Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Authors note: recommended to be read in conjunction with article: Chronology of Christ

It is remarkable that the notable Jewish historian of the first century CE Josephus, is recognised and valued for his writings to a high degree, for often he is the final or only word on a matter; yet on the question of whether the Messiah was a real person, he is largely ignored. In Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus wrote: 

“… there was about this time [during the governorship of Roman procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate from 26 to 36/37 CE], Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, ­a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principle men among us, had condemned him to the cross… he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” 

One can see why, for it is very convenient with its information, including all the salient facts in a nutshell from a ‘Christian’ perspective and also rather syrupy, with its glowing ‘wonderful’ descriptions, that again appear to be for the benefit of any Christian readers. If legitimately written by Josephus at the time, then it makes one wonder if he was a Christian himself? If not, an edit or later inclusion seem plausible. Though this does not negate the existence of Christ, using Josephus’s commentary as the final or only word would not be persuasive of itself. 

What is not always understood, is that Christ and the Apostles were commissioned to seek the lost sheep of the scattered tribes of Israel [Matthew 10:6, John 1:11, James 1:1, 1 Peter 1:1]. Matthew 15:24 ESV: ‘[Jesus] answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Christ, like the Apostles knew the Israelites were ‘scattered abroad’ and not just living in portions of Judea [John 10:16]. It was the Apostle Paul who was given a unique calling of preaching to Gentile nations [Galatians 2:7-8]. 

From the age of twelve, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph and Mary suddenly disappears from the gospels account of his life. Mysteriously, he resurfaces in Galilee eighteen years later to begin his three and a half year ministry [refer Chronology of Christ and Chapter XXIX Esau]. Where was he? One thing is certain, Jesus had ample time to visit, live with, learn from and possibly teach the descendants of the sons of Jacob. 

And so it appears that Christ did in fact, travel the world with his Great Uncle Joseph of Arimathea. Joseph was the equivalent of a business tycoon and global metal magnate of his day. Much of the life of Christ outside of the biblical account is pieced together from  traditions and what isn’t, is still ignored or denied by those who choose not to believe. For the bible clearly states; with words inspired by the very Being who created us [Colossians 1:15-16]: “[Jesus] entered our world, a world He made; yet the world did not recognize Him [John 1:10 The Voice]. 

Before we concentrate fully on Jesus and his Great Uncle Joseph, or even the Apostle Paul it may be beneficial to include an investigation into the Apostles and disciples responsible for spreading the Gospel, with the good news of the Kingdom of God [Matthew 24:14, Mark 1:14-15]. 

Josephus recognised the dispersal of the Israelite tribes when he stated: “…[W]herefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers [Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 11:5:2]. Theses tribes were scattered from as far west as the British Isles and as far eastwards as India. The main centres of Israelite occupation as we have thoroughly investigated and specifically located during Christ’s lifetime were Parthia, stretching from modern day Iran to India, the embryonic Saxon peoples who were part of the Scythian hordes of Central Asia, known as the Sakae or Saka and the Celtic peoples of Britain, Ireland, Gaul, Iberia and Asia Minor. 

Recall, the Messiah’s commission was to be ‘sent to the House of Israel.’ As this precludes the peoples in northern Judea who were mainly from the tribe of Judah as well as remnants of other tribes; it then follows that Jesus would have travelled to those same regions in the world where these ‘lost sheep of the House of Israel’ were living, thus fulfilling scripture. 

The Epistula Apostolorum, from the 3rd Century, verse 30 states: “But he said unto us: Go ye and preach unto the twelve tribes, and preach also unto the heathen, and to all the land of Israel from the east to the west and from the south unto the north…” This admonition ties in with Christ’s original instruction, when he told the disciples in Matthew 28:19 ESV: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations…” 

Hippolytus in the third century discusses the Apostles and the possible destinations in fulfilling the commission. The reader is cautioned that not all if the information may be accurate. Peter is said to have preached the Gospel in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Betania and Asia. His brother Andrew is noted as preaching to the Scythians and Thracians and was later crucified, suspended on an olive tree, at Patrae, a town of Achaia and then buried there. Tradition even says that Andrew preached the gospel in Scotland, where he is the patron saint. 

John preached in Asia, was banished by Roman Emperor Domitian [81 to 96 BCE] to the isle of Patmos, in which he wrote his Gospel and saw the apocalyptic visions of the Book of Revelation [Revelation 1:9]. He was likely released by Nero’s successor, Nerva [96-98 CE]. During Emperor Trajan’s reign [98 to 117 BCE], John, [101] years of age, passed away at Ephesus, where his remains were sought for, but could not be found [supposedly]. Tradition says he preached in Gaul. His brother James, when preaching in Judea, was cut down with the sword by Herod the tetrarch [between 41 to 44 CE], and was buried there [Acts 12:1-2]. 

Philip preached in Phrygia – and Scythia – and was crucified, after stoning in Hierapolis – near Laodicea and Colossae in Asia Minor with his head ignomously downward, in the time of Domitian [81-96 CE] and was degradingly buried with his corpse upright. Bartholomew  – also known as Nathanael [John 1:45] – preached to ‘Indians’ which is probably a reference to Parthians and to whom he gave the Gospel of Matthew. He was also crucified with his head downward and buried in Allanum, a town of greater Armenia. Where Bartholomew had preached as well as in Upper Phyrigia. 

The Apostle Matthew – also known as Levi – wrote his Gospel in the Hebrew tongue and it was published at Jerusalem. He died at Hierees, a town of Parthia, after he had also preached to the Ethiopians [refer Chapter XIII Cush & Phut]. Thomas is said to have preached to the Parthians, Medes, Persians, Hyrcanians, Bactrians and Margians. He was thrust through in the four members of his body with pine spears at Calamene, a city of India and buried there. 

James the son of Alphaeus, while preaching in Jerusalem was stoned to death by the Jews and was buried beside the temple. Prior to this he preached the gospel in Spain: “The Spanish writers… contend, after the death of Stephen [Acts 7:58-60] he [James] came… into Spain where he planted Christianity.” [Cave, Antiquitates Apostolicae, page 148] Jude or Judas [John 14:22], who was also called Lebbaeus Thaddeus, preached to the people of Edess and to all Mesopotamia, including Assyria. He passed away at Berytus and was buried there. 

Simon the Zealot or Canaanite, the son of Clopas, who was also called Jude, became bishop of Jerusalem after James the Just and was buried there at the age of 120 years. Contrary to this and also confusingly from Hippolytus, is that: “[Simon] directed his journey toward Egypt, then to Cyrene, and Africa… and throughout Mauritania and all Libya, preaching the gospel… and [then] over to the western islands… to Britain… He went at last into Britain, and… was crucified… and buried there.” [Cave, Antiquitates Apostolicae, page 203] We will return to the Apostle Simon. Matthias, who was one of the seventy, was numbered along with the eleven apostles after Judas Iscariot’s suicide; preached in Jerusalem and was buried there. 

The Apostle Paul entered into his apostleship a year after the resurrection of Christ [in 31 CE]. Preaching the Gospel for [thirty-five years]. In the time of Nero [54-68 BCE] he was beheaded at Rome and buried there. [Hippolytus, On the Twelve Apostles. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume V by Robert & Donaldson, 1885 Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), printing 1999, pages 254-255] 

Hippolytus mentions Aristobulus who is included in the scriptures written in 56 CE [Romans 16:10]. He was one of the seventy disciples who were appointed to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom [Luke 10:1-24]. Hippolytus correctly claims Aristobulus was the Bishop of Britain [Titus 1:7-9]. As one of the seventy, he would certainly have known the early disciples who became Apostles, for he is believed to have been the father-in-law of none other than the Apostle Peter. 

The Martyrologia of Adonis says under March 17th: “Natal day of Aristobulus, Bishop of Britain, [elder] brother of… Barnabas the Apostle, by whom he was ordained bishop. He was sent to Britain where, after preaching the truth of Christ and forming a Church, he received martyrdom.”

Eusebius confirms that Jesus’s disciples preached to the three main bodies of Israelites at the time: “His disciples… to preach to all the Name of Jesus, to teach about His marvelous deeds in… [the] Roman Empire, and the Queen of Cities itself, and… that others should go to the Parthian race, and yet others to the Scythian, that some already should have reached the very ends of the world…” And “The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the Britannic Isles [De Demonstratione Evangelii, Library III].The Apostles were commissioned to go to not just Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria but to the farthest part of the earth [Acts 1:8]. Heading in a north-westerly direction leads one to the far away isles waiting for the truth [Isaiah 42:4]. 

Tradition says the Apostle Peter went to Italy, became the first Apostolic See of Rome, was crucified by Emperor Nero and buried on Vatican Hill. Yet there is no Biblical evidence that Peter ever set foot in Rome. He is not included in Paul’s salutations to those at Rome; a serious omission if such was the case [Romans 16:1-15]. If Peter had been at Rome, then Paul would not have been teaching brethren in Rome for the first time [Acts 28:21-23]. The Bible, reveals Peter definitely spent time in Jerusalem and also in Babylon [Acts 15:4, 7, 1 Peter 5:13]. Yet, we will discover that the Apostle Peter did visit Italy and Rome and that he was executed by Nero’s orders and buried there. What is not true is that Peter was not even the first Bishop of Rome, let alone its first apostle for he did not establish his residence there. 

The Greek historian, Metaphrastes informs that: “Peter was not only in these western [Mediterranean] parts but particularly… he was a long time in Britain, where he converted many nations to the faith.” [Cave, Antiquitates Apostolicae, page 45] The Venerable Bede [670-735] in his Ecclesiatical History of the English Nation writes that in 665, Pope Vitalian sent the mortal remains of several Saints to Oswy, King of Britain: “… we have ordered the… relics of the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, and… John… to be delivered to the bearers of these our letters, to be by them delivered to you.” 

As Bede is held in high regard, it would be very doubtful he would put nib to scroll in his name to knowledge that was untrue. If such is the truth then these three stalwarts of the faith would undoubtedly have been buried in Avalon. So who then, is buried under the altar in St Peter’s Basilica in Rome? It was not Simon Peter, but another ‘Peter’ masquerading as the true Apostle of Christ. None other than Simon Magus who established a counterfeit church based in Rome and it is he that was the first Apostle of Rome [Acts 8:5-24, Revelation 17:5].

William Steuart McBirnie, in his book, The Search for the Twelve Apostles, states: “There certainly is no other tradition known concerning the history of St. Joseph of Arimathea and since the British tradition is vigorous we see no reason to challenge it… 

If in any country there is a strong tradition concerning some Apostolic figures, and no counter ­tradition elsewhere, then we at least stand on the ground of possibility and even probability. So it is with… St. Joseph.”

The true Way [Acts 9:2; 19:23; 24:14, 22] – rather than what today is called Christianity – as taught by the Apostles, was established in Britain from 35 CE – and as we shall discover – spearheaded initially by Joseph of Arimathea, then the Apostle Peter, Aristobulus the Bishop of Britain and his brother, the Apostle Barnabas, the Apostle Simon the Zealot and finally, the Apostle Paul himself in between his Roman imprisonment years, during 58 to 64 CE. ‘Gildas [Badonicus] the earliest British writer of history, 520’ CE, states: “Meanwhile these islands… in a distant region of the world… received the beams of light, that is, the holy precepts of Christ… at the latter part, as we know, of the reign of Tiberius Caesar [14-37 CE], by whom his religion was propagated without impediment.” ‘… the events mentioned appear to be [prior]… to the defeat of Boadicea, [in] A.D. [62]… [at the latest and more likely before]… the defeat of Caractacus, [in] A.D. [52]. Therefore the testimony of Gildas is to the effect that the gospel was preached in Britain [well] before the year 61 [The Sabbath in the British Isles; Reprinted from “Seventh Day Baptists in Europe and America” Volume 1, 1910 pages 21-39].’ 

The Way in Britain from the beginning varied considerably from the teachings that arrived later, of the Universal Church centred in Rome. From an outsiders perspective it had more of a Jewish or rather a Judaic form. It is worth noting that the Celtic or Keltic churches claimed to have descended from the true church based in Ephesus, where the Apostle John lived and preached. The Keltic Churches of Ireland, Galloway and of Iona in Scotland were one with the British Church and they claimed like Southern Gaul and Iberia, to have drawn their faith from the Apostolic Church of Ephesus. 

These early churches embodied a simpler, yet a more missionary type of religion compared with the Church of Rome. Doctrinally, even from the early centuries there were a number of differences, though the key teachings of disagreement, where the Church of Rome had changed to incorporate palatable pagan and gnostic ideas, were the nature of Christ [the Councils of Nicea in 325 CE and Constantinople in 381 CE], the Sabbath [Council of Laodicea 364 CE] and the Passover [Council of Nicea 325 CE]. 

The truth of One eternal God and the Son of Man’s origin were substituted with the Trinity [refer Arius, Alexander & Athanasius]; the seventh day Sabbath was made illegal and substituted with the worship of the ‘Lord’s Day’, the day of the Sun on the first day of the week; and the observance of Passover on the 14th day after the new Moon of the first sacred calendar month, was substituted with the commemoration of Easter on the first Sunday following the full Moon after the Spring Equinox [March 21]. 

The eighth century Catholic monk and historian Bede, highlighted the difference with church leaders in Britain: “They do not keep Easter Sunday at the proper time, but from the fourteenth… They did other things too which were not in keeping with the unity of the Church. 

After a long dispute they were unwilling, in spite of the prayers, exportations, and rebukes of Augustine and his companions to give their assent, preferring their own traditions to those which all the churches throughout the world agree…”

Vatican librarian Cardinal Baronius [1538–1607] – who spent 30 years compiling his history from Vatican records – and Anglican archbishop Ussher [1581–1656] mentioned several of the Apostles and their companions traveled to the ‘Isles of the West.’ 

Cardinal Cesar Baronious provided the following details in Latin. “Annus 35… Lazarum, Mariam Magdalenam, Martham, & Marcellam peditfequam… cum Maximino difcipulo… comitemque… Ioiephum ab Arimathaea nobilum Decurionem, quem tradunt ex Gallia in Brittanniam naugafie, illeque pofit predicatum diem claufifle extremum. [Annales Ecclesiastici, Sumptibus Uoannis Gymnici & Antonji Hierati, 1609, pages 280-281] 

An approximate translation: “Year 35 CE… Lazarus [John 12:9-11], Mary Magdalene [Mark 16:9], Martha, & Marcella the servant… with the disciple of Maximim… and with… Joseph of Arimathea the noble Decurion, fled in a boat without oars [or sails?] to Marseilles, then from Gaul to Britain, where after preaching the gospel [Joseph] ended his days [in Glastonbury].”  

Other companions on this journey included Christ’s mother, Mary. The poet Mistral states others: Trophimus [Acts 20:4], Cleon, Eutropius, Restitutus  [Sidonius] whom we know from the Bible as ‘the man born blind’ [John 9:1-38], Martial, Saturninus, Mary the wife of Cleophas [John 19:25] and Salome. The names of these saints have been perpetuated in the Gallic Church and Lazarus is persistently recognised as the first Bishop of Marseilles. Joseph of Arimathea was subsequently a frequent visitor to Gaul, to confer with the disciples resident there and particularly with the Apostle Philip, who had arrived at Marseilles ahead of Joseph and awaited him and the Bethany family. It was Philip who consecrated Joseph, appointing him as ‘the Apostle to Britain’.

The fact that Philip was the Apostle of Gaul is noteworthy, for the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians is a misinterpretation and his letter is in fact the Letter to the Gauls, where descendants of Jacob were living in considerable numbers. Galatia meanwhile was an offshoot of Gauls. Also, his mention of Crescens being in Galatia, should read Gaul [2 Timothy 4:10]. Cardinal Baronius stated: ‘… that “to the Galatians” must be corrected in the place of “to the Gauls”.’ St. Epiphanius [315-407 CE] wrote: ‘… so that St. Paul assures [Luke the Evangelist] in his epistles about some of his disciples – “Crescens”, said he, “is in Gaul.” In it must not be read in Galatia as some have falsely thought, but in Gaul.’

Britain was the obvious choice for a safe haven as it was the only free state in Europe – free from Roman persecution – and which afforded a secure asylum to these early Christians who had left the instability of Judea and the indelibly raw memories of Jesus’s horrific death which remained too vivvid and fresh while they stayed living in Palestine. 

With this band of illustrious people who had intimately known Christ and shared in the drama and horror of his execution, it is little wonder that the little isle of Britain became known as ‘the most hallowed ground on earth,’ ‘the Sacred Isle’ and ‘the Motherland.’

It was to this land that Jesus’s mother Mary arrived with her Uncle, Joseph of Arimathea. Though Christ had entrusted the care of his mother to ‘the disciple he loved’, universally considered to be John, we do not ever hear the Apostle John make mention of her. We have addressed who else might be the disciple that Jesus loved previously. The verse says John ‘took her to his own home.’ Though in the Greek, it does not include the word home [John 19:26-27]. John was a marked man – and he had his Apostolic commission that would necessitate considerable travel not suitable for Mary to endure – and so it makes sense that ultimately, Mary should find refuge with her ‘own’ as in Joseph and the Bethany family of Lazarus and his sisters. William of Malmsbury in the Magna Tabula Glastoniensis says: “St. John while evangelizing Ephesus, made Joseph Paranymphos” [or Guardian of Mary]. The fact that where Joseph went so did Mary, supports her being in his care and not John’s.

The four gospels reveal that Joseph of Arimathea had very high standing in the community and was a person of great wealth, the most influential businessman in Judea and possessing an honourable social distinction as evidenced by his ‘not consenting to the council and deed of them’, as he was a member of the Sanhedrin – as well as a ‘Provincial Roman Senator’ [George F Jowett, The Drama of the Lost Disciples, 1996, page 134]. He was a good and righteous man and because of his visibility, a secret follower of Jesus, who ‘himself waited for the kingdom of God’. It was prophesied that Christ would be buried in the tomb of a rich man [refer Chapter XXIX Esau] and Joseph was that individual. 

It took real courage on one hand to approach Pontius Pilate over the dead body of his nephew, yet his position meant an audience with the Roman Governor of Judea at such short notice was not difficult to request. It is hard to credit that Pilate who had signed Christ’s death warrant when he ‘washed his hands’ from the false charges against him; that he would release his body for private burial and have his tomb become the shrine of a martyr. This would indicate not only Joseph’s rank but also his rightful claim to Jesus’s body. A claim made possible by being a blood relative. The Jewish Talmud corroborates in stating that Joseph was the younger brother of the father of Mary. 

It is clear from the Biblical account that Mary’s husband died while Jesus was young. The Judaic law in such circumstances appointed the next male kin as guardian of the family. We can begin to understand why Jesus was frequently seen in the company of his Uncle, particularly at religious festivals and on voyages to Britain by ship, which Cornish traditions confirm and where ancient landmarks bear Hebrew names recording these visits. Joseph’s actions at the time of Jesus’s death affirm their close relationship. Rather than being a mere guardian of Jesus, Joseph was a father figure to Christ and treated him as his son. It becomes only more moving and harrowing to realise that it was this man – with the help of Nicodemus [John 19:38-40] – who took Jesus’s broken body down from the cross, cradling the corpse of the very Son of God in his arms.

The Bible says that Joseph hurried to Pilate in requesting Jesus’s body because the day was ending, darkness was approaching and with it, the Passover that evening and the Sabbath which was the Holy Day of the first day of Unleavened Bread, the following morning. Though there is a far more pressing urgency in Joseph’s need to meet with Pilate than it would appear. It begins with the word, tree and the true manner in which the Messiah was crucified.

In the nineteenth chapter of the Book of John, we learn a number of fascinating details that many have possibly overlooked. The first is that Jesus died in a garden called Golgotha, meaning ‘place of the skull.’ [John 19:17, 41]. Golgotha was a monticulus, which means ‘a small hill on top of a mount.’ The mount in question, being the Mount of Olives. The Greek word for garden means an orchard or plantation – a grove of trees. It was to this garden, set on a hill that Jesus carried not an assembled Latin or Greek cross, weighing some 200 pounds but rather the crossbeam that would be a fixed to a living tree. It was this crosspiece that Simon of Cyrene carried the final distance to Golgotha because Jesus was exhausted after enduring repeated brutal beatings at the hands of Pontius Pilates’s Roman soldiers throughout the night until morning, during his imprisonment [Matthew 27:32].

Biblical scholar Ernest Martin explains that this crosspiece associated with crucifixions had a technical Latin name, with the upper part of the cross known as a patibulum. Jesus would have had his hands and wrists bound and nailed to the patibulum. Both he and the patibulum would have then been hoisted upwards with the crossbeam nailed in place against a sizeable tree. Christ’s legs would have been bound at the ankles, his legs bent upwards together and his feet nailed to the tree trunk. It is important to understand that not only was the ‘cross’ a tree, but that the two robbers crucified with Jesus had their own patibulum, also nailed to the same tree. “… so that the bodie-s would not remain on the cross…” [John 19:31-32]. 

The trial, verdict, imprisonment and crucifixion of the Son of Man was not only illegal but rushed because of the timing right before the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread. As time was of the essence, a tree was used instead of a Roman cross. Added to this, was the biblical law that no one could hang on an instrument of death beyond sunset because the tree and the soil it was in were accounted as defiled by the accursed person [Deuteronomy 21:22-23, Galatians 3:13]. This was part of the reason why Joseph was in a hurry to rescue Christ’s corpse. It was not uncommon in times of haste for criminals to be nailed to trees [Joshua 8:29; 10:26-27]. In this instance, it meant the Roman soldiers did not have to dig three separate holes some five to six feet deep to secure three large standing poles. 

The Apostles Peter and Paul confirm that Jesus was hung and died on a tree [Acts 10:39; 13:29, 1 Peter 2:24]. Acts 5:30 ESV: “The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree [G3586 – xulon: ‘tree, wood, log, beam’].” In John chapter nineteen a different word is used G4716 – stauros. This word is generic and means a ‘pole, stake, cross.’ It applies to any instrument used for execution and therefore also applies to a tree. 

The word stauros can be used for the patibulum which supported Christ’s arms [Luke 23:26]; it can be used for the actual pole or tree trunk itself [John 19:19]; and it can be used for the combined patibulum and pole or tree trunk used as a single device for execution [John 19:25]. There is substantial irony in Jesus dying on a tree, for Christ is a living tree, the source of Eternal life and our Maker [Genesis 2:9, Psalm 1:3, Colossians 1:15-20, Revelation 2:7; 22:2, 14]. “Early Christian art indicates a close relationship between the tree of life and the cross. The Cross of Christ, the wood of suffering and death, is for Christians a tree of life. The idea that the living trunk of the cross bears twigs and leaves is a common motif in Christian antiquity.” [Kittel, Theological Dictionary, Volume V, Pages 40-41] 

Returning to Joseph of Arimathea’s urgency to claim Christ’s body. His remains were accursed, which meant so was the tree upon which he was hung. The Apostle Paul reckoned the cross as a ‘shame’ and a ‘reproach’ [Hebrews 12:2; 13:13]. To cleanse the area, required purging and this was accomplished through burning with fire [Deuteronomy 21:21, Joshua 7:24-26, Isaiah 4:4, Ezekiel 22:17-19]. Joshua 7:15 NKJV: “Then it shall be that he who is taken with the accursed thing shall be burned with fire, he and all that he has, because he has transgressed the covenant of the Lord, and because he has done a disgraceful thing in Israel.” According to the law and protocol, the Jews fully expected to burn and destroy the tree of execution and the three men hanging dead from it. So it was with great daring that Joseph requested an immediate audience with Pontuis Pilate [Mark 15:43]. If Joseph had not succeeded, Christ would have surely been consumed in the flames. 

A future prophecy makes clear that the tree of execution was destroyed and Jesus along with it, should Joseph have not dramatically intervened: “I was like an unsuspecting lamb led to its slaughter. I had no idea they were plotting against me. They were saying, “Let’s cut down that lush olive tree and destroy all its beautiful fruit. Let’s cut him off from the land of the living. Let’s make sure no one even remembers his name.” [Jeremiah 11:19] Jerome in the fourth century says of this verse: “The tree is his cross, and the bread [fruit] his body: for he says himself, I am the bread that came down from heaven [John 6:51].” [Anglican Commentary, London, 1875, Volume V, page 395] 

There is one further aspect of the Messiah’s death prior to investigating his life before his ministry began in the Autumn of 26 CE. It is linked to Deuteronomy 21:21 ESV, which says: “Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.” As it was law to purge by fire an accursed one; it was also standard practice to throw stones at them while they hung upon a tree. 

As the one mediator between God and men [1 Timothy 2:5] suffered brutal beatings through the night before his crucifixion and while he suffered the immense pressure and pain of slow asphyxiation; the Son of Man endured the horrifying experience of stoning that lead to his last breath and finally, death. The result of a relentless tide of stones lead to: “Many people were shocked when they saw him. His appearance was so damaged he did not look like a man; his form was so changed they could barely tell he was human.” [Isaiah 52:14 NCV] 

Christ’s ancestor King David, was inspired to write about Jesus, a 1,000 years before he was born: “The enemy, this gang of evil men, circles me like a pack of dogs; they have pierced my hands and feet. I can count every bone in my body [Matthew 26:26]. See these men of evil gloat and stare…” [Psalm 22:16-17]. These verses can only be understood in one context.  Though Jesus was scourged, Pilate fully intended for Jesus to recover and be set free [Luke 23;22]. The severe disfigurement of the Son of God was not by beating but through the pelting of sharp flint stones that are common on the Mount of Olives. 

And so, the One who had supreme glory sitting on a throne at the righthand side of the Ancient of Days, gave up his majesty upon high [Revelation 22:3]; humbled himself as no other has ever done; laying down his eternal life for a creation that despises him and only seeks evil continually. This spectacular Being offered himself as the ultimate sacrifice in the determination to defeat Satan and Sin once and for all. Naked, he endured a barrage of stones thrown at him – for possibly nearly six hours, from nine in the morning until he died at three in the afternoon – that would break his skin and eventually dislodge flesh away from the bone. They lacked the force to break any bones [John 19:36] and so the verses describing his utter and complete disfigurement – to his body, his genitals and his face – and then abhorrently being able to see all his protruding bones, are devastatingly heartrending in their accuracy. 

Stoning was reserved for capital crimes under the Mosaic law [Leviticus 20:2, Deuteronomy 13:10]. Though the pelting of stones by a mob at a person who merited ill-will also occurred [Exodus 8:26; 17:4, 2 Chronicles 24:20, Hebrews 11:37, Acts 5:26]. Thus Christ was sentenced to death by the Romans as the people of Judea were forbidden to apply the death penalty; but in so doing, Pilate allowed the Jerusalem authorities to kill Christ according to biblical law [John 18:31]. Therefore, extraordinarily and uniquely, Christ suffered the two death penalties simultaneously and though the Roman crucifixion certainly contributed to his death, it was the Jewish  Edomite stoning that killed him. 

The truth surrounding the manner of the Messiah’s death is profound, yet not widely known and Isaiah who penned the words, himself acknowledges that those that learn the truth would be amazed; including the educated and stately of the world: “Now many nations will be astonished… world rulers will be speechless… For they will see what they’ve never been told; they will understand what they’ve never heard.” [Isaiah 52:15 The Voice]. But Isaiah knowing human nature also knew that few would believe or be moved: “But, oh, how few believe it! Who will listen? To whom will God reveal his saving power?” [Isaiah 53:1]

The risen Christ looked very different from how he had looked formerly. The most accurate description of Christ is in the Bible: “There was nothing attractive about him, nothing to cause us to take a second look. He was looked down on and passed over, a man who suffered, who knew pain firsthand. One look at him and people turned away. We looked down on him, thought he was scum.” [Isaiah 53:2–3 The Message] Later, after Christ’s resurrection and being restored to his previous glory, Jesus looked very different [John 17:5]. 

Mary Magdalene, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and Thomas did not recognise him [Luke 24:13-16, John 20:14, 24-27]. Though Jesus was not yet returned to spirit and still physical flesh and bone [Luke 24:39-40]. His new looks are described: “You are the most handsome of the sons of men; grace is poured upon your lips; therefore God has blessed you forever.” [Psalm 45:2] He was now his true restored self and would have been what we would call handsome and attractive [Revelation 1:14, 18].

For anyone to claim that the Saviour did not exist or deny his sonship from the Father reveals a deeply deceived mind indeed, for: “Such teachings are spread by deceitful liars, whose consciences are dead, as if burnt with a hot iron.” [1 Timothy 4:2 GNT] The Apostle Paul says further: “Stop fooling yourselves. If you count yourself above average in intelligence, as judged by this world’s standards, you had better put this all aside… For the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God… God uses man’s own brilliance to trap him; he stumbles over his own “wisdom” and falls… the Lord knows full well how the human mind reasons and how foolish and futile it is.” [I corinthians 3:18-20 TLB] 

Joseph of Arimathea returned to Britain in 35 CE, for it was not his first visit. The Latin Vulgate – translated by Jerome – renders ‘honourable counsellor’ [Mark 15:43, Luke 23:50] as nobilis decurio. Decurio was the name given to a town counsellor as well as an officer in the Roman Army. Dr C R Davey Biggs in Ictis and Avalon explains that a Decurio was also a common term employed by the Romans used of an ‘officer’ or an official in charge of a metal mine.  The addition of the word noble, indicates that Joseph held a prominent position in the Roman administration as a Minister of mines. For an Israelite from Judah to hold such high rank in the Roman Empire is unusual to say the least. A number of writers have put forward a case that Joseph was an international merchant involved in mining; including E Raymond Capt in The Traditions of Glastonbury. It would explain the source of his immense wealth and standing. 

Even more interesting is that the south-western coast of England was renowned for tin mining. Cornwall was the source of the major portion of the world’s tin, where it was smelted into ingots and exported throughout the civilised world chiefly in one of the largest private merchant fleets afloat owned by Joseph, traversing the many sea lanes in transporting the precious metal. The main customer being the warring Roman Empire. Joseph of Arimathea had a controlling interest in the world tin and lead industry much like the importance of steel today. The existence of the tin trade between Cornwall and Phoenicia is frequently referred to by classical writers, including Diodorus Siculus and Julius Caesar.

Therefore, Joseph would have been a frequent visitor to Britain for it was the main source of tin in the ancient world. As a number of Israelite tribes were already resident in Britain – Simeon, Dan and Benjamin – it is highly plausible that Joseph of the tribe of Judah would be trading with people descended from these tribes. Britain was referred to as the Cassiterides, or the tin bearing islands. The Sunday Telegraph of September 21st, 1969 announced that “There is still probably as much tin under the Cornish ground as ever came out of it.”

When Joseph and his party arrived in Britain, they sailed inland to the Isle of Avalon – named from either aval, Celtic for apple, the sacred fruit of the Druids and or, avilion, which in Celtic has a similar meaning as the Biblical name Jehoshaphet, ‘the Isle of departed spirits’ – today known as Glastonbury. The sea came fourteen miles further inland in those days and lapped at the foot of Glastonbury Tor, a 521 foot high hill. 

Joseph is said to have planted his staff in the ground at Wearyall Hill, where it took root, growing into a thorn tree. It is not unknown for a staff cut from a tree to take root, as Aaron’s rod budded [Numbers 17:8]. A scion of the original tree still exists to this day in the hallowed churchyard of St John at Glastonbury. What makes it unique is that it is the only thorn tree in the world that blooms both in winter and in May.

This group was met by King Guiderius and his brother, Prince Arviragus; for it was he who had extended the invitation to Joseph and his party, being well acquainted with Joseph and so granted them twelves hides of land tax free – a symbol of promised protection. A hide was larger prior to the Norman invasion in 1066. A hide since represents a 120 acres [50 hectares] of land; though in Joseph’s day it was 160 acres. This Royal Charter is recorded in the Domesday Book, published in 1087: “The Domus Dei, in the great monastery of Glastonbury, called the Secret of the Lord. This Glastonbury Church possesses, in its own ville XII hides of land which have never paid tax.” The twelve hides of land can still be traced today [Phelps, The History and Antiquities of Somersetshire, 1836]. 

Arviragus was Prince of the Silures in Britain, in the Dukedom of Cornwall. He was the son of King Cunobelinus – Cymbeline of Shakespeare – and a cousin to the warlike patriot Prince Caradoc. These two men represented the Royal Silurian Dynasty, the most powerful warrior kingdom in Britain and from whom the later Tudor kings and queens of England had their descent and from Arviragus no less, the illustrious Emperor Constantine of Byzantium descended [306-337 CE]. Arviragus was later converted by Joseph: “Joseph converted this King Arviragus, By his prechying to know ye laws divine. And baptized him… And to Christian laws made hym inclyne…’ [Hardynge’s Chronicle] Raymond Capt cites evidence that Glastonbury bore two titles from ancient times ­ Secretum Domini and Domus Dei, Latin for ‘The Secret of the Lord’ and ‘The House of God’. 

Joseph of Arimathea constructed the first Church above ground and it was in Britain, on the same site where Jesus had originally constructed a wattle temple and altar to commune with the Father [and affectionately dedicated to his mother, Mary] – as confirmed by St Augustine in a letter to the Pope, stating the altar had existed. For up to that time the followers of the Way had met in peoples homes. For the Greek word for Church is ekklesia, meaning ‘called out ones.’ The Church constituted the people, not a building [Romans 16:3-5, 1 Corinthians 16:19, Colossians 4:15, Philemon 2]. During the persecution, the Church had met in underground catacombs in Jerusalem. This first British church building was made from wattles daubed with mud, thatched with reeds and was sixty feet long and twenty-six feet wide. Very close to the dimensions of the Tabernacle during the wilderness years and the time of the Judges [Exodus 26:1-37].

The original sacred temple and altar was preserved for hundreds of years until St David erected the first stone church in 546 CE over the hallowed wattle temple of Christ. He also encased the temple in lead to preserve it, which was reputed to also be the resting place of Mary. In 1184, a fire destroyed the Wattle Church. Fortuitously in its place, a Norman Chapel was erected, which though ruined remains till this day. 

John Leland quoting from Maelgwyn of Avalon’s Historia de Rebus Britannicis in 540 CEstates: “The isle of Avalon… received thousands of sleepers, among whom Joseph de Marmore from Arimathea by name, entered his perpetual sleep. And he lies in a bifurcated line next the southern angle of the oratory made of circular wattles by thirteen inhabitants of the place over the powerful adorable Virgin.” The tomb of Joseph was inscribed with the epitaph: AD BRITANNOS VENI POST CHRITUM SEPELIVI. DOCUI. QUIEVI. Meaning, “I came to Britain after burying Christ. I taught. I rest.” Nothing remains of his grave, though there is an empty stone sarcophagus in St John’s Parish Church, where allegedly his remains were transferred. 

Joseph of Arimathea looms large on the canvas that is the life of Christ and the early New Testament church. His contribution to the work of the Gospel based in Avalon and his service to the saints and disciples of Christ’s ‘little flock’ is both immeasurable and influential with that of the preeminent Apostles, Peter and Paul. Perhaps, no one grew as close to the Saviour after his mother Mary and the disciple he loved, John, as his Great Uncle. Joseph was more than a father figure to Jesus, for the biblical account and historical records reveal a deeply touching and moving story of a man who probably reluctantly stepped into the role, that was so early vacated by Jesus’s father Joseph. He is the unsung hero of the New Testament and a more pivotal role at that time in the history of mankind could not have gone to more sincere and humble man. 

Joseph’s death in July, 82 CE [Cressy] of very old age, must have cast a dark cloud on those of the early church that yet remained and began the final period or phase of the apostolic era [30-98 CE] until its justifiable end with the death of the last original Apostle, John. Church tradition says John died during the reign of Emperor Trajan from 98 to 117 CE; Irenaeus speaks of John as still living in 98 CE and passing away at the grand old age of 101; and Jerome dates John’s death as sixty-eight years after the Crucifixion [30 CE]. Thus if John died in 98 CE at 101, this means he was born the exact same year as his beloved Lord in 3 BCE [refer Chapter XXIX Esau and The Chronology of Christ].

The connection between Joseph and Mary the mother of Jesus, would indicate that she is also buried in Glastonbury. Support for this is that St Joseph’s Chapel was also known as St Mary’s and a stone set in the south wall of the Chapel bears the inscription: Jesus Maria. There are no records that Mary lived or died in Judea, nor has St Jerome recorded that her remains were ever taken back to her original homeland. Capgrave in Novo Legende Anglia informs readers that the Apostle John was present at Mary’s death as were all the original living Apostles and disciples; who had come at Mary’s ‘bidding to be by her side as Mary breathed her last’ as described by historians on ‘the most hallowed ground on earth.’

The temple lovingly built by Jesus’s own hands, sanctified by his prayers and bequeathed to his mother was where Mary spent her last peaceful years from 35 to 48 CE, when she died – according to a number of old records. 

The support that Joseph buried her here is in the fact that: ‘No one better than they (the Roman Catholic Church) know the facts of her (Mary’s) life, and no one better than they espouse them. And over the ages the holy ground at Glastonbury has been constantly referred to by them as “Our Lady’s Dowry”. As such it has always been recognized by the Roman Catholic Sisterhood, who never ceased to pray daily for this hallowed spot at Glastonbury – Our Lady’s Dowry.’ [St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, James Clarke]

Melchinus also known as Maelgywn was a bard and philosopher of Avalonia who about 450 CE said: “Ye ealde chyrche was built over the grave of the Blessed Mary.” According to George F Jowett, when printing was invented, ‘the first book to come off the press was the Bible, and then Wynkyn De Worde printed the life story of St. Joseph.’ It was at the same time that Pynson printed from old documents in his work the Life of St. Joseph the following: “Now here how Joseph came into England; But at that time it was called Brytayne. Then XV yere with our lady, as I understande. Joseph wanted still to serve her he was fayne.” Here we learn that Joseph was in fact Mary’s guardian and carer from 33 CE. This would have been three years after the crucifixion and so we can deduce that the Apostle John lingered in either Jerusalem or Judea for those years until he departed on his evangelising and thus transferred care of Mary to her Uncle, Joseph of Arimathea. 

Pynson adds regarding Jospeh: “So after Her Assumpcyn, the boke telleth playne; With Saynt Phylyp he went into France. Phylyp bad then go to Great Brytayn fortunate.” We learn that Joseph sought consolation by being with his good friend the Apostle Philip. William of Malmesbury quoting from an old record of the Abbey at Glastonbury dated 183 CE: “Their leader, it is said, was Phillip’s dearest friend, Joseph of Arimathea, who buried our Lord.”

Philip recognising Joseph’s value in Britain and particularly accompanying and hosting the new missionaries that Philip sent periodically from Gaul each time with Joseph, had him return to Britain rather than linger on the continent. In fact, Philip sent a total of 160 disciples over the years to assist Joseph and his companions in Britain [Capgrave, De Sancto Joseph ab Aramathea]. On this particular trip, Joseph’s own son Josephe travelled with him for he had been recently baptised by Philip. Philip had requested Josephe to return to Gaul after arriving in Britain in 35 CE. 

In 60 CE Joseph had a special passenger with his new recruits in the form of the Apostle, Simon the Zealot. Simon had been to Britain once before in 44 CE according to Cardinal Baronius and Hippolytus, though only staying a short while during the Claudian war. Simon was known as the Canaanite because he had been born in Cana of Galilee, not necessarily because he was a descendant of Canaan; though this cannot be entirely ruled out. 

He later was known as Zelotes, or the zealot on the strength of his enthusiasm and fearlessness for his missionary work that took him to Mauritania, Libya, Egypt and Africa. So fiery were his sermons in the east of England, where there were less Britons and many Roman soldiers stationed, his evangelising was short-lived. He quickly caught the attention of the Roman Catis Decianus, who was set to destroy anything and everyone Christian. Not before Simon had converted Britons and Romans alike, though the latter had to keep it secret. He was condemned to death at Caistor, Lincolnshire, crucified and buried May 10, 61 CE – the second Christian martyr in Britain after the Bishop Aristobulus. 

Lazarus and his sisters, Mary Magdalene and Martha did not stay long upon their arrival in Avalon; whether Joseph encouraged them, or Philip requested it, or they just preferred Gaul, the three of them returned. Lazarus left an imprint of his time in Britain in The Triads of Lazarus. Jowett states: “Nowhere else are his laws recorded and nowhere else but in Britain was the word ‘Triad’ employed, not even in Gaul. The word is Celtic for Law. The Triads of Lazarus are still preserved in the ancient Celtic records of Britain.’

It was back to Marseilles that Lazarus returned. Roger Hovedon comments: “Marseilles is an espiscopal city… Here are the relics of St. Lazarus [still venerated greatly to this day], the brother of St. Mary Magdalene and Martha, who held the Bishopric for seven years.” Similarly, the Church records of Lyons state: “Lazarus returned to Gaul from Britain to Marseilles, taking with him Mary… and Martha. He was the first appointed bishop. He died there seven years later” [circa 42-45 CE]. Before the escape from Judea in 35 CE, Lazarus had served as the Bishop of Cyprus. Lazarus built the first church building in Marseilles, the same site where the present Cathedral stands. Lazarus is remembered fondly – perhaps more than Philip who served longer in Gaul – for his zealous preaching and kindness. Many consider him as the Apostle of Gaul and in Marseilles, Lyons, Aix, St Maximin and La Sainte Baume, numerous monuments, liturgies, relics and traditions remind of his esteemed memory.

The Apostle Philip at first, sent Martha and her faithful handmaid Marcella to Arles. She was not there long, with Trophimus replacing her and he was soon consecrated the first Bishop of Arles. He was industrious and his area grew to become the Metropolitan of the Narbonne, with Arles as his Bishopric. Maximin, Eutropius the first Bishop of Aquitaine and Parmena who is not listed in the original party – was a disciple of Joseph and became the first Bishop of Avignon – also departed Britain to serve in Gaul. Meanwhile Martha and Marcella settled in Tarascon, spending the rest of their lives teaching and administering. They both died naturally and ‘Marcella was with Martha at her death.’

Maximin joined the other Bethany sister, Mary at Aix. It is controversial to equate Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany, though the French Church regards them as one. Maximin was the first Bishop of Aix and he and Mary lived the rest of their lives there. There are many relics and memorials for Maximin in the area and especially for Mary Magdalene. 

George Jowett, writes: “Mary’s classic beauty and her rich voice, extolled in reverence and pleasure by all who knew her, endeared her so deeply to the hearts of the people among whom she laboured that she was adored as a Saint before she died. The most hardened soul melted to her preaching, and she converted, as we are told, ‘multitudes to the faith’.” 

Martial of the original party stayed in Avalon and tirelessly served as the right hand of Joseph, teaching and converting neophtyes. Of the Evangelist Luke it is said he taught in Gaul, Dalmatia, Italy and Macedonia as well as trips to Britain to visit the saints in Avalon. Churches were also founded outside Gaul in Helvetia [Switzerland] and Lotharingia [North-eastern France]. A son of a prominent British noble founded the Helvetian church. Beatus was educated at Avalon and baptised by Aristobulus’s brother Barnabas. The same Apostle Barnabas who cofounded the church at Antioch with Paul in 43 CE [Acts 11:22]. Barnabas had been sent by Paul in advance to Britain to represent the ‘Apostle to the Gentiles.’ In the scriptures, Barnabas, meaning ‘Son of Consolation’ had changed his name form Joses the Levite. Barnabas frequently visited and with his brother and Joseph was instrumental in the growth of the early church in what is now Wales. 

It was after his brother’s martyrdom that Barnabas on a later visit baptised Beatus, formerly Suetonius. After finishing his novitiate, Beatus was ordained a Bishop and chose Helvetia as his Bishopric. Upon leaving he gave up his wealth and used it to ransom prisoners of war on the continent. Beatus made his headquarters at Underseven [Unterseen] in lake Thun. He successfully introduced the Way of the true faith into Switzerland, erecting churches and hospitals. He died in 96 CE in the humble abode he built on arrival. It is still preserved and can be seen today on the shore of the Lake.

As for Barnabas, he sadly met his death in Cyprus, where Lazarus had once been Bishop. Barnabas was stoned to death and buried by Mark the Evangelist, his younger kinsman outside the city. The record says that as he laid Barnabas to rest in his grave, he placed on his breast a copy of the gospel of Matthew. For any who may wonder who the child was that Jesus took on his knee in reference to becoming like little children [Matthew 18:3], it is thought to be Ignatius a disciple of the Apostle John; whom he ordained as the third Bishop of Antioch. Ignatius was martyred in 107 CE by the Emperor Trajan, who had him cast to the wild beasts in the Colosseum and devoured.

The Apostle Paul is both famous and synonymous with being the ‘Apostle to the Gentiles’, so it is easy to forget that his commission included not just kings but also the children of Israel [Acts 9:15]. So when did Paul preach to the tribes of Israel? The book of Acts ends abruptly at the close of Chapter twenty-eight, with Paul living two years in the city of Rome, teaching ‘the kingdom of God and about the Lord Jesus Christ.’ It is as if Acts is unfinished and interestingly, like the Books of James and III John does not have an amen at the close. 

It is widely held that Paul was set free from house arrest [Acts 28:16, 20], for six years [58-64 CE] to then return to Italy and suffer martyrdom at the hands of Emperor Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus [54-68 CE]. St Jerome places Paul’s arrival in ‘Rome in the second year of Nero’ in 56 CE, who had succeeded Emperor Claudius.

The Book of Acts may have a link with the Book of James, in that where James addresses the ‘twelve tribes scattered abroad’ [James 1:1] without saying where they are; yet acknowledging the clue that they were in regions of unrest [James 4;1], so too the Book of Acts goes quiet regarding the original Apostles after the early chapters. Is this so to not divulge who or where the lost tribes of Israel are? The only regions of war in the world at the time of Jame’s writing were Parthia and Britain – both against the Roman Empire – and both locations being of Israelite occupation. Where was the Apostle Paul for approximately six years? 

The Bible says that Paul intended to visit Spain [Romans 15.24], but there is reason to believe that Spain was a port of call on a journey going further. There is a document  in existence called the 29th Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. 

This writer doubts that it was compiled by Luke the Evangelist or that it is a missing chapter to the Book of Acts and withheld from the Biblical Canon. Even so, there is valuable information contained in its early verses. The document is known as the Sonnini Manuscript and was found in the archives of Constantinople. 

1: “And Paul, full of the blessings of Christ, and abounding in the Spirit, departed out of Rome, determining to go into Spain, for he had a long time purposed to journey thitherward, and was minded also to go from thence into Britain.” 

2: “For he had heard in Phoenicia that certain of the children of Israel, about the time of the captivity, had escaped by sea to the isles afar off, as spoken by the prophet, and called by the Romans Britain.”

3: “And the Lord commanded the gospel to be preached far hence to the Gentiles, and to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 

4: “And no man hindered Paul; for he testified boldly of Jesus before the tribunes and among the people; and he took with him certain of the brethren which abode with him at Rome, and they took shipping at Ostrium and having the winds fair, were brought safely into a haven of Spain.” 

5: “And much people were gathered together from the towns and villages, and the hill country; for they had heard of the conversion to the Apostles, and the many miracles which he had wrought.” 

6: “And Paul preached mightily in Spain, and great multitudes believed and were converted, for they perceived he was an apostle sent from God.” 

7: “And they departed out of Spain, and Paul and his company finding a ship in Armorica sailing unto Britain, they were therein, and passing along the south Coast, they reached a port called Raphinus.” 

8: “Now when it was voiced abroad that the Apostle had landed on their coast, great multitudes of the inhabitants met him, and they treated Paul courteously and he entered in at the east gate of their city, and lodged in the house of an Hebrew and one of his own nation.”

9: “And on the morrow he came and stood upon Mount Lud and the people thronged at the gate, and assembled in the Broadway, and he preached Christ unto them, and they believed the Word and the testimony of Jesus.” 

Ludgate Hill is the site of St Paul’s Cathedral, which has been a place where people from many nations have worshipped the Lord. The ancient St Paul’s Cross is said to mark the spot where Paul stood to preach the gospel. Paul is the patron saint and today his emblem, the sword of martyrdom, is incorporated in the City of London, Coat of Arms.

10: “And at even the Holy [Spirit] fell upon Paul, and he prophesied, saying, Behold in the last days the God of Peace shall dwell in the cities, and the inhabitants thereof shall be numbered: and in the seventh numbering of the people, their eyes shall be opened, and the glory of their inheritance shine forth before them…” 

The 7th numbering of the people may refer to the seventh National Census in 1861. It is from this time that the scriptural identity of the British people began to be understood, in part.

11: “And in the latter days new tidings of the Gospel shall issue forth out of Jerusalem, and the hearts of the people shall rejoice…”

14: “And Paul abode in his lodgings three months confirming in the faith and preaching Christ continually.” 

15: “And after these things Paul and his brethren departed from Raphinus and sailed unto Atium in Gaul.”

16: “And Paul preached in the Roman garrison and among the people, exhorting all men to repent and confess their sins.” 

17: “And there came to him certain of the Belgae [tribe of Gauls, or Celts] to inquire of him of the new doctrine, and of the man Jesus; And Paul opened his heart unto them and told them all things that had befallen him, howbeit, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; and they departed pondering among themselves upon the things which they had heard.”

18: “And after much preaching and toil, Paul and his fellow laborers passed into Helvetia [Switzerland]…” 

26: “And they went forth and came unto Illtricum, intending to go by Macedonia [Greece] into Asia, and grace was found in all the churches, and they prospered and had peace. Amen.” 

Aside from this intriguing concluding chapter to the Book of Acts, a number of historians record the visit of the Apostle Paul to the British Isles: Clement the third Bishop of Rome [Philippians 4:3], Irenaeus [125-189 CE], Tertullian [155-222], Origen [185-254], Eusibius in 315 and Athanasius in 353 CE. Theodoret the Bishop of Cyprus, circa 435 states: “Paul, liberated from his first captivity [56-58 CE] at Rome, preached the gospel to Britons and… the Cymry… to the islands surrounded by the sea [58-64 CE].” Capellus confirms in his History of the Apostles: “I scarcely know of one author… who does not maintain that St.Paul, after his liberation, preached in every country in Western Europe, Britain included.” 

The Morning Post of the 27th March, 1937 reported an amazing admission: The mayors of Bath, Colchester and Dorchester… were received today in special audience by the Pope, Pius XI. His Holiness, in a specially prepared address, advanced the theory that it was St. Paul himself and not Pope Gregory [and specifically Augustine in 597 CE] who first introduced Christianity into Britain.” 

There is yet more to add to the story of the Apostle to the Gentiles and that involves his relationship with the British Royal family. A little known but captivating piece of history nonetheless against the backdrop of the might of the Roman Empire. Thirteen years after the death of the Messiah and just eight years after the arrival of Joseph of Arimathea, the Roman Emperor Claudius [41-54 CE] launched a full-scale invasion of Britain in 43 CE, under the edict: “Exterminate Christian Britain” [O’Reiley, The Martyrs of the Colosseum]. He sent four legions, about 25,000 soldiers under the command of Aulus Plautius – the largest and most efficient army ever prepared by Rome to conquer a foe – where the goal was to kill man, woman and child and destroy its great institutions and burn its libraries; for his venomous hatred of Christians lasted until his dying breath as ‘he spat on the Christian in malevolent scorn.’ Nevertheless, a protracted war ensued where Rome could not subdue the warlike and stubborn British people. 

After early success by Arviragus against Aulus Plautius, but with the loss of his brother King Guiderius, the British chose a commander-in-chief [Pendragon], in Caradoc – Caradog ap Bran – or Caractacus as the Romans called him; the son of Bran the Blessed, grandson of king Llyr – the King Lear of Shakespeare. The royal boundaries of the Silures were divided in two, so that Caradoc ruled over Cambria, now called Wales; while his cousin Arviragus ruled the southern part of England from Cornwall.

The Roman writers, Tacitus, Martial, Juvenal and others documented a war like no other. The preservation of the British people, of their island, their freedom and their new-found faith were at stake. George Jowett writes: “With ungrudging admiration they tell how the Silurian warriors, led by Caractacus, Arviragus and the Arch Priests [of the Druids] swept onward in irresistible waves over the bodies of their dead and dying comrades with a battling savagery that appalled the hardened, war-scarred veterans of the Roman Legions. Their fierce outcries of defiance rang over the din and clash of sword and shield… [and their] Christian battle cry: ‘Y gwir erbyn y Byd’, meaning ‘The Truth Against the World’.”

After two years, the war has been so bloody with horrendous losses of life on both sides that Emperor Claudius sought peace through an armistice in 45 CE. Many battles were drawn, some where the Romans suffered terrible slaughter and then when the British suffered severe reverses, Tacitus said: “The fierce ardour of the British increased.” The truce only lasted six months, though during that time both Caractacus and Arviragus were invited to Rome. Claudius offered his daughter Venus Julia to Arviragus, who sensationally married her while in Rome. And so, the bizarre event occurred where a Christian British king became the son-in-law to the pagan Roman Emperor, who had  only sworn to exterminate Christianity and Britain.

No less strange was Aulus Plautius the Roman commander-in-chief who had stayed in Britain to maintain the truce, had only gone and married the sister of Caractacus, Gladys [Celtic for Princess]. Now Gladys had been personally converted by Joseph of Arimathea, together with her niece Eurgen, King Guiderius and his son Arviragus. An incredible relationship through marriage, of where her new husband and brother were wartime opponents. Aulus Plautius due to the conflict of interest in conducting a war against his in-laws, was honourably relieved of duties and after remaining in Britain with his new wife was recalled to Rome in 47 CE, taking Gladys with him and later he too became a Christian. 

Gladys new Roman name was Pomponia Graecina Plautius. Pomponia from the Plautius clan and Graecina, as an honorific name conferred on her because of her extraordinary scholarship in Greek; for she had been religious before conversion, completing training in Avalon; while her father Bran once king, was then the Arch Druid. Pomponia was gifted and talented, being a scholar in classical literature and wrote a number of books of prose and poetry in Greek and Latin, as well as her native tongue Cymric. She and her husband were to become intimately acquainted with the apostles Peter and Paul as she had been with Joseph, Lazarus, Mary Magdalene and the others at Avalon. 

The armistice failed as the two cousins considered the terms unsatisfactory. They returned home with Arviragus bringing his new wife, Venus Julia. The stalemate situation now compounded with Caractacus against his sister and new brother-in-law – until Aulus was relieved of command – and Arviragus in conflict with his father-in-law, the Emperor Claudius. Claudius and the Roman Senate had underestimated the will and fortitude of the British in regard to protecting and practicing their faith. 

George Jowett aptly comments: “[The Briton’s] religion had taught him that his earthly life was but a stepping-stone to the eventual goal of immortality… that death transcended the grave. It made him both faithful and fearless.”

The war dragged on for another seven years, with Ostorius Scapula now commanding the Roman Army. Caradoc held out until 52 CE when he was finally devastatingly defeated in Clune, Shropshire. In that time, the enemy had nicknamed him ‘the scourge of the Romans.’ Though to ensure victory, Caradoc faced the military genius of four great Roman generals – which included Vespasian, future Emperor of Rome [69-79 CE], his brother and his son Titus [79-81 CE] who was to later put Jerusalem to the torch and the Temple to destruction [70 CE] and Geta, the conqueror of Mauritania – as well as the Emperor Claudius who brought two extra Legions and a squadron of Elephants while he personally directed the Battle.

Arviragus successfully fled the battle scene and evading capture, carried on the war against Rome for many more years. The fact he was married to the Emperor’s daughter may have played a part in his remaining free. Caradoc meanwhile fled northwards to the Brigantes seeking sanctuary, but was betrayed by Aricia his cousin – also called Queen Cartismandua – while he was asleep and he was handed over to Ostorius Scapula, including his wife, daughters Gladys and Eurgen, his father Bran and members from two other British Royal families. Taken to Rome, death awaited, though because of his stature for military genius and reputation for bravery, his fame preceded him and he was received in awe by the three million citizens who lined the streets of Rome. 

During the arduous nine years of one of the most bloody and bitter wars ever fought, the Romans recorded a staggering thirty-two pitched battles, while the British Annals accounted for thirty-nine. Victories and defeats endlessly alternating between each side in one of the most evenly contested wars in history. Here was the leader of a resistance who had repeatedly outmanoeuvred the greatest Roman military strategists and relentlessly decimated the most experienced Roman Legions in combat. People came from afar, pouring into Rome to witness this valiant warrior. Caractacus was heavily chained, yet proudly walked with his family as they were led by Emperor Claudius’s chariot through the street of Rome.

Against this backdrop, Caradoc was brought to trial to deliver his own defence before Emperor Claudius and the Roman Senate. Women were not ever allowed inside, though his young daughter Gladys refused to be parted and defiantly walked up the marble steps with her father. The Pendragon stood before the Emperor ‘unconquered in spirit.’ Another breach of Roman law was evident with the attendance of Queen Agrippira, sitting on her throne in the far corner, not desiring to miss the most famous trial in history. Never before or after has one delivered such a challenging defence towards a Roman Tribunal in the Senate. It is completely unique in history, for the Eternal was with this man of courage, born from the conviction that only comes from a man made free in Christ. 

Tacitus in his Annals, records the masterful oration: “Had my government in Britain been directed solely with a view to the preservation of my hereditary domains, or the aggrandisement of my own family, I might long since have entered this city an ally, not a prisoner… Does it follow, that because the Romans aspire to universal dominion [refer Chapter XXVII Ishmael], every nation is to accept the vassalage they would impose? I am now in your power – betrayed, not conquered. Had I like others, yielded without resistance, where would have been the name of Caradoc? Where your glory? Oblivion would have buried both in the same tomb. Bid me live, I shall survive for ever in history one example at least of Roman clemency.” 

The Roman conquerors were not known for their mercy towards heads of state, just the opposite and took evil pleasure in extreme acts of tortuous barbarity; yet possibly through his family connections and certainly by the Eternal’s grace, Caradoc, the man of faith and his family, were spared on condition that he would a. live in Rome for seven years – whereas his family were all free to return to Britain – and b. would never ever bear arms against Rome. True to his word, when Caradoc returned to Britain in 59 CE, and while Arviragus was still waging war, Caradoc and his family ‘remained aloof, honour bound.’ 

Why Emperor Claudius set Caradoc free – a man who was never going to give up his Christian faith which Claudius so vehemently disdained – in so doing defying all traditions and laws, remains a mystery to all, except those who have been given the ‘peace of God’ [Philippians 4:6-7]. At the announcement, Queen Agrippira is said to have risen from her dais and first shake hands with Caradoc and Gladys in the British fashion and then hug them both as in the Roman. This public display of affection was another unusual ‘deviation from custom.’ 

Meanwhile, the war in Britain continued for the next seven years and a defining moment was when the Druids’ stronghold on Mona in Anglesey was destroyed and the Druids were massacred. It was while the Roman Legions remained assembled in North Wales, the British tribes revolted in a frenzy of defiance in 60 CE under the leadership of Queen Boadicca of the Iceni, otherwise incorrectly known as Boudicea. 

She led an army of united British tribes – comprising allegedly as many as 120,000 men – in likeness of the Judge Deborah [Judges 4:4-24]. Her immortal words to her troops included: “Never let a foreigner bear rule over me or these my countrymen; never let slavery reign in this island.” The ensuing battles saw victories at Camulodunum; Londinium, [london]; and Verulamium, [St Albans]; all being razed to the ground by fire and quenched in blood. Anyone or anything associated with the despised Roman authority was not spared. The carnage was shocking and appalling, particularly the destruction of London. 

All told, 80,000 Roman soldiers were mercilessly butchered in two years – 40,000 of which fell in London alone – so savage was the fury of the normally measured British, towards a Roman army of occupation, for their seventeen years of persecution and brutality. In her last battle in the midlands in 62 CE, Boudicca fearing capture, chose suicide in a last act of defiance, rather than the rapine that would follow. 

So shocked were both sides when the news filtered through, that each side immediately ceased combat and retreated to their respective encampments. The Romans were quick to seize the opportunity for peace and a pact with the Iceni was agreed.

When Caradoc was taken to Rome, his daughter Gladys – named after her Aunt – was sixteen years old in 52 CE. Emperor Claudius adopted Gladys in whom he had grown paternally fond – she the fervent Christian, of which he was aware, yet did not make her recant in the terms of the adoption – into his home, where she was renamed Claudia. 

Only a year later at the age of seventeen, she married a wealthy Roman Noble and Senator with vast estates in Umbria, called Rufus Pudens – who had been the aide-de-camp to Aulus Plautius and so Pudens must have laid eyes on Gladys in 45 CE during the truce. She would have been nine years old, yet it was said that her remarkable beauty was already evident. Rufus was a friend of the poet Martial who in his Epigrams, writes: “Claudia, the fair [flaxen] one from a foreign shore, is with my Pudens joined in wedlock’s band… Our Claudia, named Rufina, sprung we know from blue-eyed Britons” [iv 32, xi 40]. Martial describing Claudia said “for wit and humour she had no equal, and her beauty and scholarship exceeded that of her august aunt, Pomponia.” For Claudia was a ‘fluent linguist and, like her aunt, wrote many volumes of odes and poetry in Greek, Latin and her native Cymric.’

The startling irony must not have been lost on Caradoc regarding his sister and daughter of same name. George Jowett remarks: “What could be a stranger circumstance than that of the British Pendragon Caractacus permitting his favourite daughter to become adopted by the remorseless enemy who had brought about his defeat at Clune and see his sister and daughter married to the leaders he had opposed in battle for… years, Plautius and Pudens.”

This means that the Apostle Paul under house arrest in Rome, was living concurrently with the British Royalty in residence and while Caradoc was on parole. Caradoc and his family lived in the Palatium Britannicum, the British Palace. While residing in Rome, Caradoc was allowed to receive monies from his British estates in maintenance of the Palace. It was here in the British Palace – where Caradoc and his family and then his daughter Claudia and her husband Pudens and their children after him, dwelt – that generous and welcoming hospitably was shown to many of the early converts to the Way; thus becoming ‘the first true Christian Church above ground in Rome.’ 

The Palace is long gone, though a partial church building in disrepair remains within the palatial grounds, respectively known after Palatium Britannicum as Titulus, then Hospitium Apostolorum and finally its name today in honour of Claudia’s eldest daughter, St Pudentiana. It is bypassed without a thought by tourists – for the true Christians that lived there or the many in Rome who died for their faith – as they eagerly head to view the Vatican and its Cathedrals basking in wealth and luxury, yet which had no part in the bravery of those first in the Way.

Cardinal Baronius in Annales Ecclesias records: “… the house Pudens was the first… [where] Christians assembl[ed] form[ing] the Church, and that of all our churches the oldest is that which is called after the name Pudens.” The Jesuit Robert Parsons adds: “Claudia was the first hostess or harbourer… of… St Paul at the time of [his] coming to Rome.” [Three Conversions of England, Volume I, Page 16]

Tragically, it would be the destiny of Pudens in 96 CE and then his children years afterwards – Timotheus the eldest, Novatus the youngest, Pudentiana and Prassedis his daughters – to suffer martyrdom. Mercifully Claudia died in 97 CE before the violent death of her children, yet of a broken heart within a year of her beloved husband passing, of whom Martial says she described as “Rufus her Holy husband” [Volume 4, page 18]. 

Brian Williams writes: ‘Now it is surely without question that Caradoc, coming from Britain which had received the gospel only a few years earlier under Joseph of Arimathea, would be anxious to hear the gospel from the lips of the great apostle himself. Would not the renowned British King and the famed apostle have become intimately acquainted? And did not the Lord say of Paul, “He is chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the Gentiles, and Kings, and the Children of Israel”? Was not Caratacus a King and were not his people of Israel stock?’

Upon Caractacus’s release, he returned to Britain and resided at Aber Gweryd, now St Donat’s Major, Llan Ddunwyd, in Glamorganshire, where he had built a palace, more Romano. Importantly, Caractacus was living in Britain, during the time frame when the Apostle Paul was also granted temporary release to travel and likely this would have added incentive for him to visit Britain.

A telling and moving verse – for reasons that will become apparent – is in the second Book of Timothy, where Paul passes on his final greetings from prison prior to his imminent death, to the Evangelist Timothy: “Do your utmost to come before winter. Eubulus greets you, as well as Pudens, Linus, Claudia, and all the brethren.” [2 Timothy 4:21 NKJV]. 

It surely is far more than a coincidence, that the son-in-law, son and daughter of the British king are mentioned, who just happen to be living in Rome with Paul. This is not a random statement, but a personal message from people Paul obviously has either in the least met, or ostensibly knows intimately. Other brethren, that is believers are included in the salutation. One could reasonably infer just from this insertion that Pudens, Claudia and Linus – the first Bishop of Rome – are brethren also. The eventual martyrdom of Pudens, strongly indicates that this is more than conjecture. We have scriptural support that Pudens, Claudia and Linus, were baptised and converted Christians; with the other members of the Royal family – Eurgen, Pomponia, Claudia’s Aunt; Bran, Cyllinus and Cynon, sons of Caractacus also likely converts. 

George Jowett confirms that Eurgen, Bran, Linus and Eurgen’s husband Salog, the Lord of Salisbury were all baptised by Joseph of Arimathea [The Drama of the Lost Disciples, 1996, page 184]. 

He further states that Caractacus and his other sons Cyllin, in Celtic – who became regent in Britain while his father was captive in Rome – and Cynon the youngest son, were in fact all baptised in Rome by the Apostle Paul. All of Cyllin’s children were baptised in the faith. In later years, Cyllin abdicated in favour of his brother Cynon and like his grandfather Bran took up the cross of Christ, ministering in the faith. Llyr, the King Lear of Shakespeare and the grandfather of Caradoc founded the first Christian church in Wales at Llandaff, after his conversion and baptism by Joseph. Llyr died in Rome in 52 CE. His son Bran, the former king turned Arch Druid of the Silures, voluntarily offered himself as hostage in place of his father. And so Bran remained in the British Palace with Pudens and Claudia for a time after Caradoc was released in 59 CE.

Of Pudens, it is written: “May 17. Natal day of the blessed Pudens, father of Praxedes and Pudentiana. He was clothed with baptism by the apostles, and watched and kept his robe pure and without wrinkle to the crown of a blameless life.” [Martyr. Romana, ad diem Maii 17] Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, the Bishop of Smyrna and himself a disciple of the Apostle John. Irenaeus became the presbyter of Lyon and said of Linus: “The apostles having founded and built the Church of Rome, committed the ministry of its supervision to Linus. This is the Linus [son of Caractacus] mentioned by Paul in his Epistle to Timothy.” [Irenaei Opera, Library III, Chapter I] 

In the Apostolic Constitutions, a statement allegedly by the Apostle Peter in Book 1, chapter 46 it says: “Linus [was the] brother of Claudia, was first ordained by Paul [58 CE], and after Linus’s death, Clemens, the second ordained by me, Peter.” The second Bishop of Rome, Clemenus Romanus confirms in the Epistola ad Corinthos: “Sanctissimus Linus, Frater Claudiae (St. Linus, brother of Claudia).” This Clement who was a disciple of Joseph of Arimathea and intimate guest of Pudens and Claudia at the Palace, says according to Jowett, that ‘Paul was in constant residence at the Palatium Britannicum and personally instructed Linus for his consecrated office… and… preached in Britain.’ [Epistola Chapter 5]

Now Paul, also greets Rufus in his letter to the Romans, written just prior to Paul’s arrival in Rome: “Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; also his mother, who has been a mother to me as well” [Romans 16:13]. This is an intriguing verse. Most have  connected an apparent link between this Rufus and the one mentioned by the Evangelist Mark, whom was a son of Simon of Cyrene who had assisted Christ with his crosspiece on the day of execution [Mark 15:21]. As Cyrene is located near the coast of present day Libya, this writer is not convinced by this conclusion. 

The other equally unanimous assumption is that the mother of Rufus was a ‘church’ mother or had a spiritual impact on Paul. As Paul was taught directly by Christ, this remains a weak premise [Romans 1:1, Galatians 1:11-12]. The verse at face value seems to have escaped most peoples attention, in that Rufus and Paul were half-brothers having the same mother. The verse reveals that both Rufus and his mother, Priscilla are converted in the Way. As if this is not remarkable enough, it means that the adopted daughter of Emperor Claudius, Claudia Britannica Rufina Pudens Pudentius was the sister-in-law of Paul the Apostle. 

It can be appreciated why numerous references have Paul as either resident or a frequent visitor to the Palace to visit his nephews and nieces, at the Palatium Britannicum and why in the Roman Martyrologies it states: “The children of Claudia were brought up at the knee of St. Paul.”

A visit to Britain by Paul, in light of this information and put together with what we have discovered thus far, should leave no doubt, that the Apostle Paul would not have missed Britain out of his missionary work, when Joseph of Arimathea and the Apostle Peter had also visited the prophesied home of the regathered tribe of Judah, including the re-building of a new Jerusalem on England’s ‘pleasant pastures and mountains green.’ “Proclaim it in the faraway lands along the sea. Say, “The one who scattered Israel will regather them. He will watch over his people like a shepherd watches over his flock.”For the Lord will rescue the descendants of Jacob. He will secure their release from those who had overpowered them.” [Jeremiah 31:10-11 NET] 

Another connection to Britain for Paul was Aristobulus the elder brother of Barnabas – mentioned earlier and also the father-in-law of the Apostle Peter – and who was ordained the first and only Bishop of Britain. Alford in his Regia Fides says: “It is perfectly certain that before St. Paul had come to Rome Aristobulus was absent in Britain, and it is confessed by all that Claudia was a British lady.” [Volume I, page 83] Paul also makes mention of him: “Greet Apelles, who is approved in Christ. Greet those who belong to the family of Aristobulus.” [Romans 16:10 ESV] And so Paul likely lived in Siluria or Cambria beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire and in peace while he visited Britain. When Paul departed Rome and conducted his mission in Britain, it was the House of Caradoc which officially sponsored his work; though in reality the chief sponsor was the first female saint of Britain, Caradoc’s daughter Eurgen who endowed Paul’s mission ‘with munificent gifts and lands.’

There is scholarly debate on when Paul dictated to his amanuensis Tertius, the message to the Church in Rome, otherwise known as the Book of Romans [Romans 16:22]. Most date it confidently to between 56 and 58 CE, but without certainty to which exact year. The apostle was eager to visit Rome, but the opportunity had not easily arisen [Romans 1:13, 15; 15:22]. It is worth noting that Paul enquires about the family of Aristobulus, but not of him, directly. It is recorded that Aristobulus, was the first Christian martyr in Britain, ‘in the second year of Nero.’ This would be the year 56 CE. Now, the Apostle Paul arrived in Rome in 56 CE also and had already written his letter to the congregation in Rome from Corinth [Romans 16:23, 1 Corinthians 1:14, 2 Timothy 4.20], where he had tarried three months [Acts 20:1-3]. Paul then travelled from Greece through Macedonia whence he had come, Asia Minor, Syria and finally to Jerusalem to deliver aid, even though he knew it was dangerous to do so [Acts 19:21; 21:13; 24:17, Romans 15:25]. Paul was subsequently arrested and by sailing ship was transported to Rome [Acts 21:32-33; 26:32; 27:1-2]. Therefore, with a strong degree of certainty, Paul wrote the Book of Romans in 56 CE. 

Reverand W Morgan states: “The constant current of European tradition affirmed Britain to have been the first country in Europe which received the Gospel, and the British Church to be the most ancient of the Churches of Christ therein. The universality of this opinion is readily demonstrated. Polydore Vergil… and… Cardinal Pole, both rigid Roman Catholics, affirmed in Parliament… that ‘Britain was the first of all countries to receive the Christian faith.’ 

‘The glory of Britain,’ remarks Genebrard, ‘consists not only in this, that she was the first country which in a national capacity publicly  professed herself Christian, but that she made this confession when the Roman Empire itself was Pagan and a cruel persecutor of Christianity.’” [St Paul in Britain, 1860, Page 63] Sabelluis adds: “Christianity was privately confessed elsewhere, but the first nation that proclaimed it as their religion, and called itself Christian after the name of Christ, was Britain.” [Sabell, Enno., Library VII, Chapter 5]

In 66 CE, Claudia, her husband and their pre-teen children – using their influence as adopted daughter of an Emperor and as a Senator respectively, at a dangerous time of persecution much akin to to the daring rescue by Joseph of Arimathea thirty-six years previously – rescued the murdered and mutilated body of Paul; interring it in the private burial grounds on the Pudens estate at Aquae Salviae, the family sepulchre in the Ostian Road, near Rome. 

It was where Pudens in 96 CE and Claudia in 97 CE were laid to rest. Their children sacrificing their lives for Christ later joining them. Pudentiana was executed on the anniversary of her father’s death in 107 CE; her brother Novatus was martyred in 137 CE while Timotheus was in Britain, ‘baptising his nephew, [great] grandson of Arviragus [by intermarriage, and great grandson of Caradoc and the son of Coel, the son of Cyllinus], King Lucius, at Winchester [or more likely Glastonbury according to other sources and Winchester maybe referenced because it was where Lucius was based]. Shortly after his return… in his 90th year, [he] suffered martyrdom… Later the same year… Praxedes, the youngest daughter of Claudia and Pudens and last surviving member of the family, was also executed. Thus by the year A.D. 140, all of this glorious family were interred by the side of St. Paul in the Via Ostiensis, their earthly mission in Christ finished.’

That Paul visited Britain and Gaul, spreading the good news of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is beyond question. The following authors all confirm his presence in Britain: St Clement, Capellus, Theodoret, Ventanius, Irenaeus [125-189], Tertullian, Origen [185-254], Mello, Eusebius [315 CE] and Athanasius [353 CE] to name but a few. 

Returning to the Apostle Peter, who is mentioned by Cardinal Baronius, who wrote: “Rufus the Senator received St.Peter into his house on Viminalis Hill, in the year A.D. 44.” This is none other than the home of Rufus Pudens, though as he was with Aulus Plautius in Britain from 43 CE, this account is speaking of his father Rufus, also a Senator. Now one wonders why Peter would be visiting the estate in Umbria that was considerably north of Rome. 

In 44 CE, the British Royal family, not yet taken into captivity were not in Rome. Peter on the other hand would be aware that Priscilla was the mother of Paul and would welcome his visit.

Though Peter’s stay in Italy was short-lived, for in 44 CE Emperor Claudius had issued the banishment decree, whereby all Jews and Christians in Rome and its environs fled. True believers in the Way, departed for Gaul or Britain and so Peter left Italy for Avalon. This is documented by Cornelius a Lapide in Argumentum Epistolae St. Paul ad Romanos. 

Peter acted as free-lance missionary, preaching in Britain during the Caradoc-Claudian war. It was during this time that the Apostle Peter became well acquainted with the Royal Silurian Houses of Arviragus and Caradoc, knowing the families and children of Caradoc before their exiles to Rome eight years later. Plenty of evidence reveals that Peter was a frequent visitor to Gaul and Britain in his lifetime. His final visit occurring shortly before his arrest and crucifixion in Nero’s circus at Rome.

It appears Peter may have been a visitor to the Palatium Britinnica and the family of Pudens and Claudia, for Simon Metaphastes quotes Eusibius: “St.Peter to have been in Britain as well as in Rome.” Memory of Peter in Britain is inscribed on a rough hewn stone excavated at Whithorn [Candida Casa, Celtic Christian settlement]. It is four feet high and just over a foot wide. Written on the face of the tablet is: ‘Locvs Sancti Petri Apvstoli, The Place of St Peter the Apostle. A descendant of Arviragus, King Lucius of Britain was the first by royal decree to proclaim Christianity the national faith of Britain on 156 CE. Lucius also dedicated the first church to the Apostle Peter, for his evangelising efforts in Britain, built in 179 CE. It is still known as ‘St. Peter’s of Cornhill’. 

Peter met his end in the same city that many of the true and faithful servants of Christ did, including of course his most illustrious counterpart, the Apostle Paul. With our spoiled, self-satisfied lives and with everything we need so readily at hand – not knowing the pain of persecution and torture for one’s beliefs – it is difficult to quite imagine the suffering that many thousands of Christians endured. Peter was one such example who experienced the full wrath and cruelty of Rome. As Queen Boudicca claimed, the Romans scorned their enemies as barbarian, yet it was they who were the most barbarous and inhumane of all.

There is an infamous prison and dungeon in Rome, today called the Mamertine; located on Capitoline Hill. It has had a variety of names in the past: Gemonium, Tullianum and the Tullian Keep. It may well be the oldest torture chamber extant, built in the 7th Century CE. So brutal and fearsome was an experience there, that most prisoners died in the dungeon before a day of execution. It was not a place to be sent, for there would only ever be one outcome. The dungeon can be seen to this day, with the alleged pillar to which Peter was bound in chains. Evil resonates from its claustrophobic stone enclosure.

It was here then, that the remarkable Apostle Peter – who had shown both more faith and enthusiasm than the other disciples [Matthew 14:28-29], and less faith when denying his Lord three times [Matthew 26:72-75, John 13:37] – he, the rock on whom Jesus began his work [Matthew 16:15-19], then found himself for nine unrelenting, gruelling months at the hands of his bestial Roman torturers. His suffering was unimaginable. 

The Mamertine is a deep pit cut out of solid rock. It comprises a cell, consisting of two chambers, one on top of the other. Access to the lower chamber is through an aperture in the ceiling. The lower chamber was the death cell. Light did not penetrate it, nor was it ever cleaned. The vile filth generated over time produced a horrific stench of poisonous fumes that could be fatal of itself. It was a sickening place in 50 CE when historian Sallust described it as such. Nearly one hundred years later, Peter was imprisoned in its dark, stinking, cold clutches. It is said that thousands died in this room. How Peter survived and endured as long as he did defies reason; for he was manacled to the column for the whole nine months in an upright position, unable to ever lie down and rest or sleep.

Yet, Peter never doubted the saving power of his Lord and in those nine months his indomitable and indefatigable spirit of faith, love and forgiveness led to his gloriously converting both his gaolers, Processus and Martinianus, as well as forty-seven other precious souls. Finally, the order was given by Nero to kill Peter by crucifixion. He refused to die in the same position as his friend and teacher; declaring he was unworthy. Peter setting the precedent, demanded a reverse position, which was only too willingly granted by the taunting Romans at Nero’s circus in 67 CE, a year after Paul’s own death. Thus, the Apostle Peter died with his head hanging down; defiant, proud and at peace till the end. 

The Roman arenas were ‘carnivals of blood and death’, a sport where wagers were made on the staying power of the Christian prisoners. Through it all, the Britons showed what made their race special with their bravery and courage. Men would with their last breath of strength hurl themselves on their gladiatorial opponent in a superhuman effort to avenge. Often times being successful in ensuring that both Briton and Roman died together, impaled on one another’s weapon. Women, would push their children forward to die first, to ensure their deaths and spare them suffering the agony of being dragged across the arena floor by the wild mauling animals of prey. It is said the sadistic Romans could never understand the detached, remorseless courage of the Christian Briton with their ‘silent, savage ferocity’ in the face of death. Of course, not understanding the hope of the resurrection and immortality, they could not grasp ‘a faith that made its believers “fearlessly indifferent to death”, as Julius Caesar wrote.’

Peter and all the faithful saints with him, who suffered such momentous hardships in life and then in death, during this dramatic and dangerous, yet exhilarating time have all proven their love and loyalty for the one who had shown them the same in willingly giving his life for them, they in turn honoured him with their own lives. 

What a glorious and happy day it will be for all the saints of the little flock to be reunited with one another and with their friend and shepherd, Jesus. Just as the Apostle Paul describes so profoundly and vividly in the fifteen chapter of the book of Corinthians.

We last read of Jesus as a twelve year old, who had grown up in Nazareth [Matthew 2:23, Luke 2:42-52]. We then learn about Christ again when he is 30 years old [Luke 3:23] and of his return to Nazareth ‘where he had been brought up’; where it is obvious he had been away for some time, for ‘they said, “is this not Joseph’s son?” [Luke 4:16, 22]. In fact, Jesus was so unfamiliar to them that those in the Synagogue described him as: “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” They could not refer to him by name, so long had Jesus been absent [Mark 6:3]. 

A further indicator that Christ had been absent for many years is referred to when he and Peter were entering Capernaum and they were challenged by tax collectors. They deduced Christ was a stranger subject to the two drachma tax. Christ was actually exempt because he was a resident of Capernaum after moving from Nazareth [Matthew 4:13]. Yet he put up no argument and had Peter pay tax for them both, proving his absence had been protracted [Matthew 17:24-27].

It is not a stretch of the imagination to consider that as Joseph of Arimathea would be required to make frequent trips from the Holy land to the ‘new Jerusalem’ that he would at a certain point bring his Nephew with him. Traditions of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire and Wales attest to at least two visits by Christ; once when a boy with Joseph and later as a young man. As Jesus is described as a carpenter in scripture, he must have served an apprenticeship. In Britain and Europe within the past 150 years apprenticeships have often began at 14 years of age. It is likely Christ spent his teen years learning the trade and then working into his very early twenties perhaps, all the while in Britain [11-18 CE]. At some point, he would have ceased this occupation full time and began preparing for his destined mission. 

In the interim, Jesus had visited the Parthians in India, before returning to Britain prior to his final ministry in Galilee in 26 CE. Christ would have been desirous of seeking the lost sheep of Israel, so it is plausible he travelled to their known locations, west to east. Beginning in Gaul, Iberia, Asia Minor, Scythia and finally Parthia [18-20 CE]. Particularly Parthia, for it was an Empire that rivalled Rome, a bitter enemy and enclave of the tribe of Judah. It is interesting to note that Christ did not wish to study under the Rabbis of the Sanhedrin in Judea who were under Edomite control, for he had scathingly accused them of ‘knowing not the Law.’ [refer Chapter XXIX Esau].

Ancient wise men of India assert that Christ had dwelt among them. The Vishnu Purana mentions Christ journeying to the Himalayan Kingdom in Nepal; living there for a time [20-22]. The books of old India and religious teachers referred to Britain as ‘the Sacred Isles of the West.’ One book refers to ‘Britashtan, the seat of religious learning.’ They employed similar language to the prophet Isaiah in calling Britain, the only islands lying to the far west of Palestine, as ‘Isles of the West’ and ‘Isles of the Sea.’

It is no surprise that Christ would return to Britain for it was world renowned for the prestige and eminence of the Druidic religious wisdom, based on the ancient Levitical precepts [22-26 CE]. The Druid’s universities were the largest in the world in size and attendance; with 60 listed and having as many as 60,000 students [Morgan, History of Britain, pages 62-65]. Greek and Roman testimony states that the noble and wealthy sent their children to Britain to study law, science and religion.

Jesus may have actually lived close to ten years – nearly a third – of his life in what would become the new inheritance for Judah and be called England. In no less than twenty places in the south west of England, there are firm traditions of Jesus having visited the British Isles during his missing years between 8 CE and 26 CE.  Particularly Glastonbury, Priddy and Pilton in the Mendips, as well as parts of Cornwall and Somerset. These traditions find expression in the uncanny words of – the poet and mystic – William Blake’s extraordinary poem, Jerusalem.

And did those feet in ancient time Walk upon England’s mountains green?

And was the holy Lamb of God On England’s pleasant pastures seen? 

And did the Countenance Divine Shine forth upon our clouded hills?

And was Jerusalem builded here Among these dark Satanic mills? 

Bring me my bow of burning gold: Bring me my arrows of desire:

Bring me my spear: O clouds unfold! Bring me my chariot of fire. 

I will not cease from mental fight, Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand

Till we have built Jerusalem In England’s green and pleasant land. 

These words are not a chance happenstance, but divulge the real identity of the English people as well as the truth of the Lion of Judah visiting the very land that his people would one day fully inherit and possess [refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin]. 

George Jowett comments that this poem turned hymn was a favourite of George V [1910-1936], who would request it be played and sung on ‘special occasions of national significance.’ These powerful and profound words penned by Blake [1757-1827] who was well versed in the traditions of Glastonbury, could not be lost on the present British Royal family who descend in part from the ancient kings of Judah as attested by the extraordinary genealogical chart in the Royal Library at the Round Tower of Windsor Castle. 

Author Baring-Gould in Book of Cornwall, page 57, writes: “Another Cornish story is to the effect that Joseph of Arimathea came in a boat to Cornwall and brought the child Jesus with him, and the latter taught him how to extract the tin and purge it of its wolfram. When the tin is flashed then the tinner shouts ‘Joseph was in the tin trade’.” Another tradition in Somerset, is that Joseph and Jesus arrived ‘in a ship of Tarshish to the Summerland and sojourned in a place called Paradise.’ The name Paradise is to be found around Burnham-on-Sea and especially around Glastonbury. 

According to one author, Somerest and Cornwall have the following place names: ‘Christon, Marazion, Jesus Well, Port Isaac and Jacobstown.’ They continue: ‘… on the top of the Mendip Hills, right in the centre of the ancient lead and copper mining industry, is little hamlet of pride, where people were won’t to say, “As sure as our Lord was at Priddy”. What a very strange saying this is if, in fact, Jesus was never there.’ 

But it is Glastonbury where tradition is strongest and its early history points to the sanctity it held was influenced by more than Joseph of Arimathea’s presence. As mentioned, Glastonbury is associated with two very unusual names: Secret of the Lord and the Home of God. Both of which are ascribed to the belief that Christ not only lived there, but also built his own home. 

William of Malmesbury [1080-1143] makes reference to a letter purportedly written by Augustine to Pope Gregory, Epistolae ad Gregorium Papam: “In the western confines of Britain there is a certain royal island of large extent, surrounded by water, abounding in all the beauties of nature and necessaries of life. In it the first neophytes of the catholic law, God beforehand acquainting them, found a Church constructed by no human art, but by the Hands of Christ Himself, for the salvation of His people. The Almighty has made it manifest by many miracles and mysterious vitiations that He continues to watch over it as sacred to Himself, and to Mary, the Mother of God”. 

One would assume that this is highly doubtful, though the fact remains of the Wattle Church’s real existence. Excavations in the area, reveal a life way beyond painted savages as espoused by some historians. Villages at Godney and Meare have been perfectly preserved with approximately one hundred dwellings at each. People at this time tilled the land, grew cereals and bred livestock. They were weavers, potters and worked with iron, bronze, tin, lead and wood. If Christ lived in the vicinity, the local inhabitants may have been unaware of his identity until his later years or even after his departure. Christ did not perform any miracles until his ministry began in Galilee and after he had received the Holy Spirit [Matthew 3:16, John 2:11, Acts 1:1]. 

It is remarkable to consider that Christ may have spent his preparatory years on English soil before his ministry that changed everything, forever. The fact that there is little documentation of Christ’s missing years only underscores his living in obscurity. He would not have stood out or drawn attention to himself prior to returning to Galilee; openly teaching the Kingdom of God and performing miracles, both for the first time. After his crucifixion, resurrection and ascension and the arrival of Joseph of Arimathea, would there be a dawning recognition of  who Jesus really was.

The Apostle Paul writes: “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” [2 Corinthians 6:16] And just as Christ dwelt with people while on the Earth, he now dwells in those who seek him, spiritually: “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” says Paul. [Galatians 2:20] 

It can now be understood why the future home of Judah should be where Jesus spent many years; just as why, he was born and then returned to Judea to perform his ministry to the residue of the tribes of Judah and Israel. It should not be surprise then, that it was Britain, outside of Judea and Galilee that accepted the gospel message of the Kingdom of God first, or that it was England that promulgated that message and its written affirmation, the Holy Bible more than any other nation in the world [refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin]. Similarly, it would seem odd if Christ with Joseph in keeping with being ‘sent to the lost sheep of Israel’, had not visited all the enclaves of Israelites, throughout Spain, Gaul, Asia Minor, Scythia and especially Parthia, where the biggest number of the tribe of Judah resided. 

It was these self same peoples who the Apostle Peter addresses: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.” [1 Peter 2:9-10]

The Eternal chose a people Israel, to become Christian nations that would spread the Lord Jesus Christ to the rest of the world so that all nations could be blessed [Genesis 12:2-3]. It does not mean that the Creator is not interested in other nations, for he desires that all would seek repentance and salvation. [Romans 1:16, 1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9]; just that the nations of England and America were principally purposed to fulfil this destined role. 

Author Brian Williams concludes: “Thus it has fallen to the British and American people to give Christianity to the world. [They]… are the world’s centre and nucleus of Christianity, the custodians of the Word of God, and the propagators of the gospel to the nations of the world. It is [they] who have translated the Bible into almost a thousand tongues… [and] who have been responsible for more than 90 per cent of all missionary activity. The only reason why the world and even Britain herself does not know that she is Israel is that God planned it that way. Despite the fact that the British people worship in their National Church as though they were Israel, and despite the fact that our people have fulfilled exactly what was promised through Israel, the nation is still blind to its identity and shall be until that day when God takes the blindness away” [Isaiah 6:9-10, Revelation 3:18].

© Orion Gold 2020-2022 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to

The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar

Chapter XXVIII

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.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$33.9 billion
  2. Electrical machinery, equipment: $21.5 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $18.8 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $14.4 billion 
  5. Plastics, plastic articles: $9.9 billion 
  6. Iron, steel: $8.5 billion 
  7. Wood: $7.5 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $6.8 billion 
  9. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $5.6 billion 
  10. 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] donkey of 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 Kedar shall be gathered to you; the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on my altar, and I will beautify my beautiful house.

The wealth of second born son, Kedar and his influence is expressed with the firstborn son Nebaioth. Nebaioth is linked with Kedar – as Kedar is with Tema – and each are 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

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 Uriah the 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:

  1. The Killing of noncombatants
  2. The treatment of women and children
  3. The use of noncombatants as shields during military operations
  4. Looting, burning, and wanton destruction of property
  5. Killing the wounded and prisoners
  6. Firing on hospitals, Red Cross ambulances, and stretcher bearers
  7. 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. 

  1. Machinery including computers: US$268.6 billion
  2. Vehicles: $246 billion 
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $176.4 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $118 billion 
  5. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $83.8 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $76.3 billion 
  7. Mineral fuels including oil: $43.3 billion 
  8. Articles of iron or steel: $33.9 billion 
  9. Other chemical goods: $32.9 billion 
  10. 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%] – 

T2 [8%] – U4 [4.6%] – T1 [4%] – HV0+V [1.9%] 

Germany: H [44.8%] – J [9%] – U5 [8.8%] – T2 [7.8%] – 

K [6.6%] – HV0+V [4%] – U4 [2.9%] – T1 [2.8%] 

                          H    HVO+V     J       K      T2     U4    U5     T1

Austria        45          2           9        9       8        5       9        4    

Germany        45         4            9        7       8        3       9        3

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. 

Austria: R1b [32%] – R1a [19%] – I1 [12%] – J2 [9%] – 

E1b1b [8%] – G2a [7.5%] – I2a1 [7%] – I2a2 [2.5%] –

J1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – N1c1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

Germany: R1b [44.5%] – R1a [16%] – I1 [16%] –

E1b1b [5.5%] – G2a [5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – J2 [4.5%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – N1c1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – Q [0.5%]

                                 R1b      R1a     I1     I2a1     I2a2    E1b1b    J2       J1      G2a    

Austria                     32        19      12        7           3           8         9         1          8          

Germany                 45        16      16        2           5           6         5                     5           

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.

N Germany: R1b [36%] – R1a [22%] – I1 [18.5%] –

I2a2 [7.5%] – J2 [4%] – G2a [3.5%] – E1b1b [2.5%] –

Q [2%] – N1c1 [1.5%] – T1a [1%] – I2a1 [0.5%] – J1 [0.5%] 

E Germany: R1b [ 36%] – R1a [24%] – I1 [16.5%] –

E1b1b [7.5%] – I2a2 [5%] – G2a [4%] – J2 [2%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – N1c1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – Q [1%] 

W Germany: R1b [47%] – I1 [12.5%] – R1a [9%] –

E1b1b [8%] – I2a2 [6.5%] – G2a [5%] – J2 [5%] –

I2a1 [2.5%] – N1c1 [2%] – T1a [1.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

S Germany: R1b [48.5%] – I1 [10.5%] – R1a [9.5%] –

E1b1b [8%] – G2a [8%] – J2 [5%] – I2a1 [4.5%] – I2a2 [3%] –

T1a [1.5%] – J1 [1%] – N1c1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%] 

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” 

Kerrie L French

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to

Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans

Chapter XXV

Peleg, the brother of Joktan, is not only synonymous with a split in Arphaxad’s line, but more famously with the division of all the peoples and races from Japheth, Ham and Shem who had congregated in the Mesopotamian region [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans]. The failed Tower of Babel venture circa 6755 BCE, had ended with the Son of Man – by some means unexplained – confounding the universal language spoken [refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, origin & Destiny of Nimrod]. Now, eleven of the main lines of people began to spread abroad; the seven from Japheth and the four from Ham. Cush, Phut and Mizra to northeast Africa and Egypt; Canaan to the land of Palestine. Gomer and Javan heading towards the Mediterranean and Magog, Tubal, Meschech and Madai northward to Anatolia or Asia Minor. The majority of Tiras’s descendants heading west into south eastern Europe as Gomer and Javan; but unlike them, continuing westwards via Scotland, Iceland, Greenland and onto North America [refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian].

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The name Peleg meaning Division, Dividing Canal from the verb (palag), to split or divide. Noun (peleg) means channel or canal and noun (pelagga) means stream or division. Nouns (pelugga) and noun (miplagga) mean division.

NOBSE Study Bible Name List and Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names agree: the name Peleg means Division or Divider, although the word is commonly used to denote a channel or canal. Note that this “division of the earth” follows the pattern of the second creation day, in which Joktan represents the waters under the dividing firmament, which eventually produced dry land and all its creatures, while Peleg represents the dividing firmament, which eventually came to house the celestial lights that would lead the living on earth (Genesis 15:5, Daniel 12:3).’

The genealogy of Arphaxad to Abraham is listed in Genesis chapter eleven. Peleg had a son called Reu, born 6827 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. Reu’s name in Hebrew means, a ‘friend, associate.’ In the Book of Jubilees we read further in chapter 10:18-27.

… Peleg took to himself a wife, whose name was Lomna the daughter of Sina’ar, and she bare him a son… and he called his name Reu; for he said: ‘Behold the children of men have become evil through the wicked purpose of building for themselves a city and a tower in the land of Shinar’ 

…for in his days they built the city and the tower, saying, ‘Go to, let us ascend thereby into heaven.’… And the Lord sent a mighty wind against the tower* and overthrew it upon the earth, and behold it was between Asshur and Babylon in the land of Shinar, and they called its name ‘Overthrow’.

Two points of interest are the dating of the tower of Babel during the time of Peleg and the meaning of Peleg’s name to include a division associated with water. In an unconventional chronology, Peleg was born in 7727 BCE and died 4737 BCE; during the precessional Age of Cancer, from 8810 to 6650 BCE. Human life spans were considerably reduced post-flood though still enormously long compared to the dramatic decrease, which occurred in Abraham’s lifetime some five generations later. Peleg lived for 2,990 years. During this time frame, Nimrod challenges the Eternal and gathered the nations in support of his rebellion; with the Tower of Babel being a literal and symbolic statement of their united defiance. Nimrod had been alive for about a thousand years or longer when Peleg was born. An early date for the confusion of the languages and the dividing of the earth is circa 7275 BCE and a later date is 6232 BCE. Dividing in two gives 6755 BCE. This appears plausible as Nimrod would be still ‘young’ and Peleg about a third of the way through his life. 

This approximate dating supports a gap in history between this event and the sudden ‘[re]appearance’ of the early – but more accurately intermediate – Sumerian Civilisation circa 6000 BCE. It also ties in with the three hundred year transitional period – from 6976 to 6676 BCE – between the Treta Yuga Silver Age and the Dwapara Yuga Bronze Age; the epoch before our current Kali Yuga Iron Age, running from 3676 BCE to 2025 CE. Four short years from the time of writing until we enter another three hundred year transitional period, that also coincides with the Age of Aquarius. Though Aquarius is an air sign, it has a strong connection with water. Cancer, the Age at the time of the earth’s division is a water sign and is a startling coincidence. 

The end of the Kali Yuga in 2015: Unravelling the mysteries of the Yuga Cycle, Bibhu Dev Misra, 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The 300 year transitional period between the Treta Yuga (Silver Age) and the Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) from 6976 BC – 6676 BC also coincides with a significant environmental event –the Black Sea Catastrophe which has recently been dated to 6700 BC. The Black Sea once used to be a freshwater lake. That is, until the Mediterranean Sea, swollen with melted glacial waters, breached a natural dam, and cut through the narrow Bosphorous Strait, catastrophically flooding the Black Sea. This raised the water levels of the Black Sea by several hundred feet, flooded more than 60,000 square miles of land, and significantly expanded the Black Sea shoreline (by around 30%). This event fundamentally changed the course of civilization in Southeastern Europe and western Anatolia. Geologists Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in New York, who had first proposed the Black Sea Catastrophe hypothesis, have gone to the extent of comparing it to Noah’s Flood.

Similar major flooding events were taking place in many parts of the world, as massive glacial lakes, swelled by the waters of the melting ice, breached their ice barriers, and rushed into the surrounding areas. In the book Underworld, Graham Hancock has described some of the terrible events that ravaged the planet during that time. Sometime between 6900 BC – 6200 BC the Laurentide ice-sheet disintegrated in the Hudson Bay and an enormous quantity of glacial waters from the inland Lake Agassiz/Ojibway discharged into the Labrador Sea. This was possibly the “single largest flood of the Quarternary Period”, which may have single-handedly raised global sea-level by half a metre. The period between 7000 BC – 6000 BC was also characterized by the occurrences of gigantic earthquakes in Europe. In northern Sweden, some of these earthquakes caused “waves on the ground”, 10 metres high, referred to as “rock tsunamis”. It is possible that the global chain of cataclysmic events during this transitional period may have been triggered by a single underlying cause, which we are yet to find out.’

The ‘mighty wind’ which the Lord sent against the tower* would most likely have been a detonation of some kind. We will run into a similar scenario in the next chapter when we investigate the life of Lot and the destruction of Sodom with its neighbouring cities some five thousand years after the tower of Babel’s obliteration. A blast of this magnitude may have set off considerable seismic activity, leading to earthquakes and localised flooding throughout the Middle East and well beyond. 

Reu also had a son, called Serug, born 5867 BCE. Serug’s name in Hebrew means, ‘branch’ from the verb sarag to be ‘intertwined.’ Between Serug’s birth and his son Nahor [I], Shem died in 5717 BCE, age 6,120 years and Arphaxad died in 5617 BCE, age 5,100 years [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. 

Book of Jubilees 11:1-6

… Reu took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ora, the daughter of Ur, the son of Kesed, and she bare him a son, and he called his name Seroh… And the sons of Noah began to war on each other, to take captive and to slay each other, and to shed the blood of men on the earth, and to eat blood, and to build strong cities, and walls, and towers, and individuals (began) to exalt themselves above the nation, and to found the beginnings of kingdoms, and to go to war people against people, and nation against nation, and city against city, and all (began) to do evil, and to acquire arms, and to teach their sons war, and they began to capture cities, and to sell male and female slaves. And Ur, the son of Kesed, built the city of ‘Ara of theChaldees, and called its name after his own name and the name of his father. 

And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol… and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness. And the prince Mastema [Chief of Spirits]… sent forth other spirits, those which were put under his hand, to do all manner of wrong and sin… to corrupt and destroy, and to shed blood upon the earth. 

For this reason he called the name of Seroh, Serug, for every one turned to do all manner of sin and transgression. And he grew up, and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, near to the father of his wife’s mother, and he worshipped idols, and he took to himself a wife… and her name was Melka, the daughter of Kaber, the daughter of his father’s brother.

Kesed is a family name, as Nahor [II] had a grandson called Chesed. We will return to the people called Chaldees or Chaldeans. Nahor I, Abraham’s grandfather was born in 4967 BCE, while Peleg later died in 4737 BCE. Nahor I died in 2887 BCE, though his son Terah of purported Nimrod fame, was born in 4077 BCE. Terah in Hebrew derives from the verb tarah, meaning: ‘wanderer’ or ‘turn’ and the noun ruah, means, ‘wind, breath’ or ‘spirit.’ 

Book of Jubilees 11:7-14

And she [Melka] bare him Nahor [I]… and he grew and dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees, and his father taught him the researches of the Chaldeestodivine and augur, according to the signs of heaven. And… he took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Ijaska, the daughter of Nestag of the Chaldees. And she bare him Terah… And the prince Mastema sent ravens and birds to devour the seed which was sown in the land, in order to destroy the land, and rob the children of men of their labours. And the years began to be barren… it was only with great effort that they could save a little of all the fruit of the earth in their days… Terah took to himself a wife, and her name was ‘Edna, the daughter of ‘Abram, the daughter of his father’s sister. And…she bare him a son, and he called his name Abram, by the name of the father of his mother; for he had died before his daughter had conceived a son.

Abram is a family name along with Kesed and Nahor. There are two Nahors. Nahor I the grandfather of Abraham and Nahor II the brother of Abraham. It is Abraham’s brother we are studying and will refer to him simply, as Nahor. In Genesis 11:26, we learn of Terah’s three sons, Abram, later known as Abraham, Nahor and Haran. 

It is similar to Genesis 10:1, where Shem, Ham and Japheth were listed, but in fact Japheth is the eldest and Shem the youngest. Abram is stated first as his descendant would fulfil the Genesis 3:15 prophecy. Though Haran is the eldest and Nahor is in the middle as the second born son of Terah. We will discover that Haran died prematurely and it was territory named after him, where Abraham later dwelt. More importantly, in support for Haran being the eldest is that Nahor married a niece from Haran’s family. Haran had children first and they were marriageable age, for Nahor. Similarly, Abraham also married family. What is not clear superficially, is whose exactly.

Haran was born in 2009 BCE and Abraham was born in 1977 BCE. Nahor was born perhaps circa 1993 BCE. Nahor in Hebrew means: ‘snort’ or ‘scorched’ from the verb nhr, ‘to snort vigorously’ and the root harar, ‘to be a central hub of heat.’ 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘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).

Verb (harar I) means to be hot, burned or charred. Noun (harer) denotes a parched place and noun (harhur) describes a violent heat or fever. The unused verb (harar II) means to be free… which is the opposite of being a slave. Noun (hor) means noble or nobleman. The unused verb (harar III) appears to refer to the enclosure of kilns and ovens, as the first ones were most likely built in natural hollows. The noun… (hor)… mean[s] hole or cavern, but obviously relate to the previous word in that freemen surround themselves with walls and armies.

Verb (hara) means to burn or ignite (in the Bible solely in an emotional way: to get angry). Noun (haron) describes the burning of anger. Verb (hawar) means to be or grow white (like ash or baked bricks). Verb (nahar) looks very much like a passive or reflexive version of (harar) or its participle. This verb isn’t used in the Bible but nouns (nahar) and (naharah) describe the vigorous snorting of a horse, and noun (nahir) means nostril (which in turn reminds of a cavern).

Whatever the true etymology and original meaning, to any Hebrew audience the name Nahor would mean both A Snort or A Snorting, and Charred or Scorched, or even Noble or Freeman. For a meaning of the name Nahor… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads… Breathing Hard.

Joshua 24:2

English Standard Version

And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fatherslived beyond the Euphrates [Ur of the Chaldees], Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods [Genesis 31:53].

Book of Jasher 9:7-8

7 And the king [of Ur] and all his servants, and Terah with all his household were then the first of those that served gods of wood and stone. 8 And Terah had twelve gods of large size, made of wood and stone, after the twelve months of the year, and he served each one monthly, and every month Terah would bring his meat offering and drink offering to his gods; thus did Terah all the days.

Jubilees 12:1-15

And it came to pass… that Abram said to Terah his father, saying, ‘Father!’ 

And he said, ‘Behold, here am I, my son.’ And he said, ‘What help and profit have we from those idols which thou dost worship,  And before which thou dost bow thyself? For there is no spirit in them, For they are dumb forms, and a misleading of the heart. Worship them not: Worship the God of heaven, Who causes the rain and the dew to descend on the earth And does everything upon the earth, Andhas created everything by His word, And all life is from before His face. Why do ye worship things that have no spirit in them? For they are the work of (men’s) hands, And on your shoulders do ye bear them, And ye have no help from them, But they are a great cause of shame to those who make them, And a misleading of the heart to those who worship them: Worship them not.’

And his father said unto him, ‘I also know it, my son, but what shall I do with a people who have made me to serve before them?And if I tell them the truth, they will slay me; for their soul cleaves to them to worship them and honour them. Keep silent, my son, lest they slay thee.’ And these words he spake to his two brothers, and they were angry with him and he kept silent.

Recall, Terah is recorded as originally serving Nimrod directly at his command, administering the Babylonian religious system resurrected by Nimrod after the Flood with his mother-wife Semiramis – the evil Angel Lilith [refer Chapter XXI The Incredible identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The entanglement of that situation clung to Terah as if he were shrink-wrapped in plastic. This alignment to the mystery religion is beyond coincidental, as Terah’s descendants through Nahor, have continued their unrivalled involvement and allegiance, to the present day. After Nimrod’s demise, Terah maintained an exalted position in Ur with huge strings attached.

To give this up was a monumental request from Abraham. To defy the people who viewed Terah as synonymous with Nimrod’s legacy, was tantamount to death. 

Book of Jasher 7:41, 49-51

41 And he [the king] placed Terah the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes… 49 And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of Nimrod’s host, was in those daysvery great in the sight of the king andhis subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. 50 And Terah took a wife and her name was Amthelo [Edna in the Book of Jubilees] the daughter of Cornebo; and the wife of Terah [later] conceived and bare him a son… 51 … and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him. 

Different sources include Shem, Abraham or Esau as the eventual slayer of Nimrod. If Nimrod was born circa 8700 BCE, it is dubious whether he would still be alive some 7,000 years later when Abram was born in 1977 BCE. Shem died in 5717 BCE and is the only candidate of the the three that makes sense. Nimrod’s days after the failed tower were numbered and his demise in this era would appear logical. We will look at two different versions of the events that transpired surrounding the death of Abram’s eldest brother Haran and his family’s rather hasty departure from Ur in Sumer. The two accounts may be inaccurate or contain elements of what happened. Either way, Abram’s family fled; most likely driven by their dissatisfaction with a religious-political system they no longer could support.  

The Book of Jasher in chapter 8:1-36, enumerates an apparent history between Nimrod and Abraham, which began at his birth. I would propose that it was actually the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, Shulgi. Shulgi is to Ur as Hammurabi was to Babylon and Chedorlaomer was to Elam [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings]. King Shulgi preceded them both by a few years and was a prominent ruler of his time and the most famous monarch to have reigned from Ur – after his father the renowned Ur-Nammu – and reigned forty-six years from 1970 to 1924 BCE. 

It was in 1927 BCE that Abram’s family departed Ur for Haran – when Abram was fifty years old. Therefore, I have substituted the name of Nimrod with either Ur-Nammu – who reigned from 1988 to 1970 BCE – or Shulgi as applicable, to give the account an element of veracity that it lacks with Nimrod as a king of Ur. Besides, Nimrod had been the king of ancient Babylon, yet the king of Babylon at the time of Abram’s birth in 1977 BCE was the second king of the Amorite, Dynasty I of Babylon Sumu-la-El who began his thirty-five year reign three years earlier in 1980 BCE.

1 And it was in the night that Abram was born, that all the servants of Terah, and all the wise men of [Ur-Nammu], and his conjurors came and ate and drank in the house of Terah, and they rejoiced with him on that night. 

2 And when all the wise men and conjurors went out from the house of Terah, they lifted up their eyes toward heaven that night to look at the stars, and they saw, and behold one very large star came from the east and ran in the heavens, and he swallowed up the four stars from the four sides of the heavens. 

4 And they said to each other, This only betokens the child that has been born to Terah this night, who will grow up and be fruitful, and multiply, and possess all the earth, he and his children for ever, and he and his seed will slay great kings, and inherit their lands. 6 And they spoke and said to each other, Behold the sight that we saw last night is hidden from the king, it has not been made known to him. 7 And should this thing get known to the king in the latter days, he will say to us, Why have you concealed this matter from me, andthen we shall all suffer death; therefore, now let us go and tell the king the sight which we saw, and the interpretation thereof, and we shall then remain clear. 

8 And they did so… and we saw a great star coming from the east, and the same star ran with great speed, and swallowed up four great stars, from the four sides of the heavens. 11 … this thing applies to the child that is born to Terah, who will grow up and multiply greatly, and become powerful, and kill all the kings of the earth, and inherit all their lands, he and his seed forever. 14 And the king heard their words and they seemed good in his sight, and he sent and called for Terah… 15 And the king said to Terah… 16 And now therefore give me the child, that we may slay him before his evil springs up against us, and I will give you for his value, your house full of silver and gold. 28 And Terah saw that the anger of the king was kindled against him, and he answered the king, saying, All that I have is in the king’s power; whatever the king desires to do to his servant, that let him do, yea, even my son, he is in the king’s power, without value in exchange, he and his two brothers that are older than he [Haran and Nahor]. 29 And the king said to Terah, No, but I will purchase your younger son for a price… 

Terah said, Let my king give me three days’ time [3 is the number of decision and finality] till I consider this matter within myself, and consult with my family concerning the words of my king; and he pressed the king greatly to agree to this. 31 And the king hearkened to Terah, and he did so and he gave him three days’ time, and Terah went out from the king’s presence, and he came home to his family and spoke to them all the words of the king; and the people were greatly afraid. 32 And it was in the third day that the king sent to Terah, saying, Send me your son for a price as I spoke to you; and shouldst you not do this, I will send and slay all you hast in your house, so that you shall not even have a dog remaining. 33 And Terah hastened, (as the thing was urgent from the king), and he took a child from one of his servants, which his handmaid had born to him that day, and Terah brought the child to the king and received value for him. 

34 And Yahweh was with Terah in this matter, that [Ur-Nammu] might not cause Abram’s death, and the king took the child from Terah and with all his might dashed his head to the ground, for he thought it had been Abram; and this was concealed from him from that day, and it was forgotten by the king, as it was the will of Providence not to suffer Abram’s death. 35 And Terah took Abram his son secretly, together with his mother and nurse, and he concealed them in a cave, and he brought them their provisions monthly. 36 And Yahweh was with Abram in the cave and he grew up, and Abram was in the cave ten years, and the king [Shulgi] andhis princes, soothsayers andsages, thought that the king [Ur-Nammu] had killed Abram. 

Book of Jubilees 12:1-15:

And in the [fiftieth] year [1927 BCE] of the life of Abram… Abram arose by night, and burned the house of the idols, and he burned all that was in the house and no man knew it. And they arose in the night and sought to save their gods from the midst of the fire. And Haran hasted to save them, but the fire flamed over him, and he was burnt in the fire, and he died [at 82 years of age] in Ur of the Chaldees before Terah his father [who died in 1842 BCE], and they buried [Haran] in Ur of the Chaldees [Sumer]. 

Stalled with the palpable reticence of Terah, Abraham took matters into his own hands. Abraham would later when rescuing Lot, attack and ambush King Chedorlaomer the Elamite and his coalition army by cover of night. This Ur of Chaldea was located south of Babylon, in the area known as Sumer – the southern portion of the Land of Shinar. The descendants of Joktan had primarily dwelt in Sumer and the descendants of Peleg, to the north in Akkadia where the city of Babylon was located.

And Terah went forth from Ur of the Chaldees, he and his sons, to go into the land of [northern] Lebanon… and he dwelt in the land of Haran, and Abram dwelt with Terah his father in Haran [for 25 years, from 1927 to 1902 BCE].

At this point, after the devastating loss of his eldest son Haran, Terah – his name meaning, wanderer – decides to leave Ur and his privileged life behind. They leave to begin a new life, to soften the blow of Haran’s loss as well as possibly concern about retribution from Shulgi the king. Terah may have acted differently if he had known Haran had died at the hands of Abraham. Saying that, the Book of Jasher claims a very different version of events surrounding Haran’s death.

Book of Jasher 11:33-61, 12:1-70

33 And when Abram saw all these things his anger was kindled against his father, and he hastened and took a hatchet in his hand, and came unto the chamber of the gods, and he broke all his father’s gods. 34 And when he had done breaking the images, he placed the hatchet in the hand of the great god which was there before them, and he went out; and Terah his father came home, for he had heard at the door the sound of the striking of the hatchet; so Terah came into the house to know what this was about. 

35 And Terah, having heard the noise of the hatchet in the room of images, ran to the room to the images, and he met Abram going out. 36 And Terah entered the room and found all the idols fallen down and broken… 37 And when Terah saw this his anger was greatly kindled… 38 And he found Abram his son still sitting in the house; and he said to him, What is this work you hast done to my gods? 

… 42 Is there in these gods spirit, soul or powerto do all you hast told me? Are they not wood and stone, and have I not myself made them, and canst you speak such lies, saying that the large god that was with them smote them? It is you that didst place the hatchet in his hands, and then say he smote them all. 43 And Abram answered his father and said to him, And how canst you then serve these idols in whom there is no power to do any thing? Can those idols in which you trust deliver you? can they hear your prayers when you call upon them? Can they deliver you from the hands of your enemies, or will they fight your battles for you against your enemies, that you shouldst serve wood and stone which can neither speak nor hear? 46 Did not our fathers in days of old sin in this matter, and Yahweh the Almighty of the universe brought the waters of the flood upon them and destroyed the whole earth?

52 … and they went and brought Abram before the king. And [Shulgi] and all his princes and servants were that day sitting before him, and Terah sat also before them. 53 And the king said to Abram, What is this that you hast done to your father and to his gods? And Abram answered the king in the words that he spoke to his father… The large god that was with them in the house did to them what you hast heard. 

Abram exhibits a black sense of humour and a level of audaciousness before Shulgi, the son of renowned King Ur-Nammu.

54 And the king said to Abram, Had they power to speak and eat and do as you hast said? And Abram answered the king, saying, And if there be no power in them why dost you serve them and cause the sons of men to err through your follies? 56 O foolish, simple, and ignorant king, woe unto you forever. 60 And if your wicked heart will not hearken to my words to cause you to forsake your evil ways, and to serve the eternal Yahweh, then wilt you die in shame in the latter days, you, your people and all who are connected with you, hearing your words or walking in your evil ways.

1 And when the king heard the words of Abram he ordered him to be put into prison; and Abram was ten days in prison. 3 And the king said to the princes and sages, Have you heard what Abram, the son of Terah, has done to his father? 5 And they all answered the king saying, The man who reviles the king should be hanged upon a tree [a reference to crucifixion]; but having done all the things that he said, and having despised our gods, he must therefore be burned to death, for this is the law in this matter. 6 … And the king did so, and he commanded his servants that they should prepare a fire for three days and three nights in the king’s furnace… and the king ordered them to take Abram from prison and bring him out to be burned [a shadow of Shadrach, Meshach & Abednego: Daniel 3:12-30]. 

7 And all the king’s servants, princes, lords, governors, and judges, and all the inhabitants of the land, about nine hundred thousand men, stood opposite the furnace to see Abram. 8 And all the women and little ones crowded upon the roofs and towers to see what was doing with Abram, and they all stood together at a distance; and there was not a man left that did not come on that day to behold the scene. 9 And when Abram was come, the conjurors of the king and the sages saw Abram, and they cried out to the king, saying, Our sovereign lord, surely this is the man whom we know to have been the child at whose birth the great star swallowed the four stars, which we declared to the king…

10 And behold now his father has also transgressed your commands, and mocked you by bringing you another child, which you didst kill. 11 And when the king heard their words, he was exceedingly wroth, and he ordered Terah to be brought before him. 15 And the king said Who advised you to this? Tell me, do not hide aught from me, and then you shall not die. 16 And Terah was greatly terrified in the king’s presence, and he said to the king, It was Haran my eldest son who advised me to this; and Haran was in those days that Abram was born, two and thirty years old. 17 But Haran did not advise his father to anything, for Terah said this to the king in order to deliver his soul from the king, for he feared greatly; and the king said to Terah, Haran your son who advised you to this shall die through fire with Abram; for the sentence of death is upon him for having rebelled against the king’s desire in doing this thing. 

18 And Haran at that time felt inclined to follow the ways of Abram, but he kept it within himself. 19 And Haran said in his heart, Behold now the king has seized Abram on account of these things which Abram did, and it shall come to pass, that if Abram prevail over the king I will follow him, but if the king prevail I will go after the king. 20 And when Terah had spoken this to the king concerning Haran his son, the king ordered Haran to be seized with Abram. 22 And the king’s servants took Abram and his brother, and they stripped them of all their clothes excepting their lower garments which were upon them. 23 And they bound their hands and feet with linen cords, and the servants of the king lifted them up and cast them both into the furnace.

24And Yahweh loved Abram and he had compassion over him, and Yahweh [the Son of Man] came down and delivered Abram from the fire and he was not burned [just as the Son of God had saved Shadrach and his friends: Daniel 3:25]. 25 But all the cords with which they bound him were burned, while Abram remained and walked about in the fire. 26 And Haran died when they had cast him into the fire, and he was burned to ashes, for his heart was not perfect with Yahweh; and those men who cast him into the fire, the flame of the fire spread over them, and they were burned, and twelve men of them died.

27 And Abram walked in the midst of the fire three days and three nights, and all the servants of the king saw him walking in the fire, and they came and told the king, saying, Behold we have seen Abram walking about in the midst of the fire, and even the lower garments which are upon him are not burned, but the cord with which he was bound is burned. 28 And when the king heard their words his heart fainted and he would not believe them; so he sent other faithful princes to see this matter, and they went and saw it and told it to the king; and the king rose to go and see it, and he saw Abram walking to and fro in the midst of the fire, and he saw Haran’s body burned, andthe king wondered greatly. 

29 And the king ordered Abram to be taken out from the fire; and his servants approached to take him out and they could not, for the fire was round about and the flame ascending toward them from the furnace. 30 And the king’s servants fled from it, and the king rebuked them, saying, Make haste and bring Abram out of the fire that you shall not die. 31 And the servants of the king again approached to bring Abram out, and the flames came upon them and burned their faces so that eight of them died.

32 And when the king saw that his servants could not approach the fire lest they should be burned, the king called to Abram, O servant of Yahweh who is in heaven, go forth from amidst the fire and come hither before me; and Abram hearkened to the voice of the king, and he went forth from the fire and came and stood before the king. 34 And the king said to Abram, How is it that you wast not burned in the fire? 35 And Abram said to the king, Yahweh of heaven and earth in whom I trust and who has all in his power, He delivered me from the fire into which you didst cast me.

36 … And the king, princes, and inhabitants of the land, seeing that Abram was delivered from the fire, they came and bowed down to Abram. 38 And Abram said to them, Do not bow down to me, but bow down to Yahweh of the world who made you, and serve him, and go in his ways for it is he who delivered me from out of this fire, and it is he who created the souls and spirits of all men, and formed man in his mother’s womb, and brought him forth into the world, and it is he who will deliver those who trust in him from all pain. 39 And this thing seemed very wonderful in the eyes of the king and princes, that Abram was saved from the fire and that Haran was burned; and the king gave Abram many presents and he gave him his two head servants from the king’s house; the name of one was Oni and the name of the other was Eliezer. 

40 And all the kings, princes and servants gave Abram many gifts of silver and gold and pearl, and the king and his princes sent him away, and he went in peace. 41 And Abram went forth from the king in peace, and many of the king’s servants followed him, and about three hundred men joined him. 42 And Abram returned on that day and went to his father’s house, he and the men that followed him, and Abram served Yahweh his Almighty all the days of his life, and he walked in his ways and followed his law. 43 And from that day forward Abram inclined the hearts of the sons of men to serve Yahweh. 

57 Now therefore my king, surely you know… since your sages saw this at the birth of Abram, and if my king will suffer Abram to live in the earth it will be to the injury of my lord and king, for all the days that Abram lives neither you nor your kingdom will be established, for this was known formerly at his birth; and why will not my king slay him, that his evil may be kept from you in latter days? 58 And [Shulgi] hearkened to the voice of Anuki, and he sent some of his servants in secret to go and seize Abram, and bring him before the king to suffer death. 59 And Eliezer, Abram’s servant whom the king had given him, was at that time in the presence of the king, and he heard what Anuki had advised the king, and what the king had said to cause Abram’s death. 

60 And Eliezer said to Abram, Hasten, rise up and save your soul, that you may not die through the hands of the king, for thus did he see in a dream concerning you, and thus did Anuki interpret it, and thus also did Anuki advise the king concerning you. 61 And Abram hearkened to the voice of Eliezer, and Abram hastened and ran for safety… and the king’s servants… searched through out the country and he was not to be found, and… the king’s anger against Abram was stilled, as they did not find him, and the king drove from his mind this matter concerning Abram. 63 And Abram… was still afraid of the king; and Terah came to see Abram his son secretly… 64 And Abram said to his father, Dost you not know that the king thinks to slay me, and to annihilate my name from the earth by the advice of his wicked counsellors? 

65 Now whom hast you here and what hast you in this land? Arise, let us go together to the land of Canaan, that we may be delivered from his hand, lest you perish also… 66 Dost you not know or hast you not heard, that it is not through love that [Shulgi] gives you all this honor, but it is only for his benefit that he bestows all this good upon you? 67 And if he do unto you greater good than this, surely these are only vanities of the world, for wealth and riches cannot avail in the day of wrath and anger. 68 Now therefore hearken to my voice, and let us arise and go to the land of Canaan, out of the reach of injury from [Shulgi]; and serve you Yahweh who created you in the earth and it will be well with you; and cast away all the vain things which you pursuest. 70 And Terah hearkened to the voice of his son Abram, and Terah did all that Abram said, for this was from Yahweh, that the king should not cause Abram’s death. 

In this version, it wasn’t Abraham who accidentally killed his brother. Terah had his own firstborn son murdered. It was Terah with the grisly secret to hide. Nor did Terah altogether need Abraham to convince him to leave Ur, for how long before Shulgi’s mind returned to Terah’s betrayal, by hiding Abram after his birth. In each account, the common denominators are a. the death of Haran because he did not have the same relationship with the Eternal as Abram, b. Abram’s dissatisfaction with his fathers’s religious beliefs and allegiance to Ur’s king and his persuading Terah to repent and c. motives for Terah and or Abram to leave Ur behind. This was no mean decision, as Terah’s family were counted as aristocracy; royalty even, as we shall learn about Abraham. It was a complete uprooting and sacrifice to abandon the privileged yet complicated life, titles, standing and influence in Ur. 

The land of Haran, named after Terah’s eldest son Haran, was in a direct line northwest from Ur. Ur was fifty miles south of Babylon. From Ur of the Chaldees to the region of Haran is approximately 600 miles. Haran was located on the edge of southeastern Asia Minor, halfway along the Fertile Crescent between Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean and just beyond the northern reaches of the land that became known as Lebanon – the ‘land of Laban’ a grandson of Nahor. Terah and his family did not make it to the final destination of Canaan, deciding to stay in Haran. 

Genesis 11:31

English Standard Version

Terah took Abram his son and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, andSaraihis daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife, and they went forth together from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan, but when they came to Haran, they settled there.

Book of Jasher 13:1-2 

1 … And when they came as far as the land of Haran they remained there,for it was exceedingly good land for pasture, and of sufficient extent for those who accompanied them. 2 And the people of the land of Haran saw that Abram was good and upright with Yahweh and men, and that Yahweh his Almighty was with him, and some of the people of the land of Haran came and joined Abram, and he taught them the instruction of Yahweh and his ways; and these men remained with Abram in his house and they adhered to him. 

Terah died in Haran – Genesis 11:32. Apart from Haran, there was another city called Ur; though not to be confused with Ur located six hundred miles southeast.

Genesis 11:27-29

English Standard Version

27 Now these are the generations of Terah. Terah fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran fathered Lot. 28 Haran died in the presence of his father Terah in the land of his kindred, in Ur of the Chaldeans. 29 And Abram and Nahor took wives. The name of Abram’s wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran the father of Milcah andIscah.30Now Sarai was barren; she had no child.

Nahor married his niece – the daughter of his deceased brother Haran. Haran has three children mentioned in the Bible, Lot, Milcah and the mysterious Iscah. They were all born and raised in the city of Ur in Sumer. Before we turn to Milcah and Nahor, let’s look at Iscah and Sarai.

Genesis 20:9-13

English Standard Version

9 Then Abimelech [the Philistine king] called Abraham [c. 1878 BCE] and said to him, “What have you done to us? And how have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and my kingdom a great sin? You have done to me things that ought not to be done.” 10 And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What did you see, that you did this thing?” 11 Abraham said, “I did it because I thought,‘There is no fear of God at all in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.’ 12 Besides, she is indeed my [half] sister, the daughter of my father though not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife. 13 And when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, I said to her,‘This is the kindness you must do me: at every place to which we come, say of me, He is my brother.

Abraham feared he would be murdered for his beautiful wife Sarai – her name was later changed to Sarah. Sarai in Hebrew means, my princess and Sarah, similarly, means princess. He says to Abimelech that she is his half-sister. Yet, we read above in Genesis 11:31, that Sarai was Terah’s daughter-in-law. It does not say that Sarah is Terah’s daughter. Abraham also claims that she has a different mother. We learned in the Book of Jasher that Terah had a wife named Amthelo. The Bible always delineates if a man has more than one wife. It doesn’t say this for Terah. The Book of Jasher states that Terah married again, though later in his old age. Two clear falsifications from Abraham, to add to the original one, of Sarah not being his wife. This situation had already occurred previously when Abraham and Sarah had travelled to Egypt.

Genesis 12:10-20

English Standard Version

10 Now there was a famine in the land. So Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. 11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, “I know that you are a woman beautiful in appearance,12and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’Then they will kill me, but they will let you live. 

13 Say you are my sister, that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared for your sake.” 14 When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 And when the princes of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels.17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.

These two accounts are often highlighted by commentators to show that the highly obedient patriarch to the Creator, lied – twice. Technically, the lie to Abimelech was a half-truth if the story were true. It would be more constructive, if the time spent on critiquing Abraham’s behaviour had been used to question the discrepancy in Abraham and Sarah’s cover story. For Sarah was accomplice in saying that Abraham was her brother. The Pharaoh in question – according to an unconventional chronology and a synchronisation of the Egyptian dynasties – was the third Pharaoh of the I Dynasty, Djer. The meeting took place in 1902 BCE, when Sarah was sixty-five years old and just after Abraham had moved from Haran to Canaan. Djer ruled a united Egypt from 1922 to 1875 BCE.

The only plausible answer, if Sarah was not Terah’s daughter and therefore not Abraham’s sister, is that she is Iscah; the sister of Milcah and the daughter of Haran. In the Talmud, Rabbi Isaac states that Iscah is synonymous with Sarai. Thus, the two sisters, Milcah and Sarai, married the two younger brothers of Haran: Nahor and Abraham. The uncles, married their nieces. In the Book of Leviticus, marriages between aunt and nephew would be later outlawed [Leviticus 18:14, 20:19], though it did not forbid marriage between an uncle and niece, nor deem it incestuous. 

The name Iscah in Hebrew means, one who looks forth. This is interesting, as Sarah was barren, and so ‘one who looks forth’ for a baby, is an apt name.

The Book of Jasher 12:44 & 9:1-6

And at that time Nahor and Abram took unto themselves wives, the daughters of their brother Haran; the wife of Nahor was Milca and the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai. And Sarai, wife of Abram, was barren; she had no offspring in those days. And Haran, the son of Terah, Abram’s oldest brother, took a wife in those days. 2 Haran was thirty-nine years old when he took her; and the wife of Haran conceived and bare a son, and he called his name Lot [born 1970 BCE, seven years after Abraham]. 3 And she conceived again and bare a daughter, and she called her name Milca; and she again conceived and bare a daughter, and she called her name Sarai. 

4 Haran was forty-two years old when he begat Sarai [1967 BCE],which was in the tenth year of the life of Abram; and in those days Abram and his mother and nurse went out from the cave, as the king [Shulgi] and his subjects had forgotten the affair of Abram… and Abram knew Yahweh from three years old, and he went in the ways of Yahweh until the day of his death…

It is interesting to note that Abraham’s nephew was of a similar age. My interpretation of their relationship, their closeness as evidenced with Abraham following Lot when he had been captured, securing his life in a dare devil night time raid; had incorrectly been that they were like father and son. Rather, their ages show that they must have had a relationship akin to brothers. This presumably would have been strengthened with the loss of Lot’s father – when he was forty-three – and Abraham’s eldest brother, Haran. Also, if accurate, Abraham’s tender age highlights that the Eternal was working with Abraham from very young, showing that Abraham was precocious, open minded and humble. Quite often, though not always, it is a reoccurring theme that the Creator works with His true servants either very rarely from before birth; sometimes rarely, from birth; or still infrequently, from when still a child. 

Genesis 22:20-24

English Standard Version

20 Now after these things it was told to Abraham, “Behold, Milcah also has borne children to your brother Nahor: 

21 Uz his firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel the father of Aram, 22 Chesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph, and Bethuel.” 23 (Bethuel fathered Rebekah.) [Genesis 24:24] These eight Milcah bore to Nahor, Abraham’s brother. 

24 Moreover, his concubine, whose name was Reumah, bore Tebah, Gaham, Tahash, and Maacah.

Nahor and Milcah had eight sons. Uz the firstborn, or Huz in some translations and the interlinear version. Buz means ‘to despise’ or ‘hold as insignificant’ and ‘my contempt.’ Huz is similar to Uz and means ‘wood, counsel’ and ‘fastened.’ We briefly covered Uz, the son of Aram and their fastened location in Italy [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. The peoples of Italy, are the principal descendants of Nahor. Early in their northern Mesopotamian history, they settled in the same region as sons of Aram – specifically Uz – and that relationship is evident in modernItaly. To reinforce this, Kemuel, the third son is the only one stated with a son, or grandson of Nahor and his name is… Aram.

Nahor also had a concubine called Reumah and she bare four sons to Nahor and so we have a third gene pool to add to Milcah’s sons and the descendants of Uz from Aram. DNA and Haplogroup evidence point to Reumah’s ancestry as being possibly from Arphaxad’s great grandson Joktan. 

Whereas Milcah, as her husband Nahor, were descended from Joktan’s brother Peleg – Genesis 10:25. What is significant, is that the southern Italians and Sicilians are more closely related to Greeks than they are to other Italians. The Greeks themselves are descended from Joktan’s sixth son, Uzal [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans]. It is more than a passing coincidence that variations of Uz, Huz, Buz and Aram from Nahor; Uz from Aram; and Uzal from Joktan, should all be found in the modern Italian nation. 

Therefore the three sections of Italy: North, Central and Southern are represented by Aram, Milcah and Reumah. That said, the descendants of Nahor and Uz from Aram have in part blended, so that northern and central Italy are a mix of the two. Still, PCA graphs reveal that northern Italians are genetically closer to the related peoples from Aram in Spain and Portugal. And while the central Italians sit between the northern and southern Italians; it is the Italians in the north of Italy with which they share more in common.

Apart from Aram, many additional grandson’s of Nahor are listed in the Book of Jasher 22:15-39:

15 And Abraham’s brother Nahor and his father and all belonging to them dwelt in Haran, for they did not come with Abraham to the land of Canaan. 16 And children were born to Nahor which Milca the daughter of Haran, and sister to Sarah, Abraham’s wife, bare to him. 

17 And these are the names of those that were born to him, Uz, Buz, Kemuel, Kesed, Chazo, Pildash, Tidlaf, and Bethuel, being eight sons, these are the children of Milca which she bare to Nahor, Abraham’s brother… 19 And the children that were born to Nahor were twelve sons besides his daughters, and they also had children born to them in Haran.

20 And the children of Uz the first born of Nahor were Abi, Cheref, Gadin, Melus, and Deborahtheir sister. 21 And the sons of Buz were Berachel, Naamath, Sheva, and Madonu. 22 And the sons of Kemuel were Aram and Rechob. 23 And the sons of Kesed were Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi; and the sons of Chazo were Pildash, Mechiand Opher. 24 And the sons of Pildash were Arud, Chamum, Meredand Moloch. 25 And the sons of Tidlaf [Jidlaph] were Mushan, Cushan and Mutzi.

26 And the children of Bethuel were Sechar, Laban and their sister Rebecca.

27 These are the families of the children of Nahor, that were born to them in Haran; and Aram the son of Kemuel and Rechob his brother went away from Haran, and they found a valley in the land by the river Euphrates. 28 And they built a city there, and they called the name of the city after the name of Pethor the son of Aram, that is Aram Naherayim [near Padan-Aram] unto this day.

29 And the children of Kesed also went to dwell where they could find a place, and they went and they found a valley opposite to the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 30 And they there built themselves a city, and they called the name at the city Kesed after the name of their father, that is the land Kasdim* unto this day, and the Kasdim [Chaldeans] dwelt in that land and they were fruitful and multiplied** exceedingly.

A simplified map of the three main waves of people who entered the Italian Peninsula after the departure of the Romans. They constituted the Heruli, Ostrogoths or eastern Goths and the Lombards; who broadly represent descendants of Joktan, Aram and the branches of Nahor’s family. Anciently, Nahor’s tribes were known as the Chaldees who overthrew Babylon and made it their capital; just as in Italy today and the appropriating of Rome – modern Babylon – as the capital of the Italians.

31 And Terah, father of Nahor and Abraham, went and took another wife in his old age, and her name was Pelilah, and she conceived and bare him a son and he called his name Zoba [1867 BCE]. 32 And Terah lived twenty-five years after he begat Zoba. 33 And Terah died in that year, that is in the thirty-fifth year [1842 BCE] of the birth of Isaac [1877 BCE] son of Abraham… 35 And Zoba the son of Terah lived thirty years [1837 BCE] and he begat Aram, Achlis and Merik. 36 And Aram son of Zoba son of Terah, had three wives and he begat twelve sons and three daughters; and the Lord gave to Aram the son of Zoba, riches and possessions, and abundance of cattle, and flocks and herds, and the man increased** greatly.

And so today, the descendants of Terah and Nahor have been richly blessed as figures show for the economy, standard of living and quality of life of the Italian nation.

37 And Aram the son of Zoba and his brother[s] and all his household journeyed from Haran, and they went to dwell where they should find a place, for their property was too great to remain in Haran; for they could not stop in Haran together with their brethren the children of Nahor. 38 And Aram the son of Zoba went with his brethren [Achlis and Merik], and they found a valley at a distance toward the eastern country and they dwelt there. 39 And they also built a city there, and they called the name thereof Aram, after the name of their eldest brother; that is Aram Zoba to this day.

Aram, Achlis and Merik – sons of Zoba, son of Terah – went to dwell where the sons of Kesed the son of Nahor – Anamlech, Meshai, Benon and Yifi – had gone to dwell. Also, where Aram and Rechob – sons of Kemuel, son of Nahor – had travelled. All three groups dwelt south of Haran and in a vicinity west of Shinar. This region was adjacent to Uz, son of Aram the son of Shem, and is the Padan-Aram where Bethuel’s family also migrated. In essence, this means that the ‘Aramaean’ elements from Nahor and Terah merged with Uz from Aram and form the dual regions of northern and central Italy. 

Kemuel means, ‘congregation of God, God’s rising’ and ‘God’s grain.’ The ancient peoples of Nahor were instrumental in the Babylonian Mystery religion and today it is  continued by the Universal Roman Catholic Church in the smallest state in the world, the Vatican City. Nahor’s people also made the city of Babylon, their own and today that great capital is represented by the city of Rome. Just like the ancient capital of Assyria, Nineveh is replicated today in Moscow [refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia]. The other parallel, is that as the sons of Joktan lived in ancient Sumer, the south eastern portion of the Land of Shinar, the descendants of Peleg – mainly comprised of Nahor’s children – lived adjacently to the northwest in Akkad. 

Today, the sons of Joktan live – to the east – adjacent to the Italian Peninsula [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans].

Chesed means, ‘as if it were a; field, mountain, breast, protecting spirit.’ The Alfred Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads for Chesed: Increase. Though for the word Chaldean: ‘as it were demons’. The Hebrew word for Chaldeans is Kashedim* the plural of Chesed. Researchers state that Nahor named his son after the people he came from. That is, an earlier Kesed as mentioned in the Book of Jubilees. Similarly, others claim the word Chaldean or Chaldee does not derive from Chesed; because Chesed is stated in chapter twenty-two of Genesis, whereas the word Chaldean is used in Genesis chapter eleven to describe Abraham’s origination in ‘Ur of the Chaldeans.’ The second view is explained by either post-dated editing, or by the fact it is substantiating the first view raised. 

The line from Arphaxad to Peleg and then to Nahor is just one line of descent. It is recorded in the Bible, that other peoples came from that line. It goes without saying that other sons and daughters were born to all the different families. Family trees grow large very quickly and could not all be recorded in scripture. In the book of Jubilees we read of Peleg’s son Reu. Reu married Ora, the daughter of Ur, who was the son of the earlier Kesed. Both Ur and Kesed were family names. The name Ur first being used in southern Mesopotamia for a city and then again in Haran. The A-kkad-ians and Kashed-im were Arphaxad’s children and so Nahor using the name Kesed was not inexplicable, nor a deliberate attempt to name his son after the Kashedim. It would be like being an English person from England and having either word as your last name as people do today, for instance: John England.

Another point is that the word or prefix Kush, Kash and Kish that was common in the Babylonian region, is more reflective of the original Babylonians – and Assyrians – than that of Cush, descended from Ham as discussed in Chapters XX and XXI. Speaking of family names, the prime repeating name has the prefix Reu. Reu the son of Peleg, just mentioned; Reu-mah the concubine of Nahor and later we will see there is a Reu-el, in the family of Esau – also Jethro the father-in-law of Moses, the priest of Midian who’s name was Reu-el –  and a Reu-ben, the first born son in the family of Jacob.

Nahor’s fifth son’s name Hazo means, ‘seer, vision’ or ‘to see or have a vision.’ Pildash means, ‘steely, flashing steel, fiery iron.’ Jidlaph means, ‘he will weep, he weeps, he drips.’ Bethuel, the father of Rebekah means, ‘man of God, house of God’ and ‘virgin of God.’ There is a religious or pious theme reflected in the definitions of these names. Today, the Italian people are not just staunchly Catholic, it is the heart and headquarters of the Catholic faith. 

The mother of these eight sons, Milcah’s name means, ‘queen’ or ‘counsel.’ Milcah was an ancestor of the patriarch Jacob. Milcah’s son Bethuel moved to Padan-Aram and fathered Rebekah [Genesis 24:15]. 

Milcah’s granddaughter Rebekah, then married Milcah’s nephew Isaac [Genesis 24:67] and gave birth to Jacob [Genesis 25:21], who became Israel. Milcah and her sister Sarah are contrasted in that she conceived a bounty of sons and Sarah was barren. Eventually, Sarah also shared being as an ancestor of Jacob, in that she bore Isaac his father [Genesis 21:1-4]. 

The mother of Nahor’s remaining four sons was Reumah and her name means, ‘exalted’ or ‘wild ox.’ Reumah’s sons names are Tebah, which means, ‘confidence, slaughter’ or ‘butcher.’ Gaham means, ‘flame, burning.’ Tahash means, ‘to hurry’ or ‘hasten.’ Maacah means, ‘oppression, to press’ or ‘squeeze.’ It could be said that these names reflect the Latin temperament.

Nahor moved from Ur of the Chaldees with his father Terah and younger brother Abraham. While they settled in Haran, Nahor dwelt adjacent to Aramean territory, the land of Aram’s son Uz, which became known as Aram Naharaim, founding the city of Nahor.

Genesis 24:10

Young’s Literal Translation

And the servant taketh ten camels of the camels of his lord and goeth, also of all the goods of his lord in his hand, and he riseth, and goeth unto Aram-Naharaim, unto the city of Nahor…

The word Nahar-aimmeans ‘two rivers,’that is, the Euphrates and the Tigris. From Hebrew, it has been translated into Greek as the midst of [two] rivers.

Genesis 25:20

English Standard Version

and Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife.

The word paddan means ‘area’ in Aramean, thus the name Paddan-Aram could be translated as the region, area – or even field – of the Arameans. The descendants of Nahor are already interchangeably known as Arameans and Syrians. Bethuel had moved away from but still adjacent to the region of Aram-Naharaim.

Genesis 27:43

English Standard Version

Now therefore, my son, obey my voice. Arise, flee to Laban my brother in Haran

Rebekah is speaking to Jacob after he had deceived his father regarding the birthright blessing. Laban was her brother, the son of Bethuel, son of Nahor and was living in Haran. Haran was synonymous with the territory of Padan-Aram, near Aram-Naharaim.

Genesis 29:4-5

English Standard Version

4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers [or cousins], where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.”

Laban is called the son of Nahor, though the Hebrew word for son can mean a descendant, as in a grandson. Abraham, Lot, the son of Haran and Nahor all dwelt near each other either in Haran which included the northern Ur, Aram-Naharaim or Padan-Aram. Nahor’s descendants in the Bible are collectively called Chaldeans from the word Chaldees, derived from Kashedim, linked to the Hebrew names Kesed and Chesed. They are not called Aramaeans or Syrians from an historical or prophetic viewpoint after the book of Genesis. 

Herman Hoeh in Origin of the Nations states – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘Abraham lived among the Chaldeans. One whole book of the Bible – Habakkuk – is entirely devoted to a prophecy concerning the Chaldeans in these latter days! But where are the Chaldeans today? Certainly they are not at ancient Babylon. No one lives there! Notice first where the Chaldeans were. Abraham came from “Ur of the Chaldees”. Ancient Ur was in Mesopotamia. Ur is a shortened name for Urfa. There were once two cities by that name. 

Stephen, in his inspired sermon, makes plain that it was the northern Ur in Mesopotamia from which Abram came (Acts 7:2-3). That is where the Chaldeans first dwelt – over 400 miles northwest of ancient Babylon. Who are these Chaldeans so frequently mentioned in Bible prophecy? Here is the plain, simple explanation recognized by most Hebrew scholars. The word “Chaldean” comes from the Greek. The original Hebrew word is Chasdim, meaning “the people of Chesed”. Notice that Chesed was a common name in the family of Abraham (Genesis 22:22).

Next, consider the original Hebrew word translated in our Bibles as “Arphaxad”. Most biblical encyclopaedias will clearly show that the Hebrew form is Arfachesed MEANING ARFA OR URFA THE CHALDEAN! The Chaldeans come from Arphaxad. They are his children. Abraham was a branch of this stock! The city of Ur was named after Arfa or Urfa, the Chaldean. Chaldean probably means “capturer”, just as Jacob means “supplanter”. The reason that some Chaldeans were later associated with Babylon in Daniel’s time is that a small part of them was later settled by the Assyrians near Babylon. The original inspired Hebrew of Isaiah 23:13 explains this: “Behold, the land of the Chaldeans – this is the people that was not, when Asshur founded it for shipmen”. How clear.

The Chaldeans were divided, not an organized nation. A part of them was transplanted to Babylon. At Babylon they became the ruling class. But the remainder settled farther north around Lake Van, about halfway between the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean. Here they were called Chald[e]ans… Sometimes they were referred to as HURRI or Hurrians, after Haran (Genesis 11:29; 22:20-24). Sometimes they bore the name GUTI, probably meaning “people of God”.’

The Amorites and Kassites; the Guti and Gutium; the Goths and Visigoths; were all descended from Aram as studied in Chapter XXIII. The Ostrogoths or eastern Goths who swept into the Italian Peninsula and partially into the Balkans were related and possibly composed of a mix of the descendants of Nahor and Aram, or predominantly from Nahor. Dr Hoeh raises the point for two locations for the ancient Chaldeans. The fragmented nature of their structure mirrors modern day Italy, which did not form a single unified nation until 1861. The Chaldeans from Nahor are not the same as the Guti from Gether a son of Aram; nor with the Hurrians who descend from Nahor’s elder brother Haran. Similarly, the ancient Mitanni kingdom may have comprised a mixture of Nahor and Uz from Aram, or predominantly the ancestors of the Chaldeans. We will revisit this when we study Haran in the following chapter.

A H Sayce, pages 62-64 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘At a later date the tribe of Kassi obtained a permanent footing in Babylonia and established a dynasty there which lasted for several centuries [circa 1200-800 BCE]. Kassites and Babylonians intermingled together, and the long continuance of Kassite rule has been thought to explain the name of Kasdim given to the inhabitants of Babylonia in the Old Testament. 

Chesed, of which Kasdim is the Hebrew plural, has been explained as Kas-da the country of the Kassites… it is quite as easy to derive Kasdim from the Assyrian verb Kasddu to conquer so that the Kasidi or Kasdim would be the Kassite conquerors of the Chaldaean plain.In the Septuagint the Hebrew word Kasdim is translated… Chaldaeans… Chaldaean and Babylonian had become synonymous terms, and Babylonia had come to be known as Chaldaea…’

I am not convinced the Kassites were one and the same with the Chaldeans; rather I  consider them a division of Aram. The Kassites migrated from the east, from a similar location as the Guti. The Kassites, in direction of travel and time-frame, do not sit squarely enough to identify as the Chaldeans. The Kassites rose to prominence in the south of Mesopotamia at the same time as the Mitanni were rising in the north. The major accomplishment of the Kassites was to unify Mesopotamian culture, centred around Babylon, instead of continuing the separate independence of the surrounding city-states. This paved the way for the Chaldeans to rule a strong capital in Babylon and a unified region of neighbouring cities.

Dynasty X from 626 to 539 BCE was the most famous ruling dynasty of the Chaldeans and included Nebuchadnezzar II, who features prominently in the Old Testament. The first king Nabopolassar – who reigned from 626 to 605 BCE – was a native of Babylon, who drove out the Assyrians and re-established an independent Babylonian kingdom. His son, Nebuchadnezzar ruled from 605 to 562 BCE and it was he, who took the Kingdom of Judah into captivity. He was succeeded by his son, Amel-Marduk [565-560 BCE]. His reign was short-lived as the throne was usurped by Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law Neriglissar from 560 to 556 BCE. Then his son Labashi-Marduk, briefly reigned in 556 BCE, who in turn had the throne usurped by another possible son [Daniel 5:2,11,13,18] of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabonidus [556-539 BCE]. 

Nabonidus ruled until the fall of Babylon, at the hands of Cyrus the Great and the Medo-Persian empire [refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey]. This tumultuous sequence of toppled regimes is reminiscent of modern day Italian government and its frequent changes of ruling political parties and prime minsters.  In 2019, Italy had sixty-nine governments since the end of World War II, with an average of nearly one every year, each lasting on average for merely thirteen months. It ‘is a revolving door like no other in Europe.’

The Chaldeans are mentioned in a large number of scriptures in the Bible.

Isaiah 23:13

New English Translation

Look at the land of the Chaldeans, these people who have lost their identity! The Assyrians have made it a home for wild animals. They erected their siege towers, demolished its fortresses, and turned it into a heap of ruins.

The Chaldeans had originally transformed Babylon and Babylonia into a wealthy, prosperous region. Assyrian rule left it impoverished and powerless.

Habakkuk 1:6

English Standard Version

For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation [Latin temperament], who march through the breadth of the earth to seize dwellings not their own.

Job 1:17

Amplified Bible

17 While he was still speaking, another [messenger] also came and said, “The Chaldeans formed three bands and made a raid on the camels and have taken them away and have killed the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you.” 

Ezra 5:11-13

English Standard Version

11 And this was their reply to us: ‘We are the servants [tribes of Judah and Benjamin] of the God of heaven and earth, and we are rebuilding the house that was built many years ago, which a great king of Israel [Solomon] built and finished. 12 But because our fathers had angered the God of heaven, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house and carried away the people to Babylonia. 13 However, in the first year of Cyrus king of Babylon, Cyrus the king made a decree that this house of God should be rebuilt.’

Ezekiel 23:14-17, 23

English Standard Version

14 … She [Kingdom of Judah] saw men portrayed on the wall, the images of the Chaldeans portrayed in vermilion, 15 wearing belts on their waists, with flowing turbans on their heads, all of them having the appearance of officers, a likeness of Babylonians whose native land was Chaldea. 16 When she saw them, she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea. 17 And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoring lust. And after she was defiled by them, she turned from them in disgust. 23 the Babylonians and all the Chaldeans, Pekod [visitation] and Shoa [rich] and Koa [cutting off]… 

The vermillion is reminiscent of the crimson worn by Cardinals in the Vatican. The next passage laments the fall of Babylon to the Medes. The Chaldeans were zealous, religious and deeply steeped in astrology, the occult and the mystery religion. Plus, the Chaldeans were renowned for their cultural influence and artistic talent. Just as modern Italy led the renaissance and is a global influencer in cuisine, fashion, art and film. This might explain the focus on the feminine aspect describing their empire in the Book of Isaiah. 

Isaiah chapter forty-seven, is similar to the verses we read regarding the Prince and the ‘King’ of Tyre in Ezekiel twenty-eight [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega]. The description of the fall of ancient Babylon, runs in tandem with the descriptions in the Book of Revelation regarding future Babylon. 

Also, the Queen forevermore, I am, and there is no one besides me, is none other than the original Queen of Heaven, Asherah. Her wisdom – pride and knowledge – from which the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil derives, led her astray. This path was chosen by her desire to stay in the blended spirit and physical realm, where she was a god and pseudo-creator. This is what was offered by trickery to Eve – a descent wholly from spirit to the physical with no way back.

Isaiah 47:1-15

Amplified Bible

‘“Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; Sit on the ground [in abject humiliation]; there is no throne for you, O daughter of the Chaldeans, For you will no longer be called tender and delicate. 2 “Take millstones [as a female slave does]and grind meal; Remove your veil, strip off the skirt, Uncover the leg, cross the rivers [at the command of your captors]. 3 “Your nakedness will be uncovered, Your shame will also be exposed; I will take vengeance and will spare no man.” 4 Our Redeemer [will do all this], the Lord of hosts is His name, The Holy One of Israel. 5 “Sit in silence, and go into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans; For you will no longer be called The queen of kingdoms. 

6 “I was angry with My people, I profaned [Judah] My inheritance And gave them into your hand [Babylon]. You showed them no mercy; You made your yoke very heavy on the aged. 7 “And you said, ‘I shall be a queen [H1404 – gbereth: ‘lady, mistress’ from root H1376 – gbiyr: ‘lord, ruler’] forevermore [H5769 – olam: ‘perpetual, continuous existence, unending’].’ You did not consider these things, Nor did you [seriously] remember the [ultimate] outcome of such conduct. 8 “Now, then, hear this, you who live a luxuriant life, You who dwell safely and securely, Who say in your heart (mind), ‘I am [the queen],and there is no one besides me. I shall not sit as a widow, Nor know the loss of children.’ 9 “But these two things shall come to you abruptly, in one day: Loss of children and widowhood. They will come on you in full measure In spite of your many [claims of power through your] sorceries, In spite of the great power of your enchantments. 

10 “For you [Babylon] have trusted and felt confident in your wickedness; you have said, No one sees me.’[as with Samael, ‘blinded of God’] Your wisdom [Matthew 10:16 ESV “… so be wise as serpents…] and your knowledge [Genesis 3:6 Amplified Bible “And when the woman saw that the tree was… to be desired in order to make one wise and insightful (knowledgable) ] have led you astray, And you have said in your heart (mind),‘I am, and there is no one besides me [H657 ‘ephec & H656 ‘aphec, meaning: ‘to cease, come to an end, be clean gone, fail, finality, end, at an end’].’ 

[Exodus 3:14 ESV “God [elohiym, a God, not the God] said to Moses, “I am [H1961 hayah & H1933 hava, meaning: ‘to fall, to become, to happen, to come about, to come to pass. to appear, to arise, to come into being, to be instituted, to be established, to be brought about, to be, to exist’] who I am. {or I will be what I will be}” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’” Either an evasive, cryptic and somewhat derisive reply or just honest, blunt and to the point].

The Name of God as revealed in Exodus 3:14, An explanation of its meaning,K J Cronin – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Moses was quite understandably anticipating what the Israelites would say to him when he told them that their God had sent him to them. The first thing he anticipated them asking for was the name of their God, YHWH, which if Moses had not known would have proved that he was not sent by Him. 

It would, therefore, have been a perfectly reasonable and practical question for the Israelites to ask. As for Moses’ question of Exodus 3:13, “What should I say to them?”, we need only keep in mind one certainty to understand what Moses was asking for in these words. That certainty is that Moses already knew of the existence of a Divine name in Israelite tradition when he asked this question of God. We know this for certain because Moses refers to a Divine name in Israelite tradition immediately before he asks the question of God. It is very unlikely that he could have been aware of the existence of a Divine name without being aware of what it was and so I believe that we can say with certainty that Moses knew the name YHWH before he asked his question of Exodus 3:13. Moreover, we are informed that as a young man Moses regarded the Hebrews in his midst as his kinsfolk (Exodus 2:11). It is very unlikely that he would not have known the most important feature of his kinsfolk’s religion – the proper name of their God – and so our certainty is confirmed that Moses knew the name YHWH before asking the question of Exodus 3:13. Furthermore, his father-in-law in Midian was a priest (Exodus 2:16) and as such would surely have known the names of the most prominent regional deities amongst whom YHWH would have been counted, which also confirms our certainty that Moses would have known the name YHWH before he asked the question of Exodus 3:13. Bearing in mind these three points the question of Exodus 3:13 can perhaps best be understood as Moses saying to God “I know that You have a proper name, and I even know what that name is, but I still want direction from You as to how I should respond to the Israelites if they ask me for Your name”.

In response to his question Moses received what was no doubt more than he had expected when he asked the question of God, just as the Israelites received more than they could have expected when they asked Moses for the name of their God. Neither Moses nor the Israelites could have expected to receive two names in response to their respective questions but that is what they did receive.

For his part Moses received two answers to his question of Exodus 3:13, or two parts of the one answer, one of them in Exodus 3:14 and one in Exodus 3:15. He was told that when the Israelites ask him for the name of the God who sent him to them, he was first to say that ehyeh had sent him to them (3:14b) and he was then to say that YHWH had sent him to them (3:15). Both words are clearly intended to be understood as answers to the same question because the sentence structure in the two verses is identical, they have a shared vocabulary and there is only one question being answered.

Irrespective of the widespread opinion that these verses are attributable to the Elhoistic source, the entire passage is written with great care and deliberation and is clearly intended to be read and understood precisely as we find it. 

Considered in this way, and as the bold-type text makes clear, the most important difference between the two answers Moses receives to his question is that in the position where Exodus 3:14b has the word ehyeh, Exodus 3:15 has the name YHWH. Both are identified as sending Moses to the Israelites and because there is only one God doing the sending both must be names of the God of Israel. Moreover the word ehyeh is a first person singular of the verb, which means that as a name it can only be one by which God knows Himself; a Personal name. Therefore Ehyeh must be the Personal name of God and YHWH His proper name.It will be recalled that this conclusion is supported by the interpretations of Recanati, Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Sarna and Buber among others.’

11 “Therefore disaster will come on you; You will not know how to make it disappear [with your magic]. And disaster will fall on you For which you cannot atone [with all your offerings to your gods]; And destruction about which you do not know Will come on you suddenly. 12 “Persist, then, [Babylon] in your enchantments And your many sorceries With which you have labored from your youth; Perhaps you will be able to profit [from them], Perhaps you may prevail and cause trembling. 

13  “You are wearied by your many counsels. Just let the astrologers, The stargazers, Those who predict by the new moons [each month]Stand up and save you from the things that will come upon you [Babylon]. 14 “In fact, they are like stubble; Fire burns them. They cannot save themselves from the power of the flame [much less save the nation], There is no blazing coal for warming Nor fire before which to sit! 15 “This is how they have become to you, those [astrologers and sorcerers] with whom you have labored, Those who have done business with you from your youth; Each has wandered in his own way. There is no one to save you.’

This passage in Isaiah chapter forty-seven is dual in intention and loaded with meaning. We have read regarding Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the stature of gold, silver, brass, iron and clay in preceding chapters. The first five chapters of the Book of Daniel are dedicated to the Chaldean empire; with the first four relating to King Nebuchadnezzar himself. The king’s astrologers were not able to recount the dream, let alone explain it. Daniel had it revealed to him by the Creator through Gabriel [Daniel 9:21] and explains:

Daniel 2:1-2, 31-38 

English Standard Version

In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar had dreams; his spirit was troubled, and his sleep left him. 2 Then the king commanded that the magicians, the enchanters, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans be summoned to tell the king his dreams. 31 You saw, O king, and behold, a great image. This image, mighty and of exceeding brightness, stood before you, and its appearance was frightening. 32 The head of this image was of fine gold… 

37 You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, 38 and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all – you are the head of gold

Recall, the Medo-Persian Empire [Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey] was the chest and arms of silver and one of the legs of iron was the Byzantine Empire, the eastern leg of the Roman Empire [refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia]. The feet and toes of iron and clay are a spirit-human mix. Daniel 2:43 says: ‘As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage – by the seed of men – but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay. The Chaldean empire was the most cultured, refined and resplendent of the six kingdoms described or predicted. It remained shorter than the ones that followed and was not as militarily dominant as evidenced by the softer, though more valuable element of gold.

Another description of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire is in the Book of Daniel in chapter seven. We have previously covered the Medo-Persian empire, the second kingdom being described as a bear and also in chapter eight as a ram; the fourth kingdom, of which the Byzantium empire constitutes half of, being described in chapter seven as a ‘terrible beast with ten horns.’

Daniel 7:1-4, 17

English Standard Version

In the first year of Belshazzar [Nabonidus 556 BCE] king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and visions of his head as he lay in his bed. Then he wrote down the dream and told the sum of the matter. 2 Daniel declared, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. 3 And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another. The first was like a lion and had eagles’ wings. Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man, and the mind of a man was given to it.  17 ‘These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth.’

The lion – or a bull with a human head, known as a Lamassu – with eagles wings is a prevalent animal hybrid symbol in Chaldean history. It is also seen sometimes in Asshur’s  monuments as well Lud’s. Today, it is frequently seen in none other than Italy. The symbol of Saint Mark of Venice is a prime example.

In Daniel chapter four we read of Nebuchadnezzar’s greatness, his pride, his being humbled through madness and then his subsequent acknowledgment of the Creator for all that he had been given. The tree described, is a parallel analogy of the restraint of Asherah [refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega].

… I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in you [Daniel] and that no mystery is too difficult for you, tell me the visions of my dream that I saw and their interpretation. 10 The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these… [Daniel] answered and said… The tree you saw, which grew and became strong, so that its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth, 21 whose leaves were beautiful and its fruit abundant, and in which was food for all, under which beasts of the field found shade, and in whose branches the birds of the heavens lived – 22 it is you, O king, who have grown and become strong. Your greatness has grown and reaches to heaven, and your dominion to the ends of the earth. 

23 And because the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Chop down the tree anddestroy it, but leave the stump of its roots in the earth, bound with a band of iron and bronze, in the tender grass of the field, and let him be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven periods of time pass over him…’

27 Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you: break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity.” 29 At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, 30 and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, whichI have built by my mighty power as a royal residenceand for the glory ofmy majesty?” 

31 While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you… until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” 33 Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.

34 At the end of the days [seven years] I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, andI blessed the Most High,and praised and honored him who lives forever …35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?” 36 At the same time my reason returned to me, and for the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and splendor returned to me. My counselors and my lords sought me, and I was established in my kingdom, and still more greatness was added to me [like Job]. 37 Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, for all his works are right and his ways are just; andthose who walk in pride he is able to humble.

Prior to looking at the golden age of the Chaldeans, we will look at their ancient ancestors and clarify an important scholarly debate. We have noted the sons of Canaan; as the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan – with the Nephilim and Elioud giants. In time, other peoples came to be known by the names of some of the sons of Canaan. We have seen this with the Amorites and how that name became more well known for the blond Arameans, than it did for the darker-skinned Amor-ites from Canaan. 

A case in point is Heth. We have studied the original Heth, living in Hamath and now equating to modern Nigeria [refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa]. In time there were a light-skinned people called Hittites. Where it becomes complex, is that these Hittites inherited the name of Hatti, not from the original Heth of Canaan, but rather from the Chaldeans, who were known as Chatti. To further complicate the issue, historians have associated Khatti and Kheta or Khetae with the Kittim, to then conclude that the Hatti and Hittites were tawny-skinned Asiatics descended from the Kittim of Javan. Kitti and present day Indonesia, is not the true identity of the Hatti or the Hittites.

We will study the Hittites in detail, for their imprint and impact on the world has been monumental in successive re-incarnations throughout history. Regarding the Hatti and the Hittites, the New World Encyclopaedia states, emphasis and bold mine:

‘”Hittites” is the conventional English-language term for an ancient people who spoke an Indo-European language and established a kingdom centered in Hattusa (the modern village of Bogazkoy in north-central Turkey), through most of the second millennium B.C.E. The Hittite kingdom, or at least its core region, was apparently called Hatti in the reconstructed Hittite language. 

However, the Hittites should be distinguished from the “Hattians,” an earlier people who inhabited the same region until the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., and spoke a non-Indo-European language conventionally called Hattic.

Hittites or more recently, Hethites is also the common English name of a Biblical people, who are also called Children of Heth. These people are mentioned several times in the Old Testament, from the time of the Patriarchs up to Ezra’s return from Babylonian captivity of Judah. The archaeologists who discovered the Anatolian Hittites in the nineteenth century initially believed the two peoples to be the same, but this identification remains disputed.

Around 2000 B.C.E., 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 was Nesili, i.e. “in the language of Nesa.” The early Hittites, whose prior whereabouts are unknown, borrowed heavily from the pre-existing Hattian culture, and also from that of the Assyrian traders – in particular, the cuneiform writing and the use of cylindrical seals. Since Hattic continued to be used in the Hittite kingdom for religious purposes [a trait of the Chaldeans], and there is substantial continuity between the two cultures, it is not known whether the Hattic speakers – the Hattians – were displaced by the speakers of Hittite, were absorbed by them, or just adopted their language.’

To summarise the aforementioned quote: Two different, successive peoples dwelt in ancient Anatolia, with different languages, the Hatti and Hattic, a non-Indo-European language and then the Hittites, speaking Hittite an Indo-European language. The Hittites are definitely not the same as the sons of Heth, or Hethites from Canaan. Identifying them as one and the same, is a false premise which is correct to remain disputed amongst scholars. We will learn definitively once we study the Hittites, that the Hatti – the future Chaldeans – did not adopt the Hittite language nor did they become absorbed into the Hittite civilisation. Rather, the Hatti were displaced by the encroaching Hittites.

Amazing Bible Time Line – emphasis & bold mine:

It is a matter of considerable scholarly debate whether the biblical “Hittites” signified any or all of: 1) the original Hattites of Hatti; [no they do not] 2) their Indo-European conquerors (Nesili), who retained the name “Hatti” for Central Anatolia, and are today referred to as the “Hittites” (the subject of this article); [yes, they are the same] or 3) a Canaanite group who may or may not have been related to either or both of the Anatolian groups, and who also may or may not be identical with the later Neo-Hittite, Luwian polities [redundant]

Other biblical scholars have argued that rather than being connected with Heth, son of Canaan, [Heth and the Hittites are different] instead the Anatolian land of Hatti was mentioned in Old Testament literature and apocrypha as “Kittim” (Chittim), [incorrect] a people said to be named for a son of Javan.’

Sarah wife of Abraham. Fairy tale or Real History? Gerard Gertoux – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Hittites who lived in Syria, and sometimes in Canaan, wanted to define themselves by their genealogical link “people from the land of Heth” as does the Bible (Genesis 26:34; 36:2), the original land being likely the region around Hat(ti)-tusa (Hattusa). According to the Bible, when Joshua entered the Promised Land (in 1493 BCE) [1407 BC] he expelled a number of nations, including the Hittites. These Hittites were located north of Syria. The few scattered references that we have to Hantili’s reign (1500-1495) indicate that he intended on maintaining Hittite influence on Syria. The Hittites, south of Euphrates, mentioned in the time of Joshua and Hantili I, are therefore the same. 

The Hittites met by Abraham were not quite the same as those of Joshua 37 since they are identified as sons of Heth, not Hittites. In the biblical narrative (Genesis 23:2-10), Ephron (“of a calf”), son of Zohar (“tawny”), was not a Hittite in the usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite, implying that they had been settled in this region for a long time.’ 

Yes… Ephron was an original son of Heth, a son of Canaan, an African with dark skin.

Consequently the history of Hittites is complex, its official beginning is the period called Early Empire (c. 1530 BCE) but previously there was a period called Hattian period, with 3 ancestors kingdoms, those of Hattusa, Kanesh and Carchemish. Those ancient Hittites, called Hattians by scholars or sons of Heth, son of Canaan in Genesis 10:15, were [incorrectly called] the ancestors of the Hittites.’ 

The sons of Heth – black people – were not the ancestors of the Hittites; nor were the Hattians. The Hittites are related to the Hattians, but the Hattians are not the ancestors of the Hittites. Heth, Hatti and the Hittites are three separate, distinct peoples. Egyptian depictions of the Battle of Kadesh, show long-nosed Hattian soldiers, while the Hittite leaders look different; highlighting two different peoples.

Ancient history can be hazy for all cultures and empires with information largely based on king lists and inscriptions on tablets, steles and so forth. The Akkadian kingdom in central Mesopotamia, the northern half of the land of Shinar with Sumer, the older civilisation in the south, fascinates; yet their rise and fall are cloaked in shadows. After the Tower of Babel, all peoples dispersed eventually. The sons of Shem stayed closer to the main theatre of events, for longer. The Akkadians were the main body of Peleg’s side of Arphaxad’s family tree and later Sumer were from Joktan [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans]. 

The Amurru or Amorites from the northwest, circa 1994 BCE and the Gutians – both Aramaean peoples – from the east, circa 2067 BCE had invaded the region, with Terah and his family living further south, in northern Sumer at this time. Accad is listed in Genesis chapter ten with Babel, Erech and Calneh as the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom. The Akkadian Empire reached its political peak between 2224 and 2064 BCE, following the conquests of its founder the great Sargon during 2224 to 2169 BCE. Under Sargon and his successors, the Akkadian language was imposed on the neighbouring conquered states of Elam, the Guti and the Martu – or Amurru. Sargon had also defeated Sumer, Canaan and the Assyrians. Akkad is regarded as the first empire in recent ‘ancient’ history. 

Sargon claimed he did not know his father and that his mother was a changeling. A changeling is believed to be a fairy which has been left in place of a human, who has been stolen by fairies. Other sources say his mother was La’ibum or Itti-Bel, either a humble gardener, a hierodule – ‘a slave-prostitute living in a temple and dedicated to the service of a god’ – or a priestess to the Babylonian goddess Ishtar – Inanna in Sumer. Sargon was originally a Rabshakeh, orcupbearer to a king of Kish, Ur-Zababa – Kish as in Khatti, not from Cush.

After the fall of the Akkadian Empire, the people of Mesopotamia eventually split into two major Akkadian speaking nations; Assyria in the upper north, and a few centuries later, Babylonia to its south. The third Dynasty of Ur from 1988 to 1882 BCE was founded by Ur-Namma or Ur-Nammu. Ur-Nammu became king after serving as governor to his father and Ur-Nammu – notice family name of Ur – was the first king to use the title, King of Sumer and Akkad. Ur-Nammu is credited with building the ziggurats at Ur and Uruk. The Code of Ur-Nammu, parallels the later Code of Hammurabi [refer Chapter XIX Chedorlaomer & the War of Nine Kings]. The phrase: There will come a king of the four quarters of the earth, originated from Akkadian soothsaying.

During the same time period of the preeminenceof Akkad- from 2224 to 2039 BCE the kingdom of the Hatti existed in western Asia Minor – as evidenced by Hittite and Assyrian records. The structure of archeological finds in sites like Hattush, reveal a highly developed culture, with distinct social classes. The Hattians were organised ‘in monarchial city-states. These states were ruled as theocratic kingdoms or principalities.’ A theocracy is ‘a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission’ and ‘a form of government in which a deity is recognised as the supreme civil ruler, the deity’s laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.’ The Pope and Cardinals of the Vatican, bearing a more than coincidental similarity.

The pantheon of gods in Hatti, included the storm god Taru, represented by a bull and the sun goddess Furusemu, represented by a leopard, amongst other symbols. Certain reliefs show a female figure giving birth to a bull; as the the mother goddess Kattahha was mother to the storm god Taru [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America]. 

Ancient symbols are often replicated in modern insignias by businesses and sports teams. For instance, the famous Italian sports car marque, Lamborghini. 

The Hittites incorporated much of the Hattian pantheon into their own religious beliefs. James Mellaart proposed that the Hattian ‘religion revolved around a water-from-the-earth concept. Pictorial and written sources show that the deity of paramount importance to the inhabitants of Anatolia was the terrestrial water-god. The Hittite legends of Telipinu and the serpentine dragon Illuyanka found their origin in the Hattian civilization.’

World History Encyclopaedia, Hatti, Joshua J Mark 2012 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Hatti… migrated to the area sometime prior to 2400 BCE. The region was known as ‘Land of the Hatti’ from c. 2350 BCE until 630 BCE, attesting to the influence of the Hattian culture there.  Controlling a significant number of city states and small kingdoms, they had established lucrative trade with the region of Sumer (southern Mesopotamia) by the year 2700 BCE. The historian Erdal Yavuz writes: ‘Besides the timber and stone essential for construction, but deficient in Mesopotamia, Anatolia had rich mines which provided copper, silver, iron, and gold.’ Their trade with the cities of Mesopotamia enriched the region and helped to develop their kingdom. The historian Marc Van De Mieroop includes the Hatti among the nations… in the diplomatic and trade consortium he refers to as The Club of the Great Powers… it, included Mitanni, Babylonia, Assyria, Hattiand Egypt…

In 2500 BCE the Hatti established their capital high on a hill at the city of Hattusa [Seven Hills of Rome]and held lands securely in the surrounding areas, administering laws and regulating trade in a number of neighboring states. Between c. 2334-2279 BCE the great Sargon of Akkad invaded the region after sacking the city of Ur in 2330 BCE. He then turned his attention to Hattusa but failed to gain an advantage over the city’s defences which were especially strong in that it was located high on a well-defended and fortified plateau. 

Following Sargon’s campaigns in the region, his grandson Naram-Sin (2261-2224 BCE) continued his policies, fighting against the Hattic King Pamba late in the 23rd century BCE with as little success as his grandfather had. In spite of the constant harassment from the Akkadians, Hattic art flourished around 2200 BCE and, by 2000 BCE, their civilization was at its height with prosperous trading colonies established between Hattusa and their other city of Kanesh and, of course, continuing trade relations with Mesopotamia.

In 1700 BCE, the Kingdom of the Hatti was again invaded, this time by the Hittites, and the great city of Hattusa was stormed and destroyed by a king named Anitta from the neighboring Kingdom of Kussara. Excavations at the site show that the city was burned to the ground. King Anitta had such contempt for the city he had vanquished that he cursed the ground and further cursed whoever should re-build Hattusa and try to rule there. Even so, not long after, the city was re-built and re-populated by a later king of Kussara who called himself Hattusili [I]. 

Whoever the Hatti originally were, or where they came from, remains a mystery in the modern day owing to the… the lack of ancient records. The actual nature of the relationship between the Hatti and the Hittites remains a mystery in the modern day and waits on the discovery of ancient documentation to be resolved.’

Joshua Mark confirms the distinction between the Hatti and Hittites; admitting the lack of historical information regarding their relationship. When we study the Hittites, the relationship will become clearly apparent. The dates he provides are all earlier than Nahor’s life, for he was not born until circa 1993 BCE. These Hatti were ante-descendants of Nahor, descending from Peleg.

Later, the Chaldeans dwelt near the coastal area of the Persian Gulf and had not been  entirely subjugated by the Assyrians. In 630 BCE Nabopolassar became king of the Chaldeans and by 626 BCE he had forced the Assyrians out of Uruk and crowned himself king of Babylonia. He endeavoured to destroy Assyria, while at the same time, to restore the dilapidated network of canals in the neighbouring cities of and including, Babylon. 

As the Babylonians had grown tired of Assyrian rule and weary of internal struggles, they were easily persuaded to submit to the new Chaldean king. The result was a rapid social and economic consolidation, assisted by the fact that after the fall of Assyria, no external enemy threatened Babylonia for decades. In the cities, the temples were an important part of the economy and the business class regained its strength in the trades, commerce, livestock breeding as well as in agriculture. The collapse of the Assyrian empire, had meant many trade arteries were rerouted through Babylonia with the city of Babylon emerging as a world centre.

Naboploassar had fought the Assyrian King Ashur-uballiṭ II and then turned his attention against Egypt; his successes alternating with defeats. In 605 BCE Nabopolassar died in Babylon. 

Nabopolassar had named his oldest son Nabu-kudurri-usur, after the famous king of the second dynasty of Isin. He was trained carefully for his future kingship and shared responsibilities with his father. When Nabopolassar died, Nebuchadnezzar II was with his army in Syria. He had just crushingly defeated the Egyptians near Carchemish in a bloody battle and was pursuing them toward the south. He returned immediately to Babylon on hearing the news of his father’s death. Nebuchadnezzar’s numerous building inscriptions enumerate his many wars, most of them interestingly, ending with prayers

Nebuchadnezzar continued to frequently campaign in Syria in the bid to drive out the Egyptians. In 604 BCE he took the Philistine city of Ashkelon and attacked Palestine at the end of 598 BCE. King Jehoiakim of Judah had rebelled and was relying on aid from Egypt. Even so, Jerusalem was won on March 16, 597 BCE. Jehoiakim died during the siege, and his son, King Johoiachin, together with at least 3,000 people from Judah, were led into exile in Babylonia. The captives were treated well, according to document records.

Judah rebelled again in 589 BCE and Jerusalem was placed under siege. The city finally fell during 587 and 586 BCE and was completely destroyed. Many thousands from Judah and Benjamin were forced into Babylonian exile. The former Kingdom of Judah, was reduced to a province of the Babylonian empire. The revolt had been caused by an Egyptian invasion which pushed as far north as Sidon. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre for thirteen years without taking the city, as he had no decisive winning fleet at his disposal. In 568 and 567 BCE he attacked Egypt, again without much success, but from that time on the Egyptians refrained from further attacks on Palestine. 

Nebuchadnezzar was at peace with Media throughout his reign and he was a mediator after the Median-Lydian war which lasted five years from 590 to 585 BCE. The Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar grew, becoming one of the richest lands in western Asia – a remarkable transformation as it had been rather poor when it was ruled by the Assyrians. Babylon was the largest city of the civilised world. Nebuchadnezzar maintained the revitalised canal systems of his father and built many supplementary canals, making the land even more fertile; with trade and commerce booming during his reign.

Nebuchadnezzar’s building efforts easily surpassed those of most of the Assyrian kings before him. He fortified the old double walls of Babylon, adding a triple wall outside the old wall and erected a further wall, the Median Wall, north of the city between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers. According to Greek estimates, the Median Wall was about one hundred feet high. Nebuchadnezzar enlarged the original palace, ‘adding many wings, so that hundreds of rooms with large inner courts were now at the disposal of the central offices of the empire. Colourful glazed-tile bas-reliefs decorated the walls. Terrace gardens, called the Hanging Gardens in later accounts, were [built]. Hundreds of thousands of workers are thought to have been required for all his ambitious building  projects.’

Britannica- emphasis & bold mine:

The temples were objects of special concern. He devoted himself first and foremost to the completion of Etemenanki, the “Tower of babel.” Construction of this building began in the time of Nebuchadrezzar I about 1110 [BCE]. It stood as a “building ruin” until the reign of Esarhaddon of Assyria, who resumed building about 680 but did not finish. [Nebuchadnezzar] II was able to complete the whole building. The mean dimensions of Etemenanki are to be found in the Esagila Tablet, which has been known since the late 19th century. Its base measured about 300 feet on each side, and it was 300 feet in height. There were five terrace like gradations surmounted by a temple, the whole tower being about twice the height of those of other temples. The wide street used for processions led along the eastern side by the inner city walls and crossed at the enormous Ishtar gate with its world-renowned bas-relief tiles. [Nebuchadnezzar] also built many smaller temples throughout the country.

The [last] king [of Dynasty X] was the Aramaean Nabonidus… [556–539 BCE] from Harran, one of the most interesting and enigmatic figures of ancient times. His mother, Addagoppe, was a priestess of the god Sin in Harran; she came to Babylon and managed to secure responsible offices for her son at court. The god of the moon rewarded her piety with a long life – she lived to be 103 – and she was buried in Harran with all the honours of a queen in 547 [BCE]. 

His viceroy in Babylonia was his son Bel-shar-usur, the Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel in the Bible. Cyrus… [annexed] Media in 550. Nabonidus, in turn, allied himself with Croesus of Lydia [Lud] in order to fight Cyrus. Yet, when Cyrus attacked Lydia and annexed it in 546, Nabonidus was not able to help Croesus. Cyrus bode his time. In 542 Nabonidus returned to Babylonia, where his son had been able to maintain good order in external matters but had not overcome a growing internal opposition to his father. He appointed his daughter to be high priestess of the god Sin in Ur, thus returning to the Sumerian-Old Babylonian religious tradition. 

The priests of Marduk looked to Cyrus, hoping to have better relations with him than with Nabonidus; they promised Cyrus the surrender of Babylon without a fight if he would grant them their privileges in return. In 539 [BCE] Cyrus [I] attacked northern Babylonia with a large army, defeating Nabonidus, and entered the city of Babylon without a battle. The other cities did not offer any resistance either. Nabonidus surrendered, receiving a small territory in eastern Iran. Babylonia’s peaceful submission to Cyrus saved it from the fate of Assyria. It became a territory under the Persian crown but kept its cultural autonomy. Even the racially mixed western part of the Babylonian empire submitted without resistance.’

King Nebuchadnezzar was reportedly a very short man, though he overshadowed his height with his personality and achievements.

Nebuchadnezzar II king of Babylonia, Henry W F Saggs – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Nebuchadnezzar II… is known from cuneiform inscriptions, the Bible and later Jewish sources, and classical authors. His name, from the Akkadian Nabu-kudurri-usur, means “O  Nabu, watch over my heir.” While his father disclaimed royal descent, Nebuchadnezzar claimed the third-millennium Akkadian ruler Naram-Sin as ancestor. The year of his birth is uncertain, but it is not likely to have been before 630 BCE, for according to tradition Nebuchadnezzar began his military career as a young man, appearing as a military administrator by 610. He is first mentioned by his father as working as a labourer in the restoration of the temple of Marduk, the chief god of the city of Babylon and the national god of Babylonia.

After his father’s death on August 16, 605, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon and ascended the throne within three weeks. This rapid consolidation of his accession and the fact that he could return to Syria shortly afterward reflected his strong grip on the empire. Much influenced by the Assyrian imperial tradition, Nebuchadnezzar consciously pursued a policy of expansion, claiming the grant of universal kingship by Marduk and praying to have “no opponent from horizon to sky.”

Nebuchadnezzar’s main activity, other than as military commander, was the rebuilding of Babylon. He completed and extended fortifications begun by his father, built a great moat and a new outer defense wall, paved the ceremonial Processional Way with limestone, rebuilt and embellished the principal temples, and cut canals. This he did not only for his own glorification but also in honour of the gods. He claimed to be “the one who set in the mouth of the people reverence for the great gods” and disparaged predecessors who had built palaces elsewhere than at Babylon and had only journeyed there for the New Year Feast. Little is known of his family life beyond the tradition that he married a Median princess, whose yearning for her native terrain he sought to ease by creating gardens simulating hills.

Despite the fateful part he played in Judah’s history, Nebuchadnezzar is seen in Jewish tradition in a predominantly favourable light. It was claimed that he gave orders for the protection of Jeremiah, who regarded him as God’s appointed instrument whom it was impiety to disobey, and the prophet Ezekiel expressed a similar view at the attack on Tyre. A corresponding attitude to Nebuchadnezzar, as God’s instrument against wrongdoers, occurs in the Apocrypha in 1 Esdras and, as protector to be prayed for, in Baruch. In Daniel (Old Testament) and in Bel and the Dragon (Apocrypha), Nebuchadnezzar appears as a man, initially deceived by bad advisers, who welcomes the situation in which truth is triumphant and God is vindicated.

In modern times Nebuchadnezzar has been treated as the type of godless conqueror; Napoleon was compared to him. The story of Nebuchadnezzar is the basis of Giuseppe Verdi’s opera Nabucco [the coincidence of a modern Italian (Chaldean) writing about an ancient Chaldean (Italian)], while his supposed madness is the theme of William Blake’s picture “Nebuchadnezzar.”’

Did King Nebuchadnezzar Really Go Mad and Eat Grass for 7 Years? David Roos, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II is one of the greatest villains of the Hebrew Bible… In… 2 Kings, Nebuchadnezzar and his army lay siege to Jerusalem, loot gold and other treasures from the temple, abduct the Judean king and his court, and carry off 10,000 officers, artisans and skilled workers into exile in Babylon. Ten years later, Nebuchadnezzar returns and razes Solomon’s temple to the ground. And in another unforgettable story in Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar is punished for his hubris and wanders the wilderness like a beast eating grass for seven years.

The question is: Did any of this really happen? For centuries, historians and biblical scholars have searched for clues about the real-life Nebuchadnezzar II… We know from the archaeological record that Nebuchadnezzar was a master builder, raising Babylon to a grandeur unmatched in the ancient Near East. But was Nebuchadnezzar really the tyrant who sacked Jerusalem and sent the Judeans into exile, and is there any truth to the Bible’s account of his “bestial” bout with madness?’

“Nebuchadnezzar is one of those characters in the Bible for whom we have an enormous amount of data from non-biblical sources,” says Eckart Frahm, a professor of Near Eastern languages and civilizations at Yale University. “There’s just a tremendous amount of material.”

‘Archaeologists have recovered tens of thousands of clay tablets and other inscribed objects from sites across the ancient Babylonian Empire, which stretched from the Mediterranean Sea (modern-day Egypt and Israel) to the Persian Gulf (Iraq, Iran and Kuwait). They were written in cuneiform and include everything from royal proclamations to accounting documents. “Among [these texts] are many, many inscriptions written in Nebuchadnezzar’s own name,” says Frahm, “and obviously in these texts he presents himself not as a villain, but as the ‘great builder.’ He’s very eager to indicate that he built these massive temples and palaces, and that he’s also very pious. He confesses that he’s constantly thinking of the gods when building temples to them.”

Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t write anything about his political or military exploits, but some important details were captured in a remarkable set of clay tablets known as the Babylonian Chronicles.’

Or, it may have been the measure of the man, why Nebuchadnezzar chose to leave these aspects of pride in his life in the background and reflect on those of higher altruistic value. Nebuchadnezzar as recoded in the Book of Daniel had a change of heart after his affliction with madness – Daniel 4:34-37. His self image was humbled to include a relationship with a Creator who had opened his mind to understand and appreciate the matters that carry important consequence. 

In 2 Kings, we learn that the Judean King Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute to Babylon, so Nebuchanezzar invaded Judah to quash the rebellion. The Babylonian Chronicles confirm this, and provide an exact date for the conquest of Jerusalem (597 B.C.E.)’

“There’s no reason to doubt that this really happened,” says Frahm of both the first Babylonian siege in 597 B.C.E. and the second in 587 B.C.E. “On both occasions, many people in Jerusalem were in fact taken into exile, including the royal family.”

‘King Jehoiakim died either before or during the siege, leaving his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin to taste Nebuchadnezzar’s wrath. Along with the young king and his extended royal family, thousands of Jerusalem’s elites – officials, priests, warriors, artisans – were all marched to Babylon. In the early 20th century, archaeologists excavating beneath the ruins of an ancient Babylonian palace found 14 vaulted rooms they first believed to be part of the legendary Hanging Gardens of Babylon, but later figured out were part of a royal storehouse. In that storehouse were more clay tablets, mostly records of the day-to-day affairs of the palace. And among those tablets was a 3-inch tall fragment containing the name Jehoiakhin, king of Judah.” The fragment turned out to be part of a “ration list” indicating how much oil and foodstuffs were given to King Jehoiachin and his exiled Judean court in Babylon.”That was a remarkable find,” says Frahm. The ration list specifically mentions Jehoiachin, other Judean dignitaries and Jehoiachin’s five sons. The quantities of the rations were sizable…    

So where does this leave the famous story of Nebuchadnezzar losing his marbles and eating grass for seven years? [author allows his prejudice to spill over into derogatory sarcasm] Are there also hints in the historical record?… Nebuchadnezzar has a disturbing dream that none of his court magicians could interpret, so he asks Daniel, a young exiled Judean known as a visionary. To Daniel, the dream is clear: If Nebuchadnezzar doesn’t repent and praise the one true God, he will be stricken with a madness that will cause him to wander the wilderness like a beast. Incredibly, there is an independent record of a Babylonian king going mad and wandering in the wilderness for years. But it wasn’t Nebuchadnezzar, says Frahm. In Babylonian texts, the “mad king” was Nabonidus, a king who ruled two decades after Nebuchadnezzar and ended up losing the Babylonian Empire to the Persians.’

The author places too much confidence in the suppositions of Frahm; as well as reading the Babylonian text at face value. Why would an otherwise impressive record of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements be tarnished with a the sensitive episode of a sustained mental breakdown, or the fact he converted to worship the ‘God’ of the tribe of Judah? Easy to pin the story on a later, lesser king, if such is the case?

‘According to the records, King Nabonidus replaced the Babylonian gods with a new moon god and then led his troops on a strange campaign into the Arabian Desert to attack some towns, including Yathrib, the later Medina. 

He then dwelled the next 10 years in the Arabian city of Tayma. “This sojourn of Nabonidus in Arabia for 10 years is clearly the background of the story of Nebuchadnezzar in the wilderness,”says Frahm. There’s even physical proof of the Nabonidus story also being tied to a Hebrew sage. Four fragments discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls contained what’s now known as the Prayer of Nabonidus: I was afflicted [with an evil ulcer] for seven years…and an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the [children of the exile of Judah, and said,] “Recount this in writing to [glorify and exalt] the Name of the [Most High God].” 

Frahm says that the “exorcist” in the Nabonidus account is clearly Daniel, and it’s easy to understand why the authors of Daniel would have substituted the “tyrant” Nebuchadnezzarin their retelling. “In this theology, where you have to be punished for the sins you committed, it makes sense that it’s Nebuchadnezzar and not Nabonidus who is said to have had this strange episode,” says Frahm.’

It would seem that this parallel yet, different account is about Nabonidus. An exorcist and ulcer are not part of Nebuchadnezzar’s story. Frahm has made sizeable jumps in assumption which are not necessarily true.

‘The Hebrew Bible is an incredible document, not only for the faithful, but for historians like Frahm. In books like 2 Kings and Jeremiah, there are accounts of Nebuchadnezzar and later Babylonian kings that have been independently confirmed by ancient cuneiform tablets recovered from Babylonian sites. But then you have the [story] in Daniel about… Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams and being cursed with a seven-year madness, all of which Frahm describes not as history, but literature [can’t have it both ways; either both are fiction or both are historical accounts]. What does the example of Nebuchadnezzar teach us about the historicity of the Bible? That it’s neither entirely factual nor entirely made up, Frahm says. “You have to look at the details,” says Frahm. “When we have these independent sources, as we do for the sixth century B.C.E., you do have a good chance of figuring out what is historically correct and what is later theological interpretation [this line of reasoning is circular, flimsy and biased].”’

Roos appears keen to discredit the biblical account and promote Frahm’s interpretation of the Babylonian texts. By Frahm’s own admission, he states the name of Nebuchadnezzar has been substituted with Nabonidus. If true, this would not be hard to understand and has support for two reasons. Firstly, Nebuchadnezzar II was the most prominent and successful ruler of the Chaldean Dynasty X of Babylon. Why besmirch his legacy and renown with an account of madness? It was easy to transfer this episode to a weak king who was the last king of the dynasty; whom let the kingdom slide away irrevocably to the Medes & Persians. 

Secondly, the Bible is clear that Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar had an involved and complex relationship. They have the starring roles in the first four chapters of the Book of Daniel. There is just the one chapter devoted to Daniel and Nabonidus and one does not find as close a relationship portrayed. 

Nor does Nabonidus appear to have any affinity with the Eternal as Nebuchadnezzar before him; therefore the Babylonian text accounts if accurate, do not align with the Bible and are to be mistrusted before the Book of Daniel.

Italian men

Forwarding some five hundred years, Germanic tribes are credited with originating from a homeland in southern Scandinavia – modern day Sweden and Norway – including the Jutland area in northern Denmark and a narrow strip of Baltic coastline. The East Germanic Goths were one of the first of the Germanic tribes to form a recognised kingdom and Jordanes states, according to Dio: ‘the Goths were ever wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks.’ This is more than coincidental, in that the eastern Goths are closely related to the people we will study as the Greeks in the next chapter.

Those of noble birth amongst the Goths – from whom their kings and priests were appointed – were first known as Tarabostesei. The word ‘tarabostesei’ with its suffixes removed leaves tarabost. The first part, tara can have several meanings, including ‘bull’ or ‘fast.’ Recall the storm god of the Hatti, Taru the bull. The second half, ‘bost’ means ‘hand’ or ‘fist’.

The Goths were constantly attended by a subject tribe, the Heruli who later emerged in Italy as part of the Gothic kingdom of Rome, and to an extent by the Scirii as well. Edward Dawson proposes that there is a distinct possibility that the Goth name emerged as a result of Gaulish [Celtic] influence on a tribal name which derived from Woden or Wodan. ‘The use of Godan instead of Wodan by the Langobard tribe is [key], given the known tendency of Gaulish to convert a ‘w’ into a ‘gw’ or ‘gu’ sound. 

It then appears that Wodan [from Odin], Goth, and God are cognates.’ The people of Guti, Goth, or God.

The Ostrogoths, or Eastern Goths, dominated a vast swathe of what is now southern Russia and Ukraine by the mid-third century. In the Old English epic poem Widsith, the Ostrogoths are known as the Hreo-Gotum or Victory Goths. They migrated through eastern Europe and southwards through modern day Poland. In 487 CE the Scirian commander of Rome, Odoacer, defeated the Rugli tribe, long time allies of the Ostrogoths. This presented a future threat for Italy, with the Langobards migrating into the Rugli homelands in Lower Austria. Theodoric the Great, led the Ostrogothic invasion of Italy, supported by elements of the Rugli. Over throwing Rome and ruling from 493 to 526.

Italian women

The Langobards or Langobardi were the other significant body of people to invade and settle in Italy; who had originated in northwestern Germany from the 1st century CE and later migrated above northern Silesia – now western Poland as part of the Suevi or Suebi confederation of tribes. Recall, the Suevi continued on into the Iberian Peninsula and settled in Portugal [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. The Suebi comprised Hul and Mash, sons of Aram. It is probable that they, like the Goths had earlier origins in southern Scandinavia and were forced to migrate due to population expansion. They were also known by their original ethnic name, the Winnili  – ‘Winn’ Germanic for ‘striving’ or ‘being victorious’.

In 415, continuing to wander – recall Terah’s name means, wanderer – from Poland, the Langobards had entered Vurgundaib. This is thought to be the original lands of the Burgundians – who eventually settled in present day Switzerland – located in the northern Carpathians. 

Their westwards journey by the tail end of the fifth century lead to the area equating with modern Austria. They began to attack the established order in Italy from 568 CE; invading northern Italy and surrounding the ‘island’ dominion in Venice. The Langobards, were now known as Lombards and they filled a void left by the demise of the Ostrogoth kingdom at the hands of Byzantium. 

The Lombards occupied territory which had been home to various Celtic tribes since the sixth century BCE, almost unopposed. Their attacks badly affected Rome, cutting it off from the Byzantine empire. Unlike the Ostrogoths, the Lombards did not seek to preserve the ancient Roman methods of governance. Their kingdom in the north and the independent Lombard duchies to the south in central Italy, added a Germanic essence to the peninsula which had begun with the Goth’s arrival. 

This highlights the distinction between the northern and north central Italians with the latinised south Central and southern Italians. The Lombards from the north descending from Aram’s son Uz and the Goths from Nahor’s wife Milcah. Whereas, the southern Italians and Sicilians contain a mixture from Nahor’s concubine Reumah and Joktan’s children, such as Uzal, the progenitor of the modern Greeks. Somewhere in this mix is Terah’s other son, Zoba and his son Aram.

The biggest city in southern Italy is Naples, with some three million people. The biggest city in central Italy is the capital Rome, with approximately four million people. The biggest city in northern Italy and the fashion capital of the world, Milan – though the French would beg to differ – has three million people. It is the capital of the Lombardy region, houses the Italian stock exchange, the Borsa Italiana and has the third largest economy according to GDP after the cities of London and Paris.

During 584 to 585, the Lombards invaded the Merovingian Frankish region of Provence. Returning in kind, the Frankish king of Austrasia, Childebert II and Guntramn, king of Burgundy, invaded Lombard Italy, or Lombardy as it came to be known. They captured Trent and opened negotiations with the eastern Roman emperor with the probable view, of carving up Italy between them. The Lombards, fearing Frankish domination, elected a new king called Authari, to end their disunity after ten years of rule by various Dukes. In 590, Authari was succeeded by Agilulf, the Duke of Turin, who was able to recover most of the portions of land that had been lost to the Frankish-Byzantine alliance. The Lombards, like the Visigioths of Spain were Arians, though they later converted to orthodox christianity in the latter part of the seventh century [refer Chapter XV the Philistines: Latino-Hispano America]. 

The invasion of papal territories by the Lombard kings Aistulf [749–756] and Desiderius [756–774] compelled Pope Adrian I to seek aid from the Frankish king Charlemagne. The Franks entered Italy in 773 and after a year’s siege Pavia fell to their armies. Desiderius was captured and Charlemagne became king of the Lombards as well as of the Franks. Lombard rule in Italy came to an end in 774. 

In a momentous and astute act, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne head of the Holy Roman Empire on December 25, 800 CE.

In the 1200s, powerful city-states – indicative of the ancient Chaldeans – began to develop throughout Italy including Florence, Milan, Venice, and Naples. The Renaissance began in Florence, Italy in the 1300s. The Lombards of Florence or Firenze, are credited with initialising banks and the system of banking. From these Princedoms, famous merchant families arose such as the Medici in Florence, who then formed political dynasties. 

Italy is responsible for driving the arts, sciences and exploration forward with massive worldwide impact; a precursor to the age of discovery, later joined by Portugal and Spain. Famous influencers, included: Galileo, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Volta, Dante, Ariosto, Verdi and Vivaldi. Today, Italian artists, writers, designers, musicians, chefs, actors and filmmakers have added immeasurably to global art and culture.

In 1796, Northern Italy was conquered by Napoleon and incorporated into the French Empire. Later in 1805, Napoleon declared Italy a kingdom. Subsequently in 1814, Napoleon was defeated and Italy was divided up into small states. In 1815, the process of reunification began and in 1871, the Kingdom of Italy was established for the second time. Rome and Venice had been separate states, but by 1866, Venice became part of Italy and by 1871, most of Italy including Rome was included as one united kingdom. The key personalities in achieving unification were General Garibaldi, spear heading the campaign in Naples and Sicily, the Count of Cavour who led the government of the House of Savoy in the Kingdom of Sardina for the Northern Italian monarchy and Victor Emmanuel II – who became the first king of the united Italy.

‘From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, Italy rapidly industrialised, mainly in the north, and acquired a colonial empire, while the south remained largely impoverished and excluded from industrialisation, fuelling a large and influential diaspora.’ Many Italians migrated to Brazil – as well as Argentina, Uruguay and the United States.

Italy’s geographic shape resembles a boot. The other boot that completes the pair exists elsewhere. During World War I, Italy fought on the side of the Allies, though under the rule of the fascist leader Benito Mussolini, it waged war against the Allied powers in World War II. From 1945, Italy has had a multiparty system dominated by two large parties: the Christian Democratic Party and the Italian Communist Party. 

In the early 1990s the Italian party system underwent a radical transformation and the political centre collapsed, leaving a right and left polarisation of the party options which threw the north and south divide of Italy into sharper contrast and gave rise to political leaders like media magnate Silvio Berlusconi. 

Italy is considered to be one of the world’s most culturally and economically advanced countries,with 60,230,454 people. It is the third largest economy in the European Union, in the top ten in the world according to national wealth and the third largest with a central bank gold reserve, behind the United States and Germany. Italy has 2,451.8 tonnes of gold which equates to 69.3 percent of its foreign reserves. Italy has maintained the size of its reserves over a long period. 

Mario Draghi, a former Bank of Italy and also European Central Bank governor, ‘when asked by a reporter in 2013 what role gold plays in a central bank’s portfolio, answered that the metal was “a reserve of safety,” adding, “it gives you a fairly good protection against fluctuations against the dollar.”’ Recall that the Chaldeans were represented by the head of gold in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. 

Italy ‘ranks very highly in life expectancy [due to its mediterranean diet], quality of life, healthcare and education. The country plays a prominent role in regional and global economic, military, cultural and diplomatic affairs; it is both a regional power and a great power, and is ranked the world’s eighth most-powerful military. 

Italy is a founding and leading member of the European Union… the country has long been a global centre of art, music, literature, philosophy, science and technology, and fashion, and has greatly influenced and contributed to diverse fields including cinema, cuisine, sports, jurisprudence, banking and business.As a reflection of its cultural wealth, Italy is home to the world’s largest number of World Heritage sites (55), and is the fifth-most visited country’ in the world. The Chaldeans were one of the foremost cultured civilisations, just as Italy is today.

Italy is a member of the elite group of G7 nations; comprising the most advanced, developed and biggest economies in the world – excepting the burgeoning economies of the BRIC nations, comprising Brazil, Russia, India and China. These four as we have learned, represent the most prominent descendants from Japheth, Ham and Shem in the scriptures, in that they represent Tyre from Aram, Asshur or the Assyrians, Cush or biblically translated as Ethiopia and Magog, Tubal and Meschech. Japan is the one non-European nation in the seven, though by irony is the most westernised nation of those from the East just as Tarshish was anciently [refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan]. Italy is one of the four influential nations from Europe and as we shall discover, is closely related to them all – France, Germany and the United Kingdom – for they are all descended from either Nahor or one of his brothers, Haran and Abraham. 

There are numerous theories on the etymology of the name Italia. One is that it was borrowed via Greek from the Oscan Viteliu, ‘land of calves’ which in Latin is vitulus. Nahor’s concubine Reumah’s name, included wild ox as a meaning. The daughters of Laban, a grandson of Nahor, both married Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. Leah’s name includes, wild cow in her name’s meaning and her younger sister Rachel, includes ewe, a female sheep in hers.

Flag of the Italian Navy, displaying the coat of arms of Venice, Genoa, Pisa and Amalfi the most prominent maritime republics. The strong shipping tradition is indicative of the sons of Aram.

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

  1. Machinery including computers: US$108.1 billion 
  2. Vehicles: $45.4 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $37.7 billion 
  4. Pharmaceuticals: $36.7 billion
  5. Plastics, plastic articles: $26.3 billion 
  6. Articles of iron or steel: $21.3 billion
  7. Gems, precious metals: $20.8 billion 
  8. Mineral fuels including oil: $19.6 billion 
  9. Iron, steel: $19.2 billion 
  10. Furniture, bedding, lighting, signs, prefabricated buildings: $15.8 billion 

Mineral fuels including oil represents the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 75.3% from 2020 to 2021. That product category was propelled by Italy’s greater international sales of refined petroleum oils. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel as materials via a 72.9% gain. Italy’s shipments of articles made from iron or steel posted the third-fastest acceleration in value, up by 28.2%.’
The world’s eighth largest economy according to GDP belongs to Italy, at an even $2.00 trillion in 2019. Italy’s economy and level of development vary notably by region, with a more developed, industrial economy in the north contrasted by underdeveloped southern regions. Italy’s second biggest export is automobiles, including several famous brands such as Fiat, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Alfa Romeo and Maserati. One of Italy’s most famous exports is clothing, which includes world-famous brands like Versace, Gucci, Giorgio Armani and Prada. 

The flags of Italy, Venice and the Vatican City

Did you know that Italians have the most diverse DNA in Europe? L’Italo Americano, Giulia Franceschini, 2020 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘We usually say that America is a melting pot of cultures and races, but did you know that, according to genetic research, Italy may be just as varied? The study was carried out by a team of researchers from Rome’s Universita La Sapienza, in collaboration with the universities of Bologna, Cagliari and Pisa, and led by anthropologist Giovanni Destro Bisol in 2014. Its main findings show that Italian DNA has from 7 to 30 times more differences than those registered between the Portuguese andthe Hungarians. This variety is present everywhere, from North to South and includes also Italy’s islands, Sardinia and Sicily. In other words, Bisol et al.’s research shows that Italians have a higher level of diversity among themselves than populations living at opposite corners of the continent.’ 

The diagram below is a good example of the difference between those peoples descended from Ham’s son Mizra in North Africa and the Middle East [refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia] – below 0.0 y axis – and the peoples of Europe descending in the main from Shem’s son Arphaxad – above 0.0 y axis. It also shows the east to west gradient divide studied in the preceding chapter. The red markers show the similarity between Eastern Europeans such as Poles and Ukrainians with south eastern Europeans like Romanians and Greeks, who all descend from Joktan and are positioned less than 0.0 x axis. The Blue of southern Italy is the inter-connection between Eastern and Western Europe showing both their similarly with each half of the continent, yet also their uniqueness. Their markers lie predominantly above 0.0 x axis, as befits the the majority of Italian descent from Peleg or Aram over Joktan.

Genetic History of Ethnic Italians, unknown author, 2017:

‘In… recent decades there has been a huge increase in the study of human genetics. Practically it has substituted the banned (after WW2) studies on human races. Now we don’t divide world populations because of their eyes and/or hair color, but because of their so called genetic “haplogroup”.’ 

Ratio of blond haired people in Italy, with yellow shading over 20% of the population and black below 2.4% of the population. Highlighting the difference between the Teutonic [Aramaic] north; the Gothic [Chaldean] Centre; and the Latin [Joktan] south.

Eupedia explains the Y-DNA Haplogroup correlation for blond hair, red hair and blue eyes.

‘Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes for blue eyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I [I1, I2a1 & I2a2]. The genes for blond hair are more strongly correlated with the distribution of haplogroup R1a, but those for red hair have not been found in Europe before the Bronze Age, and appear to have been spread primarily by R1b people.’

United States National Library of Medicine, Is eye color determined by genetics? – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘A person’s eye color results from pigmentation of a structure called the iris, which surrounds the small black hole in the center of the eye (the pupil) and helps control how much light can enter the eye. The color of the iris ranges on a continuum from very light blue to dark brown. 

Most of the time eye color is categorized as blue, green/hazel, or brown. Brown is the most frequent eye color worldwide. Lighter eye colors, such as blue and green, are found almost exclusively among people of European ancestry.

Eye color is determined by variations in a person’s genes. Most of the genes associated with eye color are involved in the production, transport, or storage of a pigment called melanin. Eye color is directly related to the amount and quality of melanin in the front layers of the iris. People with brown eyes have a large amount of melanin in the iris, while people with blue eyes have much less of this pigment.

A particular region on chromosome 15 plays a major role in eye color. Within this region, there are two genes located very close together: OCA2 and HERC2. The protein produced from the OCA2 gene, known as the P protein, is involved in the maturation of melanosomes, which are cellular structures that produce and store melanin. The P protein therefore plays a crucial role in the amount and quality of melanin that is present in the iris. Several common variations (polymorphisms) in the OCA2 gene reduce the amount of functional P protein that is produced. Less P protein means that less melanin is present in the iris, leading to blue eyes instead of brown in people with a polymorphism in this gene.

A region of the nearby HERC2 gene known as intron 86 contains a segment of DNA that controls the activity (expression) of the OCA2 gene, turning it on or off as needed. At least one polymorphism in this area of the HERC2 gene has been shown to reduce the expression of OCA2, which leads to less melanin in the iris and lighter-colored eyes.

Several other genes play smaller roles in determining eye color. Some of these genes are also involved in skin and hair coloring. Genes with reported roles in eye color include ASIP, IRF4, SLC24A4, SLC24A5, SLC45A2, TPCN2, TYR, and TYRP1. The effects of these genes likely combine with those of OCA2 and HERC2 to produce a continuum of eye colors in different people.’

As with fairer coloured hair, lighter eyes predominate ing the northern regions of Italy. In previous chapters, particularly with the descendants of Shem, there have been sometimes irregular patterns in which nations are more closely related with other countries when comparing mitochondrial DNA inherited from mothers, or Y chromosome DNA inherited from fathers. 

As Franceschini states, there is wide diversification in Italy from north to south. We will compare the mtDNA from several regions now we recognise the three component parts of Italy: north, central and southern Italy, including Sicily and Sardinia. Specific regions chosen to reflect these three sections are the highest population areas of Lombardy in the north, Tuscany, Latium or Lazio in Central Italy and Campania and Sicily in the south.

Lombardy: H [38.4%] – K [11.3%] – T2 [9%] – X [6.8%] – 

J [5.1%] – U5 [5.1%] – U4 [4%] – HV0+V [3.9%] – HV [3.4%] –

T1 [2.8%] – U1 [1.7%] – U2 [1.1%] 

Lombardy has the highest percentages of lesser Haplogroups K and X in Italy; though with regard to the most common mtDNA Haplogroup in Europeans, Lombardy has less than the Italian average for H. Whereas neighbouring Piedmont has the highest percentage of Haplogroup H with 56.5% and yet the lowest level of HV at 1.2%. The region of Veneto stands out with the highest percentage of Haplogroup T2 – a relatively young Haplogroup – of 18.8%. In contrast, Liguria has the lowest level of T2 with 4% but has the highest percentage of HV0+V, with 10%. 

Friuli-Venezia-Guilia in the far northeast has the second highest levels of Haplogroup H with 54%, yet interestingly, has the lowest levels of a number of Haplogroups: HV0+V, 0%; J, 4%; T1, 0%; K, 2%; I, 0% and X, 0%.

Tuscany: H [41.4%] – T2 [8.6%] – K [7.8%] – J [6.4%] – 

HV0+V [5.1%] – HV [4.8%] – U5 [4%] – U3 [3.5%] – T1 [2.7%] –

U3 [2.4%] – U4 [2.1%] – X [2.1%] – U2 [1.9%] – U1 [0.5%]

Latium: H [39.3%] – J [8.4%] – K [7.6%] – U3 [5.3%] – 

HV0+V [4.7%] – T2 [4.6%] – U5 [4.2%] – HV [3.2%] – X [3.1%] –

T1 [2.9%] – U2 [1.9%] – U1 [1.6%] – U [1.2%] – U4 [0.6%]

Both Tuscany and Latium are not far removed from each other or from Lombardy; with mainly average levels of most Haplogroups. In fact on PCA graphs, Northern Italians and Central Italians are similar. Even Corsicans though part of France; have a genetic composition in keeping with Central Italians. It is as we move southwards that we find observable differences. For Southern Italians are more alike with Greeks and Sardinians are not comparable with anyone, being as far removed from Southern and Central Italians as say an Iranian. 

Campania: H [43.8%] – J [8%] – K [7.4%] – T2 [6.3%] – 

U3 [5.2%] – U5 [4.1%] – T1 [4.1%] – HV [2.8%] – HV0+V [2.8%] –

U [2.2%] – U4 [1.9%] – X [1.7%] – U1 [1.1%] – U2 [0.6%]

Sicily: H [45.2%] – J [6.7%] – K [6.3%] – HV [5%] – 

T2 [4.4%] – X [3.7%] – U5 [3.3%] – T1 [2.7%] – HV0+V [2.3%] –

U1 [2%] – U1 [1.7%] – U4 [1.3%] – U2 [1%] – U3 [0.7%]

Sardinia: H [44.3%] – J [13%] – T2 [10.3%] – U5 [10%] – 

K [6%] – HV [4.4%] – HV0+V [3.7%] – T1 [2.9%] –

U [1.4%] – L [0.5%] – X [0.4%]

Both Campania and Sicily, as well as Sardinia exhibit above average percentages of prime Haplogroup H. Campania has the highest levels of T1 and Sardinia lacks a number of the U sub-Haplogroups. Calabria located in the southern most tip of Italy has the highest level of HV with 10% and also the lowest percentage of Haplogroup H with 28%. Calabria also has the highest percentage of Haplogroup J and Sardinia second with 14% and 13% respectively. 

The average percentages as shown across Italy as a whole. 

Italy: H [40.2%] – T2 [8.2%] – J [8.1%] – K [7.7%] – U5 [4.6%] – 

HV0+V [3.3%] – HV [2.9%] – T1 [3.3%] – U [2.7%] – U3 [2.1%] –

X [2%] – U4 [1.9%] – U2 [1.6%] –  U1 [1.5%] –  L [0.8%]

                            H       HV   HV0+V    J        T2     U5       K       X

Piedmont         57       1.2          7          7         6      1.2        7        3

Lombardy        38         3          4          5         9         5       11        7

Tuscany            41         5           5          6         9        4        8         2

Latium              39         3           5         8         5        4         8        3

Campania         44         3          3          8        6         4        7      1.7

Calabria            28       10          4        14       10       12        8        2

Sicily                 45          5          2          7        4          3        6        4

Sardinia            44         4          4        13       10       10        6     1.3

Italy                   40         3          3          8        8         5         8        2

The demarkation between regions is blurred and not overly obvious. There are few clear patterns. For example, Haplogroup H percentages fluctuate rather than steadily increase or decrease when heading southwards, though T2 levels do decrease overall. Lombardy’s higher levels of Haplogroup K, is invariably associated with Ashkenazi Jews and the Basque in Spain and France.

                           H       J      T2      K      HV    U5   HV0+V

Lombardy          38      5        9       11         3        5          4

Campania          44      8        6        7          3        4          3

Portugal             44       7       6        6       0.1        7          5

Spain                  44       7       6        6       0.7        8          8

According to PCA graphs, Portugal and Spain are closer to Lombardy. Contrastingly, the the stronger link in maternal mtDNA is between Campania in the south of Italy and Iberia. The addition of Brazil confirms a maternal link amongst these four regions.

                            H       U        T         J     HV0+V   HV        X         

Spain                44      14        9         7           8          0.7      1.7     

Portugal           44      13       10        7           5          0.1         2          

Brazil                44      16       14       11                          2         3         

Campania        44      15       10        8           3             3         2

It is now enlightening to add Italy to the mtDNA comparison table of the principle descendants of Shem.

                        H         HV    HV0+V      J        T2         U        U5       K

Brazil             44          2                         11 

Portugal        44       0.1           5             7         6           3          7         6

Spain             44       0.7           8            7          6           2         8         6

Poland          44           1           5             8         7        1.4        10        4

Russia           41           2           4            8          7           2        10        4

Greece           41          3         1.8          10          7          3          5         5

Italy               40         3            3            8          8          3          5         8            

Ukraine        39          4            4            8          8      0.6        10         5

Romania      37          2            4           11          5           2          7        8

Finland         36                        7            6          2       0.8        21        5

Turkey          31           5        0.7            9          4           6         3         6

Iran               17           7        0.6           14          5         12         3         7

A comparison of the principal mtDNA Haplogroups for Italy with the other prominent descendants of Shem studied so far, shows that Italy with its diverse blood lines, is unlike Turkey or Iran and with its combined genetic input from Nahor, Terah, Aram and Joktan sits quite closely with Greece. Italy in fact sits squarely in the middle of the table and bisects the descendants of Arphaxad in half. From an mtDNA perspective, it is not as close to its Latin cousins.

We have Aram at one end of the spectrum and Lud at the other, with the sons of Joktan interspersed between them and Asshur and now Nahor, relatively in the centre of those nations dominated by Haplogroup H. This highlights how closely related the sons of Shem are and particularly those from Arphaxad. Note the similarity between Portugal and Spain;  Russia and Ukraine; and Greece and Italy.

The Haplogroup map above emphatically shows on the maternal mtDNA side how closely related north and central Italy are; yet their paternal Y-DNA reveals a considerable difference. In other words, their original fathers were from different families, yet their mothers are near identical. This would mean that Aram’s son Uz must have married a relative of Milcah and Sarah, the daughters of Haran. On the other hand, southern Italy has a markedly different maternal lineage, as well as a unique paternal line of descent. Therefore, their original progenitors were not related to Uz, Nahor or either of their wives.

The Fifty-Three Known Forefathers of the Italian People: Latest Discoveries from Genetics, Michael Curtotti, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘If we go back far enough (thousands of years) we find (along the patrilineal line) that virtually all Italians are descended from only fifty-three men. A third kind of DNA “autosomal DNA” [First two: Y-DNA (paternal) and mt-DNA (maternal)] (found on all the chromosomes except the sex chromosome) is also used to find relatives and estimate ethnicity (although the latter process is controversial).

R1b, the highest proportion across Italy and one of the 53 forefathers we can now identify is “R1b-U152” [R1b1a-U152 (S28) is most frequent in northern and central Italy, France and Switzerland]… and is the patrilineal ancestor of over 22% of Italians. The highest representation of R1b-U152 occurs in Bergamo plains (53%) and Bergamo Valleys (46%) and Tortona (35%).

The next of our fifty-three forefathers is R1b-S116 [P312] who is the patrilineal ancestor of 8% of Italians. R1b-S116 is found most frequently in Spain [and Portugal].

R1b-U106 [S21, M405], who comes in at 3.8% is a forefather of proto-Germanic speakers [Germany, Low Countries, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom]. He lived 4700 years ago and his branch expanded from northern Europe around 1700-500 BCE. Some of his descendants will have arrived in Italy during the Gothic and Lombard periods.

R1b-L23 dates to 6100 years before the present and represents 3.5% of Italian paternal ancestry [Southern Italy, Greece, the Caucasus].The branch is most strongly represented in Anatolia[Asia Minor, modern Turkey] and may be associated with the ancient Hittites [the Hatti]…’

In connection with sub-Haplogroup R1b-U106, this would have been passed along Arphaxad’s line via Peleg and though present in Nahor, is actually the dominant R1b in the Germans. R-U106 appearing nearly 4,000 years ago when Nahor and his two brothers were born. The approximate date given of 4,700 years ago is quite accurate. The R1b-L23 date of 6100 BCE is also interesting in that this goes back to Peleg, the ancestor, of Nahor and his descendants, the Chaldeans; when the divisional Haplogroup split, between R1b and R1a in Arphaxad’s line occurred. The author, inadvertently says ancient Hittites, this doesn’t mean the later Hittites, but the earlier Hatti 0r Chatti, who are none other than the Chaldeans, descended primarily from Nahor – the modern day Italians.

Eupedia, Maciamo Hay, 2013 & 2017 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to the founding myth of Rome, Romulus and Remus descended from the Latin kings of Alba Longa, themselves descended from Trojan prince Aeneas, who fled to the Latium after the destruction of Troy by the Greeks. Troy may well have been founded by the early M269 and/or L23 branches of R1b… If there is any truth in the myth (as there usually is), the Trojans might have brought M269 or L23 (probably with other haplogroups, notably J2) to central Italy circa 1200 BCE, around the same time as U152 invaded from the north. 

The Etruscans, who are thought to have originated in western Anatolia, not far from Troy, might also have brought R1b-L23 to Italy, also blended with other haplogroups. Nowadays R1b-L23 [in the south] is the second most common subclade of R1b in Italy, although well behind R1b-U152 [in northern and central Italy].By comparing Sardinian… DNA, it can be estimated that the Sardinians have inherited between 16% and 24% of their Y-DNA from the Phoenicians.’

Investigation will show that with regard to the Trojans, M269 is an accurate assessment and L23 is not. The same can be said of the Etruscans. The more specific R1b sub-Haplogroups for both are actually M269 and U106. With regard to the Sardinians, Hay is more accurate if he meant the R1b-S116.

‘In 475, various East Germanic tribes (Herulians, Rugians, and Scirians) were refused federated status by [the] Roman emperor. Under the leadership of Odoacer, a former secretary of Attila, they deposed the last emperor and created the first Kingdom of Italy (476-493), bringing to an end the Western Roman Empire. 

The kingdom was taken over by the Ostrogoths, who ruled the whole of Italy except Sardinia until 553. The Ostrogoths’s capital was Ravenna. They were succeeded by the Lombards (568-774), who had to contend for the political control of Italy with the Byzantines. Like the Ostrogoths, the Lombards had invaded Italy from Pannonia and settled more densely in north-east Italy and in Lombardy, which was named after them. The Lombard capital was in Pavia, Lombardy. They set up many duchies, notably those of Friuli (based in Cividale), Trento, Tuscany (based in Lucca), Spoleto, Benevento, as well as in the major cities of Lombardy and Venetia.

In the 5th century the Goths would have become such a melting pot that their original Germanic Y-DNA might have only represented a small percentage of their lineages. This explains why there is apparently so little Germanic Y-DNA in south-western Franceand Spain(location of the former Visigothic kingdom) compared to other regions conquered by Germanic tribes in Western Europe, including Italy.

In contrast with the Goths and the Vandals, the Lombards left Scandinavia and descended due south through Germany, Austria and Slovenia, only leaving Germanic territory a few decades before reaching Italy.The Lombards would have consequently remained a predominantly Germanic tribe by the time they invaded Italy.’

Hay has drawn correct conclusions though possibly via incorrect summations. The reason there is ‘little’ Germanic DNA in Spain is because they are different peoples from the Germanic Germans. Northern Italians are labelled ‘Germanic’ yet they are in part kindred peoples with the Spanish and Portuguese [refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil]. The migratory route of the Lombards had little to do with their Germanic-ness.

The Vandals and Alans were not Germanic and the Visigoths and Suevi – the Spanish and Portuguese today – were not pure Germanic. The Visigoths and Suevi were relatively Germanic, when compared with the Vandals, Alans and Moors, who were descended from Ham, via Mizra’s descendants Casluh and Caphtor [refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America].

The Y-DNA percentages for the higher population regions of Italy, plus Sardinia; followed by a comparison with the nations of Shem studied to date, reveal the following.

Lombardy: R1b [59%] – G2a [10%] – E1b1b [10%] – J2 [6%] – 

I2a2 [5%] – R1a [4%] – I1 [2.5%] – I2a1 [1%] – T1a [1%] 

Tuscany: R1b [52.5%] – J2 [11.5%] – G2a [9%] – E1b1b [9%] – 

I1 [4%] – R1a [4%] – I2a2 [2.5%] – J1 [2%] – T1a [2%] –

I2a1 [1.5%] – L [0.5%]

Latium: R1b [29%] – J2 [18.5%] – E1b1b [16.5%] – G2a [11%] – 

I1 [8.5%] – T1a [4.5%] -I2a2 [3%] –  R1a [2%] – J1 [2%] –

Q [2%] – I2a1 [1%]

Campania: R1b [29%] – J2 [18%] – E1b1b [16%] – G2a [11%] – 

J1 [6%] – I2a1 [4%] – T1a [4%] – R1a [3%] – I1 [3%] – I2a2 [1.5%] 

Sicily: R1b [26%] – J2 [23%] – E1b1b [20.5%] – G2a [8.5%] – 

R1a [4.5%] – T1a [4%] – J1 [ 3.5%] – I1 [3.5%] – I2a1 [3%] –

I2a2 [1%] – Q [1%]  

Sardinia: I2a1 [37.5%] – R1b [18.5%] – G2a [12%] – E1b1b [9.5%] – 

J2 [9%] – J1 [4%] – I2a2 [2%] – T1a [1.5%] – R1a [1%] – L [0.5%]

With the exception of Sardinia, the four predominant Italian Y-DNA Haplogroups overall, include R1b, J2, E1b1b and G2a. This grouping is similar with Spain, Portugal and Brazil. Haplogroup R1b is indicative of western Europe, J2 of West Asia, E1b1b of North Africa and G2a of the Caucasus region. 

Lombardy has the highest average for R1b, though the highest level has been recorded in Tuscany with 76.2%. Sardinia has the lowest level of R1b, followed by Sicily. Lombardy has the lowest percentage for J2, while Calabria in the very south possesses an average of 29%. The highest percentage for E1b1b is found in Sicily; while Piedmont and Trentino-South Tyrol have the lowest with 6%. The highest level by far of I2a1 is Sardinia which is similar to certain countries in the Balkans [refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans]. The highest percentages for I1 are found in Friuli-Venezia-Giuliai with 21% and also R1a with 13%; while Sardinia has the lowest I1 and Umbria and Molise each have with 0% of R1a.

                            R1b      J2     E1b1b     G2a    I1     I2a1     I2a2     R1a      J1

Lombardy          59         6         10          10      3         1           5          4         

Tuscany              53       12          9            9       4        2           3          4         2

Latium                29       19        17           11       9        1            3          2         2

Campania           29      18        16           11       3        4           2           3         6

Sicily                   26       23        21            9       4        3                        5         4

Sardinia              19         9        10          12               38           2           1         4  

There are a number of salient points highlighted in the Table. It is strikingly clear as confirmed by PCA data that the paternal ancestry for Sardinia is unlike the rest of Italy. Tuscany is counted with Central Italy, though from a paternal Haplogroup perspective, it has much in common with Lombardy in the North. 

Haplogroup R1b indicative of western Europe, decreases from north to central Italy markedly, with Latium – which includes Rome – being closer with southern Italy. It also supports the evidence that R1b generally decreases as one heads in a south eastern direction in Europe. 

In contrast, Haplogroups J2 and E1b1b increase. The J2 increase is understandable as it is rarer in northern Europe. Though even the Spanish and Portuguese do not have as high a percentage of J2. One has to look to Greece, Turkey and Iran for similar or higher levels. Haplogroup J2 is not just reflective of southern Europe but principally, of southeastern Europe, the near East and West Asia. 

Haplogroup E1b1b percentages are different, in that even Turkey and Iran do not compare with Sicily. It is only Greece that matches southern Italy. This should not be a surprise, as remember all these nations descend from Shem and as with cousins, some similarities are shared with certain cousins and other likenesses with different relatives. It bears out that those nations with these higher levels have combined a. being drawn to dwell further south in warmer climes and latitudes and b. they show higher levels of probable admixture, with the peoples of Mizra in North Africa and the Middle East.

Combining the regions into the three main areas as well as a total average for Italy produces the following results.

Italy North: R1b [49.5%] – E1b1b [11%] – J2 [10%] – G2a [7.5%] – 

I1 [7%] – R1a [4.5%] – I2a2 [3.5%] – T1a [2%] – J1 [1.5%] – I2a1 [1%] 

Italy Central: R1b [36%] – J2 [23%] – E1b1b [11.5%] – G2a [11%] – 

J1 [5%] – R1a [3%] – T1a [3%] – I1 [2.5%] – I2a1 [2%] – I2a2 [1.5%] 

Italy South: R1b [27.5%] – J2 [21.5%] – E1b1b [18.5%] – G2a [10.5%] – 

J1 [4%] – I2a1 [3.5%] – R1a [3%] – I1 [2.5] – T1a [2.5%] – I2a2 [1%]

Italy: R1b [39%] – J2 [15.5%] – E1b1b [13.5%] – G2a [9%] – 

I1 [4.5%] – R1a [4%] – I2a1 [3%] – J1 [3%] – I2a2 [2.5%] – T1a [2.5%] 

The approximate breakdown for E1b1b in Italy is E1b1b1a, 10%; E1b1b1c, 3%; and E1b1b1b, 1 %. Aside from the sub-Haplogroups mentioned of U152, U106, L23 and S116 for R1b, others include: L21 [M529] and M167. 

                                R1b      J2     E1b1b    G2a     I1     I2a1   I2a2    R1a      J1

Italy North             50       10         11          8        7         1         4         5         2

Italy Central          36       23         12         11        3        2         2         3         5

Italy South             28       22        19         11        3        4          1         3         4

Italy                         39       16         14          9        5        3         3         4         3

Italy subdivided into its three key parts, highlights a little clearer the Haplogroup level changes. Italy as a whole and averaged out reflects central Italy in both R1b and E1b1b. There is a clear three way split, which can be explained by three separate paternal lineages that have intertwined, yet remain distinct. The fathers being Uz from Aram and a wife probably related to Terah’s family; Nahor from Arphaxad and Peleg and his wife Milcah from Haran, as well as his concubine Ruemah, possibly from Joktan. 

Added to this mix and not to be discounted is a mysterious father, such as Aram from Zoba and Terah and again a wife from Joktan’s family. In total, three original progenitors with Nahor providing two of the eventual four lines. Central Italians show evidence of this in that J2 Haplogroup levels are akin to southern Italy, yet their E1b1b levels are different, being closer to northern Italy. Plus, the R1b percentage is marginally closer to southern Italians which is plausible for Nahor and Zoba were both sons of Terah; whereas Uz was from Aram with higher levels of R1b.

Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b that is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b.’ R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning 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. 

Progressing 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.

Turkey:    R-M269   14%   –  R-U106   0.4%

Russia:     R-M269   21%   –  R-U106   5.4%

Slovenia  R-M269   17%    –  R-U106      4%

Czech       R-M269  28%    –  R-U106    14% 

Poland     R-M269  23%    –  R-U106      8% 

Ukraine   R-M269  25%    –  R-U106      9%

Italy         R-M269   53%   –  R-U106      6%

Italy’s dominant Haplogroup is R1b and we can see the marked difference comparing with nations from Eastern Europe and beyond. It is worth mentioning that the north to south axis is as important as the east to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg, Aram and the mixed line of Casluh and Caphtor which have the highest levels of R1b [refer Chapters XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil].

Our Y-DNA comparison table from the previous chapters, now sees the addition of Italy – the first major descendant from Peleg’s line, Nahor. 

                       J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia       43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Armenia      33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey         33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24

Iran              32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece         26       3       23       21          6       12        16       28

Italy             19       3        16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania     15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal      13        3       10       14          7       1.5       56       58

Brazil           10                 10       11          5          4       54       58

Spain           10     1.5         8         7          3         2       69        71     

Ukraine        5     0.5     4.5          7          3       44         8       52

Poland          3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia           3                   3         3           1       46         6       52

Finland                                      0.5                      5         4         9

‘Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2, J1 and G2a percentages. Finland is… the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a… while Greece has [the most] E1b1b… Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b.’ Italy slots in towards the middle of the table with relatively average figures for all their main Haplogroups. This mirrors Italy’s geographic position in bisecting western and eastern Europe and the descendants of Peleg and Joktan.

‘Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations 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

Brazil              4         54                  [9]            

Italy                4         39         5        3           3         

Finland          5           4       28                   0.5      62

Turkey           8         16         1         4         0.5        4  

Greece          12         16         4       10         1.5      

Iran               16         10                 0.5                      1           

Romania      18         16         4       28           3        2

Ukraine        44          8         5        21       0.5         6

Russia           46          6         5        11                    23

Poland          58         13        9          6          2         4

‘The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern European Y-DNA Haplogroups comprising I1, I2a2 and N1c1 are included.’ Italy has more in common with the other Aramaic nations of south western Europe, which is not a great surprise. It sits towards the top of the table due to its low levels of R1a and higher percentage of R1b. Being a southern and western European nation, Italy does not exhibit more than low percentages of Haplogroups I1 and I2. Italy has little in common with those nations further north and east such as Poland, Ukraine and Russia. Though as mentioned, Southern Italy has commonality with Greece.

Italy is considered a Latin country like Spain, yet the reality is, that Italy is half to two-thirds Gothic, who many would label as Germanic; with the remainder of its north Germanic in a more Teuton sense. Italy has past, Greek, Roman and Celtic influences and so all this added together results in a Latin nation. Spain has almost the same influences and a Germanic Visigoth demographic dominance, yet it is a Latin nation. For Latin encompasses a related culture, romance language, religion and to some degree, ethnicity. Italy’s composition is actually similar to France; with a ‘Latin’ south and a ‘Germanic’ north. Italy and France, straddle the two world’s ethnically; though in language it is Italy and Spain which are more closely related.

Incline your ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply your heart to… knowledge…

Proverbs 22:17 English Standard Version

“Majorities are generally wrong, if only in their reasons for being right.”

George Saintsbury

© Orion Gold 2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to