the modern nation of Germany. Just as in the ancient past, Germany is sandwiched between the countries today in the west descended from Keturah and to the east by the nations descended from Joktan. The close geographic relationship between the Dutch of the Netherlands and the Germans of Deutsch-land was evident anciently when they were known as Hivites and Hittites. The original people of Hatti were in the main, descendants of Nahor – living principally in Northern and Central Italy today. The Hatti migrated from Anatolia southeastwards when Ishmael’s people grew larger and pressed into their land. The Ishmaelites appropriated their territory and name and it is they, who are the later Hittites, that people are most familiar. The mighty kingdom and formidable military machine which dwelt to the west of the other historic imperialist state of the time – Assyria.
The geographic, cultural and ethnic closeness shared between the two, explains the interplay between the names Midianite and Ishmaelite; sharing the family name of Midian. Today, both peoples can be called Germanic, as can a number of other nations – ranging from Austria in the east to England in the west, all part of the same family tree. The peoples of Ishmael and Keturah dwelt together in the wilderness – or the Arabian Peninsula – and are the original Arabians in the Bible. They did not become Arabs as we have investigated. Continuing with Herman Hoeh’s article, he addresses Ishmael and shows the prevalent view which has so erroneously taken hold:
‘Abraham’s firstborn son was Ishmael (Genesis 16:15). His descendants are called Arabs today. They still remember that they are descended from Abram’s son Ishmael. Ask any Arab. He’ll tell you so! Whenever you see the name “Ishmael,” or any name of Ishmael’s sons (Genesis 25:12-18), you will know that the prophecy is referring to the Arabs today. The Arabs have spread from Arabia throughout North Africa and eastward into the Far East. There is trouble in the Near East between Jordan and the Jews. Here is why.’
The Book of Jubilees describes the geographic proximity of the Ishmaelites and of the Sons of Keturah in chapter 20:12-13, “And Ishmael and his sons, and the sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon in all the land which is towards the East facing the desert. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs, and Ishmaelites.”
Later, the mighty entity we call Rome, evolved and slowly enveloped the Etruscan state as it outgrew its boundaries – as it had done with the Hatti in Asia Minor. In modern times, the German states which formed modern Germany in 1870 and 1871 were also a sprawling borderless geographic area. The German concept of greater living space or lebensraum, particularly from 1871 to 1940 meant German boundaries were continually expanding and changing. Adolf Hitler: “It is eastwards, only and always eastwards, that the veins of our race must expand. It is the direction which Nature herself has decreed fro the expansion of the German peoples.”
Our study of Haran and his descendants, which include the Swiss means they are not as German as we might have assumed [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]. The Swiss resolutely do not identify with a ‘German’ tag.
The Austrians on the other hand, are a different proposition than the Swiss. A survey once revealed that sixty percent of Austrians viewed themselves as German – in other words, the same as Germans living in Germany.
This is revealing, for the Austrians share Hagar as a mother with Germany. The two peoples are half brothers by their mother; as Germany-Ishmael is a half brother by his father Abraham with Keturah’s descendants, which include Denmark, the Netherlands and the other northwestern European nations comprising Scandinavia and the Low countries [Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia]. We first read of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis chapter Sixteen. We will concentrate on Hagar initially. It is alleged by Arab tradition that Pharaoh – Djer, the 3rd King of the 1st Dynasty, ruling from 1922 to 1875 BCEaccording to an unconventional chronology – had given Hagar to Sarai from his royal household in recompense for his transgression. There is reason to consider that Hagar was not a mere servant or concubine but rather, a daughter of the Pharaoh and a royal princess.
Genesis 16:1-15
English Standard Version
Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years [1902-1892 BCE] in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife [not literally, but sexually as a wife]. 4 And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her. 7 The angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from my mistress Sarai.” 9 The angel of the Lord said to her, “Return to your mistress and submit to her.”
It is clear that there is no love lost between Sarai and Hagar, Why the animosity, one can only speculate. It certainly intensified after Hagar conceived. The Angel of the Lord did not speak with anyone whom the Creator was not working with or had regard for. Hagar was wrong to be joyful over conceiving by gloating, thinking she had one over Sarai. Though we do not know what she had gone through to display that reaction.
Hagar was probably younger and possibly thought it would obtain her favour with Abram and lead to her and their son achieving a greater status in Abram’s family. One does not have to read long though, to appreciate that Abram only had eyes for Sarai. Later, when Hagar and Ishmael are cast out, the Creator again intervenes to spare their lives and ensure that their futures are safe and prosperous. The Book of Jasher contains a parallel account of Hagar’s first banishment in chapter Sixteen:
Jasher 16:25-36
25 For Hagar learned all the ways of Sarai as Sarai taught her, she was not in any way deficient in following her good ways. 26 And Sarai said to Abram, Behold here is my handmaid Hagar, go to her that she may bring forth upon my knees, that I may also obtain children through her… 29 And when Hagar saw that she had conceived she rejoiced greatly, and her mistress wasdespised in her eyes, and she said within herself, This can only be that I am better before God than Sarai my mistress, for all the days that my mistress has been with my lord, she did not conceive, but me the Lord has caused in so short a time to conceive by him. 30 And when Sarai saw that Hagar had conceived by Abram,Sarai was jealous of her handmaid, and Sarai said within herself, This is surely nothing else but that she must be better than I am. 33… and Sarai afflicted her, and Hagar fled from her to the wilderness. 34 And an angel of the Lord found her in the place where she had fled, by a well, and he said to her, Do not fear… now then return to Sarai thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands. 35 And Hagar called the place of that well Beer-lahai-roi, it is between Kadesh and the wilderness of Bered. 36 And Hagar at that time returned to her master’s house…
Genesis 21:14
English Standard Version
So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.
This incident came under the umbrella of, ‘it seemed a good idea at the time.’ The ultimate sending Hagar and Ishmael away, left them in a story state, ‘wandering in the wilderness.’ As mentioned previously in our discourse, if a people are mentioned more than once in the Bible, they are more than a territory or region, they have become an identifiable people or nation in their own right. This is what happened to Hagar. Reading between the lines, she obviously continued raising Ishmael who was a young teen. At a certain point she would have met a man who took her as a wife and had at least one child, a son with her. This son’s name is not given, though his descendants are named in the Bible as Hagrites or Hagarenes. The only nation today that is smaller than Ishmael, yet easily identifiable as related to Hagar, is the nation of Austria.
Christian Churches of God in their article No. 212C, 2007 state: ‘The question as to whether Hagar remarried and had other children is considered by some to be a matter of conjecture.
The question as to whether the Hagarites are the descendants of Ishmael, Hagar’s first-born or only son, or the sons of another tribe altogether is still to be solved. Perhaps the advances in DNA will tell us the definite solution once the tribes are properly identified and tested.’ Well, we can know now by studying the Austrian and German Haplogroups.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Hagar meaning: ‘flight, to be dragged off, pressed into service’ from a verb (hagar), to flee… the verb (garar), ‘sojourner, to drag out or away.’ From the Persian/ Greek verb (aggareuo), ‘to press into service…’ meaning mounted messenger (a royal courier who could requisite or press into service whatever he needed to deliver his message faster), which in turn is thought to be the source of the familiar noun (aggelos), meaning ‘messenger’ or ‘angel.
Hagar travels south, possibly to go home to Egypt, but loses her way. The verb used to describe her “wandering” about in the wilderness of Beersheba is (ta’a), to err, go astray. A derivation of this verb is (to’a), error. Hagar wanders the desert until her supplies run out. Desponded and exhausted, Hagar abandons her son so that she won’t have to watch him die, and sits down a bow shot away from the boy to cry. Curiously, not her cries but the cries of the boy reach heaven, and God shows up. For the second time the Angel of YHWH speaks to Hagar, and promises her that Ishmael will be a great nation.
God opens her eyes and she sees the well of Beersheba. This is fortunate for two reasons. First of all she and Ishmael now have water, but they also know again where they are. Quickened Hagar and Ishmael resume their journey.
Ishmael becomes an archer and lives in the wilderness of Paran (in the Sinai desert between the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqaba) with his Egyptian wife whom Hagar has obtained for him. Hagar becomes the grandmother of twelve princes, who form the great nation that God promised. That nation is not really named in Scriptures…[Ishmaelites, Hittites, ‘Midianites’, Arabians] Ishmael’s sons do not become the rivals of Israel as one may expect [they take a back seat to Moab, Ammon, the Midianites and Edom because geographically they are separated]. His son Kedar gets mentioned for their signature black tents, once positive in the Song of Solomon (1:5), and once negative by king David in Psalm 120:5. The prophet Isaiah mentions Ishmael’s first born son Nebaioth and his brother Kedar among the nations that will be gathered up into the Kingdom of God (Isaiah 60:7).
Although Hagar is anEgyptian, her name appears to be Semetic [correct, as descended from Arphaxad (the ruling class of Egypt) not Mizra (the actual Egyptians)]. If indeed so… the verb… is not used in the Bible and its meaning is subsequently unknown. NOBSE Study Bible… insist that the verb means to flee. BDB Theological Dictionary refers to the Arabic equivalent, meaning forsake or retire. An Arabic noun derived of this root serves as the name for Mohammed’s famous flight, the Hegira.’
1 Chronicles 5:18-20
English Standard Version
18 The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war, 44,760, able to go to war. 19 They waged war against the Hagrites,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.
1 Chronicles 5:10
English Standard Version
And in the days of Saul they waged war against the Hagrites, who fell into their hand. And they lived in their tents throughout all the region east of Gilead.
1 Chronicles 27:30-31
English Standard Version
30 Over the camels was Obil the Ishmaelite [German]; and over the donkeys was Jehdeiah the Meronothite[?]. Over the flocks was Jaziz the Hagrite [Austrian]. 31 All these were stewards of King David’s property.
Psalm 83:6-8
English Standard Version
6… the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites [Germany], Moab [France] and the Hagrites [Austria], 7 Gebal and Ammon [French Quebec] and Amalek, Philistia [Spanish Latin America] with the inhabitants of Tyre [Brazil]; 8 Asshur [Russia] also has joined them; they [Russia] are the strong arm of the children of Lot [Moab & Ammon].
Psalm 83:6
Young’s Literal Translation
… Tents of Edom, and Ishmaelites, Moab, and the Hagarenes…
The Hagrites are mentioned as separate people distinct from Ishmael. Jetur and Naphish were sons of Ishmael. Jaziz the Hagrite oversaw the flocks – goats, sheep and cattle – of King David. Though Psalm 83:6-8 is non-prophetical and a listing of the chief enemies of Israel at the time of king David, they are indicative of the future global alliance against the sons of Jacob; including the Europeans as represented by Eber in Numbers 24:24.
Austria is a mountainous landlocked country and with Switzerland, forms what has been characterised as the neutral core of Europe, gaining permanent neutrality in 1955. Austria has a population of 9,142,185 people; less than Sweden and more than Switzerland. Part of Austria’s prominence can be attributed to its geographic position at the centre of European traffic between east and west along the Danubian trade route, as well as north and south, through the Alpine passes. The capital of Austria is the historic Vienna or Wien, the former seat of the Holy Roman Empire.
Austria was first a prefecture, a margraviate formed from former territory in Bavaria; developing into a duchy and then an archduchy. In the sixteenth century, Austria rose to prominence via the Hapsburg or Habsbur Monarchy. The House of Hapsburg being one of the most influential royal dynasties in history. ‘Not only did the house occupy the throne of the Holy Roman Empire continuously between 1438 and 1740, it also occupied the thrones of the Kingdoms of Bohemia, England and Ireland (as a result of the marriage between King Philippe II of Spain and Mary I of England), Germany, Croatia, Hungary, Portugal, Spain as well as the second Mexican Empire and several Dutch and Italian principalities.’
Early in the nineteenth century, Austria established its own empire, becoming a great power and the driving force of the German Confederation. After its defeat in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 for hegemony of the German states, it sought its own course. In 1867, Austria formed an Austria-Hungarian Dual Monarchy. Following WWI, a Republic of German-Austria was proclaimed. A union with Germany, but the victorious allied powers did not recognise the new state. In 1938, the Austrian-born Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the Third German Reich, annexed Austria by the Anschluss – union.
The German name for Austria, Osterreich, derives from the Old High German Ostarrichi, which means ‘eastern realm.’ The word Austria is a Latinisation of the German name; first recorded in the twelfth century. At the time, Upper and Lower Austria was the easternmost extent of Bavaria. German is the country’s official language, though many Austrians also speak a variety of Bavarian dialects.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Austrian global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$33.9 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $21.5 billion
Vehicles: $18.8 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $14.4 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $9.9 billion
Iron, steel: $8.5 billion
Wood: $7.5 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $6.8 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $5.6 billion
Paper, paper items: $5.3 billion
Wood was the fastest grower among the top 10 Austrian export categories, up by 54.5% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the metals iron and steel via a 46.3% advance.’
Austrian man and woman
Continuing with the Book of Genesis and the story of Ishmael.
Genesis 16:1-15
English Standard Version
10 The angel of the Lord also said to [Hagar], “I will surely multiply your offspring so that they cannot be numbered for multitude.” 11 And the angel of the Lord said to her, “Behold, you are pregnant and shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has listened to your affliction.
12 He shall be a wild [H6501* – pere: running wild, wild ass] donkeyof a man, his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he shall dwell over against [H6440 – paniym: before, amongst, toward, in the presence of] all his kinsmen.” 13 So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, “You are a God of seeing,”for she said, “Truly here I have seen him who looks after me.” 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered. 15 And Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael [1891 BCE].
We learn of Ishmael’s key traits in identifying him. His posterity were to become large in number. We are not looking for a small nation in western Europe, related to the Dutch, French and Italians. The interlinear does not include the word donkey. It is added because the Hebrew word for wild* is used elsewhere in connection with a wild ass or donkey. In this context it is mis-leading as Ishmael is not an out-of-control individual. He is energetic, forceful, his own man, with a ‘fiercely independent spirit’ from his family; and he is stubborn, a hunter and predatory. Other translations assist in the meaning of these verses.
New English Translation
… He will be hostile to everyone, and everyone will be hostile to him…
New Century Version
“Ishmael… will be against everyone, and everyone will be against him. He will attack all his brothers.”
Common English Bible
“… he will fight everyone, and they will fight him. He will live at odds with all his relatives.”
The Message
“He’ll be a… real fighter, fighting and being fought, Always stirring up trouble, always at odds with his family.”
The Germans have fought wars against the major powers in Europe, past and present: Russia, Austria, France and England, in evidence of their hostility. Germany has also invaded or attacked: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria – all his half-brothers. The more distant cousins of Poland, Czechoslovakia and so forth have not escaped Ishmael’s aggression. Germany dwells in the presence or amongst his brethren and borders: Denmark, the Netherlands, Flanders, Wallonia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, the Czech Republic and Poland.
Verse twelve of Genesis chapter sixteen has been used by commentators to describe the Arab nations and on the surface it is a convincing fit. There are two, sizeable flaws in this argument. Firstly, Ishmael was not predicted to be more than one nation in the past or the future – East and West Germany not withstanding. The twelve sons of Ishmael are similar to Nahor’s twelve sons, in that Germany like Italy was a region, then a confederation of multiple states for centuries before forming one distinct nation in 1871, following Italy in 1861 [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].
Secondly, the constant reader who has resisted skimming or skipping ahead, will know with a good measure of surety, that we are searching for a nation which is kith and kin to those in western Europe and cannot, repeat cannot, be those people dwelling in north Africa or the Middle East [refer Chapter XIV Mizra: north Africa & Arabia].
Spot the difference. Compared with France and England, Germany has been at war with just about everyone.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ishmael Meaning: God Hears from (1) the verb (shama’), to hear, and (2) the word (‘el), God.
There are a surprising six men named Ishmael in the Bible:
The most famous Ishmael is the son of Abraham with Hagar.
A descendant of Jonathan (1 Chronicles 8:38).
The father of Zebadiah (2 Chronicles 19:11).
An officer under Joash (2 Chronicles 23:3).
The murderer of Gedaliah the Babylonian governor over the remnant in Judah (2 Kings 25:25).
A priest who divorced his foreign wife (Ezra 10:22).
Note that the proper ethnonym (Ishmaelite) occurs only once (1 Chronicles 2:17), and comes with a shorter version, which occurs just once… (1 Chronicles 27:30). The collective plural occurs six times (Genesis 37:25, 37:27, 37:28, 39:1, Judges 8:24 and Psalm 83:6). The name Ishmael consists of two elements. The first part comes from the verb (shama’), meaning to hear: The verb (shama’) means to hear and may also mean to understand or obey. The second part of the name Ishmael is (El)… that is Elohim, or God… The name Ishmael means He Will Hear God (Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names)…’
Genesis 17:15-25
English Standard Version
15 And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!”19 God said, “No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac [named by the Eternal]. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him. 20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and multiply him greatly. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: in ‘magnitude, extent’ and ‘importance’] nation. 21 But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this time next year.” 22 When he had finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham. 23 Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin [1878 BCE].
Abraham laughed an incredulous laugh. He did not have a disrespectful or disbelieving laugh; otherwise the Creator would have hauled him up for it. We learn that Abraham not only believed Ishmael had been provided as the son of promise, we also learn that his relationship with Ishmael was a close bond, so much so that Abraham was not desperate for another son and would have gladly had the birthright promises given to Ishmael. This is important to understand, as it impacts the events which follow.
As Abraham’s intimate relationship with the Creator as his very friend was remarkable, it lent itself to the Creator listening to Abraham and granting his wish as best as could be fulfilled, without impinging on the promises too Isaac.
The Creator says He will make Ishmael fruitful, multiply him greatly and make him a great nation. The word ‘fruitful’ means materially blessed. True to His word, the Creator has kept his promise to Abraham. The German nation is the fourth biggest economy in the world and up until recently the third largest. ‘Multiply greatly’ is reflected in that Germany has the second highest population in Europe behind Russia and the third highest European descended population after the United States and Russia. Germany’s status as a great nation is beyond question. Germany’s scientific, industrial, commercial and cultural impact on western civilisation has been considerable.
There are currently three ‘superpower’ regions in the world, North America, China and a German led Europe. What is interesting in this equation, is that we have read the verse in the Book of Numbers revealing the ships from Kittim-Indonesia going against Asshur and Eber. Eber represents western Europe. A German led, united Europe in league with Russia, will for a time, be the preeminent superpower of our far future.
Ishmael was included as part of Abraham’s household in the requisite to be circumcised. He was included in the covenant blessing to all those that chose to follow ‘the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.’ Should Ishmael have chosen to follow a path closer to the one intended for Isaac – which Isaac’s descendants have not been overly successful in walking – Ishmael’s descendants would have been the recipients of yet even greater blessings.
German men
Genesis 21:1-21
English Standard Version
The Lord visited Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old [the blood coagulates the most effectively on this day, as it the peak of vitamin K production], as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him [in 1877 BCE]. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.”
8 And the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned. 9 But Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing. 10 So she said to Abraham, “Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.” 11 And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. 12 But God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. 13 And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.”
The Book of Jubilees also records the account:
17:4 And Sarah saw Ishmael playing and dancing, and Abraham rejoicing with great joy, and she became jealous of Ishmael and said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman will not be heir with my son, Isaac.’
14 So Abraham rose early in the morning and took bread and a skin of water and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the [boy], and sent her away. And she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 When the water in the skin was gone, she put the [boy] under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went and sat down opposite him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot, for she said, “Let me not look on the death of the child.” And as she sat opposite him, she lifted up her voice and wept.
17 And God heard the voice of the boy, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the boy where he is. 18 Up! Lift up the boy, and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make him into a great nation.” 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. 20 And God was with the boy, andhe grew up. He lived in the wilderness andbecame an expert with the bow. 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran,and his mother took a [royal] wife for him from the land of Egypt.
We learn much from this chapter but are left scratching our head a little too. The word laughing can be more correctly translated as scoffing or mocking. Ishmael was sixteen or seventeen or so if Isaac was about two or three. For whatever reason, Sarah perceived it as sinister and a perceived threat towards Isaac. Possibly, it went beyond a one time joke and may have shown a reoccurring pattern that had become a concern. Either Ishmael was bullying Isaac, unfairly using his age as an advantage; or he was merely playing with Isaac as if on an equal footing and it was mis-understood by Sarah because of her attitude towards Hagar.
The Apostle Paul mentions the incident, expanding it further in Galatians 4:28-31, ESV: “Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time [Ishmael] who was born according to the flesh persecuted [Isaac] who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.” The Greek word persecuted can mean ‘to put to flight; to chase away; to pursue.’
Abraham’s fondness for Ishmael meant he did not take the news well. The Creator explains to Abraham that Sarah is reading the situation correctly and to send Hagar and Ishmael away. Not just Hagar, but Ishmael also had a relationship with the Creator, for his prayers are heard and answered and ‘God was with the boy.’ Ishmael became an expert hunter-soldier, though not in the vein of Nimrod. His wife from Egypt again, was most likely similarly related to Hagar and her pedigree in standing with Abraham’s royal ancestry [refer Chapter XXVI Abrham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia].
Galatians 4:22-26
English Standard Version
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, [Ishmael] by a slave woman and [Isaac] by a free woman. 23 But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. 24 Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai inArabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.
Genesis 28:8-9
English Standard Version
8 So when Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, 9 Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath thedaughterof Ishmael, Abraham’s son, thesisterof Nebaioth.
Genesis 36:3
English Standard Version
… and Basemath,Ishmael’s daughter, the sister of Nebaioth.
Esau, eldest son of Isaac and elder brother of Jacob, married Canaanite women and so to appease his father and mother, married a daughter of Ishmael, to keep it in the family so-to-speak. She has two different names in two separate records in Genesis which we will address when studying Esau [Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe]. Ishmael’s twelve sons are listed in Genesis and the prominent are mentioned in the Old Testament. Those in italics are mentioned once outside of this listing; those in bold, more than once.
Genesis 25:12-18
English Standard Version
12 These are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s servant, bore to Abraham.
13 These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth: Nebaioth, the firstborn of Ishmael; and Kedar, Adbeel [grief of God], Mibsam [sweet smell], 14 Mishma [rumour], Dumah, Massa, 15 Hadad [thunder], Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah [eastward].
16 These are the sons of Ishmael and these are their names, by their villages and by their encampments, twelve princes according to their tribes. 17 (These are the years of the life of Ishmael: 137 years. He breathed his last and died [in 1754 BCE], and was gathered to his people.) 18 They settled from Havilah [Poland] to Shur [the area between Mizra and Shem, Mediterranean Sea today], which is opposite Egypt [North Africa] in the direction of Assyria [Russia]. He settled over against all his kinsmen [Keturah: Scandinavia and the Low countries].
Germany has sixteen states or federated Lander, though three of them are city-states. Berlin the Capital included with Brandenburg; Hamburg; and Bremen, which are included with Lower Saxony or Niedersachsen. As Saarland is the smallest state and has a lower population density, I am including it with Rhineland-Palatinate or Rheinland-Pfalz. This leaves a convenient twelve states. There are three dominant sons, then four quite prominent sons who match with the current German States, plus the remaining five.
1 Chronicles 5:18-20
English Standard Version
18 The Reubenites, the Gadites… 19 … waged war against the Hagrites [Austria], Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. 20 And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands…
Jetur’s definition means, ‘defence, to border, succession’ and ‘mountainous’.* Naphish means ‘revival, expansion’ from the noun nepesh, ‘breath of life.’ It can also mean ‘numerous, increase’ and ‘refreshment.’ Two states fit the profile for Jetur and Naphish, as they have relative economic wealth, higher populations and are linguistically and culturally similar with Austria-Hagar; with much in common and a high probability of ethnic admixture. Firstly, Bavaria or Bayern and its principal cities of Munich and Nuremberg. Bavaria has the second highest population, with nearly thirteen million people coupled with being the second wealthiest state in Germany. Bavaria is the largest state by area and is also mountainous* in the south. Baden-Wurttemberg and its principal city, Stuttgart is a high population state of nearly eleven million people – the third highest – and is also the third wealthiest state in Germany.
Isaiah 21:11
English Standard Version
The oracle concerning Dumah. One is calling to me from Seir [Edom], “Watchman, what time of the night? Watchman, what time of the night?”
Dumah means ‘[deadly] silence’ derived from the noun duma, ‘silence of death’.
Proverbs 31:1
English Standard Version
The words of King Lemuel. An oracle that his mother taught him:
As with Agur in Proverbs chapter Thirty, we do not know who King Lemuel is as he is not recorded in the list of the kings of Judah or Israel. He is a king though who put his trust in the Creator, the Covenant God of Israel and through the fear of the Lord learned wisdom. The name Lemuel means ‘belonging to God.’ With a minor punctuation change, it can be translated as CEB: “The words of King Lemuel of Massa, which his mother taught him…”
Massa was the seventh son of Ishmael and his name means ‘to lift up’ from the verb, nasa. It can also mean ‘load’ and in this translation ‘burden’ or ‘oracle.’ King Lemuel is believed by some commentators to have been a king of Massa from Ishmael.
Two states that may fit Dumah and Massa include Hesse or Hessen – the fifth richest state and containing the wealthiest city in Germany, the financial hub of Frankfurt am Main and the Rhineland-Palatinate with Saarland. Tema, the ninth born son is mentioned three times in the Bible. Tema means ‘south country’ from the root ymn, meaning ‘the right hand side, the southern direction’ also ‘admiration, perfection’ and ‘consummation.’
Job 6:19
English Standard Version
The caravans ofTema look, the travellers of Sheba [Flanders] hope.
Jeremiah 25:23-24
English Standard Version
23 Dedan [Wallonia, Brussels, Luxembourg], Tema, Buz [Northern Italy], and all who cut the corners of their hair; 24 all the kings of Arabia [northwestern Europe] and all the kings of the mixed tribes [Joktan] who dwell in the desert [eastern Europe]…
These verses link Tema with Belgium and northern Italy in trade and wealth. Coincidently, it was Roman soldiers who had their hair cut short, in contrast to other warring ‘barbaric’ nations who had longer hair. Tema equates with Lower Saxony and the principal city states of Hamburg, Bremen and the city of Hanover. Lower Saxony is the second largest state by area and has the fourth highest population, with approximately eight million people.
Hamburg has 1,787,408 people and Bremen has 557,464 people. Lower Saxony borders the Netherlands – Midian. The biggest farms are located in this state and Hamburg is the second biggest city in Germany after Berlin. Hamburg is the biggest port in Germany and the third busiest in all of Europe. Bremen is the fourth busiest port behind Hamburg; with Antwerp in Belgium second and Rotterdam in the Netherlands, the busiest. These cities represent the ancestor traders oft mentioned in the Bible; from Ishmael, Midian, Sheba and Dedan.
Isaiah 21:13-17
English Standard Version
13 The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites [southern Belgium].14 To the thirsty bring water; meet the fugitive with bread, O inhabitants of the landof Tema.
Notice the mention of water and the link with the city-ports of Hamburg and Bremen.
15 For they have fled from the swords, from the drawn sword, from the bent bow, and from the press of battle. 16 For thus the Lord said to me, “Within a year, according to the years of a hired worker, all the glory ofKedar will come to an end. 17 And the remainder of the archers of the mighty men of the sons of Kedar will be few, for the Lord, the God of Israel, has spoken.”
Kedar means ‘dark, turbid’ from the verb qadar, ‘to become dark’ also ‘blackness, sorrow.’ Turbid means, ‘cloudy, murky, opaque.’ Kedar is the second son of Ishmael and is mentioned the most frequently. He was a leader, warlike, military proficient and driven. It is a hint of and a precursor to, the militaristic capabilities of the Prussians. Kedar and Tema are linked in these verses as the two most dominant families and we find that Kedar and Tema are in fact neighbouring states.
Isaiah 60:6-7
English Standard Version
6 A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands] and Ephah [Holland]; all those from Sheba [northern Belgium]shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord. 7 All the flocks of Kedarshall be gathered to you;the rams of Nebaiothshall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on my altar, and I will beautify my beautiful house.
The wealth of second born son, Kedar and his influence is expressed with the firstborn son Nebaioth. Nebaioth is linked with Kedar – as Kedar is with Tema – and each are very likely located in northern Germany today, as speakers of Low German and the descendants of the Prussians. Nebaioth equates with the Capital Berlin; coupled with the state of Brandenburg. Ishmael has historically maintained a geographic and military closeness with Asshur, and so it is no coincidence that they lived adjacent to each other in the Baltic region, respectively becoming known as Prussians and Russians.
Ezekiel 27:20-21
English Standard Version
20 Dedan [southern Belgium] traded with you in saddlecloths for riding. 21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you.
Kedar equates with North Rhine-Westphalia or Nordrhein-Westfalen; which is the richest state in Germany and has the highest population with nearly eighteen million people. Bonn was the capital of the old West Germany and four of the biggest cities in Germany are located there: Cologne, Dusseldorf, Dortmund and Essen. The total population of Germany is 84,497,518 people, the second highest in Europe and nineteenth highest in the world.
Psalm 120:5-6
English Standard Version
5 Woe to me, that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar! 6 Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.
Kedar in the past is compared with Meshech, as peoples of war and not for the faint-hearted traveller or immigrant.
Song of Solomon 1:5
English Standard Version
5 I am very dark, but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, like the tents of Kedar, like the curtains of Solomon.
Kedar means dark and the history of modern Germany has been dark. The state flags of Germany have a colour of black theme running through six of them, the current national flag contains black, as did the older flags of Imperial Germany and Prussia.
Isaiah 42:10-12
English Standard Version
10 Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise from the end of the earth… 11 Let the desert [eastern Europe] and its cities lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar inhabits; let the habitants of Sela sing for joy, let them shout from the top of the mountains. 12 Let them give glory to the Lord…
A future, peaceful and happier time for the peoples of Kedar is predicted.
Jeremiah 2:10
English Standard Version
For cross to the coasts of Cyprus [Kitt-im – Indonesia] and see, or send to Kedar and examine with care; see if there has been such a thing.
Kedar is again associated with war, as ships will come from the Kittim in Indonesia against Asshur of Russia and Eber of Western Europe, led by Ishmael Germany.
Jeremiah 49:28-33
English Standard Version
28 Concerning Kedar and the kingdoms of Hazor that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon struck down. Thus says the Lord: “Rise up, advance against Kedar! Destroy the people of the east! 29 Their tents and their flocks shall be taken, their curtains and all their goods; their camels shall be led away from them, and men shall cry to them: ‘Terror on every side!’ 30 Flee, wander far away, dwell in the depths, O inhabitants of Hazor! declares the Lord. For Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has made a plan against you and formed a purpose against you. 31 “Rise up, advance against a nation at ease, that dwells securely, declares the Lord, that has no gates or bars, that dwells alone [H910 – badad: securely, in safety, in ‘freedom from attack’].32 Their camels shall become plunder, their herds of livestock a spoil. I will scatter to every wind those who cut the corners of their hair, and I will bring their calamity from every side of them, declares the Lord. 33 Hazor shall become a haunt of jackals, an everlasting waste; no man shall dwell there; no man shall sojourn in her.”
It is not clear where Hazor is though they are linked with Kedar. The name Hazor means ‘Village, Trumpet, Enclosure’ from the verb hasar, ‘to begin to cluster or gather.’ The word can also mean ‘fence’ or ‘castle.’ The verses indicate that they are close to the sea, with the nearest being the Wadden Sea or North Sea.
German women
The idea that the modern nation of Germany descend from ancient Assyria can be traced to Edward Hine in 1870, an early proponent of British Israelism. Edward Hine compared ancient Assyria and Israel to nineteenth century Britain and Germany. John Wilson in 1840, ‘the intellectual founder of British Israelism’ considered that all Germanic people – including the Dutch and Scandinavians – descended from the tribes of Israel. British Israelites did not necessarily welcome Hine’s solution – instead of maintaining that other northwestern European nations were also descended from Israel – who believed all the tribes of Israel were located in Britain, with Manasseh migrating to America. ‘Hine had identified the Ten Tribes as being together in Britain in that Ephraim were the drunkards and ritualists, Reuben the farmers, Dan the mariners, [Zebulun] the lawyers and writers, Asher the soldiers’ and so forth and ‘that these tribes were regional or local people in Britain.’
All the theories have merit in that Wilson recognised the familial similarities between the northwestern European nations as did British Israelites, even though they mis-identified the continental people. Hine as it turns out was the most correct regarding Israel; then he went out on a tangent in identifying Germany as Assyria. Hine rightly believed that the ancient peoples recorded in the Bible must also be identifiable in our modern age, if the Bible is true and prophecy is to be fulfilled. Hine postulated that if a people were ‘lost’ then it meant that they had migrated to new regions, relevant exonyms and autonyms had evolved or changed and their histories long forgotten.
Unfortunately, as with Anglo-Israelism itself, any proposed German-Assyrian connections do not gain any support amongst mainstream historians, anthropologists, ethnologists, archaeologists or linguists. I would have to agree with the mainstream experts, as the theories presented are all wrong to some degree and have not done the discipline any favours. The hope is that a gradual sea-change can occur. The ever increasing fascination developing amongst the public regarding their individual genetic identity and Haplogroup ancestry is hopefully just the tip, of a very big ice-berg of people beginning to understand and appreciate the compelling data now available. A new generation can learn in detail about the incredible diversity and similarity amongst ethnicities; not only specific to them but on a national scale, as addressed in this work.
Apart from Assyria, a growing teaching amongst knowledgeable identity adherents, is that Germany or at least in part, is descended from either Jacob’s son, Judah or Gad. Though these teaching are inaccurate, it is encouraging to see that people are beginning to shake off the longstanding, mis-leading German-Asshur paradigm. On one author’s internet site, – who still teaches Germany is Assyria – there is a list provided of postulated ancestors for the Germans of which all apart from Judah and Gad, I was not aware and of course the one listed at number seven, caught my eye immediately.
Asher: a son of Jacob
Ashkenaz: a son of Gomer
Canaan: a son of Ham
Edom: Esau, a son of Isaac
Gad: a son of Jacob
Gomer: a son of Japheth
Ishmael: a son of Abraham
Judah: a son of Jacob
Simeon: a son of Jacob
We have already addressed Ashkenaz, Canaan and Gomer in previous chapters. The four sons of Jacob we will study in depth and identify as not being viable ancestors for Germany. We will also investigate Esau and his grandson Amalek; convincingly ruling them out of contention, which leaves only… Ishmael. It is intriguing that this author has heard Ishmael offered as an identity for modern Germany. Regrettably, the author has chosen to concentrate on providing evidence only about Assyria for his research. I would have been extremely interested to learn his views on Ishmael; particularly as he has devoted over thirty years to the subject, publishing a three hundred page work on the German identity.
An example of the damage caused by a mis-identification of a Biblical nation is highlighted by Greg Doudna. This author came to understand a profound truth in his early twenties – during the early 1970s – regarding who the United States of America really was in the Bible. Identity believers and British-Israelites have unanimously and incorrectly deduced that the United States is descended from Manasseh, the eldest son of Joseph. His precious gift of insight, has since been rejected by the author and he has gone even further, to dis-believe the whole identity teaching. His insight was a major part of my research beginning in the 1990s, confirming my own evolving conclusions. It is a great sadness to learn that Greg Doudna has rejected so clear a plain truth. I would like to understand how he now perceives the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament; for it is swept away almost in its entirety if one does not believe the past, present and future application of the historical and prophetic texts. We will return to his comments on the United States in a later chapter, though for now, his deduction regarding Germany clearly shows the pickle which identity adherents find themselves and why credibility with anyone outside of their small bubble-like community is next to zero.
Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna, 1989 & 2006, pages 242-243 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘… [supposedly] the Anglo-Saxons and most other major peoples in Europe are Israelites – with one gigantic exception. One people right in the heart of Europe which were not claimed to be Israel were the Germanic tribes of Germany which produced the Anglo-Saxon tribes. In this… universe Germany today is Assyria, not symbolically or metaphorically but through genetic descent, in the same way that the Germanic tribes who settled elsewhere than Germany are Israelites through genetic descent. (Is that clear?)… Anglo-Saxons and Germans are of the same origins. They are the same peoples. The Saxons came from Germany. In the Finnish and Estonian languages the very word for “Germany” is Saksa, “Saxon.” Therefore if Germans came from Assyrians, it follows that the predominant ethnic components of Britain and the United States also are Assyrian. By this reasoning the United States would be Assyrians, not Israel.’
First, the author hits upon the problem with thinking that northwestern Europeans are descended from Jacob, rather than being from Abraham. Regardless of which, observing Germany – so obviously related to these other countries – but saying they are from a different son of Shem is glaringly contradictory as he rightly points out. Second, ‘Anglo-Saxons’ and Germans are of similar, but not the same origins. Remember the early points in the introduction; peoples migrate and their name is appropriated but this does not mean the new peoples are the same bloodline as the ones who have departed. The Saxon tribes, comprising Angles, Jutes and Frisians left their names in Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany, but these three nations are not ‘Anglo-Saxon’ peoples. They are related, all descending from Abraham.
The author showing Anglo-Saxon equals Assyria, equals America is accidentally showing the inaccuracy of Germany actually being Asshur. Alternatively, we will learn that the peoples who migrated to America from Britain, though similar kindred stock, are not the exact same tribe or extended family. We will also discover, that the ‘Germans’ who migrated to the United states are not the same people as the Germans who remained behind and presently live in Germany.
Germany in Prophecy, Herman Hoeh, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Now what does the word “Hatti” or “Chatti” mean in the Hebrew language? Its closest derivation is the root “chathath” (Strongs – 2865). It means “to terrorize, or break down, as in war, hence a warrior or MAN OF WAR.” The Chatti were therefore Men of War… the ancient Chatti were… migrants who early settled in Asia Minor. Did these Chatti or Hatti later also migrate into Western Europe… Indeed! The Chatti were the chief people who settled in… [ancient] Germany. Their descendants [left] the [HESSIAN name]… In fact, the Old High German spelling of Hesse was Hatti! THE ANCIENT KINGS OF [western Anatolia] called themselves Khatti-sars – meaning the “Kaisers of Hatti,”or “Kings of Hatti.”
The Empire of Hatti and the Empire of Assyria were… not two empires existing five centuries apart as historians assume. Excavated records from Bible times PROVE that the great rulers of the land of Hatti were not only contemporary with the famous kings of Assyria, but were also federated with them.All ancient Greek writers agreed that Assyria and Anatolia (the land of Hatti) were allies. All historians recognize that there were at least two distinct peoples in Asia Minor who came to be known by the same name – Chatti or Hittite.
The… Hatti claimed to be “the Master Race.” So have the modern Germans! The Hatti lorded it over other peoples who lived in Asia Minor. They were the inventors of the DOUBLE-HEADED EAGLE which has always been A SYMBOL OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE!’
The double headed eagle is in fact an Assyrian symbol, perpetuated by the Byzantines, the Russians and the Holy Roman Empire, as well as admittedly the Austrians. The Hittites, Romans and Germans have all used a single headed eagle.
‘Ritual [standards of the Hatti have been] recovered through excavation in ancient Anatolia… [notice] swastikas… [a] Hattic ritual standard in disk form… the Iron Cross… The descendants of the ancient Hatti – the modern Hessians of Germany – perpetuate these same symbols.’
Three Hittite artefacts highlighting the iron cross and swastika emblems also used in Germany’s recent past. The symbol below, is a third century Roman swastika
It is apparent from Hoeh’s article that he believes the Hatti and Assyrians are one and the same, or that the Hessian Assyrians as he calls them, are a branch of Asshur. We have studied the original Hatti or Chatti when discussing Nahor and his descendants who were later called Chaldees after the Chatti [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].
The descendants of Ishmael became known as both Hatti and Hittites. We have discussed the confusing scenario of the original Hittites being the son of Canaan, Heth. The addition of the Nephilim as ‘Hittites’ too with the original Heth-ites and now, Ishmael as a completely different, separate and second group of Hittites.
Thus, not only were there two Hittite peoples – descended from Canaan and Ishmael – as scholars have begrudgingly recognised; there were also two peoples of Hatti – from Nahor and Ishmael – as well. Which has not been recognised, and so the Hatti and Hittites have been viewed as either the same civilisation or more recently as two peoples when technically, there are in fact three involved. Only Ishmael has been known by both names.
The close political ties of the later Hatti or Hittites, with Asshur is correct and was repeated again at the end of Rome’s supremacy, when it split in two and Asshur was the eastern arm and Ishmael the west. In recent times, when Germany was split into West Germany and East Germany, Russia based its control of the eastern block of nations and its head quarters operations in East Germany; within its’ ‘half of Berlin.’ We have touched upon the future alliance between Russia and Germany which will see them take the political and economic lead in the world, shaking up the world order, while depriving the United States in particular as well as China, of the leadership they currently take for granted.
Hoeh raises a fascinating point on the Hittite kings being known as Khatti-sars. As the Prussians did later have Kai-sers and the Russians had C-zars or Tzars as titles for their kings and of course to tie up the compelling link, these two words have derived from the original title of Cae-sar, used by both capitols of Rome and Constantinople. Following are a selection of verses in the Bible which speak of the Ishmaelite Hittites and not the Canaanite or Nephilim Hittites.
1 Kings 11:1
English Standard Version
11 Now King Solomon loved many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the people of Israel, “You shall not enter into marriage with them, neither shall they with you, for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods.” Solomon clung to these in love.
Judges 1:23-26
English Standard Version
23 And the house of Joseph scouted out Bethel. (Now the name of the city was formerly Luz.) 24 And the spies saw a man coming out of the city, and they said to him, “Please show us the way into the city, and we will deal kindly with you.” 25 And he showed them the way into the city. And they struck the city with the edge of the sword, but they let the man and all his family go. 26 And the man went to the ‘land of the Hittites’and built a city and called its name Luz. That is its name to this day. [Joshua 16:1-3].
Ishmael died in 1754 BCE and the period of the Judges began circa 1342 BCE with the first Judge, Othniel until 1015 BCE and the death of Samuel, the fifteenth Judge. During this lengthy period, the Ishmaelites migrated from Arabia via Canaan to Central Anatolia. We have discussed how the descendants of Lot and Jacob had travelled to the Aegean Sea and mainland Greece establishing city states [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]. The descendants of Nahor had migrated from northern Mesopotamia to Western Anatolia. The reason for all this movement is usually always attributable to the onward pressure of migrating peoples. For instance in northern Africa and southern Arabia, Cush and Phut were on the move as they would eventually dwell in south Asia, with Mizra filling the vacuum and expanding their territory from North Africa to dwelling in Arabia and the Middle East.
2 Chronicles 1:17
English Standard Version
They imported a chariot from Egypt for 600 shekels of silver, and a horse for 150. Likewise through them these were exported to all the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Syria. [1 Kings 10:29, 2 Kings 7:6]
1 Kings 15:5
English Standard Version
… because David did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and did not turn aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriahthe Hittite.
The Hittite women who King Solomon loved were the same as the Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite and Sidonian women, that is, they were from Shem and not Ham’s line.
Notice the man from the original Canaanite city of Luz, went to the land inhabited by the Hittites in Anatolia and built a new city called Luz. The Hittites dwelt further north than the Aramaean Syrians, who lived just to the south of eastern Asia Minor. In the conquest of Canaan, the Hittites were said to dwell ‘in the mountains’ and ‘towards the north’ of Canaan – a description that matches the general direction and geography of the Anatolian Hittite empire. Uriah the Hittite was the husband of Bathsheba, who King David conspired to kill so that he could take his wife Bathsheba. Uriah was a high ranking soldier in David’s army; a commanding officer, perhaps a General.
It is of note, as the Ishmaelites were and are, proficient military leaders and soldiers as evidenced by the Hittite Kingdom, the Roman Empire, Imperial Prussia and in our time, Nazi Germany. Hittite kings, as royal princes were trained from childhood in the art of war and combat; they possessed a wealth of experience from being on the battlefield, where they were expected to lead from the front.
The New World Encyclopaedia addresses the pertinent points we have raised on the Hittities, with additional facts which are interesting in light of their identity as Ishmael, the ancestors of Rome and as modern Germans. Other supporting quotes follow and all emphasis and bold are mine.
‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa… The Hittite kingdom, which at its height controlled central Anatolia, north-western Syria down to Ugarit, and Mesopotamia down to Babylon, lasted from roughly 1680 B.C.E. to about 1180 B.C.E. After 1180 B.C.E., the Hittite polity disintegrated into several independent city-states, some of which survived until as late as around 700 B.C.E.
The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language. However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the “Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-Indo-European language conventionally called Hattic. Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people… who are also called Children of Heth… These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.
The Hittites were famous for their skill in building and using chariots [as were the Romans and as are the Germans].Some consider the Hittites to be thefirst civilization to have discovered how to work iron, andthus the first to enter the Iron Age. The Hittite rulers enjoyed diplomatic relations with Ancient Egypt but also fought them. The Battle of Kadesh (1275 B.C.E.) is said to have been the greatest chariot battle of all time. Rameses II claimed victory but the result was really a draw and 16 years later the two empires signed a peace treaty. The tablet concluding the treaty hangs in the United Nations headquarters.’
The Hittite king, Muwatallis II had at his disposal 3,000 chariots and 40,000 foot soldiers. It was certainly the biggest chariot battle known to history. The Hittites ambushed their enemy; had a greater force of men; and their chariots were made of iron; had lighter wheels; and carried three men instead of the standard two – an extra man as a shield bearer and to weight the chariot during tight turn manoeuvres.
‘Hittite kings and queens shared power, and gender equality is clearly evident in records of marriage, property and probate transactions and also of criminal law. At one time, a matrilineal system may have been practiced… certain “queens involved themselves in the kingdom’s political and judicial activities, as well as in external political affairs”… The mother goddess was venerated. After their husband’s death, several Queens ruled in their own rights. Correspondence survives between Rameses II of Egypt and Queen Puduhepa of the Hittites as early as the thirteenth century B.C.E. He addressed her as the “great queen,” as his sister and as “beloved of the God Amon.” She co-signed treaties with her husband, King Hattusilis III, including the famous treaty with Egypt. Some correspondence was signed with her own seal, indicating that she had “full authority” to make decisions on her husband’s behalf… This ancient civilization appears to have evolved over the centuries from a harsher into a more humane, life-affirming culture, evidenced by tablets of two hundred laws from different periods that have survived. Earlier punishments required mutilation; later ones demanded fines or some form of compensation except for serious crimes, such as rape and murder – which were punishable by death.
The Hittite civilization was one of the cradles of human culture… [their culture was among the first to have codified laws, literature and libraries]. Their development of trade links did much to generate awareness of living in the same world as other peoples, and of inter-dependence between peoples and had “a profound influence on the course of Anatolian history for the next two millennia”… They often used treaties to secure safe trade and to establish its terms. These terms ensured fairness and profit on both sides. The Hittites were aware that they belonged to a common humanity, something that sometimes seems forgotten in the modern world [for example the European Union]. They also made efforts to integrate conquered people by adapting some of their religious customs.
During sporadic excavations at Bogazkoy (Hattusa) that began in 1905, the archaeologist Hugo Winckler found a royal archive with ten thousand tablets, inscribed in cuneiform Akkadian… He also proved that the ruins at Bogazkoy were the remains of the capital of a mighty empire that at one point controlled northern Syria. [The Hittite capital city Hattusha was the most advanced and powerful city of the ancient world]. The language of the Hattusa tablets was eventually deciphered by a Czech linguist, Bedrich Hrozny (1879–1952), who on November 24, 1915, announced his results in a lecture at the Near Eastern Society of Berlin [no less]. His book about his discovery was printed in Leipzig in 1917 with the title ‘The Language of the Hittites: Its Structure and Its Membership in the Indo-European Linguistic Family.’ The preface of the book begins with: The present work undertakes to establish the nature and structure of the hitherto mysterious language of the Hittites, and to decipher this language […] It will be shown that Hittite is in the main an Indo-European language.
For this reason, the language came to be known as the Hittite language, even though that was not what its speakers had called it… Under the direction of the German Archaeological Institute, excavations at Hattusa have been underway since 1932, with wartime interruptions. Bryce (2006) describes the capital as one of the most impressive of its time, comprising “165 hectares”…
The history of the Hittite civilization is known mostly from cuneiform texts found in the area of their empire, and from diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in various archives in Egypt and the Middle East. Around 2000 B.C.E., the region centered in Hattusa that would later become the core of the Hittite kingdom was inhabited by people with a distinct culture who spoke a non-Indo-European language. The name “Hattic”is used by Anatolianists to distinguish this language from the Indo-European Hittite language, that appeared on the scene at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E.and became the administrative language of the Hittite kingdom over the next six or seven centuries.As noted above, “Hittite” is a modern convention for referring to this language. The native term [for their language] was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa” [and for themselves, Neshites or Nessites]. The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes, and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite, were absorbed by them, or just adopted their language.
The kingdom developed into the greatest and richest power at the time in the region. Bryce (2006) argues that early use of tin to make bronze helped to stimulate a stable political system and also to develop trade-links with surrounding peoples. The earliest known Hittite king, Pithana, was based at Kussara. In the eighteenth century B.C.E., Anitta conquered Nesa, where the Hittite kings had their capital for about a century, until [Labarnas II] conquered Hattusa and took the throne name of [Hattusilis I c. 1650-1620 BCE] ”man of Hattusa.” The Old Kingdom, centered at Hattusa, peaked during the sixteenth century and even managed to sack Babylon at one point [ending the Amorite Dynasty], but made no attempt to govern there, choosing instead to turn it over to the domination of their Kassite allies who were to rule it for over four hundred years. Bryce describes the conquest of Babylon under King [Mursilis I Hattusilis’ grandson] (1620-1590) as the “peak of Hittite military achievement” that also marked the “end of the illustrious era of Babylonian history”…’
The Hittite kingdom finally dissolved after defeats and loss of territory to the strengthening Assyrians. The Hittite legacy was influential on both the legendary city-state of Troy descended in the main from Lot, todays French and the Etruscan civilisation from Midian, todays Dutch; who in turn, ironically, were a foundation for the later Roman Republic… the very reincarnation of the Hittite peoples who had migrated from western Anatolia to central Italy.
‘The success of the Hittite economy was based on fair trade. In return for tin, they sold gold, silver, and copper, as well as wool and woolen clothes. A banking system made credit available. This, however, was run humanely, so that if for example a farmer, due to a bad harvest, could not repay the loan, it was sometimes canceled by the king… Macqueen (1975) argues that what made Anatolia much more than a “land-bridge” between Europe and Asia was its abundant mineral resources. It was no more or no less fertile than other regions, but its resources “… made it a land of rich possibilities (that made it) a primary center rather than a backwater which served only to link more favored areas”…’
The Lion Gate at the entrance of the former city Hattusa
Amazing Bible Timeline – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Hittite Empire is mentioned… in the Bible as one of the most powerful empires in… ancient times. Scholars used to question the accuracy of the Bible saying that such [an impressive] Hittite Empire was only hearsay since it was nowhere to be found. They considered the Hittites a small group of people living in the hills of Canaan together with Abraham. This was until the discovery… [of] important proofs… [including] tablets, documents, and successful excavations… [revealing] the truth about the existence of this great empire. It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of: 1) the original Hattites of Hatti; 2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name “Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites”… or 3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities.’
Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – italics his, bold mine:
‘The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time. Consequently the history of Hittites is complex…’
We read most of the quote by writer D H Lawrence regarding the Etruscan civilisation in Chapter XXVII. The additional information is of note, now we know the identity of the Roman people who were steadily rising in power next to their Etruscan neighbours: ‘… Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him. The Prussian in him was enthralled by the Prussian in the all-conquering Romans.’
An interesting coincidence of comparison, for who were the original Romans but none other than the Ishmaelite Hittites who had migrated to the Italian Peninsula as had the Midianite Grecians becoming Etruscans. These ‘western’ Romans when Rome fell, migrated through central eastern Europe to the Scandinavian-Baltic region and after being part of the ‘Swedish Viking’ wave of traders and raiders, came to be known as Prussians. The Prussians eventually led the drive for unification of all the German States and principalities and were synonymous with militarism and authoritarianism.
According to legend, Rome was founded as a city state by Romulus II and his brother Remus on April 21, 753 BCE. After completing the construction of his city, Romulus divided ‘his warriors into regiments numbering three thousand infantry and three hundred cavalry’ which he called legions. Romulus proceeded to form the city’s system of government in selecting a hundred of the most noble and richest elders, the patricians and these men became the first senators; who ruled the complex republican government when the last king was expelled.
Romulus was the city’s first king, though after his death in 716 BCE, the city was in reality under Etruscan rule even as the Kingdom of Rome. The Etruscans governed great swathes of Italy north of Rome; including Rome which was the southern tip of a chain of semi-independent city states. By 509 BCE the power of the Etruscans had weakened sufficiently for the Romans to eject them and establish the Roman Republic, ending a period of Monarchy comprising seven kings, including Romulus [refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia].
The most famous ruler of the Republic was Julius Caesar who became the first dictator of Rome in 45 BCE after defeating Pompey in a civil war and thereby igniting the ending of the Republic. It was Julius Caesar who hired Sosigenes an Egyptian astronomer, to calculate a new twelve month calendar. In 44 BCE he was assassinated on the Ides of March by Marcus Brutus. Hopes of a return to a Republic were dashed by civil war breaking out again. In 27 BCE, Octavius appointed himself Augustus, the first emperor. The Roman Empire steadily grew in greatness; becoming the greatest the world had ever known. In 64 CE, Emperor Nero set fire to Rome, blaming the Christians. Yet, in 306 CE Rome became a ‘Christian’ empire, made official by Theodosius I in 380 CE, confirming Christianity the sole religion of the empire.
The Roman Empire contributed major achievements and left many legacies. The most notable being arches, grid based cities, sewers, sanitation, roads and highways – note Germany’s autobahns of the 1930s and much of the major road systems in Britain, are based on those originally built by the Romans – aqueducts [considered engineering marvels], central heating [hypocaust: circulation of hot air], surgery tools and techniques, medical corps on the battlefield, the Julian calendar, newspapers [Acta Diurna: ‘daily acts’], concrete, construction and architecture [The Colosseum (built in 80 CE), the Pantheon and Hadrian’s Wall in 122 CE], Latin from which the Romance languages sprung and Roman numerals. Their numbering system is still used today, as well as Latin in scientific circles and academia.
Arguably, the greatest achievement of the Roman Empire, was its system of government. Though tainted with intrigue and political violence which a modern democratic political system could not survive today, the Romans established a legal code that served as a future model for political systems, including the United States. The emperor Justinian from 492 to 565 CE, was integral in the development of the Corpus Juris Civilis, undoubtedly the earliest modern expression of civil law in history and it provided the foundation for the legal systems that define democracy in our era. The relevance of the Roman Empire to the future of western civilisation, cannot be overstated.
In 117 CE with the death of Trajan, the empire covered territory of up to five million square kilometres; comparable to the Greco-Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great of some 5.2 million square km and the Achaemenid Empire of Darius I comprising 5.5 to 5.8 million square km. The Roman Empire grew so large that it was an unwieldy task governing from the city of Rome. Emperor Diocletician divided the administrative rule into a western and eastern tetrarchy, ’the rule of two’ in 285 CE. By 330 CE, Emperor Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople, formally known as Byzantium. This decision plus his favouring the east by building new infrastructure only there, yet raising taxes in the west, led to the considerable weakening of the western empire; leaving it vulnerable to invaders.
In 395 CE, the Roman empire splitting was reinforced upon the death of Theodosius I, emperor of Constantinople. The provinces were divided between his two sons Arcadius and Honorius. Fifteen years later the Visigoths sacked Rome; the first time in eight hundred years. Finally, in 476 CE the Western Roman Empire ended and ancient Rome fell with the defeat of the final emperor, Romulus Augustus at the hands of the Goth ruler Odoacer. Heralding the beginning of the Dark Ages in Europe. The eastern Empire of Byzantium lasted until 1453 CE when it fell to the Ottoman Turks.
This transference of power from west to east was a switch from Ishmael to Asshur. This relationship had occurred previously in Anatolia as the neighbouring Hittites and Assyrians. As Rome faded, Byzantium rose to prominence. We have studied Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in the Book of Daniel chapter Two, with the head of Gold symbolising the Chaldeans; the chest and arms of silver the Medo-Persians; the torso and thighs of bronze, Greco-Macedonia; and the one lower leg of iron representing Byzantium. The other lower leg… is Rome. The major European nations or powers have all been represented respectively in Nebuchadnezzar’s statue: Italy, Turkey, France, Germany and Russia. Quite an amazing coincidence or set by a predetermined purpose?
The Roman Empire powerful like the Byzantine Empire, were both constituted of iron. We have previously discussed the feet and toes of iron and clay and the possible physical-spiritual intent, at the time of the end. We also now know, that this sixth future empire – whether it includes a human-angel admixture or not – does arise from the ashes of the Roman and Byzantine empires. The uneasy mix of iron and clay might just as easily be a reference to the short and difficult amalgamation of the Russian and German political, economic and military apparatuses. This future relationship between Ishmael and Asshur, Germany and Russia will one final time, in a cycle of three, be instrumental in ushering in the time of the end, the very period of Jacob’s Trouble, the Great Tribulation and the return of the Son of Man.
Daniel 2:33-35
English Standard Version
33 … its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone [the returning Messiah] that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth [the millennial rule of the Kingdom of God].
This seventh kingdom is the Son of Man’s rule on earth; for a thousand years. Many Bible scholars, Christians and ad infinitum seem to have difficulty accepting a millennial one thousand year period after Christ’s return. Yet the Roman and Byzantine empires were each over a thousand years long. Rome from its foundation in 753 BCE to either its fall in 476 BCE, or the divisions of 285 and 395 CE are all over a thousand years. The fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453 is again over a thousand years, from the official division in 395 CE. It is a curious coincidence that both ‘lower leg’ empires founded by Ishmael and Asshur should have each lasted a thousand years or longer.
Added to this curiosity, is the fact that the Holy Roman Empire began with Charlemagne’s crowning on Christmas day in 800, and which incorporated much of Central Europe or East Francia and particularly the lands that would ultimately encompass present day Germany.
By 936, Otto I was crowned King of Germany and the Holy Roman Empire was fir the first time fully centred in Germany. By the end of the fifteenth century the Empire was still composed of three major regions comprising Italy, Germany and Burgundy; though really, only the Kingdom of Germany counted as the Burgundian territories were lost to France and the Italian territories splintered into independent territories. The dissolution of the Empire occurred a thousand years later at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815. At this time most of the Holy Roman Empire was included in the German Confederation, with the exception of the Italian states.
A decree in 1512, changed the name to the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, though this term was hardly ever applied. The political philosopher Voltaire remarked: “This body which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.” The Empire was often called the German Empire, Deutsches Reich or the Roman-German Empire: Romisch-Deutsches Reich.After its dissolution, it was simply called ‘the old Empire’ – das alte Reich.
Beginning in 1923, Nazi propaganda would identify the Holy Roman Empire as the First Reich – Reich meaning realm or hegemony, loosely, ‘empire’ – with the German Empire as the Second Reich from 1871 to 1918 and either a future German nationalist state or as it turned out, Nazi Germany as the Third Reich.
It is a further curiosity that Adolf Hitler should wish to impose a thousand year German rule. It cannot be coincidence and very possibly demonically inspired to remark on in essence, an ante-Christ and anti-Christ millennial rule. Adolf Hitler in 1931: “I intend to set up a thousand-year Reich and anyone who supports me in this battle is a fellow-fighter for a unique spiritual – I would say divine – creation… Rudolf Hess, my assistant of many years standing, would tell you: If we have such a leader, God is with us.” Quoted by Richard Breiting in Secret Conversations with Hitler, 1970.
The similarities between the Roman Empire and Germany are numerous and palpable; replicated by the Nazi regime, whether from design or coincidence. The Nazi salute and greeting, Sieg Heil meaning Hail to Victory and Heil Hitler, resonates with the original Hail Caesar. The Nuremberg rallies with their layout, flags and standards were deliberately reminiscent of the Roman army legions which prefigured them.
The eastern third of the Frankish empire eventually evolved into modern Germany, after Louis the Pious, the only one remaining of Charlemagne’s three sons died in 840 CE, leaving East Francia to his son, Louis the German as discussed in Chapter XXVI. His territory included Alemannia, Bavaria, Khorushka, Saxony, Franconia and Thuringia.
Interestingly, a province or Gau of East Francia, is first mentioned in the Treaty of Meerssen in 870. Known as the Hattuarian Gau, on the west bank of the Rhine. Some think this was a surviving relic of the Germanic tribe, the Chattuarii. Note the striking resemblance to Hattusa the capital of the Hittite Empire and before them, the Chatti.
Louis the German died in 876 and he in turn left East Francia to his three sons: Carloman, king of Bavaria and lower Pannonia from 876 to 880; Louis III, the younger of Franconia, Hesse, Saxony and Thuringia from 876 to 882; and Charles II, the Fat from 876 to 887, of Rhaetia and Alemannia or Swabia, with the addition of Italy in 879 and France in 884. In 882, East Francia was re-united after its division in 876 with the death of Charle’s brother Louis III.
Between 1648 and 1815 Prussia or Preussen in German, rose remarkably in stature. The margraves, or marcher lords of Brandenburg became Electors of the Holy Roman Empire. Brandenburg and East Prussia fell under the control of the Hohenzollern family, who mastered the Brandenburg hereditary nobility the Junkers and ignited the centuries long march to power, which ended with the First World War and the abdication of the Kaiser in 1918. In 1640, Frederick William or Wilhelm of Brandenburg,also called the Great Elector, became ruler of Brandenburg-Prussia; throwing off vassalage under the Kingdom of Poland and re-organising his loosely knit and scattered territories. By the time he died in 1688, Frederick William had made Brandenburg-Prussia the strongest of the northern German states; created an efficient army and fortified Berlin.
The Kingdom of Prussia is Founded, Richard Cavendish, History Today, Volume 51, Issue January 1, 2001 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘His son, the Elector Frederick III (1657-1713), was not a chip off the old block. Known in Berlin as ‘crooked Fritz’, because a childhood accident had left him with a twisted spine and a humped back, he was besotted with all things French and looked for a crown as a reward for aiding the Emperor Leopold I. There could not be a king of Brandenburg, which was part of the Empire, and there could not be a king of Prussia, because part of it was in Poland. By an ingenious formula, however, Frederick was permitted to call himself king in Poland. He put the crown on his head with great ceremony at Königsberg as Frederick I and so created the Prussian kingdom, with its capital at Berlin.Brandenburg from then on, though still theoretically part of Germany owing allegiance to the Emperor, was treated in practice as part of the Prussian kingdom.’
Prussia became a European power from 1763 and in turn, Austria’s greatest rival for hegemony of Germany. Instrumental in this growth was Frederick II the Great, who reigned from 1740 to 1786. In 1857, the Prussian king was Frederick William IV. He suffered a stroke and while incapacitated, his brother William served as regent until 1861 when he then officially became King William I.
From an early age he received private tuition and as the second son of the King, was not expected to take the throne. According to Royal traditions, he was initially destined to a military life. He was an officer in the Prussian Army when he was only twelve and later on in his adolescence was commissioned as a Captain; joining the Allied monarchs fight against France and Napoleon I when he was sixteen years of age. Wilhelm I was devoted to military service and was determined to perfect the capabilities of the Prussian Army. Wilhelm helped quench several uprisings and hence consolidated the power of his brother, King Frederick William IV. He took part in setting up the Vereinigter Landtag, the Prussian Parliament with a seat for himself in the Herrenhaus or upper chamber.
Wilhelm’s most significant accomplishment was naming Otto von Bismarck as Prussian Foreign Minister in 1862; who became known as the ‘blood and iron chancellor.’ Bismarck was born in 1815 in a noble family estate west of Berlin in Prussian Saxony. He was a Prince, Count and Duke all-in-one. He died at the age of eighty-three in 1898. With the formidable assistance of Bismarck, King Wilhelm impressively modernised Germany, accelerating its journey into one of the dominant military and economic powers of Europe. ‘Wilhelm centralised power, built a strong military, and improved Germany’s international status. It was also under his reign that Germany became one of the first modern welfare states.’
There had been growing disputes between Prussia and Denmark over the territory of Schleswig and these escalated in 1863. It was not part of the German Confederation, while Danish nationalists wanted to incorporate Schleswig into the Danish kingdom. By astutely placing Denmark in the aggressors role, Bismarck was able to spark the Second war of Schleswig in 1864. Prussia, cleverly getting Austria involved, easily defeated Denmark and occupied Jutland. The Danes were forced to cede both the Duchy of Schleswig and the Duchy of Holstein to Austria and Prussia.
The subsequent governing of the two duchies, inevitably led to tensions between Austria and Prussia. Austria wanted the duchies to become independent within the German Confederation; Prussia intended to annex them. This disagreement served as the intended and perfect pretext for the Seven Weeks War between Austria of Hagar and Prussia from Ishmael, breaking out in June 1866. The two powerful armies clashed at Sadowa-Koniggratz in Bohemia, in an enormous battle in July, involving half a million soldiers. Superior Prussian troop manoeuvres, with the modern breech-loading needle guns over the slow muzzle loading rifles of the Austrians were decisive in giving Prussia victory. The battle importantly, had decided the question of hegemony in Germany. Bismarck was deliberately lenient with the spent force that was Austria; who after their defeat, played a subordinate role in German affairs.
The world-renowned Neuschwanstein castle was built for King Ludwig II of Bavaria, and served as his private refuge. Construction began in 1869 and was finished in 1892, though it was not technically completed. The Castle became the dream world that the Bavarian king escaped, after he ceded his power to the Prussians in 1866.
Following the War with Austria, the German Confederation was dissolved and the North German Federation or Norddeutscher Bund, was established under the leadership of Prussia. Austria was excluded and its longstanding immense influence over Germany abruptly came to an end. The North German Federation was a temporary organisation, existing between 1867 and 1871. Due to revolution in Spain, the exile of Queen Isabella II to France began a fortuitous and remarkable chain of events on the surface, yet cleverly contrived behind the scenes. Her abdication in June 1870 lead to the Franco-Prussian war when France refused the possibility of the Prussian Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen taking the vacant Spanish throne.
French troops were humiliated by Prussia’s ‘ultra-modern’ army and being driven back to the gates of Paris, quickly swept away the exposed myth of France’s military prowess, bringing about its downfall. In the process, Prussia had not only displaced Austria as the preeminent German power it was now the dominant state of central Europe. In 1871 Wilhelm was proclaimed Emperor or Kaiser, of a united German State, with Bismarck its first Chancellor.
On 18 January 1871, the German Empire was proclaimed in the Hall of Mirrors of the Palace of Versailles – Bismarck is in the centre, dressed in white with a gold sash
The Prussian led German Empire’s massive military build up, coupled with phenomenal economic growth, meant war with Great Britain was inevitable, as it it sought to be the principal power of all Western Europe.
The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World before the War, 1890-1914, Barbara Tuchman – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Germans knew themselves to be the strongest military power on earth, the most efficient merchants, the busiest bankers, penetrating every continent, financing the Turks, flinging out a railway from Berlin to Baghdad, gaining the trade of Latin America, challenging the sea power of Great Britain, and in the realm of the intellect systematically organising… every branch of human knowledge. They were deserving and capable of mastery of the world. Rule by the best must be fulfilled… What they lacked and hungered for was the world’s acknowledgement of their mastery.So long as it was denied, frustration grew and with it the desire to compel acknowledgement by the sword.’
Flags of the North German Confederation 1866–71 and the German Empire 1871–1918
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 175-177 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… in 1890… Germany and Prussia were the richest and most powerful nations in the world at that time, even greater than the United States and on a par with England… Tuchman says that in… [1905, Kaiser Wilhelm II] astounded everyone by “publicly ascribing the genesis of his Navy to his childhood admiration of the British Fleet”… He was the oldest grandchild of Queen Victoria and the son of Princess Victoria, the oldest daughter of the queen and Prince Albert. His father was Prince Frederick William of Prussia, the heir to the Prussian crown who eventually became King Frederick III. [Wilhelm] was closely related to all the royalty of Europe and Russia.He was a first cousin to King George V of England; Queen Marie of Romania; Queen Maud of Norway; Victoria Eugenie, the queen consort of Spain; and Empress Alexandra of Russia, the wife of Czar [Nicholas II].’
Once Germany was unified, an effective system of alliances designed and managed by Chancellor Bismarck, had maintained peace and good relations across Europe. This was necessary because the recently unified Germany in its central location in Europe bordering a host of nations was brilliantly situated for trade, yet in the case of war, extremely vulnerable to attack on a variety of fronts. In 1888, the ‘Year of Three German Emperors’ Wilhelm I died at the age of 90 in March, followed shortly by his son – Wilhelm II’s father – Frederick III, who died of cancer in June.
The new Kaiser or King, Wilhelm II was eager to be seen as the one who could competently manage foreign relations, without the need of someone else and thus Bismarck was unceremoniously and unwisely, fired. Bismarck’s clever diplomatic ‘system of complex alliances, with their give-and-take features, encouraging moderation, were deliberately’ severed. Kaiser Wilhelm II ignored renewing a treaty of friendship with Russia, rather seeking ‘alliances with the traditional opponents of German expansionism, Great Britain and France, with momentous consequences.’
The following quote is not intended to single out Germany, Germans or the Japanese. Tragically, it is indicative of all aggressor waring nations, when under the influence of dark forces. Humankind all too readily falls under the spell of depravity at times like these; thus taking leave off their otherwise moral code of decency, to replace it with evil insanity.
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, pages 182-183 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Germany attacked Belgium on August 2, 1914, as part of their plan to quickly encircle the French forces. They needed to go through Belgium, using it as a corridor. In doing this, they were violating Belgian neutrality, which had been declared in the Treaty of 1839. The brutality with which the German Army treated the defenceless Belgian citizenry was not equaled again until 1937, by the Japanese in their infamous invasion… of Nanking. The German soldiers looted, pillaged, raped and murdered civilians with cold, drunken abandon…. crimes… were brutally cruel and sadistic… but were committed with a detached lack of restraint, sometimes while singing! All of the acts were meticulously catalogued in the impartial report of the British Bryce Committee… in May 1915… the German atrocities were in violation of the Hague Convention of 1907, which dealt with the conduct of war on land, to which Germany was a signatory. The offences enumerated… are divided into the following categories:
The Killing of noncombatants
The treatment of women and children
The use of noncombatants as shields during military operations
Looting, burning, and wanton destruction of property
Killing the wounded and prisoners
Firing on hospitals, Red Cross ambulances, and stretcher bearers
Abuses of the Red Cross and the White [surrender] Flag
About one hundred thousand Belgians were killed, of which sixty thousand were civilians, six thousand by execution. About 1.5 million Belgians were displaced by the invasion… An estimated 120,000 Belgian civilians of both genders were used as forced labor, roughly half of which were deported to Germany. They toiled in prison factories and camps, some just behind the front lines, digging trenches while artillery shells burst all around them. In this can be seen the same [cold-blooded] indifference to human suffering that became even more pronounced in World War II. It is clear evidence of the massive mind control… and the violent dispositions that were programmed into the young German males.’
As if once wasn’t enough, the same dark, controlling influence polluted the leadership of Germany again a short twenty years later in World War II. Adolf Hitler’slast nameis a possible variation of Hiedler, a surname applied to those who reside near a Hiedl or ‘subterranean river.’ Other theories derive the surname from Huttler, also spelled Huettler meaning ‘one who lives in a hut’ from Hutte, or from huten, meaning to ‘guard, look after.’ Adolf derives from Adal, which means noble or majestic and Wulf, meaning wolf. A ‘majestic wolf guarding, looking after’ Germany. Hitler certainly lived up to his name, as the predatory ruler who hijacked control by dictatorship. Notice the similarity between the name Hit-ler and the word Hit-tite. The irony, is Hitler’s ancestors were not German; that is, descended from Ishmael, yet it was he who lead the German, Ishmaelite nation down its darkest path; for Hitler was half Austrian and purportedly half Jewish.
Alien World Order, Len Kasten, 2017, Page 196 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘In his book, The Biggest Secret, David Icke has made a persuasive case for the theory that Adolf Hitler was the grandson of a Rothschild, and that the Rothschild family was responsible for his rise to power. Icke informs us that according to the book The Mind of Hitler, psychoanalyst/author Walter Langer says that Hitler’s grandmother, Maria Anna Schicklgruber became pregnant with the childof Salomon Mayer Rothschild while working as a domestic servant at his mansion in Vienna.
Her illegitimate son Alois later became Hitler’s father. Icke says, “The Rothschilds and the Illuminati produce many offspring out of wedlock… and these children are brought up under other names with other parents.”’
After World War II, in 1949, Germany was divided into two countries; East Germany and West Germany. East Germany was a communist state under control of the Soviet Union. The Berlin Wall was built between the two states and ideologies to prevent people from escaping from East Germany to the West. It became a central point and focus of the Cold War. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism, the wall was torn down in 1989. Nearly a year later on October 3, 1990, East and West Germany were reunited into one country.
Notable dates in German history include, 1455 when Johannes Gutenberg first printed the Gutenberg Bible. His printing press incomparably influenced the future of the written word. In 1517, Martin Luther published his Thesis which marked the beginning of the Protestant Reformation and the huge schism from the Universal Church. In 1756, famous composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born in present day Austria. In 1806, the French Empire under Napoleon I conquered many of the German states. In 1808, Ludwig van Beethoven’s famous Fifth Symphony was first performed. In 1812, German writers the Brothers Grimm, published their first collection of tales.
Prussian flag and German flag during World war I – notice the Prussian one headed eagle, the Hittite iron cross, the Nordic cross and the pan-German colours of red, white and especially black.
After the United States, Germany is the second most popular immigration destination in the world, with the majority of migrants living in the western regions of Germany. The English word Germany derives from the Latin Germania, used by Julius Caesar ironically, to describe the peoples east of the Rhine River. The German term Deutschland, originally diutisciu land or the ‘German lands’, was derived from the word deutsch and is similar to the word Dutch, descending from the Old High German diutisc, meaning ‘of the people’ from diot or diota – ‘people.’
The Nazi flag from 1933 till 1945 and the flag of the Holy Roman Empire
Western Germany received considerable support from the United States – as did Japan – in rebuilding its economy after WWII. For decades, Germany was the third biggest economy in the world. With China’s ascent, Germany is now the fourth largest world economy behind Japan and ahead of India in fifth place, with a GDP of $3.86 trillion in 2019. Germany is Europe’s largest economy and is a top exporter of vehicles, machinery, chemicals and other manufactured goods, with a highly skilled workforce. Germany is well known for its pharmaceuticals and is the home of one of the world’s top drug makers, Bayer. Germany also has a low fertility rate, with an ageing population and workforce. Coupled with this is its high levels of net immigration, both of which are putting a strain on Germany’s social welfare system.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in German global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$268.6 billion
Vehicles: $246 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $176.4 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $118 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $83.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $76.3 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $43.3 billion
Articles of iron or steel: $33.9 billion
Other chemical goods: $32.9 billion
Iron, steel: $32.7 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 65.4% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales were the materials iron and steel via a 48.3% gain. Germany’s shipments of plastics plus articles made from plastic posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 27%.’
The German flag during the Weimar Republic between WWI and Nazi Germany and since reunification in 1989 and the German Coat of Arms
Germany is in the top ten nations in the world for technological innovation, at number five, one ahead of Russia at six. Germany has always found its name in this list and is consistently regarded as one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. German research scientists contribute to numerous fields of endeavour including space exploration and biotechnology. The German automotive industry produces some of the most high-tech engines and automobiles, with pioneering brands like Mercedes Benz, BMW, Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche.
Germany has the second largest gold reserves in the world, ahead of Italy, France and Russia at 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Germany has 3,362.4 tonnes of gold which represents 74.5% of its foreign reserves. In 2017 Germany completed a four year repatriation operation to move back a total of 674 tonnes of gold from the Banque de France and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to its own vaults.
Germany is included in the influential G7 group of nations, where apart from Japan, two of the remaining six nations descended from Abraham’s two brothers, Nahor and Haran, corresponding with Italy and France respectively. Abraham’s children within the G7 include Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States of America.
Some global analysts predict a weakening of China’s economy over the next decade, regardless of this, a strong Germany aligning itself with a mending Russia – after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 – would have enormous repercussions on the future of global foreign policy, world trade, arms development, military expansion and political control.
Geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan in an article on Russia, actual Asshur from ancient Assyria, comments on Germany’s pivotal role in central Europe – emphasis & bold mine:
‘European history is a chronicle of the rise and fall of its geographic center. As Germany rises, the powers on its periphery buckle under its strength and are forced to pool resources in order to beat back Berlin. As Germany falters, the power vacuum at the middle of the Continent allows the countries on Germany’s borders to rise in strength and become major powers themselves. Since the formation of the first “Germany” in 800, this cycle has set the tempo and tenor of European affairs. A strong Germany means consolidation followed by a catastrophic war; a weak Germany creates a multilateral concert of powers and [multi-state] competition (often involving war, but not on nearly as large a scale). For Europe this cycle of German rise and fall has run its course three times – the Holy Roman Empire, Imperial Germany, Nazi Germany – and is only now entering its fourth iteration with the reunified Germany.’
The top eight main mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany.
Austria: H [44.9%] – J [8.8%] – U5 [8.6%] – K [8.6%] –
It is instantly recognisable the almost exact similitude between the two German nations in their mitochondrial DNA percentage sequence. The maternal Haplogroups leave little doubt as to the shared lineage and mutual ancestry from their mother Hagar; as evidenced in the key Haplogroups H, J, T2 and U5.
H HV0+V J K T2 U4 U5
Germany 45 4 9 7 8 3 9
Austria 45 2 9 9 8 5 9
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6
Bel-Lux 47 3 6 12 9 3 3
Adding Austria and Germany to the table from Chapter XXVII and comparing the key mtDNA Haplogroups, highlights the unquestionable family link between Abraham and Keturah’s children with the two sons born from Hagar; Ishmael, with Abraham and the Hagarites with her second, unnamed husband.
H J T2 U5 K HV0+V HV U4
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3
Germany 45 9 8 9 7 4 0.5 3
Austria 45 9 8 9 9 2 0.8 5
Comparing Ishmael and the Hagarites with Abraham’s brother Haran’s children, highlights the re-occurring genetic relationship amongst cousins, which can sometimes be as close as those shared between siblings. The Germans and Austrians are closely aligned in mtDNA with the French from Moab and Ammon. The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Hagar’s descendants.
H HV HV0+V J T2 U U5 K
Switzerland 48 0.4 5 12 9 0.4 7 5
Bel-Lux 47 0.7 3 6 9 5 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 6 1 6 9
Norway 46 0.2 4 11 8 2 11 5
Sweden 46 0.5 5 8 4 3 12 6
Netherlands 45 8 11 12 0.5 8 10
Austria 45 0.8 2 9 8 1 .4 9 9
Germany 45 0.5 4 9 8 0.8 9 7
France 44 2 5 8 6 1 8 9
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Iceland 38 4 2 14 10 0.2 8 10
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
‘Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H.’ The addition of the Austrians and Germans, sees them unsurprisingly, nestled amongst near relatives and neighbours, the Scandinavian, Benelux and French descended peoples. Recall from previous chapters that ‘[a] pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe. Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe in the main, exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H.’
We have learned regarding Y-DNA Haplogroups that: ‘Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b. R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared [with] Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 or S21, is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula.’
‘R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. As we progress through the descendants of Shem, 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 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 which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg, Aram and the mixed line of Casluh and Caphtor which have the highest levels of R1b [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil].’
Turkey R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
Netherlands R-M269 54% – R-U106 35%
Denmark R-M269 34% – R-U106 17%
Austria R-M269 27% – R-U106 23%
Germany R-M269 43% – R-U106 19%
With the addition of Austria and Germany, we see that Germany has similar percentages as their neighbouring cousins in Denmark; while Austria possesses levels similar to their neighbours the Czechs. Though the mtDNA Haplogroups for Austria and Germany were very similar, we find more variance with the Y-DNA Haplogroups and a marked difference in the percentage of the key R1b group R-M269. The lower R-M269 level immediately stands out for Austria. A realistic explanation is that though Hagar was the mother of Ishmael and the mother of the Austrian Germans, her husband, who gave her a child or children, could likely have been from either Joktan or his great grandfather Arphaxad, rather than a direct lineal descendant of Peleg. As Austria has a similar percentage of R-M269 as its eastern European neighbours, coupled with its close geographic, cultural, political and historical ties with Hungary, this lends support for the proposition.
Principal component analysis graphs show that some Austrians are genetically related with Slovenians and Hungarians, while most are closer to Germans, particularly from Southern and Eastern Germany.
As heading west highlights an increase in R1b, travelling eastwards shows the decreasing percentages for both R1b groups.
Pakistan R-M269 3% – R-U106 0%
Palestine R-M269 0% – R-U106 0%
Middle East R-M269 0% – R-U106 0%
C & S America R-M269 0% – R-U106 0%
The absence of both of the R1b sub-Haplogroups in the Arab peoples and their related kin in Latin America shows how they are not European, western, ‘white’ or descended from Shem. Pakistan also proves that like India, they are not the same as Europeans and are incorrectly classified as Aryan.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups found in Germany and Austria.
Unlike the striking similarity with mtDNA Haplogroups, reflecting shared ancestry from the same mother, the difference in Y-DNA Haplogroups shows a different paternal ancestor for the Germans and Austrians. The higher level of Haplogroup I and especially I1, in Germany is similar with the Nordic and Germanic nations on or near its borders.
The family connection, yet distinctiveness of the German peoples was discussed by Raymond McNair in a thesis entitled:
Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Here are some interesting excerpts from an article entitled Are We Cousin to the German? by Sir Arthur Keith.
In the standard Atlases and school geographies the Germans colour Great Britain, Holland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden with the same tint as their own empire, to indicate that all those lands are inhabited by branches of the great Teutonic family… It is an historical fact that the Anglo-Saxons came into lands lying on the western shores of the present German Empire. In the same issue of The Graphic, Sir Arthur Keith illustrated prevalent British and German forms of skulls. He pointed out the marked difference between the typical British skulls when contrasted with that of the average German. Speaking of the typical British and German skull form, he says:
“The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye. In the majority of BRITON – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects predominately backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width (ibid., page 720).”
Sir Arthur Keith says that “in the vast majority of Germans” the hinder part of the head is “flattened.” He mentions, however, that this “peculiarity of the German skull” is not due to “artificial means.”
We know that the prominent occiput and flattened occiput are characters that breed true over thousands of years, and that they are characters which indicate a profound racial difference. Even in the sixteenth century, Vesalius, who is universally regarded as the ‘father of Anatomy,’ regarded the flat occiput as a German characteristic… He came, rather unwillingly,to the conclusion that the vast majority of modern German people differed from the British, Dutch, Dane and Scandinavian in head form (ibid., p. 720)
Some of the North Germans are closely allied to the Danes, Dutch and other Northwestern Europeans. The exact racial affinity of the northern Germanic type to certain other Nordics of North-west Europe yet remains to be clearly demonstrated. But many North Germans have mixed to some extent with their neighbors, thus producing a people closely related to the racial type of Scandinavia, the British Isles, and the Low Countries.’
Germany having a large and varied population, means it is helpful to break down their Y-DNA Haplogroups into four quadrants – not far removed from the four divisions created after World War II, which were administered by the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, the United States and France.
What is immediately noticeable is the strong similarity between northern and eastern Germany and the same similarity between western and southern Germany.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 N1C1
East 36 24 17 2 5 8 2 1
North 36 22 19 0.5 8 3 4 2
West 47 9 13 3 7 8 5 2
South 49 10 11 5 3 8 5 0.5
Germany 45 16 16 2 5 6 5 1
Notice the strong east to west divide between R1a and R1b; as we have encountered in previous chapters on our journey across Europe.
Haplogroup I1 is associated with northern Europe and the figures for Germany reflect this gradient. The higher overall percentage for Germany’s R1b at 45% is influenced by the higher population of the southern and western German states with 49% and 47% respectively.
Comparing Germany and Austria’s Y-DNA R1b led Haplogroups, with their Nordic and Benelux cousins, places them interestingly between the two.
R1b R1a I1 I2a1 I2a2 E1b1b J2 J1 G2a
Iceland 42 23 29 4
Norway 32 26 32 5 1 0.5 1
Sweden 22 16 37 2 4 3 3 1
Denmark 33 15 34 2 6 3 3 3
Austria 32 19 12 7 3 8 9 1 8
Germany 45 16 16 2 5 6 5 5
Frisians 55 7 [34] 2 [1]
Netherlands 49 4 17 1 7 4 4 0.5 5
Flanders 61 4 12 3 5 5 4 1 4
Wallonia 60 7 11 2 5 6 2 6
Luxembourg 61 3 3 3 6 5 8 3 6
Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham’s son Ishmael and Hagar’s ‘son’.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 2 56 58
Luxembourg 11 3 8 5 6 3 61 64
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 2 8 7 3 2 69 71
Austria 10 1 9 8 8 19 32 51
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 1 5 7 3 44 8 52
Germany 5 5 6 5 16 45 61
Flanders 5 1 4 5 4 4 61 65
Netherlands 4 1 3 4 5 4 49 53
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Denmark 3 3 3 3 15 33 48
Sweden 3 3 3 1 16 22 38
Wallonia 2 2 6 6 7 60 67
Frisians 1.4 2 7 55 62
Norway 0.5 0.5 1 1 26 32 58
Iceland 23 42 65
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
Adding Austria and Germany to the continuing table of main Y-DNA Haplogroups for European nations, places them both centrally as indicative of their respective R1b percentages. ‘Georgia remains as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland… exhibits the highest percentage of R1a, while Greece has the most E1b1b. Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.’
Neither Germany or Austria are remarkable or particularly stand out with any of their Haplogroups; confirming their location in central Europe. It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups.
The core Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations in the north of Europe, include R1, I1 and I2; which segment Europe roughly into quarters. ‘Haplogroup R1b is prominent in the west; R1a in the east; I1 and I2a2 in the north and west; with I2a1 in the south and east. Haplogroup N1c1 is prominent in the north, in counter balance to J2, J1, E1b1b and G2a which are more commonly found in southern Europe.’
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Luxembourg 3 61 3 3 6
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Netherlands 4 49 17 1 7
Flanders 4 61 12 3 5
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Frisians 7 55 [34]
Wallonia 7 60 11 2 5
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Denmark 15 33 34 2 6 1
Sweden 16 22 37 2 4 7
Germany 16 45 16 2 5 1
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Austria 19 32 12 7 3 0.5
Iceland 23 42 29 4 1
Norway 26 32 32 5 3
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
‘The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising I1, I2a2 and N1c1 are included.’ Finland possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Germany and Austria have R1a percentages similar with Denmark and Sweden, while the I1 percentages for the Germans and Austrians resemble those of the Swiss, Dutch and the Flemish.
From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.
Luke 12:48 Amplified Bible
“True scholarship involves the sincere wish to weed out the errors that we are all plagued with and to accept new understandings with humility of thankfulness. In this spirit I am submitting this research to those who are interested. My best critics will be those who show me, and the rest of the world, just where the truth lies.”
Ernest L Martin [1932 – 2002]
“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
Winston Churchill
“The surest barrier to advancing truth is the conviction one already has it”
Abraham, is a dominant figure on the genetic landscape with Noah and his sons, for his descendants loom large on the pages of history. Abraham is likened to Abel before the flood, in similarly being the first person after the flood to stand out as a towering presence in obedience to the true Creator. As Noah projects a large shadow on the antediluvian world, with Abel and Enoch, who though giant pillars themselves, never-the-less caught in the shadow cast by Noah and his genetic role in the line of Seth; so, Abraham is the pivot of the genetic evolution of the line of Shem, the principal continuation of Seth. All those who followed him such as Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah and Daniel, are enveloped not just by his genetic inheritance but also through Abraham’s faith. For Abraham is the Father of the faithful.
David A Snyder aptly states: “We will follow the life of this Abram whom God will later name Abraham. We will discover that he may have been as great a secular figure as he was a Biblical one.” He continues in his book.
Abraham of Ur – A Critical Analysis of the Life and Times of the Patriarch, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘At first I was not sure that Abraham even existed. After I investigated the secular history of the day and considered the Ugaritic literature… and the Tell el-Amarna tablets… I came to realize that the geopolitical climate at the time Abraham entered Canaan was perfectly conducive to support the stories of his travels into the Promised Land… Abraham’s family was well-educated, literate and wealthy. And if we are to believe Josephus, Abraham was possibly an astronomer and military leader. This is contradictory to the image most people have of Abraham as a nomadic shepherd leading a flock of sheep; however, I believe that only a well-educated and worldly man such as Abraham would be able to achieve the goal that God gave to him – to establish the Hebrew nation[s].’
Gerard Gertoux, The Pharaoh of the Exodus Fairy tale or real history – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Very few Bible scholars believe now (2016) in the historicity of the book of Genesis, especially the narrative of Abraham and Sarah’s life, but what is really incomprehensible is that their conclusion is based only on the following prejudice: the lack of archaeological evidence implies an absence of historicity of these biblical narratives!’
Yes, a small matter of a lack of archaeological evidence hinders the likelihood of a biblical figure being genuine; but doesn’t stand in the way at all, of scientists espousing a belief in an untenable theory to explain mankind’s existence.
A greater evidence of Abraham’s existence… is the fact that he has become a father of many nations as we shall learn.
‘Today, according to mainstream Egyptologists as well as prominent archaeologists there would never have been: 1) any biblical writing in the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 31:24), 2) neither domesticated camels in the time of Abraham (Genesis 12:6), 3) nor Philistines (Genesis 21:34), 4) nor Hittites (Genesis 23:10), 5) nor Arameans (Deuteronomy 26:5), 6) nor Chaldeans (Genesis 11:28), etc. All these criticisms are paradoxical because despite the absence of reliable chronologies these academics and Bible experts say in a dogmatic manner having found numerous anachronisms in the narrative of Abraham and Sarah.’
Egyptologists and Archaeologists should be aware that the Bible has been edited and or, written after events have transpired. Thus, terms for various peoples who are more recent than Abraham are still valid in referring to a people of an earlier time during his life. The Philistines already existed as they descend from Mizra-im. Whether they were known as Philistines, Caphtorim, Minoans, Mycaeneans even or yet an entirely different name does not invalidate their existence or their kings’s interaction with Sarah and Abraham. Same with the Hittites descended from Heth of Canaan – not the later Hittites – and the Aramaeans or Syrians. Granted, the Chaldeans are descended principally from Abraham’s brother, Nahor though they existed as proto-Chaldeans via the descendants of Peleg and the early Babylonians [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].
‘Regarding biblical chronology, the Vatican’s biblical scholars made Abraham enter into Canaan in 2138 BCE (Vigouroux: 1899, 737), while nowadays they say 1850 BCE (De Vaux: 1986, 1805). How can one explain such discrepancies in dates [of 288 years]?’
It is a step in the right direction, as the latter dating is fifty-two years out from 1902 BCE of an unconventional chronology, compared with two hundred and thirty-six years for the former.
James 2:22-24
Common English Bible
22 See, his faith was at work along with his actions. In fact, his faith was made complete by his faithful actions. 23 So the scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed God, and God regarded him as righteous [like Lot, Daniel, Job, Noah and Abel]. What is more, Abraham was called God’s friend. 24 So you see that a person is shown to be righteous through faithful actions and not through faith alone.
The word friend in Greek is philos. It signifies a deep friendship, where each knows the other and can fully count on them. A close friend of long-standing and one that has been through everything of consequence with you.
A quite profound reflection of the Creator’s relationship with Abraham. This was no ordinary friendship – it had transcended to a close, special bond between Abraham and the Eternal.
Isaiah 41:8
Darby Translation
But thou, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend…
There are two other people in scripture who are referred to in a context, of being a friend of God; though not specifically as: ‘God’s friend’ or ‘my friend’ as described of Abraham. The resurrected Lazarus is described by Christ as ‘our friend’ [John 11:11] and Moses spoke face to face with God ‘as one speaks unto his friend’ [Exodus 33:11]. There is a further link between Abraham and Moses – not just the family connection – that we will explore when we study Moses.
2 Chronicles 20:5-7
New English Translation
5 Jehoshaphat [the fourth king of Judah] stood before the assembly of Judah and Jerusalem at the Lord’s temple, in front of the new courtyard. 6 He prayed: “O Lord God of our ancestors, you are the God who lives in heaven and rules over all the kingdoms of the nations. You possess strength and power; no one can stand against you. 7 Our God, you drove out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel and gave it as a permanent possession to the descendants of your friend Abraham.
The Hebrew word for friend in both verses is ahab. This word implies a deep love and respect for another. There is encouragement in knowing that we too, can be counted as the Son of Man’s friend.
John 15:14-15
New English Translation
14 You are my friends if you do what I command you. 15 I no longer call you slaves, because the slave does not understand what his master is doing. But I have called you friends, because I have revealed to you everything I heard from my Father.
‘Friend of God’ is the meaning of the name Theophilus. In 2 Samuel chapter twelve, David comforts Bathsheba after the death of their first baby. The second child is named Solomon. Verses 24-25 ESV: ‘And the Lord loved him and sent a message by Nathan the prophet. So he called his name Jedidiah [H3041 – beloved of the Lord], because of the Lord.’ Solomon was blessed with a special name, which also means friend of God.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Abram [means:] Exalted Father, Their Shield, Their Protection From (1) (‘ab), father, and (2) (rum), to be elevated. From (1) the verb (abar), to be strong or to protect, and (2) the 3rd person plural pronominal suffix (am), their.
There’s only one man named Abram in the Bible, namely the famous son of Terah who left Ur of the Chaldeans and headed for a land which YHWH would show him (Genesis 11:31). Since Abram is the first complex character in the Bible, a lot of the Bible’s primeurs are his. However, Abram is typically not the first to call upon the name of YHWH, because that went on as far back as the generation of Enosh, the grandson of Adam and Eve (4:26). He was also not the first to worship the one and only God, because when he arrived in Canaan he found Melchizedek well engaged as priest of El Elyon (14:18). He was also not the first to be called righteous (15:6), because that was Noah (6:9) and in retrospect Abel (Matthew 23:25).
Abram is nevertheless the first on record to be approached by… the Lord (15:1), the first to be called Hebrew (14:13) and the first to engage in international commerce.He’s the first to itinerate and circulate… the first to be rich (in cattle and precious metals; Genesis 13:2), the first to compete and to establish a peaceful economic pact (with Lot; 13:6-12), the first to view the entire world as his oyster (13:14-15) and to whom the sky was the limit (15:5).
Abram was the first to pay property tax, namely 10 percent (to Melchizedek; 14:20), and this was adopted into Israel’s national policy(Genesis 28:22, Numbers 18:26, Hebrews 7:5). The first time the Bible speaks of a commercial purchase is in Genesis 17, where circumcision is instituted as sign of the great covenant… and the Lord renames Abram as Abraham and orders the inclusion into the covenant of all the men Abram had acquired via purchase (miqna, which is related to the name Cain). The first monetary transaction occurs as restitution for Sarah’s disgrace by Abimelech (Genesis 20:16; because Abram was also the first to [loan] his wife… Genesis 20 and 12:11-20).
The first actual purchase with money described in the Bible is Abraham’s flamboyantly negotiated acquisition of the cave of Machpelah from Ephron, son of Zohar of Heth. Abraham wanted that cave and wanted to pay for it in order to properly bury Sarah (Genesis 23). He paid 400 shekels for it (23:16), according to the “passing of trade”…
A somewhat more hairy unit of wealth was the camel, but where the English word “camel” is solely reserved for that humped beast of burden, the Hebrew cognate (gamal), meaning camel, comes from the identical verb (gamal), which means to trade or invest. In other words: the Hebrew noun (gamal) does not denote a specific biological genus, it describes a particular economic function, namely that of investing and long-distance trading… The camel too gets its Biblical introduction in the Abram cycle, namely when the Egyptian Pharaoh reimburses Abram for the Sarai incident with sheep, cattle, donkeys, servants and camels (12:16).
The next time Abraham’s proverbial camels are mentioned is when Abraham sends his chief of staff (probably Eliezer) north to his family’s land with “ten” camels and the whole of Abraham’s wealth in his hand (24:10), in order to obtain a wife for Isaac…
There are two ways to go about the name Abram. Traditionally this name is interpreted to consist of two elements, the first of which would be (‘ab), meaning father: The noun (‘ab) means father, but describes primarily a social relationship rather than a biological one. That social fatherhood was the defining quality of the community’s alpha male, the one around whom all economy revolved and from whom emanated all instructions by which the ‘sons’ (ben) operated. It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.
The second part of our name is traditionally considered to be part of the great (rum)-cluster of names: The verb (rum) means to be high or high up in either a physical, social or even attitudinal sense, and may also refer to the apex in a natural process: the being ripe and ready-for-harvest of fruits. Derived nouns, such as (rum) and related forms, describe height or pride. Noun (ramut) describes some high thing. The noun (‘armon) refers to a society’s apex: a citadel or palace. The noun (re’em) describes the wild ox, which was named possibly for the same reason why we moderns call a rising market a “bull” market.The similar verb (ra’am) means to rise.
The name Abram relates to Abraham the way Sarai relates to Sarah; the latter two names are basically variations of the same word… The core of both names comes from the root (‘br), meaning to be strong or to protect: The name Abraham is often reported to mean Father Of Many Nations but that’s rather obviously incorrect. In Genesis 17:5, the Lord promises Abram that he would be the father of many nations – in Hebrew: ‘ab hamon goyim – but that does not mean that Abram’s new name, namely Abraham, means Father Of Many Nations.
God changes Abram’s name to Abraham. Likewise, the Lord promises that Abraham’s… wife Sarai would “become nations” or rather: “become international” (heyata le’goyim) and changed her name to Sarah (17:16). As with our name Abraham, the phrase does not relate to the name. The name Abraham follows from the name Abram by inserting the letter (he) in front of the final (mem), and the name Sarah follows from Sarai by replacing the final (yod) with the same letter (he). This letter (he) is one of a few Hebrew letters that may represent both a consonant and a vowel… and it’s probably no coincidence that the name of the Lord, or YHWH consists of only those vowel-consonant symbols, and contains twice this potent letter (he).
The names Sarai and Sarah both stem from the root (sarar), which possibly means to rule or to be strong. The final (yod) of the original name Sarai suggests a possessive form: my strength or strength(s) of, whereas the new name Sarah reflects the general idea of ruling or being strong. The names Sarai and Sarah reflect the same core idea, but the form Sarai reflects locality and the form Sarah reflects universality.
The same transition between locality and universality is reflected in the names Abram and Abraham, which are both based on the root (‘abar), meaning to be strong (or to be able to protect)… Like Sarai, the name Abram seems to denote a nation’s private strength, whereas the name Abraham, like Sarah, reflects the strength that arises from synchronicity among states.
The core of the name Abraham comes from the exquisite root (‘br): The verb (‘br) means to be strong or firm, particularly in a defensive way (rather than offensive). The derived nouns (‘eber) and (‘ebra) refer to the pinion(s) that make up a bird’s wings, which in turn means that the ancients saw avian wings as means to protect rather than to fly with (the signature trait of angels, hence, is not an ability to fly but a tendency to protect). The verb (‘abar) describes activities done with pinions, which is to fly or to protect.
The name Abraham means Their Strength or Their Protection and reflects the security that arises from synchronicity among states. Another detail worthy of note is that the first and last letters of the name (Abraham) are often used as formatives that do not change the meaning of the core word. These two letters obviously aren’t inconsequential formative letters in our name, but if we remove them anyway, what remains is (bara), the assumed root of the noun (berit), meaning covenant. The Lord told Abraham that he would be the father of many nations (‘ab hamon goyim; Genesis 17:4-5) – not simply the father of many people…
The word (hamon), in turn, does not express simply a large number, but the rain-like noise that emerges from a unified but seething throng, and the throng, in this case, consists of autonomous nations. The Bible indicates that a multitude of goyim, or “nations” is the ultimate form of human society, which is remarkable because since time immemorial people have believed that they could somehow form a global empire that would unite all the nations, dissolve all borders and reign the entire world from one throne. But despite the efforts of many an emperor, it appears that humanity is designed to operate by means of nations…
It should be emphasized that despite the claims of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, neither Jesus nor Abraham has anything to do with any formal religion. Abraham is not a border-maker; he is a border-breaker… His patriarchy is one of consilience; in him are summed up the peacemakers of which Jesus said they would be called Sons Of God (Matthew 5:9).
The table of nations of Genesis 10 denotes the world’s various states of the first stage, and the members of the family of Abraham denote the states of the second stage. Most of these very early states have long gone (or went by other names than modern ones; very early states probably changed names much more often than states do today and were doubtlessly known to their contemporaries by multiple names)…’
The constant reader will have noted that we can actually know the early states and nations and who they are today, even though their names have continuously altered and evolved, their core, original identities have remained and have only to be deciphered. Abraham’s family, including his two brothers were a second wave of nations which arrived on the world stage late – some nine thousand years later than those originating from the Ark.
We have covered part of Abraham’s early life as well as his wife Sarah, whilst studying Nahor and Haran in the preceding two chapters. Further insight can be gleaned into Abram’s early life from the Book of Jubilees. Abram’s mother is named as Edna, though another source says Terah’s wife’s name was Amathlai. Refreshing our mind regarding Abraham in the Book of Jubilees; Jubilees 11:16-23 explains that Abram as a child “began to understand the errors of the earth that all went astray after graven images and after uncleanness… and he separated himself from his father, that he might not worship idols with him.”
‘And he began to pray to the Creator of all things that He might save him from the errors of the children of men, and that his portion should not fall into error after uncleanness and vileness. And the seed time came for the sowing of seed upon the land, and they all went forth together to protect their seed against the ravens, and Abram went forth with those that went, and the child was a lad of fourteen years. And a cloud of ravens came to devour the seed, and Abram ran to meet them before they settled on the ground, and cried to them before they settled on the ground to devour the seed… [saying], ‘Descend not: return to the place whence ye came,’ and they proceeded to turn back… his name became great in all the land of the Chaldees… they sowed their land, and that year they brought enough grain home and eat and were satisfied… Abram taught those who made implements for oxen, the artificers in wood, and they made a vessel above the ground, facing the frame of the plough, in order to put the seed thereon, and the seed fell down therefrom upon the share of the plough, and was hidden in the earth, and they no longer feared the ravens.’
Following this, Abram confronts his father in Jubilees 12:1-7, on the always heated topic of religion. Why are discussions on anything deeper than the weather subject to confrontation or aggression? As with any difference of opinion which turns into an argument, it only becomes hostile, because people uphold an idea that is only just an intangible thought in their own mind, as if it is something of great significance or immense value, as it is part of them; to be defended vigorously at all costs, spurred on by ones own ego. If a person sees all beliefs or thoughts as opinions, whether they be correct or false and that one can always build on them or if necessary tear them down and start again; then all arguments are pointless and merely based on an individuals own pride and not truly on a premise of seeking knowledge, understanding, wisdom or the truth.
‘… it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son’… he said, ‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship, And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, And has created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. For they are the work of (men’s) hands… on your shoulders do ye bear them… ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them… a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: And his father said unto him, I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them? … if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee’ … these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.’
Book of Jubilees 12:12-21
… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it… they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire… Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father, and they buried him in Ur of the Chaldees. And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of Lebanon and into the land of Canaan, and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran…
Abram sat up throughout the night on the new moon of the seventh month [1st of Tishri, Feast of Trumpets] to observe the stars from the evening to the morning, in order to see what would be the character of the year with regard to the rains, and he was alone as he sat and observed. And a word came into his heart and he said: All the signs of the stars, and the signs of the moon and of the sun are all in the hand of the Lord. Why do I search (them) out? If He desires, He causes it to rain, morning and evening; And if He desires, He withholds it, And all things are in his hand.’
And he prayed that night and said, ‘My God, God Most High, Thou alone art my God, And Thee and Thy dominion have I chosen. And Thou hast created all things, And all things that are the work of thy hands. Deliver me from the hands of evil spirits who have dominion over the thoughts of men’s hearts… let them not lead me astray from Thee, my God…establish Thou me and my seed for ever That we go not astray from henceforth and for evermore.’ And he said, ‘Shall I return unto Ur of the Chaldees who seek my face that I may return to them, am I to remain here in this place? The right path before Thee prosper it in the hands of Thy servant that he may fulfil (it) and that I may not walk in the deceitfulness of my heart, O my God.’
Jeremiah 17:9
Amplified Bible
“The heart is deceitful above all things And it is extremely sick; Who can understand it fully and know its secret motives?
As discussed previously, the likelihood of Terah fleeing Ur due to Nimrod’s wrath seems decidedly remote and even more so, accepting Nimrod was even still alive… alive, as in a corporeal human body. Haran dying in a furnace appears less likely than dying tragically in a house fire, set by Abraham or not. Josephus remarks that when Haran died, he was memorialized by the city where ‘… his monument is shown to this day.’ He also conjectured that Terah left Ur on account of the death of his son Haran and says: ‘Now hating Chaldea on account of his mourning for Haran, they all removed to Haran [in] Mesopotamia, where Terah died.’
Apart from these explanations it may simply be, that Terah also recognised the decline of the Ur III civilisation and prudently departed. A relative time of peace during King Shulgi’s reign could have been the time when Terah’s family left one city that had the Moon god Sin as its chief deity, for the only other city which coincidently worshipped the god, Sin… Haran. Whichever scenario, it appears Nahor lingered in Ur, possibly to tie up property and family affairs as they were a family of substance. Ironically, it would be many centuries later when descendants of Nahor would return as the ruling Chaldean dynasty. Whereas, Abraham’s descendants would never return.
Joshua 24:2
New Century Version
Then Joshua said to all the people, “Here’s what the Lord, the God of Israel, says to you: ‘A long time ago your ancestors lived on the other side of the Euphrates River. Terah, the father of Abrahamand Nahor, worshiped other gods.
Regarding the Moon god Sin, David A Snyder comments – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 1994, archaeologists found an ancient civilization at Gobekli Tepe in southwest Turkey, just 40 km north of ancient Haran.It consisted of several temples with large stone-carved monoliths in a circular pattern much like those found at Stonehenge in England… Archeologists were stunned to discover that the site was twelve thousand years old [circa 10,000 BCE – shortly after the flood]. The intricacy of the carvings on the monuments indicated a far more advanced civilization than historians thought existed at this early time in history. James Q. Jacobs, an anthropologist and part time astronomer, was investigating the Gobekli Tepe site on Google Earth. He knew of the moon god Sin’s temple at Haran and the Ziggurat at Ur and wondered if there was a relation to the temples at Gobekli Tepe. Google Earth revealed that the latitude at Haran equals Three-fourths atan and the Ziggurat at Ur Three-fifths atan (atan = arc tangent) and that the latitude number at the Ur Ziggurat is an accurate value for pi. The only thing I know for sure about Jacob’s statements is that both pi and atan are significant in higher mathematics. It is incredible that these mathematical calculations are from a society four thousand years old. He opines that Ur and Haran were therefore:
“Astronomical observatories and geodetically positioned where the math is easiest. Their local level planes and the rotation axis form triangles with low integer proportions.” Further, the temple at Haran is exactly 40 km from the monolith circles at Gobekli Tepe, which is exactly 1/1000th of the circumference of the earth. This meant that whoever located these three temples may have known the distance to the equator and poles of the earth from mathematical calculations alone, which he found amazing. Jacobs continues: “Gobekli Tepe features the oldest known room aligned north-south which is evidence of astronomy in practice”. The Ur and Haran moon temples evidence a relationship to astronomy and precise knowledge of geodesy – what we call exact sciences. This knowledge would require anextremely high level of math”.
Josephus comments on this subject… he explains that Abraham claimed that the movement of the sun, moon, and all the heavenly bodies are the result of the actions of the God who created them, not the other way around. He was chastised by the local authorities… If God had already spoken to Abraham while still in Ur, it is likely that Abraham would make such an argument against astrology using astronomy, and in doing so, he would have upset the local priesthood. This then became another reason for Terah to move from Ur. Josephus concludes this episode when he states: “… the Chaldeans and the other peoples of Mesopotamia raised a tumult against him, he thought fit to leave that country; and by the assistance of God, he came and lived in the land of Canaan.”’
In the 1930s, more than Twenty thousand plus ancient tablets were found in the Palace at Mari, south of Haran. The tablets were dated approximately 1800 BCE – Abraham lived between 1977 to 1802 BCE. The tablets greatly aided Assyriologists understanding of the geography of the region. Names included were linked to Abraham’s family such as Serug and Nahor. As Terah’s family were an aristocratic lineage from Ur, they would have been welcomed and known within the palace at Mari. Tablets refer to the Hebrews or Hapiru, from Terah’s ancestor Eber, his Great, great, great grandfather. Hebrews did remain in Haran and Padan-Aram for some time, as both Isaac and Jacob took wives from family living there, as did some of Jacob’s sons. If these records refer to Terah’s clan, then he was an important figure in his day, and we are provided an extra-Biblical record of Abraham’s family.
Book of Jubilees 12:28-31
‘… it came to pass… that [Abram] spoke to his father and informed him, that he would leave Haran to go into the land of Canaan to see it and return to him. And Terah his father said unto him; Go in peace: May the eternal God make thy path straight. And the Lord be with thee, and protect thee from all evil, And grant unto thee grace, mercy and favour before those who see thee, And may none of the children of men have power over thee to harm thee; Go in peace. And if thou seest a land pleasant to thy eyes to dwell in, then arise and take me to thee and take* Lot with thee [Abraham’s nephew], the son of Haran thy brotheras thine own son: the Lord be with thee. And Nahor thy brother [will live] with me till thou returnest in peace, and we go with thee all together.’
Abraham departed Ur when he was fifty in 1927 BCE. When he was seventy-five years of age in 1902 BCE, the Creator told him to leave Haran and depart for Canaan. From this time onwards, Abraham left city life and became a sojourning nomad, living in temporary dwellings in the countryside for the remaining one hundred years of his life.
Genesis 12:1-3
Amplified Bible
Now (in Haran) the Lord had said to Abram, “Go away from your country, And from your relatives And from your father’s house, To the land which I will show you; 2 … I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you (abundantly), And make your name great (exalted, distinguished); And you shall be a blessing (a source of great good to others); 3 And I will bless (do good for, benefit) those who bless you, And I will curse (that is, subject to My wrath and judgment) the one who curses (despises, dishonors, has contempt for) you. And in you all the families (nations) of the earth will be blessed.” 4 So Abram departed (in faithful obedience) as the Lord had directed him; and Lot (his nephew) left with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he left Haran [and Lot was sixty-eight]. 5 Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his nephew, and all their possessions which they had acquired, and the people (servants) which they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan.
Book of Jubilees 12:22-27
… and behold the word of the Lord was sent to him… saying: ‘Get thee up from thy country, and from thy kindred and from the house of thy father unto a land which I will show thee, and I shall make thee a great and numerous nation. And I will bless thee And I will make thy name great, And thou shalt be blessed in the earth, And in Thee shall all families of the earth be blessed, And I will bless them that bless thee, And curse them that curse thee. And I will be a God to thee and thy son [Isaac], and to thy son’s son [Jacob], and to all thy seed: fear not, from henceforth and unto all generations of the earth I am thy God.’
Much is said to Abram in a short passage. Notice the Creator said He would show Canaan to Abram. Abram was constantly on the move throughout Canaan, as if on a guided tour of the land that would one day fall to his descendants, but not to him directly or in its entirety.
Genesis 13:17
English Standard Version
Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land [of Canaan], for I will give it to you.”
Abram is told he will father a great nation – yet Sarai was barren and he had no son or heir. Even though all the nations on the earth had been in existence for many thousands of years since the flood, new nations would come from his loins. This also happened for his brother Nahor, the modern peoples of Northern and Central Italy; and Haran, including the peoples of Switzerland, France and Quebec in Canada. The ‘great good to others’, encompasses the fulfilment of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 and the promised Messiah, Immanuel – Isaiah 7:14.
Mary, pregnant with the Saviour, ‘in the fullness of time’ [Galatians 4:4] would undoubtedly recall the divine promise in Luke 1:54-55, CEB: “He has come to the aid of his servant Israel or Jacob, remembering his mercy, just as he promised to our ancestors, to Abraham and to Abraham’s descendants forever.” The profound association between Abraham’s promises for materially blessed posterity and the inextricably entwined link with the spiritual blessing of the Messiah, who would share the same ancestral heritage, is summarised by J H Allen.
Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Throughout the world it is most generally known, and throughout Christendom it is universally known, that “the seed to whom the promise was made,” did come; but it is not universally known, nor acknowledged throughout Christendom, that the many peoples are included in that same covenant with this one seed, without whom the entire structure of Christianity must fall, and that every argument for the Christ, from the covenant standpoint, must stand the crucial test of a numerous posterity from the loins of Abraham, or go down.
True, the covenant with the people failed… the people sinned, and violated their obligations… the law was added, because of their transgressions, to bridge over, “till the (one) seed should come to whom the promise was made… in favor of the Messianic covenant against all this is, that “the covenant which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law… cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” How could it? We… believe that it could not. All Christendom believes that it could not. And if it could not, neither can the promise concerning amultiplicity of children for Abraham be annulled.’
Abram did not obey in all though, as the command to leave his kindred behind was not adhered to when he allowed Lot to accompany him. How much did Terah* influence Abraham. We have discussed the close relationship between Abraham and Lot, due to their similar age, the death of Lot’s father Haran, and the fact Abraham was childless. But by taking Lot with him, it led to repercussions that caused Abraham much trouble.
David A Snyder:
‘[The Abrahamic Covenant]… was given to Abraham in three separate revelations in exchange for Abraham’s righteousness (faith) and his acceptance of the revealing God as the God of the Hebrews… The covenants in Chapter 12 and 15 seem to have been written by the “J” (Yahweh) and “E” (Elohist) sources respectively. The last covenant in Chapter 17 seems to be from the “P” (Priestly) source.’
This highlights the important matter with regard to first, the different sources of material and writer-editors of the Bible and second as discussed, the significance of a shadowy god in the scriptural background; who at the worst does not always seem to have the best interest of the person or people in question and at the least, interacts with humankind in an abrupt and dismissive manner.
We have learned that the Ancient of Days has not and does not interact with mankind directly and does so indirectly via His Son [Habakkuk 1:13; John 6:46, 14:6; 1 Timothy 2:5]. We have also learnt that there is another personage who is not His son, an Angel of the Lord – very possibly an entity named Azriel, Michael, Gabriel or unknown – who specifically dealt with Jacob and the Israelites.
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, page 85 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… there are two traditions which make up the books of the Old Testament, the older or Elohist tradition which refers to the deity in generic terms, and the Priestly tradition where the deity is called Yahweh, often called Jehovah, somewhat erroneously, due to [a] mistranslation from the Greek Septuagint. The two main streams are intertwined throughout the Old Testament and sometimes exists side-by-side as, for example, in Genesis where there are two versions of the Creation.The god of the Old Testamenthas many human attributes – he is jealous, and vindictive; he does not seem omnipotent for at times he allows evil to exist and often gets into debate with the devil. There are many gaps in the narrative; it is disjointed: jumps abruptly from one subject to another without explanation or resolution.It leaves more questions unanswered than it resolves.
In the scriptures, the deity is called El (plural Elohim) some of the time and Yahweh the rest of the time. Biblical scholars agree that the usage of Yahweh [the true name of the Creator] appears to be an anachronism and may have been inserted at later times… Elohim is… a plural form… translated as “God”… [and] “Gods” or “divine beings”… because the text is often ambiguous. generally, the name for the deity is El… when the serpent is tempting Eve he says: “You are not going to die. No, the gods (Elohim) will know… you will be the same as the gods (Elohim)…’
Another example is during the Tower of Babel, we read of the ‘gods’ saying: ‘Let Us go down.’
‘According to Exodus 6:3 the appellation Yahweh did not come into use until the time of Moses, for Moses is told by the deity that “I am Yahweh [‘the One who is’ Exodus 3:14], I appeared to Abraham , Isaac and Jacob as El-Shaddai [God Almighty], but I did not make myself known to them by my name Yahweh.” The Hebrew root shaded… means “to overpower,” “to treat with violence,” or “to lay waste.”… [giving] the deity a fearful character, that of devastator or destroyer… the god of the Hebrews is known as an uncompromising and vindictive god… Shaddai may be connected linguistically with the Hittite shadu, or mountain… the God of Lightening and Thunder of the Hittites [the storm god, Adad, his symbol a Bull]. He was the Anatolian god of the twin mountain often depicted with thunderbolts in his hand.’
The god Enlil, lord of the Air*, is also associated with a storm god. Researchers have rightly or wrongly linked El with Enlil and Enki with Yahweh. Baal is typically seen as another name for Satan, though the truth is more subtle. For Baal serves Satan and is a tempter and deceiver described as the prince of the power of the air* in Ephesians 2:2.
David A Snyder – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Ba’al Hadad was the storm god, a god of rain, thunder, fertility, agriculture, and the lord of heaven. We see him called the “Rider of the Clouds” in the Ba’al Cycle. The Hurrians… had a storm god named Teshub; and the Hittites, from what is now Turkey, had a storm god named Tarhunt… A Christian who knows his Bible will recognize a God who “Rides the Clouds”. After all, Jesus ascended into heaven on a cloud and will return the same way. There are also the following scriptural passages that refer to a Yahweh who rides the heavens or the clouds:
There is no god like the God of the darling, who rides the heavens in his power, and rides the skies in his majesty. (Deuteronomy 34:26)
See the Lord is riding on swift cloud on his way to Egypt. (Isaiah 19:1)
Who rides the heights of the ancient heavens, whose voice is thunder, mighty thunder (Psalm 68:34)
You raised your palace upon the waters. You make the clouds your chariot. (Psalm 104:3)
Dr. Michael S. Heiser in his excellent article, What’s Ugaritic Got to do with anything analyzes the similarities of the Ugarit Ba’al Cycle with Daniel 7. Here is a paraphrase of his analysis:
1. El, the aged high god, is the obvious leader of the assembly in council, while in Daniel 7, The court was convened, and the books were opened and The Ancient One (Yahweh) is seated on the fiery, wheeled throne. Both the Ugaritic text and Daniel depict God as white haired and aged and both show an assembly in heaven.
2. El bestows “eternal kingship and dominion” on Ba’al, “Rider on the Clouds” after Ba’al defeats Yam, while in Daniel 7, the Ancient One bestows dominion, glory and kingship upon the son of Man, who is coming on the clouds of heaven after the beast was slain and its body was thrown into fire to be burnt up (which also occurred in the Ba’al Cycle).
3. El is the father of the pantheon at the same time that Ba’al is “king of the gods”, implying two thrones. Daniel 7 says: Thrones were set up and later the Ancient one took His throne (singular). The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations.He and God have dominion much like El and Ba’al in the Ugaritic text. This part of Daniel clearly refers to God the Son as the second person of the Blessed Trinity to Christians [incorrect], but is an anathema to Jews and Muslims who have a difficult time explaining the use of the plural thrones.’
This does not support the false doctrine of the Trinity, nor does it contradict the central edict of monotheism and a unitarian Godhead. The writer is correct regarding the plural thrones [Colossians 3:1], as the Son of Man is the image of the invisible God [Colossians 1:15] and has received His authority and rulership from the Ancient of Days, his Father. In fact, Christ will share his throne with those who overcome [Ephesians 2:6; Revelation 3:21].
A massive assumption has been made by the writer – because of his Trinitarian bias – to call the Son of God, God the Son, as this is notBiblical or supported by scripture. The plural thrones of the Ancient of Days and the separate person of the Son of Man is an anathema not just to the Jewish and Islamic faiths but also to orthodox Catholic and Protestant Christians. Some do not believe the Nicene Creed and they are applauded for not swallowing the Universal church’s agenda inspired, dogma. Those who do, would do well in searching the scriptures, as the commended Bereans did [Acts 17:10-11] as well as taking to heart what Christ’s brother the apostle, says in Jude 1:3. It is incomprehensible that any faith believing, Christ affirming Christian, would claim to worship a Father and Son, that they do not even know. They run the risk of being ensnared in the words of the Messiah.
Matthew 25:12
Amplified Bible
But He [Christ] replied, ‘I assure you and most solemnly say to you, I do not know you [we have no relationship].’
David A Snyder continues:
‘Some will have difficulty accepting that Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, had any relationship to the pagan gods El or Ba’al. There are dozens of books by highly qualified Biblical scholars arguing this point; and by no means, do any of their opinions agree. Some say Yahweh and El are the same God, and [others] say they are not. Some say that Yahweh, like El, had a consort (the Asherah); and others vehemently deny this claim. There is much discussion of the perspective of the authors of the four sources having a lot to do with these divergent theories. In some, El is the God of the Hebrews in early Genesis while Yahweh is the God of the Hebrews by other sources.’
From what we have studied thus far, El the singular of Elohim, is the same being as Yahweh as stated in Exodus 3:5-6, 14; 6:3. El [H410 – ‘el: God, mighty, strong, powerful, great] is an adjective or descriptive word for the Creator, describing Him as the God as opposed to one of the gods or Elohim. Asherah was the consort or wife of the Ancient of days – the one and only Creator and life giver – who is otherwise known by his true and once secret, proper name, YHWH [H3068 – Yahweh: lord, the existing one, eternal]. Therefore, the Lord God is Yahweh El or the ‘Eternally powerful’ one.
There is a verse in the Psalms, which is repeated by the the Messiah in Matthew 22:44 which clearly shows the impossibility of the Trinity and that the Son of Man is a distinct entity from the one true Yahweh, or Eternal.
Psalm 110:1
English Standard Version
TheLord [H3068 – Yahweh] says to my Lord [H113 – Adonai]: “Sit at my right hand [on a throne], until I make your enemies your footstool.”
Notice the second Lord is different from the first Lord, who is Yahweh. The Hebrew word adonai means ‘to rule.’ It also infers a ‘master or king’ and runs parallel with Yahweh, revealing the special relationship the Son of Man has with the Ancient of Days. Though in no circumstance are they one entity, but rather two separate and distinct beings who are one in mind and purpose; yet also in no manner, is the Son of Man, God as the Eternal One is, but rather he is the Son of God. King David – ‘a man after God’s own heart’ – understood this relationship and the unique sovereignty of the Ancient of Days as with certainty, so did Abraham the friend of the Eternal.
Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… by the 14th century BC the god El had become a primary god controlling the actions of the other gods in the pantheon. The pantheon of Canaan, found in the Ugaritic texts, is called Elohim, which means the children of El or the children of god.
El is referred in Ugaritic literature as “Bull El”or the bull god, “creator of creatures and mankind”, and “creator eternal”which would indicate that by this time in history, the concept of a creating god, was beginning to enter Canaanite polytheism. There is a single tablet found at Ugarit titled “El’s Drinking Party” which displays he was quite promiscuous in his early days, which will become an issue when he is compared to Yahweh in many scholarly studies.
It is interesting to note that in the Ba’al Cycle, El is sometimes mentioned with the assembly in council which would seem to indicate a bi-cameral ruling authority within the pantheon as we see here: “Do not fall at El’s feet, do not prostrate yourself before the assembly in council; still standing speak your speech, repeat your message; and address the bull, my father El, repeat to the assembly in council.”
An Assembly of gods would be nothing new to Abraham since the epic stories of Sumer and Akkad frequently referred to gods conspiring together. One superior god within the pantheon established a new dynamic in polytheism, creating a four-tier hierarchy within the assembly. The first place was held by the supreme god and his consort such as Ea in Akkad and El in Canaan. The second place is held by the royal children, the third place is held by gods who serve the royal family, and the fourth place is held by minor deities who assist all the gods such as messenger-gods. This pantheon was anthropomorphic since it was arranged along the same lines as their society. There are signs that the Israelis, who lived among the Canaanites, also placed their God within an assembly of gods.
In Psalm 82:1 and 6-7 we see Elohim within the divine council when he tells the other gods they will all die: God (Elohim) rises in the divine council; gives judgment in the midst of the gods. I declare, ‘Gods [literally, mighty ones, similar to Nephilim] though you be,offspring of the most high [the Ancient of Days] all of you, yet like any mortal you shall die; like any prince you shall fall.’
Note that the gods are offspring of the most high, and are arranged… similar to the pantheon of El. The early reference to a hierarchy of gods in the Hebrew Scripture [makes] me believe that when Abraham entered Canaan (a thousand years prior to the authors of the Psalms and Deuteronomy), a hierarchy of gods was part of his understanding of deity.
While the epic stories of Canaan identified El as a supreme god, this deity was still not a transcendent, boundless God above human understanding as he was still created in man’s image [rather Adam was created in His image].
El and the other supreme gods of Mesopotamia were usually depicted as old, retired and very wise as we observed in Sumer when Enki assumed this role and Ea became the father of the gods in Akkad. When Abraham entered Canaan, El had assumed this role. Ba’al seems to become the primary god in later Ugaritic literature, pushing El to the side as a grandfather figure. The gods El and Ba’al were important deities in Canaannot only when Abraham entered in 1900 BC, but also when his descendants returned from Egypt five hundred years later.’
Though the author is promoting El as less than than who He is; nevertheless, El remains the Creator and Baal His nemesis, Samael the principal servant of the Devil.
Abraham in Greek Mythology, Abraham and the Minyan Athamas, John R Salverda – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Athamas of Greek Mythology, as the King of Orchomenus a city founded by Minyas, was a well known Minyan. Abraham and his family were said to have been from Ur of the Chaldees. These two statements fit together because the Minyans were the Armenians (Ur-Manneans indicating those from the mountains [ur] of Minni), and the Armenians of Urartu were famously known as the Chaldians of Urartu… there are fairly convincing connections between the Greek, Minyas, and the Armenians [refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. Historians know well these People and call them the Manneans, or the kingdom of Van.This group lived in the mountains, (alternately known as, the Gordyan or Cordyaean mountains by Berosus, and as, the Chaldean mountains by Xenophon,) [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]. … the Manneans, are known to have been largely composed of Hurriansit seems reasonable to assume that the Hurrians were so called after Ur, the homeland of Abraham(The pre-Canaan home of Abraham, the city of Haran, named for Abrahams brother, and the surrounding quod-city area, including the cities of Nahor, named for either Abrahams brother or his grandfather, Pethor the home of Balaam, and Carchemish were also settled, according to modern archaeologists, by the Hurrians).’
Genesis 13:2
Amplified Bible
Now Abram was extremely rich in livestock and in silver and in gold.
This is the first time we are told in the scriptures of the economic status of an individual. Abraham was not just well off or rich, he was very wealthy. The equivalent of a billionaire today. Abraham had influence and power. Abraham had at his command a large retinue of people who were either part of his armed forces, his animal husbandry for his flocks, or servants in his household.
We have learnt that he was a magnetic personality and a good speaker and that local people of Haran and its environs were drawn to him and sojourned with his family when they travelled to Egypt and then returned later to both Haran and Canaan. A wanderer’s life appeals to some people and a life with Abraham would have been an interesting adventure. The fact that Abraham had the wherewithal to meet with other kings and go to battle against them, lends credibility to the understanding that Abraham was royal and probably a king himself.
David A Snyder:
‘According to Josephus, Abraham stopped in Damascus on his way to Canaan and became a person of great importance there. Josephus quotes a contemporary historian, Nicolaus of Damascus: “Abram reigned at Damascus, being a foreigner, who came with an army out of the land [of] Babylon, called the land of the Chaldeans.
Now the name of Abram is even still famous in the country of Damascus: and there is shown a village named for him, The Habitat of Abram.”’
We discussed the Battle of Siddim from Lot’s perspective previously and we shall look at it again when we study Amalek, a grandson of Esau. Now, the aspects surrounding this event from Abraham’s experience [also refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings].
Nephilim Giants – Enemies of God in the Bible, Beginning and End, 2017:
‘What is amazing about this very brief passage in Genesis 14 is that Cherdolaomers’s 4-king coalition is able to vanquish the Nephilim in combat. They slaughtered the giants on the way to conquering the vassal states and specifically the king of Sodom. In this latter battle, Lot, the nephew of Abraham, was kidnapped. With a late-night raid, Abraham divided his forces and was able to rout Cherdolaomers’s armies. Not only did his small band defeat the 4 kings, they chased them far north to the area of Dan, passing through a fortified gate that is now named after Abraham (this gate still exists and was uncovered by archaeologists in 1966 – yet another stunning discovery that confirms the Bible’s accounts).’
Genesis 6 Giants – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Following their victory in the field, Chedorlaomer’s warriors plundered Sodom and Gomorrah and the other cities and took some of their principal inhabitants away captive. Among these were Lot and his family. To the king of Elam’s great misfortune, however, one who had managed to escape from Sodom came and reported this news to Abraham. Lot’s uncle at this time still lived in tents pitched near the great trees of Mamre the Amorite. Mamre was a brother of Eshcol and Aner. All three were Abraham’s allies. When Abraham heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the three hundred and eighteen “trained men born in his household,”and, being joined by the forces of Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner,he pursued the enemy as far as Dan.
When the right opportunity presented itself, Abraham and his men came upon Chedorlaomer’s camp in the dead of night, took the confused, frightened foe by surprise, put them to a rout, rescued Lot and his fellow captives, and recovered all Chedorlaomer’s plundered goods.’
Battle of Siddim, Andy, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The fact that this is one of the greatest battle areas to be mentioned in scripture is also notable. Indeed, the path of the invading armies foreshadows the destiny of the promised land (and of Abraham) as they practically circumvent almost the entire borders of modern Israel. Although the practical objective was to free the Cities of the Jordan plain from the Mesopotamian rule, God’s agenda was for Abraham to rescue Lot’s family. So the fact that the kings of the Jordan plain were victorious, this was so because Abraham was fighting on their side (even though he and his 318 men were not under their command). Abraham made a point that he was not under them when he refused to take plunder from the battle. This action is salient for two reasons, one worldly and one spiritual.
He refused the plunder so that: (a) He could keep his reputation of independenceand neutrality (as no one would say that one of the kings made him rich) and (b) he was giving this tithe to God via the priest of God most high Melchizedek King of Salem. The episode was the first instance where Scripture mentions tithing and the elements of communion; long before Jesus and even before the Law of Moses.
God had an unspoken covenant with Adam and Eve and a symbolic one with Noah. The covenant with Abraham was the first one actively initiated by both parties, as in a contract. Abraham had to walk between the halves of animals to make the covenant with God. A Hittite text from Anatolia, dated after the mid-2nd millennium BC, also records this ritual. The main differences between the Abrahamic covenant and that of other eastern cultures were: (a) In the other nations, the focus was on what the vassal state (here a parallel to Abraham) was promising their master. In Abraham’s covenant, the focus was on what God promised Him. (b) For the other cultures, the animals cut in half represented what would happen when failing to keep a covenant. For the Hebrews, with the passing of the torch between the animals,it meant God would rather die before He broke the covenant.’
Genesis 14:17-24
English Standard Version
17 After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley). 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine [Matthew 26:26-28]. (He was priest of God Most High.) 19 And he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; 20 and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!” And Abram gave him a tenth of everything.
21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the persons, but take the goods for yourself.” 22 But Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth, 23 that I would not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, lest you should say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’ 24 I will take nothing but what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me. Let Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre take their share.”
There are differing views regarding the mysterious Melchizedek. Some teach the name is not a personal name, but rather a title. The word is comprised of two parts: melek, meaning ‘king of’ and sadeq, meaning ‘to be just’ or ‘righteous.’ Melchizedek is also known as the Prince of Peace or Salem, an early name for Jerusalem. Others teach that Melchizedek can be none other than the Messiah. There are scriptures referring to Immanuel – the true name of the Son of Man – with similar epithets.
Isaiah 9:6
English Standard Version
For to us a child is born [Immanuel], to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Jeremiah 23:5-6
English Standard Version
5 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousnessin the land. 6 In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.’
Psalm 110:4
English Standard Version
The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, “You [the Son of Man] are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”
Hebrews 5:5-10
English Standard Version
5 So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him [the Eternal] who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; 6 as he says also in another place, “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.
8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source [the author and Alpha & Omega] of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated [called] by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.
As the Son of Man is inadvertently, though incorrectly equated with the Archangel Michael, so He is mistakenly equated with Melchizedek. The similar descriptions are because both are in the same Order, as Priests of the Most High. Theologians call it a Christophany if the pre-incarnate Christ appears in the Old Testament. The giving of bread and wine is a reason why some think it was the Word, yet this ceremony was a precursor to the Passover that was instituted for physical Israel and then reverted to bread and wine for spiritual Israel, as re-instituted by the Messiah at the last supper – which preceded the Passover the next day [refer Chronology of Christ].
Hebrews 7:1-9
Common English Bible
1 This Melchizedek, who was king of Salem and priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he returned from the defeat of the kings, and Melchizedek blessed him. 2 Abraham gave a tenth of everything to him. His name means first “king of righteousness,” and then “king of Salem,” that is, “king of peace.” 3 He is without father or mother or any family. He has no beginning or end of life, but he’s like God’s Son and remains a priest for all time.
4 See how great Melchizedek was! Abraham, the father of the people, gave him a tenth of everything he captured. 5 The descendants of Levi who receive the office of priest have a commandment under the Law to collect a tenth of everything from the people who are their brothers and sisters, though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 But Melchizedek, who isn’t related to them, received a tenth of everything from Abraham and blessed the one who had received the promises. 7 Without question, the less important person is blessed by the more important person. 8 In addition, in one case a tenth is received by people who die, and in the other case, the tenth is received by someone who continues to live, according to the record. 9 It could be said that Levi, who received a tenth, paid a tenth through Abraham.
13 The person we are talking about belongs to another tribe, and no one ever served at the altar from that tribe. 14 It’s clear that our Lord came from the tribe of Judah, but Moses never said anything about priests from that tribe. 15 And it’s even clearer if another priest [Christ] appears who is like Melchizedek. 16 He has become a priest by the power of a life that can’t be destroyed, rather than a legal requirement about physical descent [from Levi].
The author of Hebrews explains that Melchizedek has apparently just appeared post-flood, with no discernible genealogy and that he is like the Son of God, not that he is the Son of God.
The author then explains the irony of Abraham, who fathers by descent, Jacob’s son Levi who was the progenitor of Israel’s priesthood; is at the same time paying a tithe to a person who is not descended from Levi, or part of the Levitical priesthood, yet prefigures that priesthood. Rather, Melchizedek is a Priest of a different order. Similarly, the Word was from the tribe of Judah, not Levi, yet is another priest like Melchizedek, forever in the same priestly Order. The true identity of Melchizedek may have to remain a mystery much like the life of Melchizedek himself. There is an account in the Book of Enoch; if accurate, it is an explanation as to why his presence on the Earth was apparently from nowhere.
Noah had a younger brother, called Nir and Nir had a wife called Sopanim, who was sterile. Even so, Sopanim became pregnant in old age, claiming no one had impregnated her, much like Lamech’s wife who claimed no one but Noah’s father had been near her. Nir in his fury and jealousy due to the scandal, decided to banish Sopanim, and though he eventually relents, she suddenly dies at his feet. Nir and Noah prepared her burial garments – a black shroud, in a secret grave. Nir and Noah are more than shocked when they later see a fully formed child – a toddler of about three – sitting next to his dead mother. Noah was alarmed and Nir was afraid. The child spoke and blessed the Lord. They recognised his ‘glorious appearance’ as the ‘badge’ of the ‘priesthood on his chest.’ They thus named him Melchizidek and dressed him in priestly clothes.
The brothers hid the child, so that others would not kill him. Like Noah when he was born, Melchizedek had an ethereal appearance. Prior to the flood, Nir was told that his son would not perish. A messenger angel – purportedly Michael – came and took Melchizedek from the earth after forty days; possibly to the same plane and existence, as Enoch. Nir, losing both his child and wife in quick succession, died soon after from a ‘broken heart.’ Mysteriously, Melchizedek was prophesied to reappear in the twelfth generation after the flood – Abraham was the eleventh counting Noah – becoming King of Salem.
Melchizedek and his Uncle Noah, may have had the same similarity, in sharing very fair, white skin, red or blond hair and blue eyes. It was Methusalah who had chosen to skip his son Lamech and his eldest grandson Noah, to pass the priestly line of Seth to his other grandson Nir. Noah was a prophet, but not a priest. Thus it transpired that the priestly line was kept alive and continued from antediluvian to postdiluvian epochs via Melchizedek.
As an aside… not only is there a link with Abraham being an ancestor of Levi and thus the priesthood, as well as Judah – and the sceptre promise of kings – from whence the Son of Man descended; but Abraham himself, is descended from Noah and is also thus related to Melchizedek the possible nephew of Noah. Therefore, Abraham is serving one greater than he, yet of the same family; while Melchizedek is ministering to one of his own family’s descendants.
Zechariah 4:1-14
English Standard Version
And the angel… said to me, “What do you see?” I said, “I see, and behold, a lampstand all of gold, with a bowl on the top of it, and seven lamps on it, with seven lips on each of the lamps that are on the top of it. 3 And there are two olive trees by it, one on the right of the bowl and the other on its left.”… 6 Then he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts. 7 Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain. And he shall bring forward the top stone [the Son of Man] amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace to it!’”
9 “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plumb line in the hand of Zerubbabel.“These seven are the eyes of the Lord [Messenger angels], which range through the whole earth.” 11 Then I said to him, “What are these two olive trees on the right and the left of the lampstand?” 12 And… the two golden pipes from which the golden oil is poured out?” 13 He said to me, “Do you not know what these are?” I said, “No, my lord.” 14 Then he said, “These are the two anointed ones [the two witnesses] who stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”
It is reasonable and plausible that the two Witnesses at the end of the age and during the final three and one half years of tribulation and the time of Jacob’s Trouble, would be the two individuals who were translated and did not see the first death, righteous Enoch and the prophet, Elijah. Yet, in Mark 9:1-5, it is Elijah and Moses who are speaking with Christ in the transfiguration. Both Elijah and Moses were prophets – not priests.
The two witnesses prophesy and appear to fulfil the role of prophets. As they are specially anointed, could they be priests or both? [Exodus 29:6; Leviticus 8:12; Psalm 133:2]. Enoch is not mentioned in scripture as a priest, yet his interaction with the Nephilim hints at a priestly role, particularly as he is mentioned as the seventh from Adam, via the priestly line of Seth by the Apostle Jude – the brother of Christ. The pairing of Enoch with Melchizedek is worth considering. The fact that both Enoch and Melchizedek were alive to witness and interact with the Watchers and their Nephilim offspring in their respective epochs is especially significant; as the two witnesses go up against a Nephil in the guise of Nimrod, as the false Prophet and a dark Angel in the guise of Azazel, as the Beast [refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega].
Revelation 11:1-13
English Standard Version
Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple [the people] of God and the altar [Garden of Eden] and those who worship there [true believers], 2 but do not measure the court outside the temple[Eden]; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations [land of Nod], and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months [beginning with the abomination of desolation]. 3 And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days [3 1/2 years],clothed in sackcloth [symbol of mourning].” 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. 5 And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. 6 They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire.
Recall Moses and Aaron worked together when confronting the Pharaoh and his magicians Jannes [‘he vexed’] and Jambres [‘ebullient healer’ or ‘contentious, rebellious’] – Exodus 7:11; 2 Timothy 3:8. Moses was a prophet and his brother Aaron was a priest, a High Priest no less. In fact it was Aaron who threw down the staff to turn it into a snake [Exodus 7:10] and again struck the Nile River to turn it into blood [Exodus 7:20]. There is support for one witness then being a prophet and the other a priest, or for them to fulfil both roles. It must also be considered, that as they will be opposing supernatural beings that they may be angelic themselves and not human, as scholars unanimously assume – because they die and are then resurrected. The Bible reveals angels do not die, not that they cannot be killed.
7 And when they have finished their testimony [the word of the Lord], the beast [Apollyon] that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them, 8 and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom [link with Melchizedek]and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified [Jerusalem].
9 For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, 10 and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents [the month of December and Christmas? The tenth month of the sacred calendar], because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth. 11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them [resurrected], and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. 13 And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.
Genesis 15:1-19
Common English Bible
After these events, the Lord’s word came to Abram in a vision, “Don’t be afraid, Abram. I am your protector. Your reward will be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “Lord God, what can you possibly give me, since I still have no children?The head of my household is Eliezer, a man from Damascus [an Aramaean].” 3 He continued, “Since you haven’t given me any children, the head of my household will be my heir.”4 The Lord’s word came immediately to him, “This man will not be your heir. Your heir will definitely be your very own biological child.” 5 Then he brought Abram outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars if you think you can count them.” He continued, “This is how many children you will have.” 6 Abram trusted the Lord,and the Lord recognized Abram’s high moral character.
Abraham toys with the Lord in saying that He still hasn’t given him an heir and that he can give his inheritance to Eliezer. Is that a good idea Lord? Pushing the Lord God to promptly re-confirm His promise; which the Eternal emphatically does. The Lord seems content to play along with Abraham, as a friend would and does not rebuke him for his impertinence, as would be the likely outcome for most in testing the Lord’s response this way. Abraham continues the little dance, when the Lord states the land of Canaan is his inheritance.
7 He said to Abram, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land as your possession.” 8 But Abram said, “Lord God, how do I know that I will actually possess it?” 9 He said, “Bring me a three-year-old female calf, a three-year-old female goat, a three-year-old ram, a dove, and a young pigeon.” 10 He took all of these animals, split them in half, and laid the halves facing each other, but he didn’t split the birds. 11 When vultures swooped down on the carcasses, Abram waved them off. 12 After the sun set, Abram slept deeply. A terrifying and deep darkness settled over him.
13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Have no doubt that your descendants [seed] will live as immigrants [strangers] in a land that isn’t their own, where they will be oppressed slaves [in Egypt] for four hundred years. 14 But after I punish the nation they serve, they will leave it with great wealth. 15 As for you, you will join your ancestors in peaceand be buried after a good long life. 16 The fourth generation will return here since the Amorites’ [Nephilim and Elouid] wrong doing won’t have reached its peak until then.” 17 After the sun had set and darkness had deepened, a smoking vessel with a fiery flame passed between the split-open animals. 18 That day the Lord cut a covenant with Abram: “To your descendants I give this land, from Egypt’s river to the great Euphrates, 19 together with the Ken-ites [possibly descended, from the line of Cain], the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites… [Nephilim infiltrators, trying to thwart Abraham and his descendants from their inheritance].
The reference to four hundred years, includes living as immigrants and being oppressed as slaves [Acts 7:6-7] and can be computed a number of ways. For instance, from the Exodus in 1446 BCE, back to when Abraham plans to offer Isaac as a sacrifice in 1847 BCE is four hundred years. As the verses state the peak of the Amorites evil, we need to count with this in mind. We will look at the fourth generation part of the verses later.
The 400 years is linked to the 430 stated elsewhere in Exodus 12:40-41. If we add 430 years to Abraham’s year 100 when Isaac is born, the total is 530 years from Abraham’s birth to the Exodus, 1977 to 1446 BCE. Adding 45 years to the time Joshua divided the land of the Amorites [Joshua 14:7-10, Joshua is 20 years younger than Caleb], the number is 575 years from Abraham’s birth. Abraham did live a good long life as the Lord said, for one hundred and seventy-five years. Subtracting 175 from 575, gives 400 years from Abraham’s death in 1802 BCE, to the year the sins of the Amorite’s reached maturity in 1402 BCE, while the sons of Jacob were possessing the land between 1407 to 1400 BCE.
Genesis 16:1-16
English Standard Version
Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. She had a female Egyptian servant whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai.
3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan [1902 – 1892 BCE], Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram… 4 And he went into Hagar, and she conceived. And when [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress [Sarai]. 5 And Sarai said to Abram, “May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt. May the Lord judge between you and me!” 6 But Abram said to Sarai, “Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please.” Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her.
We shall continue with the story when we study Ishmael and his mother Hagar. Sarai recognised her age at seventy-five and thought, pregnancy isn’t happening, I need to take matters into my own hands. To be fair, it wasn’t the best idea and was showing impatience as well as possibly a lack of faith in the Lord’s promises. It didn’t go well and Sarai certainly regretted her decision, judging by her inclusion, as only one of two women mentioned in the chapter of faith in the Bible – the other, was Rahab the harlot.
Hebrews 11:11
English Standard Version
By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.
Hagar did not do herself or Ishmael any favours, looking down on Abraham’s wife, as we will learn. Possibly, Hagar was a gift from Pharaoh in Egypt when Abram and Sarai visited. It is thought that she may have even been the Pharoah’s daughter. The Bible renders Hagar as Egyptian, though this is more likely to be where she was from, rather than her ethnicity as a descendant of Mizra from Ham. Jospeh married a woman from Egypt, provided by the Pharaoh, though she was from a priestly family, much the same way Moses’s second wife was the daughter of Jethro the Priest of Midian. Midian being a son of Abraham. Also, Sarai may have suggested the idea with Abram, but she did not make a habit of riding roughshod over the man she called lord.
1 Peter 3:6
Common English Bible
For example, Sarah accepted Abraham’s authority when she called him master. You have become her children when you do good and don’t respond to threats with fear.
Genesis 17:1-26
English Standard Version
17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2 that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.”
3 Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4 “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. 5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. 6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful [including the tribe of Ephraim], and I will make you into nations [plural], and kings [including the tribe of Judah] shall come from you. 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. 8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.”
David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014:
‘Now there was to be a God of the Hebrews, a God that Abraham would hear from again when he was being prepared to be the father of a great nation. It is interesting to note that none of the three covenants demand that Abraham accept God as the creator – only that he will be the God of the Hebrews. As we shall see, because of Abraham’s pagan culture, his concept of God would be something he was familiar with – the practice of worshiping one deity among many (monolatry) rather than the monotheistic faith that we know today.’
9 And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins,and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised.
Just before the eighth day after a male babies birth, the amount of blood clotting material increases rapidly, until on the eighth day itself, it is 110% from the norm. This is due to the levels of vitamin K being at its highest. Vitamin K plays a key role in regulating the coagulation mechanism that controls bleeding
Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised [every male]. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant [until the new Covenant, Romans 2:29]. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, pages 127-128:
‘As part of the covenant between the deity and Abraham, and later reinforced by being repeated many more times to his descendants, he is told: You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the mark of the [old] covenant between me and you.
Just as the serpent achieves long life through sacrificing and [shedding its skin] leaving off part of himself, so may man also be saved by ritually sacrificing part of himself… a perpetual reminder… [of] his true origins…’
15 And God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.” 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?”… 19 God said, “No, but Sarah [presently 89 years old] your wife shall bear you a son [a miracle, an intervention] by the Creator, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him…
David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014:
‘Abram is the Akkadian Abu-ramu which is of west Semitic origin and means exalted father. Sarai, Abraham’s wife… whom God will later call Sarah, is an epithet of the consort of the moon god Sin of Haran. Milcah, Abraham’s sister-in-law, is derived from Malkatu, the consort of the sun god Shamash. The relation of the moon-god of Ur and Haran to Abraham and his family might be troubling to some Bible fundamentalists; however, it might also explain why God changed Abram’s name to Abraham and Sarai’s name to Sarah.’
23 Then Abraham took Ishmael his son and all those born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham’s house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old [1878 BCE] when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 That very day Abraham and his son Ishmael were circumcised.
David A Snyder, Abraham of Ur, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… one will notice that before these covenants are made, man is required to sever one or more animals in two parts. In ancient times this symbolizes what will happen to the party that breaks the covenant.In Hebrew, the verb to seal a covenant literally means “to cut”. Some scholars believe that the removal of the foreskin in circumcision is a symbol of the sealing of the covenant with God.’
Genesis 18:1-33
English Standard Version
And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. 2 He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men [angels] were standing in front of him.
When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth 3 and said, “O Lord [H136 – Adonay: lord, as in the Son of Man, Psalm 110:1], if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. 4 Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet [indicative of the foot washing at the last supper, John 13:1-13], and rest yourselves under the tree, 5 while I bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on – since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.”
6 And Abraham went quickly into the tent to Sarah and said, “Quick! Three seahs [measures] of fine flour! Knead it, and make cakes.” 7 And Abraham ran to the herd and took a calf, tender and good, and gave it to a young man, who prepared it quickly. 8 Then he took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before them. And he stood by them under the tree while they [the three angels] ate.
9 They said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “She is in the tent.” 10 The Lord said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in years.The way of women had ceased to be with Sarah. 12 So Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I am worn out, and my lord is old, shall I have pleasure?” 13 The Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh and say, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?’ 14 Is anything too hard for the Lord?At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” 15 But Sarah denied it, saying, “I did not laugh,” for she was afraid. He said, “No, but you did laugh.”
16 Then the men set out from there, and they looked down toward Sodom. And Abraham went with them to set them on their way. 17 The Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” 20 Then the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, 21 I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.”
22 So the men [two angels] turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord [the Son of Man]. 23 Then Abraham drew near and said, “Will you indeed sweep away the righteous [Lot] with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” 26 And the Lord said, “If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”
27 Abraham answered and said, “Behold, I have undertaken to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes. 28 Suppose five of the fifty righteous are lacking… 32 Then he said, “Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there.” He answered, “For the sake of ten I will not destroy it.” 33 And the Lord went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place.
The Lord was certainly patient with Abraham, especially as Abraham really drew out the conversation. As the word Adonay is used for Lord, we know it is the Son of Man, the Word and not the Angel of the Lord or someone else entirely. As it is the pre-incarnate Christ, it is odd it doesn’t use the name Melchizidek in the text if they are one and the same as many propose. The two angel Messengers may have been Michael and Gabriel, who left before the Lord and were the same angels who Lot welcomed and looked after and who then in turn, protected him and his family.
Genesis 21:1-7, 34
English Standard Version
1 The Lord visited Sarah as he had said [a year later], and the Lord did to Sarah as he had promised. 2 And Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age at the time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore him, Isaac. 4 And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him. 5 Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him. 6 And Sarah said, “God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh over me.” 7 And she said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.”34 And Abraham sojourned many days in the land of the Philistines.
The promised son and heir-proper to Abraham, Isaac, was finally born to Sarah and Abraham in 1877 BCE, one hundred years after Abraham’s birth. In Genesis chapter twenty, Abraham moves to the Negeb in the southwestern region of Canaan or the northeastern limits of Egypt depending on your interpretation. Abimelech ruled the area and it was located where the Philistines officially settled from Crete nearly one thousand years later. The view of Bible detractors is that this proves the Bible is fantasy, rather than understanding that the passages have been written and edited later, with the Philistine term added for clarity on the location. It is possible that the children of Caphtor from Casluh and Pathros, originally dwelt here before their migration to the Aegean Sea and that these were a residue of their people. Alternatively, early migrations of Minoans may have already begun. It would explain why the main body of them migrated from Minoan Crete to this exact same location [Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America].
As the location is near to the Delta region of Lower Egypt, could Abimelech be the same person as Pharaoh Narmer, also known as Menes, who united Egypt as the first Pharaoh of the 1st Dynasty and who had met with Abraham and Sarah in Genesis chapter twelve. A case for this is made by Damien F Mackey.
From Genesis to Hernán CortésVolume Four: Era of Abraham – emphasis & bold mine:
‘But who was the ruler of Egypt at the time, anachronistically called “Pharaoh” (which was a much later, New Kingdom, designation for Egyptian rulers)? The era of Abram also closely approximated to – as determined by Dr. John Osgood – the time of a great and mysterious potentate named Narmer. Now, whilst some consider this Narmer to have been the father of Egypt’s first pharaoh, Menes, my preference is for Narmer as the invasive Akkadian king, Naram-Sin… What makes most intriguing a possible collision of Menes of Egypt with a Shinarian potentate is the emphatic view of (then) Dr. W. F. Albright that Naram-Sin had conquered Egypt, and that the “Manium” whom Naram-Sin boasts he had vanquished was in fact Menes himself (“Menes and Naram-Sin”, JEA, Volume 6, No. 2, April 1920, pp. 89-98).
Tradition does seem to favour Abram as a contemporary of the first dynastic ruler of Egypt, Menes. Certainly, Emmet Sweeney has provided a strong argument for a close convergence in time of Abram and Menes: I am also inclined to accept the view that the classical name “Menes” arose from the nomen, Min, of pharaoh Hor-Aha (“Horus the Fighter”). Most importantly, according to Manetho, Hor (“Menes”) ruled for more than 60 years: Sixty years was the approximate span of time from Abram’s famine to the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah.Why is this length of time significant? It is because… [Abimelech is the] “Pharaoh”, with the addition… of this Abimelech figuring again later in the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah.
Critics may not be correct in claiming that the lack of an Egyptian name for the ruler in the case of the Abram and Joseph narratives of Genesis (cf. 12:15 and 39:1) is a further testimony, as they think, to these texts being unhistorical. Since these texts refer to the ruler of Egypt only as “Pharaoh”, it is argued that we ought not to take them as being serious histories. From the now well-known theory of toledot (a Hebrew feminine plural), we might be surprised to learn that so great a Patriarch as Abram (later Abraham), did not sign off the record of his own history (as did e.g. Adam, Noah, and Jacob). No, Abram’s story was recorded instead by his two chief sons, Ishmael and Isaac. “These are the generations of Ishmael …” (Genesis 25:12). “These are the generations of Isaac …” (Genesis 25:19).
So, there were two hands at work in this particular narrative, and this fact explains the otherwise strange repetition of several famous incidents recorded in the narrative. And it is in the second telling of the incident of the abduction of Abram’s wife, Sarai (later Sarah), that we get the name of the ruler who, in the first telling of it is called simply “Pharaoh”. He is “Abimelech” (20:2).
Admittedly, there are such seeming differences between the two accounts, as regards names, geography and chronology, as perhaps to discourage one from considering them to be referring to the very same incident; and that despite such obvious similarities as:
– the Patriarch claiming that his beautiful wife was his “sister”;
– the ruler of the land taking her for his own;
– he then discovering that she was already married (underlined by plagues);
– and asking the Patriarch why he had deceived him by saying that the woman was his sister;
– the return of the woman to her husband, whose possessions are now augmented.
The seeming contradictions between the two accounts are that, whereas the first narrated incident occurs in Egypt, and the covetous ruler is a “Pharaoh”, the second seems to be located in southern Palestine, with the ruler being “King Abimelech of Gerar”, and who (according to a somewhat similar incident again after Isaac had married) was “King Abimelech of the Philistines” (26:1).
Again, in the first narrated account, the Patriarch and his wife have their old names, Abram and Sarai, whereas in the second account they are referred to as Abraham and Sarah, presumably indicating a later time. In the first narrated account, the“Pharaoh” is “afflicted with great plagues because of Sarai”, whereas, in the second, “God healed Abimelech, and also healed his wife and female slaves so that they bore children” (20:17). The differences can be explained fairly easily…
Ishmael understandably wrote his father’s history from an Egyptian perspective, because his mother, Hagar, was “an Egyptian slave-girl” in Abram’s household, and she later “got a wife for [Ishmael] from the land of Egypt” (cf. 16:1 and 21:21). Ishmael names his father “Abram” because that is how he was known to Ishmael. Moreover, the incident with “Pharaoh” had occurred while the Patriarch was still called Abram. Isaac was not even born until some 25 years after this incident. His parents were re-named as Abraham and Sarah just prior to his birth. So, naturally, Isaac refers to them as such in the abduction incident, even though they were then Abram and Sarai.
Again, there is no contradiction geographically between Egypt and Gerar because we are distinctly told in Ishmael’s account that it was just before the family went to Egypt (12:11) that Abram had told his wife that she was to be known as his sister. Gerar is on the way to Egypt, and in a later Volume we shall encounter an Egyptian king who also had control over Gerar (or southern Geshur). Finally, whether the one whom Isaac calls “Abimelech” was still, in Isaac’s day, “Pharaoh” of Egypt – as he had been in former times – he most definitely was, at least, ruler over the Philistines at Gerar. Perhaps he ruled both lands, Egypt and Philistia.
In Hebrew [Abimelech] means “Father is King”, or “Father of the King”. Since Abimelech is not an Egyptian name (though the Egyptian name, Raneb, is of similar meaning), and since the other designation that we have for him is simply “Pharaoh”, that data, in itself, will not take us to the next step of being able to identify this ruler in the Egyptian historical (or dynastic) records. But that our Abimelech may have – according to the progression of Ishmael’s and Isaac’s toledot histories – ruled Egypt and then gone on to rule Philistia, could well enable us to locate this ruler archaeologically.
Dr. John Osgood has already done much of the ‘spade work’ for us here, firstly bynailing the archaeology of En-geddi at the time of Abram (in the context of Genesis 14) to the Late Chalcolithic period, corresponding to Ghassul IV in Palestine’s southern Jordan Valley; Stratum V at Arad; and the Gerzean period in Egypt (“The Times of Abraham”, Ex Nihilo TJ, Volume 2, 1986, pp. 77-87); and secondly by showing that, immediately following this period,there was a migration out of Egypt into Philistia, bringing an entirely new culture (= Early Bronze I, Stratum IV at Arad).
P. 86:“In all likelihood Egypt used northern Sinai as a springboard for forcing her way into Canaan with the result that all of southern Canaan became an Egyptian domain”. Then there is the all-important structural (chiasmus) guide (thanks to reader, Ken Griffith), admittedly, not well-formatted, but note how B. 1 and B’. 1’ merge beautifully with “Pharaoh” in B. 1 reflecting “Abimelech in B’. 1’: My tentative estimation would be that Abram came to Egypt at the approximate time of Narmer, the Akkadian Naram-Sin {the name Narmer (N-R-M) equates rather well phonetically with Naram- (N-R-M)}, and right near the beginning of the long reign of Hor-Aha(Menes)… It can also be thought in favour of Middle Bronze I [MBI]’s being the suitable period for Abraham that king Hammurabi of Babylon, a possible candidate for Abraham’s contemporary, Amraphel king of Shinar [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings] (Genesis 14:1), has been dated… within range of the Middle Bronze I Age (2000-1750 BC).’
In the preceding quote, John Osgood confirms an extension of Egypt into the southern Canaan region. The chances of these people descending from Caphtor, rather than any other son of Mizra is more than probable. There is a measure of confidence in Mackey’s conclusions, as he has highlighted Hammurabi’s link with Amraphel, which we have already ascertained when studying Chedorlaomer in Genesis Fourteen and the Battle of Siddim. According to an unconventional chronology, Hammurabi was born in 1912 BCE and ruled as King of Babylon from 1894 to 1852 BCE, well within the Middle Bronze Age period.
If Pharaoh Narmer is Naram-Sin – notice the Sin suffix as pertaining to the Moon god – then Abraham may have already known Naram-Sin while living in Shinar, or if not, then probably his family. It would also explain how Egypt was united into one kingdom and the beginning of the First Dynasty. Where I would not concur, is on which Pharaoh met with Sarah and Abraham. An unconventional chronology pointing to Hor-Aha’s son and third ruler of the 1st Dynasty, Pharaoh Djer.
Genesis 22:1-19
English Standard Version
After these things God [H430 – ‘elohiym: ‘one’ of the gods] tested [H5254 – nacah: did tempt or try] Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 2 He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah [Mount of Olives in Jerusalem], and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” 3 So Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, and took two of his young men with him, and his son Isaac. And he cut the wood for the burnt offering and arose and went to the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar. 5 Then Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy [H5288 – na’ar: young male]will go over there and worship and come again to you.”
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, page 88:
‘[An] example of the conflict between [El and Yahweh] was the sacrifice of Isaac… a close reading of this verse shows that it was El who requested the sacrifice from Abraham and that he was stopped at the last moment by the intervention of the angel of Yahweh.’
Boulay raises the seeming complex point regarding Yahweh and El, which we have discussed earlier. The real issue is the difference between Yahweh and the Elohim as investigated in Genesis chapters one and two [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The evidence for different Elohim or sons of God, compared with the one God, El is repeated in verse one of Genesis chapter twenty-two. The Creator chooses to not look upon sin, rather the Word was appointed to put away sin and intercede on our behalf, making a relationship with the Father possible.
Habakkuk 1:12-13
New King James Version
Are You not from everlasting, O Lord my God, my Holy One… You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, And cannot look on wickedness…
Hebrews 9:24-28
English Standard Version
24 For Christ has entered… into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf… he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many…
We also know that the Creator tests or tries mankind, though indirectly, as it is actually either the Serpent or Samael who tempts mankind with the aim of making us sin.
Psalm 11:5
New King James Version
The Lord tests the righteous…
Job 2:6
English Standard Version
And the Lord said to Satan, “Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life.”
The Creator allows this to test our hearts to see if we will choose righteousness. The Creator does not desire for us to slip and fall or sin and hence He is not the tempter, the Devil and its minions bear that role.
Matthew 4:1, 7
English Standard Version
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil… Jesus said… “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test [tempt God].’”
Thus, verse one could easily read: ‘After these things the god of this world, [2 Corinthians 4:4] did tempt Abraham…’ Further evidence that this was not the Creator speaking is that the Eternal would not ask any of his servants to sacrifice a human being. The sacrificial system of God until His Son put an end to it, only required animals. The Israelites prior to their captivity had fallen to hideously sacrificing their own children like the nations surrounding them.
Psalm 106:34-39
English Standard Version
34 They did not destroy the peoples, as the Lord commanded them, 35 but they mixed with the nations and learned to do as they did. 36 They served their idols, which became a snare to them. 37 They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; 38 they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood. 39 Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the whore in their deeds.
Isaac is described as a boy or a lad and this has been misleading, as it has inferred that he was sprung upon by Abraham and may not have been a willing participant once he understood that he was in fact the sacrificial lamb – a type of the promised Messiah [Genesis 22:4]. The Hebrew word na’ar can be translated as ‘child, youth, young’ or even ‘babe.’ In this context with Isaac being male it could be boy or lad. The translators have assumed Issac must have been a child or teenager at most.
The King James version translates this word different ways, though its most common translation is actually young man – seventy six times – and then servant fifty-four times, with child forty-four times and so forth. Young man is correct, as Isaac was thirty years old at the time in 1847 BCE; the same age the Messiah began his ministry. As Isaac lived to one hundred and eighty years of age, he was still a young man at thirty and could not be identified as either a child or a middle aged man.
6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and laid it on Isaac his son. And he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So they went both of them together. 7 And Isaac said to his father Abraham, “My father!” And he said, “Here I am, my son.” He said, “Behold, the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” 8 Abraham said, “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” So they went both of them together. 9 When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood.
10 Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11But the angel [Messenger – Mal’ak] of the Lord [Yahweh] called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 12 He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”
Notice, it is not El-Shaddai or Yahweh who calls out to Abraham. Not even the shadowy figure of the original tempting Elohim, but rather the Angel of the Lord, or the Messenger of Yahweh who intercedes.
15 And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16 and said,“By myself I [the Lord] have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies,[NCV: ‘and they will capture the cities of their enemies’] 18and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.”19 So Abraham returned to his young men, and they arose and went together to Beersheba. And Abraham lived at Beersheba.
The Angel of the Lord is not speaking of himself or swearing by himself but declaring the testimony of the Lord – of Yahweh Himself. Notice in the promised blessing, that the addition of possessing the gates of their enemies is included. This promise is stated more specifically later and is a key piece of information in identifying certain peoples descending from Abraham. A crucial element which has been missed, even by those within the identity movement who have thought they understood it correctly.
Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 158-159:
‘… when one compares the history of Isaac with that of Jesus, the similarities are very profound.
The birth of Isaac was miraculous (Genesis 18), so was the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:18)
In Abraham’s attempt to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac even assisted Abraham in carrying the wood to the altar (Genesis 22:6). In like manner Jesus also helped to carry his own crosspiece to his crucifixion.
Isaac did not dispute Abraham’s will in the matter of his own sacrifice, nor did Jesus with God the Father.
Jesus and Isaac were both “offered” on the Mount of Olives
Isaac was willing to lay down his life of his own free will, just as Jesus did.
Abraham also was willing to sacrifice his only son who was his legal son (or legitimate son for inheritance) while God the Father did in fact give up his only begotten Son. As God provided a ram caught in a thicket as a substitute sacrifice for Isaac so that Isaac could live… the Father provided Jesus as a substitute sacrifice for Israel and the world so that they may live forever.
Abraham came down from the mountain sacrifice… with Isaac still alive… tantamount to Isaac having been resurrected from the dead (Hebrews 11:17-19)… Jesus was also resurrected… at the same site and on the same mountain… Isaac had a three day journey to the spot to be “offered”… and resurrected… while… the resurrection of Jesus also took place after a period of three days.’
Abraham is the father of the faithful and he is a type of God the Father, as Isaac prefigures the coming of Christ. In turn, physically and spiritually they are the head of the family, of those who are loved by the Creator, who love the Creator and are obedient to Him.
Hebrews 11:8-18
Common English Bible
8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was going to receive as an inheritance. He went out without knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he lived in the land he had been promised as a stranger. He lived in tents along with Isaac and Jacob, who were coheirs of the same promise. 10 He was looking forward to a city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God… these people died in faith without receiving the promises, but they saw the promises from a distance and welcomed them.They confessed that they were strangers and immigrants on earth. 14 People who say this kind of thing make it clear that they are looking for a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking about the country that they had left, they would have had the opportunity to return to it. 16 But at this point in time, they are longing for a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God isn’t ashamed to be called their God – he has prepared a city for them [Revelation 21:1-3].
17 By faith Abraham offered Isaac when he was tested. The one who received the promises was offering his only son. 18He had been told concerning him, Your legitimate descendants will come from Isaac.
It was a monumental request to sacrifice his one and only son born from his wife Sarah, who had been specified as the heir for all the promises and blessings to derive. With Sarah well past child bearing age – it would require another miracle conception – yet Abraham’s faith, meant he knew the Creator could replace Isaac if that was His intention. For instance, Seth replaced Abel who was also a type of the future Saviour. Further, Abraham would have also believed in the Eternal’s power to resurrect Isaac, if that had been His intention.
In Abraham, we have one of the prime examples of what is desired and acceptable to the Creator in all of the history of humankind. In Genesis 26:5 ESV, the promise is repeated to Isaac, with the Creator saying: “because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” It doesn’t leave much out. Abraham was the consummate believer in the Eternal. He set the bar immeasurably high. Abraham being a truly difficult act to follow, is an understatement of sizeable proportion. Abraham the true friend of God, well may be the most honourable human follower of the Creator who has ever lived, next to His very own Son.
Genesis 25:7-11
English Standard Version
7 These are the days of the years of Abraham’s life, 175 years [died 1802 BCE]. 8 Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. 9 Isaac [75 years of age] and Ishmael [89 years old] his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, 10 the field that Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah his wife. 11 After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. And Isaac settled at Beer-lahai-roi.
The death of Abraham is poignantly described in the Book of Jubilees.
Chapter 23:1-7
1 And he placed two fingers of Jacob on his eyes, and he blessed the Almighty of gods, and he covered his face and stretched out his feet and slept the sleep of eternity [a long sleep until the resurrection, Job 14;14], and was gathered to his fathers. 2 And notwithstanding all this Jacob [15 years of age] was lying in his bosom, and knew not that Abraham, his father’s father, was dead. 3 And Jacob awoke from his sleep, and behold Abraham was cold as ice, and he said ‘Father, father’; but there was none that spoke, and he knew that he was dead.
4 And he arose from his bosom and ran and told Rebecca, his mother; and Rebecca went to Isaac in the night, and told him; and they went together, and Jacob with them, and a lamp was in his hand, and when they had gone in they found Abraham lying dead. 5 And Isaac fell on the face of his father and wept and kissed him. 6And the voices were heard in the house of Abraham, and Ishmael his son arose, and went to Abraham his father, and wept over Abraham his father, he and all the house of Abraham, and they wept with agreat weeping. 7 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the double cave, near Sarah his wife, and they wept for him forty days, all the men of his house, and Isaac and Ishmael, and all their sons, and all the sonsof Keturah [six sons, aged about 21 to 31 years of age] in their places; and the days of weeping for Abraham were ended.
Due to the time frame, Zohar the Hittite was descended from the son of Canaan, Heth and not those people living later called the Hittite empire in Anatolia. This would have been the last of the Black people living in Canaan as nearly all would have already migrated to northwestern Africa, southwest of Phut, who in turn were westwards of Egypt. The land of Canaan had been steadily swamped with Nephilim as evidenced by the cities of the plain – Sodom and the others – and the Battle of Siddim. Later, some of Abraham’s other children returned into the region. We have closed on Abraham’s life in Genesis twenty-five with his sons Isaac and Ishmael, though we are now turning our attention to his subsequent six sons which he sired with his second wife, Keturah.
Genesis 25:1-6
English Standard Version
Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah.2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak,and Shuah. 3 Jokshan fatheredShebaandDedan. The sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim,and Leummim.4 The sons of Midian wereEphah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah.All these were the children of Keturah. 5 Abraham gave all he had to Isaac. 6 But to the sons of his concubines [Hagar and Keturah] Abraham gave gifts and while he was still living he sent them away from his son Isaac,eastward to the east country.
We learn a couple of salient points from this passage. The sons who are mentioned directly or indirectly, more than once in the Bible are italicised. Abraham took Keturah as his wife unlike Hagar – and after Sarah died – though she may have been a concubine prior to this, as she is listed as a concubine in 1 Chronicles 1:32 ESV: “The sons of Keturah, Abraham’s concubine: she bore… All these were the descendants of Keturah.”
The other notable matter is the sending away of the six sons of Keturah, though not quite as harshly as the banishment of Ishmael and his mother. Ishmael had been given a separate blessing; different from Isaac as we shall learn. There is no recording of individual blessings in the Bible for Keturah’s sons, though we read that they did not leave without a portion each of Abraham’s wealth. They also, like Ishmael travelled eastward from Isaac. It infers a more easterly locale, or that they had already left. Josephus states: “Accordingly Isaac married Rebekah, the inheritance being now come to him; for the children by Keturah were gone to their own remote habitations.” (Antiquities of the Jews, B00k. I, 16, iii).
Book of Jubilees 20:1-2, 11-13:
1 … Abraham called Ishmael, 2 and his twelve sons, and Isaac and his two sons [Esau & Jacob], and the six sons of Keturah, and their sons. 2 And he commanded them that they should observe the way of Yahweh; that they should work righteousness, and love each his neighbour, and act on this manner amongst all men; that they should each so walk with regard to them as to do just judgment and righteousness on the earth. 11 And he gave to Ishmael and to his sons, and to the sons of Keturah, gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, and he gave everything to Isaac his son.12. And Ishmael and his [twelve] sons, and the [six] sons of Keturah and their sons, went together and dwelt from Paran to the entering in of Babylon inall the land which is towards the East facing the desert. 13. And these mingled with each other, and their name was called Arabs [Arabians],and Ishmaelites.
As addressed in part already, concerning Mizra and the Arab peoples; the Arabs have taken their name from the Arabian Peninsula. When the sons of Keturah and Ishmael migrated east to the wilderness, the ‘desert’ which is Arabia, they became collectively known as Arabians, but this does not make them modern day Arabs.
One could say, they were the original Arabs and that the sons of Mizra have appropriated that name. Similar to the sons of Shem and the Nephilim being known as Canaanites, where the original sons of Canaan had originally dwelt in Palestine and their name had been appropriated. I trust the constant reader having seen this pattern repeated, does not require elaboration.
It is not provided when Keturah or her sons were born, thus some conjecture is required. Ishmael was born in 1891 BCE, when Abraham was eighty-six and Ishmael was fourteen when Isaac was born in 1877 BCE. Sarah died in 1840 BCE at the age of 126 years. Isaac married Rebekah in 1839 BCE and with a little time to pass before marrying Keturah, it could be approximately 1835 BCE. Abraham would have been 142 years old. If the boys were born a couple of years apart and there were six of them, then circa 1833 BCE for the firstborn Zimran, till 1823 BCE for the sixth and youngest son, Shuah.
As Abraham had these additional sons late in life, they were born in the same generation as and just prior to, the birth of the twins Esau and Jacob in 1817 BCE. Even so, they were actually half-brothers to Ishmael and Isaac. Thus, Jokshan’s sons and Midian’s sons listed in the Bible, were cousins of Esau and Jacob; while Dedan’s sons were cousins to Esau and Jacob’s children.
We are not told who Keturah was or where she was from. One source claims she was from Japheth, though this does not fit the paradigm of Abraham’s descendants [refer Chapter II Japheth Orientalium]. The Book of Jubilees hints that they she may have descended from Abraham’s family from either his brother Nahor or likely Haran; but judging by the close, yet distinct Haplogroups of Keturah’s descendants it would appear that she may have been from another line of Arphaxad [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans].
Book of Jubilees 19:11
And Abraham took to himself a third wife, and her name was Keturah, from among the daughters of his household servants, for Hagar had died before Sarah. And she bare him six sons, Zimram, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah…
We are therefore looking for a cluster of smaller nations which have shared the blessings promised to Abraham and his kindred. We would expect them to be dwelling near or next to Nahor in Italy, Haran in Switzerland and Moab and Ammon in France.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Keturah, meaning: Incense [or perfumed from SHD 6989].
We know surprisingly little about Keturah. We don’t know from what nation she came, who her parents were or whether she outlived Abraham or not.
Some Jewish sages have proposed that Keturah and Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, are the same person, but there’s no evidence in the text to support this, and this proposition is ultimately fantastic.
What we do know is that Keturah became the mother of six Abrahamic sons, one of whom, Midian, became a nation that both rivaled Israel and became one of the most dominant tributaries to its theology and social structure. After all, Moses met YHWH in Midian… and Moses’ priestly father-in-law Jethro [taught] Moses all about the great benefits of delegated governance… It’s rarely noticed that Abraham complained that he was too old to have Isaac (Genesis 17:17), but when Isaac was 36 years old (compare 17:17 to 23:1) Sarah died, and some undisclosed time after, Abraham married Keturah and sired another six sons.
The name Keturah comes from the verb (qatar) meaning to produce pleasant smoke: The verb (qatar) probably originally meant to rise up but came to denote the rising up of sacrificial smoke, which in turn commonly marked celebrations and surplus, and smelled pleasant after roasts or incense. What may not be immediately obvious to the modern reader is that the name Keturah demonstrates a very high level of governance and social sophistication… the government endows all elements with enough safety that none needs to be scared, enough food that none needs to be hungry, and enough wealth that none needs to feel stifled, stunted or duped.’
This is an accurate depiction of the forward thinking, progressive and liberal societies which typify the modern nations of Keturah’s sons.
Herman Hoeh – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… Abraham had a concubine, Keturah, who was his wife after Sarah died. She bore him a number of children whose wanderings are often lost sight of… Abraham sent them northeast [southeast] toward Mesopotamia [Arabia]. There they formed the powerful Kingdom of Mitanni, named after Midian or Medan. They lived mainly along the Euphrates River. The [Assyrians] destroyed their kingdom, sending some east and others north. In the east, evidence is that they became known as the Persians or Parthians (two names for the same people)and, in India, as the Brahmins – the sons of Abram! In India one branch of Keturah’s children form the highest caste and call themselves Brahmins after their father’s original name, Abram. Among the sons [of] Keturah who later went north were the “Letushim” (Genesis 25:3). And where are the Letushim today? Along the shores of the Baltic Sea in Russia. We call them the “Lettish” people today. Many Letts have fled to this country from Russian oppression. The Letts are closely related to the other peoples living along the southeastern shores of the Baltic Sea [from Joktan]… [and] the Asshurim of North Germany…’
Keturah’s children travelled in a south easterly direction into Arabia and we have studied the Mitanni, in Mesopotamia and their descent from Nahor and possibly in part from Shem’s son Aram; though not from Abraham [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans].
The Parthians we will find are linked to Abraham, but a different line of his family and not from Keturah. We have also studied the connection between Moses and King Solomon with the castes of India and thus any association with Abraham’s name is both possible and plausible [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut].
Rather than along the shores of the Baltic Sea and the children of Joktan, who are also descendants from Arphaxad, the offspring of Keturah are in fact dwelling on the other side of the Baltic Sea; along the shores of the North Sea and Norwegian Sea. Comprising the liberal democratic northwestern European nations of Scandinavia and the Low countries. Historically, by most within the identity movement, these nations have been incorrectly espoused as the descendants of Jacob and therefore identified as part of the ‘so called’ lost tribes of Israel.
The first born son of Keturah is Zimran. He is not mentioned outside of Genesis and 1 Chronicles. Four out of the six sons may have some interplay regarding their exact identity and any deeper understanding or definitive information is welcomed. Putting what pieces there are together, Zimran is the nation of Norway. Norway has a population of 5,532,925 people. Abarim Publications defines Zimran as meaning: ‘One Who Makes Music’ [H2175] or ‘One Who Prunes’ based on the the verb zamar, to ‘prune or praise.’ Specifically, to ‘prune trees in an orchard or vineyard’ or ‘to hone a crowd into a choir.’
Norwegian man & Icelandic woman
Norway’s kingdoms were united by Haraldr Harfagri during wars of the 860s and early 870s, though Norway at this time only comprised the southern third of the modern country. From 1450 the kings of Denmark ruled Norway. Norway insisted on an election process to confirm the king, usually after they were proclaimed in Denmark. From 1536, governors were appointed to manage the country’s interests. Following the Napoleonic Wars, Sweden became the senior partner.
Norway gained full independence from Sweden on June 7, 1905, when Sweden withdrew from the Union to avert war. The Norwegian government asked Prince Carl of Denmark to become the country’s new king. He arrived during a blizzard on 25 November, with his wife Maud – the daughter of King Edward VII of England – and his son Alexander. Carl changed his name to the more agreeable Haakon VII and was welcomed as the first Norwegian king for six hundred years. The royal anthem is sung to the same melody as that of England’s God Save the Queen, which is also Liechtenstein’s anthem, though with different lyrics.
Recall, the Eternal promised Abraham and Sarah, that kings would descend from them. It is therefore interesting to note that barring one son today, all of Abraham’s children with Keturah retain constitutional monarchies. There are only twenty-nine states out of about two hundred in the world with monarchies. Norway’s monarch is King Harald V, crowned in 1991. He married Sonja Haraldsen in 1968.
Norwegian flag and Iceland’s Coat of Arms, with flag
The fifth son of Abraham and Keturah is Ishbak. He is not mentioned outside of the genealogical record either, though it appears that Ishbak is the nation of Iceland. Iceland has a population of 347,101 people. Abarim Publications give the following meaning: ‘Leaving, He will forsake’ from the verb shabaq. Also offered are: ‘He will abandon’ or ‘He will set free.’ An additional meaning includes: ‘He releases’ [H3435].
The Norwegian-Norse chieftain Ingolfr Arnarson built a homestead in the present day capital Reykjavik, in 874 CE. Other emigrant settlers followed from Scandinavia* – primarily Norwegian seafarers and adventurers – and their Celtic thralls [serfs and slaves] of Irish or Scottish stock. It is recorded that monks – the Papar – lived in Iceland before the Scandinavian settlers arrived, again of a Hiberian-Scottish origin.
As part of the Kalmar Union, Iceland had been under the control of the Crown of Denmark from 1380, though formally a Norwegian possession, until 1814. In 1874 – a thousand years after the first settlement – Denmark granted Iceland home rule and in 1918, agreed its status as an independent, constitutional and hereditary monarchy, through a Union with Denmark. In 1944, a national referendum led to Iceland leaving the Union and becoming a republic.
The term Nordic refers to Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland principally, though it can also include Scotland, Northern Germany, the Netherlands and with a stretch, Russia. Whereas Scandinavia* – originating from Scania a small region on the peninsula, the southern tip of modern Sweden from which the three peoples sprung – strictly refers to the three kingdoms of Norway, Sweden and Denmark as these three are bound intrinsically in their shared ethno-cultural Germanic heritage and related languages. More broadly, it can include Iceland and the Faeroe Islands on related languages and ancestry – as borne out by Haplogroup identity – and Finland on geographic, economic and political grounds.
The Finns, unlike Icelanders are descended from a different Arphaxad lineage and are separated from Scandinavia as evidenced by their Haplogroups; Finno-Ugric language; and their proximity to Russia, geographically and historically [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans].
The third born son, who is only listed in the Biblical family tree in Genesis chapter twenty-five and in 1 Chronicles One, is Medan, the modern nation of Denmark.
The identificationincludes the Faeroe Islands, with 49,202 people and Greenland, with 56,947 people. Denmark has a population comparable with Norway of 5,846,033 people. The meaning of Medan according to Abarim Publications is: ‘Strife’ or ‘Judgment’ from the noun madon, meaning ‘strife’ and from the verb din, ‘to judge or govern.’ It can also mean: ‘contention’ [H4091] or ‘discord’ [H4091].
A very important point to comprehend, is that the early Danes who were located in what is now southern Sweden were different people from the Danes of today living in Denmark. Population pressures in the fourth and fifth centuries CE forced them to begin a migration into Denmark, once the Saxon tribes comprising Angles, Jutes and Frisians departed for Britain en masse. It wasn’t until after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, that Denmark as we know it was free of the original Danes and their migration into Britain as the Danish Vikings. The latter Danes also settled in Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland, which they retained after the dissolution of the Dano-Norwegian Union under the terms of the 1814 Treaty of Kiel.
In 1380 Queen Margaret’s husband, Haakon VI of Norway died. Margaret of Denmark, then ensured that their son Olaf, was proclaimed king there, thus adding Norway to his territories and thereby, creating the Union of Denmark and Norway, with Denmark gaining Greenland and Iceland. Margaret was the de facto ruler while Olaf was a minor. In 1387, Olaf’s sudden and unexpected death at the age of seventeen, gave Margaret firm control as queen regent of Denmark and Norway; with Norway ruled as an appendage of Denmark. The nobility of Sweden unhappy with their own King Albert, invited Margaret to invade and take the throne. In 1388 she is accepted, at her own insistence, as SovereignLady and Ruler of Sweden; forming the Kalmar Union.
Danish man & Swedish woman
A later monarch, Christian I [1448-1481 CE] had a daughter named Margaret, who married King James III of Scotland. Her dowry included the islands of Orkney and Shetland, which were passed by the Danish crown to Scotland. The current Danish monarch is Queen Margrethe II and she was crowned in 1972. Margrethe married Prince Henri de Laborde de Monpezat in 1967, who died in 2018.
The sixth and youngest son of Keturah is Shuah. Shuah is the nation of Sweden. Sweden has a population of 10,265,328 people. Abarim Publications give the meaning of Shuah as: ‘brought low, to sink, be bowed down’ or ‘humbled, prostration; a cry’ and ‘prosperity’ from the verbs shuah, which ‘denotes a motion towards a low position’ and from shawa, ‘to cry out for salvation.’
Abarim – emphasis & bold mine:
‘There are four different Hebrew names that transliterated into English form the name Shuah, or variations thereof depending on the translation. The name Shoa (or variations thereof) is spelled the same as one of the Shuahs but pronounced slightly different. The first Shuah (pronounced shuach) is a son of Abraham with Keturah (Genesis 25:2). A feminine variation of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 4:11 (Shuhah; pronounced shuachah), which is assigned to a (female?) descendant of Judah. A completely different name occurs in Genesis 38:2 and 38:12 (pronounced shua’), where it is the name of the father of a wife of Judah (perhaps also known as Bath-shua – Genesis 38:12). A variant of this name occurs in 1 Chronicles 7:32 (pronounced shua’a), where it is assigned to a daughter of Heber, a granddaughter of Asher, son of Jacob. The name Shoa occurs in Ezekiel 23:23, where it is the name of a Chaldean[?] tribe.
The name of this son of Abraham and the name of this… female descendant of Judah mean Brought Low or Put In A Pit. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Prostration. BDB Theological Dictionary refers both versions of this form of Shuah to the verb (yasha’), meaning to be saved. The names of the father of Judah’s wife and the Asherite woman may therefore mean Noble… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Rich for Shoa and Prosperity for all variations of Shuah. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Wealth [H7744] for Shua.’
Shuah is not directly mentioned, though one of his descendants is included in the book of Job, as one of his three friends who attends to him while he is undergoing sore trials. Shuah’s descendants may have been known to the Assyrians who referred to a people as the Suhu; though describing their land as being on the right bank of the Euphrates River, south of Carchemish is probably not the same Shuah.
Job 2:11
English Standard Version
11 Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that had come upon him, they came each from his own place, Eliphazthe Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, andZophar the Naamathite. They made an appointment together to come to show him sympathy and comfort him.
Bildad is also mentioned in Job 8:1-22; 18:1-21 & 25:1-6. We will discuss Bildad again in a later chapter.
Job 42:7-9
English Standard Version
7 After the Lord had spoken these words to Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. 8 Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and offer up a burnt offering for yourselves. And my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer not to deal with you according to your folly. For you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did what the Lord had told them, and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.
It was from the eighth century that the Scandinavian Vikings expanded outwards, building an extensive trading network across Europe and beyond. The Norwegians and Danes travelled west, while the Swedes went eastwards. The eastern bound Vikings were different to the western in that they were descendants of Keturah. They penetrated deeply into the vast lands of modern Russia, following the navigable rivers, creating trading connections as far south as the Byzantine empire. By the ninth century they had trading settlements in the eastern Baltic and in the lands of the Rus. The Swedish Vikings founded their own states, where a Viking nobility ruled Slavic populations, such as that of Polotsk. In 970 CE, Eric the Victorious became the first King of Sweden. In 1249, Finland became part of Sweden after the Second Swedish Crusade led by Birger Jarl. The year 1252 saw the city of Stockholm established and in 1319, Sweden and Norway were united under the rule of Magnus IV. Danish forces invaded Sweden and executed rebellious nobility in the Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520. Three years later, Sweden declared independence from the Kalmar Union when Gustav Vasa was hailed as the new King of Sweden.
Flag of Sweden
During the 1550s many Finns migrated westwards across Scandinavia to settle. Thousands of farmers made the journey as far as eastern Norway and into central Sweden; known as the Forest Finns. They turned forests to farmlands using slash-and-burn agriculture and in return they were given land. In 1563 the Northern Seven Years War with Denmark began, ending in 1570 with the Treaty of Stettin and Sweden giving up claims on Norway. Sweden entered the Thirty Years War on the side of France and England. In 1648, when it came to an end, Sweden gained territory, giving rise to the Swedish Empire.
By 1700 Sweden had reached the peak of its power – controlling areas of Denmark, Russia, Finland and northern Germany – and the Great Northern War began. It was fought against Russia, led by Tsar Peter the Great, Denmark and Poland. The Swedes defeated the Russians at the Battle of Narva. In 1707, Sweden emboldened, invaded Russia, though bad weather weakened the army as they marched further east and the young Swedish King Karl XII fell in battle. By 1709, the Russians defeated the Swedes at the Battle of Poltava and in 1721, the Great Northern War ended with Sweden’s defeat and its Empire significantly reduced.
In 1809, Finland was lost to Russia. In 1813, Sweden fought against the French, who were led by Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig. From the victory, Sweden gained control of Norway from Denmark. In the late 1800s about one million Swedes immigrated to the United States due to poor economic conditions. In 1867, scientist Alfred Nobel obtained a patent for the explosive invention of dynamite. In 1875, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, ahead of their time, established a single currency called the Kroner. In 1927, the famous car marque Volvo, produced their first vehicle, nicknamed interestingly enough, Jakob. Sweden diplomatically remained neutral in both World Wars.
It was tragically in 1947 that Prince Gustaf Adolf, heir to the throne, was killed in an airplane crash on 26 January at Kastrup Airport in Copenhagen, Denmark. He and two companions were returning from a combined hunting trip and visit to Princess Juliana of the Netherlands – shortly before she acceded to the Dutch throne. Gustaf’s son, Karl – aka Charles XVI Gustav – then became heir to the Swedish throne and he was crowned in 1973. He married Silvia Sommerlath in 1976.
Sweden joined the European Union in 1995, but did not join the Monetary Union and therefore, still uses the Swedish Krona as currency rather than the Euro; as does Iceland, Norway and Denmark, whereas Finland adopted the Euro in 2002. Just this fact alone, is interesting in interpreting Scandinavian versus Nordic definitions – or sons of Keturah and Abraham compared with others from Arphaxad.
Sweden punches above its weight with a GDP of $530.88 billion in 2019, making it the 24th largest economy in the world.Sweden has a competitive economy and a high standard of living, with a mix of free-enterprise in tandem with a generous social welfare state. ‘Sweden’s manufacturing economy relies heavily on foreign exports, including machinery, motor vehicles, and telecommunications.’
Additionally, the three Scandinavian countries comprising Sweden, Denmark and Norway are all constitutional monarchies but Finland has never been a kingdom or had a monarchy. The histories of Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland are closely intwined as we have seen and highlight their close family relationship as four of the six bothers. The two remaining brothers, also share a close relationship and are spread across three kingdoms, with five separate territories and four distinct ethnic groups.
The second son of Keturah is Jokshan. Jokshan is the ancestor of the nations of Belgium and Luxembourg. The population of Belgium is 11,723,298 people and Luxembourg has 652,063 people.
The Belgium Flag and Coat of Arms – Unity Makes Strength
Abarim Publications gives the meaning of Jokshan as: ‘one who sets a snare’ or ‘fowler’ from the verb yaqosh or qush, ‘to lay a snare’ and figuratively “snaring” a person using ‘alluring enticements.’ Jokshan is not mentioned outside of the genealogies, though his two sons, Sheba and Dedan are. The reader will recall, we have already met a Sheba and Dedan, the sons of Raamah of India, the son of Cush [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut]. We have also encountered a Sheba, son of Joktan in Romania [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans]. Genesis Twenty-five provides the added detail of Dedan’s sons. Yet they are not mentioned directly, though Letush* is possibly indirectly.
It would appear to be a clue in identifying Dedan and highlighting a unique relationship, which is only replicated one other time with Haran, Canneh and Eden in Switzerland [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]. The only other instance in the world today, is in part England and Scotland.
Isaiah 15:5
English Standard Version
My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar… For at the ascent [H4608 – ma’aleh: incline, elevation, going up (hill)] of Luhith* [H3872 – luwchiyth: tablets, anciently a town of Moab south of the Arnon River (possible link with a grandson of Abraham and Keturah and the Ardennes)] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… [Jeremiah 48:5]
We have covered the definitions of Sheba and Dedan’s names previously, though a brief recap. Sheba can mean, ‘man, drunk, captive, splinter, seven’ and ‘oath.’ Dedan means: ‘leading gently’ or ‘to move slowly.’ Abarim states the ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low.’ The Benelux nations comprising the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg can also be called the Low countries as they are either close to the sea, or below sea level. Dedan’s three sons names according to Abarim mean the following.
Asshur-im: ‘happy people, upright people, to be level, straight up’ or ‘just.’ The word can means ‘steps’, as in taking steps to go somewhere. Letush-im: ‘metal workers’ from the verb latash, to hammer or sharpen. ‘[The] NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Sharpened. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Artificers, or Hammerers’ [of weaponry].’ Letush can also mean ‘oppressed’ or ‘strong.’ Leumm-im: ‘peoples’ from the noun le’com, nation, people.’ It refers to ‘communities’ from the root word ‘to gather.’
Job 1:15
English Standard Version
… and the Sabeans fell upon them and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.”
Job’s children while celebrating and feasting were attacked by Sabeans. It is not clear which Sabeans; though from a geographic view, they are very likely Sheba from Jokshan. It could also be referring to Sheba from Joktan, or more unlikely, Sheba from Cush.
Ezekiel 27:23
English Standard Version
Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders ofSheba, Asshur, and Chilmad traded with you.
This verse could possibly apply to Sheba of Joktan and be referring to Romania, as they are linked with Asshur and Russia in eastern Europe. The first part of the verse mentions Haran, Canneh and Eden of Switzerland and so if this Sheba is meant, it would be Belgium – or more specifically the Flemish people of Flanders in northern Belgium.
Job 6:19
English Standard Version
The caravans of Tema look,the travelers of Shebahope.
Isaiah 60:6
English Standard Version
A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come.They shall bring gold and frankincense, andshall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.
Tema is a son of Ishmael and Midian a son of Keturah; as both of these peoples are neighbours with Sheba, this is probably speaking of Sheba, descended from Abraham and Keturah. These verses confirm the economic prosperity of Sheba.
Isaiah 21:13
English Standard Version
The oracle concerning Arabia. In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge, O caravans of Dedanites.
Jeremiah 25:23-24
Young’s Literal Translation
23 Dedan, and Tema, and Buz, [all that are (in the) utmost (or farthest) corners] And all cutting the corners (of the beard), 24 And all the kings of Arabia[Central Europe], And all the kings of the mixed [mingled] people, Who are dwelling in the wilderness…[eastern Europe]
Arabia was the region where Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah migrated to be apart from Isaac’s descendants. Arabia today, equates with northern and western Europe, where the peoples descended from Keturah and Ishmael live. Dedan – southern Belgium – is associated with Tema, a leading clan of Ishmael and Buz, a leading family of Nahor in Italy.
Jeremiah 49:8
Complete Jewish Bible
Flee! Turn back! Hide yourselves well, you who live in D’dan [Dedan]; for I am bringing calamity on ‘Esav [Esau], when the time for me to punish him comes.
Ezekiel 25:13
Amplified Bible
… therefore thus says the Lord God, “I will also stretch out My hand against Edom and I will cut off and destroy man and beast. I will make it desolate;from Teman [leading tribe of Edom]even to Dedan they will fall by the sword.
The calamity of Esau will be so severe, that they will flee even as far as Dedan to try and escape. Dedan or southern Belgium, is warned to either hide or head in the opposite direction themselves. Definitely not to travel towards Edom.
Ezekiel 27:19-21
Common English Bible
19 Vedan [Dan] and Javan [Archipelago SE Asia] from the region of Uzal [Greece] traded with you. They exchanged wrought iron, cinnamon, and spices for your wares. 20 Dedan was your agent for saddle blankets [military products]. 21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [leading tribe of Ishmael] traded for you. They procured lambs, rams, and goats for you.
Dedan is associated with a leading son or clan of Ishmael, Kedar and both are spoken of as trading with the mighty Tyre, which is a Brazilian led South America. Dedan’s three sons reveal three components in southern Belgium’s composition. Dedan’ssons include the Walloons of Wallonia, the separate Brussels-Capital region and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.
Leumm represents the people of Brussels, Letush is Wallonia and the Asshur–im Luxembourg and possibly incorporating the Province of Luxembourg in southeast Wallonia. Their names are remarkably clear clues, as Leumm signifies the unique gathering of people in Brussels, Letush the artificer of weapons and Luxembourg is one of the happiest countries in the world, being the second wealthiest country in the world after Qatar, with regard to individual prosperity per person.
Wallonia produce a number of weapons in quantity, including the M4 assault rifle made by FN Herstal and owned by the Wallonia government. Wallonia is also home to the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. A 2021 survey listed the top Ten Happiest countries to live in and Luxembourg was placed at number ten. It is interesting to note, that apart from Belgium, all the sons of Keturah make the top ten. Number 9 is Austria, 8 New Zealand, 7 Sweden, 6 Netherlands, 5 Norway, 4 Iceland, 3 Switzerland, 2 Denmark and number 1 is Finland. Maybe they have a case to be included as Scandinavian after all.
The Lion, state symbol of Flanders – indicating its Dutch heritage, language and cultural ties – and the Cockerel or Rooster, state symbol of Wallonia – reflecting its French heritage, language and cultural ties.
Over two thousand years ago, the Celtic tribe of the Belgae occupied the region – before they migrated to Britain, leaving their name. In time, the area was ruled by the Romans, then the Merovingian Franks and incorporated into West Francia, remaining under French influence until the Belgian lands were first dominated by the Spanish Hapsburgs from 1555 – who split the Netherland region in two, known as the Spanish Netherlands – and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs from 1713. From 1815 to 1830, it was again the southern part of the newly formed United Kingdom of the Netherlands, created as a buffer state against France. Though being predominantly French speaking, Catholic and industrialised, meant a rift ensued with the Dutch speaking, Protestant and commercialised north – present day Netherlands. Wallonia pressed for independence with a reluctant Flanders following suit due to military pressure.
Belgian men
The fact that the Bible makes a distinction between Sheba and Dedan and speaks of them separately would indicate that the union of Flanders and Wallonia into one Kingdom in 1830 will ultimately dissolve. An historian of the Belgian revolution said that: “In Belgium, there are parties and provinces, but no nation.” Of the eleven and a half million people, 58% live in Flanders, 32% in Wallonia – though Wallonia accounts for 55% of Belgium’s territory – and 10% in Brussels.
Unlike the Flemish – who are economically more prosperous – the Walloons do not consider themselves a nation or necessarily desire an independent state. Polls find that only a minority of Walloons want Belgium to break up and if secession was forced on them by Flanders, about half would want to be attached to France. A 2020 poll found that 28% of the Flemish were in favour of a partition, compared to 18% of Walloons and 17% of Brussels residents. With that said, 56% of the same respondents ‘said it would be impossible to keep the country together in [the] future [58% in Wallonia, 46% in Flanders and 47% in Brussels].’
A Liege resident foresees a split, saying: “In Flanders they live differently, see things differently and envisage the future differently.” Remembering that the Flemish are Sheba and the Walloons coupled with the predominately French speaking Brussels are Dedan, makes the differences understandable and an eventual split likely.
Belgian women
‘The Brussels-Capital Region has the same status as Flanders and Wallonia within the federal structure… though it measures only 161 [square km] (barely 0.5% of the national territory) its population of one million [plus] represents 10% of the national total. An enclave within Flanders, it is primarily French-speaking – around 85% of inhabitants speak French… [though] officially the region is bilingual… Brussels is not only the capital of Belgium and of the European Union, but also of the “French” [speaking communities]… of [both] Brussels and Wallonia, [as well as] the Flemish community and region.’
Many people incorrectly assume that the term Walloons applies to all Belgian French speakers; including those born and living in the Brussels-Capital Region. The mixing of the population over preceding centuries means that most families can trace their ancestors from ‘both sides of the linguistic divide’ in Brussels. The local dialect – Brussels Vloms – is a Brabantic dialect that reflects ‘the Dutch heritage of the city.’ The status of Brussels in a partitioned Belgium is uncertain and a source of considerable debate, with a variety of options that are all complex. Forming a city-state as a European capital district, similar with Washington DC or the Australian Capital Territory are offered; as is an extended Brussels region, so that its borders reach Wallonia.
Belgium’s 2019 GDP was $533.10 billion making it the 23rd largest world economy, one ahead of Sweden. Belgium, a trade and transport hub, has a diversified economy with a mix of services, manufacturing and high tech industry. Its heavy integration with the rest of the European economy, means Belgium is highly sensitive to swings in the overall economic performance of its neighbours.
The Belgium monarch is King Philippe Leopold Louis Marie, who was crowned in 2013. He married Queen Matilda, born Jonkvrouw Mathilde d’Udekem c’Acoz. The monarch of Luxembourg is Henri Albert Gabriel Felix Marie Guillaume, who was crowned in 2000. He married Maria Teresa Mestre y Batista in 1981. Finally, the monarch of the Netherlands is King Willem Alexander, crowned in 2013. He married Princess Maxima in 2002.
The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg began as a stronghold known as Lucilinburhuc, after the break-up of the Frankish empire. A town grew up around the stronghold, which today is Luxembourg Castle. The territory quickly grew in stature becoming a full county in the eleventh century and a duchy in the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century it was acquired by the Duchy of Burgundy and then by the Austrian Hapsburgs in 1482. Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris in 1815, it was passed to the new king of the Netherlands, William I, but in 1890 it gained full independence.
The fourth son of Keturah is Midian. Midian is the Dutch people of the Netherlands. The country has a population of 17,235,331 people – the 10th highest in Europe. Abarim give the meaning of Midian, similar to Medan as: ‘strife’ and ‘place Of Judgment’ from the noun madon, strife, which derives from the verb din, ‘to judge’ or ‘govern.’ Midian is mentioned in the Bible numerous times and had five sons, though only one is once mentioned in scripture. The Midianites are the dominant and most prominent of the descendants of Keturah. They have had a close association with Ishmael, with the name ‘Midianite’ being interchangeable and they have also had a close link with Moab and Ammon when seeking to fight their adversaries, the sons of Jacob. The Midianites were a successful trading people, building economic wealth like their cousins Sheba and Dedan.
Midian’s eldest son is Ephah and his name means: ‘Gloom[y], Covering’ from the noun ‘epa, gloom, from the verb ‘up, to use wings or cover.
It can also mean ‘volant’ [moving lightly, nimble] and ‘darkling.’ The ‘NOBSE Study Bible Name List translates this name with Dark One; Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Darkness.’ Ephah is also a word used for a dry measurement of grain and is approximately twenty litres. Another Ephah is mentioned as a second wife of Caleb and also as part of Jahdai’s family in Judah [1 Chronicles 2:46-47].
The second son of Midian is Epher: meaning, ’Dust, Ore, Malleable, Young [Deer or Hart].’ It can also mean ‘a calf’ [H6081]. There is an Epher, the son of Ezra in the genealogies of Judah and also the half-tribe of East Manasseh – eldest son of Joseph [1 Chronicles 4:17; 5:24].
Hanoch or ‘Enoch’ is the third son of Midian. His name means: ‘inaugurated, trained.’ ‘Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… proposes initiated… NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads dedicated [or (God’s) follower H2585] for…’ The name Hanoch is also a name of one of Reuben’s sons [Reuben, the eldest son of Jacob]. Midian’s fourth son is Abida[h]: ‘father of knowledge, the [or my] father knows [H28], my father took knowledge’ from the noun ‘ab, father, and the verb yada’, to know. Midian’s fifth and youngest son is Eldaah: ‘God has called, knowledge of God’ or ‘God is knowledge.’ The name can also mean: ‘God has known’ [H420] or ‘called of God.’
Dutch men
Genesis 37:25-28, 36
English Standard Version
25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravanof Ishmaelites [H3459 – Yishma’e’liy: God will hear] coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. 26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother [Joseph] and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites [H3459], and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him. 28 Then Midianite [H4084 – Midyaniy: strife (Midian)] traders passed by. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold himto the Ishmaelites [H3459] for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt. 36 Meanwhilethe Midianites [H4092 Mdaniy: (Midianite) a variation of H4084] had sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard.
Some claim that there is a contradiction in this passage or alternatively, that the Ishmaelites and Midianites are one and the same, as some researchers incorrectly try to make their mothers, Hagar and Keturah the same person. There are two different Hebrew words used for Midianite in the text. The first term used for these merchants is Midyaniy, an adjective signifying a member of the tribe of Midian or an inhabitant of Midian. This word H4084, is used for the Midianites throughout the Bible, for instance when describing Moses’s father-in-law Jethro in Numbers 10:29. For Midian himself, Strongs H4080 Midyan, is used. The second term Mdaniy is a variation of 4084 and has the exact same meaning. What is interesting, is that it is only used once in the scriptures, here in this account of Joseph.
This is clue number one, that we are not dealing with literal Midianites, but ‘Midianites’ from the the region of Midian. Clue two, is the fact that Ishmaelites are mentioned three times to the two for Midian and clue three is in Genesis 39:1 ESV: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there.” The traders were Ishmaelites from Midian who purchased Joesph and then sold him. Once we uncover the identities of Ishmael and Joseph, there is huge symbolic national significance in this act by Ishmael; as there is also with the true identity of Judah, in the monumental ramifications of selling Joseph in the first place. Anciently and again in modern times, Ishmael and Midian have been very adjacent neighbours. The use of the term Midianite for Ishmael will become readily apparent when we study Ishmael in the subsequent chapter.
Frisian and Dutch woman
Exodus 2:11-25
English Standard Version
11 One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people. 12 He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. 13 When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, “Why do you strike your companion?” 14 He answered, “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?” Then Moses was afraid, and thought, “Surely the thing is known.”
15 When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Mosesfled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian.
Moses fled Egypt in 1486 BCE at the age of forty. The Pharaoh in question and the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus forty years later, has seen an enormous amount of scholarly debate. We will study the chronology of the Exodus and respective identities of Moses’s adoptive Egyptian mother and father in depth when we study the tribe of Levi and Moses’s life [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes and Appendix VII: Moses & the Exodus – Fabrication or Fact?]. For now, the Pharaoh at the time of Moses’s personal exodus from Egypt was the sixth king of the Twelfth Dynasty, Amenemhet III.
And he sat down by a well. 16 Now the priest of Midian [H4080 – Midyan] had seven [H7651 from H7650 – Sheba] daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. 17 The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock. 18 When they came home to their father Reuel*1, he said, “How is it that you have come home so soon today?” 19 They said, “An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds and even drew water for us and watered the flock.” 20 He said to his daughters, “Then where is he? Why have you left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread.” 21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man, and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah [H6855 – Tsipporah: bird Acts 7:29]. 22 She gave birth to a son, and he called his name Gershom [H1647 ‘foreigner’], for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land.” 23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel – and God knew.
Exodus 3:1
English Standard Version
Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro*2, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. [Exodus 4.18-19; 18.1]
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, Pages 196, 198 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Jewish legends suggest Jethro had seven names, all conveying his transformation from an idolatrous priest to a priest of God… along with, Heber*3, Putiel*4, and Keni*5 [Kenite?]… legends recorded that a Pharaoh immediately before the Exodus maintained three famous high Priests during the latter part of the Israelite enslavement in Egypt: Job, Balaam, and Jethro. Jethro was regarded as the High Priest of a Library of Stone Tablets [Ten Commandments, Exodus 32:15-16] in some versions.
Pharaoh did not welcome the pre-Exodus advice provided by Jethro about the growing Israelite problem, banning the priest Jethro-Reuel in disgrace… which was ample motive for Jethro to have helped Moses prepare for his return to Egypt.’
Moses’ father-in-law was also called Hobab*6, who was the son of Reuel or Raguel*7 [LXX Septuagint, Numbers 10:29]. There is much confusion caused by all these names, especially as Reuel was also known as Jethro, meaning ‘his excellence’ from H3502 Yithrah. The name Hobab [H2246] means ‘cherished’or ‘loved fervently.’ According to Josephus, Hobab had ‘Iothor [or Jethro] for a surname.’ Jethro’s descent is given as: son of Nawil, son of Rawail, son of Mour, son of Anka, son of Midian, son of Abraham. Josephus claims that Raguel or Reuel, was Moses’ father-in-law and Judges 4:11 clearly states that he was known as Hobab. ESV: ‘Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh.’ Some commentators claim that Jethro was an honorary title, while Reuel was his personal name. Reuel [H7467, Re’uw’el] means, ‘one who is intimate with God’ or Friend of God – thetitle given to Abraham. Raguel is another version of this name [refer Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary].
Putting it all together, it seems to this writer that Hobab was his personal or first name. As Hobab was the son of Reuel, he could have been known by his father’s or family name and thus Reuel would fit as his last or surname. Jethro then, does appear to be a title, linked to his official position as a Priest of Midian. Therefore, all three names would be correct and thus all are used to identify the same man. There is also a Reuel mentioned in the Bible who is a son of Esau by his wife Basemath, herself a daughter of Ishmael [Genesis 36:4, 13, 17].
The Gold-Mines of Midian, Richard Burton, 1878 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Jethro’s Moslem title is “Khatib el-Anbiya,” or Preacher to the Prophets, on account of the words of wisdom which he bestowed upon his son-in-law [Moses]… El-Kesai states that his original name was Boyun; that he was comely of person, but spare and lean; very thoughtful, and of few words… Other commentators add that he was old and blind… [Jethro] and Rahab are Gentiles, or strangers, affiliated to Israel [Ephesians 2:12-13; Romans 11:13, 17, 22] on account of their good deeds.’
The Desert of the Exodus, E H Palmer, 1871 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Sho‘eib, as the Arabs call Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, is said to have been blind, notwithstanding which infirmity he was divinely commissioned to preach the true religion lately revealed unto Abraham,and to convert the people of his native city Midian. They rejected his doctrine and mocked the blind prophet, for which sin they were destroyed by fire from heaven, while Midian was laid waste by an earthquake, Jethro alone escaping alive. He fled to Palestine, and is said to be buried near Safed.’
The Quran says: “The chiefs of his people, who were elated with pride, answered, We will surely cast thee, O Shuaib, and those who believe with thee, out of our city: or else thou shalt certainly return unto our religion. He said, What! though we be averse thereto?” Jewish tradition states similarly: “We will surely cast thee . . out of our city.” Shuaib was a true believer and a priest of the Most High. Shuaib responds: “My support is from God alone: on him do I trust… O my people, let not your opposing of me draw on you a vengeance like unto that which fell on the people of Noah… neither was the people of Lot far distant from you. Ask pardon, therefore, of your Lord; and be turned unto him: for my Lord is merciful and loving.”
“They answered, O Shuaib, we understand not much of what thou sayest, and we see thee to be a man of no power among us: if it had not been for the sake of thy family, we had surely stoned thee, neither couldst thou have prevailed against us. Shuaib said, O my people, is my family more worthy in your opinion than God? and do ye cast him behind you with neglect?” Regarding a man of no power, one commentator quotes: “The Arabic word dhaif, weak, signifying also, in the Himyaritic dialect, blind, some suppose that Shuaib was so, and that the Midianites objected that to him, as a defect which disqualified him for the prophetic office.”
Muslim writers identify Shuaib with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses. Baidhawi states Shuaib was the son of Mikail, the son of Yashjar, the son of Midian; whereas, the Tafsir-i-Raufi addsthat Jethro was descended from Lot through Midian having married a daughter of Lot. Shuaib is not recorded as performing any miracles in the Quran or Islamic traditions, though they do repeat as the Jews do, that Jethro gave his son-in-law the ‘wonder-working rod’ with which he performed – with Aaron – all his mighty miracles in Egypt and the wilderness.
Exodus 18:1-27
English Standard Version
Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2 Now Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, had taken Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her home, 3 along with her two sons. The name of the one was Gershom (for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”), 4 and the name of the other, Eliezer [H461 ‘God is help’](for he said, “The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”).5 Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God.
6 And when he sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you with your wife and her two sons with her,” 7 Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. And they asked each other of their welfare and went into the tent.
8 Then Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardship that had come upon them in the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. 9 And Jethro rejoiced for all the good that the Lord had done to Israel, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians.
10 Jethro said, “Blessed be the Lord, who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of Pharaoh and has delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. 11 Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, because in this affair they dealt arrogantly with the people.”12 And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.
13 The next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?” 15 And Moses said to his father-in-law,“Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.” 17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you!You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do.
21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you.23If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.”24 So Moses listened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25 Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 26 And they judged the people at all times. Any hard case they brought to Moses, but any small matter they decided themselves. 27 Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went away to his own country [Midian?].
In Exodus chapter Eighteen there are some interesting similarities in the meeting between Moses and Jethro and the one between Abraham and Melchisedek some four centuries earlier. Abraham had recently rescued Lot, defeating Chedorlaomer, King of Elam in the process. Moses had witnessed the defeat of Pharaoh king of Egypt, while delivering the descendants of Jacob. Both events had a miraculous outcome given by the Creator.
Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God and Jethro was the Priest of Midian. Melchizedek and Jethro blessed and praised the Creator for their deliverance using very similar language. Melchizedek brought out ceremonial bread and wine with Abraham. Jethro also prepared bread with a sacrificial meal to be eaten with Moses, Aaron and all the elders of Israel. There is a theme of peace and friendship in the two respective encounters. The king of Salem [Peace H8004, H7999] blessed Abraham, and Jethro and Moses would have exchanged Shaloms[H7965, H7999] as evidenced in Exodus 18:7 and Exodus 4:18.
Numbers 10:1-2, 29
English Standard Version
The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Make two silver trumpets. Of hammered work you shall make them, and you shall use them for summoning the congregation and for breaking camp. 29 And Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel the Midianite [H4084], Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us, and we will do good to you, for the Lord has promised good to Israel.”30 But he said to him, “I will not go. I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.” 31 And he said, “Please do not leave us, for you know where we should camp in the wilderness, and you will serve as eyes for us. 32 And if you do go with us, whatever good the Lord will do to us, the same will we do to you.”
It is through Jethro that we are introduced to the mysterious Kenites [H7017 – Qeyniy: ‘smiths’]. Some commentators link the Kenites with the contrived word Kainite based on the name of Cain, as the Hebrew word Qeyniy derives from H7014 – Qayin andQain or Kain, meaning, ‘possession’ or ‘purchase’. Though linked etymologically, it is ideologically a stretch to arrive at this conclusion and would mean if true, that a. the line of Cain survived the Flood and b. that Jethro was descended in part from a corrupted line. One that would be hard to imagine was his real ancestry and or acceptable to the Eternal, in his being a priest and true believer.
Judges 1:16
Common English Bible
The descendants of Moses’ father-in-law the Kenite [H7017] went up with the people of Judah from Palm City into the Judean desert, which was in the southern plain near Arad. They went and lived with the Amalekites.
We have learned that Jethro may have been descended from Lot in part, that he was a priest of ‘Midian’ and that his father Reuel was a ‘Midianite’ though the Hebrew word used is not the one used for the name of the original Midian. Does this mean he was a Midianite as in ethnology or just in a geographic context. Similarly, if Jethro is a Kenite, are they separate from Midian – living with them – or a distinct tribe originating from Midian?
Plus, a branch of the Kenites – those descended from Jethro – may have attached themselves to the tribe of Judah and or then, the Amalekites who are affiliated with Edom [refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe].
Judges 4:11
Common English Bible
Now Heber the Kenite [H7017] had moved away from the other Kenites [H7017], the descendants of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law, and had settled as far away [far removed] as Elon-bezaanannim [‘removing, wandering’], which is near Kedesh [northern part of the Tribes land in Israel equating to those of Zebulun and Naphtali].
Rememberthe association with Zebulun. It appears that part of the Kenite people were, either associated with the tribe of Judah or actually were from the tribe of Judah. The most plausible answer is that they had intermarried. The Rechabites were a clan of the Kenites and their progenitor was Hammath. The following verse is from the end of one genealogical record of the House of Judah. 1 Chronicles 2:55, RSV: “The families also of the scribes [H5608 – caphar: learned men] that dwelt at Jabez: the Ti’rathites, the Shim’e-athites, and the Su’cathites. These are the Ken’ites [H7017] who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.” The Rechabites being scribes would have been given respect for their standing, as we read in in 2 Kings chapter Ten, when Jehu – an adversary to wicked King Ahab of Israel, who ruled from 874 to 853 BCE – invites Jehonadab the son of Rechab to assist in slaughtering every last soul in a Temple of Baal worshippers.
Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite [Judges 4:17 – H7017]. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel blessed Jael in her victory song because of her resolute courage in killing Sisera, the enemy of Israel beginning a period of forty years of peace from 1184 to 1144 BCE. When King Saul was commanded to destroy the Amalekites, he honourably advised the Kenites to move away from their neighbours and allies, the Amalekites in order not to be slaughtered along with them.
1 Samuel 15:6
English Standard Version
Then Saul said to the Kenites [H7017], “Go, depart; go down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them. For you showed kindness to all the people of Israel when they came up out of Egypt.” So the Kenites [H7017] departed from among the Amalekites.
The Kenites acted as guides in the wilderness; even so, the prophesied fate of the Amalekites and the Kenites was apparently tied together. We will study Amalek separately in a later chapter.
Numbers 24:21-22
Common English Bible
21 He looked at the Kenites [H7017] and raised his voice and gave his address: “Your dwelling is secure [H386 – ‘ethan: strong, hard, rough, permanent]; your nest [H7064 – qen: ‘nest of a bird’ high] is set in the rock [H5553 – bassela: ‘crag, cliff, stronghold’ protected]. 22 Yet Kain [H7014 Kenite] will burn when Asshur [Assyria] takes you away captive.”
The Kenites were to be taken captive by the Assyrians, at the same time that the Kingdom of Israel was conquered, which was between 721 and 718 BCE. Though there may be a future application of Balam’s prophesy as there is in verses twenty-three and twenty-four. The mention of nest in the rockis a play on the wordfor nest: Qen or ken, which is pronounced “kaine” and thus the tribal name Ken-ite. The use of the Hebrew word Qayin in verse twenty-two does on the surface, appear to support a lineage from Cain, but in the context of the preceding verse where the Kenites dwell securely and on elevated ground, the use of this word meaning ‘possession’ is more applicable than Qeyniy, meaning ‘smiths’. Remember the dwelling on elevated ground as we will discover the specific significance of this description.
Jeremiah 35:2, 6-10, 16-18
English Standard Version
2 “Go to the house of the Rechabites and speak with them and bring them to the house of the Lord, into one of the chambers; then offer them wine to drink.” 6… “We will drink no wine, forJonadab the son ofRechab, our father, commanded us, ‘You shall not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever. 7You shall not build a house; you shall not sow seed; you shall not plant or have a vineyard; but you shall live in tents all your days, thatyou may live many days in the land where you sojourn.’ 8 We have obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, to drink no wine all our days, ourselves, our wives, our sons, or our daughters, 9 and not to build houses to dwell in. We have no vineyard or field or seed, 10 but we have lived in tents and have obeyed and done all that Jonadab our father commanded us. 16 The sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have kept the command that their father gave them, but this people [Judah] has not obeyed me. 17 Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them, because I have spoken to them and they have not listened, I have called to them and they have not answered.” 18 But to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said, “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Because you have obeyed the command of Jonadab your father and kept all his precepts and done all that he commanded you, 19 therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never lack a man to stand before me.”
The Rechabites fled to Jerusalem when Nebuchadnezzar the Chaldean began subjugating the Kingdom of Judah. The Rechabites were spared because of their faithful adherence to the commands of their forefather Jonadab. Whereas Judah who had not heeded the Creator’s warnings suffered punishment at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II.
In verse two, the Lord calls for the Rechabites to be brought into His House, where there are many chambers or rooms. John 14:2, ESV: “In my Father’s house are many rooms…” The obedience of the Rechabites was in contrast with the disobedience of the Kingdom of Judah – comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin – who, for all their outward piety and devotion in performing the required animal sacrifices, were not wholly obedient to the Creator in their worship. Rather than the Rechabite Kenites being a line of Cain, they are in fact the exact opposite and were an extraordinarily obedient peoples, who did not own property or farm land. A line of Cain, would not be summoned by the Eternal to His temple.
Isaiah 1:13-14, ESV: “Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations – I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them.” The Creator prefers obedience rather than sacrifice. 1 Samuel 15:22, ESV: And Samuel said, “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.”
It was an honour for Jonadab and his descendants to stand before the Lord. The Tribe of Levi were selected to stand before the Lord in Deuteronomy 10:8, in special service. Moses and Samuel [Jeremiah 15:1] and Elijah all stood before the Lord [1 Kings 18:15]. As did King David who even danced before the lord – 2 Samuel 6.14.
We have spent time on Jethro’s Kenite lineage and the offshoot branch of the Rechabites, yet there is another famous and righteous person with a similar though distinct descent. The question remains: were the Kenites descended from Midian; Judah; someone else entirely; or a mixture?
Joshua 14:6-14
Common English Bible
6 In Gilgal, the people of Judah approached Joshua. Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite [H7074 – Qnizziy: descendant of Kenaz] said to him, “You know what the Lord said to Moses, man of God, about you and me when we were in Kadesh-barnea. 7 I was 40 years old when Moses the Lord’s servant sent me from Kadesh-barnea to scout out the land [1444 BCE]. I brought back a report to him of what I really thought.8 My companions who had gone up with me made the people’s heart melt. ButI remained loyal to the Lord my God. 9 So Moses pledged on that day, ‘The land on which you have walked will forever be a legacy for you and your children. This is because you remained loyal to the Lord my God.’
10 Now look. The Lord has kept me alive, exactly as he promised. It is forty-five years since the Lord spoke about this to Moses. It was while Israel was journeying in the desert. Now look. Today I’m 85 years old [1400 BCE].
11 I’m just as strong today as I was the day Moses sent me out. My strength then was as my strength is now, whether for war or for everyday activities. 12 So now, give me this highland that the Lord promised me that day. True, the Anakim [Elioud giants] are there with large fortified cities, as you yourself heard that day. But if the Lord is with me, I should be able to remove them, exactly as the Lord promised.” 13 So Joshua blessed him. He gave Hebron to Caleb, Jephunneh’s son, as a legacy. 14 So Hebron still belongs to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite as a legacy today. This was because he remained loyal to the Lord God of Israel.
The passage says the people of Judah approached Joshua. This does not prove that the Kenizzites or Kenezites are from Judah, as the Kenites from Jethro travelled with Judah on one hand, yet confusingly appear to be listed in a genealogy of Judah. Similarly, Caleb the Kenizzite was given the city of Hebron which was within Judah’s territory. If the Kenizzites are descendants of Kenaz, then which Kenaz are they descended from? The name Kenaz derives from the verb qanaz, ‘to hunt or snare’ and thus means a ‘hunter’ or ‘hunting.’
In Genesis chapter thirty-six we read of the sons of Esau. Esau had five sons with ostensibly, three women [Chapter XXIX Esau:The Thirteenth Tribe]. One son already mentioned was Reuel – the family name of Jethro. Another son was Eliphaz and Esau had a grandson by Eliphaz called, Kenaz; who was also a chief of Edom [Genesis 36: 11, 15, 42]. It is interesting to note that Caleb had a grandson called Kenaz [1 Chronicles 4:15]. And to underscore the family name further, Caleb also had a younger brother called Kenaz [Joshua 15:17, Judges 1:13; 3:9-11] and it was his son Othniel, who was the first Judge of Israel from 1342 to 1302 BCE and he had ‘the Spirit of the Lord… upon him…’ As with the Kenites, it is difficult to equate the Kenizzites with an evil pedigree, when all the examples are of exemplary men of obedience and righteousness.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 198-199 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Kenizzites were skilled in the arts of metal-working, like Cain and Tubal-Cain, and were related somehow to Kenites [also skilled in metallurgy]. Caleb, then though eighty-five years old, fought like he was forty-five, driving the Anakim [giants] from Hebron, and was thus rewarded as the head of the tribe of Judah, receiving the land of Kiriath Arba, Hebron, the homeland of the Anakim. It is astounding to me that a Kenizzite, a person from a tribe with no genealogy linking back to Noah, and a tribe that mysteriously descended back to Cain and Nephilim, inherited Hebron, the home and capital city of the Anak!Both the Kenizzite and Kenite tribes are generally believed descended from Kenaz the descendant of Esau, but this cannot be.They like the Amalekites, existed before the birth of Esau and before the time of Abraham.’
Genesis 15:18-21
English Standard Version
18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, 19 the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, 20 theHittites,thePerizzites,theRephaim [Nephilim], 21 the Amorites,theCanaanites, theGirgashitesand the Jebusites.”
Gary Wayne raises a number of points. First, he makes the assumption that a similar skill in metallurgy links Tubal-Cain and the Kenizzites biologically? Second that the Kenizzites descend from Cain and Nephilim without argument? Third, his only valid point, which Genesis chapter fifteen corroborates is that the Kenizzites and Kenites, like the Amalekites, existed before Esau and even prior to Abraham. I would agree that Kenaz, the son of Eliphaz, Esau’s son inherited his name from the Kenizzites, as did Eliphaz’s other son Amalek, from the Amalekites. This anomaly is discussed in depth in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Whereas the Amalekites are linked to the Nephilim, the same evidence is lacking for the Kenites and Kenizzites.
Putting the pieces together, the Kenites and Kenizzites appear to have an ancient origin which prefigures Abraham and his family. The link between Jethro being a Kenite and living in Midian favours the Kenite people having become associated with the Midianites. We will explore this further in this chapter. The Kenizzites are different in that they do not have the Midianite association though like the Kenites, they do have a relationship with the tribe of Judah. Just to make it interesting, there is the overall connection the Kenites and Kenizzites share with the Amalekites, who themselves include a peoples prior [Genesis 14:7] to Esau’s grandson Amalek. Later, they are included with an amalgamation of peoples descended from Esau’s grandson Amalek – Genesis 36:12.
This does raise the important question, regarding whether anyone apart from Noah and his seven other family members survived the flood – 2 Peter 2:5. A careful reading of Genesis 7:21-23, reveals that all physical birdlife, animal life on the land – not the oceans – and humankind, that is, both Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens which were composed of flesh and breathed, died. It does not state or include hybrid creatures such as Nephilim and Elioud giants.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 200-201 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Even Gnostic gospels record Noah denying that he or his kin created the postdiluvian giants, even though his apostate descendants evidently intermarried with postdiluvian Nephilim… Nephilim are not listed in the Table of Nations that is limited to only Noah’s posterity… the Genesis flood account [is] a general accounting of events kept by saints descended from Noah for only the faithful, not a global, forensic accounting for cynical seculars and revisionist mystics.’
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 169 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Incorruptible* Race of giants is the mysterious race that… Cain [and his posterity] have all allegedly and eagerly connected themselves to in legend. Cain… claimed a more royal and divine legacy, void of Adamite impurity, which the posterity of Cain, in turn, pollinated into the people of day six [the Neanderthal].
The Gnostic gospels record that not only Noah survived the deluge but also many people from the Immoveable* Race did and that they were guided to a certain place within a luminous cloud to ensure they survived the flood.The Nephilim and the Immoveable Race survived because of the intercession of fallen angels saving them and their illicit legacy from utter destruction, all to poison the postdiluvian world…’
The ancient land of Canaan and its many peoples is a complex issue. It has perplexed Biblical scholars and secular historians alike. We have studied the first inhabitants of the land, the literal sons of Canaan who left their imprint in the region before fully migrating to northern and central Africa. There was a residue of these true Canaanites in the land, as humans and Nephilim were mixing and living in ancient cities such as Sodom, Hebron and Jericho. Ephron the descendant of Heth, son of Canaan, lived in the region and sold his field at Machpelah to Abraham. The Nephilim and Elioud had been roaming the earth for thousands of years after the flood. They were instrumental in all the titanic building structures and otherworldly architectural feats around the globe; from Stonehenge in England to the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, Machu Pichu in Peru and the Statues of Easter Island.
At a certain point – at least by the time of Abraham for they were there then and possibly much earlier – most Nephilim and Elioud converged on the land of Canaan; for these were the second wave of inhabitants in Canaan. Why Canaan? Because they were aware of the promises of the Creator; that His chosen people would descend from Abraham and ultimately dwell in Canaan. The Nephilim and Elioud were ready and waiting. This is why the Creator’s instructions were brief yet uncompromising – kill them all.
The Creator did not instruct the sons of Jacob – the fledgling Israelite nation – to murder Black people, or even White people, it was a plain and clear instruction to exterminate the giants who were there to do the exact same thing to Israel, if the sons of Jacob didn’t pre-emptively strike first. The young Israelite nation failed these simple instructions and allowed many to live amongst them. It was only some four hundred years later that King David finally eradicated the problem of the Elioud giants from the land of Canaan.
Canaan had numerous clans of Nephilim as we have seen already. The principal seven nations they were told to exterminate were the Canaanites – a specific tribe by that name, not the broad definition of the term – Perizzites, Jebusites, Girgashites, Amorites, Hivites and Hittites. Notice the last five are inherited names from sons of the original Canaan. To add to the complex mix of people, there was a third wave of people.
These were different descendants of Shem and they were a spill over from Mesopotamia, of Aramaeans and Arphaxad to the north; the Arabian Peninsula, including Keturah and Ishmael to the east; and from Egypt, Caphtor to the south. We have looked at the Aramaean and Amorite connection previously [Chapter XXIV Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. There was also the Phoenician migration to the northwestern coast and the Philistine and Minoan immigrations to the southwestern coast [Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America]. Some of the descendants of Abraham and Keturah as well as Ishmael, had ventured into the land of Canaan, though they also continued northwards to Anatolia and the Aegean Sea.
Finally Moab, Ammon and Esau with Amalek his grandson, also moved into the south western portion of the land of Canaan. In time, at least one son of Keturah was known by sons of Canaan’s names, possibly more and also Ishmael, just like some of the Nephilim tribes. Two prominent examples of this name transference, are the Hivites from the name Hiv and the Hittites called after Heth.
To summarise a complicated scenario, using Hiv as an example. Hiv was a son of Canaan. The original Hivites in the land would have been Black people descended from Hiv. In time, most of these Hivites migrated southward, though not all, because the Nephilim arrived en masse. They integrated with the remaining Hivite people. Those Nephilim living in the Hivite region, became known as… Hivites. Later still, a son of Abraham and Keturah also dwelt, in the northern Palestine region, now known as Lebanon. In this case, some of the children of Midian… and these Midianites became known as Hivites.
The Canaanites and Perizzites are almost always mentioned together though the Perizzites are the odd one out, in that they are not an original son of Canaan. Perizzite according to one source means: ‘to drag away violently, hate.’
Joshua 24:11 and Judges 1:4
English Standard Version
And you went over the Jordan and came to Jericho, and the leaders of Jericho fought against you, and also the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And I gave them into your hand… Then Judah went up and the Lord gave the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand, and they defeated 10,000 of them at Bezek.
The warlike Jebusites were associated with the environs of the ancient city of Salem which became the capital Jerusalem of the southern Kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem frequently changed hands and it was captured by Joshua [Joshua 18:28]. In Judges 19:9-12, it was occupied by foreigners [Judges 1:8]. The Tribe of Benjamin inherited the surrounding land of Jerusalem. Judges 1:21, ESV: “But the people of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who lived in Jerusalem, so the Jebusites have lived with the people of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day.”
Four hundred years after Joshua lived, King David retook the city. 1 Chronicles 11:4-8, ESV: “And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, that is, Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants of the land. The inhabitants of Jebus said to David, “You will not come in here.” Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, that is, the city of David. David said, “Whoever strikes the Jebusites first shall be chief and commander.” And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up first [reportedly building an underground water shaft or tunnel to enter], so he became chief. And David lived in the stronghold; therefore it was called the city of David. And he built the city all around from the Millo in complete circuit, and Joab repaired the rest of the city.” David bought the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite [2 Samuel 24:16-25] and later built the Temple on that location. Archaeologists have confirmed that the original inhabitants of Jerusalem were Jebusites.
The later Amorite name was applicable to Gether’s descendants from Aram.
Ezekiel 16:45-46
English Standard Version
45 You are the daughter of your mother, who loathed her husband and her children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. 46 And your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters.
These verses are interpreted by some to prove that the Israelites were a bastard or mixed nation. This chapter is actually addressed to Judah about her sinful ways. The identities here are types or euphemisms and not literal lines of descent. Samaria is a sister as it refers to the Kingdom of Israel.
The Hittites here are a Shem descended people who had influence on Judah – and were related to them – as did the Aramaean-Amorites. The Amorites included Nephilim in their midst and had two famous Giants as their kings – one being King Og, the other King Sihon.
Deuteronomy 4:47
English Standard Version
And they took possession of his land and the land of Og, the king of Bashan, the two kings of the Amorites, who lived to the east beyond the Jordan.
1 Kings 21:25-26
English Standard Version
25 (There was none who sold himself to do what was evil in the sight of the Lord like Ahab, whom Jezebel his wife incited. 26 He acted very abominably in going after idols, as the Amorites had done, whom the Lord cast out before the people of Israel.)
2 Kings 21:11-13
English Standard Version
11 “Because Manasseh king of Judah has committed these abominations and has done things more evil than all that the Amorites did, who were before him, andhas made Judah also to sin with his idols, 12 therefore thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Behold, I am bringing upon Jerusalem and Judah such disaster that the ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle. 13 And I will stretch over Jerusalem the measuring line of Samaria, and the plumb line of the house of Ahab, and I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down.
The most evil king in Israelite history was King Ahab and for Judah, it was King Manasseh. Both are compared to the Amorites in setting a standard of corruption like no other before them or afterward. Baal was the Amorites chief god and Baal’s wife was Ashtoreth, their chief goddess. The same goddess as Ishtar in Chaldea and Astarte in Greece and Rome. Their worship involved human sacrifice, temple prostitution and orgies. There have been many temples, high places, stone pillars and altars excavated in the land of Israel. Some of the sites contained large numbers of containers with the remains of young children who had been sacrificed to Baal. [refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, Chapter XXI The Incredible Idenity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]
The Girgashites, named after Girgash son of Canaan were the fifth nation. Their name means: ‘to draw away; to entice.’ As with the Amorites, they made many of their sons and daughters pass through the fire to Moloch – the Bull cult that permeates and dominates false god worship and is purportedly at the centre of the infamous Bohemian Grove.
The two nations known as Hivites and Hittites are not only linked but also, while classed as Canaanites, as in the oft-repeated lists of the seven nations, the Hivites and Hittites – with the Amorites – should also be considered separately from the rest because each had dual origins, histories, ethnic characters and national identities.
Exodus 23:28
English Standard Version
And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites from before you.
The Hivites were unique in that by subterfuge of claiming they lived afar, fooled Joshua into a treaty of peace and non-interference; in that the Hivites dwelt ‘forever’ in the land of Israel, though they did have to serve as woodcutters and water carriers [Joshua 9:1-27].
Joshua 11:19
English Standard Version
There was not a city that made peace with the people of Israel except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. They took them all in battle.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 238 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Gibeonites were Hivites/giants conscripted as woodcutters and water carriers for Israel by Joshua, after Israel had been deceived into a treaty with Gibeonites not to destroy them, as the Gibeonites said they did not live in the Covenant Land. Gibeonites survived in the Covenant Land well past the time of David because of this treaty, asa portion separate to Israel, within Israel. Gibeonites were clearly identified as surviving Amorites [2 Samuel 21:1-14], spared in this treaty from the Exodus, which Saul later violated in his zeal, endeavoring to annihilate the Gibeonites, which cost Saul seven of his [grand]sons as punishment.’
The Hivites as well as the Hittites, at the time they appear in the Scriptures, were each divided into a smaller southern and a larger northern branch, inhabiting widely distant territories. This made them different from the other five Canaanite nations. The Hivite’s – Hebrew chivim meaning ‘wicked’ – main cities at the time of Joshua were in the south and included Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kirjath-jearim. The Hivite territory in the north was adjacent to the Sidonians in Mount Lebanon. The very same area which Heber the Kenite had moved to live – away from the other Kenites who had descended from Moses’s father-in-law, Jethro – Judges 4:11.
Judges 3:3, ESV: “These are the nations: the five lords of the Philistines and all the Canaanites and the Sidonians and the Hivites who lived on Mount Lebanon, from Mount Baal-hermon as far as Lebo-hamath.” The southern Hivites were the residue of Canaan’s children and Nephilim.
The northern Hivites interest us more, as there is a link between these Hivites, Midian, the Kenites, the Sidon Phoenicians from Sidon and the Dutch Afrikaner settlers in South Africa. There could be a connection between Midian and the Hivites of Nephilim extraction, or likely an unusual coincidence, as the Dutch have the tallest male average height in the world and the second tallest women average height in the world according to a 2016 survey.
Previously, we have discussed the early Phoenician link between Tyre, the Portuguese and descended peoples of Brazil [Chapter XXIV Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. Strabo wrote that the Phoenicians originated ‘from the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula.’ The later Phoenicians of Sidon were different from Tyre and equate to the Dutch of the Netherlands. As part of the children of Keturah, they migrated from Arabia and settled in the Sidon coastal area.
They were master traders, explorers, ship builders and sailors; similar as Tyre in the past. In recent centuries, the Portuguese and Dutch have exhibited the exact same traits. The African beginnings of Sidon’s heritage have been represented in the nation of South Africa [refer Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa].
The southern Hittites in the time of Abraham made their headquarters at Kiriath-Arba; driving out the Anakim and re-naming the city, Hebron. In this region they controlled another city, Kiriath-Sepher – the city of Books – which was another name for Kiriath-Sannah, a city of Instruction. Names suggesting the existence of a repository of ancient knowledge. By Joshua’s time, these southern Hittites had been crowded out of Hebron by the Anakim and had withdrawn to more mountainous country further north. In Numbers 13:29, ESV: “The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. And the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.”
The northern Hittites on the other hand, constituted a great kingdom of confederated states, occupying the whole of northern Syria between the Mediterranean Sea and the Euphrates; extending also as we shall learn, over much of Asia Minor from Armenia to the Aegean Sea. This is why in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Reverend T K Cheyne says: “The Hittites seem to have been included among the Canaanites by a mistake.” One could include the Hivites and the blond Amorites in this context. The southern Hittites with the Hivites and Amorites, were part of the seven Canaanite nations – a blend of the Black descended Canaanites and Nephilim. The northern Hivites and Amorites – Aramaeans descended from Gether – like the Hittites, were descended from Shem and it is these Hittites that Cheyne is referring to. Once this is understood, any apparent secular-biblical crossover contradictions, regarding who, when and where for these peoples, dissolve.
Numbers 22:4,7
English Standard Version
4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “This horde [the sons of Jacob] will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field”… Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time… 7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message.
When King Balak of Moab felt threatened by the Israelites arriving en masse into Canaan and planned to employ Balaam to pronounce a curse, he enlisted the Midianites, an unwise agreement, as co-conspirators. This is why Midian brought condemnation upon themselves with the Moabites and so began a perpetual strife between Midian and Israel. In modern times, we have witnessed the same relationship as the nations of France and the Netherlands built impressive navies, mercantile enterprises and colonial empires.
Those who even have a passing knowledge of European history during the decades encompassing 1600 to 1820 will recognise which country France and Holland were in competition with, continually in conflict either militarily, politically or via trade routes and colonial territorial disputes.
Numbers 25:1-18
English Standard Version
1 While Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to whore with the daughters of Moab. 2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods [Revelation 2:14]. 3 So Israel yoked himself toBaal of Peor [Psalm 106:28, Hosea 9:10].And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. 4 And the Lord said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people and hang them in the sun before the Lord, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you kill those of his men who have yoked themselves to Baal of Peor.”
6 And behold, one of the people of Israel came and brought a Midianite woman to his family, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the whole congregation of the people of Israel, while they were weeping in the entrance of the tent of meeting. 7 When Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose and left the congregation and took a spear in his hand 8 and went after the man of Israel into the chamber and pierced both of them, the man of Israel and the woman through her belly. Thus the plague on the people of Israel was stopped.
9 Nevertheless, those who died by the plague were twenty-four thousand [Deuteronomy 4:3, 1 Corinthians 10:8]. 10 And the Lord said to Moses, 11 “Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel,in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy. 12 Therefore say, ‘Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace, 13 andit shall be to him and to his descendants after him the covenant of a perpetual priesthood, because he was jealous for his God and made atonement for the people of Israel.’”
14 The name of the slain man of Israel, who was killed with the Midianite woman, was Zimri the son of Salu, chief of a father’s house belonging to the Simeonites. 15 And the name of the Midianite woman who was killed was Cozbi the daughter of Zur, who was the tribal head of a father’s house in Midian. 16 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 17 “Harass the Midianites and strike them down, 18 for they have harassed you with their wiles, with which they beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the chief of Midian, their sister, who was killed on the day of the plague on account of Peor.”
The Israelite who blatantly brought a Midianite woman into the camp was from the tribe of Simeon. We will return to this story when we study Simeon and Levi, the priestly tribe to which Phinehas belonged [Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes].
It would appear that the sons of Jacob were very easily influenced by the religions and false gods of their neighbouring nations; who were in reality, extended family. As they followed the gods of Moab and Ammon, they also worshipped the same gods of Midian. A case in point, is the false god outlined in Numbers chapter twenty-five, prominent amongst the Moabites and Midianites, Baal of Peor. Peor was a mountain located on the Abarim range in Moab: Beth-peor [Numbers 23:28, Deuteronomy 3:29]. This god was known as Peor [Numbers 31:16, Joshua 22:17], with the title Baal meaning, lord. It is sometimes associated with the national Moabite deity, Chemosh [2 Kings 23;13, Jeremiah 48:46].
All Baal worship was synonymous with licentious sin though Baal Peor ‘especially called for sensual indulgence.’ According to Rabbinical literature, ‘the worship of this idol consisted in exposing that part of the body which [people] usually take the utmost care to conceal’ with its symbol being a giant phallus. Baal Peor was also known as Ba’al Phegor, or more commonly today as the latinised, Belphegor – pronounced as bell-fih-gore. Its name meaning: ‘Master of the Opening’ or ‘Gap’. The Hebrew word peor derives from the root word pa’ar, meaning: ‘open, gap, wide’ or ‘hole.’
According to Professor Geller on Mythology, 2027:
‘He is a shape shifter, delighting in using this ability to deceive mortals. His most common forms are polarized in their appearances. He will take the form of a beautiful woman, naked in all her glory, to seduce those who would fall for his wiles. He also appears as a terrible demon, with leathery flesh, huge horns, long sharp teeth [a beard] and fingernails… a gaping mouth [wings and a tapered tail]. He was a phallic deity, associated with sex, orgies, and all forms of debauchery… Belphegor is one of the many demons [and one of the seven princes of hell] with the attribute “Baal,”… [though] As one of the fallen angels, Belphegor was originally a member of the order of principalities, and after his fall he became a demonic counterpart to… [the sixth Sephiroth, the patron angel of beauty, one of the ten who]… oversee the Tree of Life.’
Belphegor is associated with gluttony, misanthropy, the colour green, the month of April, Sandalwood incense and the number 666. Belphegor allegedly presides over 26 legions of demons and is referred to as the Lord of Sloth, one of the seven cardinal sins. Belphegor is invoked by persons today who wish to find fame, fortune or power through invention; often with as little effort as possible. Most demonic invocations fail. Lkewise with Belphegor, whose ‘true mission is to draw the lazy into the sin of Sloth.’ An acceptable offering to Belphegor and somewhat puzzling, are farting and excrement. Yet, as Belphegor is the lord of openings or holes, the Talmudic traditions assert Belphegor’s association with exposure, defecation and faeces.
Thus, Belphegor is linked to the god Pet and wind or gas; Crepitus, a Roman god of flatulence; as well as Priapus, a fertility god with an oversized and permanent erection.
Notice in Numbers twenty-five, verse one it states Israel lived in Shittim. Though the Hebrew word means ‘acacia wood’, the similarity of Shit-tim with the slang word for faeces is undeniable. It was at Peor, where worship included eating ‘beets, drinking strong drink’ and exposing oneself in front of the idol. Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki, otherwise known as Rashi, comments that the people would uncover their anus and relieve themselves; incorporating the act into deviant sexual practices.
What is especially interesting and a little spooky, is the fact that Belphegor was a deity of the ancient Moabites, whose descendants comprise much of the French nation [Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]. To which country is Belphegor an ambassador of Hell? It is France no less and especially the capital, Paris. As a deity of debauchery, Belphegor apparently became ‘enamoured with the seedier side of the nation… and the [capital] in particular.’ Belphegor is considered an adversary of Mary Magdalene, the patron saint of France [refer Appendix VIII When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation].
Numbers 31:1-18, 32-34
English Standard Version
The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Avenge the people of Israel on the Midianites… 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. 4 You shall send a thousand from each of the tribes of Israel to the war.” 5 So there were provided, out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand from each tribe, together with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand. 7 They warred against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every male [adult].
The Midianites exist today, so we presume it was the soldiers who died and not the whole male population.
8 They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of their slain, Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings[representing the five sons/clans] of Midian. And they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword. 9And the people of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones, and they took as plunder all their cattle, their flocks, and all their goods. 10 All their cities in the places where they lived, and all their encampments, they burned with fire, 11and took all the spoil and all the plunder, both of man and of beast…
13 Moses and Eleazar the priest and all the chiefs of the congregation went to meet them outside the camp. 14 And Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 15 Moses said to them,“Have you let all the women live?16 Behold, these, on Balaam’s advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the Lord… 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones,andkill every woman who has known man by lying with him.18 But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves. 32 Now the plunder remaining of the spoil that the army took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys, 35 and 32,000 persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him [virgins].
Thirty-two thousand Midianite girls is a large number to be integrated into the tribes of Israel. Some of the tribes barely had a total number of men, women and children of this number. It shows the close family connection, meaning similar autosomal DNA, in not significantly altering Israel’s identity. Remember, the six sons of Keturah are half-brothers of Isaac, the father of Jacob – sharing Abraham as their paternal ancestor.
Keturah may have been from the family of Nahor and therefore much younger as Isaac’s wife Rebecca and Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel were – thus the gene pool being very similar on both parent’s sides. It is also possible that Keturah was from Haran’s family, like Sarah. Or, the third option, the one considered the most probable is that Keturah, like Hagar who was Ishmael’s mother, was – from either a different though still inherently similar line from Peleg or more likely still – from another son of Arphaxad equating to the peoples of Finland today [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans].
Judges 6:1-6, 11-16, 20-23, 25-27, 32- 40
English Standard Version
The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord gave them into the hand of Midian seven years. 2 And the hand of Midian overpowered Israel, and because of Midian the people of Israel made for themselves the dens that are in the mountains and the caves and the strongholds. 3 For whenever the Israelites planted crops, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Ishmael] would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and devour the produce of the land, as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they would come up with their livestock and their tents; they would come like locusts in number – both they and their camels could not be counted – so that they laid waste the land as they came in. 6 And Israel was brought very low because of Midian. And the people of Israel cried out for help to the Lord.
11 Now the angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him, “The Lord is with you, O mighty man of valor.”
13 And Gideon said to him, “Please, my lord, if the Lord is with us, why then has… the Lord… forsaken us and given us into the hand of Midian.” 14 And the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?” 15 And he said to him, “Please, Lord, how can I save Israel? Behold, my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.” 16 And the Lord said to him, “But I will be with you [Isaiah 66:2], and you shall strike the Midianites as one man.”
These same words were echoed nearly one hundred and twenty years later by Saul who would be the first king.1 Samuel 9:21 NET: ‘Saul replied, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the smallest of Israel’s tribes, and is not my family clan the smallest of all the clans in the tribe of Benjamin? Why do you speak to me in this way?” Later Samuel referred to this humility which made Saul and Gideon prime candidates for service, in 1 Samuel 15:17 ESV: ‘And Samuel said, “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The Lord anointed you [Saul as] king over Israel.’
Gideon – who was the fifth Judge of Israel – then asks the Angel of the Lord for a sign. He prepares a goat and unleavened bread.
20 And the angel of God said to him, “Take the meat and the unleavened cakes, and put them on this rock, and pour the broth over them.” And he did so. 21 Then the angel of the Lord reached out the tip of the staff that was in his hand and touched the meat and the unleavened cakes. And fire sprang up from the rock and consumed the meat and the unleavened cakes. And the angel of the Lord vanished from his sight. 22 Then Gideon perceived that he was the angel of the Lord. And Gideon said, “Alas, O Lord God! For now I have seen the angel of the Lord face to face.” 23 But the Lord said to him, “Peace be to you. Do not fear; you shall not die.”
25 That night the Lord said to him, “Take your father’s bull, and the second bull seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal that your father has, and cut down the Asherah that is beside it [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]26 and build an altar to the Lord your God on the top of the stronghold here, with stones laid in due order. Then take the second bull and offer it as a burnt offering with the wood of the Asherah that you shall cut down.” 27 So Gideon took ten men of his servants and did as the Lord had told him. But because he was too afraid of his family and the men of the town to do it by day, he did it by night.
The Lord described Gideon as a ‘mighty man of valour.’ Was He being sarcastic, or was the Eternal seeing the man he would become. Gideon doesn’t quite seem the right man for the job. He appears to be hard to convince and faith and fortitude don’t seem to be his first two attributes; but as the Creator looks on the heart, we know Gideon was special to Him. As Gideon rightly supposed, the men of the town once they saw what had happened in the morning sought Gideon out so they could kill him. Gideon’s father Joash, challenges the townsmen to let their god, Baal contend with Gideon directly or die themselves for their false worship.
32 Therefore on that day Gideon was called Jerubbaal, that is to say, “Let Baal contend against him,”because he broke down his altar. 33 Now all the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East [Ishmael] came together, and they crossed the Jordan and encamped in the Valley of Jezreel. 34 But the Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon, and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him. 35 And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh [his own tribe], and they too were called out to follow him. And he sent messengers to Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali [all in northern Israel], and they went up to meet them.
Gideon, not about to alter his path of reticence in being the Creator’s instrument, asks a second and third time, for additional signs. There is an image of the Old Testament God being one of impatience and wrath. Yet, as we saw with the discussion with Abraham about how many righteous souls in Sodom it would take to save the whole city, we have a very patient Deity in the face of Gideon’s stubbornness.
36 Then Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said, 37 behold, I am laying a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground, then I shall know that you will save Israel by my hand, as you have said.” 38 And it was so. When he rose early next morning and squeezed the fleece, he wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water. 39 Then Gideon said to God,“Let not your anger burn against me; let me speak just once more. Please let me test just once more with the fleece. Please let it be dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground let there be dew.”40 And God did so that night; and it was dry on the fleece only, and on all the ground there was dew.
The Book of Judges chapter seven relates how Gideon whittled down thirty-two thousand men to just three hundred as the Lord decreed, so that Israel’s strength of numbers wasn’t given credit instead. As with the taking of Jericho, trumpets were blared and these led to the Midianites panicking and beginning to mistakenly kill each other before fleeing. One of the Princes of Midian was named Zeeb and reminds of the Netherland Province called Zee-land.
Judges 7:23-25
English Standard Version
23 And the men of Israel were called out from Naphtali and from Asher and from all Manasseh [but not Zebulun], and they pursued after Midian. 24 Gideon sent messengers throughout all the hill country of Ephraim, saying, “Come down against the Midianites and capture the waters against them, as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan.” So all the men of Ephraim were called out, and they captured the waters as far as Beth-barah, and also the Jordan. 25 And they captured the two princes of Midian, Oreb [meaning: raven] and Zeeb [meaning wolf]. They killed Oreb at the rock of Oreb, and Zeeb they killed at the winepress of Zeeb. Then they pursued Midian, and they brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon across the Jordan.
Isaiah 10:26
English Standard Version
And the Lord of hosts will wield against them a whip, as when he struck Midian at the rock of Oreb. And his staff will be over the sea, and he will lift it as he did in Egypt.
Judges 8:1-34 recounts the Ephraimites being upset that they hadn’t been included in the ‘fight against Midian.’ Nor were they willing to help with food and supplies for Gideon’s exhausted three hundred men. Gideon, said that once he had captured the two Midianite kings, he would return to flail their flesh in Succoth and break down their tower in Penuel. Once he captured the Midianite kings Zebah and Zalmunna, Gideon returned and flailed the flesh of the elders of the first city with thorns and broke down the tower and killed all the men of the second city.
Judges 8:10-12, 21-34
English Standard Version
10 Now Zebah [meaning: sacrificial victim] and Zalmunna [meaning: protection denied] were in Karkor with their army, about 15,000 men, all who were left of all the army of the people of the East, for there had fallen 120,000 men who drew the sword. 11 And Gideon went up by the way of the tent dwellers east of Nobah and Jogbehah and attacked the army, for the army felt secure. 12 And Zebah and Zalmunna fled, and he pursued them and captured the two kings of Midian, Zebah and Zalmunna, and he threw all the army into a panic… And Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and he took the crescent [moon] ornaments [of astrological significance] that were on the necks of their camels.
22 Then the men of Israel said to Gideon, “Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also, for you have saved us from the hand of Midian.” 23 Gideon said to them, “I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you.” 24 And Gideon said to them, “Let me make a request of you: every one of you give me the earrings from his spoil.” (For they had golden earrings, because they were Ishmaelites.) 25 And they answered, “We will willingly give them.” And they spread a cloak, and every man threw in it the earrings of his spoil. 26 And the weight of the golden earrings that he requested was 1,700 shekels of gold, besides the crescent ornaments and the pendants and the purple [a colour of Phoenicia] garments worn by the kings of Midian, and besides the collars that were around the necks of their camels. 27 And Gideon made an ephod of it and put it in his city, in Ophrah. And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family. 28 So Midian was subdued before the people of Israel, and they raised their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years [1184-1144 BCE] in the days of Gideon.
An Ephod in the Old Testament refers to two different things. One, it can refer to the garment or breastplate worn by the high priest. Two and incredibly, it can refer to a transportable idol.
29 Jerubbaal the son of Joash went and lived in his own house. 30 Now Gideon had seventy sons, his own offspring, for he had many wives. 31 And his concubine who was in Shechem also bore him a son, and he called his name Abimelech [the sixth Judge of Israel, Judges 9:17]. 32 And Gideon the son of Joash died in a good old age and was buried in the tomb of Joash his father, at Ophrah of the Abiezrites. 33 As soon as Gideon died, the people of Israel turned again and whored after the Baals and made Baal-berith [‘Lord of the Covenant’] their god. 34 And the people of Israel did not remember the Lord their God, who had delivered them from the hand of all their enemies on every side…
Isaiah 60:6
English Standard Version
A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian [Netherlands or the Dutch]and Ephah [Holland or Hollanders]; all those from Sheba [Flanders or the Flemish]shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord.
This is the one instance where a son of Midian is mentioned outside the genealogical lists. Camels are a bit of a re-occurring theme in the Old Testament, particularly for Abraham’s descendants. A multitude of camels, is a reference to the abundance of wealth and treasure that is able to be carried upon camels. The camel was used for the carriage of gold and spice and other valuables – Judges 6:5. Job 1:3 mentions camels when describing Job’s vast wealth and riches [see also 1 Chronicles 5:21].
The word Ephah is a unit of measure. One of the trading Midianite business tricks was using two different kinds of weights and measures – buying by one and selling by the other according to Baidhawi, Tafsir-i-Raufi.
Leviticus 19:36
New English Translation
You must have honest balances, honest weights,an honest ephah, and an honest hin. I am the Lord your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt.
Proverbs 20:10
New English Translation
Diverse weights and diverse measures – the Lord abhors both of them.
As Ephah is the first born son of Midian and inferred as the most prominent; the people of the two provinces of North and South Holland on the western coast, have been dominant in Dutch history – with the Netherlands widely known as, or called Holland.
This usage of the name Holland, is accepted by other countries and is also employed by the Dutch; though those from regions outside Holland, may find it misrepresentative to use the term for the whole nation. Netherlands means ‘low-lying country’ and the name Holland is from Houtland, or ‘Wooded Land.’
From the 900s to the 1500s, Holland was a unified political region within the Holy Roman Empire and ruled by the counts of Holland. By the 1600s, the province of Holland had grown to become a maritime and economic power; dominating the other provinces of the Dutch Republic. The area of the former County of Holland broadly covers the modern provinces of North and South Holland. These provinces include the Netherlands’ three biggest cities: Amsterdam, the capital, Europes largest port; Rotterdam, the third busiest port in the world behind 1. Shanghai, China and 2. Singapore; and The Hague, the seat of government. The two provinces of Holland have a population of 6,583,534 people as of 2019.
Habakkuk 3:6-7
New English Translation
6 He took his battle position and shook the earth; with a mere look he frightened the nations. The ancient mountains disintegrated; the primeval hills were flattened. His are ancient roads. 7 I saw the tents of Cushan overwhelmed by trouble; the tent curtains of the land of Midian were shaking.
Some have interpreted this verse to prove a link between Cush and Midian, in that Keturah was from Cush like Moses’s third wife. This verse is merely showing the distance of the parameters of the Creator’s wrath; from the Netherlands in the west, right across to India in the east. Other notable scriptures pertaining to Midian include: Joshua 13:21, 1 Kings 11:18, Psalm 83:9 and Isaiah 9:4.
The Etruscan civilisation has long held a strong fascination for many people. For instance, the renowned author D H Lawrence, fell in love with the Etruscans in his closing years and explained his infatuation: “Myself, the first time I consciously saw Etruscan things, in the museum at Perugia, I was instinctively attracted to them. And it seems to be that way. Either there is instant sympathy, or instant contempt and indifference. Most people despise everything B.C. that isn’t Greek, for the good reason that it ought to be Greek if it isn’t. So Etruscan things are put down as a feeble Greco-Roman imitation. And a great scientific historian like Mommsen hardly allows that the Etruscans existed at all. Their existence was antipathetic to him… So being a great scientific historian, he almost denies the very existence of the Etruscan people. He didn’t like the idea of them. That was enough for a great scientific historian.”
If the Etruscans weren’t Greeks – equating in the main, to the modern French – then who were they? We have read the quote from Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins from Italians and Race and his comment on the ancient Greeks being blond and blue-eyed. Here is his comment about the Etruscans: “Some scholars suggest they were thought to have been a blond, blue-eyed people. On a mural in an Etruscan tomb, a banquet scene portrays the women with blond hair.”
It is an enduring and highly controversial mystery for historians and scholars and the subject of much debate as to where the Etruscans came from; let alone where they went or who they were. Regardless, we will learn that their proximity to the growing Roman civilisation was not a fluke and this relationship has been repeated in our times as well as extending all the way back to ancient Israel.
Mehmet Kurtkaya in his article Etruscan Origins says: “… finding Near Eastern Anatolian DNA from the period of the migration, from around 1000 BC, in local Tuscans and local cattle proves beyond any doubt that the Etruscans had migrated from Turkey to Italy with their cattle, probably on [ships] out of Troy, and/or [Smyrna] or anywhere in the Aegean coast of Turkey. It is also probable that some Etruscan migration waves took place by land, via the Balkans.”
Etruscan Origins – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Etruscans were famed for their naval prowess! [and possibly one of the ‘sea peoples of the 14th-13th centuries BCE]. People with [‘Iranian – Turkish/Anatolian’] ancestry arrived in Sicily in around 1900 BC! [too early] Ancient genome samples were similar to Mycenaean Greece and Minoan Greece samples. Etruscans arrived in Italy during the Mycenaean period. In 1894, Paul Kretschmer… suggested an Etruscan substrate in Indo-European languages, and since then Etruscan / Tursenoi / Tyrrhennian was considered by a handful of European scholars as the pre-Greek substrate which [constitutes] a large part of the Greek vocabulary. Congratulations to all European scholars in the last 140 years, including Italian linguists and scholars, who have offered evidence for the migration of the Etruscans from the Near East [also]… Minoans [Philistines] and Mycenaeans [Greeks] were genetically similar… however, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry… another research paper… suggests the arrival of people to Anatolia from the Caucasus and/or Iran around 3800 BC. Considering this genetic study together with… Etruscan genetic studies, we can decisively conclude that the founders of Minoan and Mycenaean Greek and the Etruscan civilizations migrated from Turkey! [Further], DNA analysis in 2016 and 2017… identified a massive expansion, or a series of expansions, from Mesopotamia and/or [the] surrounding area.’
According to tradition, Tarchun and his brother Tyrrhenus, were the Lydian founders of Etruria, circa 1100 BCE. They were called Etrusci or Tusci by the Romans – whom they were closely related to – and Tyrrhenoi or Tyrseni; that is, Tuscans by the Greeks. Herodotus wrote that Tyr-senians – note the similarity with the word Tyre – were descended from Lydian colonists who landed in Etruria in the thirteenth century BCE following a great famine in Lydia in Eastern Anatolia. It was decided to split the population in half, with those who drew the short straw being sent off to settle in the west and so ending up in northern Italy. The Etruscans called themselves Rasenna, which was shortened to Rasna. Hellicanus of Lesbos ascribes their existence to a settlement of Pelasgian refugees, who had fled from the Hellenic domination of Thessaly.
Interestingly, the island of Lemnos appears to bear close links with the Etruscans; as the Lemnos Stele, dated to about 600 BCE is written in a language which is remarkably similar to that of the Etruscans. It was found in a warrior’s tomb on the island along with artefacts that were similar to Etruscan items. The inference is that a community on the island was related to the Etruscans. Possibly the Pelasgians and so this would indicate a shared origin for all Etruscans, including the Lemnian pirates.
Some postulate that Rome was founded before the arrival of the Etruscans. Though dates reveal which was first and who influenced who. In this case the majority, if not all of the cities of Etruria have been found to pre-date Rome. In fact, the name of Rome itself is Etruscan in origin, as are the names of its legendary founders, Romulus and Remus. Early Rome was heavily influenced by Etruscan culture and so it more than likely that Rome was founded by the Etruscans. The Etruscan alphabet though inherited from the Greeks, was in turn passed on to the Romans.
This is significant, as we will learn that the relationship shared between Midian and the ‘Midianites’ of Ishmael, comprises not only a geographic proximity and culture but also a similar linguistic origin and group, as shown by those languages in blue in the above diagram.
The Etruscan religion included human sacrifice, just as ancient Midian had practiced. Prisoners of war could end up on the altars of the Etruscan gods. As a part of these sacrifices, prisoners were sometimes set to fight one another. The Romans later adopted this practice and it grew into the huge gladiatorial entertainments of the Roman amphitheatres. Like the Romans, the Etruscans used bronze bars as a form of money with their value stamped on them. The Etruscans had a more affluent economy than the early Romans, though it was not a free market economy, built on money.
The Lion of the Netherlands
The Etruscans introduced lions onto the Italian peninsula. Both Belgium and particularly the Netherlands, use lions on their state heraldry. Beginning circa 800 BCE until 400 BCE, Etruscan civilisation and culture flourished in Etruria of central Italy and the northern Italian Po Valley, eventually achieving regional dominance. Etruscan tribes established a series of independent city states which sometimes acknowledged the authority of a form of high king. The Etruscans of the eighth and seventh centuries were significantly influenced by eastern Greek culture.
The territorial reach of the Etruscan civilisation attained its maximum area circa 750 BCE, during the foundational period of the Roman Kingdom. Its culture flourished in three confederacies of cities; Etruria – comprising Tuscany, Latium and Umbria – the Po Valley and Campania. According to legend,there was a period between 600 to 500 BCE in which an alliance of the Dodecapolis, or Etruscan League was formed among twelve Etruscan settlements. The Etruscans dominated northern Italy until their influence over the burgeoning Roman Republic on their southern border, gradually declined and with it their territory. After 529 BCE, the balance of political power shifted away from the Etruscans in favour of Rome. The Romans grew to perceive the Etruscans as ‘former colonial masters’ thus colouring the relationship between the two peoples. It led to a series of long running wars beginning in 477 BCE. Rome and the powerful Etruscan city, of Veii – which Rome saw as a rival and threat – went to war. A year later in 474 BCE, Veii’s navy was destroyed by Hieron of Syracuse at Cumae and the city was forced to agree a treaty with Rome.
The Greek colonies in Sicily who are called ‘Greeks’ but were rather kin of the Romans, attained their height at this time and for the Greeks in Sicily, the prime enemy were the Carthaginians, who were also seeking to expand in the Mediterranean. The Carthaginians – who were Phoenicians from Tyre and today include the Portuguese descended peoples [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil] – and the Etruscans of Midianite origin and today, the Dutch, were often allied, but once defeated by the Greeks from Syracuse, the Etruscans ceased to be a major maritime power, militarily and politically.
Meanwhile the Etruscans, who had been migrating northwards to the River Po from central Italy, had been clashing increasingly with the Celts for domination of the region. A pivotal showdown took place at the Battle of Ticinum in 474 BCE. The Etruscan force, which was little more than a well-armed militia, was butchered by the Celts in a ferociously fought battle.
Though the Etruscans flourished for a couple of centuries then collapsing, it was not entirely due to Roman aggression. The Etruscans had stablished city states, similar to Greece, but as they didn’t use money, they did not have the essential economic underpinning to endure like the Greek states. Nor did they establish a powerful unified state under one ruling emperor. For there are no signs of any palaces and the burials reflect a very wealthy upper class, but no sign of one individual elevated above the rest. Thus they were engulfed by Rome’s rising consolidated power. Many cities became Roman municipia – chartered towns. In Imperial Rome, ‘the fat Etruscan became a figure of fun’ stemming from envy. Eventually the rich land of Etruria flourished again, but as part of the growing Roman Empire. The Etruscans quite possibly included Sheba and Dedan, as the Flemings and Walloons have been part of the Low Countries in modern times.
We Are Not Our Ancestors: Evidence for Discontinuity between Prehistoric and Modern Europeans, Journal of Genetic Genealogy, Ellen Levy-Coffman, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Like the ancient Basque, the origin of the Etruscan people remains obscure. The Etruscans lived in central Italy from the 8th-2nd centuries BCE. Like the Basque, they spoke a non-Indo-European language, but unrelated to the Basque language. After the Romans rose to [dominate] Italy in the 2nd century BCE, the Etruscan language disappeared from the records. It was therefore assumed that the Etruscan population had been culturally and genetically assimilated by the Romans. But the aDNA evidence tells a different story.
Two separate aDNA studies on the Etruscans reached similar conclusions, finding essentially no genetic relationship between the ancient Etruscans and the modern-day inhabitants of Tuscany (ie, “Tuscans”) (Belle 2006; Vernesi 2004). Specifically, out of twenty-eight mtDNA sequences, only six occur in any modern-day groups. The remaining twenty-one haplotypes, identified as belonging to the JT haplogroup, do not occur in any contemporary European populations, including the common Etruscan haplotypes 16126-16193 and 16126-16193-16278. These sequences, while occurring among modern-day haplogroups J2 and T, are not accompanied by substitutions at 16069 and 16294, respectively, which are inevitably present among the contemporary motifs (Vernesi 2004).
The researchers attributed this lack of genetic relationship between Etruscans and Tuscans to two possible processes – the extinction of Etruscan mtDNA lineages among modern-day Europeans, or demographic and evolutionary processes occurring in the last 2,500 years. These processes, if they occurred, were severe enough to disrupt the genetic continuity between the modern and ancient inhabitants of Tuscany.
Researchers performed a number of simulations to investigate whether certain phenomenon, such as genetic drift, migration or a higher than average mtDNA mutation rates, could have impacted the genetic continuity between Etruscans and Tuscans. (Belle 2006) None of their simulations were compatible with the DNA results. The genetic evidence did not support the conclusion that Tuscans were the modern-day descendants of the Etruscans, although the researchers noted that the skeletal remains used for their aDNA samples may not have been representative of the entire Etruscan population, but of a more elite sub-strata. Even so, they seemed to have contributed very little to the mtDNA background of modern Tuscans.
However, the researchers also found that genetic continuity could be generated if the mtDNA mutation rate was set very high (0.5 mutations per million years as opposed to commonly used lower rate of approx. 0.05 mutations per million years per nucleotide) or if gene flow from other areas was so extensive that Etruscan descendants became underrepresented in the modern Tuscan samples. They concluded, however, that the very high mtDNA mutation rates needed to reproduce genetic continuity were “implausible” and, furthermore, the only way to determine if descendants were underrepresented in the study was to collect more modern samples over time. Thus, the study concluded that modern-day Tuscans largely descend from non-Etruscan ancestors. Regarding the fate of the Etruscans, the suspicion voiced by the researchers was that the Etruscan lineages simply went extinct.’
This article tells us two things. First, the modern people of Tuscany have inherited the Etruscan name; but as the descendants of Abraham’s brother Nahor, they are not the Etruscans of two thousand to two thousand, five hundred years ago [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. Second, just because a people have seemingly vanished into the mists of time, it does not mean that they have. They had to go somewhere, be somewhere and be someone today.
An Etruscan helmet in the British Museum
A portion of the future land of the Netherlands, became a Roman province which was conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century BCE. The Saxon peoples, including the original Frisians, followed by the Angles and Jutes settled in the area before migrating to Britain. Later, the land became part of the empire of the Franks under Charlemagne, the House of Burgundy from 1384 to 1482 [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran], and then the Habsburg Empire from 1482 to 1567. From 800 to 1000 CE, the Vikings raided towns and cities along the coast, settling in some areas. In 1083, the name Holland first appears in a legal document. In 1568 the land was under Spanish King Philip II, when the Dutch revolted. Their leader was Willem I, the Prince of Orange and in 1581 the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was formed. The Netherlands has one of the oldest standing armies in Europe; established by Maurice of Nassau in the late 1500s.
In 1602 – two years after the English – the Dutch East India Company was formed. During the seventeenth century, the Netherlands became an international power known for its strong navy – much like the Etruscans. The Dutch empire expanded throughout the world through its colonies on nearly every continent. The Dutch were among the earliest empire-builders of Europe, following the Portuguese, the Phoenician descendants of Tyre and the Spanish, from the ancient Aramaeans and Syrians. During this time, the arts in the Netherlands were at their peak with notable artists such at Rembrandt and Vermeer. Wars with Spain, France and England in 1652 weakened the country and heralded its decline; with the fourth Anglo-Dutch War from 1780 to 1784, resulting in the Dutch Republic losing a number of its colonial possessions and trade monopolies to the British Empire.
In 1688, King William of Orange and Queen Mary became the rulers of the Netherlands. In 1795, the French army invaded the Netherlands and took control; declaring the Batavian Republic. Then in 1806, French emperor, Napoleon, made his brother Louis, King of the Netherlands. In 1813, Napoleon and the French were defeated and the United Kingdomof theNetherlands was formed. It included Belgium and had two capitals: Brussels and Amsterdam. In 1830, Belgium rebelled and broke away, forming its own independent nation.
The Netherlands endeavoured to stay neutral during both World Wars. In World War II they were occupied by Germany. The Dutch Jews were heavily targeted by the Germans. Over seventy-five percent of the one hundred and forty thousand Jewish people who lived in the Netherlands, were killed by the Germans as part of the Holocaust atrocities. A Jewish girl called Anne Frank became famous through her writing about hiding from the Nazis in Amsterdam, before being captured and taken to a concentration camp and her death. After World War II, most of the Netherland’s remaining colonies were granted independence. In 1948, the International Court of Justice was established at The Hague.
The Netherlands has a highly developed economy; playing a significant role in the European economy for centuries. Since the sixteenth century, shipping, fishing, agriculture, trade and banking have been leading sectors in the Netherlands. The Netherlands was ranked the fifth most competitive economy in the world by the Swiss International Institute for Management Development in 2017. Additionally, the country was ranked the second most innovative nation in the world in the 2018 Global Innovation Index.
The Netherlands stands as the 17th largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $907.05 billion in 2019. The Netherlands is a major commercial transportation hub with industrial manufacturing as well as petroleum extraction and processing. It has a highly developed agricultural sector and is the second largest agricultural exporter in the world. The Netherlands has a large financial services sector, with assets four times the size of the Dutch GDP.
Amongst the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves, the Netherlands is number ten in the world; with 612.5 tonnes, comprising 67.4% of its foreign reserves. When the Dutch Central Bank repatriated a large amount of its gold from the United States, it also oddly announced that it would move ‘its gold vaults from Amsterdam to Camp New Amsterdam, about an hour outside the city, citing burdensome security measures.’
The original flag of the Netherlands and the current flag from circa 1650. The main explanation for the change, is that the orange variant was used by the Prince and a distinction between the Prince’s flag and the National flag was required.
‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Dutch global shipments during 2021.
Machinery including computers: US$89.9 billion (13% of total exports)
Mineral fuels including oil: $84.3 billion (12.2%)
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $41.6 billion (6%)
Pharmaceuticals: $37 billion (5.4%)
Plastics, plastic articles: $32.3 billion (4.7%)
Vehicles: $26.1 billion (3.8%)
Organic chemicals: $22.4 billion (3.2%)
Other chemical goods: $19.6 billion (2.8%)
Iron, steel: $16.3 billion (2.4%)
Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 66.1% from 2020 to 2021. That percentage increase was propelled by higher international sales of refined petroleum oils, petroleum gas and coal shipped from the Netherlands. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 55.9% gain.’
I will Maintain
Portuguese explorer Vasco da Gama arrived at Calicut in 1498 and opened a gateway from Western Europe to Asia via the Cape of Good Hope on Africa’s southern tip. By 1510, the Portuguese had started making raids inland and not long after this, the Dutch Republic began sending merchant vessels to India. In 1602 they founded the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie – the Dutch East India Company, or VOC.
Dutch settlement in South Africa began in March 1647, with the Dutch ship Nieuwe Haarlem, wrecked at the Cape. The shipwreck victims built a small fort named Sand Fort. They stayed for nearly one year and were later rescued by a fleet of twelve ships. A Jan van Riebeeck was aboard one of these ships. A few years later, persuaded by some of those who had been wrecked in 1647, the VOC established a supplies station at the Cape of Good Hope under the command of Jan van Riebeeck for ten years until 1662. The party was made up of ninety Calvinist settlers and they arrived in the bay of today’s Cape Town, on April 6, 1652, on board five ships.
The objective was not to develop a colony but to establish a port of call to service the Dutch ships travelling between the Netherlands and its trading posts in the east, supplying meat, vegetables, fruit, wine and wheat. The VOC were surprisingly dismayed in the popularity of the port and its growth into a settler colony. As the only permanent settlement option and not solely serving as a trading post, the Cape Colony proved an ideal retirement destination for employees; for after several years of service in the company, an employee could lease a piece of land in the colony as ‘a free citizen’ – a Vryburgher or Vrijburger – on which he had to cultivate crops that he then had to sell to the United East India Company for a fixed price. As these farms were labour-intensive, Vryburghers imported slaves from Madagascar, Mozambique and Asia.
After King Louis XIV of France revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685 – which had protected the right of Huguenots in France to practise Protestant worship without persecution from the state – the colony attracted many Huguenot settlers, who eventually mixed with the general Vryburgher population. The authoritarian rule of the Company – telling farmers what to grow, for what price, controlling immigration and trade – influenced some farmers to escape the company rules, by moving far inland.
There were two distinct subgroups in the Vrijburger population and the first group were the itinerant farmers who began to settle further inland, seeking better pastures for their livestock as well as freedom from the VOC’s regulations. This settler community identified themselves as Boers in describing their agricultural way of life.Their farms were enormous by European standards for the land was free and underpopulated. A few Boers adopted a semi-nomadic lifestyle; known as trekboers. The Boers were suspicious of the centralised government and the increasing complexities of administration at the Cape. They continually migrated inland from the reaches of the colonial officialdom, every time it attempted to regulate their activities.
By the mid-eighteenth century the Boers had penetrated a thousand kilometres into South Africa’s interior beyond the Cape of Good Hope, at which point they encountered the Xhosa people migrating southwards. Competition between the two communities over resources on the frontier sparked the Xhosa Wars. ‘Harsh Boer attitudes towards black Africans were permanently shaped by their contact with the Xhosa, which bred insecurity and fear on the frontier.’
The second subgroup of the Vrijburger population were known as the Cape Dutch and remained in the southwestern Cape and especially in the growing settlement of Cape Town. They were urban dwellers and more educated, maintaining greater cultural ties with the Netherlands than the Boers did. The Cape Dutch became the backbone of the colony’s economic growth. They purposely did not venture inland so as to maintain close contact with a viable market.This was in sharp contrast with the Boers on the frontier, who lived on the margins of the market economy.
As the Cape Dutch could not participate in migrations to escape the colonial system, with ‘the Boer strategy of social and economic withdrawal… not viable for them. Their response to grievances with the Cape government was to demand political reform and greater representation, a practice that became commonplace under Dutch and subsequently British rule.’ In 1779, hundreds of Cape burghers smuggled a petition to Amsterdam, demanding an end to the VOC corruption and its contradictory laws. Unlike the Boers, the contact most Cape Dutch had with black Africans were mainly peaceful and so ‘their racial attitudes were more paternal than outright hostile.’
In 1752, French astronomer Nicholas-Louis de Lacaille when visiting the Cape, observed that the third-generation descendants of the original Huguenot – French and German – settlers spoke Dutch as their first language. While Afrikaans had developed from the Dutch vernacular of South Holland.
In 1795, after the battle of Muizenberg in present day Cape Town, the British occupied the colony. Then under the terms of the Peace of Amiens in 1802, Britain acceded the colony to the Dutch in March 1803. As the Batavian Republic had nationalised the United East India Company in 1796, the colony now came under the direct rule of The Hague. The outbreak of the Napoleonic wars in May 1803, then invalidated the Peace agreement. In January 1806, the British re-occupied the colony. The Anglo-Dutch Treaty in 1814 cemented the transfer of sovereignty finally to Great Britain.
Nearly one hundred years later, dissatisfaction with British rule led to bloodshed in the Anglo-Boer Wars from 1880 to 1881 and 1889 to 1902, with the loss of many innocent Boer lives in British Concentrations camps. The Union of South Africa occurred in 1910 when the four British colonies combined: the Cape, Natal, Transvaal and the Orange River or Orange Free State. In the twentieth century Afrikaner nationalism took the form of political parties and secret societies, like the Broederbond. In 1914, the National Party formed to promote Afrikaner economic interests and finally sever South Africa’s ties to the United Kingdom. It rose to prominence in winning the 1948 general election; thereby enforcing a harsh policy of racial segregation known as apartheid and declared South Africa a republic, withdrawing from the British Commonwealth. The National Party eventually left power in 1994 following negotiations to end apartheid and losing South Africa’s first multiracial elections.
Thousands of Flemish along with the Dutch, migrated to South Africa for many years between the 1600s and the twentieth century. Immigration slowed eventually, but there remains a considerable Flemish population in Southern Africa. Judging by the 2011 census figures and South Africa’s population of 60,672,691 people, some 8.2% are of white European extraction. Within that percentage the Afrikaners make up approximately 60% in the nine provinces and 5.2% of the population – 3,154,979 people. The British descended peoples comprise about 40% and 3% of the population – 1,820,180 people. A total white population of approximately 4,975,159 people.
Afrikaners are descended mainly from Dutch, German and French immigrants, coupled with small percentages of other Europeans and also indigenous African peoples. By 1691 over a quarter of the white Afrikaner population of South Africa was not ethnically Dutch.The number of permanent settlers – just prior to the end of the Dutch administration in 1795 – numbered 26,720,of whom 50% were Dutch, 27% German, 17% French and 5.5% Scandinavian, Belgian and others. This demographic breakdown has been used in many studies to represent the ethnic makeup of modern Afrikaners, which has been criticised by academics such as Dr. Johannes Heese.
‘Based on Heese’s genealogical research of the period from 1657 to 1867, his study Die Herkoms van die Afrikaners (“The Origins of the Afrikaners”) estimated an average ethnic admixture for Afrikaners of 35.5% Dutch, 34.4% German, 13.9% French, 7.2% non-European [Chinese, India, Madagascar], 2.6% British, 2.8% other European [Danish, Norwegian, Portuguese] and 3.6% unknown.
Heese argued that previous studies wrongly classified some German progenitors as Dutch, although for the purposes of his own study he also reclassified a number of Scandinavian (especially Danish) progenitors as German… British historian George McCall Theal estimated an admixture of 67% Dutch, with a nearly equal contribution of roughly 17% from the Huguenots and Germans.Theal argued that most studies suggesting a higher percentage of German ancestry among Afrikaners wrongly counted as “German” all those who came from German-speaking Swiss cantons and ignored the VOC’s policy of recruiting settlers among the Dutch diaspora living in the border regions of several German states.’
The degree of intermixing among Afrikaners can be attributed to the unbalanced sex ratio when under Dutch governance. Most VOC employees who sailed from the Netherlands were not allowed to bring their families with them. Between 1657 and 1806 only 454 women arrived at the Cape, compared to the 1,590 male colonists.Thus, white South African women, like their counterparts in colonial North America began to marry much younger and so also bear more children than Western Europeans. Afrikaner families were much larger in size, more interconnected and also became more clannish than those of other colonial settlements in the world. Some of the more common Afrikaner surnames include Botha, Pretorius and van der Merwe.
Similar to other large population groups that have been propagated by a smaller gene pool of progenitors [refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran], Afrikaners have experienced an increase in the frequency of some rare ailments, including skin disorders such as variegate porphyria and higher levels of cholesterol type familial hypercholesterolaemia. Afrikaners have some peculiarities genetically, which has made them interest to scientists. They seem to exhibit high frequencies of classical Mendelian diseases – an inherited single mutated gene – a hallmark of inbreeding or population bottlenecks.
Whether the percentage proportions are exactly correct for the Dutch, German and French components of the Afrikaners may not be as important as the fact there are undoubtedly multiple strains which constitute the genetic composition of the Afrikaner. I would propose that they are not the exact same people as the Dutch Midianite descended people, but perhaps the later Kenite lines; which also have a genetic affiliation with Midian. We have ascertained that the northern Hivites lived in the northern regions of Israel – modern Lebanon – and were the white population who lived with the residue of black peoples descended from Hiv of Canaan, living in Sidon and also known as Phoenicians as the Aramaeans of Tyre [refer Chapter XXII Canaan & Africa].
We have also noted that Heber the Kenite and his family departed from those Kenites descended from Jethro and dwelt in the north of Israel’s territory in Zebulon’s and Naphtali’s allotments. The significance of this will be borne out when we study Jacob’s sons. We have also deduced that Jethro was likely a Kenite on one side of his family and either Midianite on the other, or possibly a shared Midian and Lot lineage, that is the equivalent of Dutch and French ancestry combined.
Finally, we learned of a branch of the Kenites, called the Rechabites, who were a god-fearing people; which runs a striking parallel with the Huguenots. Strictly, the Huguenots were French Protestants from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries living primarily in southern and western France. They were followers of the teachings of John Calvin or Calvinists; which emphasised the sovereignty of God and the authority of the Bible. The Huguenots were invariably ‘skilled artisans, craftsmen, farmers and professional people’ including: ‘doctors, schoolmasters, merchants, mariners, shipwrights’ and aristocrats. They were not pastoralists or farmers.
As they gained influence in society and openly displayed their faith, this attracted Catholic hostility; particularly when they declared their intention to create a ‘state within the state.’ A series of religious conflicts ensued known as the French Wars of Religion between 1562 to 1598. Persecution by the French Catholic government headed by king Louis XIV led to some three hundred thousand Huguenots fleeing France for England, Holland, Switzerland, Prussia and the Dutch and English colonies in the Americas. Interestingly, the Huguenot Society of London was formed in 1885 and it decided to not only define a Huguenot as a French Protestant but to also include religious refugees from Belgium and the Netherlands.
In South Africa’s settlement apart from the British, the three main contributions represented by the Dutch and Flemish, Germans and the French underline the interconnectedness of the Dutch and German contributions as the white descendants of the ancient Hivites and Hittites.
The Dutch imposed their language upon the French Huguenots and imposed their religion upon the northern Germans who were predominantly Lutheran. The Reformed Calvinist religion and Afrikaans language have both had a unique impact on South Africa’s evolution. The strong connection of the Afrikaners with the Netherlands has been significant. The Prime Minister of South Africa from 1958 to 1966, Hendrik Verwoerd for instance, was born in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Another fact hard to ignore, is that the Huguenot French component seems to have persevered to a greater extent culturally than the German. The last Afrikaner President for example was named F W de Klerk; his surname actually being a form of Le Clerc. Another prominent South African head of state was Daniel Francois Malan.
One Afrikaner author, J M Greeff, 2007, states regarding his own ancestry: “It is not clear if my higher estimate of French contribution is because of a systematic mistake in Heese’s (1970) estimate, or if it is because of a quirkiness in my own ancestry. It seemed to be the case that when a lineage hit the French Huguenots it stayed in this group. It will be interesting to compare the degree of inbreeding of the early generations of Huguenots to the other early immigrants. In the light of the calculations of Heyer et al. (2005) there is an interesting possibility that the cultural inheritance of fitness may have led to a systematic bias in Afrikaners, since Huguenots tended to be more educated and trained than German emigrants who tended to be soldiers. We are currently investigating this hypothesis.”
This is pertinent when viewed with our study of the French, the French Quebecers, the Basque and the Catalonians. Both the Dutch and Germans had less pressure to emigrate than the French Huguenots, who having been religiously persecuted and while fleeing for their lives in vacating France, had a far stronger incentive in moving to the Cape to be completely clear of any further persecution. Possibly, the genetic contribution of the French and those who fled to Holland, has had a greater proportional impact on the whole Afrikaner composition.
The rural male population surplus of northern Germany died abroad, not returning home. These men contributed greatly to the census figures of the Afrikaner population during much of its history, though it seems plausible that their fitness was lower than the Dutch and Huguenot groups, as they lacked the resources to prosper in a world which was much closer to the Malthusian [exponential growth based on a constant rate] edge than today. Not everyone leaves descendants and it is plausible that these Germans were fated not to do so to a greater extent than the Dutch and Huguenots, whom they were employed to protect and serve.
This would explain why the German contribution has been a shadow of the Dutch rather than the other way around. Additionally, the genetic closeness of the north German and Dutch populations may simply be the reason for the blurring of the two. It is thought by many that the Dutch are an example of ‘simply another group of north Germans who transformed their regional identity into a national one for various reasons.’
If this were true, then every small nation next to a larger one, would just be an offshoot. Biblical and secular histories, plus autosomal and Haplogroup DNA prove this line of reasoning incorrect.
Before we delve deeper, a few interesting Haplogroup facts on Abraham’s and Keturah’s sons. According to Eupedia, Iceland has the fewest number of Haplogroups in all of Europe. Y-DNA Haplogroup I1a is far more distributed in Nordic countries, like Norway and Sweden, while only faint traces of it can be found in Southern European countries. A genetic study of Iceland’s population revealed that the majority of their male ancestors are Nordic, while the majority of their female ancestors are Celtic. A similar DNA study of the people of the Faroe Islands showed that 87% of their male ancestors are Scandinavian and 84% of their female ancestors are either Scottish or Irish.
Ninety-nine percent of European R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 [M417, with an origin circa 3400 BCE from a bottleneck lineage purportedly originating in Ukraine], which itself derives from R-M198, R1a1a and it in turn stems from R-M459, R1a1. A few pertinent subclades are: R1a-L664, which is essentially Northwest European and found chiefly in Western Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles and R1a-Z284, which is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway; found also in parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. There is a central European clade R-M458, which peaks in the Czechs and an eastern clade, R-M558 peaking in Russia.
Khazaria, Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook: emphasis & bold mine:
‘In “The Norway Project”… I1 is Scandinavia’s most common Y-DNA haplogroup and it probably originated in Denmark. R1a, common in eastern Europe, is also found in this project in subclades like R1a1a and R1a1a1. R1b, common in western Europe, is also found… and… N1c1 is a subclade found… especially common among Finns, Estonians, and Saami [Madai-Japheth] so it’s believed to have come from intermarriage with Saami men. Less common haplogroups that members have include, among others, E1b1b, G2a, I2, J1, J2b, Q1a3, and Q1a3a. E and J haplogroups have Middle Eastern origins, while Q may originate in Central Asia or Siberia, and G2a subclades probably originate in either Iran or the Caucasus region… in terms of Y-DNA, “The presence of Eu14 in Norway suggests that some admixture between Norwegians and the Finno-Ugric Uralic speakers of Scandinavia (Saami, Finns) has occurred.” (Eu14 is very common in Finland.)
Haplogroup N3 was found at an elevated 11% of Norwegians from northern Norway (especially Finnmark where 18.6% of the Norwegians have it) whereas none of the Norwegians in southern Norway had it. Scientists believe N3 came to Norwegians through intermarriage with Saami and Finnish men, as based on data from all populations N3 “has been interpreted as a signature of Uralic Finno-Ugric speaking males migrating to northern Scandinavia about 4000-5000 years ago”.
Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast. The project’s most common mtDNA (maternal) lineages are H, J, K, T2, U5, and V. Other mtDNA haplogroups include I1a, I4, T1, T1a, U1b, U2, U2e, U4a1, X, and Z1a. H is the most common mtDNA haplogroup in Norwegians according to published studies, at a frequency of about 40%.
Research by B. Berger, S. Willuweit, et al. confirmed that pre-modern Norwegian men also possessed I1, R1a, R1b, andQ.’
These ‘pre-Norwegian’ men were the true Vikings – and though related, are different peoples – who migrated to the British Isles and Ireland.
‘Among 23andMe’s customers, 8-10%** of Norwegians carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene, 8-10% carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene.
“Different genetic components in the Norwegian population revealed by the analysis of mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisisms.” European Journal of Human Genetics 10:9 (September 2002), multiple authors: pages 521-529.
The scientists studied Norwegians’ maternal and paternal lineages using DNA technology. Overall, Norwegians are genetically similar to Germans. They concluded, for instance, that the mtDNA haplogroup J, found among 10% of Norwegians, was probably “brought by the Germanic migrations to Norway.” They also showed that 75% of Norwegian men have one of the Y-DNA haplotypes Eu7 and Eu18, which are both common in Germany. They found that the non-Germanic Saami people contributed “mtDNAs with the 16144,16189, 16270 motif” to Norwegians.
Excerpts from the Abstract:
“… Both mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms showed a noticeable genetic affinity between Norwegians and central Europeans, especially Germans… Although Y chromosome binary and microsatellite data indicate that 80% of the haplotypes are closely related to Central and western Europeans, the remainder share a unique binary marker (M17) common in eastern Europeans with informative microsatellite haplotypes suggesting a different demographic history. Other minor genetic influences on the Norwegian population from Uralic speakers and Mediterranean populations were also highlighted.”
‘The breakdown of the 4 top [Norwegian] haplogroups was:
I1 = 37.3% R1b = 31.3% R1a = 26.3% N3 = 3.8%
‘Haplogroup R1a, which is common in East European populations, is most frequently encountered among Norwegians in eastern-central areas of Norway, reaching its peak (31% frequency) among those living in the Trøndelag region in central Norway. Haplogroup R1b is more prevalent in western and southern Norway, near the seacoast.’
The History and Geography of Human Genes, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi, and Alberto Piazza, 1994.
Their research shows that Norwegians are nearest to Germans and Dutch by genetic distance,followed closely behind by Danes,then Swedes, then English. These data are reportedly on page 270 in the table “Occidental/European genetic distances for reference purposes”. Icelanders are largely descended from male Norwegian migrants to medieval Iceland. Many people living in northern Scotland and the islands of Orkney and Shetland have partial descent from Norwegian settlers as well.
Especially common Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroups in the “Danish Demes Regional DNA Project” include I1, I1d and I1d1, I2, R1a, and R1b (and subhaplogroups like R1b1a2a1a1a4 which is also known as R-L48), and less common haplogroups include ones within the broad letter groups E, F, G, J, N, Q. In the “Denmark DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups in Denmark-origin lineages include E1b1b1a1b, I2b1, I1, I1d1, J2a4b3, Q1a3, R1a1a, R1b1a2, R1b1a2a1a1, R1b1a2a1a1b4, and certain others. Y-DNA I1… is typically found among the Nordic peoples of Scandinavia… and in northern Germany. It is also very common in western Finland.’
‘According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 10.8%* of… danish people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. “… Associations between SNP alleles and dark versus light hair colour in 378 Danes” reveals that 9 percent of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805007 (R151C) and 8 percent** of these Danes carry at least one copy of the minor allele T in the SNP rs1805008 (R160W), both on the MC1R gene. These alleles are frequently associated with red hair in various populations. The correlation of red hair alleles in MC1R with actual red hair was found to be stronger among the Scottish participants than among the Danish participants.
… 23andMe and other population distance and admixture tools… [studied] the autosomal DNA of about 600 Danish high school students who documented their ancestry… “chromosome painting revealed strong genetic influence from neighboring Nordic (Sweden and Norway) and Germanic (Germany and Holland) countries and negligible influence from Finland, France and Portugal.”’
‘In “The Swedish DNA Project”, Y-DNA haplogroups… show about 35-40% of Swedish males carry I1 or its subclades. In the project are participants with I1 (L22-) itself as well as I1b, I1d, I1d1, and I1d4. Among 23andMe’s customers, 10-12%** of Swedes carry the T red hair allele in the R160W gene (one of the highest frequencies in the world), 6-8%* carry the T red hair allele in the R151C gene, and 0-2% carry the C red hair allele in the D294H gene.
Swedish population Substructure Revealed by Genome-Wide Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Data, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 6(2) (February 9, 2011):
… 350,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped from 1525 Swedes. The researchers compared the Swedish samples to 3,212 samples from populations worldwide, “including Finns, northern Germans, British and Russians”. Excerpts from the Abstract: … The Swedes – especially southern Swedes – were genetically close to the Germans and British, while their genetic distance to Finns was substantially longer.
An excerpt from the body of [a] paper:
“Genetically the Swedes have appeared relatively similar to their neighboring populations – for example the Norwegians, Danish, Germans, Dutch and British… In contrast, the Finns… do not appear genetically very close to the Swedes although they are geographically nearby.”
3,112 European people (including among others Swedes, Estonians, Finns, Russians, Poles) were genetically tested. The Swedish samples came from the capital city of Sweden, Stockholm. The study describes a genetic barrier “between the Baltic region and Poland on the one hand, and Sweden on the other”. Further down it refers to the “barrier [that] emerged between the Eastern Baltic region and Sweden, but not between the Eastern Baltic region and Poland”. The study’s data comparing Swedes with Finns is consistent with how Swedes are descended mainly from Germanic people but came to mix somewhat with Finns… especially in the case of northern Swedes…’
We have learned that the Baltic people are related to the Poles as both descend from Joktan, a descendant of Arphaxad and a son of Shem. The Finns are somewhat related to the Baltic peoples of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and hence their difference with the Scandinavians and particularly their neighbours, Sweden. The percentage of I1a and N1c1 of the Norwegians and specifically the Swedes, may reflect their intermarrying with the Finns and or the Sammi to some degree; though could just as well be indicative of Keturah’s likely ancestry from the Finns descended from possibly one of Arphaxad’s other sons, Anar or Ashcol and hence the strong similarity between the Scandinavian nations and Finland regarding Y-DNA Haplogroups I1 and N1c1.
Eupedia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘What about modern Belgium, this small country divided by unending linguistic quarrels? Do Flemings and Walloons really have different origins? It is easy to claim that the Flemings are of Germanic descent just because they speak a Germanic language. This type of reasoning has already proved false in the case of the South Germany, where the Neolithic, Celtic and even Roman inhabitants remained slightly dominant genetically compared to the later Germanic invaders. Are Flemings and Walloons really genetically divided across linguistic lines, or could there be unexpected unity among them… For the first time in history, these issues are going to have a scientifically provable answer, thanks to DNA.
The dominant haplogroup in the Benelux is R1b, almost equally divided between the Germanic R1b-U106 and Italo-Celtic R1b-P312 subclades. Both are present in all the Benelux, but with a very different distribution. R1b-U106 (S21) reaches its maximum frequency in Frisia (42%) and the central Netherlands (35%), then decreases progressively in the southern Netherlands (30%), Flanders (25%) and Wallonia (22%), to increase again in Luxembourg (32%). Not all subclades of U106 may be of Germanic origin. Some subclades appear to have expanded from Scandinavia and North Germany… These include L48, the largest branch of U106, and Z18, another major branch. These also happen to be the two dominant subclades in the Benelux.Within L48, Scandinavians belong almost exclusively to the Z9 branch, while theL47 branch appears to be found mostly in the Benelux and Britain. The other major branch, Z156 is subdivided in DF96 and DF98. DF98 is also found in Scandinavia and could be considered Germanic.
However the vast majority of Z156 in Flanders is DF96, a subclade that is very rare in Scandinavia. DF96 might be more Proto-Celto-Germanic and would have dispersed around Germany and the Benelux without passing by Scandinavia… 100% of the Luxembourg samples were Germanic. The sample size may to too small to judge, but it appears that Wallonia has a higher percentage of true Germanic/Nordic U106 (67%) than Flanders (56%), despite Flanders having a slightly higher percentage of U106 in total.’
The largest branch of R-U106 is L48 and the split between the Scandinavians with Z9 and the L47 of the Benelux peoples, highlights that four sons from Keturah are similar: the Nordic-Scandinavian nations. While the other two brothers are similar with one another, the Benelux-Celtic nations – just as we would expect similarity and diversity within a family of six sons. We will also learn that the Nordic sons from Keturah are genetically more aligned with the Germanic-Teuton Germans, while the Low Countries are more aligned with the English Saxon-Vikings.
‘Dutch R1b-U106 has a particularly large swath of Z18 (25% of U106) like Scandinavia, but with more diversity of subclades. The dominant branch is L48 (about 40%), which has about three quarters of Z9 for one quarter of L47. In contrast with Belgium, the Dutch also have a considerable amount of S1688 (about 15%, including U198), a subclade that reaches itsmaximum frequency in England, but is rare in Germany and mostly absent from Scandinavia, central and eastern Europe, Italy or Iberia.So far, S1688 has not been found in Wallonia or Luxembourg and only makes up 4% of Flemish R1b-U106. U198 might be native to the Netherlands and would have been brought to England by the Anglo-Saxons from Frisia.***
In contrast with Flanders and England this time, the Dutch have hardly any Z156, and the little there is is DF96, perhaps of Flemish or Saxon origin. Interestingly the high percentage of Z18 and L48>Z9 in the Netherlandsresembles more the pattern observed in Wallonia than in Flanders. The main difference is that the Walloons have more Z156 (from Germany) and the Dutch more S1688 (native to the region).
The other main R1b subclade in the Benelux is R1b-P312 (S116), which is found in equal proportions in Flanders and Wallonia (33%), but decreases as one moves north to reach 20% in the southern Netherlands, 15% in the central Netherlands and 10% in Frisia.’
The strong link between the Dutch and English via S1688 may have its origin from primarily, the taking of 32,000 Midianite virgin girls and inserting them into the Israelite gene pool. Secondarily, Zipporah’s two sons with Moses, may have chosen to ultimately dwell in Midian and marry Midianite wives. The various R1b subclade differences we have just read between Belgium and the Flemish, and Walloons, compared with the Dutch, highlights the fact that Belgium is a different brother, stemming from Jokshan and his sons Sheba and Dedan; while the Netherlands is the separate and distinct^^ brother, Midian.
‘Here is breakdown of R1b subclades in Belgium from the Brabant Y-DNA Project. About half of Belgian R1b-P312 belong to the U152(S28) subclade [associated with France, Switzerland and Italy]… with a slightly higher frequency in Wallonia (16%) and Luxembourg (14%) [Dedan] than in Flanders (10%) [Sheba], and it keeps decreasing as one moves north to the southern Netherlands (6%), the central Netherlands (3.5%), and is almost absent from Frisia (1%) [Midian]. A bit over half of U152 in Wallonia and over 80% of U152 in Flanders belong to the L2 subclade.Wallonia seems to have more diversity, with a higher presence of typically Italic/Roman subclades like Z56 and Z192, but also of… Z36. Autosomal ancestry analysis of Belgian individuals who tested with 23andMe shows that Walloons are much more likely than the Flemings to have a small percentage of Italian DNA (typically 2 to 4% + a few more percents of ‘broadly southern European’)…’
‘The Atlantic Celtic R1b-L21 (S145) [M529]lineage, most commonly found in the British Isles, reaches its maximum in the western half of Belgium (10%), including Flemish and Walloon Brabant, then decreases to 7-8% to the east of the country. Its frequency falls to 3-5% in the Netherlands, with little difference nationwide. Most of these lineages are probably of Gaulish [Celtic] origin, although some could have been brought by the Vikings from the British Isles, especially in coastal areas. The Vikings are well known to have taken slaves among the British and Irish populations, which they brought with them to their colonies (e.g. Iceland, Normandy) and back to Scandinavia. Nowadays, over one quarter of Icelandic paternal lineages and half of the maternal lineages descend from those slaves [Scottish and Irish] brought by the Vikings. In Norway the proportion is about 15% and 30% respectively. It would not be surprising if the Vikings also brought slaves to places they founded on the continent, like Bruges, explaining how some typically Scottish or Irish subclades of L21 ended up there.
R1a was the other main Indo-European lineage… the(southern) Dutch and the Belgians have considerably lower levels of haplogroup R1a than all the Germans. Over half of the R1a in the Benelux belongs to the West Germanic L664 subclade. Other lineages include the Scandinavian Z284 subclade and the Central/Eastern European lineages M417 and Z280. Only a few R1a samples (from Luxembourg, Utrecht) belonged to the Z2123 subclade of R1a-Z93… One R1a sample from Amsterdam belonged to CTS6, the Jewish subclade of R1a, also under Z93.^’
‘Haplogroup I1, one of the most reliably Germanic lineages, has nearly identical frequencies in Flanders (12%) and Wallonia (10.5%), but is slightly higher in the Netherlands (16.5%), although that is still a far cry from the 35% observed in Scandinavia. Only Luxembourg has [a] surprisingly low frequency of I1 (2.5%)… The Nordic CTS6364 clade (including L22) was found in 18.5% of Dutch and 33% of Belgian I1 samples. The West Germanic Z58 branch accounted for 20% of Belgian samples (Z60>L573, Z138 and Z382 clades), and 63% of Dutch samples.
Half of the Dutch Z58 belonged to the Z140 clade, which so far hasn’t been found in Belgium.Z140 is found chiefly in Denmark, the Netherlands and Britain, and to a lower extent Germany.It seems that it is mostly a Frisian and Anglo-Saxon clade***. The rest of Dutch Z58 belonged mostly to Z138 and Z382. The more East Germanic Z63 branch made up 13% and 12% of Belgian and Dutch samples, respectively. Overall, Belgians appear to carry a considerably higher percentage of Nordic/Scandinavian subclades of I1, while the Dutch possess mostly West Germanic clades.^^ This could be explained by the higher percentage of Frankish ancestry in Belgium, since the Franks originated in Denmark. The majority of the Dutch I1 might be native to the Netherlands itself or neighbouring Saxony.’
‘Haplogroup J1 is one of the most common Jewish lineages, alongside E-M34 and J2a1. In the Benelux, J1 was found almost exclusively around Amsterdam and Antwerp, two cities known for welcoming Jewish immigrants in past centuries, while J2 was also higher in both in Holland andin the province of Antwerp. It is therefore likely that the differential of 2% for these lineages in Holland and Antwerp are of Jewish origin.^’
Khazaria, Dutch & Frisian Genetics, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Dutch people live in the northwestern European country called the Netherlands. Traditionally Protestant by religion, they differ from the traditionally Catholic Dutch-speaking Flemings of the Flanders region of Belgium, a neighboring country.
From 1815 until 1830, however, both countries were part of a United Kingdom of the Netherlands, and until 1581 the lands were also united.
The Dutch language, with many similarities to English, is part of a linguistic continuum that stretches into northern Germany, as varieties of Low German are distinct from the High German dialects/languages of southern Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and Luxembourg. The Dutch people are linguistically and culturally distinct from the Frisian people who also inhabit the Netherlands. (Many centuries ago, the Frisians had their own independent country.)
The Dutch people themselves are split into multiple autosomal DNA clusters, with a notable difference between North Dutch and South Dutch people [Recall, Midian had five sons]. North Dutch people autosomally cluster close to Frisians, English, and Danes, whereas South Dutch and the Flemishautosomally cluster close to Walloons and West Germans. According to Piotr Kapuscinski, this is caused by the ancient division between North Sea Germanic (Ingvaeonic) peoples and Wesser-Rhine Germanic (Istvaeonic) peoples, and he notes that North Dutch descend from Frisians, Angles, Saxons, and Norse (all Germanic peoples) whereas South Dutch descend from Celts and Germanic Franks. Therefore, North Dutch and South Dutch don’t cluster close to one another on autosomal plots of population averages.
Genetically, R1b haplogroups are very commonly found in the Y chromosomes of Frisian males just as in the males of other ethnic groups in this geographic region (Atlantic-bordering Europe). As one would expect, participants in the Frisian Waddenproject often have R1b. The “Frisian Modal Haplotype” (FMH), called R1b-8, was discovered by Kenneth Nordtvedt and is tested by looking at only 6 markers. Below R1b-8 on the genetic tree isR-U106, and a level below R-U106 on the tree are subclades including R-L47, R-L48, R-L48x, and R-L148. The primary Frisian Y-DNA haplogroup is the R1b subclade called U106/S21, defined by its mutations U106 (and L48) and negative for P312. It’s coded by Family Tree DNA as haplogroup R1b1b2a1a. U106 is also found among partial descendants of Frisians like English people, as well as in parts of Benelux, Germany, and Denmark. Some other Frisian men have the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 which is most common in Scandinavia.
“Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration.” Molecular Biology and Evolution 19:7, multiple authors, (2002): pages 1008-1021. English and Welsh people are among those studied and compared to each other. They also collected samples from Norwegians and Frisians. The Frisian samples came from 94 males who live in Friesland in the northern part of the Netherlands. Excerpt from the Abstract:
“When we compared our data with an additional 177 samples collected in Friesland and Norway, we found that the Central English and Frisian*** samples were statistically indistinguishable.” Excerpt from the Discussion section: “The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent.
Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity.”’
We will return in subsequent chapters to address the red hair alleles of the Scots, the J1 and J2 Haplogroups of the Jews, the English-Frisian link as well as the English-North Welsh relationship. As of writing, I have not found any substantial material on the Haplogroups for the Afrikaners in South Africa, or the indigenous inhabitants of Brussels, possible descendants of the Leummim. One interpretation for the name Leumm is ‘countries without water.’ Which is interesting, when compared with a landlocked territory such as Brussels. The graph below represents the regional genetic variation in Belgium and at once reveals the closeness of Brussels, Flanders and Wallonia, yet the distinctiveness of all three.
With regard to South Africa we have investigated the Black citizens [Chapter XII Canaan & Africa] and so can compare with the Y-DNA Haplogroups for the White citizens; which include those of British descent. We will endeavour to obtain a partial picture at least, by isolating the Black and British elements if possible and including what we learn from the Dutch in the Netherlands.
The top seven most common mtDNA Haplogroups for Iceland, Scandinavia, Bel-Lux and the Netherlands.
Iceland: H [37.7%] – J [13.7%] – T2 [10.1%] – K [9.8%] –
Sweden: H [45.8%] – U5 [12.1%] – J [7.7%] – K [6.4%] –
HV0+V [5%] – T2 [4%] – U4 [3%]
Denmark: H [47.3%] – J [13.4%] – K [8.9%] – T2 [5.8%] –
U5 [5.8%] – HV0+V [3.6%] – U2 [2.7%]
Belgium & Luxembourg: H [46.9%] – K [12.1] – T2 [9.4%] – J [6%] –
U [5.4%] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%]
Netherlands: H [45%] – T2 [12%] – J [11%] – K [10%] –
HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%]
H HV0+V J K T2 U4 U5
Finland 36 7 6 5 2 1 21
Iceland 38 2 14 10 10 3 8
Netherlands 45 8 11 10 12 7 8
Norway 46 4 11 5 8 3 11
Sweden 46 5 8 6 4 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 9 6 2 6
Bel-Lux 47 3 6 12 9 3 3
The six sons of Keturah show a close resemblance in their maternal Haplogroups. Iceland or Ishbak, is the only one that deviates slightly, which we have addressed with their marked high percentage ancestry from Scandinavian fathers and Celtic mothers. The addition of Keturah’s possible family’s descendants from Anar or Ashcol as modern Finland’s mtDNA Haplogroups, shows both the plausibility of the previously speculated line of reasoning and at the same time, the variable difference which highlights Finland not being a mutual descendant with the other seven nations but rather, their progenitor with their father Abraham.
H J T2 U5 K HVO+V HV U4 T1
Italy 40 8 8 5 8 3 3 2 3
Switzerland 48 12 9 7 5 5 0.5 3 2
France 44 8 6 8 9 5 3 3 2
Benelux 47 6 9 3 12 3 0.7 3 2
Netherlands 45 11 12 8 10 8 7 2
Denmark 47 13 6 6 9 4 2 1
Sweden 46 8 4 12 6 5 0.5 3 3
Norway 46 11 8 11 5 4 0.2 3 1
Iceland 38 14 10 8 10 2 2 3 0.5
The table above comparing Abraham and Keturah’s descendants with the main mtDNA Haplogroups of Abraham’s brothers, Nahor and Haran. The table below a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Keturah’s descendants.
H HV HV0+V J T2 U U5 K
Switzerland 48 0.4 5 12 9 0.4 7 5
Bel-Lux 47 0.7 3 6 9 5 3 12
Denmark 47 4 13 6 1 6 9
Norway 46 0.2 4 11 8 2 11 5
Sweden 46 0.5 5 8 4 3 12 6
Netherlands 45 8 11 12 0.5 8 10
France 44 2 5 8 6 1 8 9
Brazil 44 2 11
Portugal 44 0.1 5 7 6 3 7 6
Spain 44 0.7 8 7 6 2 8 6
Poland 44 1 5 8 7 1.4 10 4
Russia 41 2 4 8 7 2 10 4
Greece 41 3 1.8 10 7 3 5 5
Italy 40 3 3 8 8 3 5 8
Ukraine 39 4 4 8 8 0.6 10 5
Iceland 38 4 2 14 10 0.2 8 10
Romania 37 2 4 11 5 2 7 8
Finland 36 7 6 2 0.8 21 5
Turkey 31 5 0.7 9 4 6 3 6
Iran 17 7 0.6 14 5 12 3 7
Switzerland remains as one bookend of the European descended peoples, with Iran remaining at the other end as per the dominant mtDNA Haplogroup H. The addition of the Benelux and Scandinavian nations sees them clustered together, as well as with those peoples of western Europe with which they are more closely related. The exception being Icelanders.
As mentioned previously: ‘A pattern has emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, increasing as one heads west across Europe[.] Switzerland though, has not fitted into this genetic type as it sits firmly in central Europe. What we will notice as we progress, is that the nations of northwestern Europe [in the main,] exhibit higher levels of mtDNA Haplogroup H further north and west; with the Swiss being the first to evidence this fact.’ The addition of Keturah’s sons supports this correlation, as they now bookend with Switzerland.
Restating 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. R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared [with] Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men.
Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning in 1977 BCE.
The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 or S21, is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study.
It is worth mentioning that the north to south axis is as important as the east to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg, Aram and the mixed line of Casluh and Caphtor which have the highest levels of R1b [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil].’
Turkey R-M269 14% – R-U106 0.4%
Russia R-M269 21% – R-U106 5.4%
Slovenia R-M269 17% – R-U106 4%
Czech R-M269 28% – R-U106 14%
Poland R-M269 23% – R-U106 8%
Ukraine R-M269 25% – R-U106 9%
Italy R-M269 53% – R-U106 6%
France R-M269 52% – R-U106 7%
Swiss R-M269 58% – R-U106 13%
Netherlands R-M269 54% – R-U106 35%
Denmark R-M269 34% – R-U106 17%
The Dutch possess a similar percentage of R1b-M269 as their near relatives the French, Italians and the Swiss. The Germanic sub-clade of R-U106 is especially high in the Netherlands, partially due to the Frisian element of the population. In fact it is a far higher percentage even than in Germany, which we will find is similar to Denmark’s.
Denmark exhibits a higher level of R-U106 in keeping with their position in both northern and western Europe. Unexpectedly, the Danish percentage of R-M269 is lower than 50%. The reason is partially due to the fact that Denmark has a higher percentage of R1a of 15%, compared to say the Netherlands with 4%; though mainly due to the high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup I1, indicative of northern Europe at 34%; compared to the Netherlands with 16.5% and France at 9%.
The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the six sons of Abraham and his second wife, Keturah. Belgium’s Haplogroups are near identical to the Flemish percentages; therefore figures are included for both Flanders and Wallonia.
A comparison of the main Y-DNA Haplogroups reveals and supports a number of points. Finland is obviously an outlier; even more apparent than as already shown by its mtDNA Haplogroups. Recall its percentage of Haplogroup N is extraordinarily high and indicative of a very northerly location in Europe such as the Baltic nations and Russia who border Finland. Finland shares a similarly high percentage of Haplogroup I1 shared by all the Nordic nations. The three Scandinavian countries, with Iceland are all uniquely I1 driven, thus explaining the lesser percentages for R1b. The question remains as to which Haplogroup is the original between R1b and I1, and which one has derived from admixture?
Even the Netherlands has a relatively high percentage of I1. Sweden shows the impact of mixing and intermarriage with the Finns and Sammi; whereas, the Norwegians less so. In the ancient past, both Sweden and Iceland very probably had Haplogroup percentages near identical with Norway and Denmark.
The R1b percentages support the premise that Belgium and Luxembourg comprise the descendants of Jokshan; as their levels are all comparable yet distinct from their other five siblings. Jokshan had two sons, Sheba and Dedan; who had three sons. Thus providing four lines of people and with the other five sons, making a total of nine. Sheba equating to the Flemish, Letush to the Walloons, Leumm to the Brussels Capital region and the Asshurim to Luxembourg.
Continuing our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Abraham and Keturah’s sons Midian, Medan, Jokshan, Ishbak, Zimran and Shuah.
J J1 J2 E1b1b G R1a R1b R1
Georgia 43 16 27 2 30 9 10 19
Armenia 33 11 22 6 12 5 30 35
Turkey 33 9 24 11 11 8 16 24
Iran 32 9 23 7 10 16 10 26
Greece 26 3 23 21 6 12 16 28
Italy 19 3 16 14 9 4 39 43
Romania 15 1 14 14 3 18 16 34
Portugal 13 3 10 14 7 2 56 58
Luxembourg 11 3 8 5 6 3 61 64
Brazil 10 10 11 5 4 54 58
Spain 10 2 8 7 3 2 69 71
France 8 2 6 8 6 3 59 62
Ukraine 5 1 5 7 3 44 8 52
Flanders 5 1 4 5 4 4 61 65
Netherlands 4 1 3 4 5 4 49 53
Switzerland 4 0.5 3 8 8 4 50 54
Poland 3 3 4 2 58 13 71
Russia 3 3 3 1 46 6 52
Denmark 3 3 3 3 15 33 48
Sweden 3 3 3 1 16 22 38
Wallonia 2 2 6 6 7 60 67
Frisians 1.4 2 7 55 62
Norway 0.5 0.5 1 1 26 32 58
Iceland 23 42 65
Finland 0.5 5 4 9
‘Georgia remains as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages.’ Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland still exhibits the highest percentage of R1a, while Greece has the most E1b1b. ‘Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.’ The Walloons move into third place for combined R1 Haplogroups. Both Luxembourgers and the Flemish pass the French for possessing the second highest levels of R1b after Spain.
‘Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations in the north of Europe. Haplogroups R1, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is prominent in the west; R1a in the east; I1 and I2a2 in the north and west; with I2a1 in the south and east. Haplogroup N1c1 is prominent in the north, in counter balance to J2, J1, E1b1b and G2a which are more commonly found in southern Europe.’
R1a R1b I1 I2a1 I2a2 N1c
Portugal 1.5 56 2 1.5 5
Spain 2 69 1.5 5 1
Luxembourg 3 61 3 3 6
France 3 59 9 3 4
Switzerland 4 50 14 2 8 1
Netherlands 4 49 17 1 7
Flanders 4 61 12 3 5
Brazil 4 54 [9]
Italy 4 39 5 3 3
Finland 5 4 28 0.5 62
Frisians 7 55 [34]
Wallonia 7 60 11 2 5
Turkey 8 16 1 4 0.5 4
Greece 12 16 4 10 1.5
Denmark 15 33 34 2 6 1
Sweden 16 22 37 2 4 7
Iran 16 10 0.5 1
Romania 18 16 4 28 3 2
Iceland 23 42 29 4 1
Norway 26 32 32 5 3
Ukraine 44 8 5 21 0.5 6
Russia 46 6 5 11 23
Poland 58 13 9 6 2 4
‘The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising I1, I2a2 and N1c1 are included.’
From a Y-DNA Haplogroup perspective it is interesting that the peoples descended from Abraham and Keturah form into pairs aside from Luxembourg. Rather than R1b being the defining marker it is Haplogroups R1a and I1 which show the pairing similarity. For instance, Denmark and Sweden; Norway and Iceland; and the Dutch and Flemish stand out. Correspondingly, the four Nordic nations possess less R1b and more I1 and R1a, in contrast with the five Benelux peoples who contrastingly possess more R1b and less I1 and R1a. Similarly, it is only the northern four nations which possess Haplogroup N1c1, likely from admixture with near northern neighbours. Sweden possessing the third highest levels after Finland and Russia. Finland had the highest level of I1 previously, though now surpassed by Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. Switzerland still retains the highest levels of I2a2, with the Netherlands in second place.
The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for South Africa are: E1b1a, R1b, E2, A1, B2, E1b1b and J. The Haplogroups E, B and A are reflective of the Black population; R1b and J for the White people and E1b1b a shared Haplogroup. There is diversity just within the Black population of South Africa as it contains the Bantu, Zulu, Xhosa and Khoisan peoples.
Disregarding the British factor in South Africa for a moment and using the predominant element of the Dutch for White South Africans, we can observe the close percentage similarity between the Haplogroups R1b and J. Haplogroup I is missing from the data available though it would be safe to assume it is included amongst the White population as the British descended peoples also possess I1 and I2. What is of interest, is the higher percentage of E1b1b and is probably attributable to admixture with the indigenous population. The inclusion of E1b1a and the rarer E1a are certainly evidence of mixing between the original inhabitants and the Europeans in South Africa.
Inside the ancestry of South Africa’s Afrikaners, The Conversation, May 21, 2021 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘By comparing the Afrikaners in our study to 1,670 individuals from 32 populations across the world we found that 4.7% of Afrikaner DNA has a non-European origin.That may seem like a small percentage, but 98.7% of the Afrikaners were admixed.
The admixture between European and Khoe-San was more common than church records suggest. In our study, though only 1.3% of Afrikaner genes came from the Khoe-San, most Afrikaners contained some Khoe-San genes.
The highest non-European contribution (1.7%) came from South Asia, or India. This reflects colonial men’s stated preference for marrying freed Indian slaves during the founding years. A little less than 1% of Afrikaner genes have an East Asian (Chinese or Japanese) origin.
The contribution of West and East Africa is the lowest, at 0.8%. This is likely to stem from the almost 18,000 slaves imported from Africa’s west and east coasts. The fraction of genes from West Africa is slightly higher than from East Africa, reflecting the fact that while West African slaves were few, they arrived four generations before slaves from East Africa.
A common perception about Afrikaners is that they stem from very few ancestors, which would have resulted in inbreeding. Inbreeding results in long stretches of the paternal and maternal chromosomes being identical to each other. By looking at the lengths of identical stretches, it is clear that Afrikaners are as variable as the average European. This is in part due to admixture between non-Europeans and Europeans, but also because Europeans came from all over Europe.
The strongest European genetic contribution is from northwestern Europe, with the most similar population being the Swiss German population. This signal could also be interpreted as a mixture between German, Dutch and French populations – as genealogical records indicate.
In conclusion, despite laws prohibiting mixed marriages from as early as 1658, and discrimination that culminated in the apartheid system, these genetic analyses confirm that most Afrikaners have admixed ancestry. Genealogical information has indicated as much,butthese genetic findings are irrefutable.’
For now – until an exhaustive study of the Afrikaner in conjunction with the Dutch is available – the true identity of the Dutch Afrikaner remains a tantalising mystery. Are the Afrikaners Midianites, or a slightly different composition compared with native Dutch? If so, the question arises whether the Kenite factor is hidden there.
It has been said that ‘the people in Europe the most like the English, are the Dutch.’ The close tie between England and the Netherlands is one that will become clearer when we study the United Kingdom. Another saying – and one the Dutch may not be particularly fond, though I do not intend any slight – is that ‘the Dutch are Germans with clogs.’ As we progress, the close relationship between the Dutch and the Deutsch will become apparent. The ancient link between the Hivites and Hittites will be clarified, the inter-changing terms, Midianites and Ishmaelites – and of Arabia and the wilderness – will be explained; the neighbouring states of the wealthy Etruscans and formidable, militaristic Romans will leap alive and the true identity of Ishmael, will fascinate like no other.
Turn your ear toward wisdom, and stretch your mind toward understanding. Call out for insight, and cry aloud for understanding. Seek it like silver; search for it like hidden treasure. Then you will understand… and discover the knowledge of God.
Proverbs 2:2-5 Common English Bible
“Let me say to you that truth has always lived with the minority; what the majority says at a given moment is usually wrong.”
The elder brother of Nahor is Haran. Haran died prematurely at eighty-two years of age either at the hands of his younger brother Abraham in an accident or highly unlikely, murdered by Nimrod, though more probably at the hand of King Shulgi of Ur [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. His father Terah, with Lot and Abraham’s families then moved in 1917 BCE, northwest six hundred miles and settled in Haran, a city-region associated with Nahor’s family in Padan-Aram. We will learn that Haran had other children apart from those named in the scriptures: Lot, Milcah and Sarah. We do not know the name of Haran’s wife, though it is likely that Haran married a descendent of Arphaxad through Peleg’s line. It is not clear if descendants of Haran already lived in Haran; or if they arrived later after Abraham. The term Haran for the region, may have been added to the biblical account retrospectively, if they followed.
The geographic relationship of Haran adjacent to Padan-Aram – with Aram-Nahor – which in turn was next to Aram is significant as this alignment is replicated today [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. Today, Aram includes Spain and Portugal and Padan-Aram signifies Italy. Regarding identities in the Bible; if there is more than one verse – even if it is only two – it is specifying a distinct people. Haran had a son called Lot and he in turn had two sons, Moab and Ammon. Aside from these peoples, we read about a people described as Haran twice in the Bible. We are therefore seeking a people not only related to Nahor and Haran, but also dwelling next to Nahor, Moab and Ammon in Western Europe.
2 Kings 19:12
English Standard Version
Have the gods of the nations delivered them, the nations that my fathers destroyed, Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, and the people of Eden…
Ezekiel 27:21-24
English Standard Version
21 Arabia and all the princes of Kedar [Ishmael] were your favored dealers in lambs, rams, and goats; in these they did business with you… 23Haran, Canneh, Eden, traders of Sheba, Asshur [Russia], and Chilmad traded with you. 24 In your market these traded with you [Tyre] in choice garments, in clothes of blue and embroidered work, and in carpets of colored material, bound with cords and made secure.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘There are two completely different Hebrew names that have ended up as the similar name Haran in English. We’ll call them Haran I and Haran II, and note that both versions occur in Genesis 11:31: The name Haran I: Summary meaning Mountainous, MountaineerFrom the noun (har), hill or mountain. The name Haran I is assigned two times in the Bible: A son of Terah and brother of Abraham… This Haran is the father of Lot. [The other] a Levite of the family of Gershon (1 Chronicles 23:9).
The noun (har) is the Bible’s common word for mountain or hill. The obviously related verb (hera) means to be or become pregnant. An association with the previous noun is obvious, although not because the stomach of a pregnant woman resembles a mountain. The Bible depicts nations as individual women even more than as mountains; the words, (‘umma) meaning people and (’em), meaning mother are closely related. A pregnant woman is to her husband what a conceiving nation is to its deity.
The name Haran II: Summary Meaning Freedom, Central Fire From the root (harar), to be a central hub of heat. The name Haran II is assigned two times in the Bible: The city where Abram’s family settled (Genesis 11:31)… A son of Caleb and Epaha (1 Chronicles 2:46). The name Haran II probably comes from the verb (hara), to burn, or (harar), to be hot or even to be free: The root (harar) describes a society’s central and enclosed source of heat. It thus may express a geographical depression, but more so a being hot and ultimately a being a ruler (whether by might, political clout or wisdom). The unused verb (harar II) means to be free in cognate languages, which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun hor) means noble or nobleman.
The nouns (hor) mean hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Nouns (hur) and (huray) refer to any white stuff, including garments and linen, and noun (hori) describes white bread or cake. For a meaning of the name Haran II… BDB Theological Dictionary sees a connection with an Assyrian word that means Road or Path, and suggests the name stems from Haran’s location on a trade route.’
Canneh means favoured and Eden means pleasure, delight, finery, Luxury and Paradise. The descendants of Haran dwell in the nation of Switzerland. The verse in Ezekiel Twenty-seven is revealing Haran’s economic strength as well as its ethnic split as evidenced by its principle languages of German, French, and Italian – plus Romany. The Swiss themselves – regardless of language divide – are homogenous, as their Haplogroups reveal. Whereas an Austrian majority of sixty percent perceive themselves as German, the Swiss when asked the same question, resoundingly answered No. The definition meanings of Haran are remarkably specific about the Swiss.
Switzerland is mountainous, free, protected with a wall of strong military tradition, is white with snow and known for its bread, cake, pastry and deserts, including chocolate. It is favoured in wealth and scenery; a veritable paradise of luxury.
The ancient Hurrians and Mitanni were separate yet synonymous, also known as Hanigalbat, with the Hurrians having a lesser role due to a smaller population, with the height of their kingdom longevity shorter – circa 905 to 886 BCE – compared to the Mitanni; but as the warrior nobility within the Kingdom of Mitanni their impact was greater and longer.
Recall we mentioned the Mitanni in Chapters XXIII and XXV. The Aramaic Mitanni may have merged with the dispossessed Hatti by this time, as they were migrating towards Babylon due to the Hittite expansion and their encroachment into their former lands. The apogee of the Mitanni kingdom era circa 1150 to 900 BCE may be the connecting link between the peak of the Hatti empire during 1900 to 1500 BCE and the later Chaldean rule of Babylon from 626 to 539 BCE.
The Hurrian army was built around an elite chariot corps, like an honour guard, commanded by the king. The relationship between the Hurrians and Mitanni is replicated between Switzerland and Italy in the form of the Papal or Pontifical Swiss Guard. It is a combined armed forces and honour guard maintained by the Holy See. It protects the Pope and the Apostolic Palace, serving as the military of the Vatican City.
Established in 1506 by Pope Julius II, it is one of the oldest military units used in ‘continuous operation.’ The dress uniform is blue, red, orange and yellow.
The Swiss Guard are equipped with traditional weapons, like the halberd, as well as with modern firearms. ‘Recruits to the guards must be unmarried Swiss Catholic males between 19 and 30 years of age who have completed basic training with the Swiss Armed Forces.’ The corp also receive enhanced training, in unarmed combat and small arms.
Burgundy is a region in France, made famous by its red wine. It is a little smaller than Switzerland and lies to the west, with only one hundred miles separating them. Though the name lives on in France, the original Burgundians are the ancestors of the Swiss. The Burgundians are considered a Scandinavian people whose original homeland lay on the southern shores of the Baltic Sea; where the island of Bornholm – Burgundarholm in the Middle Ages – still bears their name. In the first century CE they migrated into the lower valley of the Vistula River, but, unable to defend themselves against the Gepidae, they traveled westward. Serving as foederati – meaning auxiliaries – in the Roman army, they formed a powerful kingdom, around Sapaudia – modern day Savoy – near Lake Geneva, from 450 CE.
Christian king Gundobad ruling from 474 to 516 CE, allowed Burgundy to remain independent. Though in 534 the Franks occupied the kingdom, extinguishing the royal dynasty. The area was controlled initially by Neustrian Franks, then Middle Franks and finally German Franks until the year 888. It was then under Frankish Burgundian control until 1032. It was in 888 that Rudolf I – who died in 912 – of the German Welf family was recognised as king of Jurane, Burgundy, including much of what is now Switzerland. His son and successor Rudolf II, was able to conclude a treaty circa 931 with Hugh of Provence, extending ‘his rule over the entire regnum Burgundiae.’
The union of Upper and Lower Burgundy was bequeathed in 1032 – lasting until 1648 – to the German king and Holy Roman emperor Conrad II, which became known from the thirteenth century as the Kingdom of Arles. The name Burgundy was being increasingly applied to the county of Burgundy, as well as for the Duchy of Burgundy – both located in modern France. There were four Burgundies in total: the duchy, the county, and the kingdoms of Upper Burgundy and Lower Burgundy. Upper Burgundy larger than lower Burgundy was located in present day western Italy. Lower Burgundy was located in current French speaking western Switzerland.
The Historicity of the Bible, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:
‘German Nibelungen, Old Norse Niflungar denote the Burgundian royal family which take its name from the people which initially owned the gold hoard. Siegfried slew Nibelung and twelve giants before he took the hoard. In the Norse mythology, Niflheimr (‘mist home’) is the world of frost. The similar world is Niflhel, the lowest level of Norse underworld Hel. The Indo-European root ne-bh means ‘not light (sky)’ (ne – ‘not’ and bh – ‘light’ like in Greek phos) initially and gave several related meanings: ‘sky’ (Russian nebo), ‘cloud, mist’ (Latin nebula), ‘dark’ (Anglo-Saxon nifol) etc.’
Britannica – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In 1291, when Rudolf I of Habsburg died, the elites of the Waldstatte (“forest cantons”) Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwaldenrenewed an older treaty confirming that they would maintain public peace and efficient jurisdiction without interference from outside [namely the Austrian Hapsburgs], thus securing their privileged position [Confoederatio Helvetica]. Such pacts were common at that time, but this one was to be considered much later as the foundation of the Swiss Confederation (only since 1891 has August 1, 1291, been celebrated as the birth of the nation).’
The prime Swiss communities of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden, mirror Haran, Canneh and Eden in the Bible. The word Schwyz is where the name Switzerland has derived. The Swiss are famously known for their neutrality from 1815 following the Napoleonic wars against France. The Congress of Vienna guaranteed the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland. The present nation of Switzerland was formed in 1848 with the adoption of a new constitution, as there had been internal conflict prior to this date.
Switzerland is a federated country of 26 Cantons and its administrative capital is Bern; with Lausanne serving as its judicial centre. Switzerland’s small size, its total area is about half that of Scotland and its population of 8,816,359 people, the 20th largest in Europe, gives little indication of its international significance and economic clout. Geneva is home to numerous international organisations and the Swiss economy is the 20th largest in the world – just behind Saudi Arabia [18], Turkey [19] and ahead of Poland [21], Thailand [22] and Nigeria [25].
The Heraldry for the three original Cantons – the Key similar to the Vatican keys and the Bull,
stemming from veneration lasting millennia’s.
Apart from the capital Bern, Zurich is the country’s largest and most cosmopolitan city; its famed Bahnhofstrasse rivalling shopping districts found in other leading cities in the world. Basel and Lucerne are major German speaking cities, with Geneva and Lausanne the centres of the country’s French speaking cantons. In 1992 Swiss voters narrowly turned down membership in a European Economic Area comprising the EU and EFTA. Switzerland is politically isolated within Europe, though maintains strong economic ties with the EU – its largest trading partner. In the 1990s there were growing doubts about Switzerland’s past. ‘Many Swiss questioned the country’s traditional “bunker mentality” in Europe at peace and with open borders.’
Troubling for Switzerland was an international debate concerning dormant accounts of assets left by Jews in Swiss banks during the Nazi era, but never returned. ‘A controversy that challenged Switzerland’s image of itself and resulted in a settlement between two large commercial banks and Jewish plaintiffs in which the banks agreed to pay international Jewish organizations two billion Swiss francs (about $1.25 billion). Financial officials estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars in dormant assets remained unclaimed in Swiss banks in the early 21st century.’
‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Swiss global shipments during 2021.
Gems, precious metals: US$106.3 billion
Pharmaceuticals: $101.5 billion
Organic chemicals: $29.7 billion
Clocks, watches including parts: $24.4 billion
Machinery including computers: $24 billion
Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $19.1 billion
Electrical machinery, equipment: $13.8 billion
Plastics, plastic articles: $6.2 billion
Mineral fuels including oil: $4.03 billion
Perfumes, cosmetics: $3.98 billion
Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.2% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was… clocks and watches including parts category which rose 34.7%. Switzerland’s shipments of gems and precious metals posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 23.3% year over year, propelled by higher international sales of gold and silver.’
The Alpine nation of Switzerland had a GDP of $703.08 billion in 2019. Switzerland possesses a large service sector, including financial services and a high-tech manufacturing sector served by a highly skilled labor force. Excellent quality legal, political and economic institutions with a solid physical infrastructure have set the stage for a productive economy with one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world.
Switzerland is in the top ten countries with the largest gold reserves at number seven, ahead of Japan and India and one place behind China. Its total tonnage of gold is 1,040.0 tonnes and represents 5.4 % of its foreign reserves. Switzerland maintains the world’s largest reserves of gold per capita. ‘During World War II, the neutral country became the center of the gold trade in Europe, making transactions with both the Allies and Axis powers. Today, much of its gold trading is done with Hong Kong and China.’
Haran had a specific son named in the Bible, called Lot. Though he was Abraham’s nephew, Lot was born only seven years after Abraham in 1970 BCE – when Haran was thirty-nine. They had a close relationship and instead of being as an uncle and nephew that they were, acted more like brothers, due to the closeness of their ages. With the premature death of Haran, Abraham was also protective of his nephew in more than one instance. The fact that Abraham did not have his own son for many years, meant Lot was logically in line to be Abraham’s heir. This is telling and may have significant bearing in how circumstances eventuated between the descendants of Lot and those from Abraham.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Lot mean[s] Covering From the verb (lut), to wrap closely, to envelop
Noun (lat) or (la’t) means secrecy. The verb (malat) means to deliver from confinement or dangerous predicament. For a meaning of the name Lot, both NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names read Covering. Jones adds Veil.’
In Genesis chapter eleven we read of Terah’s departure from Ur to Haran, with Abraham and Lot’s families in 1927 BCE. Twenty-five years later when Abraham was seventy-five, the Creator told him to leave Haran to dwell in Canaan further south.
Genesis 12:4-9
English Standard Version
4 So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, 6 Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem [future location of Simeon and Levi’s revenge for their sister Dinah], to the oak of Moreh. At that timethe Canaanites [dark skinned sons of Canaan] were in the land. 7 Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him. 8 From there he moved to the hill country on the east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. And there he built an altar to the Lord and called upon the name of the Lord. 9 And Abram journeyed on, still going toward the Negeb.
Genesis 13:1-18
English Standard Version
So Abram went up from Egypt, he and his wife and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the Negeb. 2 Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold. 3 And he journeyed on from the Negeb as far as Bethel to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, 4 to the place where he had made an altar at the first. And there Abram called upon the name of the Lord. 5 And Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents, 6 so that the land could not support both of them dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they could not dwell together, 7 and there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock. At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites were dwelling in the land.
8 Then Abram said to Lot, “Let there be no strife between you and me, and between your herdsmen and my herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me. If you take the left hand, then I will go to the right, or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left.” 10 And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the Lord[Eden], like the land of Egypt, in the direction of Zoar. (This was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.) 11 So Lot chose for himself all the Jordan Valley, and Lot journeyed east. Thus they separated from each other. 12 Abram settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot settled among the cities of the valley and moved his tent as far as Sodom.
Recall in Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega, the location of physical Eden was investigated. We learned that the garden area of Eden encompassed the area of southern Lebanon and the Sea of Galilee, stretching southwards to Jerusalem. We will discover soon that Zoar was situated north of the Dead or Salt Sea and so the fertile Jordan River valley was a corridor running from Galilee through the Dead Sea – which wasn’t ‘dead’ yet – and all the way south to where the river exits into the Red Sea. Lot saw that this land between Galilee and Zoar was ‘like the garden of the Lord’ or Eden and understandably chose it for his family. Thus he lived to the east of Abraham who dwelt westwards towards the Mediterranean Sea in the land of Canaan. It also explains how Lot ended up living in Sodom – where he was prominent in the City’s governance – as it was one of the five main cities with Zoar, in the plains north of the Salt Sea.
13 Now the men of Sodom were wicked, great sinners against the Lord [like Nimrod]. 14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, 15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever [for a long time]. 16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted. 17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” 18 So Abram moved his tent and came and settled by the oaks of Mamre, which are at Hebron, and there he built an altar to the Lord.
Lot chose the fertile lower ground, the plains in the valley bordered between the hills towards the west and the River Jordan to the east. We read a parallel account in the Book of Jasher 15:35-47:
35 And Lot the son of Haran, Abram’s brother, had a heavy stock of cattle, flocks and herds and tents, for the Lord was bountiful to them on account of Abram.
36 And when Abram was dwelling in the land the herdsmen of Lot quarrelled with the herdsmen of Abram, for their property was too great for them to remain together in the land, and the land could not bear them on account of their cattle. 37 And when Abram’s herdsmen went to feed their flock they would not go into the fields of the people of the land, but the cattle of Lot’s herdsmen did otherwise, for they were suffered to feed in the fields of the people of the land. 38 And the people of the land saw this occurrence daily, and they came to Abram and quarrelled with him on account of Lot’s herdsmen. 39 And Abram said to Lot, What is this thou art doing to me, to make me despicable to the inhabitants of the land, that thou orderest thy herdsman to feed thy cattle in the fields of other people? Dost thou not know that I am a stranger in this land amongst the children of Canaan, and why wilt thou do this unto me? 40 And Abram quarrelled daily with Lot on account of this, but Lot would not listen to Abram, and he continued to do the same and the inhabitants of the land came and told Abram.
This display of mercurial stubbornness is indicative of Lot’s descendants.
41 And Abram said unto Lot, How long wilt thou be to me for a stumbling block with the inhabitants of the land? Now I beseech thee let there be no more quarrelling between us, for we are kinsmen. 42 But I pray thee separate from me, go and choose a place where thou mayest dwell with thy cattle and all belonging to thee, but Keep thyself at a distance from me, thou and thy household. 43 And be not afraid in going from me, for if any one do an injury to thee, let me know and I will avenge thy cause from him, only remove from me. 44 And when Abram had spoken all these words to Lot, then Lot arose and lifted up his eyes toward the plain of Jordan. 45 And he saw that the whole of this place was well watered, and good for man as well as affording pasture for the cattle. 46 And Lot went from Abram to that place, and he there pitched his tent and he dwelt in Sodom, and they were separated from each other. 47 And Abram dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and he pitched his tent there, and Abram remained in that place many years.
The selfishness of Lot in using other peoples property and not caring how that made Abraham look was the beginning of a rift circa 1902 to 1900 BCE between both families, which ultimately led to mistrust, hatred and a perpetual rivalry, based on jealousy between their peoples lasting to the present day. The seeds of the fissure between them, even after Lot had been continually at Abraham’s side were undoubtedly the same that causes nearly all parting of the ways between people – the same reason Asherah left the Ancient of Day’s side – pride or envy, turning to disdain. In the section on Chedorlaomer of Elam [Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the war of Nine Kings], we touched on Lot being taken hostage in 1894 BCE after the Battle of the Kings at Siddim. We will return to this battle again when we study Abraham.
Genesis 14:11-16
English Standard Version
11 So the enemy took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way. 12 They also took Lot, the son of Abram’s brother, who was dwelling in Sodom, and his possessions, and went their way. 13 Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, who was living by the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and of Aner. These were allies of Abram. 14 When Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, 318 of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. 15 And he divided his forces against them by night, he and his servants, and defeated them and pursued them to Hobah, north of Damascus [capital of Gether-Aram]. 16 Then he brought back all the possessions, and also brought back his kinsman Lot with his possessions, and the women and the people.
Jasher 16:6-8
6 And they plundered all the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and they also took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, and his property, and they seized all the goods of the cities of Sodom, and they went away; and Unic, Abram’s servant, who was in the battle, saw this, and told Abram all that the kings had done to the cities of Sodom, and that Lot was taken captive by them. 7 And Abram heard this, and he rose up with about three hundred and eighteen men that were with him, and he that night pursued these kings and smote them, and they all fell before Abram and his men, and there was none remaining but the four kings who fled, and they went each his own road. 8 And Abram recovered all the property of Sodom, and he also recovered Lot and his property, his wives and little ones and all belonging to him, so that Lot lacked nothing.
Abraham risked his life to rescue Lot – who had somewhat deserved what had befallen him, after treating Abraham with disrespect – ensuring he had all his family and belongings returned to him safely. Proverbs 25:21-22 CJB: “If someone who hates you is hungry, give him food to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. For you will heap fiery coals (of shame) on his head, and Adonai [the Lord] will reward you.” Abraham was offered a reward by the King of Sodom, but refused to take anything for what he had done. We next read of Lot in Genesis chapter Nineteen.
Genesis 19:1-38
English Standard Version
The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth 2 and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash* your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.”
3 But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened* bread [March-April and the time of the Passover and Feast* of unleavened Bread], and they ate.
Hebrews 13:2
Complete Jewish Bible
… but don’t forget to be friendly to outsiders; for in so doing, some people, without knowing it, have entertained angels.
Lot had gained a position of responsibility in Sodom when he had moved to the city circa 1900 BCE. Lot was rescued by Abraham in 1894 BCE in the aftermath of the Battle of Siddim. The destruction of Sodom took place in Abraham’s 99th year, 1878 BCE. For approximately twenty years, Lot and his family had resided in Sodom. Sitting in the gate, means Lot was a member of Sodom’s ruling council and involved in the discussion and prosecution of legal matters. Lot may have been an actual Judge.
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know [H3045 – yada: ‘to know a person carnally] them.” 6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please.
Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. 10 But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door. 11 And they [the angels created a blinding light] struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door.
Judging by the name of the city of Sodom and the fact the crowd of men were wanting the two men who were angels; homo-sexuality is clearly what was intended. In a broader sense, the city was involved in adult activity with Nephilim and Eliouds, who lived there; for as stated earlier in the Book of Genesis, a second irruption of Angelic infiltration with humans had occurred. Hence the requirement for the judgement of utter destruction to be decreed. It may have involved more than sexual relations. A continuation of the ante-diluvian and post-flood Tower of Babel scientific and technological endeavour to completely tamper with mankind’s genetic code and seek profane immortality, would certainly attract punishment. For it has been reserved for the time of the end for these events to reoccur; thus requiring the Creator to re-intervene at that time. Jude connects the activities before the flood with those taking place in the five cities of the Plain.
The Greek word heteros translated as ‘strange’ flesh, is referring to sexual congress with Nephilim or perverted sex with angels not strictly just homo-sexuality.
Jude 6-7 ESV: 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling… 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural [G2087 – heteros: another, ‘one not of the same nature, form, kind’] desire [G4561 – sarx: ‘carnal cravings that incite sin’], serve as an exampleby undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Lot offered his two youngest daughters who were around 15 to 20 years old, to the mob, rather than the angels. What the rationale behind this is conjecture. Maybe Lot was buying time, for he knew the angels could and would resolve the issue without his daughters having to go out – a bluff. Or possibly, he weighed their lives versus those of the messengers sent by the Creator and made a judgement call.
12 Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone [friends] you have in the city, bring them out of the place. 13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”
14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, “Up! Get out of this place, for the Lord is about to destroy the city.” But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting. 15 As morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Up! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be swept away in the punishment of the city.”
Verse 14 is misleading, as it appears the two younger daughters were bequeathed but not yet married. The interlinear reads: And Lot went out, spake unto his sons law, which married his daughters. From the account, we learn that Lot has at least two other daughters, aside from the two virgins already mentioned. The Book of Jasher introduces a fifth daughter.
Book of Jasher 19:11, 23-35
And in the course of time Sarah sent Eliezer to Sodom, to see Lot and inquire after his welfare. 23 … and when it was told to Abraham he went and made war with the kings of Elam, and he recovered from their hands all the property of Lot as well as the property of Sodom. 24 At that time the wife of Lot bare hima daughter[1894 BCE],and he called her name Paltith, saying, Because God had delivered him and his whole household from the kings of Elam; and Paltith daughter of Lot grew up, and one of the men of Sodom took her for a wife [circa 1882-1879 BCE].
25 And a poor man came into the city to seek a maintenance, and he remained in the city some days, and all the people of Sodom caused a proclamation of their custom** not to give this man a morsel of bread to eat, until he dropped dead upon the earth, and they did so. 26 And Paltith the daughter of Lot saw this man lying in the streets starved with hunger, and no one would give him any thing to keep him alive, and he was just upon the point of death. 27 And her soul was filled with pity on account of the man, and she fed him secretly with bread for many days… and three men concealed themselves in a place where the poor man was stationed, to know who it was that brought him bread to eat… 32 And the three men saw what Paltith did to the poor man… 34 And they took Paltith and brought her before their judges… now therefore declare to us the punishment due to this woman for having transgressed our law. 35 And the people of Sodom and Gomorrah assembled and kindled a fire in the street of the city, and they took the woman and cast her into the fire and she was burned to ashes.
Paltith would have been about fifteen or sixteen, when she was put to death, which was not long before Sodom was destroyed. Anciently, daughters were given in marriage as soon as they were deemed women and able to serve a husband and bear his children.
16 But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city.
Lot’s angelic visitors and protectors had already taken an aerial reconnoissance. According to the Haggadah, they were then able to fly him and his family inside their craft out of Sodom’s boundaries. It was then that they instructed Lot to flee to further safety.
17 And as they brought them out, one said, “Escape for your life. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, lest you be swept away.” 18 And Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords. 19 Behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life. But I cannot escape to the hills, lest the disaster overtake me and I die. 20 Behold, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there – is it not a little one? – and my life will be saved!” 21 He said to him, “Behold, I grant you this favor also, that I will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken. 22 Escape there quickly, for I can do nothing till you arrive there.”Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.
Contrary Lot, might be a fitting name and at a moment when time was of the essence. We will find that his descendants are in fact a contrary and mercurial people. Granted, Lot was ninety-two years old – just ten years older than when his father, Haran died. It is ironic, for Lot did not linger in Zoar, but rather fled from Zoar and retreated to a cave.
Lot’s entreating was in fact a far bigger favour granted by the angels than sparing his life even. When asking to be able to go to Zoar, he was actually asking for one of the five cities marked for destruction to be spared.
The five cities in question were Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebo[im] and Bela – also known as Zoar. According to Lot, it would seem it was the smallest of the five cites on the plain.
In contrast to what is commonly taught, the condemnation of Sodom and the other cities was not just because of sexual transgressions. Another reason is given in Ezekiel 16:49-50 ESV: “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid** the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.”
23 The sun had risen on the earth when Lot came to Zoar. 24 Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven. 25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.
Book of Jasher 19:52-54
And he overthrew these cities, all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground; and Ado the wife of Lot looked back to see the destruction of the cities, for her compassion was moved on account of her daughters who remained in Sodom, for they did not go with her. 53 And when she looked back she became a pillar of salt, and it is yet in that place unto this day. 54 And the oxen which stood in that place daily licked up the salt to the extremities of their feet, and in the morning it would spring forth afresh, and they again licked it up unto this day.
The Book of Jasher gives Lot’s wife’s name as Ado. Certain Rabbis refer to her as Idit. The Midrash calls her Edith, which may have derived from Idit. The Book of Jasher supports other married daughters still in Sodom, when Lot, his wife and two unmarried daughters fled for their lives. It helps to explain, why Idit disobeyed the Angel’s instruction. It may have been more than the intensity of the detonation and Idit doing more than just looking back. She must have lingered too close to the blast zone. The interlinear infers this: But his wife looked back from behind him, she became pillar salt.
Luke 17:28-32
English Standard Version
28 Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot – they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, 29 but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all – 30 so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. 32 Remember Lot’s wife.
27 And Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the Lord. 28 And he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward [the east] all the land of the valley, and he looked and, behold, the smoke of the land went up like the smoke of a furnace. 29 So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley,God remembered Abraham and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow when he overthrew the cities in which Lot had lived.
Wisdom of Solomon 10.7 GNT:
You can still see the evidence of their wickedness. The land there is barren and smoking. The plants bear fruit that never ripens, and a pillar of salt stands as a monument to one who did not believe.
Evidence found supporting the Biblical description of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction? Dean Smith, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘In an article published in Science News, archaeologists working at Tall el-Hammam located in Jordan… have found evidence corroborating its massive destruction recorded in the Bible that spoke of brimstone and fire falling from the sky… Archaeologists have found evidence of the area being hit with a massive explosion that turned glaze on potsherds into glass. They also found stone fragments stuck in the glaze that supports the idea that something poured down upon cities from the sky. According to lead archaeologist Philip J. Silvia, the heat was “perhaps as hot as the surface of the sun.” They also discovered that the bricks used in the buildings were totally obliterated leaving only the stone foundations.
The Bible records that not only were the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah [destroyed] but much of the valley as well and Silva confirmed this adding they found evidence the blast covered an area of 15.5 miles and killing upwards of 65,000 people.The site on the north end of the Dead Sea was so devastated that it took 600 years for the soil to recover sufficiently to allow crops…
Writing on behalf of the Tall el-Hamman Excavation Project, co-director Dr. Steven Collins said: “The violent conflagration that ended occupation at Tall el-Hammam produced melted potters, scorched foundation stones and several feet of ash and destruction debris churned into a dark gray matrix ‘as if in a Cuisinart’” [food processor].’
Archaeological evidence confirms that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by intense fire, Dean Smith, 2020- emphasis & bold mine:
‘According to archaeologists working on the site believed to include the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, they found evidence confirming the Biblical record that the two cities were destroyed by sulphur and fire… The archaeologists, who have been working on the site for 13 years, reported discovering evidence of intense heat. This included clay and rock that had been turned into glass.
This would require a brief burst of heat of between 8,000 to 12,000 degree Celsius. The archaeologists also noted that the destruction took place “in an instant,” and resulted in the stripping of the topsoil. The archaeologists added that “a super-heated brine of Dead Sea anhydride salts pushed over the landscaped by the Event’s frontal shock wave.”
It is interesting that even the Biblical account noted the appearance of salt as it described Lot’s wife being turned into a pillar of salt and as well, noted the destruction of vegetation. They wrote, “the physical evidence from Tall el-Hamman and neighboring sites exhibit signs of a highly destructive concussive and thermal event that one might expect from what is described in Genesis 19.”’
Secular history is silent concerning Lot, ‘save for the fact that the Dead Sea has always been called by the Arabs, the Sea of Lot.’ The Battle of Siddim, including the Plain with the five cities – four of them destroyed – is located in the area of the Dead Sea or Sea of Death. The Dead Sea and its composition is an anomaly that can be explained only by the Biblical destruction of the region as recorded in Genesis chapter nineteen. Archaeological digs have confirmed the northern end – southeast of Jericho – of the Dead Sea rather than the traditional southern end, as the original site of the Valley of Siddim.
Flying Serpents and Dragons, R A Boulay, 1990, Pages 195, 197-198, 206-207 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘There is no scriptural or other evidence to support… Sodom and Gormorrah [being]… located… in the shallow or southern part of the Dead Sea, the body of water the Jews call… the Salt Sea…To the contrary, all indications are that the [five] cities were located in the northern part of the Dead Sea… [nor] the age of the Dead Sea [being] hundreds of thousands of years old… this sea dates… [according to Velikovsky to] less than 5000 years [ago]… [or] no further back than the days of Abraham [1878 BCE]. In the Biblical story… it specifically states that the area now occupied by the Dead Sea used to be called the Valley or vale of Siddim [Genesis 14:3]…
Some catastrophic event must have caused the [rupture of the] geological fault (which runs through and underlies the area) to displace, the ground sinking in the process, and forming a seal to allow the accumulation of water [creating a large inland sea] from the inflow of the Jordan River. Josephus adds… that the Lord “cast a thunderbolt upon the city and set it on fire with its inhabitants.” In the Haggadah, this thunderbolt comes from the Shekinah, the aerial chariot of the Lord: “When the angels had brought forth Lot and his family and set them outside the city, he bade them run for their lives, and not look behind, lest they behold the Shekinah, which had descended to work the destruction of the cities…”’
The Dead Sea contains twenty-one minerals including Sodium, Magnesium, Calcium, Bromine, Bitumen and Potassium. Twelve of these are found in no other sea or ocean. The Dead Sea contains ten times more salts and minerals than the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea has a 33% concentration of salt compared to only 3% in the world’s oceans. There are other bodies of water in the world with similar salt content ratios – one wonders if they are victims of a similar fate as the Dead Sea?
30Now Lot went up out of Zoar and lived in the hills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to live in Zoar. So he lived in a cave with his two daughters. 31 And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to usafter the manner of all the earth. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve offspring [seed] from our father.” 33 So they made their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and lay with her father. He did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.
The incident with an intoxicated Noah and his grandson Canaan did not end well [Chapter XI Ham Aequator]. This is another situation of being taken advantage of while inebriated, perhaps. The cave location was very remote and the eldest daughter – the only sister recorded speaking – was concerned that their father Lot is old and may die and that any chance of a man visiting wasn’t presenting itself anytime soon. Their sisters and brothers-in-law in Sodom were dead and would not be leaving children. This is more likely, than thinking the world had ended and there were no men left to continue humankind. The three of them had left Zoar and knew there were other survivors. Either way, the daughters do not take their father into their confidence.
The Biblical account presents the daughters as the ‘initiators and perpetrators of the incestuous rape’ of Lot over two nights, according to Esther Fuchs. The verb used by the older daughter about eighteen to twenty years old for giving Lot wine also means to irrigate the ground. Thus, the daughters intentions are not to just give their father a glass or two, but to fully saturate him and get Lot very drunk; before having sexual intercourse with him. The next night, the younger sister about fifteen to seventeen years old, repeats the course of action. The fact that the sisters get their father very drunk, may mean their actions were more altruistic than driven by desire.
The word used for offspring is zera, meaning seed or offspring in a general sense, rather than for a specific ‘son.’ The intent is ultimately related to the eventual Messiah and fulfilment of Genesis 3:15. From a historical perspective, these acts were essential for the future birth of the Son of Man. The Creator would judge the daughters by their thoughts and not necessarily their deeds; as this is a recurrent theme in the Bible for those the Creator is working with. The daughters true intent was not to lay with their father for sexual gratification, but rather to ensure their family line continued.
Support that Lot’s daughters were vindicated rather than Lot himself is the fact that the prohibition in Deuteronomy 23:2-4, 6 ESV, applies to males not females: “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord.
Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord. No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the Lord forever, because they did not meet you – the sons of Jacob – with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you. You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever.”
The angels who rescued Lot would have been cognisant of the fact that Ruth the Moabite would trace her lineage to the eldest sister, and her marriage to Boaz from the tribe of Judah would result in descendants, including King David and the Messianic Saviour. They would also have known that Naamah the Ammonite, would trace her lineage to the youngest sister and her marriage to King Solomon – the only wife of Solomon stated by name in the Bible – would result in the birth of Rehoboam, King of Judah after Solomon.
The goodness of Lot’s daughters intentions displayed, in that they lay with their father only once and like Ruth – acted for an ideal – when she lay at the foot of Boaz’s bed in the threshing floor.
34 The next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father. Let us make him drink wine tonight also. Then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve offspring from our father.” 35 So they made their father drink wine that night also. And the younger arose and lay with him, and he did [not?] know when she lay down or when she arose.
Scholars, such as Robert Alter have said that Lot’s daughters in sleeping with their father “suggests measure-for-measure justice meted out for his rash offer” to the mob outside their home. ‘Rabbis have observed that a man usually allows himself to be killed in order to save his wife and children… Lot was willing to allow the townspeople to abuse his daughters.’ In Sodom, Lot was ready to offer his daughters – possibly against their will – to engage in sexual relations with the people outside. Later, Lot’s daughters have relations with their unwitting father. These acts of incest are Lot’s punishment for his indecorous behaviour, according to some scholars.
There are two Rabbinic views issued against the patriarch Lot. Firstly, that Lot ‘from the outset, decided to dwell in Sodom because he wanted to engage in the licentious [behaviour] of its inhabitants.’ Lot thought he could engage secretly in depravity. He is then later, humiliated through his daughters seducing him. R Nahman bar Hanan said to the effect: “Whoever is driven by his lust for fornication, will eventually be fed from his own flesh.” Lot was so eager to engage in promiscuity, that in the end, his daughters played the harlot with him.
Secondly, Lot insidiously desired his daughters; for he was inebriated when the elder sister lay with him, though he was sober enough to know when she rose.
This is indicated in the Old Testament ‘by the supralinear dot over the word u-ve-komah (“when she rose”).’ Though Lot was not aware of what was going to happen when he drunk the wine, he was aware of having sex with his eldest daughter by the time she left his bed. Therefore, his willingness to drink wine the next night – means to some – that he was complicit in repeating incest with his younger daughter. On the basis of what is said in Proverbs 18:1 CJB: “He who separates himself indulges his desires and shows contempt for sound advice of any kind”, some Rabbis conclude that Lot did lust after his daughters. Particularly, as Lot sought out a remote cave which allowed the facilitation of the incestuous events to occur.
Even so, other Rabbis have reinterpreted the incest accounts of Lot and his daughters in the Bible in a more positive light due to the royal and messianic lineages it produced. Ironically, the other half of David’s lineage is similarly problematic for the Rabbis; as Tamar secures a son, by surreptitiously seducing her father-in-law Judah. The son Perez, in turn becomes an ancestor to Boaz and thus also, to King David.
36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day. 38The younger also bore a son and called his nameBen-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.
Book of Jasher 19:55-60
And Lot and two of his daughters that remained with him fled and escaped to the cave of Adullam, and they remained there for some time… 58 And they both lay with their father, and they conceived and bare sons… 60 And after this Lot and his two daughters went away from there, and he dwelt on the other side of the Jordan with his two daughters and their sons, and the sons of Lot grew up, and they went and took themselves wives from the land of Canaan, and they begat children and they were fruitful and multiplied.
The eldest daughter names her son Moab, which means ‘from my father.’ She has been rather brazen and immodest in openly naming her son being born of her father. This leaves no doubt as to the union having been an incestuous one. The younger daughter names her son Ben-Ammi, which means ‘son of my clan,’ a more veiled euphemistic reference to her son’s origin. While the names of the sons are descriptive of their conception, they serve a negative etiological function for Israel’s neighbours – and frequent enemies – as the Moabites and the Ammonites. The definitions, puzzlingly humiliate Lot – as if revengeful retribution was a motive – while at the same time demeaning also his daughters who named the babies.
Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis & bold mine:
‘It is a remarkable fact that the children of Lot should have commemorated their infamous origin in their very names. Moab means literally “water of a father,”while Ammon or Ben-ammi means”son of my mother.” These names, so horribly suggestive, were proudly retained by two whole nations throughout their history. The Old Testament is silent as to the personal story of the two sons of Lot, but they evidently repeated the story of the founders of the other Hebrew nations, becoming chieftains… and founding royal dynasties.… The descendants of Moab within a few generations took possession of the country formerly inhabited by the Emim, (“terrible ones”), a branch of the aboriginal Nephilim, even as their cousins, the descendants of Ammon, took possession of the country formerly occupied by the Zuzim and Zamzummim. The [partial] slaughter of these ancient giant races by Chedorlaomer and his allies no doubt cleared the way for the children of Lot. The Moabites found homes in the rich and well protected plateau to the east of the Dead Sea, extending from the land of Edom in the south to the land of Gilead in the north, while the Ammonites established themselves in the land of Gilead… and they dwelt here until they were driven into the eastern desert by the tribes of Gad and Reuben… their descendants recovered the land of Gilead after the Assyrians had carried away the tribe of Gad.’
2 Peter 2:6-8 ESV: … if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescuedrighteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked 8(for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)…
Lot is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as one of the faithful, with Abraham and Sarah. He is called a righteous soul in the Greek Interlinear. By extension, he is included with righteous Noah, Daniel and Job mentioned in Ezekiel 14:14. Lot also has in common with Job the dramatic and sudden loss of family. Lot lost his wife, and at least two daughters and two sons-in-law. Job 1:1-2, 18-19 ESV: ‘There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil. There were born to him seven sons and three daughters… “Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother’s house, and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you [refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe].”’
Ammon, the younger brother of Moab, is invariably described as the ‘children or sons of Ammon’ in the Bible, a clue to their status not being quite the same as Moab or other identities investigated thus far. The Hebrew definition of H5983 from H5971, for Ammon is tribal or inbred as one born from incest.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ben-ammi meaning: Son Of My Kinsman, Son Of My People from (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (‘am), people or kinsman [kindred].
The only Ben-ammi in the Bible is the incestuous son of Lot and his younger daughter, who becomes the patriarch of the “sons” of Ammon, also known as the Ammonites (Genesis 19:38)… it’s curious that both the daughters… of this prominent figure remain nameless, also since Lot’s daughters are matriarchs of enormous nations.
The noun (ben) means son, or more general: a member of one particular social or economic node – called a “house”, which is built upon the instructions of one (‘ab), or “father”… within… a larger economy… This noun obviously resembles the verb (bana), to build, and the noun (‘eben), stone. Our noun’s feminine version, namely (bat), means daughter, which resembles the noun (bayit), meaning house. The word for mother, (’em), is highly similar to that of tribe or people, (‘umma). The verb (‘mm) probably expressed to be inclusive or comprehensive. Its rare uses in the Bible relate to making secrets or making info available to an in-crowd.
For a meaning of the name Ammon, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads A People. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes Great People, taking the extension as an intensitive.’
The children of Ammon today are in part, the French Canadians of Quebec. They also comprise the northwesterly section of the nation of France; with the main body of French being descended from Moab.
French Canadian men
Herman Hoeh – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Abraham also had a nephew named Lot. Lot had two sons, Moab and Ammon. They were born to him after the calamity that hit Sodom (Genesis 19:37-38). They lived by the Arabs east of the Dead Sea next to Palestine. They are still in the same region today!
Their nation today is called Jordan, after the Jordan River. Jordan has been much in the news lately, Amman is the capital of Jordan now.’
The Arabs lived in north Africa and then the Arabian Peninsula; they never lived north of this area or next to Moab and Ammon. The peoples of present day Jordan as discussed, are descendants of Mizra, son of Ham [Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia]. Moab and Ammon migrated from Palestine a very long time ago; with some two thousand years elapsing.
‘Isaiah 11:14 points out that these two sons of Lot live near Palestine today. Since the days of Isaiah, the children of Moab have been “very small and without strength” (Isaiah 16:13-14). They have not been taken “into captivity” to another nation (Jeremiah 48:11), In these latter days boastful Moab lives “together with the children of Ammon” (Ezekiel 25:9-10). The Kingdom of Jordan occupies part of present-day Palestine and keeps the Jews from dwelling in Old Jerusalem. Jeremiah 49:1-2 prophesied this over 2500 years ago! But Arabs and Jordanians are not the only Hebrews!’
Isaiah chapter sixteen is a future reference to Moab. Moab and Ammon are anything but a ‘very few and feeble’ people. The Arabic peoples from Ham are not Hebrews. This appellation refers broadly to the descendants of Peleg through his grandson, Eber. It would include Moab and Ammon. In time it was applied primarily to the sons of Jacob. The chief city or capital of the Ammonites was Rabbah.
French Canadian women
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Rabbah meaning: Great from the verb (rabab), to be great or many
There are two cities named Rabbah in the Bible, the lesser known one is a city in the territory allotted to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:60). The most famous Rabbah was also known as Rabbath-bene-ammon or “Rabbath of the sons of Ammon” (Rabbath is really the same as Rabbah, just of an older spelling), which was the major city of Ammon (modern Amman, the capital of Jordan).
It’s first mentioned in the Bible as the final resting place of the huge iron bed of king Og of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:11). What Og’s bunk was doing in an Ammonite metropolis is a bit of a mystery. Bashan was a kingdom located to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and Ammon country was to the east of the Salt Sea. But Og was the last of the Rephaim… and they were expelled by the Ammonites (Deuteronomy 2:20). It appears that the Ammonites had hoisted Og’s huge stead to their capital as a trophy.
Even though YHWH had ordered not to meddle with Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:19), the tribes of Gad and Reuben [plus the 1/2 tribe of East Manasseh] settled in their land anyway. Rabbah is listed as just over the border of Gad, which puts it in or near Reuben, although that’s not explicitly mentioned (Joshua 15:25). The reason for this is probably that the Ammonites held out in Rabbah until the time of king David.
While the author of 2 Samuel focuses mainly on David’s seduction of Bathsheba, her husband Uriah was engaged with the siege of Rabbah. The author casually reports that the Ammonites were destroyed and Rabbah captured by general Joab (2 Samuel 11:1, 12:26). The gold crown of the Ammonite king weighed a talent and was placed on David’s head, and the Ammonites were massacred in the most creative ways (2 Samuel 12:31)… Nahash is also the name of the cruel Ammonite king whom Saul defeated (1 Samuel 11:1). The son of this Nahash, Hanun, provoked David into the siege that ended in Rabbah’s ultimate defeat (2 Samuel 10:1).
… the identical noun (rab) means chief or captain. Noun (rob) means multitude or abundance. Possibly a second yet identical verb (rabab) means to shoot, particularly of arrows. This may very well be a specified usage of our verb since arrows are customarily shot en masse by many archers. Noun (rab) means archer, and is identical to the adjective meaning many. Fittingly, noun (arbeh) denotes a kind of locust.
For a meaning of the name Rabbah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Great, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Great City, and BDB Theological Dictionary proposes Great or Populous.’
There are hundreds of references to Ammon and Moab, in the Bible as they were an arch nemesis of the sons of Jacob. The reason for this was heightened by the fact they were great nations with large populations living next to each other. The fact that the sons of Jacob had returned to the land centuries after leaving had only exacerbated their natural enmity as two closely related family members who just didn’t get along.
Chapter XI, The Moabites and the Ammonites, Emanuel Swedenborg – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Both became great and powerful clans or nations, but the Ammonites always preferred the roving life of… marauders, while Moab… develop[ed] into a settled, well organized and prosperous nation, the chief characteristics of which were wealth and moral corruption.
The prosperity and riches of Moab are vividly portrayed in the Word. In the cities of this land there was “a great multitude of people,” living on the “glory” and “fat of the land,” possessing “great treasure,” and crowding the temples of Chemosh and Baal Peor, where infants were sacrificed, and virgins prostituted in the name of religion. Outside of the towns were the “plentiful fields,” the vineyards and gardens of “summer fruit,” the meadows where hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle were browsing. Peace and prosperity reign everywhere; the people are fat and self-satisfied, butof the worship of the true God there is not a trace.
Small wonder that such a nation should view with alarm the approach of a great horde of desert wanderers, asking permission to pass through the land on their way to Canaan. They came as Hebrew kinsmen, worshipping an ancient but generally forsaken deity named Jehovah. Balak, the king of the Moabites, now bethought himself of a Syrian wizard, Balaam, who was know[n]: to prophecy in the name of Jehovah and who was wont to dispense his blessings or cursings for filthy lucre. If a prophet of Jehovah were to curse the children of Israel, the latter would surely be put to confusion. He, therefore, sent for the complaisant prophet, but great was his disgust when the magician was forced by his God to turn the intended curse into a blessing, the power and beauty of which are almost without equal in Hebrew literature. Dismayed, Balak now allied himself with the Midianites in an effort to destroy Israel by the seductions of harlots in the lascivious rites of Baal Peor, but again his scheme was frustrated, and he was glad to escape the frightful punishment meted out to the Midianites, who had been the most active in the plot.
The subsequent relations of Moab with Israel were of a somewhat mixed character, sometimes friendly, as is evident from the story of Ruth, the Moabitish ancestress of David, but more generally hostile. Not long after the Israelitish conquest, Eglon, king of Moab, by the assistance of Ammon and Amalek, “smote Israel and possessed himself of the city of palm trees,” (Jericho), The children of Israel now “served Eglon for eighteen years” (Judges 3:13), until they were delivered by Ehud. The Moabites, however, continued to harass the chosen people on various occasions, and were not subdued until David put to the sword two-thirds of the population, the remainder becoming bondsmen and subjected to a regular tribute, (2 Samuel 8:2; 23:20), thus literally fulfilling Balaam’s prophecy: “Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion and shall destroy him that remaineth of Ar,” (i.e., Moab). After the division of Solomon’s kingdom, Moab seems to have remained tributary to the kingdom of Israel, and in the time of Ahab paid an annual tribute of [100,000 rams] – an indication of the almost fabulous wealth of so small a nation.
After the death of Ahab the Moabites revolted and joined the Ammonites in an attack upon the kingdom of Judah. The allies, however, fell to fighting one another; and Judah, Israel and Edom now joined in a war against Moab; the latter fell into an ambush and were slaughtered; the land of Moab was swept clean by the besom of destruction; the cities were beaten down and their stones scattered over the fields… the wells of water were filled up, and all the trees of the land were cut down. The king of Moab, with his family and a small remnant of the army, took refuge in Kir-haraseth where, in the extremity of despair, and in full sight of the besiegers, “he took his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall.” (2 Kings 3:27.)
The besieging army, struck with horror at this sight, now withdrew to their own lands. After this awful event, nothing further is known of the history of Moab for a long period, but it appears that Moab gradually recovered all of its former prosperity, and in addition took possession of the territory of Reuben, after this tribe had been carried away by the Assyrians. At the time of the Babylonian invasion, Moab submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, and after the return of the Jews from the captivity the Moabites took the lead in annoying those who were rebuilding Jerusalem. Even at the time of the last Jewish war the Moabites, according to Josephus, was still “a very great nation,” but two hundred years afterwards they were exterminated or absorbed by a great invasion of “the children of the East.”’
The Moabites were neither ‘exterminated or absorbed’ but rather, they were forced to migrate westwards. The Ammonites were a more diverse or fragmented people compared to their elder brother Moab. In Canaan the Ammonites had their own territory north of Moab, with their own capital – Rabbah. Ultimately they joined with Moab and migrated with them after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. In modern times, most have unified with Moab in France, while the remainder migrated to New France in North America, eventually becoming the modern province of Quebec in Canada.
Today, the term Rabbah – as in those Ammonites not with Moab – broadly means Quebec and Rabbah – as in specifically the capital city – is fulfilled by Quebec City.
Deuteronomy 2:16-22, 37
English Standard Version
16 “So as soon as all the men of war had perished and were dead from among the people, 17 the Lord said to me, 18 ‘Today you are to cross the border of Moab at Ar. 19 And when you approach the territory of the people of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the people of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession.’
20 (It is also counted as a land of Rephaim. Rephaim formerly lived there – but the Ammonites call them Zamzummim – 21 a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim; but the Lord destroyed them before the Ammonites, and they dispossessed them and settled in their place, 22 as he did for the people of Esau, who live in Seir, when he destroyed the Horites before them and they dispossessed them and settled in their place even to this day. 37 Only to the land of the sons of Ammon you did not draw near, that is, to all the banks of the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, whatever the Lord our God had forbidden us.
The Israelites and Ammonites continually disputed territory and borders. The rift between Lot and Abraham, didn’t heal or improve with time it was continually aggravated. The instruction was clear: do not engage negatively with Ammon in any way or take their land.
Joshua 13:8-13
English Standard Version
8 With the other half of the tribe of Manasseh [half tribe of East Manasseh or Gilead] the Reubenites and the Gadites received their inheritance, which Moses gave them, beyond the Jordan eastward, as Moses the servant of the Lord gave them: 9 from Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and the city that is in the middle of the valley, and all the tableland of Medeba as far as Dibon; 10 and all the cities of Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon, as far as the boundary of the Ammonites; 11 and Gilead, and the region of the Geshurites and Maacathites, and all Mount Hermon, and all Bashan to Salecah; 12 all the kingdom of Og in Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei (he alone was left of the remnant of the Rephaim); these Moses had struck and driven out. 13 Yet the people of Israel did not drive out the Geshurites or the Maacathites, but Geshur and Maacath dwell in the midst of Israel to this day.
After the sons of Jacob fought the existing Canaanite inhabitants and had either killed or subjugated them, the land was divided amongst the tribes on the eastern side of the River Jordan. The tribe of Manasseh had split in two. The half tribe of West Manasseh stayed with their brother Ephraim, while the half tribe of East Manasseh struck out on their own. With the tribes of Reuben and Gad, they requested to live on the east side of the River Jordan. These two and a half tribes believed the land was spacious and suitable to live. It did not come without difficulties; namely. Ammonites, Amorites, various tribes of Elioud giants – such as king Og of the Rephaim – and Mount Herman, the once headquarters so-to-speak, of the Nephilim.
Judges 10:17-18
English Standard Version
17 Then the Ammonites were called to arms, and they encamped in Gilead. And the people of Israel came together, and they encamped at Mizpah. 18 And the people, the leaders of Gilead, said one to another, “Who is the man who will begin to fight against the Ammonites? He shall be head over all the inhabitants of Gilead.”
Gilead, a name brought to the wider public’s attention by the author Margaret Attwood and her insightful novel, The Handmaid’s Tale in 1985, was the broad area east of the River Jordan and bordering north of Ammon which had been settled by the two and a half tribes of Israel. In time, the word Gilead became more synonymous with the half tribe of East Manasseh than with Reuben or Gad.
Judges 11:11-33
English Standard Version
11 So Jephthah [ninth Judge of Israel for 6 years beginning 1106 BCE from the half tribe of East Manasseh or Gilead] went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and leader over them. And Jephthah spoke all his words before the Lord at Mizpah.
12 Then Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites and said, “What do you have against me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?” 13 And the king of the Ammonites answered the messengers of Jephthah, “Because Israel on coming up from Egypt took away my land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok and to the Jordan; now therefore restore it peaceably.” 14 Jephthah again sent messengers to the king of the Ammonites 15 and said to him, “Thus says Jephthah: Israel did not take away the land of Moab or the land of the Ammonites, 16 but when they came up from Egypt, Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh. 17 Israel then sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let us pass through your land,’ but the king of Edom would not listen. And they sent also to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh.
18 “Then they journeyed through the wilderness and went around the land of Edom and the land of Moab and arrived on the east side of the land of Moab and camped on the other side of the Arnon. But they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the boundary of Moab. 19 Israel then sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, ‘Please let us pass through your land to our country,’ 20 but Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory, so Sihon gathered all his people together and encamped at Jahaz and fought with Israel. 21 And the Lord, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them. So Israel took possession of all the land of the Amorites, who inhabited that country…
23 So then the Lord, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites from before his people Israel; and are you to take possession of them? 24 Will you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? And all that the Lord our God has dispossessed before us, we will possess. 25 Now are you any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab? Did he ever contend against Israel, or did he ever go to war with them? 26 While Israel lived in Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages, and in all the cities that are on the banks of the Arnon,300 years [1406 – 1106 BCE], why did you not deliver them within that time? 27 I therefore have not sinned against you, and you do me wrong by making war on me. The Lord, the Judge, decide this day between the people of Israel and the people of Ammon.” 28 But the king of the Ammonites did not listen to the words of Jephthah that he sent to him.
29 Then the Spirit of the Lord was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead andManasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the Lord gave them into his hand. 33 And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, andas far as Abel-keramim,with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.
The king of the Ammonites raised an issue three hundred years old. The Moabites hadn’t made an issue of it, so why Ammon and why now was Jephthah’s reasoning. The Israelites had defeated the Amorites – after being refused passage through Edom and Moab – and probably some of their land, had once been Ammonite land. It was too late to dispute it now. The king of Ammon remained stubborn and proud, but did not win it back.
2 Samuel 12:26-31
English Standard Version
26 NowJoab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and took the royal city. 27 And Joab sent messengers to David and said, “I have fought against Rabbah; moreover, I have taken thecity of waters.*28 Now then gather the rest of the people together and encamp against the city and take it, lest I take the city and it be called by my name.” 29 So David gathered all the people together and went to Rabbah and fought against it and took it. 30 And he took the crown of their king from his head. The weight of it was a talent of gold, and in it was a precious stone, and it was placed on David’s head. And he brought out the spoil of the city, a very great amount. 31 And he brought out the people who were in it and set them to labor with saws and iron picks and iron axes and made them toil at the brick kilns. And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.
Quebec is Kebec in Algonquin, meaning ‘where the river narrows.’ The Province of Quebec has a vast coastline. The motto of Quebec City is Don de Dieu feray valoir: “I shall put God’s gift to good use.” The Don de Dieu was one of three ships which set sail from France under captain Henry Couillard and on July 3, 1608 explorer Samuel de Champlain – established a fort at Cape Diamond and – founded Quebec City, the oldest city in Canada. The Montmorency Falls are located on the Montmorency River and are about 270 feet tall – one hundred feet taller than Niagara Falls. One of Quebec’s most important resources is water,* harnessed for hydroelectric power.
David exacted harsh measures on the Ammonites, which didn’t improve relations, but showed the strength of negative feeling between the two peoples. His actions did contravene the instruction of not to contend or ‘to struggle in opposition’ or ‘strive in rivalry’ with Ammon.
1 Chronicles 19:19
English Standard Version
And when the servants of Hadadezer saw that they had been defeated by Israel, they made peace with David and became subject to him. So the Syrians[Aram-Gether]were not willing to savethe Ammonites anymore.
1 Kings 11:7
English Standard Version
Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.
Nehemiah 4:1-9
English Standard Version
Now when Sanballat heard that we were building the wall, he was angry and greatly enraged, and he jeered at the Jews [Judeans]. 2 And he said in the presence of his brothers and of the army of Samaria, “What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they restore it for themselves? Will they sacrifice? Will they finish up in a day? Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, and burned ones at that?” 3 Tobiah the Ammonite was beside him, and he said, “Yes, what they are building – if a fox goes up on it he will break down their stone wall!”
4 Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. 5 Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders. 6 So we built the wall. And all the wall was joined together to half its height, for the people had a mind to work.
7 But when Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabs [not Arabs from Mizra. Arabians meaning, in the eastern peninsula of Arabia – probably Joktan] and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites [Philistines] heard that the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem was going forward and that the breaches were beginning to be closed, they were very angry. 8 And they all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it. 9 And we prayed to our God and set a guard as a protection against them day and night.
The Medes and Persians had allowed captives from Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild its walls and Temple compound. Tobiah the Ammonite was one who mocked their efforts.
Jeremiah 40:11-16
English Standard Version
11 Likewise, when all the Judeans who were in Moab and among the Ammonites and in Edom and in other lands heard that the king of Babylon had left a remnant in Judah and had appointed Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, as governor over them, 12 then all the Judeans returned from all the places to which they had been driven and came to the land of Judah, to Gedaliah at Mizpah. And they gathered wine and summer fruits in great abundance. 13 Now Johanan the son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces in the open country came to Gedaliah at Mizpah
14 and said to him, “Do you know that Baalis the king of the Ammonites has sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take your life?” But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam would not believe them. 15 Then Johanan the son of Kareah spoke secretly to Gedaliah at Mizpah, “Please let me go and strike down Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and no one will know it. Why should he take your life, so that all the Judeans who are gathered about you would be scattered, and the remnant of Judah would perish?” 16 But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said to Johanan the son of Kareah, “You shall not do this thing, for you are speaking falsely of Ishmael.” [Ishmael (not Abraham’s son) did assassinate Gedaliah]
Jeremiah 49:1-6
English Standard Version
Concerning the Ammonites. Thus says the Lord: “Has Israel no sons? Has he no heir? Why then has Milcom [a prominent god of Ammon, with Molech] dispossessed Gad and his people settled in its cities? 2 Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will cause the battle cry to be heard against Rabbah of the Ammonites; it shall become a desolate mound, and its villages shall be burned with fire; then Israel shall dispossess those who dispossessed him, says the Lord. 3 “Wail, O Heshbon, for Ai is laid waste! Cry out, O daughters of Rabbah! [the descendants of Lot’s youngest daughter] Put on sackcloth, lament, and run to and fro among the hedges! For Milcom shall go into exile, with his priests and his officials.4 Why do you boast of your valleys, O faithless daughter, who trusted in her treasures, saying, ‘Who will come against me?’
5 Behold, I will bring terror upon you, declares the Lord God of hosts, from all who are around you, and you shall be driven out, every man straight before him, with none to gather the fugitives. 6 “But afterward I will restore the fortunes of the Ammonites, declares the Lord.”
In modern times, France and Quebec have been blessed with wealth and abundance.
Ezekiel 21:28-32
English Standard Version
28 “And you, son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God concerning the Ammonites and concerning their reproach; say, A sword, a sword is drawn for the slaughter. It is polished to consume and to flash like lightning – 29 while they see for you false visions, while they divine lies for you – to place you on the necks of the profane wicked, whose day has come, the time of their final punishment. 30 Return it to its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. 31 And I will pour out my indignation upon you; I will blow upon you with the fire of my wrath, [similar to the fire inflicted on Sodom]and I will deliver you into the hands of brutish men, skillful to destroy. 32 You shall be fuel for the fire. Your blood shall be in the midst of the land. You shall be no more remembered, for I the Lord have spoken.”
The punishment decreed at the end of the latter days when the Son of Man returns. Many nations will suffer similar fates and some because of their attitude and treatment of the sons of Jacob.
Ezekiel 25:1-11
English Standard Version
The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, set your face toward the Ammonites and prophesy against them. 3 Say to the Ammonites, Hear the word of the Lord God: Thus says the Lord God, Because you said, ‘Aha!’ over my sanctuary when it was profaned, and over the land of Israel when it was made desolate, andover the house of Judah when they went into exile, 4 therefore behold, I am handing you over to the people of the East for a possession, and they shall set their encampments among you and make their dwellings in your midst. They shall eat your fruit, and they shall drink your milk. 5 I will make Rabbah a pasture for camels and Ammon a fold for flocks.
Then you will know that I am the Lord. 6 For thus says the Lord God: Because you have clapped your hands and stamped your feet and rejoiced with all the malice within your soul against the land of Israel, 7 therefore, behold, I have stretched out my hand against you, and will hand you over as plunder to the nations. And I will cut you off from the peoples and will make you perish out of the countries; I will destroy you. Then you will know that I am the Lord.
8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab [France] from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.
Whether this prophecy is dual, with a future fulfilment, time will tell. The people of the east in the past as well as today includes a number of alternatives. It could mean a dominant near neighbour and relative as in Ishmael, who originally dwelt in the east, known as Arabia or alternatively the wilderness. Secondly and unlikely, Assyria or Russia – the king of the North – as they spared Moab and the Ammonites in the past as well as predicted for the future – Daniel 11.41. As it appears to be the far future, possibly further distant than the King of the North timeframe, it could mean the far East and descendants of Japheth – such as Magog, Tubal and Meschech [Revelation 16:12] – in partial ironic fulfilment of the sons of Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem – Genesis 9:27.
Daniel 11:40-41
English Standard Version
40 “At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. 41 He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his [Asshur’s] hand [Russia]: Edom and Moab [France]and the main part of the Ammonites [Paris and north western France].
The French Canadians heralded from principally the north and western regions of France, particularly Normandy and Poitou. Every region with direct access to the Ocean and with a tradition of long-term fishing expeditions, attracted migrants to New France. Apparently, French Canadian soldiers were surprised when they landed in Normandy, discovering how much Norman French was like their own dialect.
The Tribe of Benjamin are the Normans, Peter Salemi – emphasis & bold mine:
‘A review of census records for the year 1700 reveals that of New France’s French-speaking colonists, 29% came from the provinces of Poitou, Aunis, Saintonge, and Angoumois in the mother country; 22% from Normandy and Perche; 15% from Paris and Ile-de-France; 13% from Anjou, Touraine, Beauce, and Maine; 9% from Brittany, Picardy, and Champagne; 5% from Limousin, Périgord, and Guyenne; 7% from other regions.
Thus over 50% of immigrants to Quebec, and possibly much more, came from north of the Loire river in France, i.e., areas of Norman, Breton, and Frankish settlement.In addition, many of the Seigneurs (Lords) of Quebec, e.g., the families of de Lotbinière, Panet, Montizambert, etc., were Norman, who left Normandy in 1686.’
Amos 1:13-15
English Standard Version
13 Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead, that they might enlarge their border. 14 So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind; 15 and their king shall go into exile, he and his princes together,” says the Lord.
Zephaniah 2:8-10
Amplified Bible
8 “I have heard the taunting of Moab [and] the revilingsof the sons of Ammon, With which they have taunted My people And become arrogant against their territory [by violently and cruelly violating Israel’s boundary and trying to seize its land]. 9 “Therefore, as I live,” declares the Lord of hosts, The God of Israel, “Moab will in fact become like Sodom [and] the sons of Ammon like Gomorrah, [a]land possessed by nettlesand salt pits, And a perpetual desolation. The remnant of My people will plunder them And what is left of My nation will inherit them [as their own].”10 This they shall have in return for their pride, because they have taunted and become arrogant against the people of the Lord of hosts.
Ammon had no authority to try to possess Gilead or take it from Israel. The sitting on the sidelines and relishing Judah’s downfall and subsequent captivity at the hands of the Chaldeans, has also been a cause of Ammon and particularly Moab, receiving retribution [Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes].
An important person mentioned earlier from the line of Ammon was Naamah, a royal princess of Ammon – not to be confused with the daughter of evil Lamech prior to the Flood. An additional reason for the sons of Jacob not to wage war and destroy Ammon and Moab. Her name means ‘sweet, lovely’ or ‘pleasant’ from the verb naem. Naamah married Solomon before he became king in 970 BCE. Their son, Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE. Naamah provided the heir to the throne of Judah and she is the only wife of Solomon, mentioned by name in the Bible. Naamah is also only one of two foreign Queen Mothers of Israel or Judah, with Jezebel – a Princess of Tyre and the daughter of the Phoenician King Ethbaal. Naamah, may well have been an influence on Solomon who later turned away from the Eternal, to worship Ammonite and Moabite gods.
1 Kings 14:21-23
English Standard Version
21 Now Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city that the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there.His mother’s name was Naamah the Ammonite. 22 And [the House of] Judah did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins that they committed, more than all that their fathers had done. 23 For they also built for themselves high places and pillars and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree… [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]
15 Fun Quebec City Facts, Nadeen White, 2018 – capitalisation hers, emphasis & bold mine:
‘Quebec City is also known simply as Quebec [similar to Rabbah of the Ammonites]. It is located in the Canadian province of Quebec… [and] is the capital city… [as well as] the second largest city… Montreal is the largest city in the province of Quebec.
Quebec is a French speaking province [and] is the official language… Approximately 80% of the residents speak French as their native language… It is the oldest French speaking [region] in North America. However, English is [also widely] spoken by most residents… Old Quebec is surrounded by fortified city walls [It is the only remaining walled city in North America north of Mexico] that were designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1985…
Quebec produces a LOT of maple syrup… I had no idea that Canada produces about 70% of the world’s pure maple syrup. Out of that 70% about 90% is from the province of Quebec. Most of the maple syrup produced in the U.S. comes from Vermont.
In 2010 the Province of Quebec produced roughly 7,989,000 gallons of maple syrup while Vermont produced roughly 890,000 gallons. Quebec isn’t just French… there are many Irish people here too! There is actually a large Irish community in Quebec.During the 17th century, Irish inhabitants of France were sent to Quebec to help populate the area. Historians estimate that about 40% of the population in Quebec is of Irish descent.’
This is a startling fact and the Irish component in Quebec is more than interesting, it is of great significance. When we study the Irish and the British descended peoples of Canada, their relationship with the French Ammonites of Quebec will be fascinatingly evident. Quebec is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic and during the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s and 1850s a large number of Irish Catholics, migrated to Canada and Quebec.
The Province of Quebec comprises nearly one-sixth of Canada’s total land area; is the largest of Canada’s ten provinces; and possesses an abundance of mineral wealth. The site of Quebec City, originally occupied by an Indian village named Stadacona, was discovered by Jacques Cartier in 1535. Quebec Province and city were formally French until being ceded to Great Britain in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris. This was the result of the famous Battle of Quebec on the Plains of Abraham – interesting coincidence – adjacent to the city in 1759, where the French were defeated. Later, Great Britain reinforced its military defences of the city in time to repel an attack during the American Revolution in the second Battle of Quebec in 1775.
The arrival of displaced Loyalists following American independence, increased Quebec’s population and so did trade with Britain, much of it through the port of Quebec. Up until the mid-nineteenth century, Quebec’s economy was centred on French and then British mercantilism. The British Parliament passed the Constitutional Act of 1791, which split the large colony of Quebec into two provinces: Upper Canada – now the province of Ontario – and Lower Canada, now the province of Quebec. Quebec city, formerly the capital of the colony, remained the capital of Lower Canada.
After the British takeover of New France, Montreal – founded in 1642 and the second largest Canadian city after Toronto – gained the dominant economic position in the province, whereas Quebec remained an important port. Quebec is the second most populous province of Canada after Ontario with 8,604,500 people. ‘On November 27, 2006, the House of Commons passed a symbolic motion moved by Prime Minister Stephen Harper declaring “that this House recognize that the Quebecois [Francophones] form a nation within a united Canada.”However, there is considerable debate and uncertainty over what this means. The debate over the status of Quebec is a highly animated one to this day.’
Nearly half of the total population of Quebec are descendants of the ten thousand original French settlers. When the Dominion of Canada was established in 1867, French Canadians accounted for one-third of the newly formed country’s population. In 1974, French was made the official language in Quebec province. Between 1897 and 1936, Quebec competed with Ontario for domestic and foreign investment. Montreal was the headquarters of the national banks, the insurance corporations and the railway companies. Even so, Ontario, because of its proximity to the United States, its shared language and the vast amounts of hydroelectric power at Niagara Falls, was more attractive for United States investment. An ensuing struggle developed between Montreal and Toronto, with Toronto eventually gaining the upper hand.
The colony of New France included Acadia, with its first capital in Port-Royal in 1605. ‘The term Acadia today refers to regions of North America that are historically associated with the lands, descendants, or culture of the former region [in north eastern Canada]. It particularly refers to regions of The Maritimes with Acadian roots, language, and culture, primarily in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands, and Prince Edward Island, as well as in Maine.It can also refer to the Acadian diaspora in southern Louisiana, a region also referred to as Acadiana. In the abstract, Acadia refers to the existence of an Acadian culture in any of these regions. People living in Acadia are called Acadians which changed to Cajuns in Louisiana, the American pronunciation of Acadians.’
The word Acadia is similar to Akkad[ia] of Babylon and Acadian parallels the name, Akkadian. The original peoples of Akkad were descendants of Arphaxad and his great grandson Peleg. They were related to or from the peoples of Haran and Nahor. As Haran’s children include the modern French it is a notable association. Explorer Giovanni de Verrazzano is credited in originating the designation Acadia on his 16th century map, where he applied the ancient Greek name Arcadia to the entire Atlantic coast north of Virginia.
‘Arcadia’ is derived from the district in ancient Greece, ‘which had the extended meanings of ‘refuge’ or ‘idyllic place’.’ By the time of de Champlain, it was La Cadie without the r.In the Mi’ kmaq language, Cadie means ‘fertile land.’ We will revisit the link between the French and the ancient Greeks. A fascinating side note of history and all the more interesting once it is understood that the French Canadians are descended from Ammon; as well as the indirect parallel with Lot’s daughters, are the eight hundred women that most French Canadians are literally descended from.
CBC, Filles du Roi, 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘It’s 1663. New France has a population problem. To dominate the fur trade along the St. Lawrence River, New France needs people. Britain’s colonies to the south have 18 times as many settlers as New France. Britain has a wide-open policy on who can come to the colonies, meaning Brits from all walks of life are risking the perilous ocean voyage. France, on the other hand, has banned Protestants from going to New France. The British colonies have a farming-based economy, meaning men bring their wives over and have families, whereas the French settlers are mostly fur trappers and missionaries. That population gap is only getting wider. Britain’s colonies are growing, but in New France, which has only one woman for every six men, the population is stuck.
To help fix New France’s gender imbalance, two men come up with an innovative idea: Jean Talon (Intendant of the colony) and King Louis XIV decide to import young women to the colony to marry male settlers. The women would be known as the Filles du Roior “Daughters of the King.” Almost all the women are poor. Many are orphans.
[Between the years 1663 to 1673, these women of marriageable age came from Rouen in the province of Normandy, La Rochelle in Aunis and included beggars and orphans from the streets of Paris]. One in 10 doesn’t survive the voyage from France. For the 800 women who make it, France pays for the women’s passage and provides a dowry… from the royal treasury.
The women are also given a hope chest containing, among other things, a pair of hose, a pair of shoes, a bonnet, gloves, a comb, a belt and various sewing supplies. The Filles du Roi step off their boats into a foreign landscape. It Is a sparsely populated, heavily wooded wilderness. Many of them are from France’s cities and are about to get a harsh introduction to the backbreaking world of 17th century farm labour. Canadian winter will be unlike anything they’ve ever experienced. And in the coming years, many of them are going to be pregnant more often than not.
As daunting as that sounds, all of the Filles du Roi come to New France voluntarily. Even with the cold climate and hard toil, life in New France has advantages over the lives they left behind. Unlike many women at the time, the Filles du Roi are allowed to choose their husbands. Admittedly, they’re choosing from a very small pool – the population of New France is just over 3,000 and includes a disproportionately high number of priests. The women meet potential suitors in a series of chaperoned, interview-like “dates.”
The meetings are presided over by Jean Talon himself, along with Ursuline nun Marie Guyart… The women sail down the St. Lawrence, stopping first at Quebec City, then Trois-Rivieres, and eventually making their way to Montreal. At every stop, they have to make a choice; go with one of the men there, or see if there’s a better husband waiting down river. The women are given 50 livres – the equivalent of roughly $1,000 today – as a dowry. As poor women without dowries, finding a husband (let alone one they liked), would have been nearly impossible in France. There are other advantages, too. Abundant food means that women in New France live longer than their peers in Europe.
Families with more than 10 children get an additional annual pension of 300 livres ($6,000) from the crown. The program leads to a population explosion unlike anything Canada has seen since. The average family has five children – almost twice as many as the “Baby Boom” that follows WWII. The population of New France more than doubles in a decade. Two-thirds of today’s French-Canadians can trace their ancestry back to one of these 800 women. Their influence was felt outside Quebec, as well. Some famous Americans also claim a Fille du Roi as an ancestor, including Hiliary Clinton, Madonna and Angelina Jolie. There are very few first-hand accounts of the lives of the Filles du Roi.Few of them could read or write.Their histories have largely been told by subsequent generations. That said, one thing we know with absolute certainty: the Quebec we know today owes a lot to the fortitude of these incredibly tough women.’
Moab is Ammon’s elder brother and comprises the bulk of the French people. In the past, his peoples were also more numerous and they interacted with the sons of Jacob constantly through conventional warfare – unlike the guerrilla tactics of the Ammonites. The name Abarim – which has been an invaluable biblical word definition and concordance website – was actually a mountain range in the land of Moab.
Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Moab meaning: Who Is Your Father?, Water Of A Father from (1) (mi), who, or (may), “water of …”, and (2) the noun (‘ab), father
The etymology and original meaning of the name Moab is unknown. The word moab is foreign to Hebrew… However, to a creative Hebrew audience, the name may have sounded like a compilation of two elements: the interrogative particle (me), what or (mi), who… The noun (‘ab) means father… It’s unclear where this word (‘ab) comes from but the verb abu means to decide.
Thus the name Moab would carry the meaning of Who’s… or What’s Your Father? a rhetorical question to which the story may easily give rise. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names takes a different approach and goes with the word (may), meaning water… Water represents the great unknown from which the dry land of the known emerges. Thus Jones reads Water Of A Father, and explains this to mean seed or progeny.The problem here is that semen is never referred to as a father’s waters.
The name Ar meaning: City from the noun (‘ir), city
The name Ar (or more complete: Ar of Moab – see Numbers 21:28) was a city on the southern shore of the river Arnon (Numbers 21:15). When YHWH delivers his famous “do not harass Moab” sermon, he declares that he gave Ar to the sons of Lot (which would be the Ammonites and the Moabites – Deuteronomy 2:9). Much later, the prophet Isaiah declares his blood curdling prophecies against Moab, and foretells its utter destruction, along with Kirof Moab (Isaiah 15:1).
Adjectives (‘ariri) and (‘ar’ar) mean stripped, childless or destitute. Noun (me’ara) literally means “place of being stripped” and is the Bible’s common word for cave. Verb (‘ur I) means to rouse oneself – literally to collect and bundle one’s feelings. Noun (‘ir) means excitement. Identical verb (‘ur II) means to be exposed or laid bare. Noun (ma’or) means nakedness and noun (ma’arom) means naked one. Adjectives (‘erom), (‘erom), (‘arom) and (‘arom) mean naked. Noun (‘or) means skin or hide. Verb (‘ara) also means to be naked or bare. Nouns (‘ara), (ma’ara) and (ma’ar) refer to bare or exposed places. Nouns (‘erwa) and (‘erya) mean nakedness or exposure. Noun (ta’ar) denotes a thing that makes bare: a razor or sheath of a sword.
The name Kir meaning: Wall from the noun (qir), wall
The noun (qarqa’) means floor; earth trampled into a compact state. The verb (qarqar) means to forcibly compact, to pound down. Verb (qara), and its by-form (qara’), mean to near, to meet or to happen upon. Noun (qora) describes a rafter or beam; the things that come together to form a roof, and which obviously relate to bricks pieced into a wall. Nouns (qareh) and (miqreh) mean chance or accident, fortune or fate. Noun (qeri)means opposition, contrariness.
For this same reason, the nouns (qiryah) and (qeret) are the words for city and federation of cities.Adjective (qari’) means called or summoned… And noun (miqra’) means convocation or called assembly. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has A Wall, A Fortress, but this word for wall typically doesn’t refer to a military wall.’
Numbers 21:28-29
English Standard Version
28 For fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the city of Sihon. It devouredAr of Moab, and swallowed the heights of the [River] Arnon. 29 Woe to you, O Moab! You are undone, O people of Chemosh! He has made his sons fugitives, and his daughters captives, to an Amorite king, Sihon.
Ar and Kir of Moab appear to be the most prominent settlements of Moab. Today, they could equate to the capital Paris and possibly the principal port – also the second biggest city – Marseille. The numbers of the Israelites and their series of military victories became a serious concern to Moab; though Moab was unaware of the Eternal’s edict to the sons of Jacob: to not attack Moab and Ammon. In a preemptive strike, King Balak of Moab, summoned a Seer and Prophet to pronounce a curse on the sons of Jacob. Though the best laid plan did not eventuate as the Moabites would have hoped.
Numbers 22:1-41
English Standard Version
Then the people of Israel set out and camped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho.
2 And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3 And Moab was in great dread of the people, because they were many. Moab was overcome with fear of the people of Israel. 4 And Moab said to the elders of Midian [descendants from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah], “This horde will now lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.” So Balak the son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, 5 sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor at Pethor, which is near the River in the land of the people of Amaw, to call him, saying,
“Behold, a people has come out of Egypt. They cover the face of the earth [estimates account for three million plus people, including 600,000 fighting men able to take up arms], and they are dwelling opposite me. 6 Come now, curse this people for me, since they are too mighty for me.Perhaps I shall be able to defeat them and drive them from the land,for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed.”
7 So the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the fees for divination in their hand. And they came to Balaam and gave him Balak’s message… 9 And God came to Balaam and said, “Who are these men with you?” 10 And Balaam said to God, “Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me…
12 God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” 13 So Balaam rose in the morning and said to the princes of Balak, “Go to your own land, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you.” 14 So the princes of Moab rose and went to Balak and said, “Balaam refuses to come with us.” 15 Once again Balak sent princes, more in number and more honorable than these.
16 And they came to Balaam and said to him, “Thus says Balak the son of Zippor: ‘Let nothing hinder you from coming to me, 17 for I will surely do you great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come, curse this people for me.’” 18 But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more. 19 So you, too, please stay here tonight, that I may know what more the Lord will say to me.” 20 And God came to Balaam at night andsaid to him,“If the men have come to call you, rise, go with them; but only do what I tell you.” 21 So Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab.
22 But God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the Lord took his stand in the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road, with a drawn sword in his hand [like a Cherub – Genesis 3:24]. And the donkey turned aside out of the road and went into the field. And Balaam struck the donkey, to turn her into the road… 28 Then the Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?” 29 And Balaam said to the donkey, “Because you have made a fool of me. I wish I had a sword in my hand, for then I would kill you.” … 31 Then the Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the way, with his drawn sword in his hand. And he bowed down and fell on his face.
32 And the angel of the Lord said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to oppose you because your way is perverse before me. 33 The donkey saw me and turned aside before me these three times. If she had not turned aside from me, surely just now I would have killed you and let her live.” 34 Then Balaam said to the angel of the Lord, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you stood in the road against me. Now therefore, if it is evil in your sight, I will turn back.” 35 And the angel of the Lord said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but speak only the word that I tell you.” So Balaam went on with the princes of Balak.
36 When Balak heard that Balaam had come, he went out to meet him at the city of Moab [Ar], on the border formed by the Arnon, at the extremity of the border… 38 Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” 39 Then Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth. 40 And Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep, and sent for Balaam and for the princes who were with him. 41 And in the morning Balak took Balaam and brought him up to Bamoth-baal…
In Numbers Twenty-three, Balaam does not curse Israel but speaks of the blessings given them by the Creator. In Numbers Twenty-four, Balaam then precedes to curse the enemies of the sons of Jacob after adding a blessing to the Israelites.
Numbers 24:10-14, 17
English Standard Version
10 And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he struck his hands together. And Balak said to Balaam, “I called you to curse my enemies, and behold, you have blessed them these three times. 11 Therefore now flee to your own place. I said, ‘I will certainly honor you,’ but the Lord has held you back from honor.” 12 And Balaam said to Balak, “Did I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, 13 ‘If Balak should give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not be able to go beyond the word of the Lord, to do either good or bad of my own will. What the Lord speaks, that will I speak’? 14 And now, behold, I am going to my people. Come, I will let you know what this people will do to your people in the latter days.”17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near [the promised Messiah]: a star [blessing of Ephraim] shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter [blessing of Judah] shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth.
Deuteronomy 2:9-11
English Standard Version
9 And the Lord said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab or contend with them in battle, for I will not give you any of their land for a possession, because I have given Ar [the capital] to the people of Lot for a possession.’ 10 The Emim formerly lived there, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim. 11 Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.
Deuteronomy 34:1-8
English Standard Version
Then Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, which is opposite Jericho. And the Lord showed him all the land, Gilead as far as Dan [the far north east], 2 all Naphtali [the north], the land of Ephraim and Manasseh, all the land of Judah as far as the western sea [the far south west], 3 the Negeb, and the Plain, that is, the Valley of Jericho the city of palm trees, as far as Zoar. 4 And the Lord said to him, “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring.’ I have let you see it with your eyes, but you shall not go over there.”
5 So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, 6 and he [the Eternal] buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. 7 Moses was 120 years old when he died. His eye was undimmed, and his vigor unabated. 8 Andthe people of Israel wept for Mosesin the plains of Moab thirty days…
Judges 3:12-14, 26-30
English Standard Version
12 And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done what was evil in the sight of the Lord.
13 He gathered to himself the Ammonites and the Amalekites [grandson of Esau],and went and defeated Israel. And they took possession of the city of palms. 14 And the people of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years.
26 Ehud [second Judge of Israel from the tribe of Benjamin] escaped while they delayed, and he passed beyond the idols and escaped to Seirah. 27 When he arrived, he sounded the trumpet in the hill country of Ephraim. Then the people of Israel went down with him from the hill country, and he was their leader. 28 And he said to them, “Follow after me, for the Lord has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand.” So they went down after him and seized the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites and did not allow anyone to pass over. 29 And they killed at that time about 10,000 of the Moabites, all strong, able-bodied men; not a man escaped. 30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest for eighty years [Ehud was a Judge of Israel for the same period from 1284 to 1204 BCE].
A famous descendant of Moab and ancestor of King David, as mentioned previously, is Ruth. Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The name Ruth means: Friend, Associate, Vision, View from the noun (rea’), friend or companion and from the noun (re’ut), a looking or understanding.
Ruth was the Moabite wife of Mahlon, son of Elimelech and Naomi of Bethlehem. Their other son, Chilion, married Orphah also of Moab. When the men die [in battle with Israel], Ruth and Naomi move back to Bethlehem, where Ruth marries Boaz. In order to do so, Boaz appeals to the Leviratic Law, which dictates that when a man dies childless, his brother is to marry his widow and sire children in the name of the deceased man (Ruth 4:10, Deuteronomy 25:5). Ruth and Boaz become the parents of Obed, the grandparents of Jesse and the great-grandparents of David, thegreat king of Israel, and finally the ancestors of Jesus…
Verb (ra’a I) means to pasture or feed and the participle (ra’a) means shepherd… Verb (ra’a II) means to associate with. Nouns (rea’), (re’eh) and (merea’) mean friend, associate or “neighbor”. Nouns (ra’ya), (re’a) and (re’ut) describe a female attendant, mate or friend. Scholars who follow this root group see the name Ruth as a feminine derivation of the root (ra’a II), meaning to associate with, or be a friend of. And thus, they say, the name Ruth means (Lady-) Friend or (Lady-) Companion. The… NOBSE Study Bible Name List agrees and reads Female Companion for a meaning of the name Ruth. The… Alfred Jones (Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names) proposes a different etymology and goes after the root (ra’a), meaning to see… The verb (ra’a) means to see, and by extension to understand. It may mean to become visible (of, say, an angel) or to become understandable (of, say, a theory). Noun (ro’eh) means either seer, or prophetic vision, and noun (mar’a) means either vision as means of revelation, or mirror.
Specifically, Jones sees the name Ruth as a contraction of the noun (re’ut), meaning look. Hence, for a meaning of the name Ruth, Jones reads Beauty but perhaps better would be Vision. There’s no telling whether to an ancient Hebrew audience the name Ruth sounded like Female Friend or Beauty, but all-in-all Ruth is quite a name.’
Ruth 1:15-18
English Standard Version
15 And she said, “See, your sister-in-law [Orphah] has gone back to her people and to her gods [Chemosh]; return after your sister-in-law.” 16 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. 17 Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.” 18 And when Naomi saw that she was determined to go with her, she said no more. 22 So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab. And they came to Bethlehem [in Judah] at the beginning of barley harvest.
Ruth 2:1-20
English Standard Version
Now Naomi had a relative of her husband’s, a worthy man of the clan of Elimelech, whose name was Boaz. 2 And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after him in whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.” … 8 Then Boaz said to Ruth… “All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. 12 The Lord repay you for what you have done… 13 Then she said, “I have found favor in your eyes, my lord, for you have comforted me and spoken kindly to your servant, though I am not one of your servants.” “The man’s name with whom I worked today is Boaz.” 20 And Naomi said… “The man is a close relative of ours…
Ruth 3:1-14
English Standard Version
Then Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should I not seek rest for you, that it may be well with you? 2 Is not Boaz our relative, with whose young women you were? See, he is winnowing barley tonight at the threshing floor. 3 Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak and go down to the threshing floor… 4 when he lies down, observe the place where he lies. Then go and uncover his feet and lie down, and he will tell you what to do.”
8 At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet!
9 He said, “Who are you?” And she answered, “I am Ruth, your servant. Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” 10 And he said, “May you be blessed by the Lord… in that you have not gone after young men, whether poor or rich. 11 And now, my daughter, do not fear. I will do for you all that you ask, for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a worthy woman. 14 So she lay at his feet until the morning, but arose before one could recognize another [comparable to, yet in contrast with the scenario involving Lot and his daughters].
Some scholars maintain that Ruth and Boaz had an intimate relationship before they married. In contradistinction to her ancestor – the elder daughter of Lot – Ruth did not entice Boaz into temptation. The terms used in verse four do have sexual connotations, as Ruth was showing that she wanted to be married. The word uncover, means to make visible, to be naked. In this case, Boaz’s feet were exposed. They then became cold and hence Boaz woke up naturally. Some commentators state that feet here, are a euphemism for sexual organs. This is very tenuous at best.
‘And lie down…’ This can also have sexual connotations, though only when paired with the Hebrew terms eṯ and ‘im [with] as in passages such as Genesis 19:32-35; Exodus 22:15; Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 22:22; 1 Samuel 2:22 and 2 Samuel 11:4. The text says that she ‘lay at his feet until morning.’ Ruth slept there until morning, not that she slept with Boaz until morning. Though it could be interpreted as morally questionable to have a woman spend the night with a single man; Boaz kept Ruth with him until morning, because of the dangers of her going home alone in the middle of the night. It was more honourable to protect her until just before dawn, so that she could slip away before first light.
‘Spread your wings over your servant…’ means Ruth asked Boaz to spread his covering over her – a Hebrew idiom for marriage – Ezekiel 16:8; Deuteronomy 22:30; 27:20 and Malachi 2:16. Ruth probably visited at night to maintain privacy, so that Boaz wouldn’t feel pressured into making a public decision to marry her. Boaz was asleep and when he awoke, the text says he was ‘startled.’ If Boaz had just engaged in sex with Ruth, he obviously wouldn’t have been startled. Boaz also refers to Ruth as a ‘worthy woman.’ This is the same phrase used for a godly wife in Proverbs 31:10. He would hardly say these words after just engaging in fornication. Boaz was careful to keep and follow the kinsman-redeemer laws, even though he clearly loved Ruth and wanted to marry her; this highlights his integrity towards Ruth, not sexual permissiveness.
Ruth 4:9-17
English Standard Version
9 Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, “You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon. 10 Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon, I have bought to be my wife…
11 Then all the people who were at the gate and the elders said, “We are witnesses. May the Lord make the woman, who is coming into your house, like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you act worthily in Ephrathah and be renowned in Bethlehem, 12 and may your house be like the house of Perez [Pharez, a royal line], whom Tamar bore to Judah, because of the offspring that the Lord will give you by this young woman.” 13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her [the first time], and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son… 16 Then Naomi took the child and laid him on her lap and became his nurse. 17 And the women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David.
2 Samuel 8:2
English Standard Version
And he [King David] defeated Moab and he measured them with a line, making them lie down on the ground. Two lines he measured to be put to death, [!] and one full line to be spared [1/3].And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.
2 Kings 3:4-27
English Standard Version
4 Now Mesha king of Moab was a sheep breeder, and he had to deliver to the king of Israel 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams. 5 But when Ahab died, the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6 So King Jehoram marched out of Samaria at that time and mustered all Israel. 7 And he went and sent word to Jehoshaphat king of Judah: “The king of Moab has rebelled against me. Will you go with me to battle against Moab?” And he said, “I will go. I am as you are, my people [Houses of Judah and Benjamin] as your people [Kingdom of Ten Tribes of Israel], my horses as your horses.” 8 Then he said, “By which way shall we march?” Jehoram answered, “By the way of the wilderness of Edom.”
9 So the king of Israel went with the king of Judah and the king of Edom. And when they had made a circuitous march of seven days, there was no water for the army or for the animals that followed them. 10 Then the king of Israel said, “Alas! The Lord has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.” 11 And Jehoshaphat said, “Is there no prophet of the Lord here, through whom we may inquire of the Lord?” Then one of the king of Israel’s servants answered, “Elisha the son of Shaphat is here,who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” 12 And Jehoshaphat said, “The word of the Lord is with him.” So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him.
13 And Elisha said to the king of Israel, “What have I to do with you? Go to the prophets of your father and to the prophets of your mother.” But the king of Israel said to him, “No; it is the Lord who has called these three kings to give them into the hand of Moab.”
14 And Elisha said, “As the Lord of hosts lives, before whom I stand, were it not that I have regard for Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would neither look at you nor see you. 15 But now bring me a musician.” And when the musician played, the hand of the Lord came upon him. 16 And he said, “Thus says the Lord, ‘I will make this dry streambed full of pools.’ 17 For thus says the Lord, ‘You shall not see wind or rain, but that streambed shall be filled with water, so that you shall drink, you, your livestock, and your animals.’
18 This is a light thing in the sight of the Lord. He will also give the Moabites into your hand, 19 and you shall attack every fortified city and every choice city, and shall fell every good tree and stop up all springs of water and ruin every good piece of land with stones.”[!] 20 The next morning, about the time of offering the sacrifice, behold, water came from the direction of Edom, till the country was filled with water. [Recall, a definition of Moab is ‘water of a father.’]
21 When all the Moabites heard that the kings had come up to fight against them, all who were able to put on armor, from the youngest to the oldest, were called out and were drawn up at the border. 22 And when they rose early in the morning and the sun shone on thewater, the Moabites saw the water opposite them as red as blood. 23 And they said, “This is blood; the kings have surely fought together and struck one another down. Now then, Moab, to the spoil!” 24 But when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose and struck the Moabites, till they fled before them. And they went forward, striking the Moabites as they went. 25 And they overthrew the cities, and on every good piece of land every man threw a stone until it was covered. They stopped every spring of water and felled all the good trees, till only its stones were left in Kir-hareseth [not the Kir of Moab], and the slingers surrounded and attacked it. 26 When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him 700 swordsmen to break through, opposite the king of Edom, but they could not.
27 Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place and offered him for a burnt offering on thewall. And there came great wrath against Israel. And they withdrew from him and returned to their own land.
These were severely harsh measures and war atrocities by the Israelites towards the Moabites. Not a big surprise that hatred brewed and raged within Moab. The sons of Jacob were disobeying the command to not harass or contend in war with Moab and then added cruelty to make it immensely worse.
2 Kings 16:9
English Standard Version
… The king of Assyria marched up against Damascus [Aram-Gether] and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir [of Moab], and he killed Rezin [the king of Damascus].
Psalm 60:7-8
English Standard Version
7 Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. 8Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”
Isaiah 15:1-9
English Standard Version
… Because Ar of Moab [the capital] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone; because Kir of Moab [the second city] is laid waste in a night, Moab is undone.2 He has gone up to the temple, and to Dibon, to the high places to weep; over Nebo and over Medeba Moab wails. On every head is baldness; every beard is shorn; 3 in the streets they wear sackcloth; on the housetops and in the squares everyone wails and melts in tears.4… the armed men of Moab cry aloud; his soul trembles. 5 My heart cries out for Moab; her fugitives flee to Zoar… For at the ascent of Luhith [possible neighbouring great grandson of Abraham and Keturah – Genesis 25:3] they go up weeping; on the road to Horonaim they raise a cry of destruction… 8 For a cry has gone around the land of Moab; her wailing reaches to Eglaim; her wailing reaches to Beer-elim. 9 For the waters of Dibon are full of blood; for I will bring upon Dibon even more, a lion for those of Moab who escape, for the remnant of the land.
Isaiah 16:1-13
English Standard Version
Send the lamb to the ruler of the land, from Sela, by way of the desert, to the mount of the daughter of Zion. 2 Like fleeing birds, like a scattered nest, so are the daughters of Moab at the fords of the Arnon… 4 let the outcasts of Moab sojourn among you; be a shelter to them from the destroyer. When the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased, and he who tramples underfoot has vanished from the land, 5 then a throne will be established in steadfast love, and on it will sit in faithfulness in the tent of David one who judges and seeks justice and is swift to do righteousness.” 6 We have heard of the pride of Moab – how proud he is! – of his arrogance, his pride, and his insolence; in his idle boasting he is not right.
Moab’s pride is their biggest stumbling block
Job 41:34 RSV:
“[They behold] everything that is high;[they (the Adversary) are a ruler] over all the [children] of pride.”
7 Therefore let Moab wail for Moab, let everyone wail. Mourn, utterly stricken, for the raisin cakes of Kir-hareseth. 8 For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah; the lords of the nations have struck down its branches… And joy and gladness are taken away from the fruitful field, and in the vineyards no songs are sung, no cheers are raised; no treader treads out wine in the presses; I have put an end to the shouting. 11 Therefore my inner parts moan like a lyre for Moab, and my inmost self for Kir-hareseth.
12 And when Moab presents himself, when he wearies himself on the high place, when he comes to his sanctuary to pray, he will not prevail. 13 This is the word that the Lord spoke concerning Moab in the past. 14 But now the Lord has spoken, saying, “In three years, like the years of a hired worker, the glory of Moab will be brought into contempt, in spite of all his great multitude, and those who remain will be very few and feeble.”
Germany has an eagle, the United Kingdom has a lion and Spain has a bull; France have a rooster as a symbol and mascot. The origin of this emblem dates back to the Gallic origins of the French nation when the Romans laughed at Gauls because of a linguistic pun. In Latin, the word gallus means Gaul, but also cockerel. The supposed stubbornness and brazen pride of the people was to be turned on its head as the French took the bird to their hearts as an icon of their nation. The French kings adopted the rooster as a symbol of courage and bravery. During the French Revolution, the cockerel became a symbol of the people and the State and was engraved on coins. Napoleon preferred the eagle – the symbol of imperial Rome – but the rooster won out over the raptor, as an apt symbol for French pride. The rooster is visible throughout France: on French stamps, at the entrance of the Élysée Palace, on jerseys of French football, rugby and handball teams and on the shirts of Olympic athletes. Mercury was often portrayed with the cockerel; a sacred animal among the Continental Celts.
Jeremiah 48:1-30, 38-47
English Standard Version
2 …the renown of Moab is no more. In Heshbon they planned disaster against her: ‘Come, let us cut her off from being a nation!’ You also, O Madmen, shall be brought to silence; the sword shall pursue you. 3 …’Desolation and great destruction!’ 4 Moab is destroyed; her little ones have made a cry… 6 Flee! Save yourselves! You will be like a juniper in the desert! 7 For, because you trusted in your works and your treasures, you also shall be taken; and Chemosh shall go into exile with his priests and his officials… 9 “Give wings to Moab, for she would fly away; her cities shall become a desolation, with no inhabitant in them.
11 “Moab has been at ease from his youth and has settled on his dregs; he has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, nor has he gone into exile; so his taste remains in him, and his scent is not changed. 12 “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I shall send to him pourers who will pour him, and empty his vessels and break his jars in pieces. 13 Then Moab shall be ashamed of Chemosh, as the house of Israel was ashamed of Bethel, their confidence. 14 “How do you say, ‘We are heroes and mighty men of war’? 15 The destroyer of Moab and his cities has come up, and the choicest of his young men have gone down to slaughter, declares the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts. 16 The calamity of Moab is near at hand, and his affliction hastens swiftly. 17 Grieve for him, all you who are around him, and all who know his name; say, ‘How the mighty scepter is broken, the glorious staff.’
18 “Come down from your glory, and sit on the parched ground, O inhabitant of Dibon! For the destroyer of Moab has come up against you; he has destroyed your strongholds… 20 Moab is put to shame, for it is broken; wail and cry! Tell it beside the Arnon, that Moab is laid waste. 21 “Judgment has come upon the tableland… and all the cities of the land of Moab, far and near. 25 The horn [symbol of power] of Moab is cut off, and his arm is broken, declares the Lord. 26 “Make him drunk, because he magnified himself against the Lord, so that Moab shall wallow in his vomit, and he too shall be held in derision. 27 Was not Israel a derision to you? Was he found among thieves, that whenever you spoke of him you wagged your head? 28 “Leave the cities, and dwell in the rock, O inhabitants of Moab!
29 … We have heard of the pride of Moab – he is very proud – of his loftiness, his pride, and his arrogance, and the haughtiness of his heart. 30 I know his insolence, declares the Lord; his boasts are false, his deeds are false.
… 38 On all the housetops of Moab and in the squares there is nothing but lamentation, for I have broken Moab like a vessel for which no one cares, declares the Lord. 39 How it is broken! How they wail! How Moab has turned his back in shame! So Moab has become a derision and a horror to all that are around him.”
40 For thus says the Lord: “Behold, one shall fly swiftly like an eagle and spread his wings against Moab; 41 the cities shall be taken and the strongholds seized. The heart of the warriors of Moab shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her birth pains; 42 Moab shall be destroyed and be no longer a people, because he magnified himself against the Lord… For I will bring these things upon Moab, the year of their punishment, declares the Lord. 45 “In the shadow of Heshbon fugitives stop without strength, for fire came out from Heshbon, flame from the house of Sihon; it has destroyed the forehead of Moab, the crown of the sons of tumult. 46 Woe to you, O Moab! The people of Chemosh are undone, for your sons have been taken captive, and your daughters into captivity. 47 Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in the latter days, declares the Lord.” Thus far is the judgment on Moab.
Ezekiel 25:8-11
English Standard Version
8 “Thus says the Lord God: Because Moab and Seir said, ‘Behold, the house of Judah is like all the other nations,’ 9 therefore I will lay open the flank of Moab from the cities, from its cities on its frontier, the glory of the country, Beth-jeshimoth, Baal-meon, and Kiriathaim. 10 I will give it along with the Ammonites to the people of the East as a possession, that the Ammonites may be remembered no more among the nations, 11 and I will execute judgments upon Moab. Then they will know that I am the Lord.
Amos 2:1-3
English Standard Version
Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom.
2 So I will send a fire upon Moab [reminiscent of Sodom’s fate], and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amid uproar, amid shouting and the sound of the trumpet; 3 I will cut off the ruler from its midst, and will kill all its princes with him,” says the Lord.
Daniel 2:32-39
English Standard Version
32 The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together were broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. 39 Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.
Daniel 7:6
English Standard Version
6 After this I looked, and behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. And the beast had four heads, and dominion was given to it.
Daniel 8:20-22
English Standard Version
As for the ram that you saw with the two horns, these are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king [Alexander the Great]. 22 As for the horn that was broken, in place of which four others arose, four kingdoms shall arise from his nation, but not with his power.
Previously, we learned that the head of gold was the Chaldean Empire – the ancestors of the Northern & Central Italians [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans] – of Babylon, represented by a lion with wings. Also, one leg of iron was the Byzantine, Eastern Roman Empire – comprising the ancestors of the Russians [refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia] – represented as half of a monstrous beast. The chest and arms of silver was the Medo-Persian empire – the ancestors of the Turko-Mongol and Turkish peoples [refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey] – represented by a bear, as well as a ram.
The torso and thighs are representative of the Greco-Macedonian empire – the ancestors of the French – which toppled the Medes and Persians.
Alexander III or the Great, defeated Persia in 331 BCE and the power of Greece lasted until 146 BCE, when it became a protectorate of the burgeoning Roman empire. After Alexander, who reigned briefly yet emphatically from 336 to 323 BCE and the subsequent seven short-lived emperor reigns from 323 to 288 BCE, four divisions of the Greek empire arose, each led by one of Alexander’s generals. Ptolemy from281 to 279 BCE, administered Egypt and North Africa; Seleucus in 281 BCE governed Syria, Asia Minor and the East. Lysimachus during 288 to 285 BCE, took control of Thrace – until it united with Greece and Macedonia – and Cassander from 315 to 297 BCE, who ruled over Macedonia and Greece.
The two thighs of Nebuchadnezzar’s statute represent the distinct Macedonian and Greek components of the Empire – in other words, Ammon and Moab. The Greco-Macedonian empire was more robust and stronger than the two preceding empires, as evidenced by being likened to bronze as opposed to gold or silver. Militarily, it defeated its enemies with raw power and speed unlike any before it, as evidenced by the agile goat compared to the ram of Persia and the lighter leopard in contrast to the heavier and slower bear of Persia, as well as the lion of Chaldea.
Alexander, with the agility of a goat crossed the Hellespont after conquering neighbouring, yet related Grecia and began his march to revenge the humiliation inflicted upon Greece by Xerxes a century before. Alexander Conquered Troy, then met Persian opposition at Granicus. After subjugating all of Asia Minor, he battled a host of supposedly half a million Persians, whom Darius III – king from 336 to 330 BCE – had assembled. They met in the plain of Issus on November 5, 333 BCE and Alexander slaughtered the greatly superior Persian force – outnumbered two to one – and broke the back of Persian opposition. Proceeding southward, city after city fell without a real fight except for Tyre in 332 BCE and Gaza, which were both subdued after sieges.
Marching southwards to Egypt, Alexander conquered the entire country with little effort and founded the world renowned capital city of Alexandria. It became the largest city of the Hellenic world. Continuing east, he fought a third momentous battle against Persia on October 1, 331 BCE with Darius at Gaugamela and again defeated a greatly superior force. Alexander’s armies reached right to India, but his troops, weary with battle, refused to go further. Returning to Babylon, Alexander intended to make this the capital of his entire empire. Though he died a victim of his profligate eating, drinking and whoring, coupled with an attack of malaria at the age of thirty-three on June 11, 323 BCE.
As brief as was his rule, his indelible mark on the world was permanent. The description of the leopard – one of the swiftest of animals and greatest, of predatory carnivores – portrays the lightning speed of attack of Alexander’s armies which was unprecedented. Alexander never lost a siege or battle – despite typically being outnumbered – from 338 to 325 BCE. His record is an entirely impressive, fought twenty, won twenty.
The four wings on the back of the leopard not only represent agility and speed, but with the four heads, symbolise the fulfilled historic fact, that Alexander’s empire was eventually controlled by four principal generals.
As John F Walvoord remarks: “The accuracy of this prophecy is so evident that liberal scholars who consider detailed prophecy an impossibility are forced to postulate that the entire book of Daniel is in fact a forgery written by a pseudo-Daniel who lived after these events of Alexander’s conquest had already taken place. This unwilling confession of the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is in itself most significant and a testimony to the accuracy of prophecy as a whole.”
Alexander the Great, thought, acted and fought on his gut instinct. The gut located in the lower torso as evidenced on Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. He was also influenced by his lower groin, in his private life. Some may say, ‘how very French.’ Cyrus the Great, as pictured by the chest, let his heart influence him when he fell for Esther from the tribe of Benjamin; allowing the tribe of Judah to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the city and Temple. Nebuchadnezzar certainly depicted a more cerebral approach in his reign with his methodical deconstruction of his enemies and impressive building projects, as represented by the head of gold.
Alexander was born in Pella, the capital of Macedon and from age thirteen, was tutored by Aristotle until he was sixteen. His mother was Olympias, the fourth of eight wives and principal wife of Philip II of Macedon. Alexander was raised to read, play the lyre, ride, fight and hunt. His mother had huge ambitions and encouraged Alexander to believe it was his destiny to conquer the Persian Empire. He had a great desire for knowledge, a love for philosophy and was an avid reader. Though Alexander was impulsive, with a violent temper his intelligent and rational side was also demonstrated by his ability and success as a general and military strategist. It would seem he had an equal appreciation of men as he had for women, though both were lesser than his dependance on alcohol.
There have been a succession of Greek ages. The ones dominated by Moab and Ammon were the later Classical age of Greece from 500 to 323 BCE and the Hellenistic era of 323 to 146 BCE. The sons of Lot were the ancestors of peoples living in Greece before these epochs, as were the sons of Jacob; stretching back to Archaic Greece during the centuries from 800 to 500 BCE and beyond to Ancient Greece, including the Mycenaean period of 1600 to 1200 BCE and the Dark age of Greece lasting from 1200 to 800 BCE.
University of Oxford, Professor of Classics and Ancient History, Simon Hornblower – emphasis & bold mine:
‘… about 1200 BCE, to the death of Alexander… in 323 BCE. It was a period of political, philosophical, artistic, and scientific achievements that formed a legacy with unparalleled influence on Western civilization.’
By the time frame comprising Classical Greece, the peoples of the region had begun to change in composition from those who had constituted Greece from 1600 BCE. The city-states up to approximately 1000 to 800 BCE had been reflective of different peoples. The rise of Macedon and its control of greater Greece saw the transition to the descendants of Ammon and Moab. The people of Troy and the greater Troad, were colonial descendants of Ammon and Moab and both the Trojans and the Macedonians were ancestors of the Frankish peoples who form modern day France. We will investigate the original founding of Troy, which is credited not to the sons of Lot but rather descendants of the tribe of Judah. The original peoples who had grouped primarily around Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Arcadia and Olympia were primarily colonies of the descendants of the sons of Jacob. In time, they were transplanted by the peoples of Moab and Ammon. The Spartans are similarly related, though they are not descendants of either Lot or Jacob.
Italians and Race, Dr Orville Boyd Jenkins – emphasis & bold mine:
‘From pre-Roman times, it appears there was already a clear distinction of short, darker-skinned, dark-haired peoples from pre-history being [overlaid] and mixed with taller, sometimes larger built, blond and blue-eyed groups. It is now generally believed thatthe Greeks also were larger, blond and blue-eyed people, which was the case when Alexander the Great spread his forces and opened up colonies all over the Middle East and Egypt.This is also attested in frescos from the era, as well as in various references to their looks.’
Both the earlier Greeks, the sons of Jacob and later Greeks from Ammon and Moab are today broadly classed as Germanic or Teutonic. The French are a Germanic-Celtic, rather pseudo Latin mix. This inclusion of fairer skin, blond hair and blue eyes was attributable to both ‘sets’ of Greeks. Alexander the Great himself, no different, as various reports reveal.
The Greek biographer Plutarch lived circa 45 to 120 CE, describes Alexander’s appearance as: ‘… for those peculiarities which many of his successors and friends afterwards tried to imitate, namely, the poise of the neck, which was bent slightly to the left, and the melting glance of his eyes, this artist has accurately observed… he was of a fair colour, as they say, and his fairness passed into ruddiness on his breast particularly, and in his face. Moreover, that a very pleasant odour exhaled from his skin and that there was a fragrance about his mouth and all his flesh, so that his garments were filled with it, this we have read in the Memoirs of Aristoxenus.’
Alexander Romance suggested that Alexander III possessed heterochromia iridium: that one eye was dark and the other light. British historian Peter Green compiled a description of Alexander’s appearance, based on his review of statues and ancient documents: ‘Physically, Alexander was not prepossessing. Even by Macedonian standards he was very short, though stocky and tough. His beard was scanty, and he stood out against his hirsute Macedonian barons by going clean-shaven. His neck was in some way twisted, so that he appeared to be gazing upward at an angle. His eyes (one blue, one brown) revealed a dewy, feminine quality. He had a high complexion and a harsh voice.’ Egyptian Historian Joann Fletcher has also said that Alexander had blond hair.
French men
Many people are intrigued by the amazing story of Troy. Three Hollywood feature films have been produced on the fantastic events, yet much of the scholarly community view it entirely as myth. Yet with all legends truth is within the tale, though admittedly it is difficult in this case to separate fact from fiction.
Regardless, the Trojan war continues to stand out during the Dark age of Ancient Greece. The siege of Troy is said to have lasted some nine to ten years and its eventual fall, through the ruse of the Trojan Horse, occurred approximately, according to an unconventional chronology, between 1186 and 1184 BCE.
Those historians who believe the story of the Trojan War are derived from a real historical conflict, often use the dates given by Eratosthenes of 1194 to 1184 BCE; which roughly corresponds to the archaeological evidence of the catastrophic burning of Troy VII and a late Bronze Age collapse. Other researchers more recently, have dated the events somewhere between 1260 to 1180 BCE.
French women
The Trojan War Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gérard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:
‘The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely sceptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires:
Mycenaean on one hand and Hittite with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III’s [1184-1153 BCE] year 8 [1177 BCE] describe actually a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the “Sea Peoples”, but without giving any reason.
A precise chronological reconstruction, based on a few absolute dates, shows that the annexation of the kingdom of Cyprus (Alasia), closely linked to the Mycenaean world, by Hittite King Tudhaliya IV played a role of detonator in the confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates and privateers on one side and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, such as Troy and Ugarit, on the other. This struggle to control a vital sea path, from Crete to Egypt, via Cyprus, which ended with a complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the famous Trojan War, had begun 10 years earlier. Surprisingly, this conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes (276-193). Historical and epigraphic context shows that Homer wrote his epic shortly after Queen Elissa founded Carthage (c. 870 BCE).’
The supposed mythic events surrounding the collapse of Troy begin when Paris – same name as future capital of France – a Prince of Troy and son of Priam who reigned from circa 1200 to 1185 BCE and the King of Troy, is visiting King Melenaus of Sparta and staying in the Spartan Palace. Paris knew of Melenaus’s wife Helen and had fallen in love with her. Paris hid Helen on his ship for the return voyage to Troy. Paris’s older brother Prince Hector did not agree with Paris, yet sailed home regardless. King Priam welcomed Helen and took her into the family as one of his own. Priam was reputed to have had fifty sons and twelve daughters. The city of Troy was splendidly wealthy and impregnable. Recall the prominent city of Kir of Moab, meaning wall.
Raging with revenge, King Melenaus of Sparta calls for the assistance and a favour from his brother King Agamemnon II who ruled Argos, circa 1202 to 1185 BCE. Though all closely related, the Trojans, Spartans or Dorians and the Achaean Greeks were different peoples. Agamemnon called in the services of Achilles, a killing machine and a fabled warrior of Demi-god stature. King Agamemnon had at his disposal a realistic number of approximately one hundred ships and ten thousand men, including allies from Athens.
According to Thucydides, Agamemnon raised an enormous fleet utilising other Greek cities of close to twelve hundred Boeotian [100+ men] and Philoctetes [50 men] ships – with a force of some 60,000 to 130,000 troops. To end the decade long stalemate, Odysseus – an ally of Menelaus – devised the ruse of a giant hollow wooden horse, an animal that was sacred to the Trojans. Once inside Troys walls and the Trojans defeated, the Greeks burned the city and divided the spoils. Cassandra – Priam’s daughter who had warned not to take the horse inside the city – was apparently awarded to Agamemnon. Neoptolemus, a son of Achilles obtained Andromache, the wife of Hector – the son of Priam, who had been killed by Achilles – and Odysseus was given Hecuba, Priam’s wife.
That most Achaean heroes did not return to their homes and instead founded colonies elsewhere was ‘interpreted by Thucydides as being due to their long absence.Nowadays the interpretation followed by most scholars is that the Achaean leaders driven out of their lands by the turmoil at the end of the Mycenaean era preferred to claim descent from exiles of the Trojan War.’ Simply, these Greeks migrated as all ancient peoples continually moved due to the search for better opportunities, usually prodded by other peoples pressing towards their territory, due to either population expansion, food shortages, famine or war. There was a continuous domino effect throughout the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe of Shem’s descendants until peoples finally settled in their current geographical and political positions beginning from approximately 800 to 1000 CE.
The Greeks and Romans took for a fact the historicity of the Trojan War and the identity of Homeric Troy with a site in Anatolia on a peninsula called the Troad or now known as the Biga Peninsula, which forms the basis of Homer’s Iliad. Ironically, Alexander the Great later conquered the Troad and Troy, when it was part of the Persian Empire. He visited the site in 334 BCE and offered sacrifices at tombs associated with the Homeric heroes of Achilles and Patroclus his cousin, killed by Hector. Alexander was reputed to be related to Achilles via his mother who was apparently descended from a royal house. Troy is known in Greek as Troia; also by association with the region to the east, as Ilios or Ilion. In Latin, Troja or Ilium, as it was known during the reign of the Roman Emperor Augustus.
A large mound known locally as Hisarlik, had long been understood to hold the ruins of a city named Ilion or Ilium which had flourished in Hellenistic and Roman times. In 1822 Charles Maclaren a Scottish journalist, posited that this was the site of Homeric Troy; though for the next fifty years, his idea received little attention from Classical scholars, most of whom regarded the Trojan legend as a fictional creation based on myth and not history. ‘Those who did believe in the existence of a real Troy thought it to be at Bunarbashi (Pinarbasi), a short distance south of Hisarlik. It took Frank Calvert an English Levantine emigrant and scholarly amateur archaeologist, until 1860 to begin exploratory work on Hisarlik. It was he who persuaded the German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann to work at Hisarlik, though Schliemann soon took full credit for adopting Maclaren’s identification and demonstrating to the world that it was correct.’
There are nine major periods of ancient Troy designated by archaeologists, that are labeled I to IX, starting from the bottom with the oldest settlement, Troy I. ‘In periods I to VII Troy was a fortified stronghold that served as the capital of the Troad and the residence of a king, his family, officials, advisers, retinue, and slaves. Troy VI and VII [are] assigned to the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, circa 1900 to 1100 BCE. Based on the evidence of imported Mycenaean pottery, the end of Troy VIIa is dated to between 1260 and 1240 BCE. The Cincinnati expedition under Blengen concluded that Troy VIIa was very likely the capital of King Priam described in Homer’s Iliad, which was destroyed by the Greek armies of Agamemnon.
The partly rebuilt Troy VIIb shows evidence of new settlers with a lower level of material culture, who vanished altogether by 1100 BCE. For about the next four centuries the site was virtually abandoned. The glorious and rich city Homer describes was believed to be Troy VI by many twentieth century authors, and destroyed about 1275 BC, probably by an earthquake. Its successor, Troy VIIa, was destroyed around 1180 BC; it was long considered a poorer city, and dismissed as a candidate for Homeric Troy, but since the excavation campaign of 1988, it has come to be regarded as the most likely candidate.’
I am not convinced with the VIIa and VIIb archaeological split. I would propose that VI is the same Troy as described by Homer and the same Troy which Priam was king of when it was destroyed. Troy VI included the height of its splendour from circa 1400 to 1180 BCE. What has been labeled VIIb, I would rename Troy VII. I agree that Troy VIIb was an attempt to rebuild, maintain and sustain a Troy that was now a shadow of its former grandeur and ultimately given up as a viable project by 1100 BCE. Is there an agenda to lessen Troy’s prestige during 1194 and 1184 BCE and thus discredit the whole saga’s validity. Possibly propaganda running parallel, are the accounts that assert there were very few survivors from Troy.
Homeric Troy is described as a wealthy and populous city, yet the idea of a lesser Troy: ‘a relatively minor settlement, perhaps [just] a princely seat’ is advanced by scholars. In 1988, Korfmann’s team searched the terrain surrounding the citadel site at Hisarlik, investigating the wider settlement. Korfmann’s findings from ‘geomagnetic surveying and isolated excavations, led him to conclude in favour of a greater Troy – that is, a settlement of some size and prosperity.’
The question of what language was spoken by the Trojans has been a burning question. No evidence of a Trojan language seems to have survived. It was thought that the Trojans were Greek, though they were not in the Achaean domain and actually opposed to the Achaeans. Both remain a mystery, until we understand the Trojans were descended from Moab and Ammon and the Greeks at this time were principally sons of Jacob. The animosity between the two peoples still alive and strong. Their differences not just due to culture but family lineage. Passages from the Iliad also allude that the Trojans were not Greek.
Who were the Trojans and where did they come from? Luciana Cavallaro, 2014 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Many scholars, including Carl Blengen American archaeologist who worked at the site in the 1930s, believed the Trojans were of Greek origin. This conjecture was attributed to the Greek names given to the characters in the Iliad but that isn’t the case. Homer mentioned a close relationship between the Trojan allies and in particular with the Dardanians.Excavations at the site of Troy/Ilios/Troya/Troia have found artefacts that showed the Trojans were in fact indigenous to the region and related to the Indo-European people who migrated to the area.
Archaeological investigations have surmised the people from Dardania and Troy shared a kinship, their ancestry a mixture of Anatolian and Luwians [the Luwians proper are the original Hatti. If these Dardanians are Luwians, then they could be related, just as the French (from Haran) are related to the Italians from Nahor – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. The latter came from south eastern Anatolia [Asia-minor], a province the Romans later called Cilicia. The Greeks and Romans thought Dardania was a subset of Troy however it was the other way around. Troy was a state of Dardania [the region, though Dardania was also the name of a city].
There are also the names of the Trojans, given in Greek as the audience was Hellenistic and more recognisable. Alexander/Alaksandu, better known as Paris was first noted in Hittite text and ruler who established trading links with the Hittites. Wilusa, Hittite word for the Greek interpretation Ilios. Priam/Piyama-Radu and Hektor are considered indigenous names though the spelling of the former changed. The Greeks did migrate to the west coast of Asia Minor and there is evidence they settled in the famous city. This was identified as Troy VIII.’
As stated in the preceding article, one proposal is that the Indo-European Luwians who arrived in the western coastal region of Anatolia are the West-Luwian speakers of Arzawa, who migrated westward. Another theory is that the Dardanians were Thracians who crossed the Dardanelles, named after the Dardans. The remains of their material culture reveal close ties with Thracians and Anatolian groups, as well as some Greek contact. Added to this is that later, a Thraco-Illyrian tribal state, the Dar-dan-i, dwelt to the north of Mace-don.
There is good cause to consider the Trojans and Greeks were offshoots and colonies from Lot and Jacob respectively. Like all colonial origins, they begin with migrants on board ships; in this case, from Canaan or Palestine. The descendants of Lot and Jacob would have been well aware of the Aegean-Grecian world via the Phoenician’s trade routes and the Mycenaean-Minoan – later Philistine – civilisation present there.
Dardania, the city purportedly founded by Dardanus, as well as the name also given to the region, was located in the northwestern corner of Anatolia and to the immediate north of Troy – facing modern Gallipoli across the Dardanelles. It is included as part of the Troad, the peninsula region at the far north-western corner of Asia-minor, now modern Turkey. Dardania historically has been defined as ‘a district of the Troad, lying along the Hellespont, southwest of Abydos, and adjacent to the territory of Ilium. Its people (Dardani) appear in the Trojan War under Aeneas, in close alliance with the Trojans, with whose name their own is often interchanged…’ Aeneas is referred to in Virgil’s Aeneid interchangeably as a Dardan or as a Trojan, but strictly speaking Aeneas was of the Dardanian branch.
Thus some consider the Dardanians or Dardans as being the same stock as the Trojans – Dardanian and Tojan being synonymous – while others like Homer distinguish the two as clearly identifiable people – not two branches of a single group. The answer includes both propositions; in that Moab and Ammon are the same stock, both having Lot as their father, yet they are also two separate lines from two different brothers. Therefore, two different though related peoples, combined through marriage. The twist is that the original Dardanus was not descended from Lot but rather from Jacob. The Dardanians and the Teucri or Teukroi are credited as collaborating in building Troy as a state. As information is scant and legend and history are fused, it is a challenge in constructing a reliable chronology regarding the original founders.
Teucer’s father is recorded as the mythical Scamandrus born circa 1627 BCE; ruling his people from 1603 to 1581 BCE. It was at that time his territory was allegedly absorbed by the Dardanians. In Greek mythology the daughter of Teucer was Batea. Batea married Dardanus who subsequently inherits rulership from Teucer of the Teucri in 1581, lasting until 1550 BCE, under the name of the Dardanians. Probably, the Teucri represent the relatively indigenous northwestern Anatolians of the second millennium BCE, while the Indo-European Dardanians, the migratory arrivals integrated into Teucri society, but who very quickly dominated it. Dardanus was born circa 1675 BCE in the land of Goshen, while the sons of Jacob were living in Egypt; for Dardanus was from a royal line of Judah, the son of Jacob.
Dardanus had a son Ilus or Ilos, who ruled from 1550 to 1514 BCE; a king who died young and childless. Ilus’s younger brother, Erecthonius or Erictanus was born circa 1540 BCE and became king after Ilus. Erichthonius married Astyoche, daughter of the ‘river-god’ Simoeis, and she bore him a son, who was named Tros, who lived circa 1474 to 1415 BCE. Erichthonius was said to be the richest ruler in the world at that time, because he owned three thousand mares.
According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dardanus had another son named Zacynthus by Bataea and Zacynthus was the first settler on the island afterwards called Zacynthus. Dionysius also said that Dardanus’s son Idaeus, gave his name to the Idaean mountains, that is Mount Ida, where Idaeus built a temple to the Mother of the Gods – that is to Cybele – and instituted mysteries and ceremonies still observed in Phrygia in Dionysius’s time. There are operas on the subject of Dardanus by Jean-Philippe Rameau [1739]. Interesting coincidence that the operas are composed by a Frenchman.
Tros is the family member credited as the ruler of the Trojans, whereby the origin of the name Troad, as well as its inhabitants, the Trojans derive. Tros married Callirrhoe and had three sons with her, including the youngest son, Ganymede. Tros bequeathed the rulership of the Trojans to – Ilos, who chose to be near the sea and strengthened Troy on the plain – his eldest son [not Ilos the son of Dardanus] and the rulership of Dardania, near Mount Ida, to his second son, Assaracus in 1415 BCE. Ilos founded the royal line of Ilium or Ilios which may equate to the Hittite [Hatti] Wilusa from [W]ilios. Assaracus and his Dardanian descendants maintained close links with their Trojan cousins.
To give a context for the period of circa 1600 BCE with the approximate founding of Troy and the birth of Dardanus circa 1675 BCE through to 1415 BCE and the death of his grandson Tros: Moab and Ammon were born circa 1878 or 1877 BCE after the destruction of Sodom, when Abraham was ninety-nine years old. Similarly, Abraham’s son Isaac was born in 1877 BCE, when Abraham was one hundred years old. Jacob’s son Joseph died in 1616 BCE at the age of one hundred and ten in Egypt, but by the birth of Moses some ninety years later in 1527 BCE, the sons of Jacob were in bondage to a ruling Dynasty who did not remember Joseph – Exodus 1:8 [refer Appendix VII Moses & the Exodus: Fabrication or Fact?].
The exodus of the sons of Jacob from Egypt occurred in 1446 BCE, 430 years after Abraham’s 99th year – Exodus 12:40-41 and Galatians 3:17. The three hundred and seventy-five years during 1400 to 1025 BCE was the period of the Judges in Israel until Saul became king. The early period and then height of Troy encompassed the approximate period of four hundred and twenty years from 1600 to 1180 BCE. From 1400 BCE onwards, the Moabites and children of Ammon were at continual loggerheads with Israel. Moving to Dardania and Troy was an attractive proposition for those who had the financial means. It may explain the wealth of Troy, if many inhabitants were wealthy immigrants.
The two families remained intertwined. Ilos married Eurydice, and became the father of Laomedon. Ilos’s daughter Themiste, married his nephew, Capys of the Dardanian line. Ilos’s son Laomedon succeeded him as king of Troy. Assaracus’ son, Capys and his wife Themiste had a son called Anchises. Of the two royal lines, those of Troy or Ilium became more powerful than the older Dardanian line, particularly under the rule of Laomedon; even though there was only three generations of kings in Troy, compared to the line of eight successive kings in Dardania. King Laomedon was known for his arrogance, his impiety and his refusal to honour his promises.
Then enters Priam or Priamos, the only son to survive in a war against Heracles. Priam had been ransomed by his sister Hesione and became the new king in 1200 BCE. He had formally been known as Podacres. Priam’s first wife was Arisbe, daughter of Merops king of Percote. They had a son Aesacus, who was a gifted seer. Priam soon married Hecuba, daughter of Dymas and gave Arisbe to Hyrtacos. With Hecuba, Priam became the father of Hector, Paris, Cassandra, Helenus, Deiphobus and countless others as mentioned. Apollodorus recorded that Hecuba was the mother of ten sons and four daughters.
Before Paris was born, Hecuba had a vision and a seer interpreted her vision, saying that Paris would one day cause the destruction of Troy. So Paris was sent to live in the wilderness. Years later, Paris returned to Troy and was recognised. Their parents had apparently forgotten the warning by the seer and welcomed him home. Priam would have returned Helen when the Greek embassy demanded the return of Helen to her husband King Menelaus the Spartan; but Paris prevailed upon his father to refuse. As a result, the war lasted for ten years and all but one son Helenus, would die in the war. Neoptolemus, son of Achilles allegedly killed King Priam on the last day of the war.
Who is Dardanus, the founder of Dardania, the city and subsequent region? A persistent secular legend from Greece and Rome, identifies a man called Dara as Dardanus, founder of ancient Troy, or rather Dardan. One translation of the Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, mentions King Solomon as being wiser than two men named Calcol and Dara or Darda and gives Dara’s name as Dardanos. In 1 Chronicles 2:6 we read of Zarah, who had five sons and his fourth and fifth sons were Calcol and Dara or Darda. Zarah was a son of Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob. We will return to Calcol when we study Judah, as he is credited with founding the city of Athens [Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin -the Regal Tribes].
The Greek poet Homer said that Dardanus was a son of Zeus, the chief of the Greek gods. The Roman and Greek legends support that Zeus called Jupiter in Latin, was a son of Saturn who was also called Kronus. Writing about the Greek gods, Sanchuniathon a Phoenician historian said that ‘Kronus’ was whom the Phoenicians called Israel, that is Jacob and he had a son called Jehud – who is, Judah. What is important is not the Greek mythology but rather the family relationship between Jacob, Judah and Zarah’s son Darda, the great grandson of Jacob as real historic figures.
Critics focus on the Greek mythology and say every Greek city cited Zeus as their founder god and thus dismiss Darda as a founder of Troy. Critics also say the Bible does not give ‘direct evidence’ that any Israelites ‘abandoned the forty-year march… and travelled to the Aegean Sea or Black Sea… to found their own kingdoms.’ This is ironic as the rest of the time, the Bible is just a collection of fanciful stories, yet in this instance it is valued for not giving evidence,as if this evidence would be believed. We will look in detail into the sons of Jacob and the historical data that family members actually departed the congregation of Israel not just during the exodus sojourn for forty years from 1446 to 1407/1406 BCE, but prior to their departure from Egypt.
The early migration of Darda is mentioned in How Israel Came to Britain, Canadian British Israel Association – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body before the Israel nation was formed – while, as a people, they were still in bondage in Egypt. One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster (Ireland). Another, under the leadership of Dardanus, a brother of Calcol, crossed to Asia Minor to found the Kingdom later known as Troy. E Raymond Capt in his work, Jacob’s Pillar, 1977, writes that Darda was ‘Egyptian’ in that he lived there during the bondage and was the son of Zarah.This Darda according to Capt, was one and the same with ‘Dardanus’, the ‘Egyptian founder of Troy.’
Hecataeus of Abdera, a fourth century BCE Greek historian, stated that “Now the Egyptians say that also after these events [the plagues of the Exodus] a great number of colonies were spread from Egypt all over the inhabited world… They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city of Greece, Argos, and that the nations of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews (remnant of Judah), which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country [Egypt]; and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these peoples to circumcise their male children, the custom having been brought over from Egypt. Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt.” [Quoted from Diodorus of Sicily. G H Oldfather, 1933. Volume I, books I-II, 1-34, page 91]. We will return to both Calcol and his brother Darda.
Depending on which interpretation of history one receives, the fallout from Troy’s defeat is as follows. If the ten year war was one against the Mycenae, then the lone royal survivor was Aeneas a member of the Dardanian branch of the Trojan royal family. His father was Anchises. Aeneas fought on behalf of Troy against the Mycenae. Datings for the ten year war – or siege for the Helenus version – range from as early as 1196 to as late 1183 BCE. Thus, 1194 to 1184 BCE is a good median.
Aeneas is said to have lead the two sons of Antenor, Archelochus and Acamas as well as the Dardanians, allies of Troy during the Trojan War. After the sack of Troy, Aeneas and his followers were allowed to leave with their lives. His descendants according to Virgil in the Aenid, continued to rule the Trojans. They travelled for seven years, settling in Latium – central Italy, corresponding with Lazio. Opposed by Latinus, ruler of the Latins, Aeneas bests him in battle and is then accepted, marrying his daughter, Lavinia. Many subsequent rulers of Rome claimed descent from Aeneas and the Houses of Troy and Dardania. This raises an integral point. The rulers or the royal line of Troy – splitting into two houses, the Trojan and Dardanian – were from Dara, the son of Zarah. Zarah was a twin of Pharez. We will study each in detail. Both twins were to be ancestors of royal lines. We will learn that nearly every royal line in Europe has descended from or included the descendants of either Pharez or Zarah.
The Romans, may well have some legitimacy to the claim of Trojan blood, as many royal houses probably could.
The pivotal issue though is not this but that the sons of Dara ruled the peoples from Anatolia, the western Luwians. These people became known as Trojans and Dardanians after their rulers – Darda and Tros. The western Luwians were Moabite and Ammonite colonists, descended from Abraham’s brother Haran. Similarly, the eastern Luwians were related to Abraham’s other brother Nahor [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans]. These peoples were known as the Hatti, who later incorporated the Chaldeans and then many centuries later were intermingled with the Ostrogoths and Lombardi, settling in northern and central Italy today. The original royal houses of Troy and Darda were from the Tribe of Judah. A portion of Ammon and Moab were the main body of Trojans and Dardanians, who in time migrated to the area of Macedonia and ultimately comprised the later Greeks of the Classical and Hellenistic periods.
The alternative Trojan history is where Helenus is the lone royal survivor from the Trojan line. Trojan king lists follow Helenus with Genger and then a Francus or Franco. Many centuries later there is another Francus, a king of the West Franks. Historians say Franc-us is a fabrication of history and inserted into the Trojan line by the Merovingian kings of France.
What is fascinating, is not whether this is true or not, but rather that the Merovingians in part, the Franks and the Trojans are actually all one and the same, regardless of whether a Francus was the great grandson of King Priam or not.
Other kings included in the Trojan king list are Pepin of France, Louis I of France and sandwiched between the two, one of the most influential and important kings in history, Charles I or the Great, better known as Charlemagne. The following works on Troy are all written by French men. I wonder if any understood that they themselves were the living descendants of the very people they were writing about; or whether their attachment is a strong subconscious ardour and inclination they have not rationalised or quite put their finger on.
Britannica:
‘The key work in the medieval exploitation of the Trojan theme was a French romance, the Roman de Troie (1154–60), by Benoit de Sainte-Maure. Later medieval writers used the Roman de Troie until it was superseded by a Latin prose account, the Historia destructionis Troiae (c. 1287; “History of the Destruction of Troy”), by Guido delle Colonne. The French author Raoul Le Fèvre’s Recueil des histoires de Troye (1464), an account based on Guido, was translated into English by William Caxton and became the first book to be printed in English as The Recuyell of the Histories of Troye (c. 1474).’
Regarding the rise of city-states or Poleis in Greece, Britannica states – emphasis theirs:
‘A related factor is Phoenician influence (related, because the early Phoenicians were great colonizers, who must often have met trading Greeks). The Phoenician coast was settled by communities similar in many respects to the early Greek poleis. It is arguable that Phoenician influence, and Semitic influence generally, on early Greece has been seriously underrated [refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa, Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil & Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah Benelux & Scandinavia].’
The first significant date in Greek history, in the Archaic age was 776 BCE, the year of the first Olympic Games in Olympia, which was located west of Arcadia – recall Acadia, Canada – and northwest of Sparta in the west of Greece. This was the highlight of the Archaic age which culminated with the Persian wars. This era included Homer and his epics The Iliad and The Odyssey.
In the period from Dark to Archaic Greece there were two powerful interrelationships which influenced Greek society, the colonizing mother city and its daughter city and the shared membership of an amphictyony. The most common link was that between two cities with the emphasis of shared ancestry. This diplomatic kinship was taken seriously right until the Hellenistic period and was the basis of key alliances; developing into the proxenia. Proxenoi were citizens of one state who looked after the interests of citizens of their related, neighbour state. This was evident in type between Sparta and Athens against Troy and was really exploited by Athens in the fifth century.
In Archaic Greece an amphictyony – literally, ‘dwellers around’ – comprised a ‘league of neighbors’ called an Amphictyonic League, which was an ancient religiousassociation of Greek tribes and states formed in the dim past, between the Trojan war and the rise of the various Greek poleis. The most important was the Delphic Amphictyony. Originally composed of twelve tribes dwelling around Thermopylae, this league was centred first on the shrine of Demeter and later became associated with the Temple of Apollo [another name for Azazel] at Delphi. The founder is said to be Amphictyon, brother of Hellen – the purported male ancestor of all Hellenes. The twelve founders were the Oetaeans, Boeotians of Thebes, Dolopes, Dorians of Sparta, the Ionians of Athens, Phthian Achaeans, Locrians, Magnesians, Malians, Perrhaebians, Phocians, Pythians of Delphi and the Thessalians. The League doctrine required that no member would be entirely wiped out in war and no water supply of any member would be cut even in wartime. It did not prevent members from the numerous clashes with each other, about dominance over temples.
Oxford University Press states: ‘[Amphictyony] a word borrowed from institutions in classical Greece and applied by some historians of Israel to its supposed organization before the monarchy [time of the Judges] as a confederation of twelve clans. It was suggested that there was a central shrine at which a cultic object was a shared responsibility among the twelve. But the amphictyony theory has now been generally abandoned.’ The number of twelve tribes is too coincidental to ignore. The premise of not destroying a family clan, is reminiscent of the war of the eleven tribes against the tribe of Benjamin, which would have wiped them out if six hundred men had not fled and hidden, so that the remaining tribes relented – Judges 20:1-48. The early Greeks as mentioned, included the related sons of Jacob. The idea of the amphictyony sounds completely plausible from an Israelite, as well as a Moabite, Ammonite perspective. As a lot of blood had been spilt between the two families.
The region of Canaan, Palestine or the Levantine, as discussed previously, was a prized parcel of real estate and so became a very crowded part of the world [refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa]. The draw to move away to lands partially established, yet with space and opportunities beckoned to the sons of Jacob and Lot. Just as the New World was attractive a few hundred years ago, ancient Greece and the Aegean was the destination of choice. This explains the flowering of cities, rather than countries or empires in the region as they were colonies of a number of differing tribes and peoples. The influx of migrating peoples also explains why the Myceaneans – formerly Minoans and latterly Philistines – left mainland Greece, for the myriad islands and particularly Crete [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispani America].
Another way of reinforcing this relationship between citizens from different city-states was through epigamia. This was enacted through an arrangement by which the husband’s family by marriage were treated as citizens of the wife’s poleis if the husband settled there. In contrast, Plutarch mentions that there was no intermarriage between members of two of the villages of Attica – Pallene and Hagnous. Not because they were dissimilar, rather they were too closely related and thus there was a ban on endogamy. This situation remarkably parallels the peoples of French Ammonite stock in Canada and Louisiana.
The Endogamy Files: What Is Endogamy? The DNA Geek, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Endogamy is a word that gets bandied around a lot in genetic genealogy circles, but what it means and how it affects our work is less clear. This post is the first in a series about what endogamy is, why it matters, how to detect it, and how to work with it. Endogamy is the practice of mating within a specific group. All human populations have practiced endogamy to one extent or another. Some still do.
Endogamy can occur because the group is geographically isolated from other people, like Native Hawaiians were; because they prefer to marry within their religion, ethnicity, language, and/or social caste, as most cultures do; or for other reasons, like consolidating power among royalty. Key to endogamy is that the group is small enough that, over time, marriages occur between cousins. Not necessarily first or even second cousins (although that can occur), but between third, fourth, and more distant cousins. Over and over. And over.
It’s important to remember that endogamy is not incest, which is sexual relations between close relatives, like a father and daughter or uncle and niece. Incest is associated with a substantial risk of early death or genetic disorders in the child, while marriages between even first cousins are much safer.
Endogamy causes something called pedigree collapse, but not all pedigree collapse rises to the level of endogamy. The home person… is the child of parents who were third cousins to one another. That is, the parents shared a pair of great-great grandparents. As a result, their child… has 30 unique great-great-great grandparents instead of the expected 32. One set of 3-great grandparents shows up twice in the child’s tree. We say the pedigree is “collapsing” rather than doubling in number with each generation back, as we’d expect. But pedigree collapse is not endogamy. Pedigree collapse is one or a few isolated incidents of cousin marriage, while endogamy occurs repeatedly over many, many generations.
This is my mother’s tree. She’s Cajun [a Louisianian descended of French Canadian immigrants from Acadia, speaking an archaic form of French], a culture that was geographically and culturally isolated in southern Louisiana and, before that, in what is now Nova Scotia. Cajuns have been marrying mainly within their own population since the 1600s… [like the expression “All Cajuns are cousins”!] My mother’s parents were fourth cousins. I don’t think they knew, because my grandmother’s father was born out of wedlock. My grandfather’s parents were third cousins; they definitely knew. There’s no known incest in this tree, but the cousin marriages go on and on, back to the earliest settlers in Port-Royal, Acadia (now Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia) in the early 1600s, because there simply weren’t a lot of options for marriage partners.
The closest cousin marriages I’ve identified in this tree are between first cousins. Consider Isaure Marie Guidry (1863–1933), my mother’s great grandmother… Her parents, Alexis Onésime Guidry and Palmire Dupré, were first cousins through their shared grandparents Louis–David Guidry and Marie Modeste Borda. To complicate matters even more, Onésime had been widowed before marrying Palmire. His previous wife, Celestine, was Palmire’s older sister, and Celestine had a daughter named Marie. So Marie and Isaure were half sisters their father Onésime, and first cousins through their mothers Celestine and Palmire. (This combination is often termed three-quarter siblings.) But they were also second cousins through Onésime and their mothers. Technically, Marie and Isaure were second cousins twice over, once through Onésime and Celestine and once through Onésime and Palmire, but you get the picture. It’s enough to make your head spin!
Isaure and Marie died more than 75 years before the advent of genetic genealogy using autosomal DNA, but what would their match to one another look like if we could analyze their genomes today? As half sisters, we’d expect them to share about 1750 cM, as first cousins another 850 cM or so, and as double second cousins roughly 200 cM twice over. In many parts of their genomes, they’d match on both copies of their two chromosomes, much like full siblings do.In fact, they might well be indistinguishable from full sisters using the methods we use for genealogy. While Isaure and Marie are an extreme case, DNA matching is affected to some degree in all endogamous populations. People who are no closer than fourth cousins might share enough DNA to be predicted as third cousins, because they’re picking up “extra” shared DNA through their other relationships.
For example, my mother shares 184 cM with D.M. If you were to plug that number into the DNA Painter SCP tool, you’d see a combined probability of 89.1% that they were either in the second cousin group (38.8% chance) or the second cousin once removed group (50.3%). In fact, their closest relationship is third cousins, who average only about 50 cM. On the other hand, Mom and D.M. are also third cousins once removed twice over, fourth cousins once removed, and fifth cousins… that we know of. All those distant relationships add to the shared centimorgan tally. Thus, the overall effect of endogamy is to make many of our DNA matches appear to be more closely related than they really are. This complicates everything, from basic relationship prediction to more advanced and powerful techniques, like the… What are the Odds? tool.
Is the entire human population endogamous? After all, we only mate (well, mate successfully) with other humans and have been doing so for ten thousand years or more, since the last archaic humans, like Denisovans and Neanderthals, died out. Technically, we’re all (very distant) cousins, and all of our pedigrees collapse eventually. What do you think?’
By the sixth century BCE, the dominant cities in Grecia were Athens, Sparta, Corinth and Thebes. They had all increased their influence to include surrounding smaller towns and rural areas. Athens and Corinth had become major maritime and mercantile powers. Herodotus described one such trader from the later Archaic period, Sostratus of Aegina, a man of fabulous wealth.
Then in the early 1970s a remarkable inscription was found in Etruria, Italy – a dedication to Apollo, in the name of Sostratus of Aegina. This discovery revealed that the source of his wealth was trade with Etruria and other parts of Italy. A rapidly increasing population in the preceding centuries had resulted in emigration of many Greeks to form colonies in Southern Italy and Sicily. The Greek colonies of Sicily, especially Syracuse were drawn into conflicts with the Carthaginians – Portuguese-Brazilian descended peoples [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. The conflict lasted from 600 to 265 BCE until the Romans intervened. A year later, the Punic wars began.
Beginning about 500 BCE, the Athenians and Spartans tussled for hegemony of Greece, though the Athenians were no longer the Israelites – of six hundred years before – but Moab – with Ammon located in Macedonia to the north. For these were the children of Lot, whose migrations southward had pushed the other Greeks to leave.
The Spartans who were distinct and not descended from Moab, Ammon or Jacob, were never defeated by Philip II or Alexander III and remained outside of the Greek Empire. Around the same time, in 499 BCE, the Ionian city states under Persian rule rebelled against their Persian-backed, tyrannical rulers. Supported by troops predominantly from Athens, they advanced as far as Sardis burning the city before being driven back by a Persian counterattack.The revolt continued for five years until finally the rebel Ionians were defeated.
Darius I, king from 522 to 486 BCE, did not forget that Athens had assisted the Ionian revolt and he assembled an armada to exact retribution.Though heavily outnumbered, the plucky Athenians and allies, defeated the Persians at the Battle of Marathon in 490. The Athenians and Persians continued to wage war until about 450, with the Athenians driving the Persians out of the Aegean. They then turned on the Spartans with the Peloponnesian War beginning in 431 BCE, and lasting to 404 BCE. Eventually, Sparta brought an end to Athens empire though was ultimately left severely weakened itself.
By 360 BCE, the Greek states had worn themselves out and ‘the exhaustion of the Greek heartland coincided with the rise of Macedon, led by Philip II.’ In 359, two strong leaders came to the thrones of both Persia and Macedon, ruling for nearly the exact same periods: Artaxerses III, from 359 to 338 BCE; and Philip from 359 to 336 BCE.
The Parthenon situated on the Acropolis of Athens was built between 447 and 438 BCE. A temple dedicated to the goddess Athena. Parthenos meant a ‘maiden, girl, virgin’ or an ‘unmarried woman.’ Construction began at the height of the Athenian Empire. The Parthenon replaced an older temple of Athena which was destroyed in the Persian invasion of 480 BCE. It also served a practical purpose as the city treasury.
Philip took twenty years in not just unifying his kingdom, but also expanding north and westwards, conquering Thrace as well as Thessaly to the south. His reforms to the Macedonian army were pivotal in his success. In 338 BCE he invaded the southern city-states of Thebes and Athens, defeating them at the Battle of Chaeronea. Now king of all but Sparta; Philip then entered into war against the Achaemenid Empire but was assassinated by one of his bodyguards Pausanias of Orestis, early during the conflict … and so entered, Alexander the Great onto the world stage, aged just twenty, born July 20, 356 BCE.
‘Modern belief in the Greek-ness of the Macedonian language was strengthened by the publication in 1994 of an important curse tablet from Pella that appears provisionally to indicate that the Macedonian language was a form of northwest Greek. Macedonian religion looks Greek; there are local variations, but that is equally true of incontestably Greek places in, for instance, the Peloponnese. Many Macedonian personal names resemble Greek ones, and it has recently been suggested that such onomastic [relating to names] evidence indicates that the Macedonian settlers originally [may have] migrated from northern Thessalian Perrhaibia and the region around Mt. Olympus – as already suggested by a poem ascribed to the Archaic poet Hesiod. The Classical Age was resplendent with most of the cultural wonders associated with Ancient Greece. It corresponds with the period of the height of democracy, the flowering of Greek tragedy in the hands of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, and the architectural marvels, like the Parthenon, at Athens.’
The Greek word for philosophy, philosophia, translates as the ‘love for wisdom.’ The discipline dates back to ancient times with some of the greatest philosophers, including Pythagoras circa 570 to 495 BCE; Parmenides circa 540-? BCE; Socrates circa 469 to 399 BCE; Plato circa 428 to 348 BCE; Aristotle 384 to 322 BCE; and Epicurus 341 to 270 BCE.
There are famous modern day philosophical thinkers who have had their contributions recognised as well. The same people descended from Lot, known as the Greeks, are now known as the French and are still producing the majority of the finest thinkers in the world. Examples include: John Calvin 1509 to 1564; Rene Descartes 1596 to 1650; Blaise Pascal 1623 to 1662; Voltaire 1694 to 1778, Auguste Comte 1798 to 1857, Jean Paul Sartre 1905 to 1980; Simone de Beauvoir 1908 to 1986; Albert Camus 1913 to 1960; and Michael Foucault 1926 to 1984. Some of the major Greek contributors to science, lived during the Hellenistic era, including Euclid and Archimedes.
In 600 BCE, a portion of the Greek Empire – an early portion of Moab and Ammon – settled in Southern France and founded the colony of Massalia; now the city that is called Marseille and the oldest city in France – Kir of Moab. The primary link between the Classical Greeks and the French are not the Gauls, but the Franks. The original Gauls are not the ancestors of Moab and Ammon. We will study these Gauls in detail in a later chapter.
As the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes believe they are Vikings and identify with that culture and past history, the truth, is that the original Vikings left Scandinavia and settled in Britain and Ireland [Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes]. Likewise the French identify with a Gallic past, yet they are not Gauls, for the true Gauls vacated France for the shores of Britain and Ireland. The Gauls were a Celtic race who left their name in northwestern Italy as Gallia, in Belgium as Belgica and in France as Celtica. The nation of France emerged from this Gallic region of the Celtic culture and peoples. Gallia remains a name for France in the Latin, with Francogallia.
The Merovingian dynasty of the Franks attracts considerable interest from researchers and the public alike, in a similar vein to the Trojan kings. We will discuss them further in a subsequent chapter as they are perhaps not all that they seem. The Merovingian kings were ostensibly a Frankish, Salian dynasty lasting some three hundred years – 476 to 750 CE – and are traditionally reckoned as the first race of the ‘kings of France.’ They importantly for the French identity, ended the hegemony of the Visigoths in Gaul. Merovingian derives from the name Merovech meaning Sea-Bull, the father of Childeric I, who ruled a tribe of Salian Franks from his capital at Tournai.
Childeric was succeeded by his son Clovis I in 481/482 CE. Many regard Clovis as the beginning point for the history of France. Clovis I extended his rule over all the Salian Franks by conquering or annexing the territories of the Ripuarian Franks and the Alemanni; uniting nearly all of Gaul except for Burgundy – the seeds of modern Switzerland – and what is now Provence. Important choices by Clovis included making Paris his new capital and converting to Christianity sometime during 496 to 506.
At Clovis I’s death in 511, – and in a situation similar to Alexander at the time of his death – his realm was divided among his four sons, Theuderic I, Chlodomir, Childebert I and Chlotar I. Despite the frequently bloody competition between them, the brothers managed to extend Frankish rule over Thuringia in 531 and Burgundy in 534; as well as gaining control over Septimania on the Mediterranean coast, Bavaria and the lands of the Saxons to the north. By 558 CE, Chlotar I was the only surviving son of Clovis.
The Merovingians grew their hair long [refer Spartans, Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe and Samson, Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe] which distinguished them among the Franks who cut their hair short. Contemporaries referred to them as the ‘long-haired kings’, in Latin reges criniti. A Merovingian whose hair was cut could not rule. The Merovingians used a distinct stock of names. Clovis, evolved into Louis and remained common among French royalty to the 19th century.
The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals and emphasis his, bold mine:
‘The old Trojan Royal House – of the line of DARDANUS – was restored to power after the Greek defeat at Troy in 1149. As noted by Herman L. Hoeh:
“A complete list of TROJAN RULERS after the fall of Troy in 1181 may be found in the original Spanish work by Bartholome Gutierrez entitled: Historia del estado presente y antiguo, de la mui noble y mui leal ciudad de Xerez de la Frontera. It was published in Xerez, Spain in 1886” (Compendium of World History, Volume II).
‘… HELENUS, the son of Priam and Hecuba, fled Troy after the first Trojan War and settled in Illyria or Epirus. There Helenus and his followers founded the cities of Buthrotum and Chaonia. During the Second Trojan War in 1149, the descendants of Helenus REGAINED CONTROL of Troy from the Greeks and restored the Royal House of DARDANUS to the city.
The Spanish history by Gutierrez records the names of Helenus’ descendants who controlled Troy and the surrounding region until the Third Trojan War in 677… At the fall of Troy in 677, members of the Trojan Royal Family, and most of the population of the city, fled to the NORTHERN SHORES OF THE BLACK SEA in eastern Europe. For the next 234 years, in this region, the… TROJAN HOUSE provided eleven rulers over the people who fled Troy…
In 442 B.C. MARCOMIR, Antenor’s son, ascended the throne; and in 441 he migrated out of Scythia and settled the people on the DANUBE. In 431 the Goths forced him, along with over 175,000 men, out of the area and into the country now called West Friesland, Gelders and Holland. Then, nine years later, Marcomir crossed the Rhine and conquered part of Gaul – MODERN FRANCE! He made his brother governor, and continued the gradual conquest of the entirety of Gaul.
Eventually this people became known as FRANKS or Franconians after a king called FRANCUS who reigned from 39 – 11 B.C. The last King of the Franks – Marcomir V – won a great victory over the Romans at Cologne in 382 A. D. and recovered all the lands in the possession of the Romans, except Armoria or Little Brittany, in 390. However, he was slain in battle three years later and the Romans conquered the FRANKS – commanding them to refrain from electing kings over themselves. Instead, the Franks elected Dukes to reign over them, starting with Genebald I in 328 A.D.
The fifth duke of the East Franks, Pharamund (404-419) is recognized by early historians as being the FIRST TRUE KING OF FRANCE. In 427 the succession passed to Clodion who founded the MEROVINGIAN DYNASTY. There is something VERY INTERESTING about this dynasty that bears explanation:
“Its kings all wore LONG HAIR. They kept their kingly office until the Pope suggested to the East Franks (Germans) that they could gain the power over the Merovingians by cutting the king’s hair. The last Merovingian was accordingly tonsured. The government thereafter passed to Pippin, father of the German king Charlemagne, who RESTORED the Roman Empire to the west in 800.The history of the Merovingians, WHO DESCENDED [in part] FROM THE TROJAN LINE AND THE HOUSE OF JUDAH, is made especially interesting in a book entitled The Long-haired Kings, by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill. (See especially chapter 7.) The Merovingians recognized that though they came from Judah, THEY WERE NOT OF THE THRONE OF DAVID and would hold their power only so long as they kept a NAZARITE TRADITION – long hair – symbolizing their subjection to a Higher Power – God – who rules supreme among men. (See Numbers 6)” (Compendium of World History, Volume II, page 183).’
We will learn that there is serious doubt about the Merovingian kings being wholly from the tribe of Judah, let alone a royal line from his sons Pharez or Zarah.
The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, page 445 – emphasis his, bold mine:
‘Even the name Lancelot, according to Ried, derived from L’Alan de Lot, Alan from the Lot Valley of southwest France. The Lot Valley is the same region that the Essenes, Templars, Rex Deus, Cathars, and Merovingians settled in. Lot derives from Lot, the nephew of Abraham, recorded in the Nephilim-infested Sodom and Gomorrrah narrative.
Lot also inexplicably shows up in the original Camu-lot. One wonders, were Camulot and the Lot region of France thus considered by Gnostics as the new Sodom and Gomorrah cities of light?’
The Franks like other Germanic peoples had resided in Scandinavia before their migration southwards and prior to that, they are linked to the Black Sea area. The Franks from the beginning, were divided into two distinct political yet related groups. The Salian Franks of very probable Moabite descent, dwelt in the west of France. This Frankish kingdom became known as Neustria and encompassed northern France, Burgundy, Orleans – upper central France – and Provence. The Ripuarian Franks, most likely from Ammon, dwelt in the Rhineland region of northwestern Germany; which in turn became known as Austrasia and later encompassed Austria, the Netherlands and northern Germany. The name Ripuarian is thought to mean ‘river people’ or ‘river dwellers.’ One is reminded of Ammon’s capital Rabbah, the city of water and Quebec with its strong association with water and the sea. The name Franci, from Frank is linked with the english word frank, to be ‘free.’ Other meanings include the Germanic words for ‘javelin, fierce, bold’ and ‘insolent.’
The author of the Chronicle of Fredegar in the seventh century, claimed the Franks came originally from Troy, citing the works of Virgil and Hieronymous: ‘Blessed Jerome has written about the ancient kings of the Franks, whose story was first told by the poet Virgil: their first king was Priam and, after Troy was captured by trickery, they departed.
Afterwards they had as king Friga, then they split into two parts, the first going into Macedonia, the second group, which left Asia with Friga were called the Frigii, settled on the banks of the Danube and the Ocean Sea – Black Sea. Again splitting into two groups, half of them entered Europe with their king Francio. After crossing Europe with their wives and children they occupied the banks of the Rhine and not far from the Rhine began to build the city of “Troy.”’
The Liber Historiae Francorum [or Gesta regum Francorum] describes how 12,000 Trojans, alledgely led by Priam and Antenor sailed from Troy to the River Don and on to Pannonia which is on the River Danube settling near the Sea of Azov. There they founded a city called Sicambria. The Sicambri circa 55 BCE are linked to the area occupied by the Salian Franks in northwestern France. The Trojans joined the Roman army in accomplishing the task of driving enemies into the marshes of Mæotis, for which it is claimed they received the name of Franks, meaning ‘savage.’
There are many kings called great and within that group, there are only a select few who cast a long shadow over the other rulers labelled great. The great of the great, if you will. For instance, Alexander the Great of Macedon. Another, is Charles I or Charlemagne who lived from 742 to 814 CE. He was the son of Pepin III, king from 751 to 768, and Bertrada of Laon.
Charlemagne co-ruled with his brother Carloman I from 768 until his death in 771. Pepin had peacefully wrenched the monarchy away from Chileric III, by beseeching Pope Zachary [741-752 CE] for the need of a strong ruler such as himself: the Mayor of the Palace, effectively wielding the true power over the Frankish kingdom. Charlemagne is considered the founder of both the French and German monarchies. The French monarchy would continue to be a great power in Europe for the following thousand years.
It is thought that Charlemagne was born in Liege in Belgium, or Aachen in Germany, where he died. He displayed a talent for languages and could speak Latin and understood Greek, amongst others. Charlemagne expanded the Frankish kingdom; establishing the Carolingian Empire. As a zealous defender of Christianity, Charlemagne gave money and land to the Catholic church and protected successive popes.
To acknowledge Charlemagne’s power and reinforce his support of the church, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans on December 25, 800, at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome – thus uniting Western Europe and the Holy Roman Empire for the first time since the fall of Rome. ‘Charlemagne ruled from the start by force of his personality which embodied the warrior-king ethos combined with Christian vision.’
Charlemagne maintained a violent and protracted thirty year series of battles from 772 to 804 CE – called the Saxon Wars – against the German Saxons, a pagan worshipping Germanic tribe who had earned a reputation for ruthlessness.
In 782 at the Massacre of Verden, Charlemagne ordered the slaughter of some four and a half thousand Saxons and tried to force them to convert to Christianity; declaring that anyone who did not get baptised or follow the Catholic faith, would be put to death. The aim was to break the Saxon’s will to fight, but they still would not surrender their autonomy or repudiate their religion. In 804, Charlemagne deported over ten thousand Saxons to Neustria in his kingdom and replaced them in Saxony with his own people. This effectively won the conflict, while earning the enmity of the Scandinavian kings; who bid their time until Charlemagne’s death and then unleashing Viking raids on Francia during 820 to 840.
Charlemagne’s son Louis was born in 778 to his second wife, Hildegard of the Vinzgau, who had nine children by the time she died at the age of 26 in 783. When King Louis I, the Pious died in 840, the empire was divided among his three sons who fought each other for supremacy. Their conflict was concluded by the Treaty of Verdun in 843 which divided the empire between Louis’s sons. Louis II, the German [843-876] received East Francia; Lothair I [843-855], Middle Francia; and Charles II, the Bald [843-877] gained West Francia. None of the kings were interested in working with their brothers and the empire’s infrastructure, as well as most of the reforms advanced by Charlemagne, deteriorated. His notable reforms included the first public schools and a monetary standard.
Hollister describes the king: ‘Charlemagne towered over his contemporaries both figuratively and literally. He was 6 feet 3 ½ inches tall [ironic as his father was very short], thick-necked, and pot bellied yet imposing in appearance for all that. He could be warm and talkative, but he could also be hard, cruel, and violent, and his subjects came to regard him with both admiration and fear… Above all else, Charlemagne was a warrior-king. He led his armies on yearly campaigns as a matter of course. Only gradually did he develop a notion of Christian mission and a program of unifying and systematically expanding the Christian West.’
Notable events in French history include, the Hundred Years War with the English, beginning in 1337. Then in 1348, the plague of Black Death spread through France killing a large percentage of the population. In 1415, the English defeated the French at the Battle of Agincourt. In 1453, the Hundred Years’ War finally drew to a close when the French defeated the English at the Battle of Castillon. The year 1643 saw Louis XIV become King of France. He ruled for seventy-two years and was known as Louis the Great and the Sun King. In 1778, France became involved in the American War of Independence, siding with the colonies in their drive for independent governance from Great Britain. The most popular French king names have been Louis with eighteen kings, Charles with ten and Philip with five – the name of Alexander the Great’s father.
In 1789, the French Revolution began with the storming of the Bastille. In 1792, the French Republic was proclaimed and the following year, King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were executed by guillotine. In 1799, Napoleon grabbed power, overthrowing the French Directory; making himself Emperor. Conquering most of Europe by 1811, he had been officially crowned Emperor of France in 1804. By 1815, Napoleon was defeated by a coalition, led by England’s the Duke of Wellington.
There is much that could be said regarding Napoleon I. The following, is a brief synopsis from Britannia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘Napoleon I, French in full Napoléon Bonaparte… byname the Corsican or the Little Corporal, French byname Le Corse or Le Petit Caporal, (born August 15, 1769, Ajaccio, Corsica – died May 5, 1821, St. Helena Island), French general, first consul (1799-1804), and emperor of the French (1804-1814/15), one of the most celebrated personages in the history of the West. He revolutionized military organization and training; sponsored the Naploeonic Code, the prototype of later civil-law codes; reorganized education; and established the long-lived Concordat with the papacy. Napoleon’s many reforms left a lasting mark on the institutions of France and of much of western Europe. But his driving passion was the military expansion of French dominion, and, though at his fall he left France little larger than it had been at the outbreak of the revolution in 1789, he was almost unanimously revered during his lifetime and until the end of the Second Empire under his nephew Napoleon III as one of history’s great heroes.’
There is an air of the Germanic or Flemish-Dutch about Charlemagne, not so with Napoleon Bonaparte who is wholly French, sharing much with his spiritual ante descent, Alexander the Great. Both of which share one major attribute and that was superior military innovation; which gave them an edge over their opponents. Sandwiched between Charlemagne and Napoleon is another formidable French leader and warrior, Joan of Arc. It was vital that England did not gain a stranglehold on France and Joan was the difference.
Britannia – emphasis & bold mine:
‘St. Joan of Arc, byname the Maid of Orléans… (born circa 1412, Domrémy, Bar, France – died May 30, 1431, Rouen; canonized May 16, 1920… national heroine of France, a peasant girl who, believing that she was acting under divine guidance, led the French army in a momentous victory at Orleans [1429] that repulsed an English attempt to conquer France during the Hundred Years’ War.
Captured a year afterward, Joan was burned to death by the English and their French collaborators as a heretic. She became the greatest national heroine of her compatriots, and her achievement was a decisive factor in the later awakening of French national consciousness. Joan was the daughter of a tenant farmer… In her mission of expelling the English and their Burgundian allies… she felt herself to be guided by the voices of St. Michael [and others]… Joan was endowed with remarkable mental and physical courage, as well as a robust common sense, and she possessed many attributes characteristic of the female visionaries who were a noted feature of her time. These qualities included extreme personal piety, a claim to direct communication with the saints, and a consequent reliance upon individual experience of God’s presence beyond the ministrations of the priesthood and the confines of the institutional church.’
The 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Notice the similarity with the customary tablets used for the Ten commandments; with the United States Declaration of Independence; and with the Eye of providence – the all-seeing eye ofa god. This Eye is a symbol that has an eye enclosed in a pyramid, surrounded by rays of light from the Sun to represent superficially, the divine providence of God watching over humanity. In reality, the god who watches, is the one who holds this world captive.
The Eye of Providence appears on the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, depicted on the one dollar bill. The Eye of Providence was adopted in 1782, but was first proposed as an element of the Great Seal in 1776. Coincidentally, it is thought to be the suggestion of the artistic consultant, Pierre Eugene du Simitiere – of French ancestry born in Geneva, Switzerland.
