Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes

Chapter XXXIII

The identities of Asshur, Edom, Judah and Dan have been investigated, discussed and written about more than all the other biblical identities put together, many times over. Anyone with more than a passing interest in the Bible and conversant in the scriptures, will recognise that these four peoples feature significantly in the end time prophecies. We have investigated three of the four and deduced their correct identities as all three so far have been inaccurate, in some instances for hundreds of years. All having major repercussions in interpreting future world events through biblical prophecy.

The prevalent view has been that Asshur as ‘the instrument of God’s wrath’ in bringing Israel to its knees in repentance is the nation of Germany. Yet, geography, history, migration, with autosomal DNA and paternal Haplogroups has revealed that the Germans are in fact descended from Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. As the dominant nation of the descendants of Peleg – from Eber, from Arphaxad and from Shem ( in Western Europe) – the Germans are also the leading nation of Joktan’s children also descended from Eber, in Eastern Europe.

A German led European Union – a United States of Europe – will ally itself with the Assyrians – Numbers 24:24. Our studies have revealed it is in fact Russia, who is Asshur and modern day Assyria – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Russia is the future King of the North (Article: Four Kings & One Queen) and the instrument of God’s wrath against (the tribes of) Israel and (true) Judah – Zephaniah 2:13, Isaiah 10:5. 

Coupled with this, is the extraordinary switch of identities between Esau and Judah, where the Jews are not from Judah but rather Edom and the tribe of Judah is not the Jewish people, but actually the nation of England – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

It is against this panorama of mistaken identities and incorrect interpretation of biblical prophecy that we now arrive to the most written about and most sought after tribal identity, Joseph. The son of Jacob chosen to be the recipient of the Birthright blessings usually given to the firstborn son. Jacob’s eldest sons, Reuben, Simeon and Levi all disqualified themselves. Even so, Levi was chosen to be the Priestly tribe and even after his own personal misdemeanours, Judah was selected to receive the blessings of the throne, orb and sceptre of royal rulership – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Even though Joseph was the eleventh of twelve sons, he was still a firstborn son of Jacob and his wife Rachel. We will learn that the prophesied blessings to Joseph and his sons Manasseh and Ephraim are specific enough to quickly identity these peoples in our modern world. It is thus beyond all belief and comprehension, that for nearly five centuries the identification of Jacob’s grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim have been, quite simply… wrong. 

When we first meet Joseph, Rachel was feeling the pressure as Leah was seven nil ahead when it came to children, or nine to two if the hand maiden’s sons are included. 

Genesis 30:22-24

English Standard Version

22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”

24 And she called his name Joseph, saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!”

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The name Joseph meaning: ‘Increaser, May He Add’ from the verb (yasap), to add, increase, repeat or do again. The name Joseph means Increaser, Repeater or Doubler, and even the fulfillment of his name is dual: Benjamin becomes Joseph’s younger brother, and Joseph himself becomes father of two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (see Ezekiel 47:13).

For a meaning of the name Joseph, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads two meanings: (1) May He (Yahweh) Add (assuming that the “He” of our name is YHWH), and (2) Increaser. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads He Shall Add. And BDB Theological Dictionary has He Adds, Increases. Spiros Zodhiates (The Complete Word Study Dictionary – New Testament) translates the name Joseph with May God Add, but note that the “God” part is implied and not actually incorporated in the name Joseph.’

From Genesis chapter thirty-seven through to chapter fifty, the narrative is dominated by Joseph’s life. Of which twelve chapters representing twenty-four percent of Genesis are devoted to Joseph. Slightly less than for Abraham from chapter twelve through to twenty-five, with twenty-six percent. Even Adam and Noah only have three chapters devoted to each of them, or six percent each of the Genesis story. Jacob on the other hand, ostensibly the most flawed of all the Patriarchs has eight chapters, or sixteen percent devoted to him, yet he also figures (though less than Joseph) prominently in the final thirteen chapters of Genesis – with a total of over forty percent of the Book of Genesis devoted to Jacob’s life.  

We have discussed in previous chapters regarding the brother’s betrayal of Joseph and selling him to the Ishmaelite traders at the behest of Judah. The early part of Genesis chapter thirty-seven is of interest as it provides the factors which led to his brothers jealousy-turned-hatred.

Genesis 37:2-11

English Standard Version

‘Joseph, being seventeen years old, was pasturing the flock with his brothers. He was a boy with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, his father’s wives [symbolically, not literally as they had been loaned to Jacob purely for reproduction, though were not his concubines (Genesis 29:24, 29)]. And Joseph brought a bad [H7451 – ra] report of them to their father.’

We learn that Joseph was with certain ones of his brothers… specifically: Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher. For whatever reason not divulged these four brothers were up to no good and Joseph told on them. At first reading, one could easily assume that Joseph was a tattle tale and acting like a spoilt brat, belying his youthful age. 

Two reasons suggest otherwise. First, the Bible does not label him as such. If the charge of youthful foolishness were considered, it would have to be quickly dropped for when Joseph was harshly rejected by his brothers and while he served Potiphar in Egypt, Joseph for a young man was focused, efficient and honourable. Far from a spoilt brat. In fact, he accepted his brutal injustices with immeasurable maturity. 

Second, the bad report Joseph made of his brothers was not merely a superficial thing, it was a very serious matter. The Hebrew word ra is translated by the KJV as evil, 442 times; wickedness, 59; mischief, 21; affliction, 6; adversity, 4; and harm 3 times. It includes a wide range of negative meanings: ‘misery, distress, calamity, malignant’ and ‘grievous.’ 

As we have yet to discuss Jacob’s son Dan, more detail will be investigated in the following chapter. Though it can be stated that Dan is the bad boy or black sheep of the family and if he was involved, he may well have been leading the other three bothers down a dark path which Joseph had no choice but to divulge – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Support for Joseph being honourable in this incident is revealed by the fact that Joseph is rather unique in the scriptures and part of a very select band of people who do not have one word writ against them. Of all the prominent people in the Bible, not including peripheral characters, it is only Daniel and Christ whom have nothing negative recorded and for prominent women, only Ruth, Esther and Mary are included in this exceptional group. Recall that Daniel is also one of the three men described as most righteous in the Bible with Noah and Job. This may have some bearing on why the Eternal revealed the most profound and impacting prophecies of all the prophets to Daniel; for the prophecies of the Book of Revelation through John are in many cases, amplifications of those originating in Daniel – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

Genesis: 3 ‘Now Israel loved Joseph more than any other of his sons, because he was the son of his old age. And he made him a robe of many colors. 4 But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.’

With what we have just learned about Jospeh and the view the Creator had of him, it is clear that Jospeh didn’t act like the favoured son, it was Jacob who created the issue as verse four says. As Jacob is guilty of innumerable unwise decisions this should not come as a surprise; yet one would have thought that growing up in a family with a pronounced and marked divide between parents and sons as Jacob and Esau had with Isaac and Rebecca, that Jacob would have shied away from repeating this tragic pattern. 

As touched upon previously, for the want of a better explanation, the understanding that Joseph’s coat was tartan or plaid is interesting. Particularly, when we consider the two nation’s who have upheld this unique textile design more than any other, are Scotland – the tribe of Benjamin – and the United States.

Genesis: 5 ‘Now Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his brothers they hated him even more. 6 He said to them, “Hear this dream that I have dreamed: 7 Behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and behold, my sheaf arose and stood upright. And behold, your sheaves gathered around it and bowed down to my sheaf.” 8 His brothers said to him, “Are you indeed to reign over us? Or are you indeed to rule over us?” So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.’

One would have to assume with what we know of Joseph’s character that he was being matter of fact and not boasting. Of course, what the brothers were not to know, is that the dream foretold of Joseph being their servant in saving his brothers from starvation in a few short years hence. Though regarding the distant future into our present time, Joseph as the preeminent brother, serves as the protector for all his brothers. 

A component of this story not readily touched upon, is that Joseph had the Holy Spirit and was converted to the truth of the Eternal. His brothers were not and so could not perceive spiritual matters the same way. This would have put considerable distance between himself and his brothers – much like David experienced with his brothers and parents (Psalm 27:10; 69:8). It also explains why Jacob favoured Joseph over Judah, the son actually most like himself in character, for the son who was like himself, spiritually.

Recall that the Eternal had a different view from Jacob, in that though the Bible reveals Joseph’s people are special to the Creator, it is in fact Judah who He loves – Psalm 78:68. In His mind, giving the royal sceptre of rulership for the very throne that His Son will return to sit on, was the favoured blessing. 

Genesis: 9 ‘Then he dreamed another dream and told it to his brothers and said, “Behold, I have dreamed another dream. Behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.”

10 ‘But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?” 11 And his brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the saying in mind.’

Jacob did not like hearing this from Joseph, yet considered the matter and deduced that it was of future importance with a positive outcome.

Genesis 39:1-10, 21-23

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, had bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him down there. 2 The Lord was with Joseph, and he became a successful man, and he was in the house of his Egyptian master. 3 His master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord caused all that he did to succeed in his hands. 4 So Joseph found favor in his sight and attended him, and he made him overseer of his house and put him in charge of all that he had. 5 From the time that he made him overseer in his house and over all that he had, the Lord blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; the blessing of the Lord was on all that he had, in house and field. 6 So he left all that he had in Joseph’s charge, and because of him he had no concern about anything but the food he ate.’

This is an incredible occurrence and shows it was more to do with the Eternal’s intervention on Joseph’s behalf, though of course, the Eternal was only able to bless Joseph and Potiphar’s household because Joesph was not only capable but obedient to the Creator. This enhances the case we have built regarding Joseph’s spirituality. To be clear, it is not that Jospeh was perfect, for all sin, but rather some people are more blameless than others and Joseph was such an individual. Potiphar was the captain of the Pharaoh’s personal retinue of soldiers and thus a high ranking official who had a palatial residence adjacent to the actual palace of the Pharaoh. Joseph was merely seventeen when he arrived in Egypt in 1709 BCE.

Joseph

Genesis: ‘Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance. 7 And after a time his master’s wife cast her eyes on Joseph and said, “Lie with me.” 8 But he refused and said to his master’s wife, “Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge. 9 He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” 10 And as she spoke to Joseph day after day, he would not listen to her, to lie beside her or to be with her’ – Exodus 20:3, 14-15, 17.

Here the Hebrew words say that Joseph was not just handsome but also had a good physique. Notice his spiritual mindset; Joseph say’s it would be sinning against God to sleep with Potiphar’s wife, not just that he would be betraying his employer. It is a simple case of sexual harassment committed by Potiphar’s wife. Though Joseph could not divulge the reason, could Joseph have requested a transfer or found a way to move? When the opportunity arose and the house was empty, she made her move, grabbing his outer garment. Joseph flees, leaving it behind. 

Potiphar’s wife then frames Joseph for an indecent proposition and Potiphar in understandable anger sends Joseph to the prison reserved for the Pharaoh’s enemies circa 1703 BCE at the age of twenty-two or twenty-three and like David who worked in the service of Saul for six years (1022-1016 BCE), so did Joseph for Potiphar. Though Satan had tried to tempt Joseph and thwart the Creator’s plan, it was not to be.

Genesis: 21 ‘But the Lord was with Joseph and showed him steadfast love and gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison. 22 And the keeper of the prison put Joseph in charge of all the prisoners who were in the prison. Whatever was done there, he was the one who did it. 23 The keeper of the prison paid no attention to anything that was in Joseph’s charge, because the Lord was with him. And whatever he did, the Lord made it succeed.’

In Genesis chapter forty we read of the Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker who are put into Joseph’s prison for misdemeanours circa 1698 BCE, when Joseph was twenty-seven or twenty-eight. They both have dreams of which Joseph interprets them. He requests that the cupbearer who’s dream is favourable, remembers him to the Pharaoh, though he does not and Joseph remains in prison. Two years later, Pharaoh has a dream. None of his wise men or magicians can interpret it. Pharaoh’s cupbearer, then recalls his encounter with Joseph and finally remembers him to Pharaoh.

Genesis 41:14-16, 25-32, 37-57

English Standard Version

14 ‘Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they quickly brought him out of the pit. And when he had shaved himself and changed his clothes [after seven years in prison – again much like David who was a vagabond eluding King Saul for seven years (1016-1010 BCE)… both men also became rulers (David, King; Joseph Vizier) by the age of thirty], he came in before Pharaoh.

15 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I have had a dream, and there is no one who can interpret it. I have heard it said of you that when you hear a dream you can interpret it.” 16 Joseph answered Pharaoh, “It is not in me; God will give Pharaoh a favorable answer” – much like Daniel with King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:27-28).

25 ‘Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, “The dreams of Pharaoh are one; God has revealed to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 26 The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good ears are seven years; the dreams are one. 27 The seven lean and ugly cows that came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty ears blighted by the east wind are also seven years of famine’ – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?

28 ‘… God has shown to Pharaoh what he is about to do. 29 There will come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt, 30 but after them there will arise seven years of famine, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt. The famine will consume the land, 31 and the plenty will be unknown in the land by reason of the famine that will follow, for it will be very severe. 32 And the doubling of Pharaoh’s dream means that the thing is fixed by God, and God will shortly bring it about.’ 

Joseph then suggests Pharaoh appoints a wise and discerning person to oversee the storing of twenty percent of grain for each year of plenty and its division during the seven years of famine so that the Egyptians did not perish.

Genesis: 37 ‘This proposal pleased Pharaoh and all his servants. 38 And Pharaoh said to his servants, “Can we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?” 39 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Since God has shown you all this, there is none so discerning and wise as you are. 40 You shall be over my house, and all my people shall order themselves as you command. Only as regards the throne will I be greater than you.” 41 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.”

42 Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his hand and put it on Joseph’s hand, and clothed him in garments of fine linen and put a gold chain about his neck. 43 And he made him ride in his second chariot. And they called out before him, “Bow the knee!” Thus he set him over all the land of Egypt. 44 Moreover, Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no one shall lift up hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.”

45 And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphenathpaneah [H6848 – Tsophnath Pa`neach: treasury of the glorious rest].

And he gave him in marriage Asenath [H621 – ‘Acnath: belonging to the goddess Neith], the daughter of Potiphera [H6319 – Powtiy Phera‘: he whom the Ra gave] priest of On [H204 – own: strength, vigour]’ – much like Moses marrying Zipporah the daughter of Jethro the priest of Midian (Exodus 2:16, 21).

‘So Joseph went out over the land of Egypt.’

Asenath

The parallelism does not end there for Hagar, daughter of Pharoah Djer (3rd King of the 1st Dynasty from 1922 to 1875 BCE) found a princess wife from Egypt for her son Ishmael (Genesis 21:21) – Chapter XXVIII The True identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

Thus it is probable that Joseph married a woman of similar aristocratic lineage to Ishmael’s wife. Not an Arab, but rather someone from the line of Arphaxad, Eber and Joseph’s great, great grandfather, Terah. This in itself, becomes of particular interest when we later survey the relationship between Ishmael’s offspring and Joseph’s descendants.

From this account we can appreciate how the Eternal moved Pharaoh beyond just appointing an overseer but actually elevating Joseph to Vizier of all his kingdom; while recognising that God’s spirit was working in Joseph. It was a wise decision on Pharaoh’s part and showed a level of humility in his character. Aside from Joseph having the Creator blessing him; being mature; as well as good looking; it becomes apparent that Joseph must have been very personable and charismatic.

The jealousy exhibited by his brothers makes more sense now we have a clearer picture of Joseph. It is Joseph’s integrity which makes him a good candidate as saviour of Egypt and thus a type of the Messiah himself, and so it is at a similar age as Christ when he began his ministry in his thirtieth year, that Joseph embarks on his own ministry of service at age thirty – refer article: The Christ Chronology.

 Psalm 105:16-21

English Standard Version

16 ‘When he summoned a famine on the land and broke all supply of bread, 17 he had sent a man ahead of them, Joseph, who was sold as a slave. 18 His feet were hurt with fetters; his neck was put in a collar of iron; 19 until what he had said came to pass, the word of the Lord tested him. 20 The king sent and released him; the ruler of the peoples set him free; 21 he made him lord of his house and ruler of all his possessions…’

Joseph received an Egyptian name, thus looking for the name Joseph in Egyptian records would be fruitless (Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man different name?) There is considerable debate on what the name Zaphenath-paneah means. Of all the definitions offered, the two which resonate the most are: ‘the man to whom secrets are revealed’ and ‘the Nourisher of the Two Lands, the Living One.’ Either way, it was through Joseph’s God and His revelation that life in Egypt was preserved. 

As intimated, Joseph’s wife Asenath is unlikely to have descended from Ham’s son Mizra (Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia) but rather from the Egyptian ruling elite. The Priest of On may have had a link with the same order as Moses’s father-in-law Jethro, the Priest of Midian (Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia) and the On-e true God. 

The city of On (or Heliopolis), the City of the Sun, bordering the land of Goshen, was a centre of worship for the sun-god Ra – Jeremiah 43:13. Of which the meaning of Potiphera’s name refers. The priests of On were considered the most intelligent, cultured and learned people in Egypt. The High Priest of On held the title, Greatest of Seers

When Joseph married into this family, he joined a social class befitting a national leader. Implied is that the marriage was selected by Pharaoh because of his confidence that Joseph too, was a seer or prophet of the highest calibre. Perhaps even a candidate for next High Priest. If this was the case, then Asenath must have embraced her husband’s faith in the God of Israel as nothing negative is mentioned of the marriage in the Bible. Remembering too, she was the mother of Joseph’s sons of unique prophetic consequence – Genesis 46:20. This high profile marriage ordained by Pharaoh, also removed any doubt about the shocking story circulating throughout Egypt, of a former slave and prisoner rising (legitimately) to second in command of the whole of Egypt. 

Asenath like her father, bore a name signalling an intended path initially at least, that was aligned with the gods of Egypt – Article: Thoth. In this instance, the goddess Neith. Neith was a powerful and popular deity worshiped primarily in the city of Sais and is considered one of the oldest deities in the Egyptian pantheon.

Neith statuette – Louvre Museum Paris

Neith is associated with the creation of the world; as the mother of the crocodile god, Sobek; as well as the mother of the sun-god Ra no less. While always appearing feminine – with a prominent bosom* like Asherah – Neith also possesses the male characteristics of an androgynous creator.

She was the patron of Lower Egypt and a goddess of wisdom and war. With a number of symbols, two stand out. One linked with war were arrows, which are of interest, as these figure prominently on the seal of the peoples descended from Joseph.

The other being a cow, whereby as a cow, Neith daily gives birth to a reborn sun. The cow (or calf), is steeped in a system of worship which was endemic in ancient Israel, particularly in Ephraim after King Solomon’s reign, but had begun during the Exodus from Egypt – clearly having an Egyptian origin (Article: The Calendar Conspiracy). The bull coincidently is a symbol of Ephraim, stemming from the Hebrew root for his name.

At the request of Thoth, Neith interceded in the kingly war between Horus and Seth (Set) over the Egyptian throne; recommending that Horus rule – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity. Neith (Asherah) is the mother of Isis (Lilith), hence the grandmother of Horus – the son of Osiris (Nimrod).

Encyclopaedia: ‘The veil of Isis is a metaphor and allegorical artistic motif representing the inaccessibility of nature’s secrets, personified as the goddess Isis shrouded by a veil or mantle (Article: Lilith). The motif traces back to a statue in the ancient Egyptian city of Sais. As recounted by Greco-Roman authors, the statue of the veiled goddess bore the inscription:

“I am all that has been and is and shall be; and no mortal has ever lifted my mantle.”

The “Parting of the Veil”, “Piercing of the Veil”, “Rending of the Veil” or “Lifting of the Veil” refers, in the Western mystery tradition and Neopagan witchcraft, to opening the “veil” of matter, thus gaining entry to a state of spiritual awareness in which the mysteries of nature are revealed.’

Isis as a veiled ‘goddess* of life’ with a French translation of the Sais inscription on the pedestal, mysteriously located at the Herbert Hoover (31st President of the United States from 1929 to 1933) National Historic Site in Iowa.

Most interesting is how Neith in predynastic and early dynasty times is referred to as the ‘Opener of the Way’ (refer Article: Belphegor), with references to Neith as the ‘Opener of Paths’ occurring during Dynasty IV through Dynasty VI. Neith is observed in the titles of women serving as priestesses of the (mother) goddess – the Queen of Heaven (Article: Asherah).

Encyclopaedia: ‘Such epithets include: “Priestess of Neith who opens all the (path)ways”“Priestess of Neith who opens the way in all her places” – el-Sayed, I: 67-69… ‘el-Sayed asserts his belief that Neith should be seen as a parallel to Wepwawet, the ancient jackal god of Upper Egypt’ – refer article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

The question remains, who was this unusually accommodating, good-hearted Pharaoh at the time of Joseph? In exact antithesis to the later hard-hearted Pharaoh of the Exodus. According to an unconventional chronology, not only are the Egyptian king lists misinterpreted by conventional chronology – as exposed by the revised chronology of David Rohl; in that dynasties can be hundreds of years out of alignment within an incorrect time frame – various Egyptian dynasties have been misunderstood as chronologically falling one after the other and not recognised as invariably being concurrent instead. 

Revising the Egyptian Chronology: Joseph as Imhotep, and Amenemhet IV as Pharaoh of the Exodus, Anne Habermehl, 2013 – emphasis mine: 

‘From previous discussion it is clear that if the plagues and the Exodus caused the collapse of the concurrent 6th and 12th Dynasties, we need to look for our Exodus pharaoh at the end of one of these dynasties. The 12th Dynasty, ruling Lower Egypt in the north, is the one which would produce our Exodus pharaoh because the Children of Israel lived in the Delta there (the 6th Dynasty would have ruled Upper Egypt in the south). 

We suggest that Dynasties 3 to 12 cannot have reigned one after the other in the order that Manetho listed them. Dynasties 5 & 6 may have run concurrently with Dynasties 11 & 12. The First Intermediate Period (at the end of the 6th Dynasty) and Second Intermediate Period (at the end of the 12th Dynasty), both times of great disorder in Egypt, appear to be the same period, as mentioned earlier. Dynasties 7, 8, 9 and 10 would therefore have reigned after the Exodus at the same time as Dynasties 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Versions of this scheme have been offered by various revisionists (e.g., Courville, 1971, volume 1, page 101; Ashton & Down, 2006, page 206). This alone could potentially remove close to 500 of the 675 years by which we wish to shorten the secular timeline.’

It makes sense to agree with the author’s proposal, in that the end of the twelfth dynasty matches the time of Moses, though would differ on the Pharaoh of the Exodus with one in the thirteenth dynasty instead. This would mean the Pharaoh of Joseph’s dream interpretation is a king from the third dynasty. The first king of the third dynasty was Pharaoh Djoser, also named Netjerikhet. Records are unclear to his length of reign, from either 19 years according to Manetho; 28 or 29 years according to the royal annals; and 37 or 38 years according to other lists and historians. Lists for the dynasty also have a variance of the number of kings, with either four, five or even eight kings. 

Therefore the options favoured are the middle number for the reign and the lower for the number of kings – which fits the chronology of Pharaohs until the time of Moses and a date of reign for Joseph’s Pharaoh circa 1700 to 1672/71 BCE. The Saqqara Tablet is viewed by this writer as the most accurate as it lists Djoser as the first of four kings and was found in a tomb near the Djoser Pyramid in Saqqara. 

Duplication, short reigns and doubt result in only two viable rulers – of either Djoser or the final dynastic ruler, Huni also named Qahedjet, who ruled for 24 years – as the Pharaoh in question, for both had Viziers. The other three, six or most probably two rulers sandwiched between these two Pharaohs are not realistic candidates. As there was a turbulent transition from Huni to Amenemhet I, not matching the peaceful reign of Joseph, Huni is consequently ruled out. Djoser was the son of the final 2nd Dynasty king, Pharaoh Khasekhemwy from 1718 to 1700 BCE and his wife Queen Nimaathap (or Nimaethap), “Mother of the King of the Two Lands.” 

Djoser is derived from the Djed symbol for stability and is also associated with the god Osiris and appears on numerous monuments built during his reign. Though it was common for Pharaohs to have a Queen and lesser wives, Djoser only had one wife, who was his half-sister, Hetephernebti. They had a daughter called, Inetkawes. 

His passion was building projects, something he continued non-stop as soon as he assumed the throne. Cities had begun to grow in Egypt during the 1st Dynasty, though under Djoser they became widespread throughout Egypt, with architecture becoming more ornate. During his reign, the borders of Egypt were made secure and expansion into the Sinai was achieved through military expeditions. This led to lucrative turquoise (Article: The Pyramid Perplexity) and copper mining in the Peninsula, which created great wealth for Egypt. 

Djoser also defeated the Libyans descended from Phut (Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut) and annexed parts of their land. Overall, his reign was marked by great technological innovation; whereby, agriculture, the arts, trade and Egypt’s civil administration all flourished.

Djoser

There were a number of Viziers in Egyptian history, though it can be no coincidence that the first known Vizier as well as the most famous one was Imhotep, Vizier to Djoser. Not only chancellor to the Pharaoh, Imhotep was reputed to be an architect, engineer, physician as well as possibly a high priest at Heliopolis. Imhotep is credited to be the designer of the Step or otherwise named, Djoser Pyramid at Saqqara. This pyramid contains a large vertical shaft under it and the complex has many similar structures that appear to have been used to store grain. The name or title, Imhotep means: ‘he that comes in peace.’ Imhotep was a renowned scholar, contributing greatly to Egyptian society. Apart from Amenhotep, he is the only other Egyptian to be deified – Appendix VI: Joseph & Imhotep – One man, different name?

Joseph, son of Jacob (Israel), was Imhotep, of Egyptian History, Nigel Hawkins, 2012 – emphasis mine:

‘It is also interesting to note that circumcision was widely practiced among Egyptians from the third dynasty onward. Although Abraham did visit Egypt, it seems more likely that this practice was introduced by Joseph-Imhotep in the third dynasty. Egyptian records show that before Imhotep, the bodies of Egyptian royalty were not embalmed. Instead, they were entombed in early Egyptian structures called mastabas, (or mastabahs), oblong structures with flat roofs and sloping sides built over the opening of a mummy chamber or burial pit.

Djoser appears to be the first king to have be embalmed, Jacob (Israel) was embalmed by Joseph and buried in a coffin and Joseph himself was embalmed and given a royal Egyptian burial. The Biblical account suggests that only Joseph’s bones were preserved as was the practice in the early dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Preservation of the whole body was not practiced until the Era of King Tut (New Kingdom).’

Imhotep

Genesis: 46 ‘Joseph was thirty years old when he entered the service of Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt.

From the Book of Jubilees, we learn Joseph’s birthday. Therefore Joseph became Vizier of Egypt sometime after late July in the year 1696 BCE.

“And the Lord was gracious to Rachel, and opened her womb, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Joseph, on the new moon [1st day] of the fourth month [June/July]…” – Book of Jubilees 28:24.

Genesis: 47 ‘During the seven plentiful years the earth produced abundantly, 48 and he gathered up all the food of these seven years, which occurred in the land of Egypt, and put the food in the cities. He put in every city the food from the fields around it. 49 And Joseph stored up grain in great abundance, like the sand of the sea, until he ceased to measure it, for it could not be measured.

50 Before the year of famine came, two sons were born to Joseph. Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On, bore them to him.

51 Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh. For, he said, “God has made me forget all my hardship and all my father’s house.”

52 The name of the second he called Ephraim, “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.”

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Manasseh meaning: ‘Forgetting, Evaporating’ from the verb (nasha), to forget.

The name Manasseh is generally seen as derived from the verb… to forget but forgetting due to “evaporation” of a memory the way water evaporates due to solar heat, or the way a principle evaporates due to interest… [describing] an upward motion, generally of something that is being pulled up and out so as to remove it. This verb occurs very often and can usually be translated with (1) to lift or lift up, (2) to bear or carry, and (3) to take or take away. An identical verb (or rather the same one used in a specialized way) means to loan on interest. The practice of loaning on interest causes the principal sum to slowly but surely evaporate and was prohibited under Mosaic law. A third identical verb (or again the same one) means to deceive or beguile.

The name Manasseh is probably due to a grammatical form in Hebrew that is comparable to the English present continuous. It fixes the letter (mem) to the root. That would give the name Manasseh the meaning of Forgetting. Another reason why a mem may occur in front of a root is when it comes from a particle that means “from”. Hence the name Manasseh may also mean From A Debt. This is significant because Manasseh’s brother is named Ephraim, a name with a distinctly bitter secondary meaning.

Perhaps Joseph named his son From A Debt, because he figured that besides his gratitude for being rescued, he felt that either God or his family owed him a debt for tearing him away from his father.

For a meaning of the name Manasseh, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Forgetting, Forgetfulness. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Making To Forget.

The name Ephraim meaning: ‘Two-fold Increase, Doubly Fruitful, Exhausted, Ashes’ from the verb (para), to be fruitful. From the verb (‘pr), to be depleted.

We would expect the people from Ephraim to be called (Ephraimites), but that word does not occur in the Bible. Instead, the Bible mostly speaks of sons of Ephraim (Numbers 1:32, Joshua 16:5, 1 Chronicles 9:3). But on occasion, the Ephraimites are referred to as (Ephrathites), for instance in Judges 12:5, where the men of Gilead capture strongholds opposite Ephraim arrest fugitives of Ephraim and asks them if they are Ephrathites. 

The meaning of the name Ephraim is somewhat debated: Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names and NOBSE Study Bible Name List go after Genesis 41:52, “…For […] God has made me fruitful…” and take the name from the Hebrew verb (para), meaning to bear fruit or be fruitful:

The verb (parar) means to split, divide and usually make more, expand or multiply. This root belongs to an extended family that also contains (paras,) to break (through), (paras and parash), to spread out or declare, (paras), to break in two or divide, and (pa’ar) means to branch out or to glorify.

Noun (par) means young bull and (para) means young heifer. Note that the first letter (aleph) is believed to denote an ox-head, while its name derives from the verb, to learn or to produce thousands. The second letter, (beth) is also the word for house (or temple or stable). The familiar word “alphabet,” therefore literally means “stable of bulls” or “house of divisions” or “temple of fruitful learning”.

It’s not clear what the unused verb (‘apar) might have meant but it’s clearly not very positive and possibly has to do with being exhausted or depleted of inner strength and inherent merit. Noun (‘eper) means ashes, which is what remains when all useful energy is extracted from a fuel. Noun (‘aper) means covering or bandage, which is what is applied over a limb when its inherent strength is broken.

Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Two-fold Increase. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Doubly Fruitful. Taking the aleph from the Qual imperfect first person singular would yield a meaning of I Am Twice Fruitful.

It’s true that the aleph is quite a weak letter which is applied often without essentially changing the meaning of a word. But it’s perfectly conceivable, and perhaps even preferred, that father Joseph casts a wry word play in the naming of his sons.

He names his first born Manasseh (Making To Forget), because, “God has made me forget all my toil and all of my father’s house”. When his father’s house finally shows up, it becomes clear that Joseph had a hard time forgetting them and was in fact happy to see them. His second son he names Ephraim, a name with a strong connection to the word fruitfulness but equally so to the word for ashes, the symbol of worthlessness and grief. 

Perhaps Joseph was not at all happy for having been made to forget his father’s house, and deemed ‘fruitfulness in the land of affliction,’ the golden bars of a still dismal cage. Perhaps the duality of the name Ephraim does not denote a double portion of the same, but rather as a reminder that the coin of his wealth and status had two sides.’

Genesis: 53 ‘The seven years of plenty that occurred in the land of Egypt came to an end, 54 and the seven years of famine began to come, as Joseph had said. There was famine in all lands, but in all the land of Egypt there was bread. 55 When all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread. Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, “Go to Joseph. What he says to you, do.”

56 So when the famine had spread over all the land, Joseph opened all the storehouses and sold to the Egyptians, for the famine was severe in the land of Egypt. 57 Moreover, all the earth came to Egypt to Joseph to buy grain, because the famine was severe over all the earth.’

Jospeh’s son Manasseh was born circa 1691 and Ephraim in 1690 BCE. The seven years of plenty ran from 1696 to 1689 BCE, with the following seven years of famine lasting from 1689 to 1682 BCE. Counting for fourteen years of Joseph’s life from age thirty to forty-four years of age. This was no ordinary famine but a disaster of very serious consequence. The Famine Stela or Stele is an inscription in hieroglyphs, located on Sehel Island in the Nile River, which is near Aswan, Egypt. It records this very disaster and tells of a seven year period of drought and famine during the reign of Pharaoh Djoser of the third dynasty. 

The stele is inscribed into a natural granite block with forty-two columns. There are three Egyptian deities on the top with Djoser facing them, with offerings in his outstretched arms. The account is set in the eighteenth year of Djoser’s reign and the seventh year of the famine which had gripped Egypt, in 1862 BCE; testifying of Djoser’s deep concern as the suffering and desperation of the people had grown to breaking point. This, in light of Joseph’s forward planning. What if none or only a small quantity of grain had been stored? It is fully at the end of seven years that the drought finally breaks and the river Nile begins to flow again. 

Online Encyclopaedia – italicisation theirs: 

‘The Famine Stela is one of only three known inscriptions that connect the cartouche name Djeser (“lordly”) with the serekh name Netjerikhet (“divine body”) of king Djoser in one word. Therefore, it provides useful evidence for Egyptologists and historians who are involved in reconstructing the royal chronology of the Old kingdom of Egypt.’

The pressure felt by Djoser as Pharoah would make sense if after seven years, Egypt had been selling grain worldwide* and not just locally. Even though Joseph had stored a consecutive yearly twenty percent of the vast abundance during the seven years of plenty, the demand in the next seven years may have meant it was a close run thing regarding dwindling grain supplies as the seventh year of famine ran its course. Understandably, Djoser would perhaps not share the same confidence in the Eternal’s deliverance as possessed by Joseph. An extension of this period into an eighth year would then have been catastrophic and would support Djoser’s alarm as evidenced on the Famine Stela. 

The World Famine Verified, Lujack Skylark – emphasis mine:

‘Shang Dynasty emperor Cheng Tang [of which] some Chinese historians stated his reign began in 1747 B.C. There are others who believe his reign began in 1675 B.C. Chinese emperor Cheng Tang [1st king of the dynasty]… very early in the dynasty recorded a 7 year famine verifying Joseph’s account of the 7 year global famine in Egypt [from 1689 to 1682 BCE] (Genesis 41:57).

Grant Jeffery wrote a book called “Signature of God” where he said the Yemen marble tablet inscription [reputed to be written at the time of the famine] about people living in a Yemenite castle during the seven years of plenty and the seven years of famine confirm the Genesis accountHe also wrote about the Yemen stone found in a rich woman’s tomb where this woman sends her [servants] to meet Joseph [who is apparently mentioned by name]!

The pygmy Woolly Mammoths on Wrangel island die out [circa] 1700 B.C…’

“Wrangel island is north of Russia… The migrations of people’s during the worldwide* famine is fascinating. Some [archaeologists] have given the migrations of these people’s from 1700-1500 B.C. window. The migrations at 1700 B.C. makes sense since people were migrating in search of food.”

‘The Kushite kingdom in eastern Africa arises [circa] 1700 B.C. as Africans fleeing famine come together living in [a] close knit community along the Nile river south of Egypt. Some Black tribes migrate from central Africa and settle in southern Africa fleeing from famine. [Archaeologists] dated their artifacts to [circa] 1700 B.C. Nordic Bronze culture in northern Europe becomes established [circa] 1700 B.C. where bronze weapons are produced used in hunting wild game.

Starving Indo-Europeans from western Russia migrate to central Europe and produce bronze weapons to hunt wild game [circa] 1700 B.C. Starving Indo-European tribes invade Dravidan dominated India [circa] 1700 B.C… [and] destroy the Dravidan Mohenjo-Daro civilization… Olmecs migrate into the Yucatan Peninsula [circa] 1700 B.C. [Archaeologists] state the Olmecs invented plumbing and the Olmecs were interested in water conservation at this time in world history.’

Not only did Joseph prepare for the famine by stock piling grain, he also had the foresight to store water. Samuel Kurinsky states: 

‘The most critical and important factor affecting the economy of Egypt was the engineering of an effective control of its water resources. Legends, both Hebraic and Arabic, have it that Joseph and his people made a great and everlasting contribution to Egypt in this regard. The application of Mesopotamian mathematics served in the planning of new systems of irrigation and in expanding the primitive systems previously installed in Egypt. The storage of water is even more effective as a hedge against years of drought and famine than the storage of grain, which, we are told, was a first step recommended by Joseph to the pharaoh’ – The Eighth Day: The Hidden History of the Jewish Contribution to Civilisation, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc. 1994, page 127.

As the famine was worldwide it impacted Jacob and his family in Canaan. He sent all his sons, except Benjamin to Egypt to purchase grain. We have discussed Genesis forty-two to forty-six and the highly charged meetings between Joseph and his estranged brothers of twenty-two years and then seeing his father Jacob, when studying Jacob, Judah, Reuben, Simeon and Benjamin – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. For the year is now 1687 BCE, two years into the famine. One cannot forget the bitter-sweet first meeting with his little brother Benjamin and the poignant jolt of a reminder, that Joseph would never see his mother Rachel again. 

The one resounding point that beams very bright is that even though Joseph toys with his brother’s and father’s emotions; making them sweat a lot – of which the Creator does not condemn, for does He not put us through our paces when we are in the wrong? – none was done from bitterness, revenge or hatred. There is a sense of humour on Joseph’s part for dragging out the eventual reunion and the suspense created in so doing.

No, what leaps out is Joseph’s profoundly all consuming emotion of ecstatic joy at finally being reunited with his family. He harboured only love and forgiveness towards his brothers who did not really know him. Here was truly a converted man, filled with the spirit of God. Joseph was a worthy type of the future deliverer and Saviour of all humankind. With his grandfather Isaac and his distant cousin Moses, he is in a select group of people to have been given a saviour’s role in imitation of the true Saviour.

In Genesis forty-five, Joseph finally reveals himself. It says in verse three, that his brothers ‘could not answer him.’ The understatement of the Book of Genesis and perhaps the whole Bible. The word dumbstruck comes to mind. It also says the brothers were ‘dismayed at his presence.’ I bet they were. Here was a ghost which had risen before them. A man who should have either been dead, at the bottom of some hideous mine or looking like skin and bone of a man twice his age, a victim of a tortuous slave gang. Yet here he was; here was their long lost brother Joseph. Brother Joseph, who just won’t go away. As a youngster following them, albeit at their father’s behest and here he was again, a revenant from if not the grave, a large shadow from the past following them still. A phantom who was second in power and authority of at least Lower Egypt, if not all the land. 

It is testament to Joseph that he didn’t try to punch or slap any of them, considering the looks on their faces at that moment. Joseph instead alerts them to the five years remaining of famine and invites them to live in the land of Goshen in the Nile delta, where he can provide for them and nurture their flocks and wealth. Pharaoh learns of Joseph’s brothers and provides gifts and provisions for their return journey. Joseph’s sense of humour is exhibited in verse twenty-four, when his last words to his departing brothers are: “Do not quarrel on the way.” He knew them all too well. Jacob in verse twenty-six believing Joseph to be dead, understandably became numb and fainted from the shock of what his sons revealed to him. 

Did Jacob ever find out what his sons had done to Joseph? Did the sons of Jacob dare divulge their crime and did Joseph’s honour mean he would not hurt his father in such a way, nor exact any kind of revenge on his brothers. It must have always been that slight bit awkward for the brothers when in Joseph’s presence and therefore, punishment enough. Until such time* that it did come to light…

On the journey down to Egypt, the Creator speaks to Jacob reassuring him, for Jacob must have remembered what had been said to his grandfather Abraham – Genesis 15:13.

Genesis 46:2-4

English Standard Version

2 ‘And God spoke to Israel in visions of the night and said, “Jacob, Jacob.” And he said, “Here I am.” 3 Then he said, “I am God, the God of your father. Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for there I will make you into a great nation. 4 I myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I will also bring you up again, and Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes.”

In Genesis forty-seven, Pharaoh Djoser meets five of Joseph’s brothers and Jacob. It is interesting to learn of Jacob’s perspective of his own life.

Genesis 47:9-10

English Standard Version

9 ‘And Jacob said to Pharaoh, “The days of the years of my sojourning are 130 years. Few and evil have been the days of the years of my life, and they have not attained to the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their sojourning.” 10 And Jacob blessed Pharaoh [as one king to another] and went out from the presence of Pharaoh.’

It was an important observation to Jacob that his life in comparison with his father Isaac of 180 years and his grandfather Abraham of 175 years had been shorter and more difficult. Jacob does live longer, though he dies younger at age 147. The difficulties in his life had in large part been caused by himself and here he does seem to be in contrast again, with his family. 

We also learn that the famine was so severe that when Egyptians ran out of money, they then had to purchase grain with their livestock and when that ran out, they then sold their lands to Pharaoh. After that, they were tenant farmers as Jospeh gave them seed to plant with the agreement they would give twenty percent of their harvests to Pharaoh.

Skipping to the final chapter of Genesis, we learn of the respect towards Joseph and Jacob and their status as rulers and kings shown to them from the lands of Egypt and Canaan. 

Genesis 50:1-3, 7-11, 15-26

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Joseph fell on his father’s face and wept over him and kissed him. 2 And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father. So the physicians embalmed Israel. 3 Forty days were required for it, for that is how many are required for embalming. And the Egyptians wept for him seventy days.

7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. With him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his household, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, 8 as well as all the household of Joseph, his brothers, and his father’s household. Only their children, their flocks, and their herds were left in the land of Goshen. 9 And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen. It was a very great company. 

10 When they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, they lamented there with a very great and grievous lamentation, and he made a mourning for his father seven days. 11 When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning on the threshing floor of Atad, they said, “This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians.”

Joseph’s brothers ask for his forgiveness, concerned for their own safety after Jacob dies.

15 ‘When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, “It may be that Joseph will hate us and pay us back for all the evil that we did to him.” 16 So they sent a message to Joseph, saying, “Your father gave this command before he died: 17 ‘Say to Joseph, “Please forgive the transgression* of your brothers and their sin, because they did evil to you.” And now, please forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father.”

Joseph wept when they spoke to him. 18 His brothers also came and fell down before him and said, “Behold, we are your servants.” 19 But Joseph said to them, “Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. 21 So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones.” Thus he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.’

The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:

‘Perhaps the most amazing revelation to be found in Rohl’s book relates to Joseph. The excavations at Tel ed-Daba (Avaris in Bible times) have revealed a large Egyptian-style palace dating from the early 13th Dynasty [later 12th Dynasty]… Rohl concludes that this must have been the retirement palace of Joseph, built in the midst of his people.

In 1987 the excavators began to uncover a large pyramid-style tomb adjacent to the palace. They discovered that the tomb had been carefully emptied in antiquity [by Israelites]. There was no evidence of the ransacking that characterizes the work of grave robbers. Further, they discovered the head of a very large statue [twice the size of a normal male] of the man who had been buried in the tomb. The head is most unusual in that it displays very un-Egyptian type features [Asiatic not Semitic] like a mushroom shaped coiffure or wig. The figure is also clean shaven. Most remarkably, this person is wrapped in a coat of many colors! Rohl concludes that this is a statue of Joseph…’

It is worth noting that over his right shoulder is a throw stick, representing a holder of authority and an office. Dramatically, the face of the statue has been cleaved off, with marks on the head where somebody has tried to split the stone. It is possible it was desecrated in vengeful retaliation for the humiliation of the Exodus related events, including the plagues and the plundering by the exiting Israelites – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Genesis: 22 ‘So Joseph remained in Egypt, he and his father’s house. Joseph lived 110** years. 23 And Joseph saw Ephraim’s children of the third generation. The children also of Machir the son of Manasseh were counted as Joseph’s own. 24 And Joseph said to his [remaining] brothers, “I am about to die, but God will visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land that he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.”

25 Then Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here.” 26 So Joseph died, being 110 years old. They embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.’ 

Joseph died in 1616 BCE. Most of his brothers had already died shortly before him, beginning with Simeon in 1630 BCE; with only three remaining brothers who died not long after Joseph, namely Naphtali (1612 BCE), and lastly Benjamin and Levi in 1611 BCE.

Exodus 13:18-19

English Standard Version

‘But God led the people around by the way of the wilderness toward the Red Sea. And the people of Israel went up out of the land of Egypt equipped for battle. Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for Joseph had made the sons of Israel solemnly swear, saying, “God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones with you from here.”

There is an interesting parallel between Joseph and his descendant born exactly one hundred and fifty years later, Joshua from the tribe of Ephraim, the successor to Moses.

Numbers 13:8

English Standard Version

‘… from the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea [Joshua] the son of Nun…’

Joshua 24:29-32

English Standard Version

29 ‘After these things Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being 110** years old. 30 And they buried him in his own inheritance at Timnath-serah, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash. 31 Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua and had known all the work that the Lord did for Israel.

32 As for the bones of Joseph, which the people of Israel brought up from Egypt, they buried them at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money. It became an inheritance of the descendants of Joseph [located in Samaria of the tribe of Ephraim].’

Jacob and Joseph are included in the faith chapter of the Bible. The importance of Jacob’s blessing for Joseph’s sons was the beginning and fulfilment of the special birthright blessing of great national prosperity and preeminence for Abraham’s descendants which was filtered to his son Isaac, passing over Ishmael (though Ishmael did receive his own blessing – Genesis 17:20), then Jacob over Esau, then Joseph instead of Reuben and Simeon and split between his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. Destiny did not decree for the peoples of Germany, the Jews, Northern Ireland or Wales to be the recipients of the principal birthright blessing. 

Hebrews 11:21-22

English Standard Version

‘By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.’

Prior to Jacob’s death, Jacob blessed his grandsons. Jacob blesses Joseph, yet the specifics are not given to his son, but rather his two grandsons; undoubtedly due to the Eternal’s inspiration. Manasseh and Ephraim are youngsters according to the account. In fact it would appear that not long after Jacob’s arrival in Egypt in 1687 BCE, he blessed the lads, so that their ages^ appear to be about five or six for Manasseh and four or five for Ephraim. 

Genesis 48:2-20

English Standard Version

2 ‘… it was told to Jacob, “Your son Joseph has come to you.” Then Israel summoned his strength and sat up in bed. 3 And Jacob said to Joseph, “God Almighty appeared to me at Luz in the land of Canaan and blessed me, 4 and said to me, ‘Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will make of you a company [multitude] of peoples…’ 5 And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt [circa 1691/1690 BCE] before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are.’

The destinies of Reuben and Simeon were radically altered when they forfeited their right to the birthright blessings through transgressions. The small nations of Northern Ireland and Wales are testimony of their alternative, yet actual histories and what might have been – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Genesis: 8 ‘When Israel saw Joseph’s sons, he said, “Who are these?” 9 Joseph said to his father, “They are my sons, whom God has given me here [in Egypt].” And he said, “Bring them to me, please, that I may bless them.” 10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim with age, so that he could not see. So Joseph brought them near him, and he kissed them and embraced them. 11 And Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face; and behold, God has let me see your offspring also.”

12 Then Joseph removed them from his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. 13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. 14 And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, crossing his hands (for Manasseh was the firstborn).’ 

Different translations state that the lads were either between Joseph’s knees or on his lap. Others, that they were on Jacob’s knees. The one point in common is that they were very young, as in infants or very small boys^ of pre-school age. Due to the understandable order that Joseph presented them as eldest and youngest to Jacob, Jacob had to cross his hands like a saltire – of which the significance and symbolism will be apparent as we progress – for Jacob understood, as had happened repeatedly in his family’s line, that the youngest was being elevated to eldest.

Genesis: 15 ‘And he blessed Joseph and said, “The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God who has been my shepherd all my life long to this day, 16 the angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the boys; and in them let my name [Israel] be carried on, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude [H7230 – rob; abundance, great number, numerous, many] in the midst [H7130 – qereb] of the earth.”

We arrive at a small word with massive ramifications. A major clue to the location of Joseph’s descendants has been there all along. Even so, it has remained hidden. Its clarification is an important step in identifying Manasseh and Ephraim. Yet biblical identity researchers and experts in the field have been so distracted by the teaching that England – and  by extension, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, (Scotland) – is Ephraim, it has not been given second consideration or thought. 

The Hebrew word for midst can be translated as ‘among, within’ and ‘inwards.’ Its meaning includes, ‘inner part, middle, the centre’ whether in a literal, geographic sense or in a figurative sense as in the ‘heart’ and core. The significance of this is revealed, when an atlas of the world is looked upon and instead of a European or Asian centric map, drawing or satellite image as is most common, an Americas centric map is viewed. 

For there, between the continents of Europe to the east and Asia to the west, sit the continents of North and South America ‘in the midst of the earth.’ Sitting astride this vast land mass are the descendants of Joseph in the nations of Canada and the United States of America

Not only do these nations occupy a geographic centre on the globe, they exert an influence on the world that figuratively is the heart or centre of our global civilisation. As Joseph was separated from his brothers, so to have the descendants of Jospeh been separated from their brother nations – Genesis 49:26.

Genesis: 17 ‘When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him, and he took his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. 18 And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.”

19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. [Manasseh] also shall become a people [a nation], and he also shall be great [H1431 – gadal].’ 

The Hebrew word used for great is different from the Hebrew word used for great in connection with Ishmael.

Genesis 17:20

English Standard Version

‘As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful [H6509 – parah: bear fruit, grow] and multiply [H7235 – rabah: become great, numerous, increase greatly, enlarge] him greatly [to a great degree]. He shall father twelve princes, and I will make him into a great [H1419 – gadowl: older, mighty, important, proud, insolent] nation.’

It is noteworthy that Ishmael was to become a great people like Isaac’s descendants. The subtle difference is that Ishmael was to act like a firstborn, of which he was literally entitled, though he had a tendency to lean towards a self-importance that was proud and selfish. The German nation, thanks to their leaders and not always a reflection of themselves have displayed this negative edge to their inherited greatness during their history – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

The Hebrew word great used for Manasseh, does not carry this slight negative edge. It is translated as ‘magnify, grow, nourish up and grow up.’ Interestingly, it has the connotation of becoming ‘great or important, make powerful, do great things, to grow up.’

In the previous chapter, we touched upon how two nations from the sons of Jacob could experience an influx of immigration way beyond their current populations. One was New Zealand, which could easily accommodate millions more people. The other nation is Canada; which could receive tens of millions more people. It may well still be growing into its greatness. If Germany as a prophesied ‘great’ nation has a population of nearly eighty-five million people, then it is conceivable that Canada may grow to a population well beyond fifty million people and upwards towards one hundred million people.

Genesis: ‘Nevertheless, his younger brother shall be greater [H1431 – gadal] than he, and his offspring [descendants, seed] shall become a multitude [H4393 – mlo] of nations.”

The Hebrew word for multitude can be translated as ‘fulness, all that is therein, handful(s).’ It means ‘that which fills, mass, entire contents, full length.’ 

It is speaking of many more people than that of Manasseh. A population say, more in line with the United States of America. 

Genesis: 20 ‘So he blessed them that day, saying, “By you Israel will pronounce blessings, saying, ‘God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh.’” Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’

There are two vital points or keys that need to be remembered and discussed in depth regarding Manasseh and Ephraim. The first is a little unique and has not been seen in discussions anywhere else in books, papers or on the internet. It is the fact that as Joseph’s inheritance was divided into two between his sons; the tribe of Manasseh also divided into two, as we have discussed in part already. As Manasseh’s name means forgotten, it is an irony that biblical identity researchers have forgotten this salient point. 

In the original allotment of land in Canaan, the half tribe of East Manasseh chose to live on the East side of the River Jordan with Gad and Reuben. The remaining half tribe of West Manasseh chose to dwell with Ephraim. We will look at this in detail and the scriptures supporting Manasseh receiving two inheritances. 

This part of the puzzle may have helped identity researchers realise more quickly than they are doing, that equating Ephraim with England and Manasseh with the United States, doesn’t just go contrary to their both being together in the midst of the earth; or that Manasseh is suddenly more powerful than Ephraim; but… who and where on Earth, are the missing half tribe of West Manasseh?

The second point is to do with the phrasing ‘a multitude of nations.’ The Israelite identity movement, driven by its biggest following, British Israel have been so taken with the height of the British Empire approximately one hundred plus years ago – when the movement was at its most active – and its descendant Commonwealth of nations, they have not seen the waning devolvement of England’s power and stature before their very eyes and the waxing evolving of the United States’s power – Article: 2050. They have only ever seen an England of many colonial parts and a United States, though enormous, powerful, prosperous beyond measure, and a great nation, still only as one giant singular country. The former colonies of England are extensions that now give it no power. 

Comparing England and the United States highlights that something is very wrong with saying England is mighty Ephraim and the United States is the lesser birthright recipient. For the scripture says in verse twenty: ‘Thus he put Ephraim before Manasseh.’ The United States was founded on the saying on their great seal: E pluribus unum – Latin for “Out of many, one.” 

Manasseh

Before we study the prophecies and blessings given to Joseph’s descendants by Jacob, Moses and Deborah, we will now look at the meaning of a multitude of nations more closely and the predominant view that it refers to the British Empire as well as the radical view – as deemed by the conservative status quo of the Israelite identity community – that maybe the fifty individual and distinct law making and self-governing states of America are in fact the biblical fulfilment of an astounding prophecy given 3,500 years before they began to dramatically unfold. 

Showdown at Big Sandy, Greg Doudna 1989 & 2006, pages 176, 183 & 185 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The argument that the United States is Israel basically consists of the following four points. 

First, some of the… prophecies of physical blessings and greatness to Abraham’s descendants… were not completely fulfilled by Israel anciently. 

Second, the house of Israel and the house of Judah were separate and never reunited

Third, prophecies concerning the house of Israel in the end-time show them to be in captivity, which means they must exist in our time as an identifiable people (and distinct from the Jews). 

And fourth… the greatest nation on earth in our time would not be ignored in Bible prophecy.’

Though this writer disagrees with the second point as discussed in Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes, the other three are real and vital proofs of an Israelite identity for nations today and not that the tribes are scattered forever amongst the nations as non-entities. As we learned in Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech, a gigantic nation like China cannot be dismissed or ignored from any biblical investigation and identification. Similarly, the greatest nation in humanity’s history cannot be ignored or dismissed from a rigorous biblical examination and explanation. For if we cannot correctly identity these two nations, then one may as well close ones Bible and never read it again. Yet, that has very nearly happened as the identity of the United States has not been understood until very recently.

Doudna: ‘… Jacob was promised his progeny would become “a nation and a company (qahal) of nations” … Ephraim… would become “a fullness (melo) of nations”… the word qahal, “company”… is used of armies or assemblies and refers to a single political unit. The plural goiim, “nations”… does not mean multiple political states (as in ” British Commonwealth of Nations”).

Rather goiim means peoples or tribes or ethnic groups… Ephraim would become one political entity consisting of multiple ethnic groups… better rendered “company of peoples”… [or, a union of states]… “United States” means in English, literally, a “company of political states,” and “state” is, of course, used synonymously in English for “nation.”

Therefore “United States” is, by a pun, “company of nations” in its very name… the fifty states in the United States are not independent, but then neither were the goiim or “nations” in the earlier fulfilment of “company of nations,” the ancient house of Israel. This I saw as the point missed by Anglo-Israelites.’

This writer whole heartedly concurs with Greg Doudna’s insightfulness. The United States is the prophesied company of peoples. Out of many, one. This phrase incredibly applies to the United States of America; its population genesis; and continued evolving demographic.

It is not indicative of the nation of England in any shape or form. It was shockingly fifty years ago, when Doudna impressively recognised the truth regarding Ephraim, if not Manasseh. Yet today, very few people attach the identity of the United States with Ephraim. Why? 

The United States in Prophecy: The Case for Identifying the United States with Ephraim (not Manasseh), Greg Doudna, 1974 – emphasis mine: 

‘If Ephraim really has become many separate and sovereign peoples, then Ephraim = Great Britain [England, Wales, Scotland], Ephraim = Canada, Ephraim = Australia, Ephraim = New Zealand, and Ephraim = other English settlers in British colonies worldwide… then Australia for example, is as much Ephraim as is Great Britain. Then when Hosea and other prophets speak of “Ephraim” doing this or doing that, just who is meant – will Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand simultaneously “call to Egypt” and “go to Assyria” (Hosea 7:11), to cite but one of many similar scriptures? 

Those who support the traditional view must deal with the inconsistency of holding that Ephraim is the British Commonwealth and then applying prophecies concerning Ephraim toward only one of that “company of nations” instead of all of them… The other settlements of Britain are Manassite The fact Britain has colonies in no way proves she is a company of nations. Britain is a single nation [composed of three countries: England, Wales and Scotland] in the same way that other Israelite nations with colonies are still single nations. 

Which land is a land of “coasts”… the United States… has one of the longest usable coastlines of any nation in the world… The… Hebrew word yam is translated “sea” and “west.” The “isles of the sea” or “coasts of the sea”… can easily be translated “coasts of the west.”

Though the author rightly highlights the inconsistency, untenableness and nonsensicalness of equating four different nations all as Ephraim, he then forgets – pun intended – that Manasseh splitting into four or more nations is not scripturally supported either. This highlights the wider error as we have discussed in the previous three chapters of mis-identifying nations not descended from Jacob as Israelite and then apportioning the remaining English speaking nations as all descended from Joseph. Rather than the correct understanding that all the English speaking nations are the individual Israelite tribes today.

Ephraim

Genesis 49:22-26

Evangelical Heritage Version

22 ‘Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a spring. His branches run over the wall.’

The image of a vine’s branches spreading like tentacles is reflected by the small trickle of English colonists who eventually became a torrent of people arriving in conquest of the American continent. With the inexorable march westwards after the first English settlement of the Virginia Colony Jamestown, in 1607 and the Pilgrims of the Plymouth Colony in 1620. It also refers to the blessings of America, extending outwards and overflowing to other nations such as the financing in rebuilding Germany and Japan after World War II.

Genesis: 23 ‘The archers have fiercely attacked him. They shot at him and harassed him, 24 but his bow remained steady. His arms and hands were made strong by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob, by the name of the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel…’ 

The fledgling and vulnerable colonies were able to navigate the conflicts on American soil and win those crucial in their survival, including: the American Revolution from 1775 to 1783, the Indian Wars of 1775 to 1890, the French War from 1798 to 1800, the Great Britain War of 1812 to 1815, the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848, the Spanish-American War in 1898 and the most potentially devastating conflict of all, the American Civil War during 1861 to 1865. 

This war had more at stake than historians realise, for there was more than the question of the survival of the Federal United States and its splitting into two, with a Confederate South. For the people of the South* embody in large part the half tribe of West Manasseh and the North, Ephraim – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.* It was a fight for sibling supremacy and the fulfilment of prophecy.

This marked divide is understood when one appreciates the United States is in fact one and a half tribes. This is why the Bible calls these peoples either Ephraim after the dominant tribe, or Joseph as the United States comprise two peoples from two tribes.

Canada is technically half a tribe and called Manasseh, Gilead or Machir in the Bible, while its French component was explained in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Therefore, the half tribe of East Manasseh is the nation of Canada and the tribe of Ephraim with the half tribe of West Manasseh, is the nation of the United States of America.

Though Israelite identity researcher Linda Watson is subtly adrift in her conclusions, she is considerably closer to the truth than nearly all biblical identity of nations commentators – capitalisation hers.

“… the tribe of Manasseh was itself divided into two half tribes – one located EAST of the Jordan [River], in Palestine, and one WEST of the Jordan [River]… just NORTH of the Tribe of Ephraim. Interestingly, in modern times this same geographic position has been maintained by the descendants of these ancient tribes. Today, Manasseh – represented by England (east of the body of water we call the Atlantic Ocean), and Canada (west of that body of water) – still lies NORTH of Ephraim, the United States of America!” – Who is America, Ephraim and Manasseh.

Genesis: 25 ‘by the God of your father, who will help you, by the Almighty, who will bless you with blessings from heaven [H8064 – shamayim: the abode of God] above [H5920 – al: on high, the most High, God], blessings from the deep that lies below, blessings from the breasts and from the womb.’ 

Jacob is predicting the physical blessing of many progeny, as well as spiritual prosperity. This is a verse that is overlooked or ignored when studying the American psyche. Explanations are sought for America’s religiosity, especially the American South, yet the simple answer is that Americans are a more believing peoples by nature through the Creator’s design.

United States one of the most religious countries, Diane Swanbrow – emphasis mine: 

‘The United States remains among the most religious nations in the world, according to a worldwide study by the University [of Michigan]. About 46 percent of American adults attend church at least once a week, not counting weddings, funerals and christenings, compared with 14 percent of adults in Great Britain, 8 percent in France, 7 percent in Sweden and 4 percent in Japan. Moreover, 58 percent of Americans say they often think about the meaning and purpose of life, compared with 25 percent of British, 26 percent of Japanese and 31 percent of… Germans, the study says.’

Sixty percent of Americans say that religion is ‘very important’ to them; whereas only twenty-one percent of Western Europeans think the same and more than eighty percent of ‘American adults call themselves Christians’ with more than a third of adult Americans claiming to be ‘born-again.’

While traditional religious belief and participation in organized religion have steadily declined in most advanced industrial nations, especially in Western Europe, this is not the case in the United States,” says Ronald Inglehart, a researcher at the Institute for Social Research (ISR) and director of the ISR World Values Surveys, which were conducted in more than 80 nations between 1981 and 2001.

Some possible reasons cited for the results: Religious refugees set the tone long ago in America; religious people tend to have more children than non-religious groups; and the United States has a less comprehensive social welfare system, prompting people to look to religion for help.

Inglehart and [Pippa] Norris, a political scientist at Harvard University, also examined the reasons the United States remains an “outlier” in religiosity among postindustrial nations. “The U.S. was founded by religious refugees who attached so much importance to religion that they were willing to risk their lives in a dangerous new environment in order to practice their religion, and to some extent this outlook has been successfully transmitted to succeeding waves of immigrants.”

Their conclusion is that the more ‘self-perceived vulnerability, the greater the importance of religion.’ Though ‘America seems an anomaly: a rich society in which people worship, pray, and believe, as if they lived in a poverty-stricken nation.’ 

‘The Bible Belt is an informal term for a region in the Southern United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is generally higher than the nation’s average. By contrast, religion plays the least important role in New England and in the Western United States.’ 

The more religious mindset of the United States should come as no surprise, for it was founded with a tolerance for freedom to worship unlike any other nation. The aim was to eliminate any dominant denomination of Christianity from becoming an official or national religion.  

The U.S. was founded as a Christian nation – here’s more proof, Bryan Fischer, 2014 – emphasis mine:

‘At the time of the founding, 99.8% of the population of the fledgling country identified themselves, to one degree of sincerity or another, as followers of Jesus Christ. And 98.4% identified themselves as Protestants. Catholics represented 1.4% of the population, and the other 0.2% were followers of Judaism. Virtually 100% of those living in America at the time of its founding were adherents of the Judeo-Christian tradition. 

This truth is reflected in our First Amendment, which… was designed specifically to protect the free exercise of the Christian faith in the new nation, and to prevent competition among the various Christian denominations. It did this by prohibiting Congress from picking one Christian denomination and making it the official church of the United States. 

States, on the other hand, were free to establish Christian denominations in their individual states, and somewhere between six and ten of the original 13 states did so. 

As [Joseph] Story writes, “The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical patronage of the national government.” 

… Maryland’s first state constitution, enacted in 1776, specifically granted religious freedom to every denomination of Protestants and Catholics, i.e., to followers of the Christian faith. Article 33 of that first Constitution read this way: 

“That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons, professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty… wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate on account of his religious persuasion or profession, or for his religious practice… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax for the support of the Christian religion.” 

Article 55 laid down the following requirement for anyone who wanted to serve in public office in the newly established state: 

“That every person, appointed to any office… shall… take the following oath: I… do swear, that I do not hold myself bound in allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland; and shall also subscribe a declaration of his belief in the Christian religion.” 

In other words, no one but Christians were allowed to hold public office. Now Maryland’s constitution has undergone subsequent revisions, but still to this day it requires “a declaration of belief in the existence of GOD” as a qualification for holding elected office.’ 

Genesis: 26 ‘The blessings of your father are greater than the blessings of my parents, greater than the treasures of the ancient hills. They will rest on the head of Joseph, on the forehead of him who is elevated above [set apart from] his brothers.’

Jacob is telling Joseph that the blessing he has passed to Joseph is considerably greater than that which was given to him by his father Isaac and that the proof is in the difference between his inheritance and that of his brothers. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Far from being an isolated depository of utterly alien dictums, Israel was the melting pot and refinery of the greatest traditions the world had come up with (Psalm 12:6). Israel was never intended to be anything other than a phenomenon from which every family mentioned in Genesis 10 would actively derive blessings, right away and from the “family-level” up (Genesis 12:3).

Long before it was formally established, Israel was an international project; a USA of its days, with myriads of cultural and economic tributaries…’

Abraham Lincoln, sixteenth President of the United States: 

“We find ourselves in the peaceful possession of the fairest portion of the Earth, as regards fertility of soil, extent of territory, and salubrity of climate… We … find ourselves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We toiled not in the acquirement or the establishment of them.” 

The United States economy is the largest in the world as measured by nominal Gross Domestic Product and has been since 1890. Its 2025 GDP was $30.51 trillion – a 26.8% share of the global economy. The biggest contributor to its GDP is the economy’s service sector which includes finance, real estate, insurance, professional and business services and healthcare.

The United States has an open economy, ‘facilitating flexible business investment and foreign direct investment in the country. It is the world’s dominant geopolitical power and is able to maintain a large external national debt as the producer of the world’s primary reserve currency.’ Although America’s population is only 4.2% of the world’s total, the United States holds 29.4% of the total wealth of the world, the largest share held by any country. The United States ranks first in the number of billionaires and millionaires in the world, with 724 billionaires and 10.5 million millionaires as of 2020. 

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in American global shipments during 2022.

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$378.6 billion 
  2. Machinery including computers: $229.6 billion 
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $197.7 billion
  4. Vehicles: $134.9 billion 
  5. Aircraft, spacecraft: $102.8 billion 
  6. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $99.1 billion 
  7. Gems, precious metals: $92.5 billion 
  8. Pharmaceuticals: $83.5 billion
  9. Plastics, plastic articles: $83.3 billion 
  10. Organic chemicals: $51.1 billion 

Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories year over year, up by 57.5% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was the organic chemicals category which rose 18.5%. United States’ shipments of aircraft and spacecraft posted the third-fastest gain in value, up by 14.9% year over year.’

Canada has the ninth biggest economy in the world with a 2025 GDP of $2.23 trillion. ‘Canada has a well developed energy extraction sector, with the world’s third largest proven oil reserves. Canada also has impressive manufacturing and services sectors, based mostly in urban areas near the U.S. border.’

Canada’s free trade relationship with the United States means that three-quarters of all its exports head to the United States market each year. Canada’s close economic ties to the United States means it has grown largely in parallel to the world’s most powerful economy.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Canadian global shipments during 2022. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$180 billion 
  2. Vehicles: $50.3 billion 
  3. Machinery including computers: $37.7 billion 
  4. Gems, precious metals: $23.9 billion 
  5. Wood: $19.8 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $17.3 billion 
  7. Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.7 billion 
  8. Aluminum: $14.2 billion
  9. Fertilizers: $13.7 billion 
  10. Ores, slag, ash: $11.5 billion 

Fertilizers represent the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 107.7% since 2021. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 50.1% led by coal, petroleum gases and oils. Canada’s shipments of electrical machinery, equipment: posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 16.7% year over year.’

Canadian Flag 1868 – 1921

The blessings afforded to the sons of Jacob, not just Joseph, are evident by the statistics of the world’s wealthiest nations. For instance based on 2018 figures and according to market research company New World Wealth, the world had accumulated $215 trillion in private wealth in 2018, a 12% increase over the previous year. ‘Incredibly, the vast majority of this wealth, about 73.5% is held by just 10 countries.’ Of those ten nations, four of them are descendants of Jacob and three more of the remaining six are descended from Abraham in Germany and his two brothers Haran and Nahor in France and Italy respectively. 

Canadian Flag 1922 – 1957

The United States was the number one wealthiest country in the world with $62.584 trillion; the United Kingdom was at fourth with $9.919 trillion; Canada at number eight with $6.393 trillion; and Australia at nine with $6.142 trillion. Adding New Zealand’s net wealth of $1.5 trillion, the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations (not including Ireland and South Africa) possessed a combined wealth of $86.538 trillion, which equated to 40.25% share of the entire world’s wealth for only six percent of the world population. An economic influence and prosperity well beyond their relative population size. 

Moses confirmed the spectacular prosperity as foretold by Jacob in his prophecy for Joseph. 

Deuteronomy 33:13-17

Evangelical Heritage Version

13 ‘Concerning Joseph he said: His land is blessed by the Lord: blessed with the best gifts from the heavens, blessed with dew and with the deep waters hidden below, 14 blessed with the best gifts produced by the sun, blessed with the best gifts yielded by the seasons, 15 blessed with the best crops from the ancient mountains, blessed with the best gifts from the everlasting hills, 16 blessed with the best gifts of the earth and its fullness, blessed with the favor of the one who was dwelling in the burning bush. May all these come on the head of Joseph, on the forehead of the one set apart from his brothers.’ 

Both Canada and the United States are breadbasket nations providing massive food surpluses. Canada, is the fourth most important food provider in the world. The Canadian Prairies, comprised of the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan are vital to the world for their grain production. The region’s mainstay is agriculture and industries process the agricultural produce. Main crops cultivated include durum wheat, canola, barley, oats, lentils, brassica and assorted horticultural products, with also the farming of sheep, cattle and poultry. 

Canadian Flag

The United States is the second most important food provider in the world. The state of California is a massive contributor to the total agricultural produce of the United States and accounts for 12.8% of the country’s agricultural yield. Most of this produce comes from the San Joaquin Valley. For instance, the county is the single biggest producer of almonds worldwide, with production constituting 70% of the total global almond yield and supply. 

In the top ten nations with the most Natural Resources, the United States ranks seventh. Mining is an integral industry in the United States. In 2015, total metal and coal reserves in the country were estimated to be worth $109.6 billion. The United States has been the leading producer of coal for decades and it accounts for just over 30% of global coal reserves. Total natural resources for the United States are an astounding estimated $45 trillion, almost 90% of which comprises timber and coal. Other major resources include substantial reserves of copper, gold, oil and natural gas deposits. 

Canada is third in the world. The vast territory of Canada has an estimated $33.2 trillion worth of commodities; is a major exporter of energy; with the third largest oil deposits and a 13% global share, after Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Deposits include industrial minerals, such as gypsum, limestone, rock salt, and potash, as well as energy minerals, such as coal and uranium. Metals include copper, lead, nickel, zinc, cobalt, cadmium and precious metals like gold, platinum and silver. Canada is the leading supplier of natural gas and phosphate in the world and is the third largest exporter of timber. 

Canada and the United States rank in the top ten technologically advanced or driven economies in the world. Canada at number eight has a highly efficient technology sector and continues to strongly encourage science and research. Canada is responsible for creating resourceful interactive machines and chip less credit and debit cards. 

The United States is second in the world, being a significant contributor in terms of technology and development. Aviation, nuclear energy, pharmaceuticals, defence systems and telecommunications have all been inventions by the world’s only hyper power. It has produced the world’s biggest technology companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Intel, IBM, Microsoft and Amazon; completely transforming modern society and the way we live. The United States ranked third in the Global Innovation Index in 2023, behind Switzerland and Sweden. 

The United States tops the top ten countries with the largest gold reserve holdings, with 8,133.5 tonnes – nearly as much as the second to fifth placed nations of Germany, Italy, France and Russia combined  – amounting to 77.5% of foreign reserves, the third highest allocation. The majority of United States gold is held at Fort Knox in Kentucky, with the remainder held at the Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the San Francisco Assay Office and the West Point Bullion Depository. ‘Which state loves gold the most? Well, the state of Texas went so far as to create its very own Texas Bullion Depository to safeguard investors’ gold.’

While the United States of America experiences social and economic challenges like any other nation, it is one of a minority where overall, its inhabitants are deemed as… happy.

Notice all the descendants of Jacob – aside from those who dwell in the troubled nation of South Africa – are living in nations who are not just blessed with material prosperity but are relatively content compared with the vast majority of the planet’s population.

Deuteronomy: 17 ‘Like a firstborn bull, he has majesty, and his horns are the horns of a wild ox [H7214 – r’em: great auroch, unicorn]. With them he will gore the peoples, all the peoples, to the ends of the earth. Such are the ten thousands of Ephraim. Such are the thousands of Manasseh.

No one does razzamatazz or pomp and ceremony like America does. It exudes a pride and power like no other nation on earth. This is why Moses likens Joseph to the extinct giant auroch bull or the otherwise ‘mythical’, unicorn. 

As voiced in the introduction (primus verba), heraldic images do not provide definitive conclusions on an identity but rather a trail which may lend support. The nations of Austria (Hagar) and the Netherlands (Midian) are related family members and thus using similar symbols in their heraldry is not a surprise.

The United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh) either employ their own animals (Eagle) or ones inherited (Unicorn) from England (Judah) and Scotland (Benjamin). From a biblical perspective, Canada has more right to use the Unicorn than either England (Lion) or Scotland (Wolf).

The fact that Canada’s coat of arms closely resembles that of the United Kingdom supports their identity as Manasseh and its early (unique) relationship with Judah. One would expect Ephraim to be more clearly defined in its separateness from Judah as pictured by America’s use of an eagle and not a lion for example in its heraldry – Numbers 24:8-9.

The United States of America’s growth from a new born nation barely two hundred and fifty years ago to fully fledged nation only just approaching middle age has been spectacular and a phenomena never before witnessed; standing as a clear testimony to the truth of the words anciently promised to Abraham and his seed through Joseph. 

Mark Lane: ‘The reference [by] Moses to the wild ox has caused some observers to associate the star sign Taurus with the [west] side of the Israelite camp’ – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and article: The Pyramid Perplexity. ‘The constellation Taurus prominently features two giant horns as if thrusting upward in attack. The constellation is almost completely above the ecliptic, indicating it is a righteous person or nation. The sign does not reveal the rest of the bull’s body. Could this mean the nation never ‘sees their tail’? In other words, its days are shortened? Or, its days as a righteous nation are shortened? Or both?’ 

America relates to the symbol of the Bull – Large Bull Statue on Wall Street below. 

The United States possesses the most powerful and technologically advanced military capability, that is typically, approximately ten or more years ahead of any other country’s development. Annually, America spends more on its military than the next seven highest ranking countries in military spending combined. Making up more than a third of global military spending, it is the foremost military power in the world and internationally the leading political, cultural and scientific force. This power has allowed America to use its horns so-to-speak in getting its way diplomatically and politically, since the First World War. 

United States economic power is demonstrated by the fact that its GDP is more than the other developed G7 nations – comprising Japan, Italy, France, Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom – combined. 

Moses speaks of the physical numerical dominance of Ephraim over Manasseh. Those who subscribe to England being Ephraim and America being Manasseh have yet to successfully and rationally explain this verse. 

The population of the United states is 347,444,880 people and Canada has 40,161,936 people. If we include the American south, the half tribe of West Manasseh with the people in Canada of principally British and Irish heritage, the half tribe of East Manasseh, they are still outnumbered by the peoples of Ephraim descended principally from British and Irish stock through the numerical superiority of the eastern, northern and western states of America. 

According to World Population Live: ‘Unlike China and India, the United States population is expected to continue to grow throughout the century with no foreseeable decline. By 2067, the U.S. population is expected to surpass 400 million people.’ It is worth under scoring the point earlier regarding Canada’s potential population explosion. WPL – emphasis mine: 

‘The population is growing at a steady pace and, based on current projections will surpass 50 million by 2070. Canada has one of the fastest growth rates of any G7 nation, growing faster than many other industrialized countries. Canada’s growth rate has been anywhere between 0.8% and 1.2% for the past ten years. While Canada’s fertility rate is 1.53 births per woman, below the population replacement rate, the population continues to grow as migration plays an increasing role in the population. Canada’s net migration rate is 6.375 per 1,000 people, the eighth-highest in the world. Unlike many other countries, Canada is “underpopulated” and celebrates a growing population. There are many job vacancies to be filled and more people means more economic growth and prosperity for Canada.’

Judges 5:7, 13-14

English Standard Version

7 ‘The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be until I arose; I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel…13 Then down marched the remnant of the noble; the people of the Lord marched down for me against the mighty. 14 From Ephraim their root [H3828 – sheresh: bottom, deep, heel] they marched down into the valley… from Machir marched [descended] down the commanders^ [H2710 – chaqaq – governor, law giver]…’

As discussed in previous chapters, certain tribes joined the Judge Deborah in the fight against the Canaanites more readily than others depending by degree on how directly it impinged on their territories. Deborah’s headquarters were located in Ephraim, so it would have been unlikely for them not to have given support. Manasseh had one son Machir, a name which can also be used in describing the descendants of Manasseh from Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh.

Grand Union flag of 1775 with the Union Jack, the union of Jacob’s sons in the canton. 

The verse in Judges containing Ephraim includes Amalek. As we have discussed Amalek in depth (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), but not specifically this verse, it is worth comparing it in different translations as the English Standard version decided to completely miss the word Amalek out from its translation. 

Judges 5:14

American Standard Version

‘Out of Ephraim came down they whose root is in Amalek…

New International Reader’s Version

‘Some came from the part of Ephraim where some Amalekites lived…’

Young’s Literal Translation

‘Out of Ephraim their root [is] against Amalek…’

New English Translation

‘They came from Ephraim, who uprooted Amalek…’

New Century Version

‘They came from Ephraim in the mountains of Amalek.’

The tribe of Ephraim included territory lived in by a residue of Amalekites. A people who existed before Esau’s grandson with the same name and who were related to the Horites. In fact, the Amalekites are traceable to the antediluvian ruler Lamech. Not Lamech, the father of Noah, but evil Lamech, descended from Cain – Genesis 4:18. The Amalekites were Nephilim related and a line of Elioud giants. Esau’s posterity intermarried with Amalek and descendants exist to this day. 

The Betsy Ross flag of 1776 with a circle of stars on a blue background in the canton, very similar to the current European Union flag.

Certain scattered Jews carry this ancestry and the Bible is indicating that they have a presence in Ephraim. There are a significant number of Jews in the United States, with approximately six to seven million people, particularly in the Northeast, where old family wealth with political leverage is located and who wield the real power and control in America – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

Numbers 26:28, 35-37, 29-34

English Standard Version

28 ‘The sons of Joseph according to their clans: Manasseh and Ephraim.

35 These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans:

of Shuthelah [noise of breaking], the clan of the Shuthelahites;

of Becher [young camel], the clan of the Becherites;

of Tahan [camp], the clan of the Tahanites.

36 And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran [watcher], the clan of the Eranites. 

37 These are the clans of the sons of Ephraim as they were listed, 32,500.

29 The sons of Manasseh: of Machir [H4353 – Makiyr: sold], the clan of the Machirites; and Machir was the father of

Gilead [H1568 – Gil’ad: rocky region]; of Gilead, the clan of the Gileadites.’ 

1 Chronicles 7:14-17

English Standard Version

14 ‘… Manasseh… [with] his Aramean concubine bore… Machir the father of Gilead… 16 And Maacah the wife of Machir bore a son, and she called his name Peresh; and the name of his brother was Sheresh; and his sons were Ulam and Rakem. 17 The son of Ulam: Bedan.

30 These are the sons of Gilead: of Iezer [no help], the clan of the Iezerites; of Helek [portion], the clan of the Helekites; 31 and of Asriel [I shall be (a) prince of God], the clan of the Asrielites; and of Shechem [back, shoulder], the clan of the Shechemites; 32 and of Shemida [wise], the clan of the Shemidaites; and of Hepher [a well], the clan of the Hepherites.

33 Now Zelophehad [H6765 – Tslophchad: first born] the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters.

And the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah

34 These are the clans of Manasseh, and those listed were 52,700.’

1 Chronicles 5:23-26

English Standard Version

23 ‘The members of the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh lived in the land. They were very numerous from Bashan to Baal-hermon, Senir, and Mount Hermon. 

24 These were the heads of their fathers’ houses: Epher [family name of Abraham’s son, Midian], Ishi, Eliel, Azriel, Jeremiah, Hodaviah, and Jahdiel, mighty warriors, famous men, heads of their fathers’ houses.

25 But they broke faith with the God of their fathers, and whored after the gods of the peoples of the land, whom God had destroyed before them. 26 So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day.’

Part of the puzzle in understanding why Manasseh split into two is the fact that the tribe of Judah and Manasseh intermarried early in Israel’s history. Something that is easily missed and glossed over. 

It explains why the half tribe of East Manasseh today (as Canada), is such a resolutely patriotic, supporter and defender of the English throne and former Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. For many Canadians will have more English blood from the tribe of Judah and his son’s Pharez heritage than they realise. 

This injection of Judah’s line has created a marked distinction between Americans of the South and Canadians. Many future Canadians fled the United States and crossed the northern border on grounds of differences in political ideology. They espoused loyalism to the Crown rather than the rebellion of a Republic. In fact, after the American Civil War, many Confederate generals fled to Canada as did their President, Jefferson Davis of Welsh and Scottish forebears. Canadians have a different sense of humour, more in keeping with the English than that of Americans.

1 Chronicles 2:4-5, 21-23

4 ‘[Judah’s] daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all.

5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul.

21 Afterward Hezron* went in to the daughter of Machir [the son of Manasseh] the father of Gilead, whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub.

22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead.’

The flags of the Canadian provinces and territories. Notice the preponderance of British (Judah and Benjamin) symbols: the four Union Jacks, the three English St George’s Cross flags, the two English passant Lions, the Scottish rampant Lion and the Scottish Saltire.

1 Chronicles 12:16-22

English Standard Version

16 ‘And some of the men of Benjamin and Judah came to the stronghold to David [descendant of Hezron*]. 17 David went out to meet them and said to them, “If you have come to me in friendship to help me, my heart will be joined to you… 

18 … Amasai, chief of the thirty… said, “We are yours, O David, and with you, O son of Jesse! Peace, peace to you, and peace to your helpers! For your God helps you.” Then David received them and made them officers of his troops.

19 Some of the men of Manasseh deserted to David when he came with the Philistines for the battle against Saul. (Yet he did not help them, for the rulers of the Philistines took counsel and sent him away, saying, “At peril to our heads he will desert to his master Saul.”) 

20 As he went to Ziklag, these men of Manasseh deserted to him [David of Judah]: Adnah, Jozabad, Jediael, Michael, Jozabad, Elihu, and Zillethai, chiefs of thousands in Manasseh. 21 They helped David against the band of raiders, for they were all mighty men of valor and were commanders^ [Judges 5:14] in the army. 22 For from day to day men came to David to help him, until there was a great army, like an army of God.’

Joshua 13:29-31

English Standard Version

29 ‘And Moses gave an inheritance to the half-tribe of Manasseh. It was allotted to the half-tribe of the people of Manasseh according to their clans. 30 Their region extended from Mahanaim, through all Bashan, the whole kingdom of Og king of Bashan, and all the towns of Jair, which are in Bashan, sixty cities, 31 and half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, the cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan. These were allotted to the people of Machir the son of Manasseh for the half of the people of Machir according to their clans.’

Canadian men

Joshua 17:1-18

English Standard Version

‘Then allotment was made to the people of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph. To Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, were allotted Gilead and Bashan, because he was a man of war. 2 And allotments were made to the rest of the people of Manasseh by their clans, Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, Hepher, and Shemida. These were the male descendants of Manasseh the son of Joseph, by their clans. 3 Now Zelophehad the son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, had no sons, but only daughters, and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.

4 They approached Eleazar the [high] priest and Joshua the son of Nun and the leaders and said, “The Lord commanded Moses to give us an inheritance along with our brothers.” So according to the mouth of the Lord he gave them an inheritance among the brothers of their father. 

5 Thus there fell to Manasseh ten portions [half tribe of West Manasseh], besides the land of Gilead and Bashan, which is on the other side of the Jordan, 6 because the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance along with his sons [next to the land of Ephraim]. The land of Gilead was allotted to the rest of the people of Manasseh [the half tribe of East Manasseh].’

The five daughters of Zelophehad had raised the matter previously with Moses and so it was reconfirmed in front of Joshua. The only stipulation was that the daughters had to marry within the tribe of Manasseh so that the inheritance would remain in Manasseh and not be lost to another tribe.

Canadian women

Numbers 27:1-7

English Standard Version

‘Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad… 2 And they stood before Moses… saying, 3 “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah… And he had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.”

5 Moses brought their case before the Lord. 6 And the Lord said to Moses, 7 “The daughters of Zelophehad are right. You shall give them possession of an inheritance among their father’s brothers and transfer the inheritance of their father to them.”

Numbers 36:10-12

English Standard Version

10 ‘The daughters of Zelophehad did as the Lord commanded Moses, 11 for Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married to sons of their father’s brothers [cousins]. 12 They were married into the clans of the people of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father’s clan.’

The five daughters of Zelophehad received territory included within the ten portions of land which comprised the half tribe of West Manasseh adjacent to the territory given to Ephraim. This was in addition to the land of Gilead and Bashan which the half tribe of East Manasseh received. As East Manasseh today is Canada, so West Manasseh reflects much of the American south.

Our Twelve Tribes: ‘The Tribe of Manasseh is in the middle of the United States. The vast lands from the Mississippi River to the Rockies are the heartland of America.’

It is an interesting correlation that the core eleven states of the South, nearly equate to the ten portions given to West Manasseh. If the Carolinas were added together as one; it would be an exact ten. Two states which joined the confederacy, though did not secede from the Union and would make thirteen, were Missouri and then Kentucky. The first seven states to permanently join the Confederation are listed first as they were ratified between March and April 1861. The following four states are listed in the order they were admitted between May and December of 1861.

Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Florida…

Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee.

An anomaly which would change the above configuration to ten states matching ten portions, would be the exclusion of the Lone Star State, Texas. The following chapter will seek to address how this could eventuate – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Joshua: 7 ‘The territory of Manasseh reached from Asher to Michmethath, which is east of Shechem. Then the boundary goes along southward to the inhabitants of En-tappuah.

8 The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but the town of Tappuah on the boundary of Manasseh belonged to the people of Ephraim. 

9 Then the boundary went down to the brook Kanah. These cities, to the south of the brook, among the cities of Manasseh, belong to Ephraim.

Then the boundary of Manasseh goes on the north side of the brook and ends at the sea, 10 the land to the south being Ephraim’s and that to the north being Manasseh’s [in geographic reversal to today], with the sea forming its boundary… 12 Yet the people of Manasseh could not take possession of those cities, but the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land. 

13 Now when the people of Israel grew strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not utterly drive them out.

14 Then the people of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, “Why have you given me but one lot and one portion as an inheritance, although I am a numerous people, since all along the Lord has blessed me?”

15 And Joshua said to them, “If you are a numerous people, go up by yourselves to the forest, and there clear ground for yourselves in the land of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, since the hill country of Ephraim is too narrow for you.” 

16 The people of Joseph said, “The hill country is not enough for us. Yet all the Canaanites who dwell in the plain have chariots of iron, both those in Beth-shean and its villages and those in the Valley of Jezreel.”

17 Then Joshua said to the house of Joseph, to Ephraim and Manasseh,

“You are a numerous people and have great power. You shall not have one allotment only, 18 but the hill country shall be yours, for though it is a forest, you shall clear it and possess it to its farthest borders. For you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have chariots of iron, and though they are strong.”

Joshua 16.8-9

English Standard Version

8 ‘… Such is the inheritance of the tribe of the people of Ephraim by their clans, 9 together with the towns that were set apart for the people of Ephraim within the inheritance of the Manassites, all those towns with their villages.’

Nearly all maps drawn show Ephraim inland with only the half tribe of West Manasseh possessing a coastline on the Mediterranean Sea. The one below is rare, detailing an accurate rendition of the western boundaries for the two tribes – Joshua 8:16.

These verses clearly highlight that Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh were broadly allotted their own region and cities. That said, the boundary lines were flexible so that for instance, certain cities of Ephraim were technically in Manasseh’s territory.

United States of America Flag

The people were at first grumbling, yet the tribe of Ephraim, as ‘the possessor of the primogeniture of Joseph’ had been given a superb region of Canaan, in the very centre of the land which reached from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean and bordered Benjamin and Dan in the South and Manasseh in the North. 

It was a rich and beautiful hill country, well watered and richly wooded, abounding in corn fields and orchards, and secure from attacks by foreigners. This allotment, which included the greater part of the region afterwards called Samaria, contained numerous important towns and cities, of which Shiloh – where the Ark of God and the Tabernacle were homed for several hundred years – was the religious centre of the nation during the period of the Judges and the early monarchy – Article: The Ark of God. 

Washington DC, capital of the United States

There was the city of Shechem between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerezim, once occupied by the ancient Hittites and later venerated as the burial place of Jacob; and the city of Samaria, which throughout the history of the separate Kingdom of Israel was the capital of the northern kingdom. Shiloh and Samaria are both cited often in the scriptures and today could represent first, the heart and soul of the nation, New York and second its capital, Washington DC.

New York City

What is disheartening yet parallels Israel’s past, is how New York is more rotten apple than big apple.

American men

Isaiah 7:5-17

English Standard Version

5 ‘Because Syria, with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, has devised evil against you, saying, 6 “Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Tabeel as king in the midst of it,” 7 thus says the Lord God: “It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass.

8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin.

And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.

9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.”

17 The Lord will bring upon you and upon your people and upon your father’s house such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from Judah – the king of Assyria!”

A plot by Ephraim to conquer Judah was not permitted to unfurl. Instead, Ephraim was to be conquered by Assyria. As this prophecy is dual, the King of the North will one day defeat modern day Ephraim. As unlikely as that may seem today, it will not seem so in the future, when Russia’s economy and military strength overtakes a divided and fragmented United States of America – refer articles: 2050; Four Kings & One Queen; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

American women

Jeremiah 50:19

English Standard Version

‘I will restore Israel to his pasture, and he shall feed on Carmel [in Ephraim] and in Bashan [Gilead], and his desire shall be satisfied on the hills of Ephraim [and half tribe of West Manasseh] and in Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh].’

The territory of Joseph was in the West and comprised Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh to its north, equating to the United States today in reverse and Gilead (or Bashan) was in the East and comprised the half tribe of East Manasseh, equating to Canada today.

City of New York

Psalm 60:6-8; (108:7-9)

English Standard Version

God has spoken in his holiness: “With exultation I will divide up Shechem and portion out the Vale of Succoth. Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim is my helmet; Judah is my scepter. Moab is my washbasin; upon Edom I cast my shoe; over Philistia I shout in triumph.”

The flags of the American States. Notice the preponderance of the colour red in the Southern States as well as stars and saltires. The crossing over of Jacob’s hands are symbolised on Scotland’s flag (tribe of Benjamin, Joseph’s brother). The American Declaration of Independence also echoes the Scottish Independence Declaration of Arbroath.

The states in the South with obvious saltires include Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. The state alluding to a saltire includes Arkansas; and with Texas, Tennessee, Georgia and North Carolina exhibits both stars and the predominant colour red. While in the northern states blue is the primary colour, it is worth noting that Canada like the American south favours the colour red on its Flag.

District of Colombia – containing the Capitol, Washington – sandwiched between the states of Virginia (south) and Maryland (north).

Gilead is Manasseh, and Manasseh is also an identity linked with Ephraim. Though Gilead is not Ephraim. The Handmaid’s Tale is a dystopian novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood and was published in 1985. It is set in a near future New England, with a strong patriarchal and totalitarian ‘theonomic state’ known as the Republic of Gilead, which has overthrown the legitimate United States government.

There are a number of interesting correlations. First, Atwood is Canadian and technically, Canada is modern day Gilead, though she has chosen to call the United States Gilead in her story. Atwood also uses the term Commanders for the key administrators of the Republic of Gilead. Again, this is a term in the Bible used for military leaders from Machir of Gilead.

Judges 5:14

English Standard Version

‘… from Machir marched down the commanders…

The main plot line is that women are having difficulty in conceiving children. Handmaids are used by the ruling families in producing children for the barren wives of commanders. The apostasy in Gilead is stated in the Book of Hosea, though most of Hosea is a warning to Ephraim. Pregnancy is discussed in a dual prophecy in the Book of Amos and eerily connects Gilead and Canada with the Ammonites of French Quebec – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Hosea 12:11

English Standard Version

‘If there is iniquity in Gilead, they shall surely come to nothing: in Gilgal they sacrifice bulls; their altars also are like stone heaps on the furrows of the field.’

Amos 1:13-14

English Standard Version

‘Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of the Ammonites [French Quebec], and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped open pregnant women in Gilead [Canada], that they might enlarge their border. So I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah [Quebec, Quebec], and it shall devour her strongholds, with shouting on the day of battle, with a tempest in the day of the whirlwind…’

Toronto, Canada

A chilling future prophetic indictment on Ephraim, reminiscent of Atwood’s Republic of Gilead is revealed in the Book of Hosea. 

Hosea 9:3-16

English Standard Version

3 ‘They shall not remain in the land of the Lord, but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean food in Assyria. 8 The prophet is the watchman of Ephraim with my God; yet a fowler’s snare is on all his ways, and hatred in the house of his God…

11 Ephraim’s glory shall fly away like a bird no birth, no pregnancy, no conception! 12 Even if they bring up children, I will bereave them till none is left. Woe to them when I depart from them!

13 Ephraim, as I have seen, was like a young palm planted in a meadow; but Ephraim must lead his children out to slaughter. 14 Give them, O Lord – what will you give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.

16 Ephraim is stricken; their root is dried up; they shall bear no fruit. Even though they give birth, I will put their beloved children to death.’

Hosea 5:3, 5, 9-14

English Standard Version

3 ‘I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hidden from me; for now, O Ephraim, you have played the whore; Israel is defiled… 5 … Israel and Ephraim shall stumble in his guilt; Judah also shall stumble with them. 9  Ephraim shall become a desolation in the day of punishment; among the tribes of Israel I make known what is sure. 10 The princes of Judah have become like those who move the landmark; upon them I will pour out my wrath like water.

11 Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in judgment, because he was determined to go after filth. 12 But I am like a moth to Ephraim, and like dry rot to the house of Judah. 13 When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah his wound, then Ephraim went to Assyria, and sent to the great king [of the North]. But he is not able to cure you or heal your wound. 14 For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear and go away; I will carry off, and no one shall rescue.’

Hosea 6:4, 8 -10

English Standard Version

4 ‘What shall I do with you, O Ephraim? What shall I do with you, O Judah? Your love is like a morning cloud, like the dew that goes early away… 8 Gilead is a city of evildoers, tracked with blood. 9 As robbers lie in wait for a man, so the priests band together; they murder on the way to Shechem; they commit villainy. 10 In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing; Ephraim’s whoredom is there; Israel is defiled.’

Hosea 7:1, 8-9, 11–13

English Standard Version

1 ‘… the iniquity of Ephraim is revealed, and the evil deeds of Samaria, for they deal falsely…

Ephraim mixes himself with the peoples; Ephraim is a cake not turned [becomes dark]. 9 Strangers devour his strength, and he knows it not; gray hairs are sprinkled upon him, and he knows it not…’ 

A provocative prediction regarding the future ethnic demographic of the United States. The increase in numbers of African Americans, Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans in the United States, from births, immigration and mixing with each other as well as with the white population, will eventually impact the American people and blacken its population in which the majority of its citizens will ultimately become overwhelmingly black, brown or mixed. 

While this is not a slur on people ethnically, it is a warning on the resulting impact on America’s collective will, economic standing and political process – Article: 2050.

Hosea: 11 ‘Ephraim is like a dove, silly and without sense, calling to Egypt [the Arab world], going to Assyria [Russia]. 12 As they go, I will spread over them my net; I will bring them down like birds of the heavens; I will discipline them according to the report made to their congregation. 13 Woe to them, for they have strayed from me! Destruction to them, for they have rebelled against me! I would redeem them, but they speak lies against me.’

Hosea 8:5-6, 8-9, 11, 14

English Standard Version

5 ‘I have spurned your calf, O Samaria 6… The calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces. 8 Israel is swallowed up; already they are among the nations as a useless vessel. 9 For they have gone up to Assyria, a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers… 11 Because Ephraim has multiplied altars for sinning, they have become to him altars for sinning… 14 For Israel has forgotten his Maker and built palaces, and Judah has multiplied fortified cities; so I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour her strongholds.’

Along with the United States (Ephraim) and Canada (Manasseh), England (Judah) comes under similar condemnation and will suffer the same punishment.

Flag of Hawaii: the eight stripes represent its islands and like the Cambridge (or Grand Union) flag, contains a Union Jack in it canton

Judah’s Sceptre, & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The first thing recorded of Jeroboam, as [the first] king of Israel, is that he built the city of Shechem, in Mount Ephraim, and dwelt there. This city was the first capital of that kingdom. From there the king of Israel went out and built the city of Penuel, and seemed to prosper for a short season.

But Jeroboam fell to thinking that, if his subjects were allowed to continue going to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord, their hearts would turn again to Rehoboam, whose capital city it was, and they would then kill him, and go again to the kingdom of Judah. 

Therefore he made two calves of gold, and said unto the people, “It is too much (trouble) for you to go to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And he set one in Bethel [Tribe of Benjamin on border with Ephraim in the south], and one in Dan [Tribe of Dan in the far north]. And this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one (in Bethel), and even unto Dan. And he made a house of high places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi. 

“And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month [October/November], on the fifteenth day [sabbath] of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he offered upon the altar. 

So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made. So he offered upon the altar which he had made in Bethel, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised in his own heart; and ordained a feast unto the Children of Israel, and he offered upon the altar and burnt incense,” I Kings 12:28-33. 

‘This was the great sin which was such a curse to the people. But we want you to note just how the Lord speaks of it. After the prophet whom he had sent out of Judah had proclaimed the doom of Jeroboam, he further adds: 

“The Lord shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of his good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves [worship of the Mother Goddess, Asherah – refer article: Asherah], provoking the Lord to anger. And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin,” I Kings 14:15, 16.’

What is incredible, is that Jeroboam instituted a new feast and Holy day holiday one month after the Feast of Tabernacles of the seventh month of Tishri (September/October) of each year. This mirrors and foreshadows the Americans millennia later instituting their own celebration approximately one month after the Old Covenant Feast of Tabernacles. That is, Thanksgiving on the fourth Thursday in November, which is one month later during the eighth month according to the sacred lunar calendar – Article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

While Thanksgiving invariably falls between November 22nd and the 28th, the Eighth Astrological House is October 24 to November 22. Scorpio is the eighth astrological sign and is linked with the Tribe of Dan – where one of Jeroboam’s golden calfs was erected. The significance of this will become apparent in the next and final chapter.  

Hosea 11:2-6, 8-10

English Standard Version

2 ‘The more they were called, the more they went away; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning offerings to idols. 3 Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk; I took them up by their arms, but they did not know that I healed them. They shall not return to the land of Egypt [captivity], but Assyria shall be their king, because they have refused to return to me.

6 The sword shall rage against their cities, consume the bars of their gates, and devour them because of their own counsels. 8 How can I give you up, O Ephraim? How can I hand you over, O Israel? How can I make you like Admah? How can I treat you like Zeboiim?’ – Genesis 14:2. 

9 ‘I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath. 10 They shall go after the Lord; he will roar like a lion; when he roars, his children shall come trembling from the west [Article: Four Kings & One Queen]; 11 they shall come trembling like birds from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria, and I will return them to their homes, declares the Lord. 

12 Ephraim has surrounded me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit, but Judah still walks with God and is faithful to the Holy One [until the time of their punishment and captivity over one hundred years later].’

Hosea 12:1, 8, 14 

English Standard Version

‘Ephraim feeds on the wind and pursues the east wind [the Orient, East Asia, China and Japan] all day long; they multiply falsehood and violence; they make a covenant with Assyria, and oil is carried to Egypt… Ephraim has said,

Ah, but I am rich; I have found wealth for myself; in all my labors they cannot find in me iniquity or sin.” Ephraim has given bitter provocation; so his Lord will leave his bloodguilt on him and will repay him for his disgraceful deeds.’

Abraham Lincoln’s proclamation on April 30, 1863, for a nation-wide day of fasting and prayer: 

“It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God… and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord… We have been the recipients of the choicest blessings of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation ever has grown; but we have forgotten God!

We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us. It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.”

How far has America come from this standard? How far indeed.

The last good man?

Isaiah 17:3-4

English Standard Version

3 ‘The fortress [military defence, strength] will disappear from Ephraim… 4 And in that day the glory of Jacob will be brought low, and the fat of his flesh will grow lean.’

Zechariah 9:10, 13

English Standard Version

10 ‘I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth. 13 For I have bent Judah as my bow; I have made Ephraim its arrow…’

Isaiah 9:9, 12, 19-21

English Standard Version 

9 ‘… Ephraim and the inhabitants of Samaria, who say in pride and in arrogance of heart… 12 The Syrians [Spanish, Portuguese] on the east and the Philistines [Mexicans, Colombians] on the west devour Israel with open mouth. 19 Through the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land is scorched, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no one spares another. 20 They slice meat on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours the flesh of his own arm,

21 Manasseh devours Ephraim, and Ephraim devours Manasseh; together they are against Judah.’

A tragic time when Canada and the United States in desperation, will turn against each other, as well as turning on England. This is in contrast with the current relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, which has been born and refined during two world wars and several joint military operations over the decades. Churchill described it a ‘special relationship’. All the more meaningful when their individual identities, are rightfully understood.

In 1946, March 5, Winston Churchill in an oration, The Sinews of Peace, at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri – which incidentally, he also lodged ‘iron curtain’ in the diplomatic lexicon – describes the friendship between Great Britain and the United States.

“Now, while still pursuing the method of realising our overall strategic concept, I come to the crux of what I have travelled here to Say. Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organisation will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States. 

This is no time for generalities, and I will venture to be precise. Fraternal association requires not only the growing friendship and mutual understanding between our two vast but kindred Systems of society, but the continuance of the intimate relationship between our military advisers, leading to common study of potential dangers, the similarity of weapons and manuals of instructions, and to the interchange of officers and cadets at technical colleges.”

When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited with the then United States President, Barack Obama, they lavished praise on their nations relationship during the first official visit by a Canadian leader in nearly twenty years. Trudeau toasted the two nations as ‘siblings’ at a state dinner and Obama said that the United States and Canada were ‘blessed to be neighbours.’ Yet former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau does not fully comprehend how the United States of America and Canada really are related brothers, bonded by blood. As with Barak Obama, the blessing in being neighbours, far transcends sharing an undefended border thousands of miles long. Yet their observations like Churchill’s, are no less true.

In fact this element of deep trust between Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah – with Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben – extends to Asher and Naphtali. 

Not everyone is aware that the only nations considered true allies by the United States are Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. A 2013 report disclosed by the German publication Der Spiegel noted that while the United States has a massive cyber-espionage program, ‘only Canada, Australia, Britain and New Zealand were explicitly exempted from spy attacks.’ 

European nations such as Germany and France want the United States to treat them the same way they treat the Anglo-nations, which have been called the “five eyes.” There are longstanding and deep tensions over intelligence sharing between the United States, Germany and France. The United States has for decades, with few interruptions, strictly shared intelligence with just these four principal countries under the ‘five eyes’ agreement (FVEY), which includes a proviso that they do not spy on each other.

Potent symbols of American military power

“Germany and France have long resented this special relationship in intelligence,” according to Tim Naftali (Naphtali), of the New America Foundation, “But the question is whether (France and Germany) would be able to accept the coordination of their foreign policies that comes along with the agreement.” When intelligence agencies discuss targeting they are giving away what they know, said Naftali. “Is the US prepared to do that across the board with France and Germany?” The United States of America officially considers Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand as its most trusted and possible only non-hostile, allies. 

Hosea 4:17-19

English Standard Version

‘Ephraim is joined to idols; leave him alone. When their drink is gone, they give themselves to whoring; their rulers dearly love shame. A wind has wrapped them in its wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices.’

Isaiah 28:1, 3, 7

English Standard Version

‘Ah, the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim, and the fading flower of its glorious beauty, which is on the head of the rich valley of those overcome with wine! The proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim will be trodden underfoot; These also reel with wine and stagger with strong drink; the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink, they are swallowed by wine, they stagger with strong drink, they reel in vision, they stumble in giving judgment.’

The prophet Isaiah may have meant this figuratively, as in drunk with power and success, though a literal explanation is probably also intended. There are nations with higher rates of alcohol consumption nationally and per person than the United States, but figures for rates of alcoholism tell a different story. The core of the United States population primarily descended from the tribe of Ephraim, is ahead of any other English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking nation.

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:

  1. Hungary – 21.2%
  2. Russia – 20.9%
  3. Belarus – 18.8%
  4. Latvia – 15.5%
  5. South Korea – 13.9% (tie)
  6. Slovenia – 13.9% (tie)
  7. United States – 13.9% (tie)
  8. Poland – 12.8%
  9. Estonia – 12.2% (tie)
  10. Slovakia – 12.2% (tie)

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Rates of female Alcohol Use Disorder/Alcoholism:

  1. United States – 10.4%
  2. Russia – 7.4%
  3. Sweden – 7.3%
  4. Hungary – 7.2%
  5. South Korea – 6.8%
  6. Belarus – 6.2%
  7. Austria – 6.1%
  8. United Kingdom – 4.7%
  9. Latvia – 4.6%
  10. Slovenia – 4.5%

Psalm 78:9, 67-68

English Standard Version

‘The Ephraimites, armed with the bow, turned back on the day of battle. They did not keep God’s covenant, but refused to walk according to his law. They forgot his works and the wonders that he had shown them… He rejected the tent of Joseph; he did not choose the tribe of Ephraim, but he chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which he loves.’

Isaiah 11:13-14

English Standard Version

‘The jealousy of Ephraim shall depart, and those who harass Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not harass Ephraim. But they shall swoop down on the shoulder of the Philistines in the west, and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put out their hand against Edom and Moab, and the Ammonites shall obey them.’

Zechariah 10:6-7

English Standard Version

“I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph. I will bring them back because I have compassion on them, and they shall be as though I had not rejected them, for I am the Lord their God and I will answer them. Then Ephraim shall become like a mighty warrior, and their hearts shall be glad as with wine.” 

Jeremiah 31:6, 8, 9, 18, 20

English Standard Version

‘For there shall be a day when watchmen will call in the hill country of Ephraim… Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth… for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

I have heard Ephraim grieving, ‘You have disciplined me, and I was disciplined, like an untrained* calf; bring me back that I may be restored, for you are the Lord my God. Is Ephraim my dear son? Is he my darling child? For as often as I speak against him, I do remember him still. Therefore my heart yearns for him; I will surely have mercy on him, declares the Lord.’

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Ephraim is called a “bullock” or young* bull. In Hebrew “bullock” is “aegel”. Historically this very same name, “Aegel”, pronounced in the same way, was an alternative form for the ethnic term “Angle”. The Angles gave England (i.e. “Angle- land”) its name. Together with the Saxons, Jutes… and others the Angles conquered from the Celts the land that was later named England. 

The Angles were also called “Aegels”. The appellations “Angle” and “Aegel” were employed interchangeably. The Hebrew word for young bull is “Aegel”. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yistchaki 1040-1105 CE) was the foremost Medieval Jewish Commentator. In commentating on this verse (Jeremiah 31:18) Rashi states that the Hebrew word “Aegel” (Young Bull) was a name applied to Ephraim.’ 

It was circa 449 to 477 CE that the Angles – the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh from Angeln – followed the Jutes, departing from their lands in the Cimbrian Peninsula as part of a full-scale migration (invasion) across the North Sea to Britain, where they founded several kingdoms in newly conquered territory. Angeln was reputedly left abandoned and empty by the mass population movement, allowing the Danish Vikings from Asher to migrate south and west to fill the gap. 

During this period, the Danes became an ever greater threat to the Frisian hegemony of the North Sea and the northwestern European coastal territories. The Angles as part of the Saxon peoples – who also comprised the Jutes from Judah and the Frisians from Issachar and Zebulun – left little imprint on Anglia and Mercia, their strongholds in west and east Middle England (refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes). 

Chromosomes Sketch New Outline of British History, New York Times: 

‘But surprisingly, there is little sign of Anglo-Saxon heritage in southern England. “One tends to think of England as Anglo-Saxon,” Dr. Goldstein said. “But we show quite clearly there was not complete replacement of existing populations by either Anglo-Saxons or Danes. It looks like the Celts [or rather Jutes] did hold out.”

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen 1902 – emphasis mine:

‘When Jacob transferred the birthright to the sons of Joseph he, with one hand resting on the head of each, prayed: “Let my name (Israel) be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac.” The birthright kingdom did, as we have seen, inherit the name of Israel, and also that of Isaac. For Amos says: “And the high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel (Bethel and Dan) shall be laid waste, and I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword,” (Amos 7:9). Here we have Isaac, Israel and the house of Jeroboam used as interchangeable names for the ten-tribed kingdom. 

Thus the name of Isaac was named upon the house of Joseph, and it is true, both in race and name, that, in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” It seems that the Jews [Edom] had a preference for the name of Jacob, but Israel clung to the name of Isaac, especially after they were taken into captivity; they dropped the name of Israel and called themselves “Saac” – Sacae, or Saxae, as per Latin derivation – which is nothing more or less than the Hebrew name of Isaac, from which the initial letter “I” has been dropped. 

It is now a well-authenticated fact that the word Saxon is derived from the Hebrew name of I-saac, together with an affix which means sons of. Professor Totten says: “In most of the Eastern languages ‘sons of’ is written ‘sunnia.’ It is equivalent to the Scottish ‘Mac’ and the English and Irish ‘Fitz’ – Mac Donald, son of Donald; Fitz Henry, son of Henry. So, in the distant home of our ancestors, Saac-Sunnia means sons of Isaac. Stambul is formed of Istanbul by dropping the prefix I, and so the Saxon is a direct descendant of our father Isaac. 

Doctor W. Holt Yates accepts this derivation of the Saxon name as positive, and the Reverend W. H. Poole, D. D., speaks of it as follows: “It is a little curious to glean from the ancient nations and from the stone monuments of the early times the various forms in which this word is to be found.

I will here insert a few from a list of my own gleaned from ancient history, thus: Sons of Isaac, Sons of Saac, Saac-Sunnia, Saac-Suna, Saac-Sena Saaca-pena, Esakska, Sacae-Amyrqui, Beth-Sakai (House of Isaac), Sunnia-Sakai, Sakai-Suna, Saca-Suna, Sacae-Sunnae, Sackisina, Sacka-Sunia, Saca-cine, Saka-Suna, Sacas-Sani, Sakas-Saeni, Saxi-Suna, Sach-Suni, Sachi, Sacha, Sakah, Saachus, Saacus, Sacho, Saxo, Saxoi, Saxonia, Saxones, Saxae, Sach-sen, Sack-sen, Saxe-sen, Saxone, Saxony, Saxon.” –  “Our Race.” 

Concerning the etymology of the word Saxon, Yatman says: “Its history is as follows: The Persians used the terms Sacae and Scythian as convertible, whether from a corrupt rendering of one from the other or because the Sacae, a great tribe of Scythians (wanderers) bordering upon them, were so called by a tribal name. 

Of the fact of the identity of the Sacae and the Scythians there is not the shadow of a doubt, and it is clear that these people called their country Sacasena. It is equally clear that the Saxons of England were the Scythians or Celte-Scythians. Their geographical position in Europe is accurately described by Plutarch, Tacitus, Ptolemy, and other authors.” To this testimony all the historians agree. Strabo asserts that the most ancient Greek historians knew the Sacaea as a people who lived beyond the Caspian Sea.

Diodorus says: “The Sacaea sprung from a people in Media who obtained a vast and glorious empire.” 

Ptolemy finds the Saxons in a race of Scythians, called Sakai, who came from Media. 

Pliny says: “The Sakai were among the most distinguished people of Scythia, who settled in Armenia, and were called Sacae-Sani.” 

Albinus says: “The Saxons were descended from the ancient Sacae of Asia.” 

Prideaux finds that the Cimbrians came from between the Black and Euxine (Caspian) seas, and that with them came the Angli. 

Sharon Turner, the great Saxon historian, says: “The Saxons were a Scythian nation, and were called Saca, Sachi, Sacki, Sach-sen.” 

Gawler, in “Our Scythian Ancestors” (Page 6), says: “The word ‘Saacae,’ is fairly and without straining or imagination, translatable as Isaacites.”

‘But why has it been necessary for the historians of these various nations thus to trace this name, search records, tablets and monuments, and hunt for the origin of the Anglo-Saxons? Are they an obscure people? Are they a feeble nation? Are they an ignorant folk? Are they an uncivilized race? No; they are diametrically opposite to all this… but they do not know where they originated, nor who were their ancestors – they are lost. 

Some of these historians whom we have quoted do not agree among themselves as to the origin of the Saxons, but belong to different schools of contention, and are wrangling over the question whether these lost people belong to the Aryan, or to the Semitic race. The only use which we have, just here, for their contention is to show that they all trace the Saxons to the very place where the captive ten tribes of Israel were deported by Shalmanesar, the King of Assyria. 

These same historians also show that the Sax-ons sprang into existence, in so far as their modern and medieval history is concerned, about three years after the Israelites were taken to that country, and that there they lose them and can trace them no further.’

Helmet of East Angle King Raedwald

In the Book of revelation we read about the 144,000 saints who live at the end of days. They are the loyal and faithful ones gathered from the sons of Jacob. In counterpoint to the mark of the Beast (or the mark of Cain), on (in) everyone’s forehead, these elect are sealed by the Holy Spirt with special protection from the Tribulation.

Revelation 7:1-8

English Standard Version

1 ‘After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2 Then I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, with the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm earth and sea, 3 saying,

“Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.”

4 And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:

verses 5-8

12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed,
12,000 from the tribe of Reuben,
12,000 from the tribe of Gad,

12,000 from the tribe of Asher,
12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali,
12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh,

12,000 from the tribe of Simeon,
12,000 from the tribe of Levi,
12,000 from the tribe of Issachar,

12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun,
12,000 from the tribe of Joseph,
12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed.

What various commentators have righty observed though wrongly interpreted, is that Joseph at number eleven and Manasseh at number six, are mentioned twice in place of the missing tribe of Dan. The answer is less to do with Dan and more to do with the fact that the 12,000 people from Manasseh means from the British and Irish descended peoples of Canada. The 12,000 people from Joseph, means from the British and Irish descended peoples of the United States; comprising the tribe of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. Hence recall in the Bible, they are known and called, either Ephraim or, Joseph. Manasseh on the other hand remember, is known variously as Machir, Gilead, the half tribe of East Manasseh or simply as, Manasseh.

As we have learned from previous chapters: Judah is England; Reuben is Northern Ireland; Gad is the Republic of Ireland; Asher is Australia; Naphtali is New Zealand; Simeon is Wales; Levi are scattered, though mainly in England, Wales and Scotland; Issachar and Zebulun are the British in South Africa and Zimbabwe; and Benjamin is Scotland. 

Why representation from the tribe of Dan is missing will be discussed in the following chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Key moments and dates in Canadian history.

1688 – War fought between King William’s New England and New France. 

1713 – The British gained control of much of Eastern Canada under the Treaty of Utrecht.

1755 – The British expelled the Acadians from their lands. 

1759 – The British occupied Quebec City in the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. 

1763 – France lost the French and Indian War, also known as the Seven Years War to the British. The British gained control of all the French lands in Canada as a result and these were absorbed into the British Empire.

1775 – The invasion of the Continental Army of America is stopped at the Battle of Quebec. 

1783 – The Treaty of Paris established official borders between the United States and Canada. 

1784 – The colony of New Brunswick was established. 

1791 – Quebec was divided into Upper Canada, today’s Ontario and Lower Canada, today’s Quebec. 

1812 – War between the British and the United States. American forces attempted to invade Canada. 

1818 – The 49th parallel is determined as the border between much of the United States and Canada.

1837 – Rebellion occurred throughout Canada towards the British government. 

1838 – The Durham Report was issued which recommended that Upper and Lower Canada be united. 

1840 – Upper and Lower Canada were merged into a single colony, the United Provence of Canada by the Act of Union. 

1846 – The border between the United States and Canada in the west is decided by the Oregon Treaty. 

1867 – The Dominion of Canada is formed as the Canadian Confederation. It included the four provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario. 

1870 – The province of Manitoba joins Canada and in 1871, British Columbia becomes the sixth province of Canada. 

1873 – The Northwest Mounted Police were established. They become the Canadian Mounted Police. 

1896 – Gold was discovered in the Yukon. The Klondike Gold Rush occurred as thousands of prospectors moved to Canada to find gold. 

1905 – Saskatchewan and Alberta became provinces. 

1931 – The Statute of Westminster was authorised, whereby Canada became an independent nation. 

1982 – The year Canada actually became fully independent from the United Kingdom, adopting its own constitution. 

Canada is a federation composed of ten provinces and three territories (10+3=13). The etymological origins of the word Canada is accepted as coming from the St Lawrence Iroquian word kanata, meaning ‘village’ or ‘settlement.’ The national motto A Mari Usque Ad Mare means ‘From Sea to Sea.’ Covering 3.85 million square miles, Canada is the world’s second largest country by total area, after Russia. Its southern and western border with the United States, stretching 5,525 miles, is the world’s longest (undefended) bi-national land border. Canada’s capital is Ottawa, with 1,323,783 people. 

Britannica – emphasis mine:

‘Although Canada shares many similarities with its southern neighbour – and, indeed, its popular culture and that of the United States are in many regards indistinguishable – the differences between the two countries, both temperamental and material, are profound.

“The central fact of Canadian history,” observed the 20th-century literary critic Northrop Frye, is “the rejection of the American Revolution.” Contemporary Canadians are inclined to favour orderly central government and a sense of community over individualism; in international affairs, they are more likely to serve the role of peacemaker instead of warrior, and, whether at home or abroad, they are likely to have a pluralistic way of viewing the world.

More than that, Canadians live in a society that in most legal and official matters resembles Britain – at least in the English-speaking portion of the country.’

Canadian Coat of Arms – not so far removed from the United Kingdom’s as discussed.

Key moments and dates in American history.

1492 – Christopher Columbus ‘discovered’ the Americas. The origin of the name America is often attributed to the explorer Amerigo Vespucce. Yair Davidy offers an alternative derivation from the term Machir, the son of Manasseh. The Western Hemisphere is referred to as either North, Central or South America, though when the term ‘American’ is used, this is normally a universal reference to the peoples of the United States. The nickname ‘Yankee’ for a North American derives from a form of the name Jacob. The Latinos themselves, use the term Norte Americanos to refer to Americans in the United States. 

America may have even taken its name from a Welshman called Richard Amerik, a chief investor in late fifteenth century voyages of discovery. The word Amerik itself is derived from ap Meuric, Welsh for ‘son of Maurice’ – the latter was anglicised further to Morris. The American state of Pennsylvania is possibly named after the Welsh word for head, pen.

In an audio study course called An Invitation to Hebrew in its section on the ‘Vocabulary of Jewish Life’ the teacher confirms that ‘covenant in Hebrew is… b’rit. He mentions its occurrence in the term b’nai b’rit, or the ‘children of the covenant’ in reference to the United States of America, which is called in Hebrew, Artzot Ha-Brit, ‘the lands of the covenant’ (Mordecai Kamrat, Spoken Arts, Incorporated, 1960).

1513 – Juan Ponce de Leon visited Florida. 

1540 – Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto explored the Southeast. 

1565 – St. Augustine was established as the first permanent settlement in the United States. 

1607 – The Jamestown settlement and Virginia Colony was founded by John Smith. 

1620 – The Mayflower landed with the pilgrims at Plymouth. 

1629 – The Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded. 

1692 – The Salem witch trials took place in Massachusetts. 

1765 – The British government imposed the Stamp Act on the colonies. The colonies protested with the Stamp Act Congress. 

1770 – The Boston Massacre occurred. 

1773 – Bostonians protested the Tea Act with the Boston Tea Party dumping tea into the Boston Harbor. 

1774 – The First Continental Congress was held. The British government imposed the Intolerable Acts on the colonies. The American colonies grew unhappy with what they called “taxation without representation”.

1775 – The Revolutionary War began with the Battle of Lexington and Concord. The Second Continental Congress was held and the Battle of Bunker Hill occurred. The American Revolutionary War fought by the Thirteen Colonies against the British Empire, was the first successful war of independence by a non-European entity against a European power in modern history. 

1776 – The American colonies declared their independence as the United States of America. 

1777 – The Continental Army stayed at Valley Forge for the winter. 

1781 – The British surrendered at Yorktown, Virginia. The Articles of the Confederation were ratified by the colonies. 

1783 – The Revolutionary War officially ended with the Treaty of Paris. 

1787 – The Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Convention. 

1789 – George Washington became the first President of the United States. 

1791 – The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution as the first ten amendments.

1793 – The cotton gin (engine, machine) was invented by Eli Whitney. 

1803 – The size of the United States was nearly doubled with the Louisiana Purchase from France. 

1812 – The War began against Great Britain. 

1815 – United States troops led by Andrew Jackson defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans. 

1823 – The Monroe Doctrine was declared by President James Monroe. North and South America were closed to any further colonisation and to any interference by a European power.

1836 – The Battle of the Alamo in Texas. 

1838 – The Cherokee Nation was forced to march from the Southeast to Oklahoma in what was known as the Trail of Tears. 

1846 – The Mexican-American War began. 

1849 – Prospectors travelled to California in the California Gold Rush. 

1860 – Abraham Lincoln was elected president. 

1861 – The American Civil War began. 

1863 – The Union Army won the Battle of Gettysburg. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves in the South. 

1864 – Union General Sherman made his famous “march to the sea.” 

1865 – The American Civil War came to an end with General Robert E Lee surrendering at the Appomattox Court House. President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. 

1865 – Slavery was outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment. 

1867 – Alaska purchased from Russia. 

1869 – The First Transcontinental Railroad was completed. 

1876 – The telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell. 

1914 – In both World Wars the United States tried to remain neutral but ended up on the side of the United Kingdom and the Allies. 

Britannica – emphasis mine:

‘Probably no other country has a wider range of racial, ethnic, and cultural types than does the United States. The nation’s wealth is partly a reflection of its rich natural resources and its enormous agricultural output, but it owes more to the country’s highly developed industry. 

Despite its relative economic self-sufficiency in many areas, the United States is the most important single factor in world trade by virtue of the sheer size of its economy. Its exports and imports represent major proportions of the world total. The United States also impinges on the global economy as a source of and as a destination for investment capital. The country continues to sustain an economic life that is more diversified than any other on Earth, providing the majority of its people with one of the world’s highest standards of living. 

America was the first of the European colonies to separate successfully from its motherland, and it was the first nation to be established on the premise that sovereignty rests with its citizens and not with the government. In the 20th century the United States emerged as a world power, and since World war II it has been one of the preeminent powers. It has not accepted this mantle easily nor always carried it willingly; the principles and ideals of its founders have been tested by the pressures and exigencies of its dominant status. The United States still offers its residents opportunities for unparalleled personal advancement and wealth.’ 

The Lightkeeper, 2050:

‘America is compellingly and utterly unique in all history, in the modern world and in our life times. No single nation has been so materially blessed or prosperous beyond belief. No single nation has so heavily influenced the rest of the whole world in its export of American culture through film, television, literature and music. Never, has a single nation so comprehensively dominated civilisation in its development of trade, information technology, media, telecommunications, munitions, missiles and defence systems.

As an active superpower and hyper power since 1991, the United States has undeniably built an empire unlike anything seen in the world, for though they do not have a mass of territorial conquests or colonies like the [former] British Empire, their financial investment and influence worldwide intertwines the global economy like the roots of a tree that grow underground, wrapping themselves around everything in its path.’

Yair Davidy describes the link between the name Joseph and Parthian rulers, as well as metallurgy in ancient Spain and of Samaria in ancient Israel.

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘Arsacides were the rulers of the Parthian* Empire in Persia. The Parthians rulers were of Israelite descent’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. ‘Some scholars trace the name “Aspourgos” to the Iranian “aspa” meaning horse or to the Akkadian-Syrian “aspuraku” meaning “horseman”. The name however had a different original connotation and any similarity with the word for “horse” and the like deviates from the primary root of the name. 

Haynman traces the name “Aspourgos” to the Semitic-Hebrew root “asaph” (to gather in) and to “biraka” which she understands to, mean “thy self-creation” or something similar. She points out that the name Joseph has the same origin. 

The people of Tanais did have their own independent form of monotheistic belief, similar to but not derived from Judaism. They did not eat pork’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘They were part of the Sacae-Scythian people who had Israelite tribal names and are shown for other reasons to have been of Israelite descent. It may therefore be concluded that they revered “Joseph” under the name “Aspourgos” because they were descended from Joseph. The guilds connected with Aspourgos really did have ceremonies commemorating traditions about Joseph. They also retained some degree of monotheistic sentiment because they were of Hebrew origin. This was also the reason they did not eat pork whereas all other peoples in the region at that time did. 

researchers have suggested that the features found in Tanais were part of the Sakae-Scythian culture in general. Tanais was abandoned in the early 400s CE, about the time of the Hun invasion of Europe, and its inhabitants apparently joined their Scythian brothers and moved westward.’ 

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘Ammianus Marcellinus said that the original inhabitants of Tartessos had been called Dorians. The Dorians in Classical literature were a branch of the Greeks but in this case the intention is to people coming via the port of Dor on the coast of Israel. Dor was the major port on the coast of Central Israel and in Assyrian times it was the name given to a province comprising the whole coastal area. Bochart using Greek and Latin sources demonstrated that the Dorians who migrated to Gades and Tartessus were descendants of a legendary “Dorus and Phoenicius” i.e. of Dorians and Phoenicians. Bochart traced them to Dor in Israel and says that originally they were identified as Galicians, i.e. Galatians’ – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy. 

‘… the original Dorians of Tartessus, the first settlers of Baetica in southern Spain, and the Galatians were all essentially one and the same people and that amongst them were members of the Tribe of Manasseh. “Dor and her towns” had been part of the region inherited by the Tribe of Manasseh whose original Canaanite inhabitants at first could not be driven out but were put to tribute (Joshua 17:11-12, Judges 1:27- 28). Later the area was considered Israelite. “All the region of Dor” became one of the 12 administrative districts into which the Land of Israel was divided by King Solomon and it was governed by Abinadab who “had Taphah the daughter of Solomon to wife” (1-Kings 4:11). 

When the Assyrians conquered Israel they named the whole coastal region of Manasseh and Ephraim after Dor. Ptolemy records the “Menesthei Portus”, i.e. the Port of the Tribe of Manasseh in the region of the Turdulorum just to the east of Gades off the southwest coast of Spain! The port of Gibraltar is within the area most consistently connected with Tartessos and therefore was Israelite before Spain existed. Gibraltar since 1704 CE has belonged to Britain [Judah*]. This is not a coincidence! 

Metal produced in Baetica (in southeast Spain) was called “Samarian metal” (Pliny N.H.) after Samaria in Israel. There was also a port named “Samarium” in Galatia of northwest Spain. The Samar (Somme) River in north Gaul and neighboring city of Samarobriva (Amiens) and the Sambre River just to their north in Belgium were also named after Samaria in Israel.’ 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘When Americans spread westward toward the Pacific Ocean, they migrated in wagon trains. In doing so, they carried on a tradition of the ancient Scythians. The Scythians also migrated via covered wagons, which are described in the following words: 

“The wagons in which the women and children traveled had from four to six wheels. They were covered with felt roofs and the space inside was divided into two or three compartments. Little clay models of these prototypes of the modern caravan have been found in some… Scythian burials.” 

Like the cowboys of the American “West,” the Scythians also “excelled at lassoing.” 

With their horse riding, lassoing, and “wagon trains,” Scythian culture resembled the pioneer days of the American West (without the six­ shooters). Perhaps the power of genetic influence is more potent than generally realized. 

The original twelve tribes of Israel grew to became thirteen when Joseph was subdivided into the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. Since Ephraim was given its portion before Manasseh, Manasseh essentially became “the thirteenth tribe.” The number “13” has uniquely been associated with the founding of America. The United States of America was born as a union of thirteen separate colonies, with its flag exhibiting thirteen stripes and thirteen stars. The prominence of the number “13” in the founding of America indicates a divine hand influencing world events to appropriately place the number “13” on this new Manassehite nation.’ 

This is circumlocutory reasoning to fit a theory. It could be argued that thirteen represents Ephraim as the thirteenth born and the last or youngest even though receiving a blessing greater than Manasseh. Thirteen could also represent Jospeh as in, he represents twelve and thirteen. Apportioning Manasseh to the number thirteen is convenient but doesn’t make sense by itself, particularly when we know the United States is principally Ephraim or one and a half tribes comprising Joseph. It is Canada which is Manasseh and to be fair, it is the one whom is forgotten – with its ten provinces and three territories.

Collins: ‘A common symbol of the United States of America is an eagle clutching “an olive branch” and a “group of arrows” in its talons. The olive branch signifies America’s desire for peace while the arrows signify prowess in war. Is it only coincidence that the ancient Scythians (a “Sacae” nation) used the same war sign as modern America (a “Saxon” nation): a clump of arrows? [recall the meaning of Asenath’s (Joseph’e wife) name and the goddess Neith being associated with arrows]. Furthermore, the eagle was also a common Scythian symbol. 

One Scythian eagle ­crest was found in a pose resembling the eagle­crest of the United States: both show eagles with modern outstretched wings and flared tail feathers (the Scythian eagle holds prey in its talons, while the American eagle holds a branch and a clump of arrows in its talons). Indeed, the eagle­ crest of the United States not only has its roots in the Scythian eagle­ crest, but also proclaims [an Israelite] origin by having thirteen arrows in one talon, thirteen leaves on the olive branch in the other talon, thirteen stars over the eagle’s head, thirteen bars in the shield over the eagle’s body, and even thirteen letters in the phrase “E PLURIBUS UNUM.”

If this sounds surprising, consider the fact that in 1857, two messages were given by a Rev. F. E. Pitts to a joint session of the U.S. Congress, presenting evidence that the United States of America was descended from the ten tribes of Israel! Pastor Pitts had little of the information presented in this book available to him, so he based his conclusion on biblical prophecies alone. He utilized prophecies in the books of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Hosea to show that America had fulfilled many prophecies about the ten tribes of Israel. Pastor Pitts wrote: 

The United States of America, our great country, is foretold in the Holy ScripturesThe United States of America is the nationality that is promised in the prophetic Scriptures to arise in the latter times as Israel RestoredSuch was ancient Israel, and such is the United States of America.”

An alternative argument on the re-occurring number thirteen, is presented by Stewart A Swerdlow in his book, Blue Blood, True Blood, Conflict and Creation, 2002:

‘The United States was established with 13 colonies, one for each of the Illuminati families. The original flag had 13 stars, and still has 13 stripes. The eagle, the symbol of the United States, holds 13 arrows in its talons. The United States is actually a corporate asset of the Virginia Company that was established in 1604 in England with direct involvement of the Rothschilds. The finances of the Rothschilds were necessary to fund the exploration and exploitation of the North American continent. The assets of the Virginia Company, including the United States, are owned by the Holy Roman Empire via the Vatican. Executorship remains with the British royal family, but actual ownership lies with the Roman Catholic Church’ – Articles: The Life & Death of Charles III; and The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want?

The United States of America is not named after Amerigo Vespucci, as you learned in school. The Illuminati would never name a continent, actually two continents, after an Italian mapmaker.

The name is actually a combination of words.

  • “Am” is the Hebrew word for “people”
  • “Ame” is also the command form of the Spanish/Latin verb “to love”
  • “Eri” or “ari” is a Hebrew term for “lion”
  • “Rica” is the feminine form of the Spanish word for “rich”
  • “Ka” is the ancient Egyptian word for soul, or spirit force within a body

The symbolic statement of America is that it is a combination of Lemuria and Atlantis; a blend of the… Lyrae with… Draco… [and] the combination of these… civilizations would produce the most powerful, technological Empire ever known!’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

There are two other words worth noting that may have an etymological link with the word America. The first is Amorica (or Aremorica), which literally means ‘place in front of the sea.’ The word differs merely by one vowel letter. It was the name for the northwestern extremity of ancient Gaul, now known as Brittany. In Celtic, Roman and Frankish ages, Amorica also included the western area of what later became known as Normandy. Both Normandy (from the Normans) and Brittany (derived from Britons) have strong Israelite association – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The other word is Mercia, which derives from the Old English word Merce, meaning ‘people of the Marches’ or boundaries. Swapping two letters, gives Merica. Mercia was a powerful Saxon kingdom with its capital in Tamworth, during the seventh to ninth centuries and was prominent amongst the six other great Saxon kingdoms: East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘The first national flag of those original United States had thirteen Stars and thirteen Bars. The bars symbolize the Union, and the constellation of thirteen stars was intended to symbolize the nation formed of thirteen independent states. In this, the Great Seal of our country… we have the arms and crest of the United States of America.

We would first call your attention to the fact that the eagle is holding in what is called the “Dexter” talon an Olive Branch. In the fourteenth chapter of Hosea, that prophet, who has so much to say about lost Ephraim-Israel, we have the following: “O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God; I will heal their backslidings; I will love them freely; for mine anger is turned away from him… I will be as the dew to Israel; he shall grow like the lily (the national flower of Egypt), and cast forth his roots as Lebanon (royal cedar). His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the OLIVE tree. Ephraim will say, What have I to do any more with idols?”

Ephraim is the representative of the house of Joseph, and we have placed this Scripture before our readers that they may see that the Olive tree is among the insignia of the birthright family, and that it is here represented as belonging to one of the Branches of the birthright kingdom, and since the birthright is Joseph’s, it is the Olive Branch of Joseph which has been placed in the “Coat of Arms” of [Ephraim], the thirteenth tribe in Israel, who has now fulfilled the prophecy of becoming a great [company of nations].

Still this fact, if it stood alone, might not mean so much, but in the other talon, which is called the “Sinister,” is a “Bundle of thirteen Arrows,” which represents the nation individually and collectively prepared for war. 

It is marvelous that the Olive Branch should have been made our official insignum of Peace, and that the Arrows should have been made by law to represent the War Power of the country, for the Arrows were in the heraldry of Israel, as well as the Unicorn and Lion, when Balaam was compelled to bless instead of curse them.’

“God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of [a] unicorn [ox]: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.”

“He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee” – Numbers 24:8-9, BRG Bible.

Verse eight is as a clear reference to the United States of America (Joseph) as verse nine is to England (Judah) – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Allen: ‘Also, the Josephites were Bow-men, and Jacob, after speaking of Joseph and his branches, said,

“The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him. But his Bow (munitions of war) abode in strength, and the Arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob,” Genesis 49:23-24.

It is a well-known, and much-rejoiced-over fact that the Bow of the United States, which has sent her Arrows into the ranks of her enemies, has always abode in strength, and that both her chief men and people have always said: “God has helped us.” 

… and the Eagle, like everything else that pertains to national Israel, has fallen to the birthright family, and is now the national ensign of the thirteenth tribe of Israel, the people of which are not only the descendants of [Ephraim]… but they also compose the firstborn nation out of the “MANY NATIONS,” which were promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and whose ensign Eagle holds in his beak a scroll upon which is written their national motto, “E Pluribus Unum,” which has thirteen letters, and means “One out of MANY.”

“He (Israel) shall fly as an Eagle, and spread his wings over Moab,” Jeremiah 48:40. No wings except those which are spread out can be shadowing wings, and the Shadowing wings of Israel’s Spread Eagle are in the ensign of the United States of America. Hence, America is the land shadowed by wings of which Isaiah wrote, whose ambassadors cross the sea in vessels of bulrushes, or, literally, of caldrons which absorb water; i. e., the modern steamship. The Shield, or escutcheon, which is borne on the breast of the Spread Eagle, has thirteen pieces, called pales, or paleways, which comes from the same word as palings or pickets. These thirteen paleways are united by one at the top. The Lord said to Abraham: “I am thy Shield.” 

‘On the national seal of America, the “Great People,” above the shadowing wings and the scroll, is a Cloud emitting rays of Glory. “Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel… and behold the Glory of the Lord appeared in the Cloud.” To our fathers that glory Cloud was significant of the presence of Jehovah. That Glory Cloud,  which hung over Israel, guided those who had but just escaped from the Egyptian bondage, and it stood between them and their enemies. But this is not all, for this Cloud of our American heraldry surrounds what is called “The Constellation.” This constellation is a group of thirteen stars, or planets, on a field of azure sky, which is exactly the same number of planets that appeared on the azure sky in the dream of Joseph, which drove him into separation from his brethren. 

Any one of these features in the blazonry of our nation might have been a coincidence, but when we see that there is not a single feature, but that which is Josephic and Israelitish, it is simply astounding.

But when we turn our face upon the reverse side of that great national seal we are overwhelmed, for there stands the Great Pyramid of Egypt [Article: The Pyramid Perplexity], which is one of the two great monuments of Egypt, the birthplace of Ephraim and Manasseh, the Egypto-Israelitish sons of Joseph, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham. And, marvel of marvels! The national Crest of England has that other great monument of Egypt, the Sphinx [Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega], on its reverse side. Thus do the people of Great Britain and the United States of America, the Brother nations, by that which speaks louder than words, for signs are arbitrary, say that they are the offsprings of the Egypto-Israelitish holders of the Abrahamic birthright. 

The people of the United States made this declaration by that which was made a law on Thursday, June 20, 1782, for on that day the ensign which bears those shadowing wings of Israel, together with the Heraldry of Joseph, became a law among us. Also over the pyramid on the reverse side of the Great Seal of America is another thirteen-lettered motto, which, of course is not only lawful, but also national; i.e., “Annuit Coeptis,” – “He (the Lord) hath prospered our undertakings.” This also is Josephic, for we read, “The Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man.” “The Lord was with him (Joseph), and that which he did the Lord made it to prosper,” Genesis 39:3-23. 

Those who understand the Cabala and the arithmography of the Scriptures, it is known that the number thirteen is significant of rebellion, but all that we can say about it here is that the first time this number occurs in the Bible it is with reference to Rebellion (Genesis 14:4)’ – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. ‘Surely that people whose characteristic number is thirteen did rebel in 1776, and prospered in it, too. They also prospered in 1814, in another little affair concerning the acquisition of a vast stretch of territory known as Louisiana. 

This people have also had rebellion within their own borders, and it is a remarkable fact that, although thirteen was not the number of states in the Confederacy, the Confederate Congress, in 1863, formally adopted a battle flag for the Confederacy, and also a Confederate flag.’

Recall there were actually thirteen states supporting the Confederacy. The first seven member states were: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina and Florida. The next four states to join were: Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. The final two who allied with the confederacy, making thirteen were Missouri and Kentucky.

Allen: ‘The Battle Flag was a white field with a blue cross of this (X) shape, in which there were thirteen stars.’ The Scottish Saltire is white with a blue (diagonal) cross.

(Confederate) Rebel Flag

Allen: ‘The flag for the Confederacy was white, with a red field in the Dexter chief corner, bearing this same (X) cross with its thirteen stars. Here again is both rebellion and the birthright cross of the house of Joseph. In his struggle the government also prospered, and it was essential that it should thus prosper, not only in this case, but also in the others of which we have spoken, in order to fulfill a prophecy concerning one feature of their history, namely: “Shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to undo the heavy burdens, and let the OPPRESSED GO FREE, and that YE break every yoke?” These are the reasons for which Our Race go to war. England freed her slaves in 1838 and America freed hers in 1861.’

Tribal Emblems of Ephraim – National symbols of America, Mark Lane – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘In Numbers Chapter 2 it says “Everyone of the children of Israel shall camp by his own standard, beside the emblems of his father’s house” (Numbers 2:2). 

We thus conclude that each tribe of Israel had emblems, or tribal symbols. The tribal symbols of Ephraim would likely have been: 

 Symbol of a Bull or Wild Ox or Horn
 

Symbol of fruitfulness of the land: Sheaf of Wheat or Fruit Laden Bough 

Symbol of Strong Arm or Arrows

If the USA is the prophetic fulfillment of Ephraim we would expect to see its citizens rallying to their county’s protection under similar national symbols. That is precisely what we see. Ephraim was granted the blessing of divine protection. In the Bible this is signified by the figure of an eagle. The Lord said that he protected Israel on the exodus from Egypt “on eagle’s wings” (Exodus 19:4). Therefore, the eagle is the symbol of God’s protection: it is not the symbol of a nation per se. Many of the national symbols of the USA match the symbols of the tribe of Ephraim. 

(1) Great seal of the United States: 

Eagle grasps a clutch of arrows in one claw

Eagle grasps a fruitful bough in the other claw
Eagle’s breast displays a shield (allusion to spiritual protection)
Eagle’s head is turned to its right: facing West (allusion to the West side of the Camp)
Over the Eagle’s head is a cloud (allusion to the cloud of God which traveled with the Camp)
Obverse side displays a pyramid (allusion to Joseph who ruled Egypt)
Obverse side display the “eye of God” (another allusion to God’s watchful protection)

(2) American Money: 

The penny displays two sheafs (two tribes) [representing Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh] of wheat: on the left and on the right 

The US one dollar bill has both sides of the Great Seal printed on it 

(3) American Mottos: 

“In God We Trust” placed on pennies (1865) official motto of US (adopted in 1956)
“New World Order” NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM (Great Seal)
“Out of Many One” E PLURIBUS UNUM (Great Seal)
“He has Prospered our Undertakings” ANNUIT COEPTIS (Great Seal)

In the US national symbols the number 13 is prominent. There are 13 stars in the cloud, 13 arrows in the clutch, 13 leaves on the bough, 13 fruits on the bough, 13 strips on the shield… The spiritual number 13 signifies “Rebellion” and in truth the United States gained its independence by rebelling against the authority of its… brother the United Kingdom. There were also 13 states in the original colonies of the United States. Normally rebellion has a negative connotation, however at the core of the American ideal of liberty and pursuit of happiness is the concept of resisting over-authoritarian governments.

It is fair to say Americans love their country and they express that on many occasions by honoring their flag, or their ‘colors’. One of the possible pitfalls of a nation being as great as America is its citizens might fall into a love of country that surpasses their love for God. To them the flag is a symbol of protection, much as the skins protected the tabernacle in the desert. When citizens begin to look to their government for protection, and not to God for protection, they put their trust in the wrong place. Instead of ‘In God We Trust’ it is ‘In our Natural Resources We Trust’, or ‘In our Military We Trust’, ‘In our Government We Trust’, or ‘In America We Trust’. When an American… looks at the stars and stripes, the colors should remind him that the great nation of the United States depends for its existence and prosperity on the blessing and protection of God, not the government of the day.’

Symbol of United States protection – the American Bald Eagle

Commentators correctly attribute symbols relating to Joseph (who is indicative of Ephraim) of olives and arrows to the United States of America; yet incorrectly define them as belonging to the tribe of Manasseh.

The Meaning of the Great Seal of The United States, American Heritage Education Foundation, 2017:

‘The Great Seal of the United States is the official emblem and heraldic device of the United States of America. It was adopted by the Continental Congress in 1782 [on June 20] to represent the nation and to demonstrate to other nations of the world the ideas and values of its Founders and people. The Great Seal of the United States guarantees the authenticity of official U.S. documents. It is used 2,000-3,000 times per year to seal documents. Such documents include treaties, presidential proclamations, appointments of government officials, and presidential communications to heads of foreign nations. The seal is also printed on the U.S. $1 bill, providing U.S. citizens with a ready reference to the nation’s foundational ideas. 

The custody of the Great Seal is assigned to the U.S. Department of State. The seal can be affixed by an officer of the Secretary of State. The Great Seal… was first used officially on September 16, 1782, to guarantee the authenticity of a document that granted full power to General George Washington “to negotiate and sign with the British an agreement for the exchange, subsistence, and better treatment of prisoners of war.” Thomas Jefferson was the first Secretary of State to have custody of the Great Seal. The Great Seal has two sides and displays a number of important symbols. The front (obverse) side of the seal displays the coat of arms of the United States. The coat of arms is officially used for coins, postage stamps, stationary, publications, flags, military uniforms, public monuments, public buildings, embassies and consulates, passports, and items owned by the U. S. government.’ 

While the above definitions repeatedly mention God (the Creator); it is not really the Eternal who is being venerated but actually His adversary – refer articles 33; and Asherah.

The long held belief amongst biblical identity adherents that Ephraim is England and its colonies, while Manasseh is the United States; is after some five hundred years, like cemented stone masonry which is long dried and set. For those who tightly hold onto this explanation, there is on the one hand little point in attempting to loosen this deeply imbedded paradigm of error. Those who support this premise feel real indignation from any argument which presents the opposing view.

Rightly so, as it is intrinsically flawed arguing that England is Manasseh, when such is clearly not the case and they can correctly see through this inaccuracy. Even so, the perceived threat of the truth regarding Ephraim is felt so strongly, that extensive lists are compiled to validate the United States is still Manasseh. 

Since Canada is the real Manasseh and not the United States let alone England or its offshoots, many of the points used as proof suddenly lose their relevance or veracity as applicable evidence. It still may be of value to look at a selection of points raised by high profile researchers, only as they relate to the United States and Ephraim, while ignoring the blind tangents of those relating to the United Kingdom, Great Britain or England – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator. 

‘Jacob placed Ephraim before Manasseh, and he was called the Firstborn’ – Genesis 48:14-19, Jeremiah 31:9.

It is argued that Ephraim’s (prophetic) destiny was to be fulfilled before Manasseh’s because the roles were reversed. If such is the case, then the United states (July 4, 1776) did become a nation… before Canada (July 1, 1867). The younger did become the firstborn. 

Tzvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov (1784-1840):

“Why did Jacob not command that Manasseh be placed on his left side and Ephraim on his right? Why did Jacob have to cross his hands over? The truth is that Manasseh is the firstborn! This is why it says ‘guiding his hands wittingly’ (Genesis 48:14). He did not change Manasseh over to the left side for in truth Manasseh is the firstborn and the most important but he put Ephraim before Manasseh concerning the chronological precedence.’

‘Ephraim set before Manasseh means he would be first in both time and greatness’ – Genesis 48:20.

It is argued that Ephraim would be set before Manasseh in terms of position, chronology and in sense of occurrence and importance. If such is the case, then the United States is a greater nation than Canada and was formed before Canada became a nation.

Fishel Mael, Hashevetim, page 490:

“The order of placing of the sons was important both in regards to their positioning concerning Joseph and in that concerning Jacob. Concerning Joseph… Ephraim is the one who fulfills his place and most continues his path… Therefore Joseph set Ephraim on his right-hand side to show that Ephraim is the main principle of his might and the continuer of his path…

However concerning Jacob it is just the opposite. Manasseh is closer… to the path of Jacob… Jacob however guided his hands wittingly to indicate that the greatness of Manasseh would not be revealed so soon… Jacob agreed only that Manasseh remain at his right-hand side for he is destined to complete the quality… of Jacob…”

‘Manasseh would become a great people after Ephraim.’

It is argued that though Manasseh is the elder son of Joseph, he would additionally or subsequently to Ephraim, become a great people – the second to come into greatness. If such is the case, then Canada (who is still growing into its greatness) has definitively been second to America. 

‘Manasseh would be a republic with a representative government, not a monarchy.’

As the scriptures do not say this, it cannot be a valid point of argument. This commentator defines the name Manasseh as ‘responsible representation’ as in a republic, Ephraim as ‘aristocracy’ as in royalty and Machir as ‘capitalism’ and the ‘principle of salesmanship.’ These definitions in this writer’s view are stretching Hebrew definitions to fit incorrect suppositions that cannot be used as objective evidence.

Judah was to be defined by its monarchy. Both Manasseh and Ephraim were not. Though if Manasseh was to be a great people, or a ‘multitude gathered as a unit’, as in one people, one nation; and Ephraim a ‘company of nations’, as in multiple groups of peoples comprising diverse peoples… then Canada and the United States have uniquely fulfilled scripture. 

Bible exponent William Dankenbring, based on Greg Doudna’s research, became perhaps the most vocal supporter of the belief that Ephraim was the United States, prior to his death in 2017. It is a view only a minority of people have been able to comprehend within the identity movement. Ironically, there are a number of people in America who do not have any allegiance or ties to British-Israelism or a Church of God affiliation, who understand that the United States is Ephraim of the Bible. 

The United States as Ephraim, William F Dankenbring – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Although virtually no one has noticed it, God has left the identity of modern Israel in the most obvious place one could imagine – in the very name of our great nation!  Our nation is the only nation in the world directly named ‘company of nations’!

The house of Israel was a company or union of equal members, none of whom were sovereign. This fits the United States. It does not fit Great Britain or the British Commonwealth. The British Commonwealth has never been a company of equal states. Britain has always been one great nation. Whereas the British Commonwealth is a collection of scattered, independent, satellite nations around the world under the authority of the single great nation Britain.

The United States is an assembly of fifty united states who have given up their sovereignty in the interests of collective political union and are, for the most part, united geographically, as was the house of Israel anciently. The United States began with thirteen states. When we reached the West Coast we had ‘filled up’ our land with forty-eight states, perhaps paralleling the forty-eight cities for the Levites in ancient Israel. Then we added two more to reach a ‘fullness’ of fifty, or five times the number in the house of Israel of old (and the Jubilee number). The United States is the company, fullness, assembly, or convocation of states that Ephraim was to  become.’

‘In Hebrew, the word for “nations”… is goyim, and means “peoples, nations, states, a troop, a flight,” a word that has the sense of “massing.” Thus Jacob really said the descendants of Ephraim would become a TROOP of people, a MASS of people, MANY states, families, or groupings. Thus we have in fulfillment of this prophecy THE FIFTY STATES of the United States – we became 50 different states, UNITED, but ONE PEOPLE. Each state has its own constitution and government.

Obviously, the prophecies directed toward Ephraim in the Bible are directed to ONE UNITED COUNTRY, one sovereign nation, UNITED TOGETHER – as Ephraim was historically, and as the United States is, today! The very words of the U.S. Constitution reveal our national identity! The Constitution begins, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union…”

The U.S.A. – A Union of “Nation-States” Ephraim was to become a united company or assembly of peoples. Isn’t it interesting that the United States is famous around the world for being the “melting pot” of the nations? The United States has more emigrants from more diverse locations, than any other nation on earth!  This is both a strength, and a fatal weakness. The prophet Hosea foretold this condition would describe Ephraim in the last days! Hosea wrote, “Ephraim MIXES with the nations; Ephraim is a flat cake not turned over (white on one side, baked black or brown on the other side). Foreigners sap his strength, but he does not realize it. His hair is sprinkled with gray, but he does not notice” (Hosea 7:8-9). 

Ephraim’s very name means “double fruit.” It is the United States which exploded onto the world scene, becoming a world power in the days of Theodore Roosevelt at the turn of the century, and the twentieth century has been hailed as “America’s Century,” and world peace “Pax Americana.” Jacob prophesied that the younger brother, Ephraim, was to be greater than his older brother, Manasseh. Manasseh, the firstborn, was the older brother. Which nation is older – the United States or Great Britain? 

But what about the United States? Is it greater than Great Britain… Let’s face this question honestly and squarely, without pride, pretence, or hypocrisy. The United States is the wealthiest nation in the world in terms of resources, business and assets, and gross national produce – although we have also become the world’s biggest debtor nation by far due to our… living beyond our means… Either California or New York could be the world’s fifth or sixth richest nation in the world. The state of Illinois produces more than the entire continent of Africa! The eight industrial states from New York to Illinois produce as much as the Common Market, [Russia], or all of Latin America, Africa, most of Asia except Japan, and the Middle East combined!

The United States is greater than Britain by far. It is the United  States which is the greatest and most powerful nation the world has ever seen. It has been the United States which has soared to the status of the richest of nations… not Great Britain. The comparison in national wealth is meaningless – there is no comparison. The economy of the United States has been the engine that has driven the free world since the end of World War II. It has led to postwar recovery of the entire Western World. Further, there is no comparison in military power between the two nations [today]…

If the United States is NOT Ephraim, the most populous, “doubly fruitful” Israelitish nation – then who is? Fruitfulness, flourishing population, can also refer to the rate of growth. The growth rate of the United States has been nothing short of phenomenal… an exponential population growth of nearly 70 times over!  No country in history has, like the United States, literally come from out of nowhere, and literally EXPLODED in population growth and power, both [in its] military and economic [influence]! Truly, the United States – modern “Ephraim” – has experienced a dramatic population increase. Truly it has lived up to its name – and is “DOUBLY fruitful”!’

Two great powers, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and Reuben) and the United States of America (Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh). Both have the word united as part of their official names as the House of Israel and the House of Judah were once the United Kingdom of Israel. Don’t forget the forgotten nation, Canada (the half tribe of East Manasseh).

Early during the American Civil War, the Union’s plan was to economically strangle the Confederacy via naval blockades in all the major Southern Ports. The Confederacy sent Ambassadors to Britain in an attempt to drum up opposition support. They bypassed the Union blockade and reached Cuba. James Mason and John Slidell boarded the British mail ship, the Trent. The Union intercepted the ship and arrested the two diplomats. 

The Union had violated all principles of international law relating to neutrality, with the British government rightly pointing out that the United States Congress had declared war on Britain in 1812, when the British had seized American vessels en route to France. 

It looked as if Britain might enter the war against the North but was averted by Lincoln’s apology and the release of the Confederate commissioners. Britain openly favoured the South, letting them build warships in British shipyards. According to Kemp, the link was ‘cemented by the personal friendship of the British Jewish Prime Minister… Benjamin Disraeli, and the Confederate Jewish Secretary of State, Benjamin Judah. Disraeli’s views on race… made him personally sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and when Judah fled the South at the end of the war, he stayed as Disraeli’s personal guest at the latter’s private house in England.’

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Battle of the Bull Run [July 21, 1861] was an early defeat for the Union, which at first believed it would easily be able to crush the Confederates by launching an attack into northeastern Virginia. Repulsed by the Confederates, the Union army fled in disarray to Washington DC. The Confederates pursued the Union army, and seemed to threaten the Northern capital. The battle exhausted both sides, with the Union suffering 14,500 casualties and the South 9,100 in the seventeen-day-long engagement. 

On April 6, 1862, a confederate army, which had crept undetected on Grant’s forces, launched a surprise attack on the Union camp at Pittsburg Landing on the Tennessee River. The engagement, which became known as the Battle of Shiloh, saw the Confederates repulsed after two days of savage fighting. The losses inflicted in the battle gave both sides cause for concern. The Union forces suffered some 13,000 casualties and the Confederates around 10,700. Around 3,400 of these were killed outright, a record which was soon surpassed in later battles of the war.’

Abraham Lincoln at the end of the war, had instructed Grant to be generous with the defeated Confederates as he intended a policy of reconciliation to restore the Union. The President also intended repatriation of the Black slaves to Africa or the Caribbean. With his assassination, the Northern floodgates of hate spilled forth against the South. The United States Congress sought revenge through a series of laws known as the Reconstruction Acts with the design to punish the South for everything, including slavery, secession and the war. 

The Flag on the right is remarkably similar to the state flag of Georgia and was the first Confederate flag from 1861 50 1863 and known as the ‘Stars and Bars’.

Special Field Order No. 15 had instigated exclusive rights for the freed Blacks in parts of the coastal regions of South Carolina and Georgia; creating black homelands and enclaves within American borders. Remarkably, this order was revoked by the incoming President, Andrew Johnson. Not only had the Civil War ended slavery across the entire nation, it also made clear that the federal system of government had won out, in that the government had the right on certain matters to override the individual ‘state’s rights’, as supported by the confederate ideology. 

The war produced devastating loss of life with a total of 610,000 deaths of which 250,000 were from the South. This represented 4.5% of the total population of the South numbering 5.5 million people, as compared to 1.6% of the North with a population of 19.4 million people. The half tribe of West Manasseh after the Civil War, was not only defeated, it was destroyed and plundered. During the reconstruction, the best of the South left for the western territories. It is there that the vibrancy of the old South was relocated to Texas, California, the Northwest and the Cowboy states. 

Destiny decreed the breaking up of the ‘company of nations’; the multitude of people; the union of states; was not to occur in 1861, for Ephraim and West Manasseh had not come into the fullness of their birthright blessings which would peak exactly one hundred years later during the 1960s. 

The union of America’s fifty states is what gives it its strength. The opposite condition would erode, diminish and destroy America’s power. 

From Information Warfare to the Break-Up of the USA… Decoding the Work of Dr. Igor Panarin, New Dawn, 2017 – emphasis mine: 

‘In 2010 Dr. Panarin predicted the USA would balkanise, amidst social conflict, and split into separate states. Certainly the proposition of a ‘United States’ based on constitutionalism rests on weak foundations and has nothing of an organic character about it. There is no defining feature of an American ‘ethnos’, and no basis for a positive symbiotic relationship enduring between the sundry ethnicities. Panarin claims the United States is on course to balkanise due to the stressors of its huge debt, deficit and social protests. “The overlapping financial, economic and social challenges may eventually cause the world’s strongest superpower of the 20th century to collapse,” notes Panarin.

Far from being a fanciful scenario, the US military recently addressed the same problems emerging from rapid urbanisation in ‘megacities’. The US military regards ‘megacities’ (populations of 10,000,000 or more) as an approaching problem of instability. The US Army comments that megacities are a unique environment that they do not fully understand. One of their reports gives a picture of proliferating criminal networks and underground economies, natural disasters and the inability of decaying infrastructures to withstand stressors. A predicted feature is the breakdown of civic order through ethnic and religious conflict among diverse groups that are forced together to share diminishing resources and utilities.’

“As resources become constrained, illicit networks could potentially fill the gap left by over-extended and undercapitalized governments. The risk of natural disasters compounded by geography, climate change, unregulated growth and substandard infrastructure will magnify the challenges of humanitarian relief. As inequality between rich and poor increases, historically antagonistic religions and ethnicities will be brought into close proximity in cities. Stagnation will coexist with unprecedented development, as slums and shanty towns rapidly expand alongside modern high-rises. This is the urban future.”

‘The report comments on the increasingly heterogeneous populations inherent in a megacity as potentially “explosive.”

“One of the hallmarks of megacities is rapid hetero and homogeneous population growth that outstrips city governance capability. Many emerging megacities are ill-prepared to accommodate the kind of explosive growth they are experiencing. Radical income disparity, and racial, ethnic and sub cultural separation are major drivers of instability in megacities. As these divisions become more pronounced they create delicate tensions, which if allowed to fester, may build over time, mobilize segments of the population, and erupt as triggers of instability.” 

‘The US Army analysis accords with the 2010 analysis of Dr. Igor Panarin.’

A special report in the Guardian newspaper, entitled The last days of a white world, by Anthony Browne, September 3, 2000, ominously confirms – emphasis mine:

“It was news and no news; the most significant milestone in one of the most profound changes to affect the US in the past century, and yet a non-event. Last week the US Census Bureau issued figures showing that non-hispanic whites made up 49.8 per cent of the population of California. Now they are an ethnic minority in the country’s most populous state, the one most usually identified with the American dream.

As recently as 1970, eight out of 10 Californians were white. Fuelled by immigration at its highest rate since the start of the last century, and higher fertility rates, the Asian and Latino populations of California have risen by almost a third since 1990. At the same time, with limited immigration and low birth rates, the population of non-hispanic whites has fallen by 3 per cent. By 2040, hispanics are expected to be the overall majority in the state. Where California goes, the rest of America is predicted to follow. At present 72 per cent of the US population is non-hispanic whites; the US Census Bureau predicts they will become a minority between 2055 and 2060.

Not every one likes the new face of America. White far-right extremists predict the break-up of the union. Thomas W. Chittum, a New Jersey-based Vietnam War veteran, declared in his book Civil War Two, that the US, like Yugoslavia, will shatter into new, ethnically-based nations. ‘America was born in blood, America suckled on blood, America gorged on blood and grew into a giant, and America will drown in blood,’ Chittum warned.

The separatists have set up groups such as Americans for Self-Determination. One of the founders, Jeff Anderson, said: ‘We are suggesting the US be partitioned into states for blacks, whites, hispanics, and so on, along with multi-racial states for those who wish to continue with this experiment. Now is the time to begin such a multi-racial dialogue about separatism, before a storm of violent racial conflict erupts.’

Canada possesses one of the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world. Influenced principally by economic policy and family reunifications. In 2019, a total of 341,180 immigrants were admitted to Canada, mainly from Asia. 

India, the Philippines and China are the top three countries of origin for immigrants moving to Canada, with new immigrants settling mainly in the urban areas of large cities such as Toronto with 5,928,040 people, Montreal with 4,098,927 people and Vancouver with 2,463,431 people. Canada accepts large numbers of refugees, accounting for over ten percent of the annual global refugee resettlements. Canada resettled more than 28,000 people in 2018. 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to the 2016 Canadian Census, the country’s largest self-reported ethnic origin is Canadian (accounting for 32 percent of the population), followed by English (18.3 percent), Scottish (13.9 percent), French (13.6 percent), Irish (13.4 percent), German (9.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent), Italian (4.6 percent), First Nations (4.4 percent), Indian (4.0 percent)… Ukrainian (3.9 percent), [Dutch (3.23%) and Polish (3.21%)]. There are 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands, encompassing a total of 1,525,565 people. 

The Indigenous population in Canada is growing at almost twice the national rate, and four percent of Canada’s population claimed an Indigenous identity in 2006. Another 22.3 percent of the population belonged to a non-Indigenous visible minority. In 2016, the largest visible minority groups were South Asian (5.6 percent), Chinese (5.1 percent) and Black (3.5 percent). 

Between 2011 and 2016, the visible minority population rose by 18.4 percent. In 1961, less than two percent of Canada’s population (about 300,000 people) were members of visible minority groups. Indigenous peoples are not considered a visible minority in Statistics Canada calculations.’ 

Those people identifying as British and Irish amount to 45.6%. Added with the 32% that identify as Canadian, which is primarily English (followed by French) as in the main, they are founding families from whom the majority were ‘English’ and have dwelt in Canada for two or three centuries they understandably and logically perceive themselves as Canadians, rather than English, Scottish or Irish. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘In Canada, Third World immigrants are called “visible minorities” and according to the 2006 census, their numbers increase at a rate five times the growth in the population as a whole [Genesis 9:27]. In the five years between 2001 and 2006, the Third World population increased 27.2 percent to nearly 5.1 million individuals, with the majority coming from China, the Philippines, and India. In 2009, Third World immigrants made up 42.9 percent of Toronto’s residents, and 41.7 percent of Vancouver’s population. As of 2007, nearly 20 percent of Canada’s population [were] born elsewhere, and official government projections are that by 2031, 33 percent of the country’s population will be of Third World immigrant origin. This figure is most likely an underestimate, as the higher reproduction rate… has not been factored in. In reality, Canada is set to lose its white majority population by 2040.’

The United States while comprising a diverse population demographic still harbours a core British and Irish element that influenced not only the genesis of the American nation but still strongly influences American society today… though, for how long? 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In 2018, there were almost 90 million immigrants and U.S.-born children of immigrants in the United States, accounting for 28% of the overall U.S. population. The United States has a diverse population; 37 ancestry groups have more than one million members. White Amercans of European ancestry, mostly German, Irish, English, Italian, Polish and French including White Hispanic and Latino Americans from Latin America, form the largest racial group, at 73.1% of the population. African Americans constitute the nation’s largest racial minority and third-largest ancestry group, and are around 13% of the total U.S. population. Asian Americans are the country’s second-largest racial minority (the three largest Asian ethnic groups are Chinese, Filipino, and Indian).’

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the European-origin element of the American population stood at 64 percent at the beginning of 2010. This is a dramatic decline from 1960, where whites made up 88 percent of the US’s population… In 2009, non-Hispanic whites made up just under half of all children three years old… Just ten years earlier, more than 60 percent of children in that age group were white. According to the 2010 data, nonwhites babies under the age of two outnumbered white babies for the first time… Illegal immigration from Latin America is America’s single largest demographic issue, and if allowed to continue unabated, will see much of the US turned into a Third World country within a few decades.

… even though [white Americans] percentage of the total population is set to drop further, their real numbers will remain relatively constant for several decades. After the year 2050 there will be a sudden and dramatic decline, however as old age takes its natural toll (unless the white birthrate increases).’ 

The 2020 Census broke down the United States demographic as the following. White and European – not including Hispanics (refer Chapter XV The Philstines: Latino-Hispano America) – comprised 57.8% of the population of America. The two largest groups were those of German ancestry as well as English. The English percent of 7.1 is bolstered by those old families who now identify as ‘American’ and are predominantly of English heritage at 6.1%. Thus 13.2% is the exact same as the 13.2% who say they are German. 

From a Celtic-Saxon-Viking perspective, including all British and Irish stock who would represent the peoples of Joseph living in America, one could add the Irish with 9.7% and the Scottish at 1.7%. Thus the principal descendants of Joseph, would equate to 24.6%. The reality though, as we will investigate, is that the peoples of German descent may actually be descendants of Joseph too and possibly the peoples of Norwegian (1.3%) and Dutch (1.2%) descent. This would produce a grand total of 40.3% of the total population, or approximately 135 million people.

The peak immigration period for Germans was in the mid-nineteenth century, when thousands were driven from their homes by unemployment and unrest. Despite having no successful New World colonies, the first significant groups of German immigrants arrived in the United States in the 1670s and settled principally in New York and Pennsylvania. Germans were attracted to America for familiar reasons to other immigrants, such as open tracts of land and religious freedom. Their contributions to the nation included establishing the first kindergartens, Christmas trees (refer article: Asherah), hot dogs and hamburgers.

Is there any evidence when ‘Germans’ as an example, emigrated to the United States, that they were closer ethnically to Israelites in America than Ishmaelites in Germany? Actually, it would seem yes. 

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… many people of Israelite descent remained in Germany, especially in the west, until around the 1800s when there was a massive migration to the USA. The migrants from Germany to America were different physically, sociologically, and ideologically from those who stayed behind

They were more liberal and independently minded, often of non-conventional, more fundamental religious persuasion and of a different physical type. In Germany they had belonged to groups and social classes that never actually really belonged to the mainstream of historical German society.

Similarly, in Britain, the migrants to America either came mostly from the west and north or they belonged to socially distinct elements that had formed a separate grouping alongside the feudal stratifications that had previously existed. 

In the case of Germany we have descendants of Israelites separating themselves from their non-Israelite neighbors and moving out: Often one village would remain and all inhabitants of the community next door emigrate to America. What applies to Britain and Germany has been studied and documented but the same phenomenon appears to have taken place throughout Europe wherever people of Hebrew origin were to be found.’

Biblical identity Researcher Raymond McNair looked into this question and reported the following – emphasis & bold mine. 

‘Most true Germans are characterized by “Alpine” round skulls… Yet ethnologist Madison grant writes, “In the study of European populations the great and fundamental fact about the British Isles is the almost total absence there of true Alpine round skulls”. 

Ripley, in The Races of Europe says, “The most remarkable trait of the population of the British Isles is its head form; and especially the uniformity in every respect which is everywhere manifested. The prevailing type is that of the long and narrow cranium, accompanied by an oval rather than broad or round face”. Remember that this is the same type as the northern Celtic type. It is also the same as the Teutonic, Scandinavian type – the Scythian type!’

In a 1915 article – “Are We Cousins to the Germans?” – Sir Arthur Keith wrote that “the Britons and German represent contrasted and opposite types of humanity”. He explained, “The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye.

In the majority of the Briton – English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish – the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects prominently backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width”. Keith then pointed out that “in the vast majority of Germans,” the back of the head is flattened” – indicating “a profound racial difference”… “The explanation,” according to Keith, “is easy. With the exodus of the Franks to France and the Anglo-Saxons to Britain in the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth centuries of our era, Germany was almost denuded of her long-headed elements in her population”. 

an older study from R.F. Parsons… showed that the German heads were indeed more rounded than the British heads. The study also reported: In 1925 [a sample of] Germans [shows] the glabello-maximal length averages [are] 189 mm and the breadth 155. In 127 British soldiers they are 191 mm and 149 respectively, and in 103 medical students of British parentage, 194 and [152] (Parsons, R.F. Anthropological observations on German prisoners of war. The Journal of the Royal Anthropologic Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 49, January-July 1919, pages 20-35). 

Britannica [11th Edition, Volume 11] The total number of those who sailed for the United States from 1820 to 1900 may be estimated at more than 4,500,000. The greater number of the more recent immigrants was from the agricultural provinces of northern [western] Germany… It is clear then that the Anglo-Saxon peoples are not Germanic – at least in the modern sense of the term.’

This writer concurs with Davidiy and McNair. The Germans who departed Germany to live in America during the 1800s and particularly before, were different from those who stayed behind. German officials who witnessed the emigration remarked on the physical differences and the ethnic distinction. The distinction also included areas of origin in Germany, religious orientation and social outlook.

Aside from German ancestry, citizens who claim to be English-American are the next largest group. Predominantly found in the Northwest, the West and northeast of the United States, the number of people directly claiming to be English-American has dropped by over twenty million people, since the 1980 United States Census because more citizens who originated from the land of Pilgrims have started to identify themselves as simply: American

The majority of the founding fathers of the United States were of English ancestry as have been the majority of United States presidents. But by English – while an original origin from England is obvious – it is meant within the United States and what is not so obvious, in that these ‘English’ people are descendants from the tribes of Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. 

Online Encyclopaedia:

‘In 1982, an opinion poll showed respondents a card listing a number of ethnic groups and asked, “Thinking both of what they have contributed to this country and have gotten from this country, for each one tell me whether you think, on balance, they’ve been a good or a bad thing for this country.” The English were the top ethnic group, with 66% saying they were a good thing for the United States, followed by the Irish at 62%.’

The most English states according to the 2000 census in numbers of people were [southern States in bold]:

1. California 7.4%; 2. Florida 9.2%; 3. Texas 7%; 4. New York 6%; 5. Ohio 9.2%; 6. Pennsylvania 7.9%; 7. Michigan 9.9%; 8. Illinois 6.7%; 9. Virginia 11.1%; 10. North Carolina 9.5%.

The states with the highest percentages of people with English ancestry [New England states in bold] included: 1. Utah 29%; 2. Maine 21.5%; 3. Vermont 18.4%; 4. Idaho 18.1%; 5. New Hampshire 18.0%; 6. Wyoming 15.9%; 7. Oregon 13.2%; 8. Montana 12.7%; 9. Delaware 12.1%.

The English as discussed, were the first non-Native Americans to settle the eastern seaboard area that became the United States of America. The first permanent colonies were established at Jamestown, Virginia in 1607, Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay during 1620 to 1622 and also James Oglethorpe’s settlement in Savannah, Georgia, in 1732. 

‘English joint-stock companies, proprietors, and Crown officials sought to create a modified version of their native society in their American colonies. While many Englishmen came to America to exercise their own religion, and others sought liberation from the religious intolerance on both sides of the Atlantic – as did Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island – most English settlers were drawn by the economic opportunities and cheap land’ – S Hanft, English Americans

Between 1820 and 1930 over four million British immigrants chose the United States as their new home. They brought with them technological skills which helped turn the United States into a major industrial nation by the end of the nineteenth century. Cultural alignment and a common language allowed British immigrants to integrate more rapidly, giving rise to a unique Anglo-American culture. 

America and Britain in Prophecy, Raymond McNair, 1996: 

‘Sharon Turner (1768-1842) … says, “Europe has been populated by three great streams of population from the East… The earliest of these… comprised the Cimmerian and Celtic race. The second consisted of the Scythian, Gothic, and Germanic tribes; from whom most of the modern nations of continental Europe descended… third and most recent… Slavonian and Sarmatian nations… who established themselves in Poland, Bohemia, Russia, and their vicinities. 

It is from the first two generations of European population that the ancient inhabitants of England successively descended… The earliest of these that reached the northern and western confines of Europe, the Cimmerians and Celts, may be regarded as our first ancestors; and from the German or Gothic nations who formed, with the Scythians, the second great flood of population into Europe, our Anglo-Saxon and Norman ancestors proceeded”.’

Ezekiel 34:11-12

Amplified Bible

11 ‘For thus says the Lord God, “Behold, I Myself will search for My flock and seek them out. 12 As a shepherd cares for his sheep on the day that he is among his scattered flock, so I will care for My sheep; and I will rescue them from all the places to which they were scattered on a cloudy and gloomy day.’

Even though the tribes were so-called lost, they would be sifted through the nations and eventually allotted new homes. It was understood during the apostolic age that the tribes existed under different nomenclature. 

Colossians 3:11

English Standard Version

‘Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.’

The author of Colossians (refer article: The Pauline Paradox) confirms that the Israelites were known as barbarians and Sycthians as they migrated westwards through Europe. This verse is contrasting between Greeks, Jews and Israelite Scythians, whether ethnically or spiritually, because they had responded to a gospel preached ostensibly by Paul (or perhaps the apostles) – Article: The Pauline Paradox. They could be a slave physically, yet still free spiritually. These same Scythians were synonymous with the later peoples called Saxons. 

It was reported in 2010 “that when teams of geneticists led by Professor Bryan Sykes took DNA samples in the Celtic regions of Britain they discovered ancestries in the Caucasus, which lay within ancient Scythia, and Mediterranean Europe”. 

For the most common variant of the Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3 the Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database has DYS389i, ii values of 13 and 29, and DYS385a, b values of 11 and 14. This Haplotype differs by just one step upward on the most quickly mutating marker. This Haplotype is very interesting, from the perspective of the YHRD database, because most of the top frequencies are not in Europe but in the United States. Of the top twenty, twelve are among United States populations. Two are Hispanic samples, three are African-American and the rest are European American. 

These samples congregate in areas of the United States settled by English, Scottish, Irish, German and French immigrants. This accords with the Western European origin of the AMH. The Republic of Ireland and London in England appear among the top ten European frequencies, along with four separate locations in The Netherlands. Although descendants would have likely acquired this Haplotype through British ‘Celtic’ ancestry, the multiple hits in the Netherlands suggest a Saxon origin is more than likely. 

This confirms observations made by the late Raymond McNair and others that those immigrants who arrived in America, were somehow different from other Europeans such as the Germans who lived nearby, but who stayed behind in Europe. This physical evidence supports the proposition that Americans of Western European origin are different compared to the peoples they left behind in England, Ireland and Germany and that they are in fact a unique tribe of the sons of Jacob. In this case, the tribe of Joseph and his sons Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh. 

Based upon the information above on Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3, immigration and other data, Raymond G Helmer concluded: ‘In short – haplotype R1b came to the United States from exactly the immigrants that we would expect to carry it’ – R G Helmer, The Blood of Mankind – Part III The Blood of America. 

Another group who joined the great story of the United States were the Irish, with the great potato famine of the late 1840s, early 1850s sparking mass migration from Ireland. Between 1820 and 1920, some 4.5 million Irish are believed to have moved to the United States and settled in large cities like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco. Currently, almost ten percent (9.7%) of the total population of the United States claim Irish ancestry, some 32.5 million people compared with a total population of nearly seven million for the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland today (figures include Scots-Irish). Irish ancestry citizens of note include John F Kennedy and Neil Armstrong.

Other White and European peoples on the 2020 census include Italian (5.1%), French (3.0%) and Polish (3.0%) ancestry. One of the most influential nationalities to migrate in large numbers to the United States were the Italians. Between 1880 and 1920, more than 4 million Italian immigrants arrived in the United States forming ‘Little Italys’ wherever they went. Italians brought their cuisine, culture and entertainment to the United States. A further large wave of Italian immigrants arrived in the country following World War II. 

Historically, along with the English, the French colonised North America first and most successfully in the North East along the border areas of Quebec and in the south around New Orleans and Louisiana. The largest of the Slavic speaking groups to live in the United States, were Polish Americans, who were some of the earliest Eastern European colonists to the New World. Up to 2.5 million Poles arrived in the United States between the mid-nineteenth century and World War I, flocking to the largest industrial cities of New York, Buffalo, Cleveland, Milwaukee and Chicago. 

According to the 2020 Census, the largest ‘non-white’ minority group is the Hispanic and Latino American peoples comprising 18.7% of the total population. Dominated by Mexican descent at 10.29%. Other Latinos include Puerto Rican 1.49%, Cuban 0.57% and the remainder at 6.35%. From 1990 to 2000, the number of people who claimed Mexican ancestry almost doubled in size. 

Those with Mexican ancestry are most common along the Southwestern border of the United States and they are the largest ancestry in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Phoenix. In many states, the Hispanic population doubled between the 2000 and 2010 census. In New Mexico, Hispanics outstripped whites for the first time, reaching forty-six per cent compared to forty per cent. 

While Hispanic communities cover a swath of states from California to Texas, American Indians are more dispersed, with pockets of populations in states including Arizona, New Mexico, Montana and the Dakotas, with a higher concentration of Alaska Natives in Alaska of the total 0.7% they comprise of the American population. The Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders account for 0.2% of the population. 

The second biggest minority group is African-American at 12.1%. Black or African-American is a term for citizens of the United States who have ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa. The majority of African Americans are descended from slaves from West and Central Africa and have become an integral part of the story of the United States, gaining the right to vote with the 15th amendment in 1870, but struggling with their civil rights for at least another century – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Predominantly living in the south of the nation where they were brought to work on the cotton plantations and as slaves in the late eighteenth to mid-nineteenth centuries; Black Americans also have sizeable communities in the Chicago area of Illinois and in Detroit, Michigan. 

The third biggest minority group is Asian American at 5.9%. It comprises Chinese 1.2%; Filipino 1.1%; Indian 1.0%; Vietnamese 0.5% and other Asians at 2.1%. Finally, Middle Eastern peoples according to the 2010 Census accounted for 3.2% of the total population, of which there were Arab 0.54%; Iranian 0.1501%; Armenian 0.1537%; and Jewish at 2.11%. 

The United States has its roots as a welcoming homeland for immigrants, though that hasn’t always been the case. As waves of new arrivals flooded United States shores in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a movement to restrict who was allowed into the country took hold as well. In 1882, Congress enacted the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first major federal law to put immigration limits in place and the only one in American history aimed at a specific nationality. It came into being in response to fears primarily on the West Coast, that an influx of Chinese immigrants was weakening economic conditions and lowering wages. This law was extended in 1902. 

Other laws followed. For instance the Immigration Act of 1917, which created an Asiatic Barred Zone to restrict immigration from East Asia and the Emergency Quota Act of 1921, which limited the number of immigrants from any country to three percent of those people from that country who had been living in the United States as of 1910. The 1924 Immigration Act capped the number of immigrants from a particular country at two percent of the population of that country already living in the United States in 1890. This favoured immigrants from northern and western European countries like Great Britain over immigrants from southern and eastern European countries such as Italy. 

It prevented any immigrant ineligible for citizenship from coming to America. Since laws already on the books prohibited people of any Asian origin from becoming citizens they were completely barred entry. The law was revised in 1952, though retained the quota system based on country of origin in the United States population and still only allowed low quotas for Asian nations. 

‘Speaking to the American Committee on Italian Migration in June 1963, President Kennedy cited the “nearly intolerable” plight of those who had family members in other countries who wanted to come to the U.S. and could be useful citizens, but were being blocked by “the inequity and maldistribution of the quota numbers.” Two years later, in signing into law a replacement system that established a uniform number of people allowed entry to the United States despite national origin, President Lyndon B Johnson said it would correct “a cruel and enduring wrong in the conduct of the American nation.”

As discussed in length in the preceding chapter (Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes) it is next to impossible to find studies on the European component of the English speaking nations outside of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Though an excellent study is the one presented by Richard Morrill. 

Morrill touches upon the lack of research to draw upon. It is recommended that Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, are read prior to the next section in this chapter. What is proposed is that the core American, whether they be descended from Manasseh or Ephraim will have variations in their paternal and maternal Haplogroups, showing they are similar yet distinct from other English speaking, Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples. 

The key Y-DNA Haplogroup for the male descendants of Jacob is R1b (U106, U198, M529, M222). We would expect to find mutations of the same sub-clades and similar ratios within the British and Irish descended American peoples. 

Race, Ancestry, and Genetic Composition of the U.S. Richard Morrill, Professor Emeritus of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Washington, 2015 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Race and ancestry, or countries/peoples of origin, are popular topics, with large amounts of data attempting to help us understand the ethnic nature of the country. In this paper I attempt a summary description of the intersections of race, ancestry, and genome, at the state level, but I hasten to emphasize that the “findings” are tentative, highly uncertain, and based on astoundingly unreliable data. I hope some readers may point the way to better data or safer interpretations.

Table 1 presents a summary of numbers of people by “race” by broad ancestral/ethnic or countries of origin together with the main Y-DNA (male) genetic haplogroups associated with the racial and ancestral groups. [Note: No figures have been altered in Tables 1, 2 or 3. Certain words in the cells have been edited for clarity and accuracy, though not to change any meaning].

The haplogroups are male individuals who share a particular mutation or common male ancestor up to 50,000 years ago. All this is uncertain and speculative, for these reasons. The race and ancestral identifications are self-reported, and subject to lying as well as ignorance. But we still can make beautiful detailed maps, down to the county level! The numbers of persons with good DNA analyses are too few to permit highly confident estimates at useful levels of geography. But let’s see what we have.’

Table 1Race, Ancestry, Haplogroups

GroupNumber (millions)Ancestry groupNumber (millions)Haplogroups
White215









White, non-Hispanic192England, Scotland, Ireland87R1bI


Germany50R1bI


Scandinavia10IR1b


France & Belgium12R1b


Italy16R1bJ


Eastern Europe16R1aI,J,N


Balkans, Near east2J, G






White Hispanic23Mexico16R1b


Central America, Caribbean7R1b






African40

E






Asian14Moderate white admixtureO






Native American34US, AK5QR1b


Latin America29







Pacific Islander0.4Hawaii white admixture
up to 50%






Mixed9


M

‘Well, some 215 million people are probably mainly white (69%), of which 192 million (61%) are self-identified non-Hispanic white. The difference of 23 million are people who identify as white and Hispanic. About 40 million identify as Black or African-American, although there is probably an admixture of 20 percent or more of “whiteness”. Up to 14 million identify as of Asian origin, but as many as 1 million may be white in genetics and appearance, e.g. people from Afghanistan, NW India or West Pakistan. Finally less than 1 million identify as Pacific Islanders.’

We have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, the identity of the Indian and Pakistani peoples from Hamitic, or equatorial descent. They are not descended from European or western peoples via Shem. The Latino-Hispano peoples of the Americas are a mix of Aram, from Shem; Tiras from Japheth; Mizra from Ham; and Canaan – Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America.

Morrill: ‘This leaves a large number of 34 million who identify as all or partly Native American, including about 5 million Alaskan or US Native American, about half of whom are clearly Native American, but about half of whom appear to be and are probably genetically mostly white. Then 29 million are “Mexican” or Caribbean, etc., not a race, but a perceived or actual combination of Spanish (some Portuguese) and Native Americans, from the US southwest, central America, the Caribbean, and South America. Even though these people legitimately identify as a mix of Native and Spanish, most are genetically “white”.

Ancestry, country of origin, or ethnicity are even harder categories. The complexity is incredible. Not only have the “countries” changed again and again over the last few centuries, but persons’ stated identities, which can be multiple, are often bewildering, because of centuries of mixing, often with people who may not know their heritage. For example, some 20 million identify as “American” which is perfectly reasonable, if they are descended from early immigrants (1620 to 1820). People also do reasonably identify with more than one country/people, but these combinations are not tabulated, and it is difficult to claim accuracy from the data on ancestry. Finally, most of our ancestries are European countries, but we know from both history and genetic analysis that people have mingled and moved within “Europe” for thousands of years.’

This is where Haplogroups and their sub-clades are key as they point towards a European origin that is either more British (Irish), Germanic (Benelux), Scandinavian, French, Italian, Iberian, Baltic or Slavic.

Morrill: ‘Given these warnings, what do we almost know? The largest groupings of non-Hispanic whites [are] first the

English-Scottish-Irish at some 87 million, 28% of the population, followed by

Germans (including Dutch, Austrian, Swiss) at about 50 million, and

Scandinavians at 10 million.

Others from Western Europe include 16 million from Italy and probably 12 million from France.

Eastern Europe is the origin of about 16 million, including 9 million from Poland, 3.5 million from Russia, and 1.5 million from both Hungary and Czechoslovakia, and over 1 million from Greece. About 2 million are from the eastern Balkans and the Middle East.’

A high percentage of those people claiming German, Dutch and Scandinavian ancestry are likely the same peoples as the British and Irish. A proportion of the French, if they originated from northwestern France may also be included. 

Morrill: ‘As discussed above, self-identified Hispanic whites number some 23 million, people with an African origin perhaps 40 million, of an Asian origin, 13 million, then up to 34 million as from Native American or Native-American-Spanish admixture. Much has been learned about the genetic evolution of humans and of their complex migration… across the globe. Since the majority of Americans are of European ancestry, the genome story of Europe translates to the genetic structure of the United States. Table 2 summarizes the numbers of persons by haplogroup estimated for the US population. In Table 1 I added an estimate of the haplogroups associated with the racial-ancestral combinations. These are tentative and will be worked on further.’  

Table 2Major haplogroups
GroupPopulation% of populationAreas
R1b15650Western Europe
E4314Africa
I4413Central Europe
R1a166Eastern Europe
J145Southeast Europe & Near East
G124West Asia
O103Asia
Q93Native American
N20.7Baltic, Siberia
M0.50.2Pacific Island

‘The relevant haplogroups are:

  • E… still dominant in Africa, and the many descendant groups… equally old
  • F, which developed in south Asia (India-Pakistan)… All F subgroups seem to have differentiated in the same hearth area (India to the Caucasus)…
  • G occurs in modest numbers in Italy, Turkey and the Balkans
  • N in the Baltic countries and Siberia,
  • I divided into I1, still strongly Scandinavian and I2 in south Italy and the west Balkans
  • J in Greece and the Middle East (includes most Jews).
  • R1b… Europe, dominant from Italy through France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium on through England and Ireland (plus North Africa).
  • R1a is strongest in Eastern Europe (Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Russia)
  • O, Asian
  • Q, Native American

In the tables and maps I distinguish between the R1B peoples dominantly English, German or French-Italian, and an R1bh population, which is the self-reported American Hispanic population…’

Haplogroup G is an old paternal Haplogroup from the line of Shem. It is found predominantly in the men of the Caucasus region, such as in Georgia. Haplogroup N is an intermediate Haplogroup from the line of Japheth and found in European men – for example the Finns – through admixture. Meanwhile Haplogroup E is an ancient mutation inherited from Canaan and indicative of Berbers and sub-Saharan Africans. European men who carry E1b1b have had a paternal African ancestor.

While Morrill is correct regarding Haplogroup J, it is important to appreciate that J firstly splits into J1 and J2 and secondly is indicative of men descended from Ham. Haplogroup J1 found in Middle Eastern men (Arabs) and J2 in Southwest Asia (Pakistan). Those men in Iran, Turkey, Greece and who are Jewish, carry Haplogroup J as a result of intermixing.

Morrill: ‘How does this translate to US states (besides with difficulty)? The estimates are based on the self-reported ancestry of people by states and related to the haplogroups of those ancestries. Please see Table 3 and three maps of states the classification is based on the top 2 or 3 relevant haplogroups. [Hawaii] is unique as the only state with a dominant O, Asian, group, and the District of Columbia as the only area dominated by E (African origin).

Four states, KS, ME, NH, and WV are most strongly just R1b (West European – English, German and Italian-French). The largest number of states, 12, the historic south, plus MO, are primarily R1b and secondarily E. Six states are also strong in R1b and E, but also in R1a, eastern Europe, IN, MD, MI, OH, NY (also has Hispanic and Jewish), and PA. Somewhat similar are IL and NJ (notice that many of these are contiguous), with R1b, E, and R1bh.’

Estimated Haplogroups for US states





StateDominant groupShare2nd (share)3rd (share)4th (share)
R1b EnglishR1b GermanR1b French-Italian
ALR1b50E 25


3884
AKR1b56Q 13I 7R1a 6
28217
AZR1b53R1bh 25E 7R1a 6
28178
ARR1b70E 13


38284
CAR1b37R1bh 30O 14E 7R1a519117
COR1b68R1bh 16R1a 6I 6
332510
CTR1b76R1a 15


341329
DER1b69E 14


381813
DCE43R1b 31


1786
FLR1b52R1bh 20E 15R1a8J 5301210
GAR1b50E 30


3794
HIO 40
R1b  22M 16

1318
IDR1b70I 8


41227
ILR1b56E 15R1bh 12R1a 6
27229
INR1b69E 7R1a 6

37275
IAR1b81I>10


33435
KSR1b70



35323
KYR1b71E 7


50174
LAR1b55E 25


24922
MER1b97



561031
MDR1b53E 24R1a 8

29168
MAR1b80R1a 8


42830
MIR1b69E 14R1a 11J 5
302712
MNR1b68I 16 +R1a 8

23387
MSR1b44E 28


3275
MOR1b74E 12


38297
MTR1b78I 11Q 7

40308
NER1b79R1a 11I 9

32416
NVR1b51R1bh 20


271410
NHR1b96



501037
NJR1b58E 17R1bh 13R1a >12J 8261319
NMR1b55R1bh 35Q >10

33175
NYR1b56E 15R1a 10R1bh 9J 7261317
NCR1b55E 20


36127
NDR1b72I>10R1a 9

19467
OHR1b66E 12R1a >10

28299
OKR1b55Q 10E 7

34174
ORR1b67I 9


36238
PAR1b77R1a 11E 10

342914
RIR1b89R1a 7


38645
SCR1b53E 28


37115
SDR1b70I 20?Q 9R1a6
25405
TNR1b59E 17


43124
TXR1b49R1bh 30E 13

221215
UTR1b65I 13R1bh 12

44156
VTR1b93R1a 5


501231
VAR1b56E 20


37136
WAR1b63I >10O 7R1bh 6
33228
WVR1b73



45217
WVR1b77I >10R1a >10

24458
WYR1b80Q 5I >5

43298

Morrill has separated R1b into four groups: Hispanic, English (western), German (central) and French (southern). Constant readers will be conversant with these groups. For new readers to the subject, the phylogenetic tree below delineates the prominent R1b mutations.

Thus the Hispanic R1b derives from the R1b exhibited by male ancestors from Spain and Portugal: the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250). Whereas the R1b carried by French, Swiss and Italian men is the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28).

The R1b indicative of North West Europeans and carried by German men is the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21). What Morrill terms an English R1b, is in fact also U106. Though if one were to be more specific, many English men possess a mutation derived from U106, the West Germanic U198.

Perhaps an addition to the four groups proposed by Morrill would be the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21), found in Irish, Scottish and Welsh men.

‘The [first] map includes a set with the R1b and I1 combination (high in Scandinavian also), ID, IA, and OR, a related pair with a significant R1bh presence, UT and WA, which also has a sizeable O population. Also related are MT and SD, with R1b, I but also Q (Native American). States with R1b, I and also R1a (Eastern Europe) include MN, NE, ND and WI. Three states have R1b, then Q or Q and I:  OK<WY and AK (the highest Q share at 13%).’

‘The [second] map shows first four states with R1b and R1a, all in New England: CT, MA, RI and VT. CO and NV have the combination of R1b and R1bh.’ 

‘CA [California] is quite complex, with only a modest R1b share [Western European], a very large r1bh share [Hispanic], and also a sizeable O [East Asian and Polynesian] and then E [African-American] share. AZ and NM also have R1b, R1bh, but also Q (Native American).  FL is also complex, with R1b, R1bh, but also E, R1a and J.’

California shows a higher Hispanic element in its population as well as Black and Asian compared to European stock. If we contrast New Hampshire and New Mexico with each other; New Mexico has 55% R1b and 35% R1bh as indicative of its Latino element being 35% of the State’s population and 10% Q of its Native American component, either separate or part of the Hispanic proportion. The R1b split shows that its white population have 5% southern European influence; 17% Central European; and 33% Western European. 

New Hamphire on the other hand reveals its beginnings with purely European stock of 96% with little or no Black and Hispanic influence. Its R1b split shows that 10% of its population have central European ancestry; 37% have southern European heritage; and 50% have western European or British and Irish descent. 

The state of Maine has the highest western European R1b percentage at 56%. Rhode island has the highest southern European R1b percentage at 45%; and North Dakota has the highest central European R1b influence at 46%. Connecticut appears to have the highest level of eastern European R1a at 15%; New Mexico the highest Latino R1bh at 35%; and Washington DC the highest level of African-American E1b1b at 43%. 

Morrill: ‘I also present a few maps of ancestry combinations. The shares of English (plus Scot and Irish), German (plus Austria, Netherlands and Switzerland) and French-Italian (plus Belgium) – all part of the R1b group, are also shown in Table 3. English and German (19 states) and German and English (7) are the most common ancestries of Americans (Map 4). English and German by themselves dominate most in KS and WV. Scandinavian is added to English-German for ID, OR and WA (which also adds Asian), and to German-English, for IA, MN, ND, SD, then together with East European for NE and WI. These 11 states are the most “northern European”. Native Americans are added most for MT, OK, WY and especially AK (now 15 states) and then a Hispanic component to CO and UT.’

‘The English-German and German-English sets include 8 more states with a sizeable Black population, AR, DE, IL, IN, KY, MI and MO, and OH, then PA with a sizeable French-Italian and East European population as well. The full set is also a contiguous bloc across much of the north, and crossing into the south central. Not surprising (Map 5) is the English Hispanic (AZ, NV) and Hispanic-English, (NM, plus CA and TX, with additional Asian and German, and Black and French-Italian, respectively), covering the southwest, plus FL, adding a Black population). An English-Black combination covers the rest of the southern portion of the country – LA (Black English, French), then AL. GA, MS, NC, SC, TN and even MD.’

‘This leaves, (Map 6) besides HI and DC, a northeastern set of 8 states with a distinctive combination of English and French-Italian, CT, ME, NH, RI, VT, plus MA, adding E European) and complex NY, adding Black and East European. The entire mosaic reveals the fascinating stories of immigration and subsequent migration, still ongoing and becoming ever more complex.’

Regarding Haplogroups, constant readers will recognise the tables below as we conclude this chapter. Newer readers are encouraged to read Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes, in helping perhaps to gain more from the following material.

Since we lack major MtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroup studies for British Canadian and American citizens; the main mtDNA Haplogroups are reproduced below for the British, Irish and closely related peoples of western Europe.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2       U4       U5       T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Ireland            44            6            11        12           5          1          8          1

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England          45             3           12          8          6          2          9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6          2         6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

Wales               60           4            15          8           1                     4          2

One would expect Canadians and Americans of Celtic-Saxon-Viking stock to be somewhere within this grouping of family nations descended principally from Abraham; which includes Keturah, Ishmael, Esau and Jacob. The question, is where? Possibly between Ireland and Scotland for Americans and for Canadians, between Scotland and England.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase.

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

It is here that we would obtain an indication of how German the migrants from Germany are in the United States, for if they are German as in descending from Ishmael, the dominant R1b the males would likely carry is U106. If though they are from the tribe of Joseph, then one would expect these German men to carry more recent mutations from R1b-U106. Until more research is conducted, or studies made available, this will be a tantalising question remaining to be answered. 

We have kept a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations studied. 

Turkey            M269   14%  –  U106   0.4%

Slovenia          M269   17%  –  U106      4%

Russia             M269   21%  –  U106   5.4%

Poland             M269   23%  –  U106     8% 

Ukraine           M269   25%  –  U106     9%

Austria             M269   27%  –  U106   23%

Czech               M269   28%  –  U106   14% 

Denmark         M269    34%  –  U106   17%

Germany          M269   43%  –  U106   19%

USA                  M269   46%  –  U106    15%

France              M269   52%  –  U106     7%

Italy                  M269    53%  –  U106    6%

Netherlands    M269   54%  –  U106   35%

England           M269   57%  –  U106   20%

Swiss                 M269   58%  –  U106   13%

Ireland             M269   80%  – U106      6%

With the addition of the United States we can see that its Central European component of R-U106 matches the most closely, the Czechs, Swiss, Danes, Germans and English. Its broadly western R1b Haplotype R-M269 percentage, most closely matches ironically, Germany, then France, Italy, the Netherlands and England. Overall, the United States matches Germany the most closely. This is an interesting finding and a little surprising perhaps that it does not match England more closely?

The question, is whether this is because the white, western European, British and Irish driven R1b percentages for Americans are truly more aligned with Germany, or whether they very probably, show admixture, that only a comprehensive study of British and Irish descended Americans could answer the question… if there are with England for instance, comparable R-U106 mutations.

The blurring of the two near related streams of male DNA exhibited by the English and Germans is reflected in the following similarities.

The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in English men. 

Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry. 

Interestingly in comparison, 15% of American men carry R1b-U106.

Y-chromosome haplogroups in US populations, Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog, 2005 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘For the US population as a whole: The most common haplogroup is R-M269 (37.8%), which is found in all of the ethnic groups. This haplogroup predominates in Western European populations.

E-P1 [E1b], the second most frequent haplogroup in the U.S. (17.7%), is the most common haplogroup in West African populations [V38 – E1b1a]. It is found at high frequencies in our AA samples, and at lower frequencies in HA samples from the Eastern U.S.

Three haplogroups that originate in Northern and Western European populations include I-P30 [I1, M253] (6.1%), the third most common haplogroup in our U.S. sample, I-P19 [I, M170] (2.8%) and I-P37* [I2a1, M438] (1.6%).

Haplogroups that likely originate in Eastern and Southern* European populations are also present in our U.S. database, including R-M17 [R1a1a] (3.4%), E-M78 [E1b1b1a, L539] (2.4%), G-P15 [G2a] (2.4%), and J-M172 [J2] (1.5%).

The fourth and fifth most frequent haplogroups in our database, Q-P36 (5.9%) and Q-M3 (5.8%), along with C-P39 (1.5%), are founding Native-American Y chromosomes. These haplogroups are frequent in our NA and HA samples, and are found at low frequency in our AA, EA, and SA samples. Asian-derived chromosomes, primarily in haplogroups O and N, are extremely rare in all but our SA sample.’

This article presents an overall picture of Y-DNA Haplogroups which is helpful in part, yet still lacking the specific R1b sub-Haplogroups we require for the original Israelite core of the American male demographic.

Remember, it is Haplogroups G, I1 (I2), R1a and R1b which are exclusively associated with Shem’s descendants and it is R1b-U106 which is indicative of a heritage from Abraham; whether by his six sons with Keturah; his son Ishmael; and importantly, his son Isaac.

Combining this information with the more recent percentage for R-M269 and adding to the table below gives an idea of where the United States sits in relation to its brother and cousin nations, if not a precisely comprehensive view.

                           R1b      J      E1b1b       G         R1a        I

Ireland               81       2           2           1            3        12

N Ireland           77       2                                      2        20     

Wales                 74    0.5           4           3           1         16

Scotland            73        2           2       0.5           9         14

England             67        4           2           2          5         21

Flanders             61        5           5           4          4        20

France                59        8           8          6           3        16

Netherlands      49        4           4          5           4        25

United States    46        2       [21]          2           3         11 

Germany            45        5           6          5         16        22

Italy                    39       19         14          9           4        10

Sephardim        30       28        19          8           4        12

The five countries of Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the European continent. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. A reflected scenario of these factors in England is indicative of the United States, which has also experienced a great inpouring of waves of emigrants over a period of three hundred years. 

While the demise of the United States of America is both foretold and irreversible, it has at least another century or more before the gradual fading into the shadows becomes noticeable enough to be alarming for its citizens.

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 90:

‘For thirty years it has been fashionable to predict the imminent or ongoing decline of the USA. This is as wrong now as it was in the past. The planet’s most successful country is about to become self-sufficient in energy, it remains the pre-eminent economic power and it spends more on research and development for its military than the overall military budget of all the other NATO countries combined. Its population is not ageing as in Europe and Japan… and… in… [2013] Shanghai University listed what its experts judged the top twenty universities of the world: seventeen were in the USA. The Prussian statesman Otto von Bismarck… said more than a century ago that “God takes special care of drunks, children and the United States of America.”

It appears still to be true.’

As Mark Twain quipped in ironic parallel with the America set before us today:

“Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”

God Bless America…

The final chapter in The Noachian Legacy concentrates on the most written about son of Jacob, the tribe of Dan. Yet in all the articles and books dedicated to him, not one actually reveals Dan’s modern identity.

… and [they] who have lived wisely and well will shine brilliantly, like the cloudless, star-strewn night skies. And those who put others on the right path to life will glow like stars forever. This is… for your eyes and ears only… [a] secret. Put the book under lock and key until the [time of the] end. In the interim there is going to be a lot of frantic running around, [by people] trying to figure out what’s going on.

Daniel 12:3-4 The Message

“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”

Mahatma Gandhi

“With great power there must also come – great responsibility.”

Spider Man, Amazing Fantasy No. 15 – 1962

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

Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes

Chapter XXXII

We have learned the identities of half the sons of Jacob. So far, all have been located in the British Isles. The other half have migrated to the New World and beyond. It is recommended that Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes are read prior to this chapter.

We have addressed the over extension by biblical identity researchers, when defining the sons of Jacob and concluding that Joseph represents all the English speaking peoples; while then attributing the other tribes to nations in northwest Europe. Yet these nations are invariably the descendants of Abraham and Keturah, Lot or even Ishmael.

Certain tribes were prophesied to not just live in the North and west from Canaan as the British and Irish do today – Isaiah 49:12, Jeremiah 31:10. Two were predicted to live in ‘the midst’ of the earth, one was to live in ‘the Southwest’ and another was described as a ‘great southern land.’ 

Historically, biblical identity adherents have been consistent in identifying Zebulun, Issachar’s younger brother and twin of Dinah as the Dutch of the Netherlands. The description of ports, ships and trade has led to this conclusion. We have addressed the Netherlands previously (refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia), for the Dutch descend from Abraham’s son Midian.

Issachar has been linked to Switzerland due its landlocked position and watch making expertise, though the predominant identification favoured for Issachar has been with Finland. As we learned in Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans, Finland is not descended from Abraham or his two brothers, let alone Jacob; but rather possibly from Joktan, the brother of Peleg or more likely judging by Haplogroup and autosomal DNA, from Arphaxad’s other sons Anar or Ashcol. 

The Swiss descend from Haran, Abraham’s brother – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. A key point we will find in identifying Issachar is that they are geographically adjacent with Zebulun and therefore to be found together. A further pairing to add to those we have highlighted already with Judah and Benjamin; Simeon and Levi; Reuben and Gad. Thus, wherever one is located the other will be next to them. The Netherlands and Finland – and likewise the Netherlands and Switzerland – being separated, are very far apart and could not fulfil this requirement, geographically, genetically or linguistically. Leading biblical identity teacher Yair Davidy comments on the prevailing, yet inaccurate view: 

‘Finland was settled by peoples from the Israelite tribes of Gad [Ireland], Simeon [Wales], and especially Issachar. The earliest written histories of Finland repeat the tradition that they were descended from the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Descendants of several Israelite tribes are to be found in Switzerland [Haran]. Issachar judging from tribal names and national characteristics prevails.’ 

Historically, Asher has been attributed principally with Belgium because of the blessing of fine cuisine or misleadingly pastries and more recently as Scotland and Ireland. Naphtali has been attributed to Sweden because of a love of freedom, as well as with Norway. Yair Davidy adds: ‘Norway was colonized by Naphtalite Huns and other groups of Naphtali.’ We will discover that Yair Davidy is correct initially and that these Naphtalites continued their migration into Britain and Ireland and then travelled further afield. 

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

‘Issachar is compared to a “large-boned ass,” Jacob continues: “For he saw a resting-place that it was good, and the land that it was pleasant; and he BOWED HIS SHOULDER TO BEAR, and became a SERVANT UNDER “ASSWORK.” (Genesis 49:14-15.) An ass is not the most intelligent of animals, but it is a willing worker. Such is Finland. Finland is the ONLY nation that has voluntarily taken the full responsibility of her debts. She is today paying off a huge indemnity to Russia. Her land is pleasant and good, not extraordinarily rich. 

According to Deuteronomy 33:19 she derives wealth from fishing and from hidden treasures of the sand… gigantic peat bogs… the finest sand for glass-making. Issachar is not a colonizing people they dwell pastorally “in tents,” said Moses.’

Not the most gracious of comments, though the intent is correct. But, we are searching for a British and Irish descended, or Celtic-Saxon-Viking people who have shouldered a burden of some kind. They will also be dwelling with Zebulun.

Hoeh: ‘Zebulun settled in Holland (The Netherlands). Zebulun dwell at the “shore of the sea, and he shall be a shore for ships, and his flank shall be upon Zidon” a Gentile country. Moses said: “rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out.” She takes also treasures from the sea and the sand, Zebulun, then, is a colonizing people. She is not a pillaging people as Benjamin.’ 

Hoeh is accurate on the colonising aspect of Zebulun as well as drawing attention to their dwelling by Zidon. In the Bible, the territory which included Canaanites and Midianites was called Sidon – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil – and is fulfilled in modern day South Africa.

Recall, we spent considerable time looking at the connection between the Kenites, the Hivites, the Midianite Dutch and their ancient Phoenician association with the city of Sidon. As a consequence, we have now located Zebulun and Issachar.

By a strange twist of irony, the very identity ascribed to Zebulun by identity researchers is Holland and it is predominantly Dutch descendants who are entwined with the tribes of Zebulun and Issachar today. Thus Zebulun comprises the British element – and Issachar – within South Africa. Issachar has also dwelt in Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.

Herman Hoeh: ‘Asher “his bread shall be fat and he shall yield royal dainties” (Genesis 49:20). This peculiar expression could have reference alone to Belgium and the kindred state Luxembourg. From Belgium have come the finest Flemish paintings, the royal tapestries which graced the halls of kings, fine cut diamonds, porcelain and Belgian lace. Belgium and Luxembourg are blessed above many [other sons] of Jacob “Blessed be Asher above sons; let him be the favoured of his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil” prosperity. Iron and brass shall [be] thy bars; and as thy days, so shall they riches increase. Because of uranium, Belgium’s prosperity will continue to grow.’

Hoeh is correct to highlight Asher’s blessing being disproportionate to his brothers; though still tertiary to those of Joseph and Judah the birthright and sceptre recipients. The blessings are far more extensive, than the nation of Belgium possesses. The people of Belgium being descended from Abraham’s grandsons Sheba and Dedan – refer Chapter XVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

Hoeh: ‘Nepthali represents Sweden “satisfied with favor, full with the blessings of the Lord.” She is compared to a prancing hind or deer and “giveth goodly words” (Genesis 49:21). From Sweden, with a well-balanced economy, come the Nobel prizes in token to great world accomplishments. Sweden, during two world wars and the recent trouble in Palestine, sent her emissaries to speak words of conciliation and peace. 

The promise by Moses to possess “the sea and the south” is applicable both to ancient Nepthali and modern Sweden: notice the position of the Sea of Galilee and Baltic relative to the position of this tribe. (It may be of interest to note that the word translated as ‘west’ regarding Napthali is also defined as roaring sea, which is how Herman Hoeh explained it. Sweden is basically on the west border of the Baltic Sea).’

Both Hoeh and Nickels who comments in the parentheses, have missed the reference to the South and West is from Canaan’s perspective. Therefore, the Baltic is a far cry from fulfilling this clue. As will become clear, Naphtali is the nation of New Zealand and Asher is Australia

Genesis 49:13-15

English Standard Version

13 “Zebulun shall dwell [H7931 – shakan: lodge] at the shore of the sea; he shall become a haven for ships, and his border [H3411 – yrekah: flank, quarters, recesses] shall be at [unto] Sidon.”

Regarding Jacob’s oracle, the New English Translation says that the verb ‘shakhan means “to settle,” but not necessarily as a permanent dwelling place. The tribal settlements by the sea would have been temporary and not the tribe’s territory.’ 

This is significant as since 1994 and the handing over of white control of South Africa’s political process to all South African’s, the British descended peoples from Zebulun in particular, have begun to migrate en mass to North America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and other countries.* We will shortly learn that this was predicted. 

Stats SA, July 2012:

‘… provided a breakdown of demographics, including the estimated shifts among different racial population groups. Black South African estimates increased… the country’s coloured population grew… [and] The Asian/Indian population group… South Africa’s white population, however, declined by 17,311 people between 2020 and 2021… Notably, while South Africa’s white population still maintains its proportionate make-up of the overall population, at 7.8%, this has steadily declined over the years, from 7.9% in 2019, 8.1% in 2016, and 9.0% in 2011. Stats SA pointed to emigration as a key factor in this declining trend.’

South Africa has a population of 60,799,352 people, thus the White population equates to 4,742,349 people. Of which an approximate sixty/forty split divides the Afrikaan speakers from the English as a first language. The British descended people account for approximately 1,896,939 people, less those who have left South Africa and Zimbabwe. In the past, the total White population was nearer eight million people and closer to fifteen to twenty percent of the population.

British Red Ensign used in South Africa until 1928

The Cape of Good Hope was a welcome stop in any journey sailing past Africa, east or west. The cape originally was called the Cape of Storms by the Portuguese explorer Bartolomeu Dias in the 1480s.

Cape Town

Encyclopaedia: ‘Cape Town is the legislative capital of South Africa. It is the country’s oldest city [founded in 1652] and the seat of the Parliament of South Africa. Cape Town is the country’s second-largest city by population, after Johannesburg… The city is known for its harbour… and for landmarks such as Table Mountain and Cape Point. 

Cape Town has been named the best city in the world, and world’s best city for [travellers], numerous times, including by The New York Times in 2014, Time Out in 2025, and The Telegraph for the past 8 years.

Genesis: 14 “Issachar is a strong donkey, crouching between the sheepfolds [saddle bags or two burdens]. 

15 He saw [H7200 – ra’ah: perceive, vision] that a resting place was good, and that the land was pleasant, so he bowed his shoulder to bear, and became a [tributary] servant at forced [slave] labor.”

The New English Translation comments – emphasis mine: 

‘The verb forms in this verse {“sees,” “will bend,” and “(will) become”} are preterite; they is used in a rhetorical manner, describing the future as if it had already transpired. The oracle shows that the tribe of Issachar will be willing to trade liberty for the material things of life. Issachar would work (become a slave laborer) for the Canaanites, a reversal of the oracle on Canaan’ – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator.

The descendants of Issachar have in the main, chosen to stay in the Republic of South Africa; with many having fled from Zimbabwe. The two burdens are the original Black (Canaanite) population and the (Hivite) Afrikaners, descended from Midian and the Kenites – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The connotation is that as Zebulun chose to live by the Sea, such as Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London and in Durban; Issachar has chosen to dwell inland and is thereby landlocked, like most of the Dutch Afrikaners in Bloemfontein, Pretoria, Johannesburg and by extension Zimbabwe. 

Johannesburg

Encyclopaedia: ‘Johannesburg [founded in 1886] is the most populous city in South Africa. With 5,538,596 people in the City of Johannesburg alone and over 14.8 million in the urban agglomeration, it is classified as a megacity and is one of the 100 largest urban areas in the world.

Johannesburg is the provincial capital of Gauteng, the wealthiest province in South Africa, and seat of the country’s highest court, the Constitutional Court. The city is located within the mineral-rich Witwatersrand hills, the epicentre of the international mineral and gold trade. The richest city in Africa by GDP and private wealth, Johannesburg functions as the economic capital of South Africa and is home to the continent’s largest stock exchange…’ 

Ezra 3:7

English Standard Version

‘So they gave money to the masons and the carpenters, and food, drink, and oil to the Sidonians [South Africa today] and the Tyrians [Brazil today] to bring cedar trees from Lebanon to the sea, to Joppa, according to the grant that they had from Cyrus king of Persia [Elam].’

South African flag from 1928 to 1994.

The flags in the centre are the Union Jack; The Orange Free State; and the South African Republic flag. The main flag is based on the flag of the Netherlands, before the orange (of William of Orange) was changed to red.

Deuteronomy 33:18-19

English Standard Version

18 And of Zebulun he said, “Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out* [H3318 – yatsa’: depart, pull out, spread], and Issachar, in your tents [at home]. 

19 They shall call peoples to their mountain [H2022 – har: hill country]; there they offer right [H6664 – tsedeq] sacrifices; for they draw [H3243 – yanaq: to suck] from the abundance [H8228 – shepha: resources] of the seas and the hidden [H2934 – taman: conceal, bury, secretly] treasures [H8226 – saphan: valuable, covered] of the sand.”

Notice Issachar and Zebulun are included together in both verses and are not receiving separate prophetic blessings; just different futures within the same prophecy by Moses. Much of South Africa is at high altitude. Johannesburg is some 5,600 feet above sea level on a plateau, where the air is thinner than the coast and it apparently takes an egg one minute longer to boil. The Hebrew word for right, tsedeq means ‘righteousness’ but also ‘just, justice’ and a ‘righteous cause.’ 

Particularly linked with ‘government’ and a ‘vindication’ against ‘controversy’ and ‘victory’ or ‘deliverance’ to bring about an ‘ethically right’ result. This remarkably parallels the monumental political changes in South Africa since 1994. The reference could also be pointing to a Messianic fulfilment.

Current Flag of South Africa 

Matthew 4:13-16 – Isaiah 9:1-2, 4

English Standard Version

13 ‘And leaving Nazareth [Christ] went and lived in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, 14 so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

‘But there will be no gloom for her who was in anguish. In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the latter time he has made glorious the way of the sea, the land beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.

15 “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, 16 the people dwelling in [deep] darkness have seen a great light, and for those dwelling [and walking] in the region and shadow of death, on them a light has dawned [shone].”

‘For the yoke of his burden, and the staff for his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, you have broken as on the day of Midian.’

The Messiah is speaking of Himself as a light in revealing the gospel of the Kingdom of God and He is also speaking of His return. Thus, we learn that at the time of the Son of Man’s second coming, either the earth has spun on its axis and the magnetic north and south poles have reversed; or the Lamb approaches Earth from the South. For this is where Zebulun (33.9249 S) and Naphtali (36 50’54.4596 S) reside today at a similar latitude in the southern hemisphere of the globe.

It is another coincidence that Midian is mentioned in verse four of chapter nine of Isaiah. Not only does Zebulun dwell with a branch of the Midianites in South Africa; New Zealand was discovered by the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman and named after the Dutch province of Zeeland derived from Sea-land, in 1642.

Southern Rhodesia flag 1924 to 1964

The prediction of mineral wealth from the soil is incredible in its fulfilment and not something that could be attributed to the Netherlands or Finland. Of the world’s top mineral producing countries, South Africa is an incredible number one and the mining powerhouse of the world. South Africa’s geographic location is in a continent that is considered the richest in biodiversity and natural resources and it abounds with mineral reserves which are estimated to be worth over $2.5 trillion dollars, according to World Mining Statistics

Flag of Rhodesia 1968 to 1979

This dominant African nation is the largest producer and exporter of important and high in demand minerals and gems in the world, such as platinum (accounting for nearly 50% of world production), diamonds of gem quality – as opposed to industrial quality of which only Australia, Russia, Zaire and Botswana produce more – chrome, manganese, vanadium and vermiculite. South Africa is the second largest producer of ilmenite, palladium, rutile and zirconium. South Africa is the world’s third largest coal exporter; fifth in the world for gold; and a huge producer of iron ore. In 2012, it overtook India to become the world’s third-biggest iron ore supplier to China – the world’s largest consumer of iron ore.

South Africa has the 40th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $410.3 billion in 2025.

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

  1. Gems, precious metals: US$35 billion 
  2. Ores, slag, ash: $18.6 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $10.7 billion 
  4. Mineral fuels including oil: $10.3 billion 
  5. Machinery including computers: $6.6 billion 
  6. Iron, steel: $6.3 billion 
  7. Fruits, nuts: $4.5 billion 
  8. Other chemical goods: $2.1 billion 
  9. Aluminum: $1.9 billion 
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $1.7 billion

Gems and precious metals was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 75.3% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel which rose 58.9%. South Africa’s shipments of mineral fuels including oil posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 49.51% year over year.’

Current Flag of Zimbabwe

Judges 5:14-15

English Standard Version

14 ‘… from Machir marched down the commanders, and from Zebulun those who bear [H4900 – mashak] the lieutenant’s staff [H7626 – shebet]; 15 the princes [chiefs, rulers] of Issachar came with Deborah, and Issachar faithful to Barak [from the tribe of Naphtali, Judges 4:6]; into the valley they rushed at his heels…’

When the majority of Israelite tribes – though not all as we have discovered earlier – aided the fourth Judge of Israel Deborah (1184-1144 BCE) in her war against Jabin the King of the Canaanites, both Zebulun and Issachar were enthusiastic in their support on the battlefield. The Hebrew word mashek means, ‘to draw’ as in a bow, ‘to march’, ‘to be tall.’ The Hebrew word shebet means, a ‘rod, staff, club, sceptre’ as in a ‘mark of authority’ and a ‘shaft of’ a ‘spear’ or ‘dart.’ Its wider application includes ‘literally a stick for punishing, writing, fighting, ruling’ and ‘walking.’ The verse could be paraphrased as: ‘… from Zebulun, those with military authority and competency.’

Rhodesian Coat of Arms 1924 to 1981

Notice two symbols on the Rhodesian Coat of Arms. Firstly, the prominent English Lion passant and secondly, Thistles of Scotland, showing the common familial tie with Judah and Benjamin. Even more significant is the pick axe, a tool used for digging and representative of mining; while also indicative of Issachar’s servitude.  

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘As a loyal British colony, Southern Rhodesia called up 5,500 young white men – a significant proportion of that age group in the country at the time – and sent them to fight for Britain on the Western front in France. During World war II, double that number served in the British forces, with eleven Rhodesian Air Force pilots given “ace” status… Rhodesia’s superb fighting force was never defeated militarily [raids against Mozambique and Zambia guerrilla forces], but this helped little when the demographic war had been lost.’

We have discussed the significant pairings of Jacob’s sons… some between blood brothers as with Simeon and Levi and now Issachar and Zebulun and other pairings between half-brothers, including Judah and Benjamin, Reuben and Gad and next, Asher and Naphtali. The final pairing are the sons of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The odd one out is Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

That said, the sagacious reader will have deduced that a case could be made for Judah and Simeon; Benjamin and Dan; with Levi the odd tribe.

2 Chronicles 30:18

English Standard Version

‘For a majority of the people, many of them from Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than as prescribed. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying, “May the good Lord pardon everyone…”

2 Samuel 24:6-7

English Standard Version

‘Then they came to Gilead, and to Kadesh in the land of the Hittites; and they came to Dan, and from Dan they went around to Sidon and came to the fortress of Tyre and to all the cities of the Hivites and Canaanites… 

1 Chronicles 12:38-40

English Standard Version

38 ‘All these, men of war, arrayed in battle order, came to Hebron with a whole heart to make David king over all Israel. Likewise, all the rest of Israel were of a single mind to make David king. 39 And they were there with David for three days, eating and drinking, for their brothers had made preparation for them. 40 And also their relatives, from as far as Issachar and Zebulun [2 Chronicles 30:10] and Naphtali, came bringing food on donkeys and on camels and on mules and on oxen, abundant provisions of flour, cakes of figs, clusters of raisins, and wine and oil, oxen and sheep, for there was joy in Israel.’

Coat of Arms of Zimbabwe 

These verses confirm the closeness between Zebulun and Issachar as one people; albeit spread in part, over two countries. The third passage highlights that in the past as it is today, Zebulun and Issachar with Naphtali, once lived the greatest distance northwards in Canaan, while today, South Africa and New Zealand are the furthest southwards below the equator.

Former South African Coat of Arms

Notice the more Dutch-Midianite looking Lion passant guardant, as opposed to an English one; though there is homage to seafaring and trade represented by the figure of Britannia and the anchor.

An interesting verse regarding Issachar.

1 Chronicles 12:32

English Standard Version

32 ‘Of Issachar, men who had understanding [H998 – biynah: ‘wisdom, knowledge’] of the times [H6256 – eth: ‘season, occasion’], to know [H3045 – yada: ‘percieve, understand’] what Israel ought to do [H6213 – asah: ‘offer, prepare’]…’

The Hebrew word for understanding means, ‘discernment, perfectly.’ The word for know means, ‘to discriminate, distinguish’ ‘to make known, declare.’ The Hebrew word for ought means, ‘to attend to, put in order, to observe, celebrate, appoint, ordain’ and ‘institute.’ The Tribe of Issachar were given the responsibility and skills to perform the function of regulating the calendar, so that the dates for the Holy Days, Sabbaths and New Moons were observed correctly. This was a function that in time (no pun intended), the Levitical priesthood took responsibility – refer articles: The Calendar Conspiracy; and The Sabbath Secrecy

Remarkably, in Cape Town, there is the southern suburb of Observatory where the world renowned South African Astronomical Observatory (SAAO) is situated, as well as the location of the McClean Dome. Another dome onsite houses the Victoria telescope, built in 1897. The Southern African Large Telescope (SALT) has the largest single optical telescope in the southern hemisphere based in Sunderland some two hundred and fifty miles to the North, though they conduct research in astronomy and astrophysics at SAAO. In the library are two clocks. The first shows normal South African time and the second shows sidereal time – ‘based on the Earth’s rate of rotation measured relative to the fixed stars – something like the time kept by a sundial, so roughly four minutes slower than an average day.’

South Africa’s Coat of Arms, including observations on its symbols

Genesis 30:17-20

English Standard Version

17 ‘And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son [in 1742 BCE]. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant [Zilpah] to my husband.”

So she called his name Issachar [there is reward, there is recompense].

19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son [1740 BCE]. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.”

So she called his name Zebulun [honour, dwelling].’

Genesis 46:13-15

English Standard Version

13 ‘The sons of Issachar: Tola, Puvah, Yob [Job], and Shimron.’ 

14 ‘The sons of Zebulun: Sered, Elon, and Jahleel.’

15 ‘These are the sons of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob in Paddan-aram, together with his daughter Dinah [Zebulun’s twin]…’

Recall in the article: Job, how Job’s second wife was possibly a descendant of Dinah. And here we see that Job is a family name in Dinah’s brother’s line. The name is also listed in Genesis 10:29 as a son of Joktan. The Book of Jasher refers to this Jobab of Genesis 10:29 and to the Job [Iob] listed here. 

Issachar

Book of Jasher 45:5-7: 

5 ‘… Issachar went to the land of the east, and… took [for himself a wife from]… the daughters of Jobab the son of [Joktan], the son of Eber; and Jobab the son of Yoktan had two daughters… and the name of the younger was Aridah.

6 … Issachar took Aridah, and… came to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house… 7 And Aridah bare unto Issachar Tola, Puvah, Job [Iob or Jashub, Numbers 26:24, 1 Chronicles 7:1] and Shomron, four sons…’

Issachar married an equivalent of an eastern European. The identity of Jobab is not clear, though an example of a Czech may not be far amiss* – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Recall, Levi married Aridah’s elder sister – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. The Book of Jubilees records Issachar’s wife’s name as Hezaqa.

Book of Jubilees 34:20-21

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives… the name of Issachar’s wife, Hezaqa: and the name of Zabulon’s wife, Ni’iman… and the name of Naphtali’s wife, Rasu’u, of Mesopotamia… and the name of Asher’s wife, ‘Ijona…’

The Book of Jasher continues regarding the wives of Naphtali, Asher and Zebulun.

Book of Jasher 45:9-10, 12-20

9 ‘… Naphtali went to Haran and took from thence [a daughter] of Amuram the son of Uz, the son of Nahor… 10… the name of the elder was Merimah… and Naphtali took Merimah… and brought [her] to the land of Canaan, to their father’s house. 11 And Merimah bare unto Naphtali Yachzeel, Guni, Jazer and Shalem, four sons…’

12 And Asher went forth and took Adon the daughter of Aphlal, the son of Hadad, the son of Ishmael, for a wife, and he brought her to the land of Canaan. 

13 And Adon the wife of Asher died in those days: she had no offspring; and it was after the death of Adon that Asher went to the other side of the river and took for a wife Hadurah the daughter of Abimael, the son of Eber, the son of Shem.

14 And the young woman was of a comely appearance, and a woman of sense, and she had been the wife of Malkiel the son [descendant] of Elam, the son of Shem. 15 And Hadurah bare a daughter unto Malkiel, and he called her name Serach, and Malkiel died after this, and Hadurah went and remained in her father’s house.

16 And after the death of the wife [of] Asher he went and took Hadurah for a wife, and brought her to the land of Canaan, and Serach her daughter he also brought with them, and she was three years old, and the damsel was brought up in Jacob’s house. 17 And the damsel was of a comely appearance, and [Serach] went in the sanctified ways of the children of Jacob; she lacked nothing, and Yahweh gave her wisdom and understanding. 18 And Hadurah the wife of Asher conceived and bare unto him Yimnah, Yishvah, Yishvi and Beriah; four sons.

19 And Zebulun went to Midian, and took for a wife Merishah the daughter of Molad, the son of Abida, the son of Midian [the son of Abraham and Keturah], and brought her to the land of Canaan. 20 And Merushah bare unto Zebulun Sered, Elon and Yachleel; three sons.’

Naphtali like his half brother Gad, married from the line of Nahor (North Italian) as his father Jacob and his grandfather Isaac had done before him – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Asher took a first wife from Ishmael (German) who died childless and Asher’s second wife Hadurah was descended from Eber, which could mean probably Peleg or possibly Joktan* – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

Fascinatingly, the strong link between Zebulun and part of Midian – the British and Dutch South Africans – continues, with Zebulun taking his wife Merishah from the line of Abraham’s son Midian’ – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Zebulun

Numbers 1:28-31, 41, 43

English Standard Version

28 ‘Of the people of Issachar, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, from twenty years old and upward, every man able to go to war: 29 those listed of the tribe of Issachar were 54,400. 31 those listed of the tribe of Zebulun were 57,400… 41 those listed of the tribe of Asher were 41,500… 43 those listed of the tribe of Naphtali were 53,400.’

1 Chronicles 7:1-5

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Issachar: Tola, Puah, Jashub, and Shimron, four. 2 The sons of Tola: Uzzi, Rephaiah, Jeriel, Jahmai, Ibsam, and Shemuel, heads of their fathers’ houses, namely of Tola, mighty warriors of their generations, their number in the days of David being 22,600. 

3 The son of Uzzi: Izrahiah. And the sons of Izrahiah: Michael, Obadiah, Joel, and Isshiah, all five of them were chief men. 4 And along with them, by their generations, according to their fathers’ houses, were units of the army for war, 36,000, for they had many wives and sons. 5 Their kinsmen belonging to all the clans of Issachar were in all 87,000 mighty warriors, enrolled by genealogy.

Strangely, further sons or grandsons for Zebulun are missing from the 1 Chronicles genealogical lists. 

Genesis 30:7-13

English Standard Version

7 ‘Rachel’s servant Bilhah [refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes] conceived again and bore Jacob a second son [in 1742 BCE]. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.”

So she called his name Naphtali [wrestlings of God, my struggle, cunning].

9 When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife…

Zilpah the mother of Gad and Asher

Genesis: 12 ‘Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son [in 1744 BCE]. 13 And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.”

So she called his name Asher [happy, happy one].’

Genesis 46:17, 24

English Standard Version

17 ‘The sons of Asher:

Imnah, Ishvah, Ishvi, Beriah, with Serah

And the sons of Beriah: Heber and Malchiel… [1 Chronicles 1:31-32: ‘who fathered Birzaith. Heber fathered Japhlet, Shomer, Hotham, and their sister Shua…]’

Asher

Genesis: 24 ‘The sons of Naphtali: Jahzeel, Guni, Jezer, and Shillem.’

In Asher’s family there is the family name of Heber (Eber, Hebrew, Iberia, Hiberi, Hibernia, Hebrides) – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes – and Naphtali has a son, Jahzeel similar to Zebulun’s son Jahleel.

Australian Flag

Genesis 49:20-21

English Standard Version

20 “Asher’s food shall be rich [H8082 – shaman: plenteous, lusty, robust], and he shall yield [be granted or permitted] royal [H4428 – melek: (fit for a) king] delicacies.”

The Good News Translation for Asher says: ‘Asher’s land will produce rich food. He will provide food fit for a king.’ Australia is one of the bread basket nations of the world, with an infinite market opening up to its neighbours in East Asia.

Australian Coat of Arms

Notice the strong link with the tribe of Judah, incorporating the symbols of: Crowns, Lions and the St George’s Cross.

Genesis: 21 “Naphtali is a doe [deer] let loose [H7961 – shalach: let free], that bears [granted, given] beautiful [beauty, goodness] fawns [(offspring) or confusingly, ‘he gives beautiful words’].

A more helpful paraphrase of verse 21: ‘Naphtali is a female deer running free, that has been bestowed beauty and goodness.’ This verse explains itself for anyone who has had the opportunity in visiting New Zealand.

Naphtali

Deuteronomy 33:23-29

English Standard Version

23 ‘And of Naphtali he said, “O Naphtali, sated with favor [H7522 – ratsown: pleasure, delight], and full of the blessing [prosperity] of the Lord, possess [inherit] the lake and the south [H3220 – yam: west (47 times KJV), south (1)].”

24 And of Asher he said, “Most blessed of sons [or blessed with children] be Asher; let him be the favorite [acceptable, a pleasure, delight] of his brothers, and let him dip [plunge] his foot in oil. 25 Your bars shall be iron and bronze, and as your days, so shall your strength be.’

It is clear from these verses that Asher especially and Naphtali in large part, have been granted special favour above their brothers, aside from Joseph and Judah. Both Australia and New Zealand regularly make the top ten lists for best or safest countries to live in.

The CEV says: ‘The Lord is pleased with you, people of Naphtali. He will bless you and give you the land to the west and the south.’ The nation furthest from the original land of Canaan as well as from the British and Irish Isles, in a southwest direction is, New Zealand. It is also separated by vast oceans and sea. Even taking its name from the word Sea-land inherited from the Netherlands and Denmark prior to that. 

Australian men

The original Hebrew says that Asher would be blessed with children, a favourite amongst his brothers, while in possession of immeasurable wealth beneath his feet. After North America and England, Australia has the highest population of the sons of Jacob with 26,996,595 people. It is a very popular destination to visit or emigrate and has a high level of wealth relative to its population. Though Belgium is a blessed nation, it does not match the oracle as given by Moses, like Australia does. Australia has the highest average wealth in the world, passing Switzerland in 2018. 

Australia is the 14th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $1.77 trillion in 2025. Australia combines an open domestic economy, with an extensive network of free trade arrangements with trading partners principally around the Asia-Pacific Rim. 

Sydney

Australia ranks at number ten in the nations with the most natural resources. Australia, which is similar in size to the continental United States, is known for its large reserves of coal, timber, copper, iron ore, nickel, oil shale and rare earth metals. Australia is one of the world leaders in uranium and gold mining. The country has the largest gold reserves in the world, supplying over fourteen percent of the world’s gold demand and forty-six percent of the world’s uranium demand. Australia is also the top producer of opal and aluminum. 

If that wasn’t enough, it is number three in the world for mineral producing nations. It is interesting that Australia is called the ‘lucky country’ especially as this is the meaning of his blood brother’s name, Gad. The link with Ireland doesn’t stop there. Some thirty percent of Australians claim Irish descent and they share a love of the unique yet similar sports of Gaelic football and Australian or Aussie Rules football. 

Australian women

The continent-nation of Australia has approximately $737 billion worth of seaborne ore reserves alone. It houses massive reserves of important minerals, such as bauxite – twenty-three percent of the world’s reserves – and nickel, with some thirty-five percent of the world’s total reserves. It may not exceed the scale of South Africa and Russia in terms of mineral reserves, but Australia is more popular among international mining investors due to the government’s credibility and track record of performance in protecting its mining industry. As Russia (2) and Ukraine (4) are top five mineral powers, the counter balance to the mighty Assyrians and Orphir (from Joktan) respectively, are Sidon-Midian-Zebulun of South Africa and Asher of Australia. 

A coincidence pertains to the fact that Asher from Jacob and Asshur of Shem have similar names and both possess enormous countries containing vast mineral wealth, with allies who also possess huge reserves.

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

  1. Ores, slag, ash: US$132.1 billion 
  2. Mineral fuels including oil: $91 billion 
  3. Gems, precious metals: $20.7 billion 
  4. Meat: $11.6 billion 
  5. Cereals: $10.1 billion 
  6. Inorganic chemicals: $6.4 billion 
  7. Machinery including computers: $4.8 billion 
  8. Aluminum: $4.7 billion 
  9. Copper: $3.9 billion 
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $3.7 billion 


Cereals was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 164.1% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was aluminum which was up by 52.6%. Australia’s shipments of ores, slag and ash posted the third-fastest gain in value up by 45.6% year over year. The most modest advance among Australia’s top 10 export categories was for gems and precious metals thanks to its 5.6% gain.’

Judges 5:17-18

English Standard Version

‘… Asher sat still at the coast of the sea, staying by his landings. Zebulun is a people who risked their lives to the death; Naphtali, too, on the heights of the field.’

Judges 4:10 

English Standard Version

‘And Barak called out Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh. And 10,000 men went up at his heels, and Deborah went up with him.’

We learn that Asher like Reuben, Dan, Gad, Simeon, Levi and Judah was reticent to get involved in a war that didn’t directly impinge on their territory. Meanwhile, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, Zebulun, Issachar and Naphtali took part. With Naphtali, Zebulun was the most courageous. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘ANZAC [Australia and New Zealand Army Corps] Day is still celebrated on April 25th each year to honour New Zealand’s military dead. An astonishing 103,000 New Zealander’s served in the armed forces during the First World War – out of a total population of one million. Of this number, 16,697 were killed. This meant that 1.6 percent of all New Zealanders died in the conflict… the highest death [rate] per capita of any country in the war. An even greater number of New Zealanders served in World war II. Some 140,000 soldiers fought overseas in Europe, North Africa, and in the Pacific… 11,928 were killed, or just under 1 percent of the total population…’

It can be no small coincidence that the two greatest men’s Rugby Union teams in the world – consistently for over one hundred years with seven Rugby world cups between them out of a possible ten – are the New Zealand All Blacks and the South African Springboks.

For what is rugby, but a battle without weapons or resulting in death. Blood and injury though are par for the course in the most brutal sport in the world outside of cage fighting, boxing and American Football.

Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, Hitler’s commander in North Africa during World War II insightfully said about the Australians and New Zealanders after facing their infantry divisions (ANZACs):

“If I had to take hell, I would use the Australians to take it and the New Zealanders to hold it.”

Judges 7:23

English Standard Version

‘And the men of Israel were called out from Naphtali and from Asher and from all Manasseh, and they pursued after Midian.’

When the Judge Gideon fought the Midianites, his main allies apart from his own tribe of Manasseh, were Naphtali, with their neighbour Asher, in the far north of Canaan.

Joshua 19:24-29

English Standard Version

24 ‘The fifth lot came out for the tribe of the people of Asher according to their clans. 

25 Their territory included Helkath, Hali, Beten, Achshaph, 26 Allammelech, Amad, and Mishal. On the west it touches Carmel and Shihor-libnath, 27 then it turns eastward, it goes to Beth-dagon, and touches Zebulun and the Valley of Iphtahel northward to Beth-emek and Neiel. Then it continues in the north to Cabul, 28 Ebron, Rehob, Hammon, Kanah, as far as Sidon the Great. 29 Then the boundary turns to Ramah, reaching to the fortified city of Tyre…’

The inheritance of Asher in Canaan is described in the Book of Joshua. It is interesting, as it a condensed description of their current neighbours today. Zebulun and Sidon equating to South Africa on the African continent to their west, separated by a vast expanse of sea; and similarly to the east, Tyre equating to Brazil on the South American continent – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

A curious prophetic verse is in the Book of Isaiah, which describes where certain tribes of Israel were dispersed.

Isaiah 49:12

Christian Standard Bible

See, these will come from far away, from the north and from the west, and from the land [H776 – ‘erets: land without return (under) [the] world] of Sinim [H5515: ‘distant, a people living at the extremity of the known world’, by connotation the South].

We know the North and west relates to the British Isles. The counterpoint to that is Sinim, which is inferred as the opposite direction of, or southwards (and far away). Just as the tribe of Naphtali was to eventually settle in the South and west… exactly where New Zealand is located – Deuteronomy 33:29.

Some researchers propose that Sin-im relates to China (as the Arabs called the Chineses Sin[a]); or to Canaan’s son Sin; but both these options are an incorrect interpretation. The Jerome translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible for Isaiah 49:12 says: ‘ecce isti de longe venient et ecce illi ab aquilone et mari et isti de terra australi.’ The key phrase being: isti de terra australi. 

By a strange turn, the word Australia is derived from the Latin word australis, meaning ‘southern.’ Australia has been colloquially referred to as Oz, slang for Aus’ since the early twentieth century. It is the ‘land down under’ and literally the great ‘southern land.’ Australia has been called ‘the Oldest Continent’, ‘the Last of Lands’ and ‘the Last Frontier.’ Australia is the last of lands, in the sense that it was the last continent, apart from Antarctica to be explored by Europeans. 

The term Terra Australis Incognita, or an ‘unknown land of the South’ dates back to Roman times. After European discovery, its name included Terra Australis.

An anonymous quote: 

‘The earliest recorded use of the word Australia in English was in 1625 in “A note of Australia del Espíritu Santo, written by Sir Richard Hakluyt”, published by Samuel Purchas in Hakluytus Posthumus, a corruption of the original Spanish name “Tierra Austral del Espíritu Santo” (Southern Land of the Holy Spirit) for an island in Vanuatu.

The Dutch adjectival form Australische was used in a Dutch book in Batavia (Jakarta) in 1638, to refer to the newly discovered lands to the south. Australia was later used in a 1693 translation of Les Aventures de Jacques Sadeur dans la Découverte et le Voyage de la Terre Australe, a 1676 French novel by Gabriel de Foigny, under the pen-name Jacques Sadeur. Referring to the entire South Pacific region, Alexander Dalrymple used it in An Historical Collection of Voyages and Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean in 1771.’

The name Sinim (סינים siyniym) occurs nowhere else in the Bible and it is evident that it is a remote country; remarkable in that it is the only such land specified by name in the Bible. The Chaldee also interprets it as Jerome has done: of the south. Whereas the Syriac has not translated it but retained the name Sinim.

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002:

‘The Egyptians referred to the southernmost known area of land as “sin-wur”. This corresponds to the Land of “Sinim” meaning Australia. There are reports of Egyptian and Phoenician remains being found in Australia.’ 

New Zealand men

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘Another large mass of people, the Yue­chi, was being pushed out of inner Asia toward Scythia and Parthia. Early Chinese chronicles record that the “Ephthalites” were one of the tribes of the Yue­chi. The Ephthalites were also called “White Huns” because they were “fair­skinned” (indicating a Semitic origin). Other names for the Ephthalites include the “Hephthalites” or “Nephthalites,” although the Encyclopaedia Britannica adds that “the initial N… is believed to be a clerical error.” It should be easy for anyone with a knowledge of biblical history to identify this tribe as the Israelite tribe of Naphtali! The consonants of Ephthali (or Nephthali) precisely match Naphtali, one of the ten tribes of Israel.

It is interesting that the Encyclopaedia Britannica observed that the ancient historians who recorded that this tribe’s name began with an “N” are “believed… (to have made) a clerical error.” No evidence is offered to support a claim that it was a clerical error, but it is “believed” to be one. Why? 

The reader must realize that “establishment” histories have a strong bias against “finding” any of the “lost” ten tribes of Israel (doing so would draw interest toward the Bible). While many Israelite tribal names can be found in Asia, this similarity between the “Nephthalites” and an Israelite tribe (the Naphtalites) is glaringly obvious.

The presence of a tribe in Asia bearing a Hebrew name unchanged from biblical times is an academic “hot potato”! A “belief” that the “N” is an ancient “clerical error” helps to obscure the Israelite nature of this tribe. Indeed, if establishment histories were to examine Scythian or Parthian history in much depth at all, their identity as the ten tribes of Israel would be impossible to miss. Perhaps that is why their history (prominently cited by Greek and Roman historians) is mostly ignored in the modern world. 

The fact that the Ephthalites were “fair­skinned” further verifies their identification as Israelites (since the Israelites were of the Semitic, or “white” race). The fact that the Ephthalites were called “White Huns” indicates that while they came out of Asia, they were differentiated from the rest of the Huns, who were not fair­skinned or white. Indeed, the Encyclopaedia Britannica itself refers to the Sakas (or Sacae Scythians), the Yue­Chi and the Ephthalites as being related “Indo-Scythian” tribes. 

In chapter eight, it was documented that the Nephthalites were undoubtedly the Israelite tribe of Naphtali which went into Asia in 741 B.C. as captives of the Assyrians. Since the tribe of Naphtali did not go into captivity in a piecemeal fashion, but rather in one complete mass (II Kings 15:29), they retained their original Israelite tribal name longer than the other tribes. 

The Ephthalites waged war on the Sassanian Persians (which was natural since the Ephthalites were kinsmen of the Parthians and Scythians). As late as 484 A.D., the Ephthalites defeated the Persians and extended their control into India, establishing a capital as Sakala (which bore the name of Isaac). 

The Encyclopaedia Britannica cites the Greek writer, Procopius, as stating the Ephthalite Huns were “far more civilized than the Huns of Attila.” Ephthalite power in Asia was not broken until 557 A.D. when they were beaten by the Persians and Turks… the Ephthalites, as a whole, simply disappeared from Asia. Where did they go? They were likely pushed toward Europe, arriving in a later migration. This would make the tribe of Naphtali one of the first to go into Asia and the last to leave it.’

Origin, Yair Davidiy, 2002 – emphasis mine:

‘In the very far east of Scythia in what is now eastern Siberia and western China a good portion of the Naphtalite horde had remained. In the 450-500 CE period the Naphtalites began to move west eventually entering Scandinavia in the 500’s and 600’s CE. The Naphtalites themselves settled mainly in Norway.’ 

Tribal Identifications: Naphtali, Yair Davidiy – emphasis mine:

‘Sons of Naphtali were… Jahzeel, Guni, Jezer, and Shillem.

Jahzeel are recalled in Zealand of Denmark. Culturally, the region of Zealand in Denmark had contacts with Zeeland in Holland up to the first century b.c.e… In Danish Zealand itself are places known as Sjaelland, Silund, and Selund which names… possibly derive from Shillem (Silem) son of Naphtali.

Guni, son of Naphtali, may be recalled in the Gugerni of Batavian-Holland and in the Egan of Denmark. Jezer, son of Naphtali, is connected to the Vraesan of Denmark and from the Danish isle of Fyne, the Vraesi are believed to have migrated en-masse to Britain.

The symbol of Naphtali was “A hind let loose” (Genesis 49;21) and  a deer or stag was used as a royal symbol by the Kings of Scandinavia. The stag also seems to have been a favourite motif amongst Phoenecian and Israelite craftsmen.

Norway was known as Thule. P. Senstius (1931) once suggested that Thule is a shortened form of  Nafthali… not only Norway but also the people of Norway were called Thuls and… this word means Speaker [in Old English]. The Greek traveler Pytheas from Massilia (Marseille) traveled along the coast of what is now known as Norway… around 330 BC, and he called that land Thule, which a Norse [scholar]… Ottar Groenvik understands as “the land of the Thuls” or “the Thul land”.

“Naphtali… giveth goodly words” – Genesis 49:21, KJV.

As we have discussed in the previous two chapters, the waves of invaders into Britain and Ireland match the sons of Jacob and their tribal groupings. Though ultimately the twelve sons became fourteen tribal splits, they were to form ten nations in the modern world. 

The tribal divisions being Reuben, Gad, Benjamin, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Ephraim, the half tribe of West Manasseh and the half tribe of East Manasseh. 

New Zealand women

These fourteen tribes became the ten English speaking nations comprising: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States of America. Levi was scattered which leaves thirteen. Issachar and Zebulun are together as one, which leaves twelve. Ephraim and the half tribe of West Manasseh are together as one and are called either Ephraim, Joseph or Samaria in the Bible, which leaves eleven… and Dan the enigma, remains unidentified until later, which leaves ten. 

The waves of invaders also follows the pattern of ten, rather than fourteen arrivals. They are the Cymry; the Cruithni; the Fir Bolg; the Tuatha de Dannan; the Hiberi or Goidels; the Jutes; the Frisians; the Angles; the Norsemen; and the Danes. Sandwiched in between these are the Royal Milesians who were a branch of Judah from Zarah and the Normans who were predominantly the tribe of Judah – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

The ancient Britons were spear headed by the Cymry and are the Welsh today principally from the tribe of Simeon; the Cruithni from Benjamin were known as Picts and became Scottish; the Fir Bolg from Reuben became synonymous with the Ulaid and today Northern Ireland; the Danann are simply the tribe of Dan; the Goidels (or Gaedhals) of Gad became Gaels the ancestors of the Irish; the Jutes from the true tribe of Judah are the founding peoples of todays English; the Frisians descended from both Zebulun and Issachar became the British South Africans and Rhodesians; the Angles to be yet revealed, became known as Americans and Canadians; the Norsemen (or Norwegians) from Naphtali, became New Zealanders [notice all the Ns]; while the Danish Vikings became Australians from their ancestor Asher. 

New Zealand Coat of Arms

Just as the Norwegians, Danes and Normans were known as Vikings and the earliest tribes to arrive were called Celts, so too were the tribes of Jutes, Angles and Frisians collectively known as Saxons. The term ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is made up and is somewhat misleading as it implies two separate peoples, when in fact the Angles were Saxons. It is interesting to note that the first letter of many of Jacob’s sons names have survived either to the present day or at least until their arrival in Ireland or Britain. Especially noticeable, with the tribe of Naphtali. 

Both Collins and Davidy’s comments are informative regarding Naphtali who had remarkably, kept their identity for some fifteen hundred years. An important point to understand is that as peoples migrated they pushed against those in front of them and in turn were pressed from behind. The Naphtalite Huns made their way to Scandinavia as had many of the tribes before them. They with the Danes and the Normans were the last to vacate Scandinavia. The Normans had dwelt in Brittany and Normandy for two centuries before they invaded Kent and Sussex. Meanwhile, the Danish Vikings had the numbers to establish a capital at York and to inject their royal line into the British Saxon kings. The Norwegian Vikings raided and then settled the north of England, Scotland and Ireland. Though there is some overlap between the two Viking peoples.

A number of interesting similarities are that the Vikings were expert sailors and navigators who had designed practical yet fast open going vessels, known as longboats.

Viking Dragon Ship

This interest and ability is mirrored today by the Australians and New Zealanders in the love of sailing and yachting. Notice the three ships on the New Zealand Coat of Arms. The biggest city in New Zealand, Auckland, is known as the City of Sails as there are more yachts per head of population than anywhere else in the world.

City of Auckland

Both Australia and New Zealand have shook up the most famous Yachting regatta in the world, the America’s Cup in recent decades, with New Zealand leading the innovation within the competition, for perhaps the most prestigious sporting trophy in the world. 

The Vikings were known for dwelling near water outlets and on the coast. Today Australians and New Zealanders live principally within striking distance of a beach and have built their largest cities all on the coasts. An interesting correlation is just as the Vikings either established or cultivated the five principle coastal cities in Ireland… Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Limerick and Cork – they then went on to Australia and built the thriving five major cities: Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. 

Though Norwegians and Danes today claim to be Vikings, they are in reality descendants of Abraham and his second wife Keturah and have instead inherited the name. The true Vikings have either been assimilated within Britain and Ireland as the Norman aristocracy, or the previous Danes and Norsemen ventured on to Australia and New Zealand, creating their new identity’s as Aussies and Kiwis.

The United Tribes of New Zealand flag from 1834 to 1840

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘The Phoenicians also mined tin and other ores in Britain, and exported them to other nations in the Mideast. George Rawlinson states: 

“The Phoenicians had one more colony towards the west… Phoenician ships from Gadeira… crossed the mouth of the English Channel… to the Scilly Isles and conveyed thither a body of colonists who established an emporium. The attraction which drew them was the mineral wealth of the islands and of the neighboring Cornish coast… It is reasonable to suppose that the Phoenicians both worked the mines and smelted the ores.”

‘Historical evidence points to the Israelite tribe of Asher as being directly involved with the mining of tin in early Briton. William Camden, a British historian who lived from 1551 to 1623, states in his historical work, Britannia, that: 

“The merchants of Asher worked the tin mines of Cornwall, not as slaves, but as masters and exporters.” A British historian of the nineteenth century, Sir Edmund Creasy, also noted that: “The British mines mainly supplied the glorious adornment of Solomon’s Temple” – Article: The Ark of God.

Notice the tribe of Asher were involved in mining, just as Australians are heavily involved today. The tribe of Asher took on the Danish name which may or may not have derived from the name of Jacob’s son, Dan as investigated previously. By coincidence the peoples today now called Danes in Denmark are the descendants of Me-dan – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

New Zealand Flag

The Denes (or Danes) are thought to have either had a female leader called Dana (or Danu); that they worshipped the Goddess Dana; or simply that someone called Dan mentioned in medieval Scandinavian texts was the legendary founder of the ancient Danish kingdom.

Unrest in Scania led to war and a new order, represented by the Scyldings and the Healfdena. They led the migration of Danes from Sweden into the Cimbric Peninsula, thus putting pressure on the Jutes in the north. This may have resulted in feuds and local power struggles, which would have in turn impacted the sizeable tribe of the Angles. In 420 CE a man named Hoc seemed to be allied to the Scyldings by blood or marriage. The Danish side of his parentage is covered by the epic poem, Beowulf, which describes him as the son of Beowulf the elder, while the other side was probably Jutish or Anglian.

In 448 CE Hnaef a prince of a group of Danes called the Hocingas, and as a Sæ-Dene (Sea Dane), is involved in a power struggle in the North Sea. His family likely settled in modern Jutland. Hnaef winters with his elder sister, Hildeburh, who is married to Finn, king of the Frisians. Fighting appears to be sparked by a feud between the Jutish allies of either side, as those with the Frisians are angry that some of their people have sworn loyalty to the Danes who are ‘stealing’ Jutish territory. 

Hnaef is killed during the Freswæl, the ‘Fight at Finnesburg’. Finn is then killed in revenge by Hengist, Hnaef’s Jutish comrade in arms. As his duty is done to his deceased lord Hnaef, Hengist with his brother Horsa leads his people to Britain to take up temporary service under another lord, the high king of Britain Vortigern, but this soon turns into a conquest of the southeastern territory of England in 455 CE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. Large numbers of Jutes and Angles follow Hengist and this has the effect of leaving Jutland almost deserted for the incoming Dene. 

The Danish migration was complete by about the sixth century, but a single, fully unified kingdom took approximately three more centuries to emerge. During the ninth and tenth centuries the Danes, along with the Norwegians, became the scourge of Britain and Ireland. The Danes staged a major invasion of the English kingdoms during 879 to 880 CE, conquering a swathe of eastern and northern territory in Britain. The Danish army under Guthrum formalised its rule under the Peace of Wedmore in 879. Guthrum secured the Danish kingdom of East Anglia, which was founded to exist alongside the Scandinavian kingdom of York. 

By 918 CE the failure to apply a concentrated force meant that the Danes were defeated. They lost a large number of men, particularly at Bedford, where the besieged English garrison inflicted a severe defeat upon them, putting their army to flight. The Danish kingdom in England fell to Edward the Elder of Wessex, as he began to unify the country under one king. At the very end of the tenth century a Danish dynasty took the English throne, heralding a new Anglo-Scandinavian period which was ended with the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and the arrival of more Scandinavians, the Normans. The Danes also settled in Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland. 

The Frisians descended from Issachar and Zebulun, being a smaller tribal unit are invariably lost as part of the larger Saxon tribe the Angles, from an historical perspective. This is not surprising as in the Bible, Issachar and Zebulun are often quoted with Ephraim and Manasseh. Zebulun and Issachar are also the younger brothers of Judah and so their close association with the Jutes explains the Jutish, Angle and Frisian triangular nucleus of the Saxon peoples. 

The word viking became associated with someone who goes on a ‘pirate raid’, a predatory ‘sea robber’ but this is a later interpretation of the word based on their reputation for attacking the medieval kingdoms of England and France. The word was originally used to denote a trader. Indo-European languages contain cognates of the root word for trader, such as the Latin vic (vicus: village, habitation), along with the Saxon wic and the Germanic wich. All of these relate to the Scandinavian vik, from the Old Norse, vikingr. A Vikingr or Viking was someone who went on expeditions, often abroad, usually be sea and in a group with other Vikingar (plural) to wics (or wichs) to trade.

Norway is called the North Way as it was the North way or sea path. Without roads the only reliable travel was by water, so trading centres would be sited in protected inlets. The use of vik became transferable from the trade location or village to its location on inlets. In England, this double usage did not apply, but many Saxon villages still retain their trading names, such as Harwich, Ipswich, and Norwich, while Hamptonwic was modified to Southampton. 

The Norse feminine vik, means an inlet, small bay or creek. As the Vikings dwelt beside creeks that fed to the sea, the name also incorporates the fact that viking means a ‘creek dweller.’ The origin of this interpretation though may go back to earlier etymology which derives Viking from the same root as Old Norse vika, meaning ‘sea mile’. This was originally ‘the distance between two shifts of rowers’, from the root weik (or wik), as in the Proto-Germanic verb wikan, meaning ‘to recede’ and the Proto-Nordic verb, meaning ‘to turn’. The Old Icelandic equivalent is vikja, meaning ‘to move, to turn’, with a nautical usage. 

Linguistically, this explanation is probable as the term predates the use of the sail by the Germanic peoples of Northwestern Europe, as the Old Frisian spelling Witsing (or Wising) shows that ‘the word was pronounced with a palatal k and thus in all probability existed in North-Western Germanic before that palatalisation happened, that is, in the 5th century or before…’ If such is the case – that the tired rower moved aside for the rested rower on long sea journeys – a vikingr would originally have been a rower; so that the ‘word Viking was not originally connected to Scandinavian seafarers but assumed this meaning when the Scandinavians begun to dominate the seas.’ 

When the Norsemen were invaded by the Roman Catholic soldiers, they asked the people who their king was, and they replied “Viking,” which means; “We’re King.”  A very antipodean response. Coincidently, the Vikings were known as Ascomanni, or ash-men’ by the Germans for the Ash wood of their boats. The Gaels called them Lochlannaich, ‘people from the land of lakes’; while the Saxons called them Dene and the Frisians called them Northmonn

As mentioned previously, most Australians and particularly New Zealanders do not live very far from water. In Australia, Vickers and Vickermans are popular surnames. The Vikings imprint on history is less piratical raider propaganda and more the reality of sea-faring traders, fishermen, farmers and craftsmen; with their own laws, art and architecture. 

Dutch explorer Captain Willem Janszoon landed in Australia in 1606, though it was in 1770 when Captain James Cook mapped the eastern coast and claimed the continent for Great Britain. The first British settlement was founded in 1788. In 1824 the vast Island is called Australia, changed from New Holland – coined by Dutch explorer Abel Tasman in 1644 – at the request of Governor Lachlan Macquarie. 

In 1841, New Zealand became its own colony separate from Australia. The year 1868 saw the end of convicts being sent to Australia. Some one hundred and sixty thousand convicts were shipped to Australia between 1788 and 1868.

Six colonies were formed in Australia: New South Wales, 1788; Tasmania, 1825; Western Australia, 1829; South Australia, 1836; Victoria, 1851; and Queensland, 1859. These same colonies later became the states of the Australian Commonwealth. In 1911, the Northern Territory became part of the Commonwealth and the city of Canberra was founded. It was named as the Australian Capital Territory or ACT.

The Commonwealth of Australia was formed in 1901 and a national flag was adopted. Even though it was adopted one year before New Zealand, the New Zealand flag of 1902 had originally been designed earlier in 1869. 

In 1986, Australia became fully independent from the United Kingdom. Australia is the sixth largest country in the world and the biggest island, though as it is officially a continent, Greenland is deemed the biggest island in the world. In 2021, Australia signed a significant security treaty with the United Kingdom and the United States (AUKUS) aimed at countering the growing threat of China in the region. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘Australian and New Zealand participation in the disaster of the Gallipoli Campaign – which was an attempted invasion of the Turkish mainland during World war I [1914-1918] – forged the antipodean nations into a heightened sense of national consciousness [and camaraderie]. The brutality of the battle… ended in an Allied defeat…’

New Zealand is called by the indigenous Maori: Aotearoa, translated as ‘land of the long white cloud.’ Maori had several traditional names for the two main islands, including Te Ika-a-Maui, ‘the fish of Maui’ for the North Island; and Te Waipounamu, ‘the waters of greenstone’; or Te Waka o Aoraki, ‘the canoe of Aoraki’ for the South Island.

New Zealand also has some seven hundred smaller islands, covering an area of 103,500 square miles and a population of 5,255,216 people. In comparison, Japan has an area of 145,937 square miles and a population of one hundred and twenty-five million people. The area of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland is 93,628 miles with a population of sixty-nine million people.

Naphtali was prophesied to be free as a deer let loose and so it is for the small population of New Zealand compared to its area. Saying that, there are still two nations in the world who could increase their population sizes dramatically as they have enough land to be able to sustain them satisfactorily. Unlike Australia say, which has a vast interior of desert and only coastal regions suitable for the bulk of their population. Those nations are New Zealand and Canada; both of which are under-populated and have potential for massive growth. We will look further into this when we study Canada in the next chapter. 

Due to their remoteness, ‘the islands of New Zealand were the last large habitable landmass to be settled by humans.’ Approximately 1000 CE, Maori had become the dominant Polynesian culture and society. In 1642, the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman sighted and officially recorded New Zealand. In 1840, representatives of the United Kingdom and Maori chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi, declaring British sovereignty. A year later, New Zealand became a colony of the British Empire and by 1907 it had become a self-governing dominion. New Zealand gained full independence in 1947, with the British Monarch remaining the head of state. 

In 1951, the United Kingdom increasingly focusing on its European interests led to New Zealand joining Australia and the United States in the ANZUS security treaty. A variety of ethical conflicts, particularly New Zealand’s nuclear free policy led to the United States’s suspension of ANZUS obligations. The treaty remained in effect between New Zealand and Australia, whose foreign policy has followed a similar historical trend of close political cooperation, free trade agreements and mutual citizenship rights between the two nations, so that citizens can visit, live and work in both countries without restrictions. 

New Zealander’s, consistent with their identity as Naphtali have been involved and contributed man power in many conflicts, including: Vietnam, the two World Wars, the second Boer War, the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency, the Gulf War and the Afghanistan War. It has also contributed forces to numerous several regional and global peacekeeping missions since World War II. 

New Zealand has an advanced market economy, ranked 14th in the Human Development Index and 3rd in the Index of Economic Freedom. New Zealand is identified as one of the world’s most stable and well governed nations. As of 2017, the country was ranked fourth in the strength of its democratic institutions and first in government transparency and lack of corruption. 

‘The following export product groups categorise the highest dollar value in global shipments from New Zealand during 2024.

  1. Dairy, eggs, honey: US$12.4 billion
  2. Meat: $5.2 billion
  3. Fruits, nuts: $2.9 billion
  4. Wood: $2.9 billion
  5. Cereal/milk preparations: $1.6 billion
  6. Beverages, spirits, vinegar: $1.5 billion
  7. Machinery including computers: $1.5 billion
  8. Fish: $1.22 billion
  9. Modified starches, glues, enzymes: $1.18 billion
  10. Electrical machinery, equipment: $960.7 million

Electrical machinery and equipment was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 38.2% from 2023 to 2024. In second place for improving export sales was fruits and nuts which rose by 34.1%.

It was the ascent of Mount Everest by New Zealander Sir Edmund Hillary with Sherpa Tenzing Norgay in 1953 that was one of the defining moments of the twentieth century. Hillary stated: “In some ways, I believe I epitomise the average New Zealander: I have modest abilities, I combine these with a good deal of determination, and I rather like to succeed.” 

The British diaspora in Sub-Saharan Africa includes British and Irish descended people not just in South Africa and Zimbabwe but also in lesser numbers in countries such as Namibia (formerly South West Africa, a German colony and then administered by South Africa from 1946 to 1966), Kenya, Botswana and Zambia. 

Though Great Britain had settlements and ports along the West African coast to facilitate the Atlantic slave trade, British settlement in Africa began in earnest at the end of the eighteenth century, at the Cape of Good Hope and following the second British occupation of the Dutch Cape Colony in 1806. 

British settlers were encouraged to Albany (Settler Country), in 1820 to bolster the Cape’s eastern frontier against the Xhosa. Natal was added as a colony in 1843. After defeating the Boers in 1902, Britain also annexed the Boer Republics, the Orange Free State and the Transvaal. 

Map showing population density of the Black Africans in South Africa

The discovery of gold in the Witwatersrand in 1886 after diamonds in Kimberly in 1866, encouraged additional settlement not just by the British but also Australians, Americans and Canadians. Mining magnate and empire builder, Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) envisioned a British Africa linked from Cape Town to Cairo in Egypt. Cecil Rhodes was the founding chairman of the board of directors of De Beers Mining Company, funded by Nathaniel, the first Lord Rothschild – Article: The Establishment: Who are they… What do they want? 

Rhodes foundered the British South Africa Company in 1889 which controlled the territory named after him from 1895 to 1911 and then as Southern – first used in 1898 – Rhodesia from 1911 to 1964. The region had originally been known as Zambesia. Later called Rhodesia from 1964 to 1979 and then finally Zimbabwe. Northern Rhodesia is now known as Zambia. Meanwhile, British East Africa became Kenya. In 1923, the company’s charter was revoked and Southern Rhodesia attained self-government and established a legislature. 

With the exception of South Africa, the British populations of Zimbabwe, Zambia and Kenya are relatively small, with approximately 30,000, 40,000 and 32,000 people respectively. These peoples may or may not be descended in part from Issachar. Zimbabwe is adjacent to South Africa and large numbers of Zimbabwean British white people have left, especially to live in South Africa. The Republic of Zimbabwe shares a one hundred and twenty-five mile border on the south with South Africa. 

Map showing population density of White Africans in South Africa

The rapid decolonisation of Africa in the 1950s and 1960s alarmed a proportion of Southern Rhodesia’s white population. In an effort to delay the transition to black majority rule, the white Southern Rhodesian government issued its own declaration of Independence from the United Kingdom in 1965. At first seeking recognition as an autonomous realm within the Commonwealth, it instead reconstituted itself into a republic in 1970. Hostility between black political factions and the white government, led to war weariness, diplomatic pressure and an extensive trade embargo imposed by the United Nations. These pressures prompted Rhodesian prime minister Ian Smith to concede to majority rule in 1978. 

Rhodesia was once known as the Jewel of Africa for its great prosperity. The name Zimbabwe derives ‘from a Shona term for Great Zimbabwe, a medieval city (Masvingo) in the country’s south-east whose remains are now a protected site.’ Zimbabwe may stem from ‘dzimba-dza-mabwe, translated from the Karanga dialect of Shona as “houses of stones”. Archaeologist Peter Garlake says that Zimbabwe represents a contracted form of dzimba-hwe, which means venerated houses in the Zezuru dialect of Shona and usually references chiefs’ houses or graves.’ 

The modern equivalent of the Aramean Phoenicians discovered Southern Africa in 1488, when Portuguese explorer Bartolomeu Dias sailed around the southern tip of Africa – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. It was many years later in 1652, when the modern equivalent of the Midianite Phoenicians via the Dutch East India Company established a small settlement at the Dutch Cape Colony; with the intent to be a small port town for ships traveling to India, which eventually became a full settlement of German, French, Dutch and British settlers – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The Dutch Colony in 1795 was occupied by British forces after the Battle of Muizenberg. In 1802, the Dutch regained control of the Cape Colony with the Peace of Amiens agreement. Then in 1806, the British regained control after the Battle of Blaauwberg. By 1814, the Dutch formally agreed that the colony was to be part of the British Empire. 

The British outlawed slavery in 1833 and so began the Great Trek inland by the Dutch Boers, who founded two republics. The republic of Transvaal formed in 1856 and was annexed by the British in 1877, sparking the first Boer War in 1880. The Boers won and gained independence for Transvaal and the Orange Free State. In 1889, the Second Boer War began, with the British winning and taking over Transvaal and the Orange Free State. In 1910 the Union of South Africa was formed – within the British Empire as a self-governing dominion – from the four colonies, comprising the Cape Colony; Natal Colony; Transvaal Colony; and the Orange Colony. In 1912, the African National Congress (ANC) party was formed. 

In 1931, the Union gained legislative independence from the United Kingdom, becoming fully sovereign. Three years later, the South African Party and National Party merged to form the United party. They sought reconciliation between Afrikaners and English speaking White people. Then in 1939, the party split over the entry of the Union into WWII as an ally of the United Kingdom; as the National Party followers strongly opposed the decision. 

In 1948 the ethnic Afrikaners of the National Party were voted into power and they initiated the apartheid policy of separating white people and black people based on their race and entrenching a system of segregation in the land. 

Many of the British diaspora had voted ‘No’ in a 1960 referendum on South African independence, but it was approved by a narrow margin. The Natal majority voted against the republic and some residents called for secession from the Union after the referendum. In 1961, South Africa was declared a republic and became a fully independent nation, ending the British Monarch as the head of State with Queen Elizabeth II losing the title Queen of South Africa. Pressured by other Commonwealth nations, South Africa withdrew from the organisation in 1961, to later rejoin in 1994. 

It was at this time that ANC leader Nelson Mandela formed an armed branch of the ANC to fight against apartheid. He was arrested in 1962 and jailed. Mandela was incarcerated for twenty-seven years while fighting for equal rights; becoming a worldwide symbol against apartheid. 

Frederik Willem de Klerk was elected president in 1989. He immediately began to work to end apartheid, with Public facilities desegregated. In 1990, Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Subsequently, Nelson Mandela and Frederik Willem de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and by 1994 Apartheid had been fully repealed. Equal rights were attained and black people voted; electing Nelson Mandela as South African president. 

Constant readers will appreciate this is the point where we study Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups, with autosomal DNA. As mentioned in the previous chapter (Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes), the assumption by geneticists is that the white Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples of the United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, are composite peoples of the English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish and Northern Irish.

In other words, their Haplogroups will be the same as these five antecedent lines from Britain and Ireland. Though they will be similar, the contention proposed here is that the continued mutations for the defining paternal marker paternal R1b Haplogroups – including U106 (Proto-Germanic), U198 (West Germanic), M529 (Atlantic Celtic) – will be changing. Consequently other applicable north western European Y-DNA lineages such as I1 and I2a2 will also include differences, as these five nations are individual, separate and distinct tribes primarily descending from different sons of Jacob. 

The biblical identity community arrived at the same erroneous conclusion as scientists, in that these nations are all the descendants of Joseph and hence the exact same peoples. The difference in facial features, national characteristics, social mores, administrative processes, spoken accents, cultural and sporting interests, seems to have completely bypassed everyones attention and perception to see and acknowledge the differences which clearly point to different members, of the same family group. As there are no studies known to this writer to enlist as support, we will look at some of the individual demographics and statistics for each tribe. As it is plausible that Issachar and perhaps even Zebulun have spilled over into Rhodesia we will include the British white people from Zimbabwe. 

Of significance amongst the white community in Rhodesia was its transience. Settlers were as likely to leave Rhodesia after a few years as permanently settle – Genesis 49:13. For example, of the seven hundred British immigrants who were the first white settlers in 1890, only fifteen were still living in Rhodesia in 1924. As the white population of Rhodesia had a low birth rate of 18 per 1,000 people, it was dependent upon immigration, which accounted for sixty percent of the growth of the white Rhodesian population between 1955 and 1972. 

American historian Josiah Brownell noted: ‘the turnover rate for white residents in Rhodesia was very high, as Rhodesia took in a total of 255,692 white immigrants between 1955 and 1979 while the same period a total of 246,583 whites emigrated.’ During the boom of the late 1950s Rhodesia took in an average of ‘13,666 white immigrants per year, mostly from the United Kingdom and South Africa’ but conversely, an average of 7,666 whites emigrated annually.  Between 1961 and 1965, Rhodesia took in an average of 8,225 white immigrants per year, yet lost more people each year with an average white emigration of 12,912 people. 

Most people arriving were uninterested in settling in Rhodesia permanently and did not apply for Rhodesian citizenship, despite a 1967 campaign urging them to do so. Brownell explains that ‘patriotism in the white community was “shallow” due to its essentially expatriate character. 

Brownell also claimed that the majority of white immigrants in the late 1960s and early 1970s were unskilled laborers who competed with the country’s black African workforce and did not contribute badly needed technical or professional skills to the country. He argued that this was due to a government policy aimed at making white immigration as “unselective as possible” and guaranteeing every white immigrant a job.’ 

White Zimbabweans make up about 0.22% of the total population today and are mostly of British origin, though there are also Afrikaner, Greek, Portuguese, French and Dutch enclaves. The white population peaked at around 278,000 people, or 4.3% of the population in 1975, though it was 7.3% of the population in 1960 with some 223,000 people. What is interesting is that in 1890 the Black population was only about 150,000 people, yet in fifty years it had exploded into the millions. This was due to what the white settlers brought: food, medicine and employment.

In 1921, Rhodesia had a total population of 899,187 people; of which, 33,620 were European; 1,998 were mixed race; 1,250 were Asiatic; 761,790 were Bantu natives; and 100,529 people were Bantu aliens (not native to the territory). Most emigration has been to the United Kingdom, then South Africa, Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 

White South Africans are split in two from a descent, linguistic, cultural and historical perspective – the Afrikaans speaking descendants of the Dutch East India Company’s original settlers the Afrikaners, and the Anglophone descendants of the colonial Britons. White Afrikaners trace their ancestry to the mid-seventeenth century, developing a separate cultural identity and distinct language; whereas the English speaking South Africans trace their ancestry to the settlers of 1820. The remainder of the White South African population consists of immigrants who arrived later from Europe, including Germans, Italians, Greeks and Jews, of which many left when apartheid was abolished. Portuguese immigrants arrived after the collapse of the Portuguese colonial administrations in Mozambique and Angola. 

In 1911, white people comprised 22.7% of the population. By 2020, they numbered just 7.8% of the total population. Just under a million white South Africans live as expatriate workers abroad, constituting the majority of South Africa’s brain drain. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘Australia and New Zealand were unique among the European colonies because they were the only areas of the New World where nonwhite slaves were never imported as part of the colonization process. The result of this significant difference was that the new colonies in Australia and New Zealand were homogenous in their early years and for this reason, established a record for stability and progress virtually unmatched in history.  

[Their] racial history… is therefore focused on the interaction between the white immigrants and the native populations of the Aborigines… [Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut] and the Maori… [Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia] It was only in the last part of the twentieth century that significant numbers of nonwhites… entered… [and] that development, even more… [is altering] the racial dynamics of Australia and New Zealand – and not in favour of the Europeans.’

Australians of European, including Celtic-Saxon-Viking descent are the majority, estimated at seventy-six percent of the population. The majority proportion of early settlers arrived from their own free will and were of British and Irish descent, with the convict and prison guard element very much in the minority at twenty percent. Many of the first Australian settlers came from London, the Midlands, the North of England and Ireland; then afterwards from the southeast and the southwest of England, as well as Scotland. 

In 1888, sixty percent of the Australian population had been born in Australia, and almost all had British ancestral origins. From the remaining forty percent, thirty-four percent had been born in the British isles and six percent were of European origin, mainly from Germany and Scandinavia. In the 1840s, Scottish born immigrants constituted twelve percent of the Australian population. The European population on the continent grew from 0.3% of the population in 1800 to 58.6% in 1850. Germans constituted the largest non-British community for most of the nineteenth century. ‘The census of 1901 showed that [98%] of Australians had Anglo-Celtic ancestral origins, and [were] considered as “more British than Britain itself.’

During the 1950s, Australia was the destination of thirty percent of Dutch emigrants and the Netherlands born became numerically Australia’s second largest non-British group. ‘Abolition of the White Australia Policy in 1957 led to a significant increase in non-European immigration, primarily from Asia and the Middle East. This is ironic as the White Australia policy was enacted after gold was discovered in the 1850’s bringing an influx of peoples, including Chinese. With them came Triad gangs, smuggling and other crimes that led to public agitation and eventually the State of Victoria in 1856 passed a law forbidding Chinese to enter. The exclusion law was then adopted by every other colony. 

Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean and Sri Lankan are the most commonly nominated Asian ancestries in Australia. Chinese Australians constituted 5.6% of the Australian population and Indian Australians constituted 2.8% on the 2016 census. In 2019, 30% of the Australian resident population, were born overseas. 

New Zealand is one of the last major landmasses settled by humans. Most European New Zealanders have British or Irish ancestry, with smaller percentages being other European ancestries such as Germans, Poles (historically noted as ‘Germans’ due to the partitioning of Poland), French, Dutch and Scandinavians. Lesser minorities include: Greek, Turkish, Italian, Lebanese, Arab and Balkan Slavs. 

The ethnic makeup of the New Zealand population is undergoing a process of radical change because of waves of immigration, higher birth rates and increasing interracial marriages; resulting in the New Zealand population of Māori, Asians and Pacific Islanders growing at a higher rate than those of solely European descent. Over one million New Zealanders recorded in the 2013 Census were born overseas. 

Most New Zealanders are resident in New Zealand, though there is also a significant diaspora, estimated at around 750,000 people. Of these, around 640,800 live in Australia and others are heavily concentrated in the United Kingdom, the United States or Canada. In 1961 the European element in New Zealand comprised 92% of the population and the Maori 7%. By 2018 the whites comprised 72% of the total, the Maori 17% and others accounted for 11%. The United Kingdom remains the largest source of New Zealand’s immigrant population, with around a quarter of all overseas born New Zealanders born in the United Kingdom. Other major sources for New Zealand’s overseas born population include: China, India, Australia, South Africa, Fiji and Samoa. 

Despite their reputation for raping the Vikings left little trace of their DNA, Mail Online, November 1, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘Analysis of thousands of DNA samples from the UK, continental Europe and Scandinavia revealed a surprising lack of Viking genes in England, despite the Norsemen once occupying much of the country. The international team led by scientists from Oxford University and the Wellcome Trust… [and their] research, published in the journal Nature, did not find any obvious genetic footprint from the Romans or Danish Vikings. However, this is not down to a lack of virility – merely that they were not here in large enough numbers to have had enough children for their genes to live on today. Study co-leader Sir Walter Bodmer said: 

“You get a relatively small group of people who can dominate a country that they come into and there are not enough of them, however much they intermarry, to have enough of an influence that we can detect them in the genetics… At that time, the population of Britain could have been as much as one million, so an awful lot of people would need to arrive in order for there to be an impact.”

‘His colleague Professor Peter Donnelly added: 

“Genetics tells us the story of what happens to the masses. ‘There were already large numbers of people in those areas of Britain by the time the Danish Vikings came so to have a substantial impact on the genetics there would need to be very large numbers of them leaving DNA for subsequent generations. The fact we don’t get a signal is probably about numbers rather than the relative allure or lack thereof of Scandinavians to English women.”

‘Others said that the Danes may actually have been more attractive to local women because their habit of washing weekly meant they were seen as cleaner. Even in Orkney, which was a part of Norway from 875 to 1472, the Vikings contributed only about 25 per cent of the current gene pool. It suggests that the Vikings mixed very little with the indigenous population they initially terrorised and then conquered.’

On the surface, it would seem this is a valid point, but the reality is that the vast bulk of ‘Danish Vikings’, the tribe of Asher – and probably some of Naphtali too, as many ‘Australians’ originally from Britain later moved to settle in New Zealand – had left the United Kingdom. Even though they are related to the English, Welsh and Scots, they remain a distinct tribe, having left en masse. Therefore, one would not expect to find genetic ‘evidence’ of them in the United Kingdom. 

It is not about the size of a people or their impact. The Angles were the biggest tribe of the Saxons, far outnumbering the Picts, Cymry, Frisians, Jutes, Norsemen, Danes and Normans. Their genetic footprint is also negligible. This only makes sense if the vast bulk left British shores. The Romans, mainly soldiers would have intermarried with some British women and so their DNA is likely still in Britain. The key piece of information in this genetic puzzle is that as the Romans are the ancestors of the Germans (refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar), sharing similar DNA and paternal Haplogroups, particularly R1b-U106. Spotting their DNA is like looking for a needle in a haystack. It is there, but not going to be necessarily visible. 

‘The Vikings, from Norway, Sweden and Denmark, carried out extensive raids and occupations across wide areas of northern and central Europe between the eighth and late 11th centuries. Danish Vikings in particular took over large parts of England, eventually settling in an a region stretching from Essex to County Durham which was ruled by ‘Danelaw’. 

The findings support previous research from the University of Oslo suggesting that Viking men were family-orientated and not particularly bothered about the British women they conquered. Rather than Viking raiding parties consisting wholly of testosterone-charged men, researchers found that significant numbers of women, and possibly whole families, travelled on the longboats. DNA extracted from 45 Viking skeletons showed that women played an integral part in establishing settlements in the UK.’

The other salient point is that comparing DNA from the UK with ‘continental Europe and Scandinavia’ will not add anything useful as the original Vikings left Scandinavia and now live primarily in Australia and New Zealand. Not only are the Antipodeans unlike the English, the Scots and Welsh they are also not the same as the Swedes, Norwegians and Danes who are children from Abraham and his second wife Keturah – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Added to this, is the fact that the ‘Vikings’ who swarmed out of Sweden and colonised the vast tracts of Russia were not the same peoples as now living in Britain or Scandinavia – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. 

Recall in Chapter II Japheth Orientalium, we looked at the prophecy in Genesis chapter nine, verse twenty-seven regarding Japheth ‘dwelling in the tents of Shem.’ We also detailed the global agenda to ‘water-down’ the European nations in the drive towards eliminating particularly, the pure white stock of the nations of Israel – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

In Australia, between the years 1984 to 1995, forty percent of all migrants were of Asian origin. In 2003, a report revealed that fourteen percent of the residents of Perth were born in Southeast Asia – principally Vietnam. Demographic trends indicate that Australia’s residents will be twenty-seven percent Asian by 2025. Considering Third world reproduction rates and the natural shrinkage of the First World population, Australia will be close to a Third World majority population well before 2050. 

An example of an irony of the savage kind is that the largest mosque in Australia, located in Sydney, New South Wales is called the Auburn Gallipoli. This is in reference to the World War I battle where thousands of Australian troops were killed and defeated in an attempt to invade the Islamic Ottoman Empire – Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey. 

The First World element of New Zealand’s population is projected to drop to less than sixty percent by 2026; with the Asian population set to increase by 145% between 2001 and 2021. Predictions from the 2001 census include European children constituting 63% of all children in New Zealand in 2021 compared with 74% in 2001. The 2006 census showed that the Asian ethnicity had overtaken the Pacific Polynesian peoples into third palace and that by 2026, they will overtake the second place Maori. These stats show that it is highly likely that New Zealand will lose its majority First World population status before the year 2050. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016 – emphasis mine:

‘The lesson of Rhodesia proves that no matter how technologically proficient, no matter how militarily-capable, no matter how determined, no minority can indefinitely resist the power of demographics… The White Rhodesians failed to understand the relationship between demographics and political power… Rhodesian whites were imbued with the nineteenth century white supremacist belief that they had a paternalistic right to rule over nonwhites “for their own good”… white rule caused an explosion in black numbers as Western medicine, education, and technology boosted black numbers way beyond their natural reproduction levels. As a result, white supremacism created a racial demographic time bomb which swept away all vestiges of Western rule. 

This reality underlines the truth that demographic replacement is the sole driver of cultural change and that the majority of the population determines the nature of the society. It is a lesson that the Western world, which has imported vast numbers of nonwhites through mass immigration policies which started in the last part of the twentieth century, must learn. Failure to do so will result in them sharing the same fate of the white Rhodesians.’

Israelites in Southern Africa, Mikkel Stjernholm Kragh, 2010:

‘South Africa… has become very bad for whites since 1994. The crime rates per inhabitant for violent crimes such as murder and rape in South Africa are among the highest in the world. More than 3,600 white farmers and their family members have been murdered in farm attacks since 1987. The ANC government has made racial employment laws, Black Economic Empowerment, which bar whites from large parts of the job market. Many white South Africans had become so poor that in 2008 more than 600,000 Afrikaners lived in squatter camps. Many fear that South Africa will follow Zimbabwe’s example and completely drive out the whites. Many even call it a genocide.’

The following chapter concentrates on the birthright tribes descending from Jacob’s eleventh son, Joseph. The constant reader has now shared in the increasingly shocking revelations surrounding the true identities for Ishmael, Esau and Judah. The biblical identity of Joseph’s sons, Manasseh and Ephraim are no less profound and strikingly reshape prophetic understanding.

There is a time to look for something and a time to stop looking for it. There is a time to keep things and a time to throw things away… There is a time… to speak…

Ecclesiastes 3:6-7 New Century Version

The Teacher was very wise and taught the people what he knew. He very carefully thought about, studied, and… looked for just the right words to write what is dependable and true. Words from wise people are like… nails that have been driven in firmly… that come from one Shepherd. So be careful, my son, about other teachings.

Ecclesiastes 12:9-12 New Century Version

“The overwhelming majority of people never think and those who think never become the overwhelming majority. Choose your side.”

Elif Shafak

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

Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Chapter XXXI

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genesis 34:1-31

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

Dinah

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Levi and Simeon

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

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

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

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

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

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genesis 48:5

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

Genesis 49:5-7

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Joshua 19:1, 9

English Standard Version

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

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

Deuteronomy 33:8-11

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Book of Jubilees 31:12-17

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 Chronicles 6:65

English Standard Version

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

Joshua 21:9

English Standard Version

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

Judges 1:3, 17

English Standard Version

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

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

Book of Jubilees 34:20-21

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

The name of Reuben’s wife is ‘Ada;

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

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

and the name of Gad’s wife, Maka

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genesis 46:8-16

English Standard Version

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

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

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

10 The sons of Simeon [6]:

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

11 The sons of Levi [3]:

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

16 The sons of Gad [7]:

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

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

Numbers 26:1-65

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 1 Chronicles 4:24-43

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

1 Chronicles 5:1-26

English Standard Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

14 These were the sons of Abihail the son of Huri, son of Jaroah, son of Gilead [family name of Manasseh], son of Michael, son of Jeshishai, son of Jahdo, son of Buz [family name of Nahor]. 15 Ahi the son of Abdiel, son of Guni [family name of Naphtali], was chief in their fathers’ houses, 16 and they lived in Gilead, in Bashan and in its towns, and in all the pasturelands* of Sharon [great plain]* to their limits.

The words sharon and shannon may be linked, as shannon in Hebrew means fertile plain* and in Irish it means ‘old river’. A plain is fertile because it is close to a river or water. Ironically, there is a renowned Irish musician called… Sharon Shannon.

1 Chronicles: 18 ‘The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh had valiant men who carried shield and sword, and drew the bow, expert in war… 19 They waged war against the Hagrites [sons of Hagar**], Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab. 20 And when they prevailed over them, the Hagrites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried out to God in the battle, and he granted their urgent plea because they trusted in him. 21 They carried off their livestock: 50,000 of their camels, 250,000 sheep, 2,000 donkeys, and 100,000 men alive.

… 26 the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan… [in Media].’

A significant number from the tribes of Reuben and Gad were taken into captivity together, after living next to each other for some six hundred and seventy years. It is no surprise if they migrated across Europe following each other and if they are now living adjacent to one another, across an expanse of water (the Irish Sea), from Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, who had also shared a geographical proximity. Replicated today in England, Wales and Scotland.

In Luke 3:23-38 we read of Christ’s adoptive Father’s lineage, from Judah to David and included are men who are called related tribal family names:

29 ‘… Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David…’ 

In Ezekiel chapter forty-eight, the Prophet Ezekiel describes a visionary city and the portions the twelve tribes occupy; with Manasseh and Ephraim included together. Four gates on each of the four sides are described:

Ezekiel 48:30-35

English Standard Version

30 “These shall be the exits of the city:

On the north side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, 31 three gates, the gate of Reuben, the gate of Judah, and the gate of Levi, the gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel.

32 On the east side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Joseph, the gate of Benjamin, and the gate of Dan.”

We will discover that the grouping of Joseph, Benjamin and Dan is no coincidence. Their historical and genetic link a profound part of the Israelite story, coupled with prophetic outcomes of magnitude.

33 On the south side, which is to be 4,500 cubits by measure, three gates, the gate of Simeon, the gate of Issachar, and the gate of Zebulun.

34 On the west side, which is to be 4,500 cubits, three gates, the gate of Gad, the gate of Asher, and the gate of Naphtali. 35 The circumference of the city shall be 18,000 cubits. And the name of the city from that time on shall be, The Lord Is There.”

Returning to the dramatic decrease in the Simeonite tribe between censuses, leading identity researcher, Steven Collins provides a logical answer. He also concluded that the Simeonites were the historical Spartans, though we have ascertained an alternative identity in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Simeon

The Missing Simeonites, Steven M Collins – emphasis mine:

‘In the book of Numbers, we find that the Israelites under Moses undertook a first and second census of the tribes of Israel while they were in the Wilderness. The results of those enumerations of the tribes of Israel reveal some surprising results. In Numbers 1:1-3 and verse 18, we see that the census tallied the number of males “twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.” Therefore, we should keep in mind that the entire population of Israel’s tribes in the Wilderness consisted of far more than the tally in Numbers 1. 

As a guideline, one would ordinarily double the numbers to allow for one wife per man of military age. Given the polygamous culture at that time, some of the men may have had a number of wives. It is difficult to make an estimate of the number of children, but we should keep in mind that large families were very common at that time. Numbers 1:46 records that 603,550 adult males were numbered in the census. Based on some of the above rough methods of estimating the number of the entire nation of Israel at that time, we can see that the Israelites can be conservatively estimated to be body of approximately 3,000,000 people. For American readers, that number would equal the approximate population of Oregon. The actual number of Israelites was likely higher as the tribe of Levi wasn’t included in this census, nor were the people of the “mixed multitude” which accompanied the Israelites out of Egypt (Exodus 12:38).

Listed below are the populations of adult males per tribe, given in the order listed in Numbers 1.’

TRIBEPOPULATION
Reuben46,500
Simeon59,300
Gad45,650
Judah74,600
Issachar54,400
Zebulon57,400
Manasseh32,200
Ephraim40,500
Benjamin35,400
Dan62,700
Asher41,500
Naphtali53,400

‘Modern readers will notice that the tribe of Judah was, at that time, the largest tribe. The three smallest tribal figures are the three tribes which descended from Jacob and Rachel: Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin. 

However, when the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are totalled together, they numbered 72,700, showing the actual total of Israelites descended from Joseph constituted the second largest grouping in Israel. Notice that the tribe of Simeon was the third largest tribe in this census…

Now, let’s examine the census taken approximately 40 years later… For purposes of comparison, listed below are the totals from each census and the change in the total of adult males in each tribe. The second census is listed in Numbers 26. Numbers 26:2 confirms that it is the sum of males “twenty years old an upward… all that are able to go to war in Israel,” so each census was conducted with the same criteria.’

TRIBE1st Census2nd CensusChange
Reuben46,50043,700-2,800
Simeon59,30022,200-37,100
Gad45,65040,500-5,100
Judah74,60076,5001,900
Issachar54,40064,3009,900
Zebulon57,40060,5003,100
Manasseh32,20052,70020,500
Ephraim40,50032,500-8,000
Benjamin35,40045,60010,200
Dan62,70064.4001,700
Asher41,50053,40011,900
Naphtali53,40045,400-8000
TOTALS603,550601,730-1,820

‘The national totals indicate the number of Israelites enumerated under Moses had dropped very slightly, but the tribal totals reveal something very different had transpired. The most evident change is that over half the tribe of Simeon inexplicably “disappeared” from the census totals. What happened? Simeon, the third largest tribe in Israel in the first census, had plummeted to be the smallest tribe of all in the second census! Another anomaly leaps out at the reader.

The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh shared the birthright blessing of the Abrahamic covenant, which included being blessed with large population growth. Manasseh had, indeed, risen dramatically in population, going from 32,200 to 52,700, a gain of 20,500 people, by far the largest increase in any tribe.’

Close to the timing of the second census, the tribe of Manasseh split into two tribes. With half renaming with Ephraim on the West side of the River Jordan and the other half dwelling on the East side of the river with Reuben and Gad.

Collins: ‘However, its brother tribe which shared this birthright blessing, Ephraim, dropped 8,000 people to join Simeon at the bottom of the population totals of the tribes in Israel. Even the tribe of Benjamin outnumbered the Ephraimites at that time. Judah was still the largest tribe, but Manasseh’s explosive growth resulted in the tribe of Joseph being the largest tribe if Manasseh and Ephraim were added together. 

As many readers might observe, something “doesn’t add up” in these figures. As commentator Paul Harvey says here in America, let’s examine what happened to determine “the rest of the story.”

I believe the key to what happened in Numbers 26 is found in the previous chapter. In Numbers 25, we learn that Phineas, a Levite, executed “a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites” (verses 7-14)’ – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘Phineas leaped to execute this Simeonite prince for his audacity in rebelling against God by taking a Midianite woman into his tent at a time when god was punishing Israel for such deeds. Indeed, God sent a plague among the Israelites which killed 24,000 people, and that plague was stayed by the action of Phineas.’

More violence from the explosive brothers Simeon and Levi and this time it is between themselves. 

‘The Bible does not record which tribes suffered the most from that plague. Even if one assumes the Simeonites bore the brunt of this plague, it does not begin to account for the drop in population of approximately 56,000 males of 20 years and older among the tribes which lost population between the two censuses. Also, Numbers 25:9 records that 24,000 people died in the plague, it does not state that all those slain were “males 20 years of age and older.” This indicates that 24,000 men, women and children of all ages died in the plague, and that perhaps 6,000 of that total were males 20 years and older. Where did the rest go?

It is my belief that after the execution [of] a Simeonite prince by a Levitical priest, there was… great dissension in the camp of Israel. We know from the accounts in the Torah of their wanderings in the Wilderness that the Israelites were very prone to revolting against Moses over various provocations. We know from Genesis 34:25 that Simeon and Levi were the two most impulsive sons of Jacob, the two most likely to settle a matter “by the sword.” To put it in modern American terms, they were the kind who “shot first and asked questions later.” Genesis 49:5-7 prophesies that impulsive wrathfulness leading to violence would characterize both Simeonites and Levites through all the millennia up to and including the “latter days.”

In the episode of Phineas the Levite unilaterally executing a Simeonite [prince], the two most violent tribes were likely at [loggerheads], and a civil war among the tribes was not improbable. God usefully directed the Levites’ propensity to violence into becoming a tribe of butchers, killing, cutting up and sacrificing innumerable animals under the system of animal sacrifices established in ancient Israel. Simeon had no such outlet.

I believe a logical explanation for the sudden drop in several tribes’ population is that most of the tribe of Simeon and varying contingents of the other tribes literally “walked out” of the camp and left the main body of Israelites to strike out on their own. The huge drop in the number of Simeonites indicates that the Simeonites led this partial “exodus” from the Israelite camp. The Simeonites were impulsive and the execution of one of their chieftans (however just) could easily have provoked such an action. 

The census figures indicate that the tribes of Ephraim and Naphtali contributed most of the remaining Israelites who accompanied most of the tribe of Simeon as it left the Israelite encampment. The census data indicates that the entire tribes of Manasseh, Asher, Issachar and Benjamin stayed with Moses as their second census totals reflect normal demographic growth.

Would God or Moses have allowed so large a mass of Israelite to leave the camp? I think the answer is yes. Indeed, they may have encouraged it as a way to end the dissension in the camp. There was no commandment of God that forbade any Israelites to leave the camp in the Wilderness, so the only penalty that exiting Israelites would bear would be that their children would not enter the Promised land with the children of those who stayed. Remember that every adult (except Caleb and Joshua) were under a death sentence in the Wilderness. For their rebellion, they would wander till the entire generation who refused to go into the Promised Land at first was dead! Under such circumstances, many could have thought: “If my choice is stay and die in this desert or leave and trust to my wits and sword to make a living, I’ll choose the second option.”

The tribe of Simeon… likely… led such a mini-exodus. The fact that Manasseh grew greatly between the censuses and that Ephraim dropped dramatically argues that this can only be explained if a large number of Ephraimites left the camp. Both tribes were the birthright tribes, and they shared the same promises. If no one had left the camp, the population figures of Ephraim and Mansseh should have reflected the same growth.

If we limit our number of exiting Israelites to only those tribes who had net reductions in their tribal totals, we have about 50,000 males above age twenty and all their wives and children (perhaps 200,000 people). The tribes whose populations stayed static indicates that some of the natural growth of those tribes was deleted from the census because contingents of their tribes also joined the exodus. The total of those leaving the camp may have been larger than 200,000. If such an event occurred, there would have been a powerful stimulus to conduct the second census to “see who we have left.” Indeed, Numbers 26:1-2 shows that right after the events described above, God told Moses to take a census of all the tribes.

Where did the departing Israelite go?’

Members from the tribes of Reuben, Gad and Ephraim were early arrivals in Ireland, though there were two other tribes who were the very first to arrive in the British Islands: Erin and Albion. Those two tribes were Dan and Simeon. Both would then enter Britain to explore it, with Simeon making their permanent home there instead of Ireland. It was the Simeonites who moved completely to Britain and were the first Britons with the distinction of the status as the first tribe to settle there, known as Cymry and later as the Welsh. 

Whereas the Danites were likely the first tribe to explore Britain, they like the tribe of Benjamin and unlike Simeon had a foothold in both Britain and Ireland before Benjamin moved entirely to the northern reaches of Britain. Known at different times as Pictavia; Caledonia, Alba and Scotland – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The Tribe of Dan’s story is somewhat more complicated – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Origin, Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Sennacherib recorded having exiled more than 200,000 people from Judah. The Bible mentions him having captured all of the unfenced cities in Judah (2 Kings 18:13) and Midrashim also [speaks] of Sennacherib deporting vast numbers from Judah and Simeon. These exiles joined the deported Tribes of northern Israel and shared their destiny. Sennacherib… intermittently besieged Jerusalem over a number of years but his army was stricken by an angel and 185,000 Assyrians died. Sennacherib returned to Nineveh where he was assassinated by two of his sons who fled to Ararat (Urartu) [refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran] (2 Kings 19:37). 

The Ten Tribes before their exile had been called by the Assyrians, “Khumri”. This term* in Assyrian could also be rendered “GUMRI”. A similar name, “Gimiri” in Babylonian can connote “tribes” and a related term “gamira” can mean mobile exiles. At all events most authorities agree that the Cimmerians of history were composed of several peoples of differing origins. All signs indicate that at least some of these peoples were Israelite! 

The Cimmerians had first been reported… by the Assyrians at the earliest in 714 though the more accepted date is ca.707 BCE. The Scythians though originally part and parcel with the Cimmerians had separated from the main body and were acting independently. Cimmerians and Scythians essentially consisted of the same elements though in different proportions. The king of the Cimmerians was referred to in an Assyrian inscription as “King of the Amurru”. The name “Amuru” was sometimes applied to Israelites and geographically the land of “Amurru” had encompassed the former Israelite areas of “Syria and Palestine”. 

The Celts were believed to have come from the east and to have advanced via the Danube Valley. Welsh Legend stated that their ancestors, the Cymry, had been led by Hu Gadarn* from Drephane opposite Byzantium (on the Bosporus) across the sea to Britain. The Welsh call themselves “Gomeru”. In Welsh tradition, they (i.e. Cimmerians) were led by Hu from Drephrobane… across the sea to Defene in Wales. The name Defene is sometimes rendered as “Daphne” and there was a port named Daphne opposite Byzantium. Daphne of Antiochea was one of the places to which the Ten Tribes were taken into exile.’ 

Britain’s Trojan History, Bernard Jones – emphasis mine:

‘Homer, in his epic the Iliad, tells us that Aeneas led the Dardanians in the war against the Greeks whilst Hector led the Trojans. Aeneas was a cousin to Hector, who was killed by the great Achilles. It was said that Hector was the ‘heart’ of Troy whereas Aeneas was its ‘soul’. Aeneas survived the war and led his people in exile to found a new Troy. The voyage of Aeneas had taken seven years when, eventually, he brought his fleet to rest’ – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Jones: ‘Here, he was received honourably by Latinus the king who, because of an oracle, pledged his daughter in marriage to the Trojan prince. His daughter, however, was already betrothed to a king of the Rutuli and he immediately went to war against the Trojans because of the insult. The war was a bloody affair but ended when the king of the Rutuli was killed by the Trojan prince. Aeneas had a son by his first wife, Creusa, and they called him Ascanius. Sadly, Creusa had perished at Troy on the night that the city fell. In due course Aeneas married Lavinia, the daughter of king Latinus and the Trojans built a city and it was called Lavinium, after her.

Brutus* the Trojan was the great grandson of Aeneas of Troy. He accidentally killed his father when they were both out hunting and, as a result, was exiled for committing such a crime. He ended up in a certain part of Greece where he discovered descendants of Trojan captives, taken there by the Greeks after the Trojan War. Brutus stayed in the country for quite a time and became known for his skills, his courage and wisdom. 

In due course Brutus was prevailed upon to become the leader of all the Trojans, in order to free them from thralldom under the Greek king. After a number of battles, and against all odds, Brutus captured the Greek king. To save himself from being killed the king agreed to give his daughter to Brutus as his wife, and to let the Trojans depart in peace for another country. The Greeks supplied Brutus with a large number of ships and the Trojans departed, landing eventually in Totnes, in Devon.’

Welsh men

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 469 – 471 – emphasis mine:

‘… ancient Britons migrated from Troy, from tribes led by a Trojan hero named Britu, one of many nomatives from which Britain derived… legends suggest London’s Celtic name from antiquity was Lloegress, which owned an even more mystical name dating even further back into antiquity, documented as Troja Newydd, or New Troy.

Brutus of Troy was the grandson of Aeneus, founder of the Romans in Greek mythology. Brutus was the hero of legend who rebelled against the Greeks three generations after the fall of Troy, escaping the wrath of the Greeks by sailing with his people past the Pillars of Hercules to an island known today as Britain. They freed Britain from a race of giants led by Gog, Magog, and Albion… Brutus and his victorious followers settled along the banks of the Thames River, naming it Troia Nova (New Troy), or Trinovantum. Brutus’s ancient kingdom of Britain became identified as Albion… the earliest name by which Britain was known… 

Ancient Welsh legends… record three waves of… immigration that were made up first of the tribe of Cymrey… second invasion came from the tribe of the Lloegrians, and the third invasion derived from the Brython tribe of Llydaw. All three were of the same language, culture, and race. Lloegres was the ancient appellation for southern and central England, while Cymrey was the name given for Wales, northern England, Cornwall and the Scottish border region. After the death of Brutus, Britain split into three kingdoms under the rule of his three sons. The names of those three kingdoms became known as Lloegres, Cymry, and Albyne.’

For further information on the story and identity of Brutus and his entourage, refer Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. 

Wayne: ‘… the region of Troy, was known in antiquity as Galatia… the Black Sea region is the originating home of the Celts… and home of the Scythians and Sarmatians. The Greeks knew the Celts as Keltoi or Galatia, while the Romans… knew the Celts as the Celtae and Galatai. Julius Caesar… referred to the Celts first as Gauls… they referred to themselves in their own language as Celts.

Some scholars think Celt derived from the root key, the Old Irish celim, meaning “hidden,” suggesting they were the hidden people or people that concealed things. Celt, in another version, is thought to have derived from the European root quel, meaning “elevated,” which then evolved to Old Irish as Celthe.

The Celts regarded themselves as the elevated or noble race. The noble Celt was… blond, blue-eyed [including] the Irish, British, Welsh, and Scottish…[Celts, who] had red hair and pale green eyes… [possessing] strikingly similar characteristics to the Tuatha Denaan… Galatea translates as “milky white”… The Celts of Galatia were the very same people to whom… Paul preached.’

Identity scholar and author Raymond McNair, offers an explanation for the original derivation for the term Celt.

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘… the Gauls, Cimmerians, Cymry and the Celts are all simply different offshoots of the CIMMERIAN branch of the great SCYTHIAN people. The ancient writers spoke of all the GAULS as CIMBRI and identified them with the CIMMERIANS of earlier date. 

… the word “Galatae” was also spelled as “Geltae” or “Keltae.” This is seemingly according to Lysons, the derivation of the word Celt or Kelt. It is possible that this name “Kelt” is derived from the name of a rivulet or a brook just northeast of Jerusalem, very near Jericho. The Encyclopedia Britannica speaks of this brook and calls it “Wadi Kelt” (11th edition, Volume XIX, Article Palestine, page 602). This same Wadi is mentioned a number of times in the Rand McNally Bible Atlas, but it speaks of it as the “Wadi el Qelt” (Chapter XIX, page 395). 

It is highly possible that this name comes from “Wadi Kelt.” The Ten Tribes of Israel would have been familiar with this Wadi since many of them from Northern Israel would have passed near it on their way to observing the annual festivals in Jerusalem. Kelts have never in modern times lived in the area of Jericho, but it is now abundantly evident that the ancestors of the present-day Kelts did once live in the vicinity of the “Wadi Kelt.”

McNair highlights the origin and similarity of early religious practices in Britain with that of the Israelite homeland in Canaan, coupled with the striking similarity between the Hebrew and Welsh languages.

McNair: ‘… Lysons made this confession: 

“I confess that but for the universal tradition which assigns our (the British) descent to Japhet [Chapter II Japheth Orientalium; and Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan], I should have been rather inclined to attribute to the British Celts a Semitic origin, both on account of the relics of worship which we find in Britain, and also on account of the language…” (Our British Ancestors, page 18). 

‘Lysons then shows that there are literally thousands of words in the English language which come from the Hebrew language (ibid., page 21 ff.). He says: 

“Thus I propose to show in the course of these pages when we come to the relics of British worship remaining in the country, and retaining with little variation or corruption their aboriginal names, the remarkable similarity between those names and the HEBREW and CHALDEE languages” (ibid., page 21). 

‘He then points out that many of the “old British families” have Hebrew names. “Now, whatever may be the historical value of the Welsh poems, it is undoubted that Talies in his Angar Cyfyndawd, says that his lore had been ‘DECLARED IN HEBREW, Hebraig…'” (ibid., page 22). 

On page 93 of this same work, Lysons says: 

“Yet this we gather from the names attaching to the British monuments still remaining among us, when divested of modern corruptions, that there is a strong affinity between these British names and that language of which HEBREW is either the original or one of its earliest off-shoots; and that therefore HEBREW, CHALDEE or some other very near cognate, must have been the language of the first inhabitants in this island” (ibid., page 93). 

‘Lysons then proceeds to show the similarity between many ancient British and Hebrew words, and between the corrupted religion of the Palestinian Israelites and that of the ancient British people. Lysons finally makes this startling statement: 

“We cannot avoid the conclusion that our British ancestors were devoted to that kind of worship which they brought with them from the East, whence they came at a very early period, even close upon the Patriarchal times of Holy Writ” (ibid., pages 93, 94). 

‘… the early British ancestors said they came from Armenia in the area of the Caucasus Mountains; and we know that many of them arrived in the British Isles centuries before Christ’s birth. Robert Owen also substantiates this view by the following statement: 

“Most Welsh scholars have employed their time on the production of grammars and dictionaries. The Hebrew learning of Dr. John Davies of Mallwyd seems to have influenced his countrymen to accept the Puritan atavism of referring Welsh to the language of Moses as its fountain” (The Kymry, pref. v., vi.). 

‘For any who still might have any lingering doubts regarding the similarity between the Hebrew and the early British languages which were used by its ancient peoples, one need only study the present-day Welsh language. There are many strong similarities between modern Welsh and Hebrew. Even one who is unskilled in the science of languages cannot fail to detect a close similarity between the spoken Hebrew language when contrasted with modern Welsh. Many Welsh words are almost devoid of any vowels whatsoever, just as the ancient Hebrew language was written without any vowels.’

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen 1902 – emphasis mine: 

“… the people of Wales call themselves, in ancient Welsh, ‘Bryth y Brithan,’ or ‘Briths of Briton,’ which means ‘The Covenanters’ of the ‘land of the Covenant.’ The first form of this phrase is almost vernacular Hebrew.” The fact that these “Brythonic Celts” who migrated to the British Isles bore the Hebrew B­R­T root word for “covenant” confirmed their Israelite origin. 

It is also unmistakably recorded in British history that the earliest settlers in Wales and southern England were called Simonii. They came by the way of the sea in the year 720 B.C. At this time there was the greatest influx of the Tuatha de Daanan to Ireland, and this synchronizes with the deportation of the Israelites of the commonwealth of Ephraim to Assyria, and the flight of Dan and Simeon from the seaports and coast country of Palestine. That Simonii is the plural of Simeon we need scarcely mention. 

Omri, the sixth king of Israel, built the city of Samaria, the third and permanent capital of Israel, and that eventually the entire country, formerly called “All Israel,” became known as Samaria, because that was the name of its capital also that Samaria became one of the national names of Israel, and is so used in some prophecies concerning them. Hence Omri is regarded as the real founder of the kingdom of Samaria, and Samaria-Israel was often referred to by other nations as the House of Omri. 

When Shalmanesar, the king of Assyria, who led Israel into captivity, made a record of that captivity on the tablets of Assyria, he called them the House of Omri (Beth Khumree); also when Israel was confederate with Resin, king of Syria, and went against the Jews, and the Jews besought Tiglath-Pilesar, who was at that time king of Assyria, to become their confederate, he also in his records referred to Israel as the Beth-Khumree. In the annals of Sargon, who was also a king of Assyria (Isaiah 20:1), successor of Shalmanesar, and predecessor of Senacharib, Israel is called Beth Khumree (House of Omri), and their capital city Khumree. On the Nimroud obelisk, “Jehu, the son of Omri,” is written “Yahua-abil-Khumree.” 

Professor Rawlinson, who does not believe this truth we are enforcing, says: “Jehu is usually called in the Bible the son of Nimshi – although Jehosaphat was his actual father (2 Kings 9:20), but the Assyrians, taking him for the legitimate successor to the throne, named as his father, or rather ancestor, “Omri,” the founder of the Kingdom of Samaria – Omri’s name being written on the obelisk, as it is in the inscriptions of Shalmanesar, where the Kingdom of Israel is always called the country of “Beth Omri.” Dr. Hincks also says: “The title, ‘Son of Omri,’ is equivalent to that of King of Samaria, the city which Omri built, and which was known to the Assyrians as Beth Omri, or Khumri.” 

The tribes of both Dan and Simeon belonged, of course, to the Beth Khumree, when used as meaning the Kingdom of Omri, or Samaria. Simeon seems to have clung to this name far more tenaciously than did Dan, for they still call themselves and their country Kymry [Cymru]. Saville says: “This name Kymri, or Cymry, as it is more commonly written, is in reality the plural of Kymro, meaning a Welsh-man, and the country of the Kymry is called by themselves Khymru, which has been Latinized into the well-known name of Cambria.

The letter V in the Welsh language has two powers, and both these powers are active in the word Kymry. This letter V sounds as U, except when it stands in the last syllable of [a] CL word, and then it has the sound of the Italian i or the English ee! Hence, the correct pronunciation of the country of Wales, or land of the Cymry, in its ancient tongue would be as near as possible to the names Kumree, Khumree, or Kumri.” 

Thomas Stephens, in the preface to his “Literature of the Kymry,” says: “On the map of Britain, facing St. George’s Channel, is a group of counties called Wales, inhabited by a people distinct from, and but very imperfectly understood by, those who surround them. Their neighbors call them Welsh-men. Welsh or Walsch is not a proper name, but a Teutonic term signifying ‘strangers,’ and was applied to all persons who were not of that family: but the proper name of these people is Kymry. They are the last remnant of the Kimmerioi of Homer, and of the Kimry (Cimbri) of Germany.

From the Cimbric Chersonesus (Jut-land) a portion of these landed on the shores of Northumberland, gave their name to the county of Cumberland, and in process of time followed the seaside to their present resting-place, where they still call themselves Kimry, and give their country a similar name [Cymru]. Their history, clear, concise and authentic, ascends to a high antiquity. Their language was embodied in verse long before the languages now spoken rose into notice, and their literature, cultivated and abundant, lays claim to being the most ancient in modern Europe.” 

Thus we find that the Khumree, Kumri, Kimry, Cumbre, Cimbri, or Cambrians, as the name is variously called in different tongues, were strangers and wanderers among the nations until they settled in the isles of the sea with the rest of their brethren, the Brith-ish or covenant people. 

“Herodotus, the ‘Father of History,’ tells us much about the Khumbri, a people who, in his day, dwelt in the Crimean peninsula and thereabout. He particularly notes that they had come into that territory from Media, which he remarks was not their original home or birthplace.” – Our Race. 

We have thus conclusively followed the word Khumree, for the reason that the people who are known as Angles, Saxons, Danes, Celts or Kelts, Jutes, Scots, Welsh, Scyths (or Scythians), or Normans can trace themselves back to Media-Persia, but no further, and find their ancestors in the Khumree, at the place, and at the very time, when Israel was losing her identity and was actually known in the history of that country as the Beth Khumree.’

Cardiff, capital city of Wales

Raymond McNair outlines a summary for the words Omri, Ghomri, Gimiri, Kymry and Cimmerian.

‘If we carefully piece together all of the various points which are clearly brought out by the different historians concerning the Cimmerians, the Gimiri and the Kymry, we are brought to the following conclusions: 

(1) The Cimmerians appear in history in the same general vicinity to which Israel had been taken captive. 

(2) They appear about one century after the first tribes of Israel were deported into the regions south of the Caucasus Mountains, near the Black and Caspian Seas – about 741 B.C. 

(3) All of these peoples are closely related i.e. the Cimmerians, Gimiri, and the Kymry. 

(4) They leave the area of Armenia, or the Caucasus regions, and arrive in North-west Europe. In fact… branches of these Cimmerians penetrated into Central Europe, North Italy, Spain, and into many countries of Europe, as well as into Britain and Scandinavia. 

(5) … these Cimmerian or Kymric peoples are also closely related to the Gauls and Kelts…

(6) All of these peoples were sprung from the Scythian hoard, and mixed freely with them. The fact that they fought with the Scythians does not mean they were not close relatives of the Scythians. We have previously observed that the tribes of Israel even while still living in the Promised Land were continually warring among themselves, as is also mentioned in James 1:1; 4:1. 

(7) The Cimmerians were the same as the Gimiri who were also the same as the Ghomri or the people of Omri. These peoples were different branches of Dispersed Israel.’

A tangible line is clearly and undeniably drawn along the dots which join Simeon, King Omri, the Cymry and in turn the Welsh. The relationship of these terms with the word Gaul is worth noting. First, the origin of the name Gaul is offered by Raymond McNair in his thesis Key to Northwest European Origins.

‘Spier mentions the name by which the exiles of Israel were known, at the time of the Second Temple. He says: 

“The second holidays were adopted by the entire GOLAH, the communities living beyond the confines of Israel (meaning the exiled Ten Tribes)” (The Comprehensive Hebrew Calendar, page 11). This Jewish author uses the word “Golah” when referring to the dispersed Israelites who were living beyond the confines of the Promised Land. Note the similar pronunciation of the words “Golah” and “Gaul.” 

Speaking of the territory east of the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee, Hurlbut says, “Decapolis… embraced no less than five sections as may be seen upon the map [not shown]: (1) Gaulonities, the ancient Golan now Jaulan, east of the Jordan” (A Bible Atlas, page 94). 

‘This is speaking of New Testament Palestine. The city which was anciently called “Golan” had by New Testament times given its name to the district called “Gaulonities.” (Encyclopaedia Biblica, Article Golan, pages 1747, 1748). The word “Golan” had been slightly changed in spelling to Gaulon-itis, the land of the Gaulon, meaning the land of the dispersed. On pages 100, 101, 104, and 105 of Hurlbut’s A Bible Atlas are maps illustrating this area lying immediately to the east of the sea of Galilee. The… Jewish historian, Josephus, speaks of a territory in the inheritance of Israel known as Gaulonitis. “He also gave Gaulonitis… to Philip, who was his son…” (Antiquities Book XVIII, Chapter VIII paragraph I). 

We now know that the people of Israel who lived in the area of GAUL-on-itis or Golan went into their captivity in 741 B.C. Those “Gaulonites” from Gaulonitis were the first to be dispersed among the nations. Since they spoke Hebrew at the time of their exile, they must have called themselves “Golah” or Gauls meaning “Captives.” These East-Jordanic Gauls, the exiles, or captives, who had been taken out of their land by the Assyrians, had probably ceased to pronounce the “h” sound by this time.’

Welsh women

McNair continues with the link between the term Gaul, its Greek equivalent Galatia and the migrations of these peoples to the British Isles. 

McNair: ‘The Gauls conquered Rome in 390 B.C. They conquered Great Britain, France except the Rhone basin, the whole of Spain except its Mediterranean coast, and north of Italy, parts of Germany, Russia, Switzerland, Hungary, Romania, and Silesia. Their empire was greater than either that of Charlemagne or of Napoleon – reaching from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Black Sea at the time when Alexander the Great was engaged in his conquest of Asia in 334 B.C. (ibid., 46, 47). 

“They (the Gauls) loved bright and varigated colours in their clothes, coloured stripes and checks” (ibid., page 67). Here we can see the tartan or “Scotch Plaid” which is still used by some of the present-day descendants of the Kelts who now live in Scotland. 

There were two Roman Gauls: (1) Gallia Cisalpina (Hither), included North Italy between the Alps and Apennines, and (2) Gallia Transalpina (Further), encompassed modern France, Belgium, and parts of Holland, Germany, and Switzerland. 

“The Greek form of GALLIA was GALATIA, but Galatia in Latin denoted another Celtic region in Central Asia Minor, sometimes styled Gallograecia” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 11th edition Volume XI, Article Gaul page 532). 

It is interesting to note that Livy and the elder and younger Pliny were Celts. 

Julius Caesar in his Commentaries says that Gaul in his day was divided into three peoples – (1) Aquitani, (2) Gauls or Celts and (3) Belgae.

… these same people afterward bore the name “Gauls” in Europe and some of their kindred brethren also bore the name “Galatians,” and lived in Central Asia Minor – in the heart of modern-day Turkey. The true Galatians (or Gauls) only comprised about one-tenth of the population of the territory of “Galatia.” 

Speaking of the Gauls and Kelts, Funck-Brentano in his work, The Earliest Times, states that the Celts came from the north – from Jutland, Friesland and from the coasts of the Baltic. He says: “They were the Normans of the century before our era” (ibid, page 27). They called themselves “CELTS,” but they were also known by the name of “GALATES,” and the Romans called them “GALLI.” To the ancients, the designations, Galli, Galates, and Celts were synonymous. But he says that these three names may have designated three different branches of the same race originally (ibid, pages 27, 28). A fourth branch was the Volcae-Walah, Wallachians, Wallons, and Welsh, all being derived from this Celtic name Volcae. The Celtic branch were tall and fair with pink and white skin. The Greek artists in the third century B.C. used the Gauls or Kelts as their ideal in sculpture and paintings (ibid., pages 27,28).’

In support of the convincing research quoted already, the following etymological associations are worth either recapping, or adding as further weight. Ancient Gaul or Gallia in Latin, was a vast region of western Europe which spread far beyond the modern borders of France. The Greek term Galatia is the same as Gallia. The Greeks connected the word Galatai to the ‘milk white’ skin of the Gauls and Galatians, as gala means milk. In turn, the word is related to the Welsh word gallu which means ‘to be able (can)’. 

Even so, Gaul is not related to Gallia, but rather stems from the French Gaule or Waulle, which derives from the Old Frankish word Walholant, meaning ‘land of the foreigners.’ The Old English word Wealh, or Wealas derives from the Proto-Germanic, walhaz, meaning an outlander, foreigner, Celt. An exonym applied by Germanic speakers to Celts and Latin speaking people indiscriminately. It is cognate with the names Wales, Wallonia of Belgium and Wallachia of Romania. Whereas the Irish word Gael – formed from Goidel and Gaidheal – superficially similar with Gaul, are two distinct words and not derived from one another. 

Interestingly, an old Welsh name for Wales was Gwalia and the modern French name for Wales is Pays de Galles; matching the similar Romanian translation of ‘country of the Gauls’. Germanic peoples called the Gauls, Volcae and the Old English word for native Britons was Vahls, which in time become Wales. It must be remembered, these are descriptions of the Welsh by others. The Cymry always called their land (country) Cymru and in Gaelic, Gymru.

A little out of context – as it relates to subjects in the article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega – but because it is Welsh focused, interesting aspects relating to dragons have been included. Dragons being akin to Seraphim which are themselves, described in the scriptures as fiery flying serpents. The dragon is a powerful symbol of rebellion and is also representative of the tribe of Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis mine:

‘The early Britons, from whom the modern Welsh are descended, provide us with our earliest surviving European accounts of reptilian monsters, one of whom killed and devoured king Morvidus (Morydd) in ca 336 BC. We are told in the account translated for us by Geoffrey of Monmouth, that the monster ‘gulped down the body of Morvidus as a big fish swallows a little one.’ Geoffrey described the animal as a Belua. Peredur, not the ancient king of that name (306-296 BC), but a much later son of Earl Efrawg, had better luck than Morvidus, actually managing to slay his monster, an addanc (pr. athanc: var. afanc^), at a place called Llyn Llion in Wales. At other Welsh locations the addanc is further spoken of along with another reptilian species known as the carrog. The addanc survived until comparatively recent times at such places as Bedd-yr-Afanc near Brynberian, at Llyn-yr-Afanc above Bettws-y-Coed on the River Conwy (the killing of this monster was described in the year 1693), and Llyn Barfog. A carrog is commemorated at Carrog near Corwen, and at Dol-y-Carrog in the Vale of Conwy. 

Moreover, ‘dinosaurs’, in the form of flying reptiles, were a feature of Welsh life until surprisingly recent times. As late as the beginning of the present century, elderly folk at Penllin in Glamorgan used to tell of a colony of winged serpents that lived in the woods around Penllin Castle. As Marie Trevelyan tells us: 

‘The woods around Penllin Castle, Glamorgan, had the reputation of being frequented by winged serpents, and these were the terror of old and young alike. An aged inhabitant of Penllyne, who died a few years ago, said that in his boyhood the winged serpents were described as very beautiful. 

They were coiled when in repose, and “looked as if they were covered with jewels of all sorts [Ezekiel 28:13]. Some of them had crests sparkling with all the colours of the rainbow”. When disturbed they glided swiftly, “sparkling all over,” to their hiding places. When angry, they “flew over people’s heads, with outspread wings, bright, and sometimes with eyes too, like the feathers in a peacock’s tail” – refer articles; Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. He said it was “no old story invented to frighten children”, but a real fact. His father and uncle had killed some of them, for they were as bad as foxes for poultry. The old man attributed the extinction of the winged serpents to the fact that they were “terrors in the farmyards and coverts.”

‘This account is intriguing in many respects, not the least being the fact that it is not a typical account of dragons. The creatures concerned were not solitary and monstrous beasts, but small creatures that lived in colonies. Not at all like the larger species of winged reptile that used to nest upon an ancient burial-mound, or tumulus, at Trellech-a’r-Betws in the county of Dyfed, for example. 

But whilst we are in Wales, it is worth noting that at Llanbardan-y-Garrag (is Garrag a corruption of carrog?), the church contains a carving of a local giant reptile whose features* include large paddle-like flippers, a long neck and a small head. Glaslyn, in Snowdon, is a lake where an afanc^ was sighted as recently as the 1930s. On this occasion two climbers on the side of a mountain looked down onto the surface of Glaslyn and they saw the creature, which they described as having a long grey body, rise from the depths* of the lake to the surface, raise its head and then submerge again. 

One could multiply such reports by the hundred. In England and Scotland*, again until comparatively recent times, other reptilian monsters were sighted and spoken of in many places. The table at the end of this chapter [not shown] lists eighty-one locations in the British Isles alone in which dinosaur activity has been reported (there are, in fact, nearly 200 such places in Britain), but perhaps the most relevant aspect of this as far as our present study is concerned is the fact that some of these sightings and subsequent encounters with living dinosaurs can be dated to the comparatively recent past.’ 

‘… in the 15th century, according to a contemporary chronicle that still survives in Canterbury Cathedral’s library, the following incident was reported. On the afternoon of Friday, 26th September, 1449, two giant reptiles were seen fighting on the banks of the River Stour (near the village of Little Cornard) which marked the English county borders of Suffolk and Essex. 

One was black, and the other ‘reddish and spotted’. After an hour-long struggle that took place ‘to the admiration of many [of the locals] beholding them’, the black monster yielded and returned to its lair, the scene of the conflict being known ever since as Sharp fight Meadow.

In 1867 was seen, for the last time, the monster that lived in the woods around Fittleworth in Sussex. It would run up to people hissing and spitting if they happened to stumble across it unawares, although it never harmed anyone. Several such cases could be cited, but suffice it to say that too many incidents like these are reported down through the centuries and from all sorts of locations for us to say that they are all fairy-tales. 

For example, Scotland’s famous Loch Ness Monster* is too often thought to be a recent product of the local Tourist Board’s efforts to bring in some trade, yet Loch Ness is by no means the only Scottish loch where monsters have been reported. Loch Lomond, Loch Awe, Loch Rannoch and the privately owned Loch Morar (over 1000 ft deep) also have records of monster activity in recent years. Indeed, there have been over forty sightings at Loch Morar alone since the end of the last war, and over a thousand from Loch Ness in the same period. – refer article: The Top Ten Unexplained Mysteries of all Time*. ‘However, as far as Loch Ness itself is concerned, few realise that monstrous reptiles, no doubt the same species, have been sighted in and around the loch since the so-called Dark Ages…

As recently as the 18th century, in a lake called Llyn-y-Gader in Snowdon, Wales, a certain man went swimming. He reached the middle of the lake and was returning to the shore when his friends who were watching him noticed that he was being followed by: ‘... a long, trailing object winding slowly behind him. They were afraid to raise an alarm, but went forward to meet him as soon as he reached the shore where they stood. Just as he was approaching, the trailing object raised its head, and before anyone could render aid the man was enveloped in the coils of the monster…’ It seems that the man’s body was never recovered.’

The Flag of Wales

Leading into Levi and an important identifying sign of the sons of Jacob, is the fact that the Creator gave ancient Israel dietary guidelines – Leviticus 11:1-8.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning clean and unclean meat has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘Red or Green?’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

We find considerable evidence of the Levitical influence in ancient Britain. There has also been much written linking the Levitical system with the early Druids, who practised a combined pagan and Hebrew tradition. 

Yair Davidy put together a number of quotes showing historical documentation adapted from his work The Israelite Origin of the Celtic Races, 1996 – emphasis mine. Beginning with Donald MacKenzie, whom in 1935 examined historical food prohibitions in Scotland.

“There are still thousands of Highlanders and groups of Lowlanders who refuse to keep pigs or to partake of their flesh”. MacKenzie quotes from Sir Walter Scott (“The Fortunes of Nigel”): “Sir Munko cannot abide pork, no more than the King’s most sacred majesty, nor my Lord Duke Lennox, nor Lord Dalgarno… But the Scots never eat pork strange that! Some folk think they are a sort of Jews.” “The Scots till within the last generation disliked swine’s flesh as an article of food as much as the Highlanders do at present”. Also from Sir Walter (“The Two Drovers”) we have an account of execration in Gaelic of a Highlander cursing some Englishmen who had been ridiculing him: “A hundred curses on the swine eaters, who know neither decency nor civility!” 

‘James VI of Scotland “hated pork in all its varieties”. In the English Civil War, a song against Scottish partisans of the Rump Parliament (1639-1661) went: “The Jewish Scots that scorns to eat The Flesh of Swine, and brewers beat, ’twas the sight of this Hogs head made ’em retreat, Which nobody can deny.” Dr. Johnson (1773): “The vulgar inhabitants of Skye, I know not whether of the other islands, have not only eels but pork and bacon in abhorrence; and accordingly I never saw a hog in the Hebrides, except one at Dunvegan”. Dean Ramsay (1793-1872): “The old aversion to the ‘unclean animal’ still lingers in the Highlands… I recollect an old Scottish gentleman who shared this horror, asking very gravely, ‘Were not swine forbidden under the law and cursed under the gospel?’ – Matthew 8:30-32.

‘John Toland (1714): “You know how considerable a part of the British inhabitants are the undoubted offspring of [Judah and Levi] and how many worthy prelates of this same stock, not to speak of Lords and commoners, may at this time make an illustrious figure among us… A great number of ’em fled to Scotland which is the reason so many in that part of the Island have a remarkable aversion to pork and black puddings to this day, not to insist on some other resemblances easily observable.” 

‘D. A. MacKenzie… claimed that the taboo preceded Christianity and that the coming of Christian missionaries to Scotland actually weakened the prohibition. Mackenzie stated that after examination it appeared to him that in ancient Scotland there were two different cults or attitudes, one of which regarded the pig with abhorrence while the other revered it [perhaps reflective of two different tribes: Benjamin and Dan]. Ancient pictures of wild boars have been found engraved on rocks. A first century BCE grave in Scotland contained what appears to have been a pig offering and other finds indicate the consumption of swine. 

MacKenzie connects the pig taboo with the Galatians… These were a small group of Galatians (also called “Galli”) who had gravitated to Anatolia (modern Turkey), conquered Phrygia and formed their own kingdom called Galatia in which they ruled over the natives. 

Lucian (“De Dea Syria”) wrote concerning the Galli of Galatia: “They sacrifice bulls and cows alike and goats and sheep; pigs alone which they abominate, are neither sacrificed nor eaten. Others look on swine without disgust, but as holy animals”. Mackenzie brings numerous sources showing that in Gaul, in Ireland, in other parts of Britain, pigs were both plentiful and respected. The boar was a favorite symbol. Pigs were reared for meat all over the Celtic area and the Continental Celts [not the same people as the British Celts] even had a developed industry curing swine meat which they sold to the Romans and were famous for. 

Eels, hare, and pike are also forbidden by the Mosaic code and the Scots had prejudices against all of these and refused to eat them though they are popular foods amongst the neighboring English. The obvious place to look for the source of these prohibitions is in a past exposure to and acceptance of the Mosaic Law and this was the source to which observers in the past usually traced them. It is interesting to note that from time to time certain fish and fowl which the Mosaic Code (of Ancient Israel) does permit came under a ban but only in the case of those expressly prohibited by the Law of Moses did the taboo last or become widely accepted.’ 

“Julius Casar found that the ancient Britons tabooed the hare, the domestic fowl and the goose. The hare is still taboo to many Scots”. 

‘It should be noted that abstaining from foods prohibited by the Mosaic Law may have physiological advantages conducive to long-term physical and emotional stability. Our examination of the religious practices of the early Christian Celts revealed that not only food taboos but also a large number of other practices were taken directly from the Mosaic Law and also that there existed a conscious identification with the Jews and ancient Levis. Some of these practices had proven parallels in ancient Druidical pre-Christian custom which taken together with other facts proves that at least a portion of these people were of Israelite descent. 

When the Celts became Christian they carried over into Christianity some of the customs of the Druids. There were Biblical Laws among the customs of the Druids that the British and Irish Celts continued to practice after becoming Christians. This explains in part why the original Celtic Christians of Britain adopted many “Old Testament” practices of the Law of Moses.

Concerning the Druids: Julius Caesar (in his book “The Conquest of Gaul”) wrote: 

“The Druidic doctrine is believed to have been found existing in Britain and thence imported into Gaul; even today those who want to make a profound study of it generally go to Britain for the purpose… It is said that these pupils have to memorize a great number of verses so many, that some of them spend twenty years at their studies. The Druids believe that their religion forbids them to commit their teachings to writing, although for some other purposes, such as public and private accounts, the Gauls use the Greek alphabet”. 

‘The Romans persecuted the Druids and many Druids fled to Scandinavia according to Welsh tradition and this has been confirmed by archaeological finds… Those Druids who remained in West Britain and Ireland founded colleges and communal settlements… When the Celts were converted to Christianity… [these] were transformed into monasteries.’ 

‘T. W. Rolleston, (“Myths And Legends of the Celtic Race”, 1911, London) quotes from Bertrand (“L’Irlande Celtique”) – The Druids like the Hebrews… had an Oral Law that it was forbidden to write. They gave tithes and first fruits. Their sacrificial modes were similar to Biblical ones. They practiced ritual purity in ways that are reminiscent of Laws in the Bible about purification. Traditions exist that some of the Celts of Britain and Ireland practiced the Mosaic Law before the coming of Christianity. 

Leslie Hardinge says that the Celtic Christians of the British Isles placed a “strong emphasis on the legal aspects of the Old Testament”. An Irish work (“Liber ex Lege Moisi”) from ca. 800 CE uses Old Testament Law as “a prime directive, for the proper conduct of everyday life”. It is said that the Celtic Church was closer to Judaism than any other branch of Christianity. Harding says: 

“The shared elements include the keeping of the Saturday Sabbath, tithing, the definition of “first fruits” and offerings… inheritance of religious office, and fasting and dietary restrictions. It also appears that the Celts kept Easter by older methods of reckoning, one of which caused Easter to coincide with the Passover. Other scholarship suggests that Irish Churchmen of the seventh and eighth centuries actually considered themselves to be Priests and Levites, as defined under Old Testament law”. 

MRS. Winthrop Plamer Boswell, (“The Roots of Irish Monasticism”, California, 1969) adds to the above listed Jewish features of Celtic religion: 

“… the prominence of Hebrew features in Irish canon law collections (including Biblical cities of Refuge and Jubilee Years) together with Mosaic prohibitions on diet and injunctions on tithes… There was also a Hebrew treatment of the sanctuary… and finally there were many Hebrew words occurring in cryptographic monastic Irish works such as Hisperica Famina”. 

‘… the Celtic Church kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day’ – refer articles: The Sabbath Secrecy; and The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. ‘Incidentally, John Brand (“Observations on the Popular Antiquities of Great Britain”, London, 1841) describes the great lengths the Church went to, to extinguish all possible traces of 7th-day Sabbath keeping amongst the English.

An article tracing the early observance of Saturday as the Sabbath noted:

‘[In the 500s CE Scotland]: “In this latter instance they seem to have followed a custom of which we find traces in the early monastic church of Ireland, by which they held Saturday to be the Sabbath on which they rested from all their labours” Columba specifically referred to Saturday as the Sabbath and this was the custom of that early church on Iona, an island off the coast of Scotland. [Scotland and Ireland 600s CE]: “It seems to have been customary in the Celtic Churches of the early times in Ireland as well as Scotland, to keep Saturday as a day of rest from labour.

They observed the fourth commandment (that you should not work on the seventh day) literally on the seventh day of the week.” [In the 900s CE Scotland]: “They worked on Sunday, but kept Saturday in a Sabbatical manner.” [In the 1000s CE Scotalnd]: “They held that Saturday was properly the Sabbath on which they abstained from work.” During the 11th century the Catholic Queen of Scotland, Margaret, tried to stamp out those that kept Saturday as the Sabbath Day and who refused to honor Sunday as the Sabbath Day.’

W M Stukeley, in his book Abury, affirms after a close study of the evidence: “I plainly discerned the religion professed by the ancient Britons was the simple patriarchal faith.” Cited in The Drama of the Lost Disciples, G F Jowett, 2009, page 44. 

It is important to recognise that while the Celts in Ireland and Scotland may have held onto the Mosaic Law as specified under the Old Covenant – thereby in the process giving evidence of their Israelite roots – certain aspects of the Law had been either annulled, amended or amplified by Christ’s death – Article: The Sabbath Secrecy.

The Book of Chronicles records the main clans from the three sons of Levi.

Levi

1 Chronicles 23:1-32

English Standard Version

1 ‘When David was old and full of days, he made Solomon his son king over Israel.

2 David assembled all the leaders of Israel and the priests and the Levites. 3 The Levites, thirty years old and upward, were numbered, and the total was 38,000 men. 

4 “Twenty-four thousand of these,” David said, ‘shall have charge of the work in the house of the Lord, 6,000 shall be officers and judges, 5 4,000 gatekeepers, and 4,000 shall offer praises to the Lord with the instruments that I have made for praise.” 6 And David organized them in divisions corresponding to the sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.

7 The sons of Gershon were Ladan and Shimei.

8 The sons of Ladan: Jehiel the chief, and Zetham, and Joel, three. 9 The sons of Shimei: Shelomoth, Haziel, and Haran [family name of Abraham], three. These were the heads of the fathers’ houses of Ladan. 

10 And the sons of Shimei: Jahath, Zina, and Jeush and Beriah. These four were the sons of Shimei. 11 Jahath was the chief, and Zizah the second; but Jeush [family name of Esau] and Beriah did not have many sons, therefore they became counted as a single father’s house.

12 The sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, four.

13 The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses.

Aaron was set apart to dedicate the most holy things, that he and his sons forever should make offerings before the Lord and minister to him and pronounce blessings in his name forever.

14 But the sons of Moses the man of God were named among the tribe of Levi. 

Readers seeking a comprehensive survey on the spiritual giant that was Moses, may be interested in the following – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

15 The sons of Moses: Gershom and Eliezer.

16 The sons of Gershom: Shebuel the chief.

17 The sons of Eliezer: Rehabiah the chief. Eliezer had no other sons, but the sons of Rehabiah were very many. 18 The sons of Izhar: Shelomith the chief. 19 The sons of Hebron: Jeriah the chief, Amariah the second, Jahaziel the third, and Jekameam the fourth. 20 The sons of Uzziel: Micah the chief and Isshiah the second.

21 The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi.

The sons of Mahli: Eleazar and Kish [family name of Benjamin]. 22 Eleazar died having no sons, but only daughters; their kinsmen, the sons of Kish, married them.

23 The sons of Mushi: Mahli, Eder, and Jeremoth, three.

24 These were the sons of Levi by their fathers’ houses, the heads of fathers’ houses as they were listed according to the number of the names of the individuals from twenty years old and upward who were to do the work for the service of the house of the Lord. 25 For David said, “The Lord, the God of Israel, has given rest to his people, and he dwells in Jerusalem forever. 26 And so the Levites no longer need to carry the tabernacle or any of the things for its service”

28 For their duty was to assist the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord, having the care of the courts and the chambers, the cleansing of all that is holy, and any work for the service of the house of God. 29 Their duty was also to assist with the showbread, the flour for the grain offering, the wafers of unleavened bread, the baked offering, the offering mixed with oil, and all measures of quantity or size. 30 And they were to stand every morning, thanking and praising the Lord, and likewise at evening, 31 and whenever burnt offerings were offered to the Lord on Sabbaths, new moons, and feast days, according to the number required of them, regularly before the Lord. 32 Thus they were to keep charge of the tent of meeting and the sanctuary, and to attend the sons of Aaron, their brothers, for the service of the house of the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.

The Book of Chronicles also records which Levite families settled in various cities, of the various tribes throughout ancient Israel. The sons of Levi being Gershon, Kohath and Merari. Most of the Kohathites, of which Aaron descended lived in the territories of Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, the tribes that later constituted the Kingdom of Judah.

1 Chronicles 6:54-64

English Standard Version

54 ‘These are their dwelling places according to their settlements within their borders: to the sons of Aaron of the clans of Kohathites, for theirs was the first lot, 55 to them they gave Hebron in the land of Judah and its surrounding pasturelands, 56 but the fields of the city and its villages they gave to Caleb the son of Jephunneh. 57 To the sons of Aaron they gave the cities of refuge: Hebron, Libnah with its pasturelands… 

60 and from the tribe of Benjamin, Gibeon, Geba with its pasturelands… All their cities throughout their clans were thirteen. 61 To the rest of the Kohathites were given by lot out of the clan of the tribe, out of the half-tribe, the half of [West] Manasseh, ten cities. 62 To the Gershomites according to their clans were allotted thirteen cities out of the tribes of Issachar, Asher, Naphtali and [East] Manasseh in Bashan.

63 To the Merarites according to their clans were allotted twelve cities out of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Zebulun. 

64 So the people of Israel gave the Levites the cities with their pasturelands. 65 They gave by lot out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin these cities that are mentioned by name.’

The Prophet Malachi proclaims a powerful prophecy about the time of the end and the Messianic return; with the majority of people who doubt and the few who exhibit faith. Included, is a return by the Levites to Godly worship. Maimonides stated that during this time each Israelite would be informed of which tribe he belongs to.

Malachi 3:1-18

New Century Version

1 ‘The Lord All-Powerful says, “I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way for me. Suddenly, the Lord you are looking for will come to his Temple; the messenger of the agreement, whom you want, will come.”

2 No one can live through that time; no one can survive when he comes. He will be like a purifying fire and like laundry soap. 3 Like someone who heats and purifies silver, he will purify the Levites and make them pure like gold and silver. Then they will bring offerings to the Lord in the right way. 4 And the Lord will accept the offerings from Judah and Jerusalem, as it was in the past. 5 The Lord All-Powerful says, “Then I will come to you and judge you. I will be quick to testify against those who take part in evil magic, adultery, and lying under oath, those who cheat workers of their pay and who cheat widows and orphans, those who are unfair to foreigners, and those who do not respect me.

6 “I the Lord do not change. So you descendants of Jacob have not been destroyed.Since the time of your ancestors, you have disobeyed my rules and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord All-Powerful.

13 The Lord says, “You have said terrible things about me.

“But you ask, ‘What have we said about you?’

14 “You have said, ‘It is useless to serve God. It did no good to obey his laws and to show the Lord All-Powerful that we were sorry for what we did. 15 So we say that proud people are happy. Evil people succeed. They challenge God and get away with it.’

This is highly reflective of our modern age. Many people, not just the world’s elite, use their wealth to take an unfair advantage of the majority of the world, in keeping them impoverished. It certainly looks like they are all getting away with their selfishness and cruelty; particularly as each century passes by without retribution. But, their own day of reckoning beckons and justice will be served. 

Malachi: 16 Then those who honored the Lord spoke with each other, and the Lord listened and heard them. The names of those who honored the Lord and respected him were written in his presence in a book to be remembered. 17 The Lord All-Powerful says, “They belong to me; on that day they will be my very own. As a parent shows mercy to his child who serves him, I will show mercy to my people. 18 You will again see the difference between good and evil people, between those who serve God and those who don’t.”

An odd story concerning Reuben, is his giving mandrakes to his mother Leah, when he was still very young and likely only ten years of age.

Genesis 30:14-23

English Standard Version

14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes [H1736 – duwday: basket, mandrake] in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 

16 ‘When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” 

So he lay with her that night. 17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar.

19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.

22 Then [later] God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son and said, “God has taken away my reproach.”

Reuben may or may not have known that the mandrake contains aphrodisiac and fertility properties. As he was a child, probably not; though what led him to find the mandrakes for Leah? Did Leah have a liking for them? Was Reuben inspired by the Eternal to look for them? Leah had a temporary barren period after the birth of Judah in 1746 BCE until Issachar’s birth in 1742 BCE. It is ironic that she gives the mandrakes to Rachel and conceives herself that night, yet Rachel who likely takes the plant root does not bear Joseph until 1726 BCE. Some versions incorrectly call the plant a love apple, or in other words, a tomato. 

The Mandrake is common in Palestine and flourishes in the spring, ripening at the time of the wheat harvest as Genesis states. The mandrake, also known as Satan’s apple, is the fruit, a potent root that somewhat resembles the human form of the Mandragora officinarum, a member of the Solanaceae or potato order. 

There is also a British version, the Bryonia Alba. They are said to have mystical and magical properties. It is a member of the Nightshade family, used primarily for its anaesthetic properties and closely allied to the Atropa belladonna or deadly nightshade of southern Europe. 

If ingested in sufficient quantities it can cause delirium and hallucinations. It is native to the Mediterranean and tellingly, the Himalayas – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

The next time we read again of Reuben is in Genesis thirty-five, in one small verse sandwiched between the death of Rachel and the death of Isaac. Isaac died in 1697 BCE and Rachel died giving birth to Benjamin circa 1699 BCE. Assuming it is 1698 BCE, Reuben is fifty-four years of age. Reuben is still young, not even middle aged; for he dies at the age of one hundred and twenty-five in 1627 BCE.

Genesis 35:21-22

English Standard Version

21 ‘Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder. 22 While Israel lived in that land, Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine. And Israel heard of it.’

Bilhah was Rachel’s handmaid and someone who Reuben would have known very well. Further details are given in the Book of Jubilees.

Book of Jubilees 33:1-9

1 ‘And Jacob went and dwelt to the south of Magdaladra’ef. And he went to his father Isaac, he and Leah his wife, on the new month [New Moon the 1st] of the tenth month [January/February]. 2 And Reuben saw Bilhah, Rachel’s maid, the concubine of his father, bathing in water in a secret place, and he loved [lusted after] her.

3 And he hid himself at night, and he entered the house of Bilhah, and he found her sleeping alone on a bed in her house. 4 And he lay with her, and she awoke and saw, and behold Reuben was lying with her in the bed, and she uncovered the border of her covering and seized him, and cried out, and discovered that it was Reuben. 5 And she was ashamed because of him, and released her hand from him, and he fled. 

6 And she lamented [mourned as if one had died] because of this thing exceedingly, and did not tell it to any one. 7 And when Jacob returned and sought her, she said to him: ‘I am not clean for you, for I have been defiled as regards you; for Reuben has defiled me, and has lain with me in the night, and I was asleep, and did not discover until he uncovered my skirt and slept with me.’

8 And Jacob was exceedingly wroth [vengeful, resentful, fierce anger] with Reuben because he had lain with Bilhah, because he had uncovered his father’s skirt. 9 And Jacob did not approach her again because Reuben had defiled her [well after the births of Dan (1746 BCE) and Naphtali (1744 BCE)]. And as for any man who uncovers his father’s skirt his deed is wicked exceedingly, for he is abominable before Yahweh.’

Bilhah

A tragic experience involving the rape of Bilhah; coupled with not being able to be close to Jacob ever again. The condemnation against Reuben is severe because of his evil act and one realises the prophecy’s regarding his offspring are a punishment, just as Canaan’s children were punished even though it was Canaan’s sin – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa

It is curious that this incident is a sexual act after the sexual aspect of the mandrake story. It is in part because of this, that identity adherents have labelled France as Reuben. Though we have already discovered their rightful identity – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Reubens Ravishing of Bilhah: A Parallel Account, Dr Rabbi David Frankel – emphasis his:

‘We may compare the short original story [refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator] of the son (Canaan or Ham) molesting his father (Ham or Noah) [in reality it was Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk* who slept with Noah] and being cursed with the similarly curt story of Reuben’s sin with his father’s concubine, Bilhah, as related in Genesis 35:21-22.’

Rachel gave Bilhah to Jacob as a substitute wife. After Rachel’s death, her status reverts to a concubine as she was not married to Jacob.

Frankel: ‘… we have a brief story about a son who sexually disgraces his father, though in this case it is the eldest son rather than the youngest son, and the disgrace to the father is done indirectly through incest with the father’s concubine, an act that the incest laws in the Torah call “revealing your father’s nakedness”:

Leviticus 18:8 Do not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is the nakedness of your father. Leviticus 20:11 If a man lies with his father’s wife, it is the nakedness of his father that he has uncovered… Deuteronomy 27:20 Cursed be he who lies with his father’s wife, for he has revealed what his father has covered…

Many have noted that the ending of the Reuben and Bilhah story is truncated. What happened when Israel “heard about it”? The story could hardly have simply ended there! The parallel with the Noah story suggests that the original continuation may be found in the “blessings” of Jacob before his death in Genesis 49:3-4…

Just as Noah immediately cursed his youngest son for taking sexual advantage* of him, so Jacob, upon hearing about the act of his oldest son with his concubine, immediately pronounced the demotion of his status vis-a-vis his brothers. If this conjecture is accepted, the similarity between the two stories is even greater. Note that brothers play no active role in the story of Reuben’s sin just as they play no active role in the reconstructed story of Ham and Canaan. And, at least if we follow the reconstruction of that narrative suggested above, it too ended with the father’s denunciation of the sinful son alone.   

Incidentally, another parallel between the narratives should not be missed: just as the biblical editor sought to “sanitize” the sexual sin in the Noah story so did the Rabbis suggest that Reuben did no more than move his father’s bed from Bilhah’s tent to his mother Leah’s tent.’

Genesis 49:3-4

English Standard Version

3 “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the firstfruits of my strength [H202 – ‘own: vigour, generative power], preeminent in dignity [loftiness, exaltation] and preeminent in power. 4 Unstable [H6349] as water [H4325], you shall not have preeminence [H3498], because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it – he went up to my couch!”

This is the only time when Jacob inserts his own opinion or feelings amongst the oracles concerning his sons – “he went up to my couch.”  It cost Reuben dearly, as the birthright or at least the lions share, if it was to be split with Simeon, was lost, forever – just as Esau had also lost his birthright. Today, Northern Ireland as a country (which is not a nation), is caught in a no-mans-land, between the lions of Judah and Gad… England and Ireland respectively. It’s checkered past, violent and unstable as predicted. Like water that is never truly calm or still, so has the volatile history of Northern Ireland been embroiled between Catholic, Republican Irish and Protestant, Northern Irish Loyalists who reside in the majority of Ulster’s nine Counties.

The Hebrew word for unstable is pachaz, meaning, as in ‘recklessness, wantoness, unbridled license, frothiness’ – to froth. The Hebrew word for water is mayim and has the connotation for ‘danger, violence, transitory.’ It can mean ‘water of the feet’, literally: urine. The word preeminence is the Hebrew word yathar, meaning ‘excel.’ Reuben was not going to have an excess, say like Joseph, but rather a considerably minute inheritance. 

Northern Irish man and woman

It is interesting to note that the Northern Irish are staunchly loyal and royal in their mindset and policy. Only Canada apart from obviously the English, rivals them for their patriotism towards the Monarchy and its figurehead that was Queen Elizabeth II. It is as if they are over-compensating for what might have been as the eldest and even possibly the recipient of the sceptre and orb of regal rulership. In Northern Ireland the reminder of this is in the practice of the frequent use of the word ‘royal as in the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the title for the Northern Irish police force from 1922 to 2001.

Deuteronomy 33:6

King James Version

‘Let Reuben live, and not die [H4191 – muwth: put to death]; and let not his men [H4962] be few [H4557 – caphar: small, numbered].’

Moses predicts that Reuben would have a lot of descendants… or did he. The King James version with many others, misleadingly says Reuben would have many offspring. This is in part why identity researchers have unanimously taught Reuben as France. The Interlinear shows that the word not is added. 

The Hebrew word in question H4962 math, is translated as men (14 times), few (2), number (1) and small (1). The connotation is having less sex and subsequently less males.

The English Standard version translates this verse accurately: “Let Reuben live, and not die, but let his men be few.” 

Other translations with the correct context and meaning include:

HCSB: Let Reuben live and not die though his people become few.

CEV: Tribe of Reuben, you will live, even though your tribe will always be small.

MSG: Reuben: “Let Reuben live and not die, but just barely, in diminishing numbers.”

It is clear that Reuben though severely punished, in that he would be a very small tribe; he would still exist and not cease to live. France – aside from its predominant Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b-U152 which does show they are related to the Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples of Britain (R1b-U106) and Ireland (R1b-M529)… they are still not the same – possess a large population and a preeminence of power.

Thus France does not fulfil the prophecies for Reuben. Northern Ireland does… and its intricate relationship with Gad from Ireland, makes it the only plausible biblical answer.

Belfast, capital city of Northern Ireland

Judges 5:15-16

Common English Bible

15 ‘… Among the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [1]. 16 “Why did you stay back among the sheep pens, listening to the music for the flocks?” For the clans of Reuben there was deep soul-searching [2].’

The Reubenites were reluctant to get involved in the combined tribes of Israel war against the Canaanites during Deborah’s judgeship. In fact, they didn’t participate at all. The other tribe that declined involvement, was the tribe of Dan. This is a strange coincidence as we will discover when we study Dan. The word used for soul-searching in verse sixteen is different from the one in verse fifteen. The idea is said twice, so the strength of their reticence has been underlined for it to be stated in such a way. 

The first Hebrew word is (H2711), cheqeq meaning ‘thoughts, decrees, resolve, statute, action prescribed, an enactment, a resolution.’ It looks like they took so long to deliberate and make an official decision that the war was begun and finished before they could make up their minds. This is indicative of the Northern Irish government’s policy making, as it is not known for its decisiveness.

The second word is (H2714), cheqer meaning ‘a search, investigation, enquiry, examination, enumeration, deliberation.’ Just the definitions of the word sound painful. Therefore the procrastination of the Reubenites in making a decision, meant they did not get involved at all. 

Gad

Genesis 49:19

Amplified Bible

‘As for Gad [H1410 – gad: a troop] – a raiding troop [H1416 – gduwd: band, army, company] shall raid [H1464 – guwd: overcome, invade (with troops)] him, But he shall raid [H1464] at their heels and assault them (victoriously).’

NLV: “A group of soldiers [the English] will go against Gad [Ireland]. But he will go against them at their heels [in Northern Ireland].”

Gad would be attacked but will have the last word. In this verse and context, Gad’s name means a ‘raiding troop’, yet in Genesis 30:11, his name means ‘good fortune’ from H1409 gad. Both definitions are correct and in the Hebrew definition of the name Gad in Genesis chapter forty-nine, there is a play on the word Gad, as in ‘Gad, a Gad shall Gad.’ The mentioning of raiding at the heels of their enemies is another interesting coincidence, as in the preceding verses, Jacob speaks of Dan as a venomous serpent that with its fangs will bite a ‘horses heels so that his rider falls backward.’

Worth noting is that the tribe of Dan has a primary relationship with Ephraim; a secondary one with Reuben; a tertiary one with Benjamin and subsidiary connections with both Simeon and Gad – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

In Judges five and the war against the Canaanites, we observed that Judah, Simeon and Levi were not involved and Reuben and Dan did not participate. Gad, like Judah and company is not mentioned either. These tribes all have one thing in common and that is that they were on the periphery of the action and the war zone so-to-speak. The exception being Machir of the half-tribe of East Manasseh, who also dwelt on the east side of the River Jordan with Reuben and Gad. In Moses’s prophecy Gad chose the best land for himself.

Deuteronomy 33:20-21

English Standard Version

20 ‘And of Gad he said, “Blessed [H1288 – barak: ‘bless oneself, be adored’] be he who enlarges [H7337 – rachab: ‘grow wide, grow large, make room’] Gad! Gad crouches like a lion; he tears off arm and scalp [guerrilla and terrorist warfare].

21 He chose the best of the land for himself, for there a commander’s portion was reserved; and he came with the heads of the people, with Israel he executed the justice of the Lord, and his judgments for Israel.”

It could be argued that the Emerald Isle is the best of the land of the British Isles and even of all the Israelite nations. The identifications of Switzerland or Sweden as Gad fall short in two ways. Arguably, they both have great landscapes and countryside. It is not impossible but rather more difficult to assign a. specific armies (or invaders) for either one which so indelibly affected the Irish conscience; and b. their chances of enlarging their territories is highly unlikely. 

Ireland on the other hand had to endure extreme measures while the English occupied their land. The saga of the English interaction and treatment of the Irish is brutal and uncomfortable reading. English Lordship began in 1172, with Ireland subordinated to the English (later British) Crown in 1541. Ireland was merged with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom in 1801.

The Irish eventually won back their country and became independent from the United Kingdom in 1922 and finally a Republic in 1949. As a Lion themselves, they stood up to the powerful Lion of Judah – Genesis 49:9. With regard to enlarging their territory: first considered was the massive Irish immigration to the United States of America. Many millions fled the potato famine (1845-1852), which was in large part induced by the English. Only English and German descended Americans outnumber those of Irish descent in America. 

A more accurate interpretation, which in the past may have seemed unlikely, though with the United Kingdom having withdrawn from the European Union and Scotland sabre rattling its intention to leave the union; a Northern Ireland separating itself from England, Wales and Scotland and forming an agreement with Ireland does not seem so far fetched. A federated Ireland with either the two capitals of Dublin and Belfast, or a new neutral location working together would be seen as a victory for the Republic.

Dublin, capital city of Ireland

The religious divide of the Northern Ireland populace could be evidence of a genetic split; in that the Protestants are primarily from Reuben and the Catholics are not Reuben at all, but actually reflective of Gad. This could be another interpretation of Gad ‘enlarging his territory.’ 

Irish men

As the tribes of Israel are all in the process of distancing themselves from Judah and the hold its monarchy exerts; a Northern Ireland forsaking the United Kingdom could be inevitable. And before Scotland or Wales would still be a sensational political event. The big question of course is whether Scotland or Wales would actually leave the United Kingdom as historically they were the integral tribes constituting the Kingdom of Judah; comprising Judah, Benjamin and Simeon. 

Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950:

‘Reuben, unstable as water and [not] having the excellency of greatness, we have recognized as France. Southern France, settled by the descendants of Javan* (the Greeks), is gentile … is unstable, yet sets the styles for the world, has the form of real excellency, and has the same sex weakness as Reuben, is France… And is it not significant that the very country at war with England around 1800 should be France (Reuben), who would lose the birthright in the Napoleonic war? (Napoleon was Italian.)’ 

This identification appears to fit quite well, superficially. Though it unravels when we understand who the French are and that Reuben was to be the smallest tribe – refer* Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Hoeh: ‘Gad, which means “the troop” certainly designates Switzerland the only Israelite nation in which every man is mobilized for defense. Against Gad would come the foreign troops, said Jacob, but he will “trod upon their heel.” Moses declared that Gad does NOT “leap,” a characteristic of the colonizing or pillaging tribes. Gad “teareth the arm, yea, the crown of the head” of the Holy Roman Empire [or in reality, Catholicism], in whose territory “he chose a first part for himself, and there a portion of a ruler was reserved.” To Gad come “the heads of the people” as they do today to Geneva. 

No other nation on earth so perfectly fits this description of a nation of troops. Switzerland, Geneva particularly, has had a history of being an “international lawgiver.” Note: Even though the migrations of some of the ancestors of Switzerland and Germany are similar, while some have erroneously taught that Germany is Gad, Germany has no history of being a recognized lawgiver – but instead primarily descended from Assyria’ – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar.

Irish women

Hoeh offers no example in evidence of the Swiss being tread upon in fulfilment of prophecy; yet a leap is taken for Gad in assigning the Holy Roman Empire a role. A misinterpretation of scripture is applied by assigning a meaning of Gad as having many troops; rather than the ordeal of being invaded and ruled relentlessly, as Ireland endured. Also missed, is the close relationship between Reuben and Gad in dwelling together across the River Jordan.

We will find that all the sons of Jacob had a close relationship with one other tribe. It is a startling coincidence, yet all the sons of Jacob paired off, though not always with a full brother, more times it was with a half brother. The exception is Dan, who from the get go was a lone wolf, a maverick, unlike his brothers and more attune with his cousin Esau or even his uncle Ishmael. So far, we have witnessed the close ties between Judah and Benjamin; between Simeon and Levi and between Reuben and Gad. 

The antiquity of Ireland’s history is shrouded in a mist of mystery and myth. What is apparent is that there has been an overlapping of various waves of people. We will endeavour to sift through the legendary and mythical history and glean what is relevant for Reuben and Gad. In so doing, we will bump into Benjamin and Zarah from Judah which we have investigated already (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes) as well as the tribe of Dan, who will be studied separately in a later chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Ireland’s early history is ‘based largely upon the pseudo-historical Lebor Gabala Erenn, translated into English as the “Book of Invasions”; and Cath Maige Tuired, or the “Second Battle of Maige Tuired.” One of the first peoples recorded in Ireland – following the Flood – are the Partholonians, named from their leader Partholon.

An intriguing word as it is remarkably similar to the Israelite empire of the Parthians*, discussed in Chapter XXX Judah and Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. They are alleged to have ruled in Ireland for some three hundred years and then became extinct due to a disease. A gap of thirty years may have transpired separating them and the next people to arrive, the Nemedians. 

In the Annals of Clonmacnois, written circa 1408 CE, Bartholome is mentioned arriving in Ireland during the time that Abraham was alive. Geoffrey Keating proposes the Partholonians arrived in Ireland circa 2061 BCE, which is amended in the unconventional chronology to 2044 BCE. Meanwhile, Abraham lived between 1977 BCE and 1802 BCE. An Old English version by Roberts of this same tradition said that the people who were led by Bartholome, sailed to Ireland from the Middle East via Spain. As Bartholomaeus is etymologically linked with Partholomus, this is likely a representation of the Partholonians.

Partholon was the son of Sera, who was the son of Sru a king of Greece. Partholon had fled from Greece, after murdering his own father and mother. In the process, Partholon had lost his left eye – Articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity. Accompanied by his wife Dealgnaid (Delgnat); three sons, Slanga, Rudraige, Laiglinne, their wives; and a group of a thousand followers, they sailed via Sicily and Iberia before landing at Inber Scene – Kenmare in County Kerry. The Partholonians lived on a small island near the head of the estuary of the River Erne. In their third year, the settlers encountered the giant Fomorians; where they fought in the Battle of Mag Itha – Slemna of Mag Itha. In this reputed first battle on Irish soil, they defeated the Fomorians, led by a Cichol Gricenchos.

David Hughes in The British Chronicles, 2007, says: ‘the Partholonians were prominent in Ulster and in Scotland where they were referred to as “Parthi.”* An erroneous tradition says they descended from Noah’s son Japheth. Due to the timing of Jacob being born in 1817 BCE, the Partholonians could not be from the sons of Jacob. Though the later Nemedians do appear to have a connection with Jacob. 

It is possible Partholon was a Hebrew, descended from Eber like Abraham. Sru may be the same as Reu, the grandson of Eber and Sera could be his son Serug, the great grandfather of Abraham – Genesis 11:16-26.

The Nemedians arrived in Ireland in approximately 1714 BCE, ruling Ireland for two hundred and seventeen years, to circa 1497 BCE. Their journey to Ireland began seemingly from Spain with a fleet of thirty-four ships and a thousand and twenty people – much like the Partholonians who preceded them. 

Only one ship with about thirty people is said to have survived the journey, which included Nemed and his four sons. The name Nemed in Hebrew means ‘sanctified’ or ‘separated’ and is synonymous with the Hebrew name Peresh, given to the son of Machir from the half tribe of East Manasseh – 1 Chronicles 7:16. The Nemedians are also coincidently claimed by one source ‘to be descendants of Sru, Sera and Isru. These names… are all forms of the name Israel.’ Sera-[li] is how the Assyrians rendered the name Israel in at least one inscription.

An ancient indigenous people in Ireland, were the Fomorians. The Fomorian origins are supposed to be from North Africa. They worshipped a goddess, Domnu and their leader was Balar (or Balor), a form of the word Baal, meaning ‘lord’ or ‘possessor’ – Article: Belphegor. They were in essence, sea-going pirates and possibly female dominated. They are not considered as Celtic or permanent for they were a strange race of ugly, misshapen giants who lived on Tory Island off the coast of Donegal in Northwest Ireland. 

The ancient Annals of Clonmacnois records that the Fomorians were: “descended from Cham, the sonne of Noeh, and lived by pyracie and spoile of other nations, and were in those days very troublesome to the whole world.” Previously mentioned, the Giant’s Gateway in Ireland – Cloch-an-na-bh-Fomharigh: ’causeway or stepping-stones of the Fomorians’ – was associated with giants and hence is commonly called the Giant’s Causeway – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim.

The Fomorians were cruel and violent and they would repeatedly raid the mainland. The Fomorians had once fought the Partholonians. Once the numbers of the Nemedians had grown, they were at first successful against the Fomorians, with four decisive victories; but a pestilence decimated the population so that less than two thousand Nemedians survived. Thus the Fomorians ruled over the Nemedians for a period and then later also over the Dananns, extracting heavy tributes and taxes from them. 

The Fomorian giants were undoubtedly Elioud descendants of the Nephilim – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II. They were an ancient inhabitant of the land and very possibly the first. The Irish Province of Ulster derives its name from them. For they would have been known as the Ulaid (or Ulaidh) and singularly as the Ulad (or Uladh). This is the old Irish spelling for the Hebrew word Elioud also transliterated Eljo; being the second generational offspring and beyond, of the Nephilim. The Irish name Uladh is pronounced as Ulla, which would then become Ula-ster and hence Ulster. 

A commentator adds – emphasis mine:

The etymology of the… word Elioud is composed of the words, El, Io, and Ud. You will also find this name in Welsh charters, which it is clear it is not originally a Welsh word, but it was Hebrew and taken to the Welsh. The Welsh etymology is also very similar, where it is said the meaning of el is many and iud is lord. I believe that this is a mistranslation, and it has the same meaning as the Hebrew.

The word El is a generic name for God… found in the word Elohim. The word Io is related to the words wisdom and knowledge. Sir Godfrey Higgins had written, “in Syriac Io, was the God of Wisdom or Knowledge… The God of Wisdom was the spiritual fire…” The meaning of the word Ud is “brand or branded.” Therefor, the meaning of Elioud would be something like “branded with the spiritual fire of Godly wisdom, or wisdom branded by the spirit fire of God.”

Hence, they were [like] the sons of Cain, the accursed and branded by God as it is said in the scriptures when God confronted Cain about Abel’s death; God responded, “Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over”, and God “set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him” (Genesis 4:15) – refer article: Na’amah.

The original Wisdom of God who walked in the midst of fire, was the companion of the Eternal – Ezekiel 28:11, 14, 16-17, Proverbs 8:22-36 – Article: Asherah.

As an aside, in the genealogy of Christ through his mother Mary, one of His ancestors is a certain Eliud (Matthew 1:14–15), the great-great-grandfather of Joseph, the father of Mary – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The name Eliud is (G1664), Elioud and means: ‘God his Praise’ or ‘God of Majesty.’ 

Three Nemedian chieftains led their people in revolt; attacking the Fomorian stronghold of Tory Island, with the Nemedians managing to kill one of the Fomorian kings and capturing one of their towers.

In the process, the Nemedians were again almost totally annihilated, with purportedly only thirty Nemedians surviving the battle. These survivors fled from Ireland. 

According to legend, one branch of the Nemedians under Fergus Lethderg, fled with his son Briottan (Britain) Maol to Alba (Scotland), where the whole island was named after him. This is more convincing than Britain being named after Brutus some four hundred years later. These were related peoples to the British peoples who became known as Britons and the Cymry descended from Simeon. A second branch of the Nemedians were led by a Semeon (Semion) or Simon Brec, a son of Erglan son of Beoan son of Starn son of Nemed. They supposedly fled to Greece, where their descendants would later return to Ireland after being slaves for a long time; now known as the Fir Bolg

According to some versions, Semeon had never been in Ireland and only his descendants were there. The name Semeon equates to the name Simeon, the son of Jacob. Though it is not the same person, rather a shared family name. For this branch of the Nemedians are the tribe of Reuben, who were known as the Fir Bolg, one and the same as the Belgae* on the continent. The Fir Bolge or sons of Bolge are also referred to as ‘Ffirvolge.’ Related names include: Firvolgian, Firbolgian, Belgarian and Belgian.* 

Ptolemy describes the Tribe of Semoni on the southeast coast of Britain. They adjoined the Iceni whose name according to Yair Davidy “may be understood to be a Phoenician (or North Israelite) form of the appellation Jachin [the fourth] son of Simeon (Genesis 46:10). The Welsh in their own and in Irish Literature were referred to as Semoni.” This is an important point, for the Semoni as Simeonites, were to become known as Cymry. 

Five sons of Dela, a descendant of Semeon brought their people out of slavery from Greece and Thrace. This was two hundred and thirty years later in 1267 BCE, after they had departed Ireland in 1497 BCE, prior to the tribe of Zarah-Judah’s arrival in approximately 1404 BCE – Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. The sons of Dela divided Ireland into their original five provinces: Ulster, Connacht, Leinster, Munster and Meath.

Their rule was short lived; lasting a mere thirty-seven years and succession of nine kings, until the Tuatha de Danann – the tribe of Dan – arrived circa 1230 BCE. The Fir Bolg were perceived ‘as inferior people, and strangely, quite primitive in comparison to the Tuatha De Danann…’ Some versions record that the tribe of Dana’s ancestor was Bethac who had left Ireland with the other Nemedians and later returned. The Hiberi Scotti or Gaels arrived in 1046 BCE to find the Tuatha de Danann had been ruling for one hundred and seventy-four years after the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE.

The ancient Book of the Genealogies by MacFirbis states – emphasis mine: 

“Every one who is white (of skin) and brown (of hair), bold, honourable, daring, prosperous, bountiful in the bestowal of property, wealth, and rings, and who is not afraid of battle or combat: they are the descendants of Milesius in Erinn… Every one who is black-haired, who is a tattler, guileful, tale-telling, noisy… the disturbers of every council and every assembly, and the promoters of discord among the people, these are the descendants of the Firbolgs” – aka the tribe of Reuben in Northern Ireland.

The Fir Bolg did not seem to have any trouble with the Fomorians, however they did not like the Tuatha de Danann and fought the First Battle of Moytura against them, where they were defeated, circa 1230 BCE. 

The Story of the Irish Race – emphasis mine:

“The Irish race of today is popularly known as the Milesian Race [the (Hiberi Scotti) Gaels and not the Royal Milesian (Scots) from Zarah-Judah nearly 400 years previously], because the genuine Irish (Celtic) people were supposed to be descended from Milesius of Spain, whose sons, say the legendary accounts, invaded and possessed themselves of Ireland a thousand years before Christ [in 1046 BCE]. 

The races that occupied the land when the so-called Milesians came, chiefly the Firbolg [Tribe of Reuben] and the Tuatha De Danann [Tribe of Dan], were certainly not exterminated by the conquering Milesians [Gad, not Zarah-Judah]. Those two peoples [Reuben and Dan] formed the basis of the future population [in Ulster], which was dominated and guided, and had its characteristics moulded, by the far less numerous but more powerful Milesian [Zarah-Judah] aristocracy and soldiery.

All three of these races, however, were different tribes of the great Celtic family, who, long ages before, had separated from the main stem, and in course of later centuries blended again into one tribe of Gaels [Irish] – three derivatives of one stream, which, after winding their several ways across Europe from the East, in Ireland turbulently met, and after eddying, and surging tumultuously, finally blended in amity, and flowed onward in one great Gaelic stream. 

The possession of the country was wrested from the Firbolgs, and they were forced into partial serfdom by the Tuatha De Danann (people of the goddess Dana), who arrived later. Totally unlike the uncultured Firbolgs, the Tuatha De Dannann were a capable and cultured, highly civilised people, so skilled in the crafts, if not the arts, that the Firbolgs named them necromancers, and in course of time both the Firbolgs and the later coming Milesians [Hiberi Scotti] created a mythology around these. 

In a famed battle at Southern Moytura (on the Mayo-Galway border) it was that the Tuatha De Danann met and overthrew the Firbolgs. The Firbolgs noted King, Eochaid was slain in this great battle, but the De Danan King, Nuada, had his [red] hand cut off by a great warrior of the Firbolgs named Sreng. The battle raged for four days. So bravely had the Firbolgs fought, and so sorely exhausted the De Dannann, that the latter, to end the battle, gladly left to the Firbolgs, that quarter of the Island wherein they fought, the province now called Connaught. And the bloody contest was over. 

The famous life and death struggle of two races is commemorated by a multitude of cairns and pillars which strew the great battle plain in Sligo – a plain which bears the name (in Irish) of “The plain of the Towers of the Fomorians”. The Danann were now the undisputed masters of the land. So goes the honoured legend.”

The Fir Bolg lost the battle because the Danann had superior ‘technological’ weapons. Tailtiu was the daughter of the King of the Mag Mor, “Great Plain”, from the Land of the Dead, which was a poetic name for Spain. Tailtiu married the last Fir Bolg king, Eochaid Mac Eirc, who died at Moytura. At her husband’s death, she married Eochaid Garb Mac Duach, a Danann warrior. Eventually, Lugh Lamfada led the Danann to overthrow the Fomorian tyranny and oppression and annihilate them, circa 1220 BCE in the Second Battle of Moytura. Balor was their last leader and Lugh killed him. Since Tailtiu was the foster mother of Lugh, she was held in honour by the Tuatha de Danann. The Tribe of Dana subsequently intermarried with the Fomorian giants – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. 

Fir means ‘man or men’ and Bolg is thought to have derived from the Hebrew Bela(gh) from either the son of Benjamin (Genesis 46:21); or more likely, a family head in the tribe of Reuben (1 Chronicles 5:8), who interestingly hailed from Aroer, near Baal*-meon. A symbol of Reuben is a Man, which is linked to the water carrier (water from Jacob’s oracle in Genesis 49:4) and the zodiacal sign of Aquarius – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Yair Davidy comments – emphasis mine: 

‘The Fir Bolg are identified by researchers with the Belgae who in the 100s BCE sent colonists from their base in North Gaul into southern Britain where they were reported by Ptolemy. T.F. O’Rahilly idenfitied the Belgae in Ireland with the Erain (Iverni in the southwest) [and the] Ulaid (Ulster)… The Belgae gave their name to Belgium.

Within the Land of Israel the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half Menasseh at an early stage had formerly expanded their territories up to and perhaps even beyond the Euphrates River. Sections of other Israelite tribes, including Benjamin, were also to be found in the Israelite areas between the Jordan and Euphrates Rivers. Ptolemy in his map of “Arabia” records the existence of Israelite [clans] and territorial names in areas adjoining the Euphrates. Amongst these names are Balagea and Belginaea which appellations relate to the Belgae descendants of Bela(g)h from Benjamin and/or Reuben.’

As both Benjamin [Cruithni Picts] and Reuben [Fir Bolg] lived in Northern Ireland, the link to Bela could relate to either or both of them. Ultimately, it was the tribe of Reuben who finally settled there, appropriating the ancient name of the Ulaid, becoming the modern word Ulster. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis mine:

‘Israel, as we know, was cast out of her land for idolatry, and Baal-ism was one of her chief idolatries. Before she was cast out she seems to have acquired the habit of attaching the name of the god Baal to places and cities, for on the ancient maps of Palestine we find Baal*-meon, Baal-gad, Baal-ath, Baal-shalisha, Baal-Tamar, Baal-peor [Article: Belphegor], Baal-hazor, Baal-zephon, Mt. Baalah, and others. 

But surely these people carried that same proclivity with them to the islands, for in Ireland this name of the god Baal is found just as frequently, if not more frequently, a circumstance which shows that this idol was honored and worshipped by her eastern colonists. 

The Rev. T. R. Howlett furnishes us with the following list of Baal-it-ish names found in Ireland: Baa-y-Bai, Baal-y-gowan, Baal-y-Nahinsh, Baal-y-Castell, Baal-y-Moni, Baal-y-ner, Baal-y-Garai, Baal-y-nah, Baal-y-Con-El, Baal-y-Hy, Baal-y-Hull-Ish, Baal-NahBrach, Baal-Athi, Baal-Dagon. 

Regarding the evidence given by these names, Howlett says: 

“These certainly are memorials of the Baal worship once prevailing in Ireland. In them we have not only the name of Baal, but its conjunction also with other Hebrew names. How can this be accounted for, except as they were so called by emigrants from Phoenicia and Palestine? One thing that particularly marks the Hebrew origin of these names is their attachment to places but not to persons.

The Canaanites and Phoenicians, attached the names of their gods, Baal, Bal, Bel to persons, as Eth-Baal, Itho-bal, Asdru-bal and Han-i-bal. These were family names among the heathen nations surrounding Israel. In like manner, we find among the chosen people the names of their God associated with and forming a part of family and personal names; as “El” and “Jah,” in Isra-el, Ishma-el, Lemu-el, Samu-el, Ezeki-el, El-isha El-ijah…

Baal never found favor among the Hebrews as a personal name, though used freely for localities. They gave it to their towns, but not to their children. Its use in Ireland is proof of the Israelitish origin of the earliest settlers – philological evidence of racial unity.”

Linked with the Fir Bolg time frame are the Galioin, also associated with the Lagin and Domain and all part of the Gabair peoples who arrived from Brittany (or Amorica) in France. Their name is considered a cognate to that of the Galli and Gauls. Yair Davidy states: ‘these names in Hebrew connote both “Exile” (“Goli”, “Gali”) and [the Sea of] Galilee.’ The Domain may be linked to the tribe of Dana and or the Fomorians and their goddess Domnu. As the Tuatha de Danann and Fomorians intermarried it is highly likely. The related Dumnonii were a British tribe found in Devon, Cornwall and also as far north as Cale-don-ia in Scotland. 

The migration of the Dal Riata, the Dalriada Scots to the West coast of Scotland is presented in the following article (also refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes). 

The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE – emphasis mine:

Linguistic and genealogical evidence associates ancestors of the Dál Riata with the prehistoric Iverni [rather Simeon] (Erainn) and Darini, suggesting kinship with the Ulaid [actually Reuben] of Ulster and a number of Belgic [probably Reuben] kingdoms in Munster. 

The bulk of the inhabitants in County Antrim would have been the Cruthinic Robogdii [from Benjamin**], relatives of the Epidian Cruthin [Picts**] across the Sea of Moyle. Ultimately the Dál Riata over-lords [from Zarah-Judah], according to the earliest genealogies, are descendants of Deda mac Sin, a prehistoric king or deity of the Belgic Érainn [probably Reuben].

Dalriada was founded by Gaelic-speaking people from Ulster, including Robogdian Cruthin, who eventually Gaelicised the west coast of Pictland, according to the Venerable Bede, by a combination of force and treaty. The indigenous Epidian [Caledonian Picts from Benjamin] people however remained substantially the same and there is no present archaeological evidence for a full-scale migration or invasion.

The inhabitants of Dalriada are often referred to as Scots (Latin Scotti), a name originally used by Roman and Greek writers for the Irish who raided Roman Britain. Later it came to refer to Gaelic-speakers in general, whether from Ireland or elsewhere. The name Dál Riata is derived from Old Gaelic. Dál means “portion” or “share” (as in “a portion of land”) [Genesis 49:27, Deuteronomy 33:6] and Riata or Riada is believed to be a personal name. Thus, Riada’s [possibly Reuben’s] portion.’

Adamson: ‘The kingdom reached its height under Áedán mac Gabráin (r. 574–608), but its growth was checked at the Battle of Degsastan in 603 by Æthelfrith of Northumbria. Serious defeats in Ireland and Scotland in the time of Domnall Brecc (d. 642) ended Dál Riata’s “golden age”, and the kingdom became a client of Northumbria, then subject to the Picts (Caledonian Cruthin). There is disagreement over the fate of the kingdom from the late eighth century onwards. 

Some scholars have seen no revival of Dalriada after the long period of foreign domination (after 637 to around 750 or 760), while others have seen a revival of Dalriada under Áed Find (736–778), and later Kenneth Mac Alpin (Cináed mac Ailpín, who is claimed in some sources to have taken the kingship there in c. 840 following the disastrous defeat of the Pictish army by the Danes). Some even claim that the kingship of Fortriu was usurped by the Dalriadans several generations before MacAlpin (800–858). The kingdom’s independence ended in the Viking Age, as it merged with the lands of the Picts to form the Kingdom of Alba.’

The salient points include: a. the similarity between Robo-gdii and possibly Reube-n. Even so, the link between the Cruthin and Picts is stronger b. the indigenous Cruithnic Epidians of Caledonia remained unchanged because they were the larger body of people, the Picts from Benjamin c. the Riada’s portion was either small, with the kingdom not lasting long as is fitting with the small tribe of Reuben. Or alternatively and perhaps more likely, it is applicable to Benjamin being the ‘son of the right hand’ and ‘sharing the spoil’.

The Dal Riada Scots, were an amalgamation of invaders primarily composed of the tribe of Benjamin. They assimilated with the Picts to form the new nation of Scotland. The Dal Riada included a number of people who migrated back to Ulster during its plantation by England. We will investigate the identity of these people in a subsequent chapter. The ruling class of the Dal Riada Scots were those of the Red Hand of Zarah [Milesian Scots] – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

The settlements of the Phoenicians in Spain were originally named after several Hebrew names. One principal settlement was named Gades, Gadir or Gadeira, and today this city is known as Cadiz. Located on the Atlantic Ocean, it surely served as a major port for Phoenician expeditions to [Britain] and North America. The prominent historian, George Rawlinson, cites the Phoenician word for “enclosure” or “fortified place” as the source for the name of this ancient port city . He could just as easily have credited ancient Hebrew as the source of its name as the Hebrew word “gadar” means “enclose,” “fence up” or “make (a wall).” Since the Hebrew word “gadar” would have been written without vowels at that ancient time, its consonants G­D­R serve precisely as the root word for the names Gadir or Gadeira. 

Another historian, L.A. Waddell, states Gades could be rendered “House of the Gads.” Gad was the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, and could easily have given its name to the colony of Gades. The tribe of Gad was prophesied by Moses in Deuteronomy 33:20 to “be enlarged”… historian, Philip Hitti, cites that Gades was founded as a colony of the Phoenicians around 1000 B.C. , while the Encyclopaedia Britannica states that Cadiz was founded “as early as 1100 B.C.” This time frame for Cadiz’s founding is in the era of Israel’s rise to empire status under Kings David [1010-970 BCE] and Solomon [970-930 BCE], when we would expect to see Israel’s dominance in what is traditionally called the “Phoenician” Empire. That “Gades” bore the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel (Gad) strongly indicates that it was given that name by Israelites rather than by inhabitants of Tyre or Sidon. 

… an ancient name of Ireland was Ibheriu or Iberiu, and ancient Gaelic histories record that the ancestors of the Gaelic settlers of Ireland came from Iberia (“Phoenician” Spain). Ancient Ireland was also called Hibernia, a name which also preserved the Hebrew root word “Eber.” Note how closely the words Ibheriu and Iberiu coincide phonetically with the pronunciation of the word Hebrew. One other possibility exists for these early names in the British Isles… that early histories of [Britain] record that the tribe of Asher operated the ancient mines in Cornwall. One of the clans of Asher was named the Heberites (Numbers 26:45), and this Hebrew name also serves as a precise root word for such names as Hibernia and the Hebrides

As this large group of Israelites resettled in the Black Sea region, they assumed new identities, but many key factors made them readily identifiable as Hebrews. The region to the east of the Black Sea (and north of Armenia) came to be known as Iberia, confirming the presence of Hebrews from the ten tribes in that region. The Hebrews had given the old Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain the name Iberia (after Eber, the namesake of the Hebrews), and it has long been called the Iberian Peninsula. The name of a modern Spanish river (the Ebro) still preserves the name of Eber, and is a reminder of the Hebrew (“Phoenician”) presence in the ancient Iberian Peninsula. The appearance of the same Hebrew name (Iberia) in the region north of Armenia verifies that this region became an area of Israelite resettlement for those who escaped Assyrian captivity by voluntary flight.’ 

The Goidels derived from Gaed-hals as Gaels, were similarly known as Hiberi or Scotti. One legend of their coming to Ireland is that the leader was called Gad-elus* and they arrived based on the tradition that it was some four hundred years after the Exodus, in 1046 BCE. Their story mirrors and entwines with the arrival of the earlier Milesians from Zarah, Judah in 1404 BCE – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes. In this instance, Niul married an Egyptian princess named Scota and their son’s name was Goid-el Glas a contemporary of Moses and the Israelites who were still living in slavery in Egypt. Moses had healed the infant Goidel Glas from a snakebite and foretold that Goidel’s descendants would one day live in a land with no serpents. Few nations have no snakes at all; though Ireland is notably one, with Iceland and New Zealand. Notice the name Glas, is the same as the prefix glas, for the city of Glasgow. 

The name Scotti (or Scot) is linked to the Hebrew word Succoth which means a dwelling or booth, as in a temporary shelter. Gael is similar to the word Gaul, though does not derive from it. Portugal, is a word that is broken down into port-of-the-Gal (Gael); just as H-iber-nia is linked to the Iber-ian Peninsula. The Gaels gave Ireland its name Hibernia from their name the Hiberi, which is derived from the name Hebrew, which stems from Eber, the grandson of Arphaxad. The Gaels also gave their name Gaeli, to their language, Gael-ic. 

Judah’s Sceptre & Joseph’s Birthright, J H Allen, 1902:

‘It is a remarkable fact that Young in his “Analytical Concordance” gives us the word Leag, as the original Hebrew word, while Strong in his “Exhaustive Concordance” gives us the equally correct word Gael, from the same Hebrew word. But be it Leag to the Hebrew or Gael to the Saxon, it is the same word to the same people, which they have reversed and given to their newer language, which is called the Gael, or Gael-ic tongue… spoken in its primitive simplicity in many places in Wales, Scotland and the north of Ireland. Wa-els is only another form of Gaels…’

Genesis 10:24

English Standard Version

‘Arpachshad fathered Shelah; and Shelah fathered Eber.

‘Similar to Eber, the name Shelagh is popular in Ireland. According to the website Celtic Female Names of Ireland other derivations are: “Sile – [Shee-la]… Sheela, Sheelah, Sheila, Shelagh, Sheelagh, Shiela, Sheilag, Cicily, Celia, Selia, Sissy.” 

Genesis 46:16

English Standard Version

‘The sons of Gad [7]:

Ziphion, Haggi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi, and Areli [7].’

Numbers 26:35-36

English Standard Version

‘These are the sons of Ephraim according to their clans: of Shuthelah, the clan of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the clan of the Becherites; of Tahan, the clan of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the clan of the Eranites.’

Anciently, Ireland was called Erin, Eran and Aran. A number of Ephraim’s and Manasseh’s descendants migrated to Ireland and from there, nearly five million ‘Irish’ travelled to America between 1820 and 1930. For four decades the Irish constituted one third of all immigrants to the United States. In 2019, thirty-two million Americans identified as having Irish ancestry; ten percent of the total population. The link with Gad’s sixth son Eri is difficult to ignore with the name E-ire or Eir-e and the prefix ire. To this day, the Republic of Ire-land is called Eire.

Yair Davidy:

“Roberts” in what is described as “one of the oldest histories in the English language” speaks of Israelites led by a certain Bartholome (Numbers 23:36, Eran son of Ephraim son of Joseph) who were driven from Spain and settled in Ireland: “Gwrgan(r)t….directed them (Bartholomew and company)… to go to Ireland, which at that time lay waste and uninhabited… and there they settled…” “He Bartholome… had his name from a river of Spain called Eirinnal, on the banks of which they had lived… they had arrived from Israel their original country and… their ancestors dwelt in a retired part of Spain, near Eirnia, from whence the Spaniards drove them to sea…”

One Gaelic tribe was known as the Syths and the Welsh historian Gildas, records ‘the Skythic Vale’ from which the Clyde and Forth rivers originate. An area they occupied is the Isle of Skye which became known as Sgia or Syiath. In Gaelic it is called ‘Ant-Eilean Sgiathanach’ and later as Scotia. The Scots were also known as Scithae, Scitae, Scuitae and Scotae to the writers of old, with the Greeks calling the Scythians, Skuthes. 

Ireland enjoyed a long period of peace and prosperity after the Danite, Lugh Lamfada defeated the Fomorians. Lugh ruled Ireland for forty years from 1220 to 1180 BCE. One of his four wives was called Eri-u. A different wife had an affair with Cermait, the son of Dagda. Lugh killed Cermait for seducing his wife and Dagda is said to have wept tears of blood over the death of his son. Cermait had three^ sons: Sethor MacCuill, Cethor MacCecht and Tethor MacGreine. At Uisnech, the sons of Cermait ambushed and killed Lugh to avenge their father. Dagda succeeded Lugh as king of Ireland. Though Dagda had received a near mortal wound from Caitlin, the wife of the Fomorian King Balor, during the Second Battle of Moytura in 1220 BCE, he did not die until he had reigned for a further eighty years till 1100 BCE. 

Next, the reign of Delbaeth lasted for ten years, before his son Fiachna succeeded him, also ruling for ten years. Fiachna died fighting Eogan of Inber Mor. Fiachna was succeeded by the sons^ of Cermait and they ruled Ireland for twenty-seven years. The three Danite brothers married the daughters of Fiachna. 

The brothers then divided the land between themselves. Some seven years later in 1046 BCE, a man named Ith arrived in Ireland with some of his companions. Ith was the son of Breogan and the brother of Cualnge and Fuat. Ith was most notably, the uncle of a certain Mil* Espaine, again reminiscent of the earlier Milesians, yet in the time frame occupied by the later Gaels. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Breoghan (or Brigus) was king of Galicia, Andalusia, Murcia, Castile, and Portugal – all which he conquered. He built Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia in Galicia, and the city of Brigansa or Braganza in Portugal – called after him; and the kingdom of Castile was then also called after him Brigia. It is considered that “Castile” itself was so called from the figure of a castle which Brigus bore for his Arms on his banner. Brigus sent a colony into Britain, who settled in that territory now known as the counties of York, Lancaster, Durham, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, and, after him, were called Brigantes; whose posterity gave formidable opposition to the Romans, at the time of the Roman invasion of Britain. Bilé was king of those countries after his father’s death; and his son Galamh [Galav] or Milesius succeeded him. This Bilé had a brother named Ithe.’ 

These Milesians were the sons of Mil (or Miled). His ancestors had originally come from Scythia, but Mil had brought them out of Scythia and later Egypt, before they settled in Spain, which was known as the Land of the Dead. From this point, legendary history and myth are noticeably blurred. 

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 455-456, 458:

‘Mils… known also as Millessius died in Spain, but his… descendants later conquered Ireland… [including] Hyber and Hymec, that later… [claimed] the land for themselves, renaming the island the land of Scota… a son named Eire-Ahmon… became the ancestral forbearer of the [Scot] kings of Ireland… Ireland… was derived from Hyber land, which in Latin was Hibernia and in old English was Iberland, which eventually changed to Iverland and then Ireland. The Irish heritage of Scota eventually migrated to Scotland, with Mor McErc of Dalriada as their leader in the fifth century CE… until 843 CE, when Kenneth McAlpin won and united the Scots with the Picts… [reuniting] two related but separate strains of bloodlines… the Picts migrated to Scotland in 600 BCE. Ireland is additionally the land where the lost eleven tribes of Israel were whispered to have migrated after their defeat at the hands of the Assyrians around 721 BCE.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis mine:

‘Milesius, in his youth and during his father’s life-time, went into Scythia, where he was kindly received by the king of that country, who gave him his daughter in marriage, and appointed him General of his forces. In this capacity Milesius defeated the king’s enemies, gained much fame, and the love of all the king’s subjects. His growing greatness and popularity excited against him the jealousy of the king; who, fearing the worst, resolved on privately despatching Milesius out of the way, for, openly, he dare not attempt it. 

Admonished of the king’s intentions in his regard, Milesius slew him; and thereupon quitted Scythia and retired into Egypt with a fleet of sixty sail. Pharaoh Nectonibus, then king of Egypt, being informed of his arrival and of his great valour, wisdom, and conduct in arms, made him General of all his forces against the king of Ethiopia then invading his country. Here, as in Scythia, Milesius was victorious; he forced the enemy to submit to the conqueror’s own terms of peace. By these exploits Milesius found great favour with Pharaoh, who gave him, being then a widower, his daughter Scota in marriage; and kept him eight years afterwards in Egypt. During the sojourn of Milesius in Egypt, he employed the most ingenious and able persons among his people to be instructed in the several trades, arts, and sciences used in Egypt; in order to have them taught to the rest of his people on his return to Spain. 

The original name of Milesius of Spain was… “Galamh” (gall: Irish, a stranger; amh, a negative affix), which means, no stranger: meaning that he was no stranger in Egypt, where he was called “Milethea Spaine,” which was afterwards contracted to “Milé Spaine” (meaning the Spanish Hero), and finally to “Milesius” (mileadh: Irish, a hero; Latin miles, a soldier). At length Milesius took leave of his father-in-law, and steered towards Spain; where he arrived to the great joy and comfort of his people, who were much harasssed by the rebellion of the natives and by the intrusion of other foreign nations that forced in after his father’s death, and during his own long absence from Spain. With these and those he often met; and, in fifty-four battles, victoriously fought, he routed, destroyed, and totally extirpated them out of the country, which he settled in peace and quietness. 

In his reign a great dearth and famine occurred in Spain, of twenty-six years’ continuance, occasioned, as well by reason of the former troubles which hindered the people from cultivating and manuring the ground, as for want of rain to moisten the earth; but Milesius superstitiously believed the famine to have fallen upon him and his people as a judgment and punishment from their gods, for their negligence in seeking out the country destined for their final abode, so long before foretold by Cachear their Druid or magician… the time limited by the prophecy for the accomplishment thereof being now nearly, if not fully, expired. 

To expiate his fault and to comply with the will of his gods, Milesius, with the general approbation of his people, sent his uncle Ithe, with his son Lughaidh (Luy), and one hundred and fifty stout men to bring them an account of those western islands; who, accordingly, arriving at the island since then called Ireland, and landing in that part of it now called Munster, left his son with fifty of his men to guard the ship, and with the rest travelled about the island. 

Informed, among other things, that the three sons of Cearmad, called Mac-Cuill, MacCeacht, and MacGreine, did then and for thirty years before rule and govern the island, each for one year, in his turn; and that the country was called after the names of their three queens – Eire, Fodhla, and Banbha, respectively: one year called “Eire,” the next “Fodhla,” and the next “Banbha,” as their husbands reigned in their regular turns; by which names the island is ever since indifferently called, but most commonly “Eire,” because that MacCuill, the husband of Eire, ruled and governed the country in his turn the year that the Clan-na-Milé (or the sons of Milesius) arrived in and conquered Ireland. And being further informed that the three brothers were then at their palace at Aileach Neid, in the north part of the country, engaged in the settlement of some disputes concerning their family jewels, Ithe directed his course thither; sending orders to his son to sail about with his ship and the rest of his men, and meet him there.’

Ith with his nephew’s blessing, had decided to travel and explore this beautiful, new land Erin, which he had been told much about. Ith arrived peacefully in Ireland with his followers. The tribe of Dan welcomed Ith to Erin at first, though became suspicious of Ith’s motives for coming to Erin. Through misunderstanding of Ith’s comment about the land, the Danite kings murdered Ith and his two brothers. The Milesians escaped with Ith’s body. 

When his body was brought back to his family in Spain, the sons of Mil sought to avenge their great uncle’s death. They embarked with their warriors and families to Erin in sixty-five ships. A bard named Amairgin who was the son of Mil, led the warriors to Erin. The Danites chose to avoid a confrontation with the Milesians, so they used magic to hide Erin in a fog. The Danites also cast a spell of straying on the Milesian fleet. Amairgin then used magic to dispel the Danite spells. Eber Donn, a son of Mil, planned to exterminate all the tribe of Dan. In retaliation, the Danites sent a magical storm against the Milesian ships; whereby Eber Donn fell overboard and drowned in the raging sea. Amairgin managed to guide his ships to safety and eventually land in Ireland. 

The three wives of MacCuill, MacCecht and MacGreine: Banba, Fodla and Eri-u sought out the Milesian leaders. Each queen asked the Milesians to name Ireland after her. It was Eriu who won the honour. Ireland became known as Erinn. All three Danite kings and their three queens lost their lives in the Battle of Tailtiu. Resulting in the defeat of the Tuatha de Danaan and forcing their retreat. The Danites did not leave Erin, continuing to dwell in Northern Ireland. Mythic legend continues with Manannan placing a powerful spell of invisibility over many parts of Ireland, with magical palaces hidden under mounds. These places were called Sidh (or Sidhe). 

With their magical abilities, the Danites were believed to be able to appear or vanish from sight at will; as well as being considered immortal. We will return to this aspect of the Danites in Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. Two further sons of Mil, Eber Finn (Heber) and Eremon (Heremon) partitioned Ireland into north and south and became their respective kings. Heremon ruled northern Ireland and Heber the south. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

‘When Ithe arrived where the (Danan) brothers were, he was honourably received and entertained by them; and, finding him to be a man of great wisdom and knowledge, they referred their disputes to him for decision. That decision having met their entire satisfaction, Ithe exhorted them to mutual love, peace, and forbearance; adding much in praise of their delightful, pleasant, and fruitful country; and then took his leave, to return to his ship, and go back to Spain. 

No sooner was he gone than the brothers began to reflect on the high commendations which Ithe gave of the Island; and, suspecting his design of bringing others to invade it, resolved to prevent them, and therefore pursued him with a strong party, overtook him, fought and routed his men and wounded himself to death (before his son or the rest of his men left on ship-board could come to his rescue) at a place called, from that fight and his name, Magh Ithe or “The plain of Ithe” (an extensive plain in the barony of Raphoe, county Donegal); whence his son, having found him in that condition, brought his dead and mangled body back into Spain, and there exposed it to public view, thereby to excite his friends and relations to avenge his murder. 

And here I think it not amiss to notify what the Irish chroniclers, observe upon this matter… that all the invaders and planters of Ireland, namely, Partholan, Neimhedh, the Firbolgs, Tuatha-de-Danans, and Clan-na-Milé, [were] originally Scythians… who had the language called Bearla-Tobbai or Gaoidhilg [Gaelic] common amongst them all; and consequently not to be wondered at, that Ithe and the Tuatha-de-Danans understood one another without an Interpreter – both speaking the same language, though perhaps with some difference in the accent. 

The exposing of the dead body of Ithe had the desired effect; for, thereupon, Milesius made great preparations in order to invade Ireland – as well to avenge his uncle’s death, as also in obedience to the will of his gods, signified by the prophecy of Cachear, aforesaid. But, before he could effect that object, he died, leaving the care and charge of that expedition upon his eight legitimate sons by his two wives… 

Milesius was a very valiant champion, a great warrior, and fortunate [recall meaning of Gad] and prosperous in all his undertakings: witness his name of “Milesius,” given him from the many battles (some say a thousand, which the word “Milé” signifies in Irish as well as in Latin) which he victoriously fought and won, as well in Spain, as in all the other countries and kingdoms he traversed in his younger days.

The eight brothers were neither forgetful nor negligent in the execution of their father’s command; but, soon after his death, with a numerous fleet well manned and equipped, set forth from Breoghan’s Tower or Brigantia (now Corunna) in Galicia, in Spain, and sailed prosperously to the coasts of Ireland or Inis-Fail, where they met many difficulties and various chances before they could land: occasioned by the diabolical arts, sorceries, and enchantments used by the Tuatha-de-Danans, to obstruct their landing; for, by their magic art, they enchanted the island so as to appear to the Milesians or Clan-na-Milé in the form of a Hog, and no way to come at it (whence the island, among the many other names it had before, was called Muc-Inis or “The Hog Island”); and withal raised so great a storm, that the Milesian fleet was thereby totally dispersed and many of them cast away, wherein five of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius, lost their lives. 

That part of the fleet commanded by Heber, Heremon, and Amergin (the three surviving brothers), and Heber Donn, son of Ir (one of the brothers lost in the storm), overcame all opposition, landed safe, fought and routed the three Tuatha-de Danan Kings at Slieve-Mis, and thence pursued and overtook them at Tailten, where another bloody battle was fought; wherein the three (Tuatha-de-Danan) Kings and their Queens were slain, and their army utterly routed and destroyed: so that they could never after give any opposition to the Clan-na-Milé in their new conquest; who, having thus sufficiently avenged the death of their great uncle Ithe, gained the possession of the country foretold them by Cachear, some ages past…’

An additional myth with recognisable details yet conflicting chronology which explains the origins of the Milesians allegedly begins some four hundred and forty years earlier with a Scythian named Phoeniusa Farsaidh (or Fennius Farsa), who was a King in Scythia and a wise and learned man. Phoeniusa Farsaidh erected a school in the valley of Senaar, near the city of Æothena (Athens).

Having continued there with his younger son Niul for twenty years, he returned home to his kingdom, which, at his death, he left to his eldest son Nenuall; leaving him no other patrimony other than his learning and the benefit of the school. Niul, after his father returned to Scythia, continued some time at Æothena, teaching the languages and other laudable sciences, until upon report of his great learning he was invited into Egypt by Pharaoh. The king gave him the land of Campus Cyrunt, near the Red Sea to inhabit and his daughter Scota in marriage. 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart: 

‘Gaodhal [Gathelus], the son of Niul, was the ancestor of the Clan-na-Gael, that is, “the children or descendants of Gaodhal.” In his youth this Gaodhal was stung in the neck by a serpent, and was immediately brought to Moses, who, laying his rod upon the wounded place, instantly cured him: whence followed the word “Glas” to be added to his name, as Gaodhal Glas (glas: Irish, green; Latin glaucus; Greek glaukos), on account of the green scar which the word signifies, and which, during his life, remained on his neck after the wound was healed.’

If Gaodhal the leader of the Gaels (Gad) who would enter Ireland in 1046 BCE knew Moses, this would mean he was living four hundred years early – a conflict in the timeline – and during the time of the Milesian (Zarah-Judah) arrival into Ireland circa 1404 BCE.

O’Hart: ‘And Gaodhal obtained a further blessing, namely – that no venemous beast can live any time where his posterity should inhabit; which is verified in Creta [Crete] or Candia, Gothia or Getulia, Ireland, etc. The Irish chroniclers affirm that from this time Gaodhal and his posterity did paint the figures of Beasts, Birds, etc., on their banners and shields, to distinguish their tribes and septs, in imitation of the Israelites; and that a “Thunderbolt” was the cognizance in their chief standard for many generations after this Gaodhal.’ 

‘The following is a translation of an extract from the derivation of this proper name, as given in Halliday’s Volume of Keating’s Irish History, page 230.’ 

“Antiquaries assert that the name of Gaodhal is from the compound word formed of ‘gaoith’ and ‘dil,’ which means a lover of learning; for, ‘gaoith’ is the same as wisdom or learning, and ‘dil’ is the same as loving or fond.”

Some versions of these legends also state that they kept the Laws of Moses, including abstaining from eating unclean meats. The Goidels wandered for forty-two years in North Africa, the land of the Philistines, Syria and onwards to Spanish Galatia in northwestern Iberia. Some records also include ‘Miletus in ancient Caria on the west coast of Anatolia and Messina in Sicily’ as locations of their sojourn.

‘Heber Scut (scut: Irish, a Scot), after his father’s death and a year’s stay in Creta, departed thence, leaving some of his people to inhabit the Island, where some of their posterity likely still remain; “because the Island breeds no venemous serpent ever since.” He and his people soon after arrived in Scythia; where his cousins, the posterity of Nenuall (eldest son of Fenius Farsa…), refusing to allot a place of habitation for him and his colony, they fought many battles wherein Heber (with the assistance of some of the natives who were ill-affected towards their king), being always victor, he at length forced the sovereignty from the other, and settled himself and his colony in Scythia, who continued there for four generations. (Hence the epithet Scut, “a Scot” or “a Scythian,” was applied to this Heber, who is accordingly called Heber Scot.) Heber Scot was afterwards slain in battle by Noemus the former king’s son.’ 

Regarding Joshua’s friend Caleb, Yair Davidy states:

‘Historically the Kings of Egypt very rarely gave their daughters to outsiders but it is recorded that Solomon king of Israel married a daughter of Pharoah. Also Moses the deliverer and Lawgiver of Israel as a child had been adopted by a daughter of Pharoah. In Talmudic tradition the foster-mother of Moses was the same “Batya” daughter of Pharoah who later married Mered (1 Chronicles 4:18) from the Tribe of Judah.’ 

1 Chronicles 4:13-18

English Standard Version

13 ‘The sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah… and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: KenazThese are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite [not Jewish] wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah.’

Davidy: ‘According to Talmudic tradition “Mered” is another name for Caleb, son of Yefunei, the Kenazzi, a Prince of Judah (Numbers 13:6). Caleb, says the Talmud, married “Batya” the daughter of Pharoah who had rescued and raised Moses.’ 

Recall we studied Caleb in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Davidy has additional details of interest. The account of Caleb being Mered or marrying Pharaoh’s daughter is difficult to align, as Moses was born in 1526 BCE and Caleb was born in 1478 BCE. Moses flees Egypt in 1486 BCE, some eight years before Caleb is born. Caleb was also perhaps a slave at the time; his marrying Moses adoptive mother, Queen Sobeknefru is unlikely – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Davidy: ‘Some descendants of Caleb, the “Chelubai” (1 Chronicles 2;9) are traceable to Chalybonitis and to the “Chalybe” people. Chalybonitis was in northwest Syria. Chalybonitis in northern Syria was in an area associated with the Iari descendants of Yair who himself (1 Chronicles 2:22) was a son of Segub son of Hezron ancestor (or “father”) of Caleb (Chaleb): The eponymous ancestor IAR was later recalled in place-names of Ireland and Scotland.

The family name of Caleb was “Kenazi” which name connotes “metalworker”. In the Pontus (on the southeast shores of the Black Sea) and Caucasus the Chalybes were famous metallurgists. The Chalybes were considered as of Cimmerian origin. They are recalled by Greek Chroniclers such as Xenophon. A people of similar name (i.e. the “Calybes”) who were also famous as metal-workers were later reported of in the Galatian area of northwest Spain. Justin (44:3) said that the Calybes were skilled metallurgists. From Galatia (“Galacia”) in Spain Celts identified with the Milesian-Hiberi migrated to Ireland and from there to Britain. The legend of the Milesians that one of their ancestors had been married to the daughter of Pharoah may be connected with the presence of “Chalybes” (or “Calybes”) descendants of Caleb from Judah amongst them.’ 

An interesting point raised by Davidy – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

Gildas said that the British Celts were “Truly Israel of the Exodus”. Gildas wrote about 540 CE. He lived in Britain at the time that it was being conquered by the pagan Angles, Jutes, and Saxons [Frisians]. As a Christian priest and a Celt he was horrified by what he saw. He attributed the calamity to the sins of the native British people and upbraided them. He used Biblical expressions and several times addressed the British princes as Israel and referred to Britain as “a treacherous lioness of Gad” though why he chose Gad out of all the 12 Tribes of Israel is unknown.’

A curious thing for Gildas to say, seeing as the tribe of Gad were well ensconced in Ireland at this time. Yair Davidy: ‘In 1581 Vincenzio Galilei (father of the astronomer, Galileo Galilei) wrote that the Irish [Royal Milesians] believed themselves descended from David, King of Israel, and that was why they used a harp as their symbol.   

Davidy: ‘Ptolemy listed numerous place and historical ethnic names proving that Israelite tribes once ruled over all the area of northern Syria reaching at least to the Euphrates. Examples are the areas called RAHABENI (i.e. Reuben), MASANI (Menasseh), CAUCHABENI (i.e. Sons of Chauchi, i.e. of Haggi son of Gad), BATHANAEI (Bashan in Aramaic), CHALYBONITIS (Chalybes of Judah), and the cities of Belginaea and Belagaea (Belgae from Bela-g-h) [Reuben (or Benjamin)], and GABARA from Geber in the region of Bashan (Bathanaei) close to Masani (Menasseh). 

The “House of Gabbar” were the ruling dynasty of “Yadi”. Yadi was a Judaean enclave in northwest Syria (“Hamath which belonged to Judah” 2 Kings 14:28) known as “Yadi” (i.e. “Judah” in Assyrian) and also garrisoned by the “Dananu” from the Tribe of Dan and somehow associated with the neighbouring Tribe of Gad since its other name “Smal” is synonymous with Zephion a clan of Gad.

The Lagin people gave their name to Leinster in east Ireland. They were also known as GABAIR. After being conquered by the Milesian Goidels, the Lagin Gabair joined forces with them and participated in raids on, and settlement in, Scotland. They have been equated with the Gailian or Galioin, which names may well derive from the Golan in the Land of Israel since GEBER or GABAR appears to have once been an important family name in that general area. To the northeast of Eboracum (York) and the Parissi in Britain were the GABRANTOVICES. Further north in the Caledonian region (of Scotland) of the Gadeni (Otadeni) was the settlement of Gabrosentas. 

From Gilead (“Galaad”) of Israel emerged the Galatae or “Galadi” of northern Gaul, the Galadon of northern Wales and southern Britain, and the Caledonians of Scotland. These groups had ethnic migratory connections with the Gaels of Ireland. An example of genuine Historical tradition mixed with literary additions and imaginations is found in the Chronicles of Eri. ‘The Chronicles of Eri, being the history of the Gaal Sciot Iber, or the Irish People, translated from the Phoenician dialect of the Scythian language’, by Roger O’ Connor were published in London in two volumes in 1822. 

The Chronicle says that the Gaali had been in Armenia, and the Caucasus. They were traders and metallurgists, and archers. They were oppressed by the Assyrians and fled via Hamath in northern Syria. Hamath adjoined ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ which in effect was a suburb of Hamath. Hamath in Northern Syria or rather ‘Daphne of Antiochia’ was considered by the Talmud as one of three regions through which the Lost Ten Tribes were taken into exile.

The Chronicles tells how the Gaali sailed to Spain which was then ruled by the Phoenicians who in turn were directed from Hamath. In Spain the Galli moved from the southern area of Tartessos to Galatia in the northwest. They shook off Phoenician control. Together with the Phoenicians from their base in Spain they had established mining operations in Cornwall, in Britain. Some of them moved to Aquitaine in Gaul. Due to war and famine, those of the Galli who were in Spanish Galatia emigrated to Ireland. Though not Phoenicians they worshiped God under the form of baal, received instruction in Phoenician ways, bore Hebrew-sounding names and they had Israelite-values such as an aversion to images and other characteristics. 

The Chronicles connect up with a verse in Isaiah: ‘They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD. They shall cry aloud from the sea. Wherefore, glorify the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea’ (Isaiah 24:14-15).

‘Cry aloud from the sea’: In Hebrew the word ‘from the sea’ (‘me-yam’) also means ‘from the west’. The major sea was to the West. The Aramaic Translation and Commentators say it means the exiles who will be in the West in the Last Days. Then it goes on to speak of the isles of the Sea meaning Britain. 

According to “The Chronicles of Eri” the Gaali of Sciot (the people he is speaking of) had the custom of lighting beacon fires on the coasts.’

“All the headlands and promontories belonging to the Gaal of Sciot on the northwest coast of Spain were called in the Phoenician language Breoccean, that is, The Land of Flaming Fires, because of the blaze that was kept up and could be seen at a great distance out to sea. The same custom was observed on the coast of Cornwall and Devonshire after the Gaal of Sciot joined with the Phoenicians in their mining operations there, and that land was called Breotan, Breo meaning Flaming Fire’ (‘BIAR’ = burn in Hebrew).”

‘We thus find that the people known as the Gaal of Sciot, the people whom the Chronicles claim were the ancestors of the Irish and Scots… had the custom of lighting fires that could be seen out to sea. They practiced this custom when they were in northwest Spain and later on the southwest coast of [England] when they set up mining operations in that area. We find elsewhere that this practice was known throughout Britain. 

A Polish Linguist named Piotr Gasiorowski reports that the ancient British were in the custom of lighting fires on the hilltops that could be seen out to sea: 

“I think the tradition of erecting hilltop cairns and mounds as orientation marks, and of using beacon fires for long-distance communication was very strong in Celtic (also Roman) Britain; the landscape of much of the country is as suitable for this purpose as could be. One trace of that is the occurrence of the Brythonic element tan – ‘fire’ (Welsh tan) in hill names (there are many Tan Hills in England) not only in ancient times but all through history down to the invention of the telegraph. For example, a network of beacons set up on hilltops was used in England in 1588 to signal the approach of the Spanish Armada, and once it was spotted off the Scillies (islands southwest of Cornwall in southwest Britain) the news reached the English commanders in no time at all.”

King Heremon was the seventh son of Milesius (or Mil); though only the third of the three sons who left any issue. From him were descended the kings and nobility of the Connaught and Dalriada Kingdoms. Heremon with his eldest brother Heber were the joint first ‘Milesian’ Gael monarchs of Ireland. The date given in the Library of Ireland, Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart, 1892, is that they began to reign in 1699 BCE.

This is too early, for Judah and Gad were born in circa 1746 and 1744 BCE respectively and it does not take into account the period of the Nemedians for 217 years; the gap until the Fir Bolg returned of 230 years; their rule of 37 years; the approximate time the Fomorians ruled the Danites for 10 years; and finally, the Tuatha de Danann’s 174 (or possibly 197) years of kingship in Ireland. 

Heber is recorded as being killed a year later. In an unconventional chronology this equates to 1045 BCE. Heremon then reigned for fourteen years until 1031 BCE. ‘During which time a certain colony – called by the Irish, Cruithneaigh, in English “Cruthneans” or Picts (from the Tribe of Benjamin) – arrived in Ireland and requested Heremon to assign them a part of the country to settle in, which he refused; but, giving them as wives the widows of the Tuatha-de-Danans, slain in battle, he sent them with a strong party of his own forces to conquer the country then called “Alba,” but now Scotland; conditionally, that they and their posterity should be tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland.’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Heber and Heremon, the chief leading men remaining of the eight brothers, sons of Milesius aforesaid, divided the kingdom between them (allotting a proportion of land to their brother Amergin, who was their Arch-priest, Druid, or magician; and to their nephew Heber Donn, and to the rest of their chief commanders), and became jointly the first of one hundred and eighty-three Kings or sole Monarchs of the Gaelic, Milesian, or Scottish Race, that ruled and governed Ireland, successively, for two thousand eight hundred and eighty-five years from the first year of their reign, Anno Mundi three thousand five hundred, to their submission to the Crown of England in the person of King Henry the Second; who, being also of the Milesian Race by Maude, his mother, was lineally descended from Fergus Mor MacEarca, first King of Scotland, who was descended from the said Heremon – so that the succession may be truly said to continue in the Milesian Blood from before Christ one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine years down to the present time. 

Heber and Heremon reigned jointly one year only, when, upon a difference between their ambitious wives, they quarrelled and fought a battle at Ardcath or Geshill (Geashill, near Tullamore in the King’s County), where Heber was slain by Heremon; and, soon after, Amergin, who claimed an equal share in the government, was, in another battle fought between them, likewise slain by Heremon. Thus, Heremon became sole Monarch, and made a new division of the land amongst his comrades and friends, viz.

… the south part, now called Munster, he gave to his brother Heber’s four sons, Er [family name of Judah] , Orba, Feron, and Fergna; allotting a part of Munster to Lughaidh (the son of Ithe, the first Milesian discoverer of Ireland), amongst his brother Heber’s sons…

the north part, now Ulster, he gave to Ir’s only son Heber Donn;

the east part or Coigeadh Galian, now called Leinster, he gave to Criomthann-sciath-bheil, one of his commanders;

and the west part, now called Connaught, Heremon gave to Un-Mac-Oigge, another of his commanders…’

‘From these three brothers, Heber, Ir, and Heremon (Amergin dying without issue) [Three crowns of Munster], are descended all the Milesian Irish of Ireland and Scotland, viz.: from Heber, the eldest brother, the provincial Kings of Munster (of whom thirty-eight were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and most of the nobility and gentry of Munster, and many noble families in Scotland, are descended.

From Ir, the second brother, all the provincial Kings of Ulster (of whom twenty-six were sole Monarchs of Ireland), and all the ancient nobility and gentry of Ulster, and many noble families in Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, derive their pedigrees; and, in Scotland, the Clan-na-Rory – the descendants of an eminent man, named Ruadhri or Roderick, who was Monarch of Ireland for seventy years (viz., from Before Christ 288 to 218). 

From Heremon, the youngest of the three brothers, were descended one hundred and fourteen sole Monarchs of Ireland: the provincial Kings and Hermonian nobility and gentry of Leinster, Connaught, Meath, Orgiall, Tirowen, Tirconnell, and Clan-na-boy; the Kings of Dalriada; all the Kings of Scotland from Fergus. Mor MacEarca down to the Stuarts; and the Kings and Queens of England from Henry the Second down to the present time’ – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘The issue of Ithe is not accounted among the Milesian Irish or Clan-na-Milé, as not being descended from Milesius, but from his uncle Ithe; of whose posterity there were also some Monarchs of Ireland, and many provincial or half provincial Kings of Munster: that country upon its first division being allocated to the sons of Heber and to Lughaidh, son of Ithe, whose posterity continued there accordingly. 

Milesius of Spain bore three Lions in his shield and standard [Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal tribes], for the following reasons; namely, that, in his travels in his younger clays into foreign countries, passing through Africa, he, by his cunning and valour, killed in one morning three Lions; and that, in memory of so noble and valiant an exploit, he always after bore three Lions on his shield, which his two surviving sons Heber and Heremon, and his grandson Heber Donn, son of Ir, after their conquest of Ireland, divided amongst them, as well as they did the country: each of them bearing a Lion in his shield and banner, but of different colours; which the Chiefs of their posterity continue to this day: some with additions and differences; others plain and entire as they had it from their ancestors.’

The thirteenth monarch of Ireland was Tigernmas ot Tiernmas and he reigned seventy-seven years; though according to Keating, he reigned only fifty years; of which he fought twenty-seven battles with the family of Heber Fionn, all which he won. It was during his reign that gold was mined near the Liffey and skilfully worked by Inchadhan. Tigernmas also ‘made a law that each grade of society should be’ ranked and ‘known by the number of colours in its wearing apparel.’ It is believed to have been the origin of the Scottish plaid.

‘According to Keating, one colour was used in the dress of a slave; two colours in that of a plebeian; three, in that of a soldier or young lord; four, in that of a brughaidh or public victualler; five, in that of a lord of a tuath or cantred; and six colours in that of an ollamh or Druid, or chief professor of any of the liberal arts, and in that of the king and queen.’ 

Tigernmas died in 890 BCE ‘on the Eve of 1st of November or Halloween, with two-thirds of the people of Ireland, at Magh Sleaght [Field of Adoration], in the county of Leitrim, as he was adoring his Sun-God idol, Crom Cruach [the crooked heap].’ Tigernmas was the first to introduce image worship in Ireland. This idol was worshipped up to the time of St. Patrick, by whom it was destroyed. The sun worship was a throwback to the Magi (or wise men) from the East – the empire of Parthia – who were led to Bethlehem by divine inspiration to witness the infant Messiah. 

During his son Smiomghall’s reign, the Picts in Scotland were forced to abide by their oath, and pay homage to the Irish Monarch. Later, King Fiacha Labhrainn, slew Eochaidh Faobharglas, of the line of Heber at the battle of Carman. During his reign all the inhabitants of Scotland were brought in subjection to the Irish Monarchy, and the conquest was secured by his son the twentieth Monarch, Aongus Olmucach. In 796 BCE, the Picts had again refused to pay the tribute originally imposed on them by Heremon, but the Monarch went with a strong army into Alba and in thirty pitched battles overcame them and forced them to pay the required tribute. 

Crimthann-Niadh-Nar was the one hundredth Monarch of Ireland, and styled ‘The Heroic.’ It was in his reign that the Saviour was born in 3 BCE. Tuathal Teachtmar was the 106th Monarch of Ireland. ‘When Tuathal came of age, he got together his friends, and, with what aid his grandfather the king of Alba gave him, came into Ireland and fought and overcame his enemies in twenty-five battles in Ulster, twenty-five in Leinster, as many in Connaught, and thirty-five in Munster. And having thus restored the true royal blood and heirs to their respective provincial kingdoms…’ 

Irish Pedigrees, John O’Hart:

1. Partholan and his followers, called in Irish Muintir Phartholain, meaning “Partholan’s People.” 

2. The Nemedians [Tribes of Reuben, Simeon and Dan]. 

3. The Fomorians [Elioud giants], 

4. The Firbolgs or Firvolgians, who were also called Belgae or Belgians [tribe of Reuben (Northern Ireland)]. 

5. The Tuatha-de-Danans [Tribe of Dan]. 

6. The Milesians or Gaels [(Hiberi) Tribe of Gad]. 

7. The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin (Scotland)]. 

8. The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [Vikings]. 

9. The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah]. 

10. The Anglo-Saxons (or English) [(Jutes) tribe of Judah]. 

11. The Scots [led by the Royal Milesians from Zarah of Judah; accompanied by the residue of the tribe of Benjamin] from North Britain. 

John O’Hart: ‘The Nemedians came from Scythia in Europe, and were located chiefly in Ulster at Ardmacha (or Armagh), and in Derry and Donegal; and in Leinster at the Hill of Uisneach, which is situated a few miles from Mullingar, in the county Westmeath. 

The Fomorians are represented as a race of giants, and were celebrated as having been great builders in stone’ – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. ‘They were located principally along the coasts of Ulster and Connaught, mostly in Antrim, Derry, Donegal, Leitrim, Sligo, and Mayo, and had their chief fortress (called Tor Conaing or Conang’s Tower) on Tor Inis or the Island of the Tower, now known as “Tory Island,” which is off the coast of Donegal; and another at the Giants’ Causeway, which in Irish was called Cloghan-na-Fomoraigh or the Causeway of the Fomorians, as it was supposed to have been constructed by this people, who, from their great strength and stature, were, as above mentioned, called giants: hence the term “Giants’ Causeway” – a stupendous natural curiosity of volcanic origin, situated on the sea-coast of Antrim, and consisting of a countless number of basaltic columns of immense height, which, from the regularity of their formation and arrangement, have the appearance of a vast work of art; and hence were supposed to have been constructed by giants. 

After the Fomorians became masters of the country, the Nemedians (neimhedh: Irish, dirt, filth of any kind), were reduced to slavery, and compelled to pay a great annual tribute on the first day of winter – consisting of corn, cattle, milk, and other provisions; and the place where these tributes were received was named Magh Ceitne, signifying the Plain of Compulsion, and so called from these circumstances. 

This plain was situated between the rivers Erne and Drabhois (drabhas: Irish, dirt, nastiness), between Ballyshannon and Bundrowes, on the borders of Donegal, Leitrim, and Fermanagh, along the sea-shore. – See Connellan’s “Four Masters.” Three bands of the Nemedians emigrated with their respective captains: one party wandered into the north of Europe [Dan]; others made their way to Greece [Reuben], where they were enslaved, and obtained the name of “Firbolgs” or bagmen, from the leathern bags which they were compelled to carry; and the third section took refuge in England [Simeon], which obtained its name Britain, from their leader “Briottan Maol.” – See Miss Cusack’s “History of Ireland.” 

The Firbolgs [Reuben] or Firvolgians, who were also Scythians, divided Ireland amongst the five sons of their leader Dela Mac Loich: “Slainge [slane] was he by whom Teamor (or Tara) was first raised.” (Four Masters). One hundred and fifty Monarchs reigned in Tara from that period until its abandonment in the reign of Diarmod, son of Fergus Cearrbheoil, who was the 133rd Monarch of Ireland, and King of Meath.

The Firvolgians ruled over Connaught down to the third century, when King Cormac Mac Art, the 115th Monarch of Ireland, attacked and defeated the forces of Aodh or Hugh, son of Garadh, King of Connaught, who was the last King of the Firbolg race in Ireland; and the sovereignty of Connaught was then transferred to the Milesians of the race of Heremon – descendants of King Cormac Mac Art. The Firbolg race never after acquired any authority in Ireland, being reduced to the ranks of farmers [indicative of Northern Ireland, with food and live animals the country’s second biggest export] and peasants; but they were still very numerous, and to this day a great many of the peasantry, particularly in Connaught, are considered to be of Firbolg origin. 

The Tuatha de Danans [Tribe of Dan], also of the Scythian family, invaded Ireland thirty-six years after the plantation by the Firbolgs. According to some annalists, they came originally from Persia, and to others, from Greece; and were located chiefly at Tara in Meath, at Croaghan in Connaught, and at Aileach in Donegal. The Danans being highly skilled in the arts, the Round Towers of Ireland are supposed to have been built by them. The light, gay, joyous element of the Irish character may be traced to them. They were a brave and high-spirited race, and famous for their skill in what was then termed Magic: hence, in after ages, this wonderful people were considered to have continued to live in hills or raths, as the “good people” long so commonly believed in as fairies, in Ireland. But their “magic” consisted in the exercise of the mechanical arts, of which those who had previously invaded Ireland were then ignorant.

It is a remarkable fact, that weapons of warfare found in the carns or gravemounds of the Firbolgs are of an inferior kind to those found in the carns of the Tuatha-de-Danans: a proof of the superior intelligence of the latter over the former people. 

The inventor of the Ogham [owam] Alphabet (ogham: Irish, “an occult manner of writing used by the ancient Irish”) was Ogma, father of one of the Tuatha-de-Danan Kings. In McCartin’s Irish Grammar it is stated that there were no less than thirty-five different modes of writing the Ogham, which has hitherto defied the power of modern science to unravel its mysteries. But the truth of our ancient history is strangely confirmed by the fact that the letters of this Alphabet are all denominated by the names of trees and shrubs indigenous to Ireland! According to the “Book of Leinster,” it was “Cet Cuimnig, King of Munster, of the royal line of Heber, that was the first that inscribed Ozam [or Ogham] memorials in Erinn.” This extract gives a clue to the period when Ogham stones were first erected, and why… most of them are to be found in the Province of Munster; for, according to the Septuagint system of chronology, that King of Munster reigned about the year 1257 before the birth of Christ! 

The Milesians invaded Ireland one hundred and ninety-seven years later than the Tuatha de Danans; and were called Clan-na-Mile [meel], signifying the descendants of Milesius of Spain.’

The term Milesian is complicated as in this instance and time frame it accurately refers to the tribe of Gad; the peoples who are deemed the last tribe to invade Erin, summarily known as Hiberi, Scotti, Goidel, Gael and Milesian. The word Milesian is also used to describe the inclusion of the clan of Zara from the tribe of Judah; as in the Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.

O’Hart: ‘The Cruthneans or Picts [Tribe of Benjamin] were also Scythians, and, according to our ancient historians, came from Thrace [refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian] soon after the arrival of the Milesians; but, not being permitted by the Milesians to remain in Ireland, they sailed to Scotland and became the possessors of that country, but tributary to the Monarchs of Ireland. In after ages colonies of them came over and settled in Ulster; they were located chiefly in the territories which now form the counties of Down, Antrim, and Derry. 

The Danes and Norwegians (or Scandinavians) [refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes], a Teutonic race of Scythian origin, came to Ireland in great numbers, in the ninth and tenth centuries, and were located chiefly in Leinster and Munster, in many places along the sea-coast: their strongholds being the towns of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, and Limerick. 

The Anglo-Normans [Tribe of Judah] came to Ireland in the twelfth century, and possessed themselves of a great part of the country, under their chief leader, Richard de Clare, who was also named Strongbow. They were a Teutonic race, descended from the Normans of France, who were a mixture of Norwegians, Danes, and French, and who conquered England in the eleventh century. The English invasion of Ireland was accomplished ostensibly through the agency of Dermod MacMorough, King of Leinster; on account of his having been driven from his country by the Irish Monarch for the abduction of the wife of Tiernan O’Ruarc, Prince of Breffni. For that act, Roderick O’Connor, the Monarch of Ireland, invaded the territory of Dermod, A.D. 1167, and put him to flight. King Dermod was obliged, after many defeats, to leave Ireland, in 1167; throw himself at the feet of King Henry the Second [1154-1189], and crave his assistance, offering to become his liegeman. 

Henry, on receiving Dermod’s oath of allegiance, granted by letters patent a general license to all his English subjects to aid King Dermod in the recovery of his Kingdom. Dermod then engaged in his cause Richard de Clare or Strongbow, to whom he afterwards gave his daughter Eva, in marriage; and through his influence an army was raised, headed by Robert Fitzstephen, Myler Fitzhenry, Harvey de Monte Marisco, Maurice Prendergast, Maurice Fitzgerald, and others; with which, in May, 1168, he landed in Bannow-bay, near Wexford, which they reduced, together with the adjoining counties – all in the kingdom of Leinster. 

In 1171, Earl Strongbow landed at Waterford with a large body of followers and took possession of that city. He then joined King Dermod’s forces, marched for Dublin, entered the city, and made himself master. King Dermod died in his castle at Ferns, county Wexford, A.D. 1175, about the 65th year of his age. Of him Holingshed says – “He was a man of tall stature and of a large and great body, a valiant and bold warrior in his nation. From his continued shouting, his voice was hoarse; he rather chose to be feared than to be loved, and was a great oppressor of his nobility. To his own people he was rough and grievous, and hateful unto strangers; his hand was against all men, and all men against him.” 

The Anglo-Saxons or English, also a Tuetonic race, came from the twelfth to the eighteenth century. The Britons or Welsh came in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. These English colonies were located chiefly in Leinster, but also in great numbers in Munster and Connaught, and partly in Ulster.’ 

These ‘English’ and ‘Welsh’ represented the ‘Irish’ who emigrated to America and Canada; being a separate and distinct set of people – different tribes, as we will discover.

O’Hart: ‘The Scots, who were chiefly Celts of Irish descent, came in great numbers from the tenth to the sixteenth century, and settled in Ulster, mostly in Antrim, Down, and Derry; but, on the Plantation of Ulster with British colonies, in the seventeenth century, the new settlers in that province were chiefly Scotch [Scots Irish], who were a mixture of Celts and Saxons.’

These peoples known as Scots Irish (Ulster Scots) and as Scotch-Irish in America, are a distinct people, whom we will address in a later chapter. Needless to say, they are not descended from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon, Levi, Reuben or Gad.

O’Hart: ‘Thus the [first seven] colonies that settled in Ireland were a mixture of Scythians, Gaels, and Phoenicians; but the four last were mostly Teutons, though mixed with Celts; and a compound of all these races, in which Celtic blood is predominant, forms the present population of Ireland.’ 

Song of Inisfail, Irish Melodies, Thomas Moore”

‘They came from a land beyond the sea And now o’er the western main
Set sail, in their good ships, gallantly, From the sunny land of Spain. 

“Oh, where’s the isle we’ve seen in dreams, Our destined home or grave?”
Thus sang they, as by the morning’s beams, They swept the Atlantic wave. 

And lo! where afar o’er ocean shines A spark of radiant green, As though in that deep lay emerald mines, Whose light through the wave was seen.

“Tis Innisfail – ’tis Innisfail!” Rings o’er the echoing sea; While, bending to heaven, the warriors hail That home of the brave and free.

Then turned they unto the Eastern wave, Where now their Day-god’s eye A look of such sunny omen gave As lighted up sea and sky.

Nor frown was seen through sky or sea, Nor tear o’er leaf or sod, When first on their Isle of Destiny Our great forefathers trod.’

After the Flood, William Cooper, 1995 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… the early Irish chroniclers were most emphatic in their insistence that the Irish were of Scythian stock. And there is good etymological evidence for this. 

The Irish were long referred to as Scots even before some of them migrated to the country that today bears their name, and as Brewer tells us: 

“Scot (is) the same as Scythian in etymology; the root of both is Sct. The Greeks had no c, and would change t into th making the root skth, and by adding a phonetic vowel we get Skuthai (Scythians), and Skodiai (Skoths). The Welsh disliked s at the beginning of a word, and would change it to ys; they would also change c or k to g, and th to d; whence the Welsh root would be Ysgd, and Skuth or Skoth would become ysgod. Once more, the Saxons would cut off the Welsh y, and change the g back again to c, and the d to t, converting the Ysgod to Scot.”

Cooper: ‘It would be no strange thing to find Scythian peoples as far west as Ireland. After all, the land in Asia Minor known of old as Galatia, was populated by a migrating colony of Gallic Celts from whom the country got its name. St Paul wrote his famous epistle to their descendants. Many other examples from history are known of nations seemingly popping up in places where one would normally not expect to find them, so it requires no great stretch of the imagination to accept what the early Irish chroniclers so often insisted upon, namely their descent from the Scythian races. 

Of added interest are certain details that have been handed down to us by Geoffrey of Monmouth. We are told by him how Partholan’s colony consisted of thirty ships. Interestingly, Nennius makes no mention of the number of ships, but does tell us that the colony consisted of 1000 souls, which indicates that he and Geoffrey were working from different sources. 

However, Geoffrey also tells us that the colony had recently been expelled from the Spanish mainland, and moreover that they were called ‘Basclenses’, or Basques. Now, we know that the present-day Basques of northern Spain are of an entirely mysterious origin, and we also know that they speak a language that is quite unrelated to any known Indo-European tongue’ – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

‘In which context, it is interesting to note what Professor Mackie has written concerning the language of the early Picts who had more than a passing influence on both the early and later history of the Irish: 

“The Picts certainly used a form of P-Celtic (the mother of Welsh, Cornish and Breton), with traces of Gaulish forms. However, it is clear, from the few scraps of evidence which survive, that the Picts also used another language, probably unrelated to any “Indo-European” tongue and therefore so different from modern European languages as to be incomprehensible to us.”

‘Presumably, this information would not have been available to that allegedly incorrigible forger, Geoffrey of Monmouth, but it is instinctive to compare Mackie’s remarks with a comment by Cusack, when she says: “… those who have maintained the theory of a Gaulish colonisation of Ireland, have been obliged to make Spain the point of embarkation.”

‘The next recorded invasion (or settlement) of Ireland… was led by Nemedius… or Nemedh, and it is recorded that the people of Nemedh were credited with having built certain types of fort as well as clearing the land for a particular method of cultivation. A later outbreak of plague took its toll on the population, the remainder of whom are recorded as having fought off an invasion of Ireland by the Formorians… we know from the chronicles of the early Britons that the British mainland was… settled by Brutus and his people in ca 1104 BC… although Brutus is said to have been the first coloniser of Britain, the chronicles do emphatically state that he had to displace an indigenous race of ‘giants’.

Whether physical giantism is here intended cannot be certainly resolved, as the early British word ‘gawr’ (like the Hebrew gibbor) could mean simply a great warrior as well as a giant man. The Formorians, it seems, were the displaced natives of Britain who were trying to seek a foothold on the Irish mainland only to be repelled by the Nemedians, thereafter having to live, like many other displaced peoples, by scavenging and piracy. 

After the repulsion of the Formorians, the few Nemedian survivors settled further inland, presumably for safety while they consolidated their numbers. They are then recorded as subsequently dividing themselves into three ‘bands’, each with their respective leaders. One of these groups migrated to northern Europe, where they founded a nation known later to the Irish as the Tuatha de Danann [the tribe of Dan].

A second group settled, intriguingly, in the northernmost parts of Britain, apparently the first Pictish settlement [of the tribe of Benjamin] of what is now Scotland. This settlement of Picts from ‘Scythia’ (so states the British record – note etymological derivation given above of Scot from Scythian) into Albany, is recalled in the early British chronicles as having taken place under the Pictish king Soderic. The British chronology seems to have slipped somewhat at this point, but the event is real enough and accurately portrayed [circa 1030 to 1000 BCE]. 

The third group are named as the Firbolgs [the tribe of Reuben], who migrated to Greece and then returned to Ireland which they subsequently divided up into five provinces.

The last colonisation of Ireland is then recorded…

“The fleet of the sons of Milidh came to Ireland at the end of this year, to take it from the Tuatha de Danann, and they fought the battle of Sliabh Mis with them on the third day after landing.”

‘The children of Milidh, known to us as the Milesians, had landed unobserved in the mouth of the river Slaney in what is today the county of Wexford, from where they marched to Tara, the central seat of government. The word Milesian is still used (though with increasing rarity) to denote the Irish people themselves, or things pertaining to Ireland. And of further interest to our enquiry is the fact that the Milesians… arrived (via the Spanish peninsula) from the city of Miletus, whose ruins still stand on the Turkish mainland, and which was finally destroyed by the Persian army in the year 494 BC.

Moreover, with regard to the… often stated Phoenician element of Irish descent, we should… note that the ancient Greeks once held that Phoenicia was founded by one Phoenix, whose brother Cadmus had invented the alphabet. Likewise, the early Irish recalled the time when they lived under a king named… Phenius, ‘who devoted himself especially to the study of languages, and composed an alphabet and the elements of grammar.’ So it is clear… the early Irish chroniclers were passing on an account… of authentic historical events and personages, and of the equally historic descent of their own race from Phoenician and Scythian stock. And on the subject of that descent, Cusack adds yet again to our store of knowledge: 

“As the Milesians were the last of the ancient colonists … only their genealogies, with a few exceptions, have been preserved. The genealogical tree begins, therefore, with the brothers Eber and Eremon, the two surviving leaders of the expedition…

The great southern chieftains, such as the MacCarthys and O’Briens, claim descent from Eber;

the northern families of O’Connor, O’Donnell, and O’Neill, claim Eremon as their head. 

There are also other families claiming descent from Emer, the son of Ir, brother to Eber and Eremon;

as also from their cousin Lugaidh, the son of Ith.

From these four sources the principle Celtic families of Ireland have sprung…”

‘As we see in the genealogy, Eber and Eremon were able to trace their own descent from Gadelas, the father of the Gaels and the Gaelic languages, but just how seriously did the early Irish take the question of pedigree? Were they serious enough to take the trouble to keep accurate records over long periods of time? Once more, Cusack answers the question for us: 

“The Books of Genealogies and Pedigrees form a most important element in Irish pagan history. For social and political reasons, the Irish Celt preserved his genealogical tree with scrupulous precision. The rights of property and the governing power were transmitted with patriarchal exactitude on strict claims of primogeniture, which claims could only be refused under certain conditions defined by law… and in obedience to an ancient law, established long before the introduction of Christianity, all the provincial records, as well as those of the various chieftains, were required to be furnished every third year to the convocation at Tara, where they were compared and corrected.”

The Flag of Ireland

The white in the centre signifies a lasting truce (peace); between the orange – which stands for William of Orange, the Orange Order and Ireland’s Protestant minority – and the green, which represents Irish nationalism, the Irish Catholic and the Irish people.

The beginning of Gad’s ordeal, involving enduring ‘troops’ treading on them as per biblical prophecy was with the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in 1169 CE. Since then, it was an endless cycle of political resistance to English rule and military campaigns to rid the Isle of their oppressors; who’s aim seemed to be to turn the Irish into the English. Most of Ireland gained independence following the Anglo-Irish war from 1919 to 1921, as the Irish Free State in 1922. Achieving full independence as the Republic of Ireland in 1949, with Northern Ireland part of the United Kingdom as a ‘constituent country.’

Irish history can be broken down into periods of a. invasion by England and the Lordship of Ireland from 1171 to 1542; b. the Kingdom of Ireland from 1542 to 1800; c. being conquered by England during 1536 to 1691; d. the period known as the Protestant Ascendancy lasting from 1691 to 1801; until e. the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland when Ireland merged with Britain from 1801 until 1922.

Though the Normans had invaded Britain in 1066, it was a century later when they landed in Ireland. As quoted earlier, in 1169, Anglo-Norman mercenaries set foot in Ireland at the request of Diamait mac Murchada (Dermot MacMurragh), the deposed King of Leinster; who sought their help in regaining his kingship. The Normans achieved this within weeks as well as raiding neighbouring kingdoms. This military intervention was sanctioned by King Henry II of England. In return, Diarmait swore loyalty to Henry, promising land to the Normans and in turn altering the course of Irish history forever. 

During much of the Middle Ages Ireland was ruled as a separate kingdom under the British Crown. Not the whole country, just an eastern portion. The English ‘knew that the best way to defeat the cunning Irish was to suppress the entire country, which would have cost a fortune… or they could just build a big wall around the greater Dublin area… they decided on the less painful latter option and called the walled area The Pale.’ It was not till 1603, with victory over the Irish in Ulster that Britain gained complete control of Ireland. 

True(ish) History of Ireland, Garvan Grant:

“When Elizabeth I ascended to the English throne in 1558, she took a more lenient attitude towards Ireland. She even let the people of Ireland carry on being Catholic, speak their own language and live, which was dead nice of her. In return, all she wanted from the various chieftains who had divided the country up between them was ‘unconditional loyalty’, the swearing of an odd oath and bucket-loads of cash. This suited everyone – until some of the Irish fellas got greedy and started scrapping with their neighbors over bits of land. This led to Elizabeth showing her not so lovely side and coming down quite hard on the Irish. 

Tired of fighting, the English then decided the best way to ‘civilize’ the Irish were to send some nice English, Scottish and Welsh people to live on their lands, so the Irish could see just how brilliant being British was. These ‘Plantations’ might have worked too, except that a lot of the planters weren’t very brilliant – or very nice. They hadn’t signed up for it because they loved the Irish and wanted to make them better people; they came because they were given free land with free peasants (or ‘slaves’) to work on it. It was lovely in theory, but probably not a recipe for success on the ground.” 

The province of Ulster was troublesome, thus land was confiscated from members of the Gaelic nobility of Ireland – who then fled Ulster – and given to Scottish small farmers, so that they remained and did not sell the land back to the native Irish. Thus Scots migrated to Ireland in large numbers under the government sanctioned Plantation of Ulster and its planned process of colonisation during the reign of James I. The success of this policy was the foundation of the problems Northern Ireland faced until 1998 and in reality till this day. Cromwell after the English Civil War was short of cash to pay his troops, so he confiscated eighty percent of the land for his troops in lieu of money. The dispossessed landowners were offered poor quality land in Connaught in exchange. 

Grant: “Until the seventeenth century war in Ireland had been mainly about unimportant things such as land, money, and power, but after the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, it became more about good, old-fashioned religion. How God felt about this change was anyone’s guess. In 1649, when the latest war in England ended and Charles I lost his head and couldn’t find it anywhere, the English sent over a lovely chap by the name of Oliver Cromwell. He was only in Ireland for nine months but managed to get in more violence than many other English people had done in decades. His theory of how to win a war – and it has yet to be proved wrong – was to kill everybody. He and his army – they were originally going to call it the New ‘Slaughter Everybody’ Army but eventually decided on the much catchier New Model Army – basically attacked anyone they met who wasn’t one of their soldiers.” 

The British attempt to solve the ‘Irish Problem’ by creating the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801, was a solution that pleased nobody in Ireland; for the protestant ruling class did not want to lose their independence and the Catholics felt betrayed when George III refused to grant Catholic emancipation.

Within a United Kingdom, Ireland started to struggle for reform. O’Connell and his Catholic Association founded in 1823 led the struggle for Catholic emancipation. The Potato Famine in the years 1845 to 1852 caused enormous upheavals as the population of Ireland fell from nine Million to three million through famine and emigration. No doubt, a London government would not have let this tragedy happen in mainland Britain.

The Easter Rising of 1916 was put down quickly by Westminster. Crass mishandling by the British resulted in many of the leaders of the Easter Rising being shot by firing squad, with the extremists acquiring the status of martyrs. In the 1918 election, seventy-three of the one hundred and six Irish seats went to Sinn Fein. They refused to go to Westminster and set up a provisional government in Ireland. Three years of bitter guerrilla warfare with atrocities on both sides ensued; before a truce was finally signed in 1921. The ‘final solution of the Irish Problem’ was partition. The Irish stalemate continues: Northern Protestants feel they have a right to determine their own future democratically on the basis of being in the majority. Northern Catholics feel they have the right to be part of a united Ireland. 

There are a number of flags associated with Northern Ireland and the larger province of Ulster, comprising nine counties. The only official flag is the Union Flag of the United Kingdom. The Ulster Banner (Red Hand Flag, Ulster Flag) used officially by the government, from 1953 until the parliament was abolished in 1973 – first receiving a royal warrant for use in 1924 – has no sanctioned status since then, though some loyalists, unionists and sports team have adopted it. It is not to be confused with the similar flag with a yellow background, which is the provincial flag of Ulster (below). 

The Saint Patrick’s Saltire (below) represents Northern Ireland indirectly in the Union Flag. It is flown during St Patrick’s Day parades in Northern Ireland and some northern Irish royal events.

The Republic of Ireland is the 26th largest economy in the world with a GDP of $598 billion in 2025.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Irish global shipments during 2024.

  1. Pharmaceuticals: US$89.7 billion
  2. Organic chemicals: $46.3 billion
  3. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $21.1 billion
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $14.4 billion
  5. Perfumes, cosmetics: $12.2 billion
  6. Machinery including computers: $11 billion
  7. Aircraft, spacecraft: $6.6 billion
  8. Other chemical goods: $4.7 billion
  9. Dairy, eggs, honey: $4.6 billion
  10. Meat: $4.2 billion

Ireland’s top 10 export product categories generated 89.3% of the overall value of total Irish shipments. Electrical machinery and equipment [represented] the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 37.1% from 2023 to 2024.’

The term Ulster Scots is used for those peoples residing in Northern Ireland with a Scottish connection, while those who emigrated to North America are known as the Scotch-Irish. We will learn that the peoples who departed from Ulster for America were not descended from the tribe of Reuben – nor are the Ulster Scots who remain in Northern Ireland. Their ancestors were mostly Protestant Presbyterian Scottish colonists originating from principally Galloway and then Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Ayrshire, the Scottish Borders and parts of Northern England (which were once part of Scotland and incorporated into England), which bordered Scotland. A minority came from further north in the Lowlands or from the Highlands. 

The Scots Irish emigrated onwards from Ireland in considerable numbers to what is now the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. It was just a few generations after arriving in Northern Ireland that sizeable numbers of Scots Irish emigrated to Great Britain’s North American colonies. Between 1717 and 1775, an estimated two hundred thousand migrated to the United States. Scots Irish also travelled to Britain’s acquisition of New France, becoming Scotch-Irish Canadians. 

In the United States 2000 Census, ‘4.3 million Americans (1.5% of the population of the United States) claimed Scotch-Irish ancestry. Author and former United States Senator Jim Webb suggests that the true number of people with some Scots-Irish heritage in the United States is [more likely over 27 million people;] possibly because contemporary Americans with some Scotch-Irish heritage may regard themselves as either Irish, Scottish, or simply American instead.’

This is an important point as these Scots Irish are the same as the Ulster Scots remaining in Northern Ireland. They are not the same as Americans and Canadians of simply standard Scottish and Irish stock, or even from English, Welsh and German descent. 

Not only does Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales possess a very different genetic make-up from each other, they are also different – in the main – from the rest of England. Proving that the four constituent nations comprising the United Kingdom are four distinct and separate peoples – England from Judah; Scotland from Benjamin; Wales from Simeon; and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben.

The population of the Republic of Ireland is 5,312,460 people and comparable with Scotland. Yet it remained considerably smaller for decades at approximately 3.5 million, until experiencing accelerated growth from the year 2000. The population of Northern Ireland grows slowly and is approximately 1,910,500 people – where Reuben’s people are few. Its composition will be discussed in a later chapter. While Wales has 3,307,856 people; also exhibiting slow growth. Simeon shares a larger territory with Judah – within the Kingdom of England – in proportion to its population size.

Tests reveal that the Welsh carry the most DNA of the original settlers in the British Isles. Or in other words, the Welsh have the most undiluted DNA in the British Isles, reflecting their status as one of the first Israelite tribes to permanently settle in Britain. 

This is underscored by three reasons. First, as we learned from the two census records of the Israelites during their forty year sojourn; the vast majority of Simeon departed and struck out on their own. Second, we also know that even if they spent time in Ireland very early on, the tribe of Simeon were primarily based in Britain. Only the tribe pf Dan shared the island with them, for Benjamin arrived later and Reuben and Gad remained in Ireland. Third, due to its westerly location and mountainous landscape, few invaders including even the Romans, Saxons and Vikings ventured into Welsh lands.

An article described the Welsh as “the true pure Britons, according to the research that has produced the first genetic map of the UK. Scientists were able to trace their DNA back to the first tribes that settled in the British Isles… This means the DNA of people living there has not experienced the influx of ‘foreign’ genes like other parts of Britain. The research found that there is no single ‘Celtic’ genetic group.”

The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish really are all different tribes and definitely not from the same one. The term Celtic, is clearly a cultural and historical time frame reference and only broadly an ethnic one. 

The research confirmed that the people of Orkney are the most distinct, “a result of 600 years of Norwegian rule” and “the Welsh are the next most distinct. But even within Wales there are two distinct tribes, with those in the north and south of the principality less similar genetically than the Scots are to the inhabitants of Kent.” This is and isn’t a surprise, as Scotland and Kent share the same father Jacob, yet different mothers. Rachel for Scotland and Leah for Kent.

If the southern Welsh have the same mother as Judah of England, that is Leah because they are Simeon, then north Wales must have a different mother. This would lend itself to the northern Welsh possibly having one of the Handmaids as their mother. Or it could be explained by Simeon’s other wife (of Canaanite extraction) – Genesis 46:10. We will return to this conundrum.* 

Khazaria, Welsh, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Bryan Sykes, professor of human genetics at the University of Oxford and founder of Oxford Ancestors, showed that people from North Wales and Mid-Wales are more genetically interlinked with each other than either are with people from South Wales. Y-DNA haplogroups carried by members of “The Wales Cymru DNA Project” include [E1b1b] (E-L117)… (E-V13)… (E-M34), G1a1a1, G2a1, I1 (I-M253), [I2a1]… (I-M223, I-P37, etc.), J1, J2, R1a1a (R-M512, R-M198, R-M173, R-Z280), R1b1a (R-M269, R-M173, R-L21), and… (R-P312), among others.

The SNP subclade Z138+ (also known as Z139+) of the Y-DNA haplogroup I1 is found at low frequencies in Germanic-speaking populations including England and Wales, but also in Portugal, southern Italy, and Romania. STR (short tandem repeats) analysis reveals a western subgroup of I1 where GATA-H4 ≥ 11 that’s most common in Wales that exists at lower frequencies in English and other European populations.’

Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration, Molecular Biology and Evolution, multiple authors, 2002, pages 1008-1021:

‘They studied English, Welsh, Norwegian, and Frisian men and genetically compared them to each other. Samples included males from 2 towns in North Wales (Abergele^ and Llangefni) and 5 towns in England as far east as North Walsham in East Anglia. The sampled men from Central English towns genetically resembled each other closely, in contrast to the North Welsh men who “differed significantly both from each other and from the Central English towns.” They found common Germanic roots of the English and Frisian males in the study, confirming that the Anglo-Saxons (but not the Welsh) are largely descended from people not indigenous to the British Isles. Excerpts from the article:

“Our results indicate the presence of a strong genetic barrier between Central England and North Wales and the virtual absence of a barrier between Central England and Friesland… The best explanation for our findings is that the Anglo-Saxon cultural transition in Central England coincided with a mass immigration from the continent. Such an event would simultaneously explain both the high Central English-Frisian affinity and the low Central English-North Welsh affinity…

Anglo-Saxon settlements and culture appeared throughout England but, importantly, did not extend into North Wales, where many of the original Celtic Britons living in England are thought to have fled…”

‘Extraordinary’ genetic make-up of north east Wales men, BBC News, July 19, 2011: 

‘Dr. Andy Grierson of the University of Sheffield comments on the finding of E1b1b1 in a large percentage (the article states approximately 30 percent) of men from northeast Wales (the town of Abergele^). 

(Most of the men specifically carry E1b1b1a2, also known as E-V13). This is found in a much higher frequency than populations in the rest of the United Kingdom, which average 1 percent [see map above]. The sample size was 500 people. Grierson said, 

“This type of genetic makeup is usually found in the eastern Mediterranean which made us think that there might have been strong connections between north east Wales and this part of Europe somewhere in the past. But this appears not to be the case, so we’re still looking to find out why it’s happened and what it reveals about the history of the region.”

Whatever the reason, the presence of such a high percentage of Haplogroup E1b1b, indicates admixture with an African line of male descent in the past – whether it be Berber as in North African, or Black as in sub-Saharan African – with the resulting mutation of V13 found only in Europeans.

Recall in Genesis 46:10 that Simeon had six sons and his youngest son Shaul, was born to a Canaanite woman. While this doesn’t explain the Y-DNA Haplogroup directly, it may be linked if this branch of Simeon maintained a proclivity to marry Canaanites – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Khazaria: ‘The fine-scale genetic structure of the British population, Nature 519, multiple authors, 2015, pages 309-314: Welsh form part of this intensive evaluation of autosomal DNA. Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… We use haplotype-based statistical methods to analyse genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data from a carefully chosen geographically diverse sample of 2,039 individuals from the United Kingdom… The regional genetic differentiation and differing patterns of shared ancestry with 6,209 individuals from across Europe carry clear signals of historical demographic events… in non-Saxon parts of the United Kingdom, there exist genetically differentiated subgroups rather than a general ‘Celtic’ population.”

Welsh people could be most ancient in UK, DNA suggests, BBC News, June 19, 2012:

‘This is another article about Professor Donnelly’s team’s research. Excerpts from the article:

“… DNA samples were analysed at about 500,000 different points. After comparing statistics, a map was compiled which showed Wales and Cornwall stood out. Prof Donnelly said:

‘People from Wales are genetically relatively distinct, they look different genetically from much of the rest of mainland Britain, and actually people in north Wales look relatively distinct from people in south Wales.’

While there were traces of migrant groups across the UK, there were fewer in Wales and Cornwall. He said people* from south and north Wales genetically have ‘fairly large similarities with the ancestry of people from Ireland on the one hand and France [Moab and Ammon] on the other…’ He said it was possible that people came over from Ireland to north Wales because it was the closest point, and the same for people coming to south Wales from the continent, as it was nearer. However he added: ‘We don’t really have the historical evidence about what those genetic inputs were…’

Because of its westerly position and mountainous nature, Anglo-Saxons who moved into central and eastern England after the Romans left did not come that far west, and neither did the Vikings who arrived in around 900AD… The mountains were also the reason why (Welsh) DNA may have remained relatively unchanged, as people would have found it harder to get from north to south Wales or into England compared with people trying to move across the flatter southern English counties, making them more likely to marry locally and conserve more ancient DNA… ”

DNA links Welsh men to Scotland, Helen McArdle, Herald Scotland, November 24, 2014: 

‘The team of Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales and Scotland’s DNA discovered that 1 percent of Welsh males carry a Y chromosome variety that descends from ancient Picts from Scotland and is related to the modern Scottish variety of this lineage. Excerpts from the article:

“Some 10 per cent of all Scottish men belong to this ‘Pictish’ lineage compared to just 0.8 per cent of Englishmen. It is particularly concentrated in Perthshire, Fife, Angus and Grampian, regions of Scotland with known Pictish heritage. The discovery of shared ancestral ties between men in Scotland and Wales is at the centre of a new theory that this one per cent of Welsh men are direct descendents* of a small band of ancient Scottish aristocrats, who fled the Old Welsh-speaking kingdom of Strathclyde in the ninth century to escape a Viking invasion. They are thought to have headed south, by sea, to find refuge in north Wales after the Viking kings Ivar and Olaf led their dragonships up the Clyde in 870, laying siege to the fortress on Dumbarton Rock and eventually capturing Artgul, the king of Strathclyde.”

DNA survey reveals 25% of Welsh men directly descended from ancient kings and warlords, Nathan Bevan, Wales Online, December 18, 2014: 

‘Alistair Moffat of CymruDNAWales is interviewed as saying 25 percent of Welsh men whose grandparents were all Welsh inherited their Y chromosomes from about 20 medieval Welsh royals, nobles, and warlords who had many descendants. Moffat also spoke about what the team learned so far about the earliest immigrants to Wales, thousands of years ago. He said, 

“We all suspected that Wales was a Celtic country but no-one was prepared for just how much – the classic Celtic Y chromosome marker R1b S145 [L21] being carried by a whopping 45% of Welsh men, as opposed to just 15% over on the other side of Offa’s Dyke. We have always known that Wales [Simeon] is different from England [Judah], but now here is a statistic that shows there is no question about it.” 

In the previous chapter we discussed the defining marker paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup for the descendants of Abraham being R1b-U106 (S21). It is prevalent in England, as well as the downstream sub-clade U198. In Wales, it is R1b-L21 (M529) which is predominant. M529 is a defining marker R1b Haplogroup in Ireland and the British Celtic nations. R1b-S116 (P312) derives from L11 (which is downstream from M269) as does U106, with L21 deriving from R1b-S116.

As intimated previously, this writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). This is not the chapter to elaborate on this contention, though at some point it is hoped it can be addressed more fully, with input from geneticists welcome. 

Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either adjacent to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or even deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would seem better placed deriving from L11 directly and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

While it is not a surprise that Simeon and Judah are different; as blood brothers their different R1b Y-DNA Haplogroup mutations is puzzling. This extends to the Scots and Irish, not just for the Welsh, as all share the same father. The Scots and Irish have different mothers – Rachel and Zilpah respectively – yet Reuben-Northern Ireland, Simeon-Wales and Judah-England all have the same mother in Leah. Why these five sons don’t share the same R1b mutation; or why the three sons from Leah at least do not; and why the four Celtic sons with different mothers do and the Saxon son doesn’t, will have to remain an enigma for the time being.

(A further thought to this question after time of writing, is the idea that Y-DNA Haplogroups can be affected by geography and chronology. Though this seems an unrealistic proposition, surely.)

Khazaria: ‘The Welsh television presenter Angharad Mair had her DNA tested by CymruDNAWales [in 2015]. Upon examining her mitochrodrial DNA, they found that her maternal lineage came from the Levant region (eastern Mediterranean) thousands of years ago. Excerpts:

“… These particular mitochrodrial DNA markers… appear with very high frequency in Wales at around 11%… However, they are most commonly found among Ashkenazi Jews of Europe, where a third of all maternal bloodlines are Levantine… ‘I was very excited to discover that I had Jewish ancestry – which might’ve only developed in the last two centuries…’

This interesting revelation hints at a link between Edom and Simeon in the past. The Bible reveals when this may have occurred in one instance. 1 Chronicles 4:42-43, ESV: ‘And some of them, five hundred men of the Simeonites, went to Mount Seir…  And they defeated the remnant of the Amalekites who had escaped, and they have lived there to this day.’

Khazaria, Irish, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The “Celtic” Irish people of the emerald isle of Ireland are closely related to the Scottish people of nearby Scotland, and Irish and the partly Frisian-Anglo-Saxon English people from England are also significantly related. This shows the limitations of assuming we know everything about somebody’s ancestry merely based on what language their ethnic group traditionally spoke (in this case, Irish Gaelic versus English). Also, some Irish people moved to Iceland and are thus partly related to modern Icelanders.

R1b, which originated in western Europe, is the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among Irish men, at a frequency of about 81.5%.

I1 is the second most common with 6%, followed by [I2a2] at 5% [I1 and I2 older mutations related to though predating R1b (and R1a)],

R1a at 2.5% [Eastern European origin through admixture, Shem], and E1b1b at 2% [North African origin… Canaan].

G2a is found in only about 1% [Caucasus… Shem]. Also rare are [I2a1] (1%) [Southeastern European… Shem] and J2 (1%) [Southwest Asian… Ham].

According to The ALlele FREquency Database, 8.4% of the 226 Irish people studied carry at least one T allele in the R151C (rs1805007) gene where TT usually causes red hair. That isn’t the only red hair allele that Irish people sometimes carry. Between 4-6% of 23andMe’s Irish customers carry the T red hair allele on the R160W (rs1805008, Arg160Trp) gene, while 4-6% of their Irish customers carry the C red hair allele on the D294H (i3002507) gene… Irish people carry red-hair gene variants including Arg151Cys, Arg160Trp, and Asp294His. There are also correlations between these and light skin.

The Irish DNA Atlas: Revealing Fine-Scale Population Structure and History within Ireland, multiple authors, Scientific Reports 7, December 8, 2017, article number 17199:

‘The “Irish DNA Atlas” project is run by the Genealogical Society of Ireland, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and the University of Leicester. They sought people whose 8 great-grandparents were all born in Irish towns within 30 kilometers of each other. This major autosomal DNA study includes 194 Irish people who told 4 generations of their ancestry and linked their ancestors to specific regions within Ireland. They were compared to 2,039 people from the “Peoples of the British Isles” (PoBI) dataset, to 6,760 people from throughout Europe, and to two ancient Irish individuals.

The scientists managed to divide the Irish population into “10 distinct geographically stratified genetic clusters; seven of ‘Gaelic’ Irish ancestry [Ireland], and three of shared Irish-British ancestry [Northern Ireland].”

They also “demonstrate high levels of North-West French-like and West Norwegian-like ancestry within Ireland.” It has long been known that Norse (Viking) people settled in Ireland during the Middle Ages so this makes sense. They did not, however, interpret the French-like DNA to be a signal of medieval Norman French ancestry since people in northwestern France are related to other Celtic peoples.

They also detected some Scottish ancestry that came into Ulster in northern Ireland in the 16th-17th centuries. This again conforms to what we know about the religious and ethnic divide between the substantially Protestant and British communities of Northern Ireland [Reuben] and the traditionally Catholic Republic of Ireland [Gad].’

The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles, multiple authors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, September 3, 2019:

‘Irish people were among those who participated in this autosomal DNA study of 2,544 people. The Irish people from County Donegal in northwestern Ireland are shown to represent “the most genetically isolated region of Ireland observed to date. This isolation shows little evidence of the migrations that have impacted the rest of Ulster.”

Using admixture analysis, the researchers concluded that “Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates”. It is no surprise that the researchers determined that Irish, Welsh, and Scottish people inherited a majority of their ancestry from the ancient “Celts”.

This is answered by the simple fact that the Viking element are contributions from two separate sons of Jacob – not from the descendants of Abraham and Keturah – two different and distinct tribes of whom then departed from Ireland (and Britain)** to migrate to lands in the New World – Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes. 

Khazaria: ‘… researchers studied the Y-DNA of Irish men with surnames considered to be of Norse origin. They examined both unique event polymorphisms and short tandem repeat (STR) markers. They found that these Irish men actually didn’t usually have paternal roots from Scandinavia, nor do Irish men in the general population of modern Ireland… “the findings are consistent with a relatively small number of Norse settlers (and [descendants]) migrating to Ireland during the Viking period (ca. AD 800-1200) suggesting that Norse colonial settlements might have been largely composed of indigenous** Irish…”

Those peoples who have remained** in Scotland and Ireland are the tribes of Benjamin and Gad respectively, with principally Reuben in Northern Ireland.

Insular Celtic population structure and genomic footprints of migratiuon, PLoS Genetics, January 25, 2018:

‘…structural clustering for the autosomal DNA of 1,035 Irish individuals. The authors found 23 Irish clusters. The abstract says that these clusters “segregate with geographical provenance.” Excerpts from the Abstract:

“… Cluster diversity is pronounced in the west of Ireland but reduced in the east where older structure has been eroded by historical migrations. Accordingly, when populations from the neighbouring island of Britain are included, a west-east cline of Celtic-British ancestry is revealed along with a particularly striking correlation between haplotypes and geography across both islands. A strong relationship is revealed between subsets of Northern Irish and Scottish populations, where discordant genetic and geographic affinities reflect major migrations in recent centuries.

Additionally, Irish genetic proximity of all Scottish samples likely reflects older strata of communication across the narrowest inter-island crossing. Using GLOBETROTTER we detected Irish admixture signals from Britain and Europe and estimated dates for events consistent with the historical migrations of the Norse-Vikings, the Anglo-Normans and the British Plantations. The influence of the former is greater than previously estimated from Y chromosome haplotypes…”

A Y-Chromosome Signature of Hegemony in Gaelic Ireland, multiple authors, American Journal of Human Genetics 78, February 2006, pages 334-338:

‘The researchers used 17-marker simple tandem repeat (STR) analysis on the Y chromosomes of samples obtained from Irish men. They discovered that 16.9% of men from northwestern Ireland, and 8.2% of men from Ireland as a whole, descend from a single male ancestor from early-medieval times from the family dynasty of the Uí Néill, since the haplotype is often found in people holding surnames associated with this dynasty. Their abstract calls this a “modal haplotype”.

Population structure and genome-wide patterns of variation in Ireland and Britain, multiple authors, European Journal of Human Genetics 18, 2010, pages 1248-1254:

‘The researchers studied the genetics of 3,654 including people from Ireland, the United Kingdom (including Aberdeen, Scotland), Sweden, Portugal, Bulgaria, and the American state of Utah (whose people are largely of English descent). Haplotype diversity was found to be lower in Ireland and Scotland than in southern Europe.

Also, Irish people have higher levels of linkage disequilibrium and homozygosity compared to other Europeans. The results showed that the population of Ireland has been relatively isolated throughout the millennia. The article notes that Scottish people are “intermediate between the Irish and English cohorts” in principal component analysis. British and Irish people are predominantly “Northwestern” European in origin but also partly “Scandinavian” (more so for English people than Irish people) and have relatively small amounts of “Iberian” and “Balkan” ancestry.

Admixture results based on the Dodecad Ancestry Project showed, at K=11, that Irish are mostly “Northwest European” (as we’d expect), also partly “Northeast European” and “Basque”, with a small slice of “Sardinian”, and a little bit of “West Asian”.

The Irish are very similar to British, which is also shown by their clustering together in two main groups.’

Genome-Wide Association Studies of Quantitatively Measured Skin, Hair, and Eye Pigmentaion in Four European Populations, multiple authors, PLoS ONE 7, October 31, 2012): 

‘As expected, Irish people were found to have overall lighter skin pigmentation than continental Europeans. The article also confirmed that, on average, the hair colors of Irish and Polish people (northern Europeans) are lighter than Italian and Portuguese people (southern Europeans). Within Ireland, Irish females have a pronounced tendency toward lighter hair than Irish males; a sexual dimorphism of this magnitude wasn’t detected in the Poles. Northern Europeans also have, on average, lighter eyes than southern Europeans. Furthermore, both Irish males and females tend to have lighter eyes than even Poles do.

DNA blueprint of the Irish revealed, Damian Corless, Irish Independent, September 11, 2010 – emphasis mine:

‘This article is based on research by Brendan Loftus of University College Dublin, whose “research team… mapped the complete genetic code of an Irish person for the first time.” Researchers hope that analysis of the Irish genome will help to explain why Irish people are susceptible to particular disorders and try to find preventative measures and cures for those disorders. Excerpts from the article:

‘… Ireland’s geography has had a huge part to play in shaping the nature of our society and our closest family ties. According to Loftus: “The geographic isolation of Ireland over generations would affect the size of the gene pool by limiting the type and number of potential mating partners.” Major genetic surveys of Ireland and Britain have established that the gene pool of both islands is amongst the least diluted in Europe. The genetic evidence shows that three quarters of the ancestors of the Irish and British people were the pioneering settlers…’

So much for the widely held, propagandised belief that the British and especially the English are a mongrelised, hybrid people.

Corless: ‘The inescapable upshot of this is that the Irish are not Celts, any more than the English are Anglo-Saxons. In fact, both the Irish and the British are Basques, with the Irish significantly more Basque than our neighbours across the pond, who’ve absorbed more migrations from Europe over the centuries. The dilution rate for Ireland is estimated at a tiny 12%, against 20% for Wales and Cornwall, 30% for Scotland and 33% for England… 

Ancient Irish legends say that there were six invasions or migrations from the south many generations before the Celts arrived around 300BC. The evidence suggests that the Celtic language, fashions and technologies which are supposed to define our Irish heritage, were acquired as cultural accessories… The Irish and Basques share by far the highest incidence of the R1b gene in Europe, which has a frequency of over 90% in Basque country and almost 100% along parts of Ireland’s western seaboard. 

If further proof were needed, there’s the physical fact that the Basques are distinguished by a very high incidence of fair (and some reddish) hair, pale skin, blue eyes, and, apparently, sticky-out ears. Sound like anyone you know?’ – Refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

Recall from the previous chapter, how Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France (Brittany), the North coast of Spain (Basque) and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.

English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest, Nicholas Wade, The New York Times, March 5, 2007:

‘Geneticist Stephen Oppenheimer of the University of Oxford used genetic evidence to disprove the traditional historical narrative that the Irish people are mainly Celts and that they’re very distinct from Englishmen. Oppenheimer suggested, rather, that most of the ancestors of Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English [that is early English, known as Britons and hence related to the Welsh] peoples came from Spain and that their original language was related to Basque. Excerpts:

“… In Dr. Oppenheimer’s reconstruction of events, the principal ancestors of today’s British [Cymry and the Picts, but does not include the Jutes and Normans] and Irish populations arrived from Spain… speaking a language related to Basque… Although the Celtic immigrants may have been few in number, they spread their farming techniques and their language throughout Ireland and the western coast of Britain. 

Later immigrants arrived from northern Europe [who] had more influence on the eastern and southern coasts. They too spread their language, a branch of German… As for subsequent invaders, Ireland received the fewest; the invaders’ DNA makes up about 12 percent of the Irish gene pool, Dr. Oppenheimer estimates, but it accounts for 20 percent of the gene pool in Wales, 30 percent in Scotland, and about one-third in eastern and southern England…”

In the previous section (Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes), we looked at the top mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and compared them with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot. The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups showed that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to frequency similarity. 

It was Germany, which mirrored their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian. 

From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture was portrayed, where the English and Scottish were most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.

England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]

Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] – 

T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%] 

Wales: H [59.8%] – J [15.3%] – K [7.6%] – U5 [4.4%] – 

HV0+V [4.3%] – I [3.3%] – T1 [2.2%] – T2 [1.1%] – X [1.1%] 

Ireland: H [44.1%] – K [12%] – J [10.7%] – U5 [8.4%] – 

HV0+V [5.7%] – T2 [5.4%] – I [3%] – W [2.3%]

England:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Scotland:  H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Wales:       H – J – K – U5 – HV0+V 

Ireland:     H – K – J – U5 – HV0+V 

Adding Ireland, which includes Northern Ireland, with Wales reveals a similarity of sequence which pairs them together rather than with either England or Scotland. The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall for England, Scotland, France, the Flemish, Dutch and Germans are H, J, U5, K and T2. For both Ireland and Wales, Haplogroup T2 is edged into sixth by Haplogroup HV0+V.

Noticeable is the fact that both Ireland and Wales who have been isolated compared with England and Scotland, have very low levels of T2 (and T1). Haplogroup mtDNA T is a relatively recent mutation compared with say H or even J and U. Ireland also stands out in having a high level of Haplogroup K, like the Dutch and Flemish. Haplogroup K is also found in very high levels amongst the Ashkenazi Jews.

Specific sub-clades for the most common and widespread Haplogroup H found in Ireland, include: H1i, H2a5, H3i, H14a, H17b, H24, H26a, H27a, H39, H44, H45b, H46, H47, H48, H53, H59 and H76.

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2      U4       U5        T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Ireland            44            6            11        12           5          1          8          1

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England           45            3           12          8          6          2          9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6          2         6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

Wales               60           4            15          8           1                     4          2

The addition of Ireland and Wales with their near and extended family members is highly revealing. When we study the percentages of the most frequent mtDNA Haplogroups more closely, we observe the Irish have as close an affinity with their French cousins, as their half-brothers England and Scotland on the maternal side. 

The Welsh Haplogroups prove categorically that they are the most ancient of Britons and have the least maternal dilution in the British Isles as all the studies have shown. 

The Welsh mtDNA Haplogroup snap shot is a great glimpse into the distant past for what probably all the other nations on the table may have once looked like with a very high majority percentage of H and then perhaps possessing J, U, K and T building from 5% or less of their total mtDNA inheritance as the centuries passed. Other older Haplogroups possibly additions in the gene pool from admixture and inter-marriage. It is the Welsh similarity with the Sephardim from Esau which also stands out.

Ireland shares percentage similarity with England and Scotland in the maternal Haplogroups H, J, U5 and T2. Wales shares similarity with England and Scotland in Haplogroups J and K and not much with the Irish, except possibly Haplogroup J. What has to be accounted for is that Ireland’s Haplogroups are for both countries. Separating Ireland and Northern Ireland would perhaps provide a different picture.

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Gad (Reuben).

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HV0+V

Wales                60    15        1        8                      4            4

Sephardim       56      5                  8         8                         9

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.4          7            5

Bel-Lux             47       6       9      12      0.7           3            3

Denmark          47      13      6        9                       6            4

Norway             46      11      8        5      0.2          11            4

Sweden             46       8      4        6      0.5          12            5

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8            8

Germany           45      9       8        7     0.5            9            4

Austria              45      9       8        9     0.8            9            2

England            45    13       6         8                      9            3

Scotland           44    13       6         7     0.2            8            3

Ireland              44    11       5        12        1            8            6

France               44     8       6         9         3           8            5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                         11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7             5

Spain                 44      7       6        6      0.7           8            8

Poland               44     8       7         4         1          10            5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2         10            4

Greece               41     10       7        5          3           5         1.8

Italy                  40      8        8       8           3           5            3

Ukraine            39      8        8        5          4         10            4

Iceland             38    14      10      10          4           8            2

Romania          37     11        5        8          2           7            4

Finland            36      6        2        5                      21            7

Turkey              31      9        4        6          5           3         0.7

Ashkenazim    23      7        5      32          5           2            4

Iran                   17     14       5         7          7           3         0.6

Adding Ireland and Wales to our growing table of European nations is revealing. The Sephardim who have recently bookended the western side of the mtDNA Haplogroups are now replaced by the Welsh. It is an extreme westerly position as akin to Iran who bookend the eastern end of the table with fascinatingly, the Ashkenazim. 

Discussed previously, a pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of three more of Jacob’s sons, Gad (Reuben) and Simeon, places Ireland next to Scotland. Again, the combined Haplogroups for Ireland mean the connection between Northern Ireland and Scotland influences the figures, for it would be Northern Ireland which would sit nearer to Scotland. We will explore the Northern Irish and Scottish connection further in a later chapter.

Thus, Ireland unlike Wales joins Scotland and England in going against the pattern of increasing levels of Haplogroup H as one heads westwards. Wales replaces the Sephardim as the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 60%. The Welsh also replace England, Scotland, Denmark, Iceland and Iran with the highest frequency of Haplogroup J at 15%. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

Notice that Ireland (1), Wales (2), Scotland (3) and England (5) are in the top five nations for men exhibiting the highest percentage of Haplogroup R1b.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

Turkey            M269   14%  –  U106   0.4%

Russia             M269   21%  –  U106   5.4%

Slovenia          M269   17%  –  U106      4%

Poland             M269   23%  –  U106     8% 

Ukraine           M269   25%  –  U106     9%

Czech               M269   28%  –  U106   14% 

Austria             M269   27%  –  U106  23%

France              M269   52%  –  U106     7%

Italy                  M269   53%  –  U106    6%

Swiss                 M269   58%  –  U106   13%

Denmark         M269   34%  –  U106   17%

Germany          M269   43%  –  U106   19%

Netherlands    M269   54%  –  U106  35%

England           M269   57%  –  U106   20%

Ireland             M269   80%  – U106      6%

When we added England (a) we saw that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively, all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree. Now with the addition of Ireland and Gad, we can see the result of less mixing over the millennia with an incredible percentage of R-M269 for the Republic. 

Notice the more Germanic, Central European R-U106 percentage for Ireland is closer to those nations of Eastern and Southern Europe, rather than Ireland’s western neighbours. Again highlighting Ireland’s ancient and isolated position in Europe. R1b clades associated with Ireland apart from M529 include: M37, specific to the Irish; L226/S168 in Central and Western Ireland; and M222 in Northwestern Ireland and associated with the Scots Irish. We will study M222 in more depth in a later chapter. R1b clades associated with the Welsh include: M167, shared with the Cornish and Basque and L371 specific to the Welsh. 

Paternal Y-DNA Haplogroups for Ireland, Wales and Northern Ireland:

Wales: R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – E1b1b [4%] – 

I2a2 [3%] – G2a [2.5%] – R1a [1%] – I2a1 [1%] – T1a [1%] – J2 [0.5%] 

Ireland: R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%] – 

R1a [2.5%] – E1b1b [2%] – I2a1 [1%] – J2 [ 1.5%]  – G2a [1%] 

Northern Ireland: R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] – 

R1a [ 1.5%] – J2 [1.5%] – I2a1 [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Wales:         R1b – I1 – E1b1b – I2a2 – G2a – R1a – I2a1 – T1a – J2

Ireland:       R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b1b – I2a1 – J2 – G2a 

N Ireland:   R1b – I2a2 – I1 – R1a – J2 – I2a1 – Q

There is a subtle yet clear difference between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. They are two different peoples and ethnically divided, not just by nationality or religion. It is interesting to note that Wales and Ireland are similar in percentage for Haplogroups, I2a1, I2a2, E1b1b and G2a; whereas Ireland and Northern Ireland have a closer match only in J2. All these are admixture groups and it is in the principal Haplogroup, that the full blood brothers of Wales from Simeon and Northern Ireland predominantly from Reuben have a closer match in R1b levels.

Comparing the defining marker northwestern European Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Irish and Welsh with their related near neighbours.

Ireland:         R1b [81%] – I1 [6%] – I2a2 [5%]

N Ireland:     R1b [76.5%] – I2a2 [10%] – I1 [9%] 

Wales:            R1b [74%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [3%]

Scotland:       R1b [72.5%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [4%] 

England:       R1b [67%] – I1 [14%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Flanders:       R1b [61%] – I1 [12%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

France:           R1b [59%] – I1 [9%] – I2a2 [3.5%] 

Netherlands: R1b [49%] – I1 [17%] – I2a2 [7%] 

Germany:       R1b [45%] – I1 [16%] – I2a2 [4.5%] 

Italy:               R1b [39%] – I1 [4.5%] – I2a2 [2.5%]

Sephardim:    R1b [29.5%] – I [11.5%] 

Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s male descendants as well as that of his two brothers – Nahor and Haran. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Wales and Northern Ireland, though not in Ireland. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2 and is relatively high in the Republic, while it is highest in Northern Irish men. 

Comparing the Welsh and Irish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German, Jewish cousins and brothers Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                           R1b      R1a       I1       I2a1    I2a2      E1b1b     J2      J1     

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Sephardim        30          4       [12]                                    9        23       20

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Germany            45        16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3         3            6            5          8          3       

Flanders             61         4         12          3            5            5          4          1         

England             67          5         14          3           5             2         4          

Scotland            73           9          9           1           4            2          2            

Wales                 74           1         12          1           3             4      0.5       

N Ireland           77           2          9       0.5         10                        2              

Ireland               81           3          6          1           5             2          2          

The five countries comprising Britain and Ireland immediately standout as belonging together; as well as separately from their near family members in the western portions of the continent. We learn a number of things. The English show the greatest levels of admixture. This is not surprising as one, they are the largest nation and two have been geographically placed to be impacted the most by the invading migratory waves of Israelites. Though England’s R1b frequency is lower because of this, notice the higher percentage for Haplogroup I, similar to its full brothers Simeon in Wales and particularly Reuben in Northern Ireland, while higher than its half brothers Benjamin in Scotland and Gad in Ireland.

Men with Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have had a male ancestor who was not from the line of Abraham, though still related to the older Haplogroup I lineage descending from Arphaxad and Peleg.

Scotland’s higher percentage of R1a stands out due to its Nordic admixture – and before that Nordic intermixing with northern Slavs. Wales has a higher percentage of the Canaanite E1b1b, already touched upon. Ireland considerably, then followed by Northern Ireland, reveals a purer paternal Haplogroup identification, if the principle R1b is observed bearing out their isolation. Followed by Wales, Scotland and lastly England. Northern Ireland’s percentage of Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 is high, similar with England. The unique genetic status of Northern Ireland will be investigated in a subsequent chapter.      

Continuing with our Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Reuben, Simeon and Gad.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9        [8]       4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23        21         6        12        16       28

Italy                19        3       16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16        45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6        52

England           4                   4         2           2        5        67       72

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15        33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16        22       38

Wallonia          2                   2         6           6        7        60       67

N Ireland         2                   2                                2         77       79

Scotland          2                    2         2        0.5      9         73       82

Ireland             2                   2         2            1       3         81       84

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7         55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26       32       58

Iceland                                                                    23       42       65

Wales            0.5               0.5         4          3           1        74       75

Finland                                         0.5                       5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.

Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. The Welsh and Irish join England and Scotland in carrying the highest percentage of combined R1 and Ireland replaces Scotland with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe. 

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Ireland is an additional example supporting this fact. We have now investigated thirty-three peoples, ranging from Russia and Iran in the East to Ireland and Iceland in the West; Italy and Greece in the South to Norway and Finland in the North. 

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                         R1a       R1b        I1      I2a1       I2a2     N1c

Wales                  1         74         12           1          3

N Ireland         1.5        77           9       0.5         10

Portugal          1.5         56           2       1.5           5          

Spain                  2         69        1.5          5           1

Ireland               3         81           6          1           5

Luxembourg     3         61           3          3           6              

France                3         59          9           3          4            

Switzerland       4         50        14           2          8          1

Netherlands      4         49        17            1          7               

Flanders            4          61        12            3          5

Brazil                  4         54                      [9]            

Italy                    4         39          5            3          3         

Sephardim         4        30         [1]                             

Finland               5          4         28                    0.5       62

England              5        67         14           3           5        

Frisians               7        55       [34]           

Wallonia             7        60         11           2           5

Scotland             9         73          9           1           4         

Turkey                8         16           1            4     0.5         4  

Ashkenazim     10         12        [4]                              0.2

Greece               12         16          4          10      1.5      

Denmark          15         33        34            2        6         1

Sweden             16         22        37            2        4         7

Germany          16         45        16             2        5         1

Iran                   16         10                      0.5                    1           

Romania          18         16          4           28        3         2

Austria             19         32        12              7        3      0.5

Iceland             23        42        29                        4         1

Norway             26       32        32                         5        3

Ukraine            44          8         5             21     0.5        6

Russia               46         6          5             11                 23

Poland              58        13          9              6         2        4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Northern Ireland replaces Switzerland with the highest levels of I2a2 and Ireland replaces Scotland as the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b. Finland remains at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.

Though Haplogroup R1b may fluctuate markedly amongst Abraham’s descendants, it is Haplogroup I1, which remains consistently higher compared with other European nations. A case in point, is a nation descended from Aram such as Spain, whose men in turn have high levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b but not in Haplogroup I1 – for R1b is a defining western European marker. Conversely, Swedish males exhibit high Haplogroup I1 levels but far less R1b.

Paternal Haplogroup I1 is a much older male lineage – one of Abraham’s ancestors – from which the downstream R1b Haplogroup mutation ultimately descends and is palpably a north western European Haplogroup marker. Yet today the two combined, decidedly form a British and Irish identity. One that distinguishes the sons of Jacob from their own near relatives: Ishmael-Germany; Midian-Netherlands; Medan-Denmark; Haran-Switzerland and Moab and Ammonite, France.

This chapter almost completes the sons of Jacob who dwell in the United Kingdom and Ireland. One more tribe to go. Prior to tackling the enigmatic tribe of Dan, we will turn our attention to the six tribes who bravely departed the shores of the British Isles and headed across the world’s oceans seeking adventure and better fortune as they explored forgotten lands and formed new nations.

These people were more willing to listen than the people in Thessalonica. The Bereans were eager to hear what Paul and Silas said and studied the Scriptures every day to find out if these things were true…

Acts 17:11 New Century Version

Most of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in the Scriptures ever comes from the prophet’s own interpretation. No prophecy ever came from what a person wanted to say, but people led by the Holy Spirit spoke words from God.

2 Peter 1:20-21 New Century Version

“Most of the time, we see only what we want to see, or what others tell us to see, instead of really investigate to see what is really there. We embrace illusions only because we are presented with the illusion that they are embraced by the majority… And like obedient schoolchildren, we do not question their validity… Because since the earliest days of our youth, we have been conditioned to accept that the direction of the herd, and authority anywhere – is always right.” 

Suzy Kassem 

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

Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes

Chapter XXX

For the constant reader – those reading the chapters in order – you may have a good idea now, on what is to be unfurled on subsequent pages, let alone the remaining chapters. For others, the information which follows will undoubtedly challenge, vex or astound, without a background of a comprehensive context. Cries of racism and simple mindedness could be the thoughts of many. The weight of proof thus far for the identities we have studied, means there is little room to manoeuvre in trying to deny the plain truth. For truth is singular and any other versions of it, whether it be our own or someone else’s, is still, but a mis-truth. Thus, it is a hopeless and forlorn endeavour indeed, to try and support old errors over new evidence, but alas it is a given that most will continue along a path that is comfortable yet restrictive, rather than one which is challenging yet enlightening. 

Judah is the fourth son of the Patriarch Jacob and was his fourth son with first wife, Leah. It is interesting to learn that of all his twelve sons, it is Judah who is most like his father, Jacob. For all this, Jacob favours his second youngest son Joseph; the eldest son by his favourite wife, Rachel. It is to Joseph that Jacob passes the birthright blessings, normally given to the literal eldest son; the promises, which were passed from Abraham to Isaac and then from Isaac to Jacob – refer Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Yet, the most similar son is not ignored, in that Judah was promised a unique and separate blessing of his own, the royal orb and sceptre of kingship. 

This was not just any royal kingly line, for it has two distinct components not possessed by the royalty of other nations. First, there would always be someone alive from the tribe of Judah and specifically from his descendant King David, who is qualified to sit on the throne. The massive spin on this and one that many Israelite identity believers have missed, is that though the Creator promised that someone from Judah would always occupy the throne, He did not pledge that the most eligible person descended from David would be the monarch – refer articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III

This throne has survived until the present era, yet those who sit on it are not entirely true descendants of Judah, but usurpers – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

The second component of Judah’s blessing was that the throne given him was on loan; that those who sit on it are temporarily holding it for someone else. The identity of that person means the incumbent King or Queen is behooved to reign justly and to be countered righteous themselves. For the seat belongs to the Son of Man and it is to Him that it will be given at His second coming. A throne He qualified for – and one that He will rule the whole world from – when He defeated sin and death; the two main instruments of weaponry, the Adversary uses in their ongoing war of enslavement against humanity (Isaiah 9:7, Hebrews 1:8; 2:14-15) – Article: Asherah; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, June 2, 1953, Westminster Abbey, London, England

Israelite identity (or British Israelite) proponents have failed to interpret the Bible, history and world events accurately for they have mis-identified Judah. We have seen the disastrous results of this in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Esau is the second most mentioned identity in the scriptures, some 30%, of all biblical identity references. The tribe of Judah is stated the most, some 60%, of all biblical identity references with the remaining 10% accounting for all the sons of Japheth, Ham and the remaining descendants of Shem, even including Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim. 

Yet the identities ascribed to both Edom and Judah, as well as to Joseph have been incorrect for nearly five hundred years from when knowledge of the subject began to gain universal appeal. Granted, most understand half of Joseph, that is, his eldest son Manasseh in part, yet even here the identities of Joseph’s two sons have been in continual error until the early 1970’s, when it was first brought to attention that the identity for Manasseh was incorrect. 

So, the four main peoples in the Bible, Judah, Edom, Ephraim and Manasseh have been incorrect since the subject was first addressed hundreds of years ago. The truth on Ephraim – to this writer’s knowledge – first came to light nearly fifty years ago, yet has remained very much in the shadows. The truth on Edom has been known far longer in some circles outside of the identity movement, particularly amongst the Jews themselves, though it too has only been discussed and revealed since the 1970’s. Unlike Ephraim, a number of works have been written on Edom and the truth has been available to the public for some time. 

Given the many, clear and distinctive clues available in the scriptures, it is baffling how blindness has afflicted it would seem, nearly everyone to the real identities of Joseph and Edom. More puzzling still, are the profound verses surrounding the tribe of Judah and how they have remained hidden while in plain sight all along. We will learn that the identity of Judah is the key… the Key, that unlocks the whole third of the Bible which is prophetic. Judah is the key that unlocks the second third of the Bible which is historical. Finally, the remaining third of the Bible – though written by extension to the whole world – is generally written to the remaining tribes of Israel; but specifically, it is to Judah that it primarily pertains. 

Matthew 10:5-6

Common English Bible

‘Jesus sent these twelve out and commanded them, “Don’t go among the Gentiles or into a Samaritan city. Go instead to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.’

Matthew 15:24

New Century Version

Jesus answered, “God sent me only to the lost sheep, the people of Israel.”

It is appreciated this is unpalatable for some readers and maybe abhorrent to others, as it appears to be a statement which is both racist and anti-Semitic all at once. The reader must understand and appreciate two points.

First, the Jews as studied in Chapter XXIX Esau: the Thirteenth Tribe, are not the tribe of Judah. 

Abraham of Ur, David A Snyder, 2014 – emphasis mine:

‘It is very seldom that a father admits that he learned something from his son. But in my case, in a roundabout way that is what happened several years ago on our annual fishing trip to Alaska. One night after dinner at Redoubt Mountain Lodge on Crescent Lake, we were discussing the Incarnation. He asked why God chose the tiny country of Israel over the highly advanced cultures of China or India to send His son to mankind. Even with my Miller Light induced keen insight, I found I could not answer the question to his or my satisfaction. I must admit that this question has haunted me ever since. 

Little did I know at the time that this question is known by theologians as The Scandal of Particularity and has been asked by theologians for centuries. Fortunately I think I have answered it, at least to my satisfaction, at the end of this book when I give my theories as to what part Abraham played in God’s plan of salvation. So, I must thank my son Paul for spicing my life with this riddle that had so much to do with the writing of this book.’ 

David Snyder’s book was very helpful with regard to research about Abraham. The author highlights a major concern, that we looked at in the previous chapter. The Messiah was sent to His Father’s people, albeit small at that time, from the tribe of Judah in Galilee, north of Judea – which included Idumea (Edom) in the southern portion of the land south of Galilee. It was not about the size of the populace, but the fact they were the Creator’s chosen people. That said, Christ visited areas of the world where the bulk of the Israelites had migrated over the course of five or more centuries – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

Second, we shall learn that the Creator chooses whom He wills. If this is racist by our own individual definition, then it runs contrary to His. 

In Acts 17:26 NIV it says: 

‘From one man [Adam, via Noah] he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.’

If one thinks this world is marked by national boundaries that are either happenstance or merely the creation of human governments, then this is not what has occurred. There is a curious verse in Deuteronomy 32:8 NET:

‘When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided up humankind, he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of the heavenly assembly.’

The footnotes in the New English Translation states: 

‘The Hebrew term (ʿelyon) is an abbreviated form of the divine name El Elyon, frequently translated “God Most High”… This full name (or epithet) occurs only in Genesis 14, though the two elements are parallel in Psalm 73:11; 107:11; etc. Here it is clear that Elyon has to do with the nations in general whereas in verse 9, by contrast, Yahweh relates specifically to Israel. The title depicts God as the sovereign ruler of the world, who is enthroned high above his dominion. The idea, perhaps, is that Israel was central to Yahweh’s purposes and all other nations were arranged and distributed according to how they related to Israel… a Qumran fragment has “sons of God,” while the LXX reads (angelōn theou, “angels of God”)… 

“Sons of God” is undoubtedly the original reading; the MT and LXX have each interpreted it differently. MT assumes that the expression “sons of God” refers to Israel (Hosea 1:10), while LXX has assumed that the phrase refers to the angelic heavenly assembly (Psalm 29:1; 89:6; Psalm 82). The phrase is also attested in Ugaritic, where it refers to the high god El’s divine assembly. According to the latter view, which is reflected in the translation, the Lord delegated jurisdiction over the nations to his angelic host (Daniel 10:13-21), while reserving for himself Israel, over whom he rules directly [via the Archangel Michael].’

Thus, the nations and peoples of the world are actually allotted to and governed by, invisible higher authorities and angelic powers. The Creator has reserved Israel – the twelve sons of Jacob – for Himself. Verse eight is translated a number of ways in different versions.

English Standard Version

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

New International Version

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.

New Century Version

God Most High gave the nations their lands, dividing up the human race. He set up borders for the people and even numbered the Israelites.

The latter two have based their translation on the subject of verse nine, though the interlinear uses the Hebrew word Israel (H3478): ‘When most High divided nations their inheritance, where separated sons of Adam, set bounds people, according to number children Israel’ The word for ‘children’ is ben (H1121) and is translated in the KJV as: son (2978 times), children (1568), old (135), first (51), man (20), young (18) and stranger (10). Used as sons, it can mean sons of God or angels. The following verses clarify that the context is speaking of the sons of God, as the Creator is included.

Deuteronomy 32:8-12

Common English Bible

‘When God Most High divided up the nations – when he divided up humankind – he decided the people’s boundaries based on the number of the gods.

Surely the Lords property was his people; Jacob was his part of the inheritance.

God found Israel in a wild land – in a howling desert wasteland – he protected him, cared for him, watched over him with his very own eye. Like an eagle protecting its nest, hovering over its young, God spread out his wings, took hold of Israel, carried him on his back. The Lord alone led Israel; no foreign god assisted.’

The Message verses 8-9

When the High God gave the nations their stake, gave them their place on Earth, He put each of the peoples within boundaries under the care of divine guardians. 

But God himself took charge of his people, took Jacob on as his personal concern.

Living Bible verse 8

When God divided up the world among the nations, He gave each of them a supervising angel!

There are further verses which support angelic governance of specific nations and the Creator’s participation in this process.

Psalm 47:7-9

Common English Bible

‘… God is king of the whole world! Sing praises with a song of instruction! God is king over the nations. God sits on his holy throne. The leaders of all people are gathered with the people of Abraham’s God because the earth’s guardians belong to God; God is exalted beyond all.’

Psalm 2:1-2

New Century Version

‘Why are the nations so angry? Why are the people making useless plans? The kings of the earth prepare to fight, and their leaders make plans together against the Lord and his appointed one [the Son of Man].

Isaiah 41:9, 14

New English Translation

‘… you whom I am bringing back from the earth’s extremities, and have summoned from the remote regions [the antipodes, southern Africa, northern America and the British Isles] – I told you, ‘You are my servant.’ I have chosen you and not rejected you… Don’t be afraid, despised insignificant Jacob, men of Israel. I am helping you, says the Lord, your Protector, the Holy One of Israel.’

Daniel 10:1-6, 20-21

English Standard Version

‘In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar. And the word was true, and it was a great conflict. And he understood the word and had understanding of the vision… I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold, a man [an angel] clothed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude… Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? But now I will return to fight against the prince of Persia; and when I go out, behold, the prince of Greece will come. But I will tell you what is inscribed in the book of truth: there is none who contends by my side against these except Michael, your prince [the Prince of Israel].’

Before we delve into Judah and his half-brother Benjamin, we will complete our discussion on Jacob, begun in Chapter twenty-seven about Abraham (Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia); continued in Chapter twenty-eight on Ishmael (The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar); and Chapter twenty-nine with Esau (Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe); for Jacob and Judah are much alike… though first, we shall address the British Israelite Identity movement itself.

British Israelism also known as Anglo-Israelism is the belief that the peoples of the British Isles are “genetically, racially and linguistically” the direct descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. There is an error right here already, in that we will learn that all twelve tribes – actually thirteen – were ‘lost’ and all thirteen after migrating through Europe, converged on the islands of Britain and Ireland. 

The movement’s roots in the sixteenth century, gained increasing popularity in the 1800s – with its formal beginning sprung from works by John Wilson (1799-1870) and Edward Hine (1825-1891) – continuing on till the present day. A well known online encyclopaedia with a palpable bias, states that these central tenets of British Israelism ‘have been refuted by evidence from modern archaeological, ethnological, genetic and linguistic research.’ It would be enlightening to learn of all this supposed evidence – Article: British Israelism: As Adjudicated by a ‘Neutral’ Investigator. It would also be fascinating to learn from this particular contributor, who then, are the descendants of ancient Israel today? 

Any reader who has undertaken the dedicated and unswerving journey of reading every chapter in this quest, will now know that we have convincingly and undeniably found a modern counterpart for every biblical identity. There only remains a handful of nations around the world that could be the sons of Jacob. Anyone prejudiced, unyielding or upholding a misleading agenda, would be severely exposed in seeking to refute the massive body of evidence compiled and presented thus far. 

One of the earliest expressions of the biblical identity doctrine was by a French Huguenot magistrate M le Loyer, in a work published in 1590, entitled, The Ten Lost Tribes. This may well be where the erroneous label ‘Ten Lost Tribes’ originated, as well as mistakenly presenting the Scandinavian and Germanic peoples as additional sons of Jacob; when in fact, they are descendants of Abraham, just not through his son Isaac. Apparently James VI of Scotland, (James I of England) believed he was the King of Israel. In 1919 the British Israel World Federation was founded in London and Covenant Publishing in 1922. The Federation has its headquarters in Bishop Auckland in County Durham. 

From the 1930s Herbert Armstrong (1892-1986), founder of the Radio and later, Worldwide Church of God; promoted the doctrine to its widest appeal, as one of his central teachings in understanding biblical prophecy – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Much of his own book on the subject – The United States and Britain in Prophecy – was heavily based or copied from an earlier work in 1902 by J H Allen, Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright

Criticisms of the movement by current scholars, include amateur research and scholarship in theology, anthropology, history and linguistics and of course the catch-all, sink the whole ship tactic, ‘its anti-semitic.’ As we have already addressed, the term anti-semitic is used in a linguistic context not an ethnic one and thus has been misleadingly misappropriated by opponents – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

One critic states: ‘the overwhelming cultural, historical and genetic evidence [is] against it.’ The presentation of this evidence would again be enlightening. Granted, the link between certain Hebrew and English words has shown to be a flawed argument – but not in every case. What no one seems to have considered, is the similarity between English and the Germanic (Teutonic) language it evolved from, revealing not just other language family members but related genetic family also – refer point number three in the Introduction. 

English has evolved from Old English and Old English evolved from Low German. As Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – the Germans and English are closely related cousins. Not as closely related as Scotland and England who are half brothers, but still a family kinship as evidenced by not only the link in philology, but also the migration of the Saxon hordes from Northern Germany to England and the fact that from the east coast of England to the western border of Germany, it is merely two hundred miles. 

Today there are provinces in both Germany and in Britain which are named after the Saxons and the primary tribe, the Angles. In Germany there are the federal states of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony); Sachsen-Anhalt (Saxony-Anhalt); and Sachsen (Saxony). 

In Britain there was the former Kingdom of Wessex (West Saxony); and the modern counties of Sussex (South Saxony); and Essex (East Saxony). Immediately south of the German-Danish border, in the German part of Schleswig, is the province Angeln (Anglia). Until 1800, the foremost language in Angeln was Danish, but during the first part of the nineteenth century German became the primary language. In eastern England there is a region called East Anglia. The name England itself is derived from Angle-land. In everyday language Anglo-Saxon is another name for the English speaking peoples, regardless of how many of their ancestors were from the Saxon tribe known as Angles. 

There is another movement called Christian Identity – a 1920s offshoot of British Israelism – that includes a racial interpretation of Christianity with a theology focus which is wholly white supremacist, racist and truly anti-semitic, embedded in fundamentalist teachings. This writer confirms that no connection exists between themselves and the Christian Identity or even the British Israel Federation. Nor has any of the material presented in this work been inspired or influenced by either organisation or its beliefs. Any similarity of suppositions, points or teachings are purely coincidental and cannot be perceived as the same or linked in either their formation or explanation. 

Genesis 27:26-29

Christian Standard Bible

26 Then his father Isaac said to him, “Please come closer and kiss me, my son.” 27 So he came closer and kissed him. When Isaac smelled his clothes, he blessed him and said:

“Ah, the smell of my son is like the smell of a field that the Lord has blessed. 28 May God give to you – from the dew of the sky and from the richness of the land – an abundance of grain and new wine.

29 May peoples serve you and nations bow in worship to you. Be master over your relatives; may your mother’s sons bow in worship to you. Those who curse you will be cursed, and those who bless you will be blessed.”

Isaac’s blessing to Jacob said he would inherit rich lands, be prosperous and have power over other nations, including his relatives: Edom, Ishmael and Hagar, Midian – and the other sons of Keturah – Haran, Moab, Ammon and Nahor – the Chaldeans. Today, they respectively equate to the Jews and Israel; Germany and Austria; the Netherlands; Scandinavia, Belgium and Luxembourg; Switzerland; France, French Quebec in Canada; and Italy. They are the non-Israelite countries descended from Abraham and his two brothers – the nations principally of northwestern Europe. (We learned in chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, that Edom has turned the table on Jacob as prophesied)

Aside from any other information, once we understand who Abraham’s other descendants are, we would have to objectively look throughout the world and say honestly which nations have had dominion over all these nations for the past five hundred years. There are only two nations that could answer to that enquiry and now, the reader will have worked out who they are. 

What has alluded those who have already understood this mystery, is the exact identity of these two primary leading nations descended from the two most prominent sons of Jacob. For the first time, they can be revealed and explained. 

Recall that Rebekah had been blessed by her family in Genesis 24:60 NKJV: “Our sister, may you become The mother of thousands of ten thousands; And may your descendants possess The gates [doors, cities] of those who hate them.” Some by extension teach this includes pivotal sea-gates around the globe. If so, then Great Britain and the United States have shared the lion’s share of strategic ports: the Straits of Malacca, Singapore, the Suez Canal, Bab el Mandeb, Strait of Hormuz, Cape of Good Hope, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands; plus the Panama Canal and other locations throughout the Pacific ocean. 

Jacob receives additional blessings. One from Isaac when Jacob hastily departs from his home in escaping a wrathful Esau and again, in a vision while sleeping.

Genesis 28:1-17

Christian Standard Bible

1 ‘So Isaac summoned Jacob, blessed him… 3 May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you so that you become an assembly [H6951 – qahal: multitude, company] of peoples. 4 May God give you and your offspring the blessing of Abraham so that you may possess the land where you live as a foreigner, the land God gave to Abraham.

10 Jacob left Beer-sheba and went toward Haran. 11 He reached a certain place and spent the night there because the sun had set. He took one of the stones from the place, put it there at his head, and lay down in that place. 12 And he dreamed: A stairway was set on the ground with its top reaching the sky, and God’s angels were going up and down on it. 13 The Lord was standing there beside him, saying, 

“I am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your offspring the land on which you are lying. 14 Your offspring will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out toward the west, the east, the north, and the south. All the peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring.”

The promise of Jacob’s offspring being a blessing to all nations is an echo of what the Creator spoke to Abraham. Genesis 22:18 NKJV: ‘In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.’ Paul teaches that the fulfilment of this promise was through the Son of Man. Galatians 3:8, 16 ESV: ‘And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles [all nations] by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed”… Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.’ 

Hebrews 2:10-18

Common English Bible

10 ‘It was appropriate for God, for whom and through whom everything exists, to use experiences of suffering to make perfect the pioneer of salvation. This salvation belongs to many sons and daughters whom he’s leading to glory. 11 This is because the one who makes people holy and the people who are being made holy all come from one source. That is why Jesus isn’t ashamed to call them brothers and sisters… 14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, he also shared the same things in the same way. He did this to destroy the one who holds the power over death – the devil – by dying.

15 He set free those who were held in slavery their entire lives by their fear of death. 16 Of course, he isn’t trying to help angels, but rather he’s helping Abraham’s descendants. 17 Therefore, he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way. This was so that he could become a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, in order to wipe away the sins of the people. 18 He’s able to help those who are being tempted, since he himself experienced suffering when he was tempted.’

It is vital to grasp, that a two-fold promise was given: material prosperity and spiritual salvation. This is not something that very many people understand.

Genesis: 15 ‘Look, I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go. I will bring you back to this land, for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” 16 When Jacob awoke from his sleep, he said, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 He was afraid and said, “What an awesome place this is! This is none other than the house of God. This is the gate [stairway] of heaven.”

Jacob’s offspring were to be numerous and to spread in all directions of the globe, north, south, east and west. In modern times this has been fulfilled as the British and Irish peoples have spread abroad to all continents, as well as making permanent homes in the antipodes, southern Africa and the Americas. 

Verse three is worth looking more closely at. An assembly of peoples hints at more than one nation. The Hebrew word qahal [H6951], is translated by the KJV, as congregation (86 times), assembly (17), company (17) and multitude (3). The Hebrew word preceding it is rabah [H7235], which the KJV translates as multiply (74), increase (40), many (28), great (8), exceedingly (2) and abundance (2); to be ‘many and numerous.’

Thus, Jacob’s children were to become numerous, while also more than one nation. Other versions translate in some insightful ways which assist in identifying the Israelite nations today.

NCV: … and may you become a group of many peoples.

NET: … and give you a multitude of descendants! Then you will become a large nation.

TLB: … may you become a great nation of many tribes!

NIRV: … May he make your family larger until you become a community of nations.

NLT: … And may your descendants multiply and become many nations!

VOICE: … and multiply your descendants so that you will give rise to nation after nation!

Jacob

Genesis 29:1-35

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the east. 2 As he looked, he saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks of sheep lying beside it, for out of that well the flocks were watered. The stone on the well’s mouth was large, 3 and when all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone from the mouth of the well and water the sheep, and put the stone back in its place over the mouth of the well.

4 Jacob said to them, “My brothers, where do you come from?” They said, “We are from Haran.” 5 He said to them, “Do you know Laban the [grandson] of Nahor?” They said, “We know him.” 6 He said to them, “Is it well with him?” They said, “It is well; and see, Rachel his daughter is coming with the sheep!” 

7 He said, “Behold, it is still high day; it is not time for the livestock to be gathered together. Water the sheep and go, pasture them.” 8 But they said, “We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together and the stone is rolled from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.”

9 While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10 Now as soon as Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, Jacob came near and rolled the stone from the well’s mouth and watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother.

11 Then Jacob kissed Rachel and wept aloud. 12 And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s kinsman, and that he was Rebekah’s son, and she ran and told her father.’

It was love at first sight for Jacob, just as it had been for his father Isaac, when he saw Rebekah for the first time.

13 ‘As soon as Laban heard the news about Jacob, his sister’s son, he ran to meet him and embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his house. Jacob told Laban all these things, 14 and Laban said to him, “Surely you are my bone and my flesh!” And he stayed with him a month.

15 Then Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my kinsman, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?” 16 Now Laban had two daughters. The name of the older was Leah [H3812: weary], and the name of the younger was Rachel [7354: ewe].’

Leah

17 ‘Leah’s eyes were weak [H7390 – rak: tender, soft, delicate as in soft of words, delicate of flesh, shy], but Rachel was beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: comely, fair, beautiful] in form [body] and appearance [face].

Leah’s eyesight was not weak, rather her countenance was not as striking as her sister’s.

18 ‘Jacob loved Rachel. And he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.” 19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to any other man; stay with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed to him but a few days because of the love he had for her.’

Rachel

21 ‘Then Jacob said to Laban, “Give me my wife that I may go in to her, for my time is completed.” 22 So Laban gathered together all the people of the place and made a feast. 23 But in the evening he took his daughter Leah and brought her to Jacob, and he went in to her. 24 (Laban gave his female servant Zilpah to his daughter Leah to be her servant.)

25 And in the morning, behold, it was Leah! And Jacob said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Did I not serve with you for Rachel? Why then have you deceived me?” 26 Laban said, “It is not so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also in return for serving me another seven years.” 28 Jacob did so, and completed her week. 

Then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel to be his wife. 29 (Laban gave his female servant Bilhah to his daughter Rachel to be her servant.) 30 So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years.

31 When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren [like her grandmother, Sarah]. 32 And Leah conceived and bore a son [1], and she called his name Reuben [See, a son], for she said, “Because the Lord has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me.”

33 She conceived again and bore a son [2], and said, “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” And she called his name Simeon [heard]. 34 Again she conceived and bore a son [3], and said, “Now this time my husband will be attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore his name was called Levi [attached].

35 And she conceived again and bore a son [4], and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.”Therefore she called his name Judah [praise]. Then she ceased bearing [for the time being, as Leah had two additional sons and a daughter].’

Jacob fled from his brother Esau in 1760 BCE. The Seder Olam Rabba states that Leah and Rachel were themselves also twins and were twenty-two (or twenty-one in another version) when they married Jacob. In 1753 BCE, Jacob would have been sixty-four years old. His working for seven years makes sense if Rachel had only been fifteen when they first met. It may also explain how Jacob was deceived on his wedding day and night if they were twins, thinking Leah was Rachel. 

Laban certainly knew what he was doing and had his plan regarding his daughters, unbeknown to Jacob. Reuben was born 1752 BCE; Simeon in 1750 BCE; Levi in 1748 BCE; and Judah was born in 1746 BCE according to an unconventional chronology.

Genesis 30:1-43

English Standard Version 

1 ‘When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, she envied her sister.

She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or I shall die!”

2 Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel, and he said, “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?” 3 Then she said, “Here is my servant Bilhah; go in to her, so that she may give birth on my behalf, that even I may have children through her.” 4 So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife, and Jacob went in to her. 5 And Bilhah conceived and bore Jacob a son [1/5].

6 Then Rachel said, “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called his name Dan [judged]. 7 Rachel’s servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son [2/6]. 8 Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his name Naphtali [wrestling].’

It is worth noting that when we investigate Dan – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe – we learn he was a troublesome son. Dan was conceived in an atmosphere of a marital argument, where Rachel was consumed with envy towards her sister and Jacob was angry. This may be in part, due to further controversy surrounding Dan’s birth.

9 ‘When Leah saw that she had ceased bearing children, she took her servant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Then Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son [1/7]. 11 And Leah said, “Good fortune has come!” so she called his name Gad [good fortune]’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. 12 ‘Leah’s servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son [2/8]. 13 And Leah said, “Happy am I! For women have called me happy.” So she called his name Asher [happy].

Dan was born later the same year as Judah in 1746 BCE and his brother Naphtali in 1744 BCE. Gad was also born in 1744 BCE and his brother Asher in 1742 BCE.

14 ‘In the days of wheat harvest Reuben went and found mandrakes in the field and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” 15 But she said to her, “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes.” 16 When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to meet him and said, “You must come in to me, for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” So he lay with her that night.

17 And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son [5/9]. 18 Leah said, “God has given me my wages because I gave my servant to my husband.” So she called his name Issachar [wages or hire]. 19 And Leah conceived again, and she bore Jacob a sixth son [6/10]. 20 Then Leah said, “God has endowed me with a good endowment; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she called his name Zebulun [honour]. 21 Afterward she bore a daughter and called her name Dinah.’

Issachar was born in 1742 BCE and his name may have been in part a homage to his grandfather Isaac. Zebulun and Dinah are thought to have been twins as it does not say Leah conceived Dinah, but rather she followed Zebulun – the Book of Jubilees corroborates twins. Leah was thirty-four when she had her last children; seven children in the space of twelve years. Additional information is provided in the Book of Jubilees regarding Leah and her sons, with the spacing between the births given.

Book of Jubilees 28:11-23

28:11 ‘And Yahweh opened the womb of Leah, and she conceived and bare Jacob a son, and he called his name Reuben, on the fourteenth day of the ninth month [November/December]… Yahweh saw that Leah was hated and Rachel loved. 13 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare Jacob a second son, and he called his name Simeon, on the twenty-first of the tenth month [December/January], 14 And again Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare him a third son, and he called his name Levi, in the new month [1st – New Moon] of the first month [March/April]… 15 And again Jacob went in unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a fourth son, and he called his name Judah, on the fifteenth [Sabbath] of the third month [May/June]… 

17 And when Rachel saw that Leah had borne four sons to Jacob… she said to him: ‘Go in unto Bilhah my handmaid, and she will conceive, and bear a son unto me.’ 18… and she conceived, and bare him a son, and he called his name Dan, on the ninth of the sixth month [August/September]… 19 And Jacob went in again unto Bilhah a second time, and she conceived, and bare Jacob another son, and Rachel called his name Napthali, on the fifth of the seventh* month [September/October*]… 

20 And when Leah saw that she had become sterile and did not bear, she envied Rachel, and she also gave her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob to wife, and she conceived, and bare a son, and Leah called his name Gad, on the twelfth of the eighth month [October/November]… 21 And he went in again unto her, and she conceived, and bare him a second son, and Leah called his name Asher, on the second of the eleventh month [January/February]…

22 And Jacob went in unto Leah, and she conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Issachar, on the fourth of the fifth month [July/August]…and she gave him to a nurse. 23 And Jacob went in again unto her, and she conceived, and bare two (children), a son and a daughter, and she called the name of the son Zebulon, and the name of the daughter Dinah, in the seventh of the seventh* month [September/October*]…’

Confirmation Zebulun and Dinah were twins, with Zebulun the eldest. Levi was born on the New Moon or first day of the month. A day that was later celebrated like a Sabbath and Judah was actually born on what would be the second Sabbath day of the month, according to the lunar cycle calendar – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Genesis: 22 ‘Then God remembered Rachel, and God listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She conceived and bore a son [1/11] and said, “God has taken away my reproach.” 24 And she called his name Joseph [may he add], saying, “May the Lord add to me another son!” [this was fulfilled literally, with the birth of Benjamin and also figuratively, when Joseph became two, by having his own sons Manasseh and Ephraim].’

25 ‘As soon as Rachel had borne Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, “Send me away, that I may go to my own home and country. 

26 Give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you, that I may go, for you know the service that I have given you.” 27 But Laban said to him, “If I have found favor in your sight, I have learned by divination that the Lord has blessed me because of you. 28 Name your wages, and I will give it.”

29 Jacob said to him, “You yourself know how I have served you, and how your livestock has fared with me. 30 For you had little before I came, and it has increased abundantly, and the Lord has blessed you wherever I turned. But now when shall I provide for my own household also?” 31 He said, “What shall I give you?” Jacob said, “You shall not give me anything. If you will do this for me, I will again pasture your flock and keep it: 32 let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages. 33 So my honesty will answer for me later, when you come to look into my wages with you. 

Every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats and black among the lambs, if found with me, shall be counted stolen.” 34 Laban said, “Good! Let it be as you have said.” 35 But that day Laban removed the male goats that were striped and spotted, and all the female goats that were speckled and spotted, every one that had white on it, and every lamb that was black, and put them in the charge of his sons. 36 And he set a distance of three days’ journey between himself and Jacob, and Jacob pastured the rest of Laban’s flock.

37 Then Jacob took fresh sticks of poplar and almond and plane trees, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the sticks. 38 He set the sticks that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, 39 the flocks bred in front of the sticks and so the flocks brought forth striped, speckled, and spotted. 40 And Jacob separated the lambs and set the faces of the flocks toward the striped and all the black in the flock of Laban. He put his own droves apart and did not put them with Laban’s flock. 41 Whenever the stronger of the flock were breeding, Jacob would lay the sticks in the troughs before the eyes of the flock, that they might breed among the sticks, 42 but for the feebler of the flock he would not lay them there. So the feebler would be Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.

43 Thus the man increased greatly and had large flocks, female servants and male servants, and camels and donkeys.’

Book of Jubilees 28:25-30

28:25 ‘And in the days when Joseph was born… Jacob’s possessions multiplied exceedingly, and he possessed oxen and sheep and asses and camels, and menservants and maid-servants. 30 And Laban and his sons envied Jacob, and Laban took back his [own] sheep from him, and he observed him with evil intent.’ 

Joseph was born quite sometime after Zebulun and Dinah, fourteen years later in fact, in 1726 BCE. A real battle of wills, mind games and trying to out smart the other is the core of Laban and Jacob’s relationship. This must have grown wearisome to say the least for Jacob after thirty-four** years. It is though, another six years in 1720 BCE before Jacob finally has had enough and the call to return home to his parents has grown irresistible. 

At some point, Jacob’s mother Rebekah dies and whether this influences Jacob’s return is not known. There are two schools of thought from Rabbis. The first is that Rebekah died at the age of 133 years in 1724 BCE, twenty-seven years before Isaac. Her death would have occurred prior to Jacob’s return to his parents’ home; ‘and it was [possibly] coincident with that of Deborah’ – Genesis 35:8. Her decease is not mentioned because Jacob had not arrived in time; so Esau was the only son present to attend to her burial. 

One tradition holds the ‘ceremony was performed at night out of shame that her coffin should be followed by a son like Esau.’ Alternatively, according to the Book of Jubilees 31:8-11, 48, Jacob, when he arrived home, found his mother alive; and she afterward accompanied him to Beth-el to accomplish his vow – Genesis 28:19-20. 

This would mean Rebekah died at the age of 155 years in 1702 BCE, some five years before Isaac’s death (Jubilees 35:1, 41), thus determining that her age when she married was twenty years old, while Isaac was forty. It is this version, which would be considered the more accurate. 

Most readers assume that Jacob worked for Laban for twenty** years, yet the biblical math does not support this premise. An unknown author assist in providing the correct explanation: 

“In Genesis chapter 30 we find the entire account of Laban talking Jacob out of leaving Haran following the birth of Joseph, and Jacob agreeing to stay on and work for some of Laban’s livestock. But note the statement in Genesis 30:36, where it is noted that Laban separates himself from Jacob by 3 days journey. Now if Jacob is separated 3 days journey from Laban then he is certainly no longer in Laban’s house (Genesis 31:41). And so the 20 years mentioned in Genesis 31:41 cannot include the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban. Thus, it appears that there were two separate 20 years periods, one in which Jacob lived in Laban’s house (verse 41), and another in which Jacob lived in Haran but outside of Laban’s house (verse 38), which included the 6 years in which Jacob lived 3 days journey from Laban.  

In all likelihood, the 20 years in Haran but outside Laban’s house included the 14 years working for Laban’s daughters as well as the 6 years working for Laban’s livestock. All together this would mean that Jacob was in Haran for a total of 40 years, not just 34 years, and certainly not just 20 years. And so Jacob would have come to Haran at 57 years old (6 years before Ishmael died), and stayed until 97 years old before returning to Canaan. Now recall one of the difficulties of Jacob being in Haran for only 20 years is that this forces him to have 12 children in just 7 years, and forces Joseph to be roughly the same age as his brothers, making Genesis 37:3 (i.e., Joseph the son of Jacob’s old age) nonsensical.  

But now that we see Jacob was in Haran for 40 years, this allows Jacob to start having children when he was 64 years old (7 years after coming to Haran at 57 years old). In which case it is very much possible that all of Jacob’s children were born by the time he was 76 years old, with the exception of Joseph, who we know wasn’t born until 15 years later when Jacob was 91 years old.  Now in this scenario the statement of Genesis 37:3 makes much more sense, given that Joseph was born when Jacob was 91 years old and his other children much earlier, when Jacob was probably between the ages of 64 and 76 years old.”

Genesis 31:1-55

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now Jacob heard that the sons of Laban were saying, “Jacob has taken all that was our father’s [Bethuel], and from what was our father’s he has gained all this wealth.” 

2 And Jacob saw that Laban did not regard him with favor as before. 3 Then the Lord said to Jacob, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your kindred, and I will be with you.”

4 So Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah into the field where his flock was 5 and said to them, “I see that your father does not regard me with favor as he did before. But the God of my father has been with me. 6 You know that I have served your father with all my strength, 7 yet your father has cheated me and changed my wages ten times…14 Then Rachel and Leah answered and said to him, “Is there any portion or inheritance left to us in our father’s house? 15 Are we not regarded by him as foreigners? For he has sold us, and he has indeed devoured our money. 16 All the wealth that God has taken away from our father belongs to us and to our children. Now then, whatever God has said to you, do.”

17 So Jacob arose and set his sons and his wives on camels. 18 He drove away all his livestock, all his property that he had gained, the livestock in his possession that he had acquired in Paddan-aram^ [refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans], to go to the land of Canaan to his father Isaac. 19 Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole her father’s household gods. 20 And Jacob tricked Laban the Aramean^, by not telling him that he intended to flee. 21 He fled with all that he had and arose and crossed the Euphrates, and set his face toward the hill country of Gilead [the future territory of the half tribe of East Manasseh].

22 When it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob had fled, 23 he took his kinsmen with him and pursued him for seven days and followed close after him into the hill country of Gilead. 24 But God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream by night and said to him, “Be careful not to say anything to Jacob, either good or bad.”

25 And Laban overtook Jacob… 26 And Laban said to Jacob, “What have you done, that you have tricked me and driven away my daughters like captives of the sword? 27 Why did you flee secretly and trick me, and did not tell me, so that I might have sent you away with mirth and songs, with tambourine and lyre? 28 And why did you not permit me to kiss my [grandsons] and my daughters farewell? Now you have done foolishly… 30 And now you have gone away because you longed greatly for your father’s house, but why did you steal my gods?” 31 Jacob answered and said to Laban, “Because I was afraid, for I thought that you would take your daughters from me by force. 

32 Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live. In the presence of our kinsmen point out what I have that is yours, and take it.” Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them. 33 So Laban went into Jacob’s tent and into Leah’s tent and into the tent of the two female servants, but he did not find them. And he went out of Leah’s tent and entered Rachel’s. 34 Now Rachel had taken the household gods and put them in the camel’s saddle and sat on them. Laban felt all about the tent, but did not find them. 35 And she said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me.” [an outright lie perhaps or fortunate timing] So he searched but did not find the household gods.

36 Then Jacob became angry and berated Laban. Jacob said to Laban, “What is my offense? What is my sin, that you have hotly pursued me? 38 These twenty years I have been with you. 

Your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried, and I have not eaten the rams of your flocks. 39 What was torn by wild beasts I did not bring to you. I bore the loss of it myself… 40 There I was: by day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night, and my sleep fled from my eyes. 41 These twenty years I have been in your house. I served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for your flock, and you have changed my wages ten times. 42 If the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac, had not been on my side, surely now you would have sent me away empty-handed. God saw my affliction and the labor of my hands and rebuked you last night.”

43 Then Laban answered and said to Jacob, “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine. But what can I do this day for these my daughters or for their children whom they have borne? 44 Come now, let us make a covenant, you and I. And let it be a witness between you and me.” 45 So Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. 46 And Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones.” And they took stones and made a heap, and they ate there by the heap… 48 Laban said, “This heap is a witness between you and me today… The Lord watch between you and me, when we are out of one another’s sight. 50 If you oppress my daughters, or if you take wives besides my daughters, although no one is with us, see, God is witness between you and me.”

51 Then Laban said to Jacob… 53 The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor [Laban’s grandfather], the God of their father, judge between us.” So Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac… 55 Early in the morning Laban arose and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned home.’

An amicable parting and agreement to not do each other any harm. Jacob, with the Creator’s help extricated himself from a difficult domestic noose. Jacob and Esau’s reconciliation in 1720 BCE was discussed in the preceding chapter. The Book of Jubilees contains additional details. 

Book of Jubilees 29:5-20

29:5 ‘… Jacob turned his face toward Gilead in the first month [March/April], on the twenty-first thereof [what would become the seventh and last Holy day of Unleavened Bread]. And Laban pursued after him and overtook Jacob in the mountain of Gilead in the third month [May/June], on the thirteenth thereof… 7 And Laban spoke to Jacob. And on the fifteenth [full moon, Sabbath] of those days Jacob made a feast for Laban, and for all who came with him, and Jacob swore to Laban that day, and Laban also to Jacob, that neither should cross the mountain of Gilead to the other with evil purpose

8 And he made there a heap for a witness; wherefore the name of that place is called: ‘The Heap of Witness’… 9 But before they used to call the land of Gilead the land of the Rephaim… and the Rephaim were born (there), giants whose height was ten [15 feet], nine, eight down to seven [10’ 6’’] cubits. 10 And their habitation was from the land of the children of Ammon to Mount Hermon, and the seats of their kingdom were Karnaim and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, and Misur, and Beon. 

11 And Yahweh destroyed them because of the evil of their deeds; for they were very malignant, and the Amorites dwelt in their stead, wicked and sinful, and there is no people today which has wrought to the full all their sins, and they have no longer length of life on the earth. 13 And he passed over the Jabbok in the ninth month [November/December], on the eleventh thereof [in 1720 BCE]. And on that day Esau, his brother, came to him, and he was reconciled to him, and departed from him to the land of Seir, but Jacob dwelt in tents.

14 And… he crossed the Jordan, and dwelt beyond the Jordan, and he pastured his sheep from the sea of the heap unto Bethshan, and unto Dothan and unto the forest of Akrabbim. 15 And he sent to his father Isaac of all his substance, clothing, and food, and meat, and drink, and milk, and butter, and cheese, and some dates of the valley. 16 And to his mother Rebecca also four times a year, between the times of the months, between ploughing and reaping, and between autumn and the rain (season) and between winter and spring.… 

17 For Isaac had returned from the ‘Well of the Oath’ and gone up to the tower of his father Abraham [‘on the mountains of Hebron’], and he dwelt there apart from his son Esau [estranged]. 18 For in the days when Jacob went to Mesopotamia, Esau took to himself a wife Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael, and he gathered together all the flocks of his father [Isaac] and his wives, and went up and dwelt on Mount Seir, and left Isaac his father at the ‘Well of the Oath’ alone… [that is, he took his inheritance early and took what was Isaac’s wealth – recall Issac was old and blind] 20 And thitherJacob sent all that he did send to his father and his mother from time to time, all they needed, and they blessed Jacob with all their heart and with all their soul.’

Next, we learn of Jacob’s change of name, a specification on his blessing and the death of his wife Rachel followed by his father Isaac’s passing.

Genesis 35:1-21

English Standard Version

‘God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there. Make an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you fled from your brother Esau.” 2 So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Put away the foreign gods that are among you and purify yourselves and change your garments. 3 Then let us arise and go up to Bethel, so that I may make there an altar to the God who answers me in the day of my distress and has been with me wherever I have gone.” 4 So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that they had, and the rings that were in their ears. Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree that was near Shechem.

5 And as they journeyed, a terror from God fell upon the cities that were around them, so that they did not pursue the sons of Jacob. 6 And Jacob came to Luz (that is, Bethel), which is in the land of Canaan, he and all the people who were with him, 7 and there he built an altar and called the place El-bethel, because there God had revealed himself to him when he fled from his brother. 8 And Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died, and she was buried under an oak below Bethel. So he called its name Allon-bacuth.

9 God appeared to Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-aram, and blessed him. 10 And God said to him, “Your name is Jacob; no longer shall your name be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name.” So he called his name Israel.

11 And God said to him, “I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body [this was not fulfilled by the Edomite-Jew].

12 The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you.” 13 Then God went up from him in the place where he had spoken with him. 14 And Jacob set up a pillar in the place where he had spoken with him, a pillar of stone. He poured out a drink offering on it and poured oil on it. 15 So Jacob called the name of the place where God had spoken with him Bethel.’

Verse eleven is applied to Jacob, yet we will find that it is specifically addressing Joseph and Judah in the future. In fact, Joseph’s part of the verse is split between his sons Manasseh and Ephraim. From Judah would issue kings, and from Manasseh a nation and from Ephraim, a company of nations. There is another way of interpreting the verse and that is the nation is Joseph and the company of nations are the remaining ten brothers and their specific inheritances. 

The Hebrew word for nation is goy [H1471] and is translated: nation (374 times), heathen (143), Gentiles (30) and people (11). We will study this further when we investigate Manasseh and Ephraim – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. Alternative translations for this verse include: 

MSG: … A nation – a whole company of nations! – will come from you.

NLT: … You will become a great nation, even many nations.

VOICE: … You will give rise to a great nation; indeed nation after nation will come from you.

Genesis: 16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor. 17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son [2/12].” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni [son of my sorrow or son of my strength]; but his father called him Benjamin [son of the right hand].

19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem), 20 and Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb. It is the pillar of Rachel’s tomb, which is there to this day. 21 Israel journeyed on and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder.’

As Benjamin was considerably younger than Joseph – who had been born in 1726 BCE and was himself fourteen years younger than Zebulun and Dinah, arriving in Egypt at the age of seventeen in 1709 BCE, coupled with Jospeh not having known Benjamin, until he met him in Egypt in 1687 BCE and the fact that Benjamin is described as a ‘little one’ or a boy, who was given extra servings of food by Joseph – an age of twelve (plus or minus 2 to 3 years) is plausible, when Joseph was age 39 or 40. This means a birth of circa 1699 BCE for Benjamin as well as the untimely early death of his mother Rachel, at the age of seventy-five.

Book of Jubilees 36 

21 ‘And Leah his wife died… and he buried her in the double cave near Rebecca his mother to the left of the grave of Sarah, his father’s mother. 23 And all her sons and his sons came to mourn over Leah his wife with him and to comfort him regarding her, for he was lamenting her for he loved her exceedingly after Rachel her sister died; 24 For she was perfect and upright in all her ways and honored Jacob, and all the days that she lived with him he did not hear from her mouth a harsh word, for she was gentle and peaceable and upright and honorable. 24 And he remembered all her deeds which she had done during her life and he lamented her exceedingly; for he loved her with all his heart and with all his soul.’

A difficult start to their marriage, with Leah being relegated behind Rachel to the point of ‘hatred’ must have mercifully eased over time and particularly after Rachel’s death. We saw earlier that though Leah wasn’t unattractive, possessing a gentle disposition, she was in the shadow of her outgoing and alluring sister. Rachel is a definite reminder of Rebekah and Leah has a certain hint of Sarah about her. Leah dies after Rachel her twin, yet apparently before Jacob travels to Egypt in 1687 BCE, as Leah is buried in Hebron. This means she died rather early herself, somewhere between seventy-five and eighty-seven years of age. If we say eighty-five, then she would have had ten years with Jacob after her sister died. Her death may have acted as a further prompt for Jacob to depart to Egypt during the famine. 

It is worth noting that Jacob just prior to his death, was inspired to split the family blessing, so that a son of Rachel received the physical birthright blessing of prosperity and a son of Leah received the spiritual blessing of the Messianic line and promise – in the ongoing war begun in Genesis 3:15. Leah’s elevation in Jacob’s and the Creator’s eyes may have played a part in this fateful decision. 

We will complete learning about Jacob’s latter life when we study Joseph.

The subject of the so-called Ten Lost Tribes is a voluminous one and many works have been undertaken to expound on it. Some are better than others and a number contain considerable detail. 

It is not the aim to rehash these when they are already available and have intrinsic value and merit; yet some consideration to this aspect of the sons of Jacob is required as background and has relevancy with their migratory routes from what is now Palestine to the British Isles – either by way of the Mediterranean, southern Europe and Ireland, or via south-central Asia and across Europe to Scandinavia and finally Britain. The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints (Mormons), have an interest in the subject and regrettably misinterpreted the American Indian as one of the lost tribes – refer Chapter III Tiras the Amerindian. A series of Mormon articles address the topic. 

What Became of the Tribes of Israel? – emphasis & bold mine:

‘How long Israel remained in Assyria after they had been carried away captive by Sargon II is not known. In the Apocrypha, Esdras describes the following vision: “But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt, that they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land. And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river. For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. Then dwelt they there until the latter time.” (2 Esdras 13:41-46.) Elder George Reynolds commented on the direction of the travels of the tribes of Israel: 

“They determined to go to a country ‘where never man dwelt,’ that they might be free from all contaminating influences. That country could only be found in the north. Southern Asia was already the seat of a comparatively ancient civilization; Egypt flourished in northern Africa; and southern Europe was rapidly filling with the future rulers of the world. They had therefore no choice but to turn their faces northward. The first portion of their journey was not however north; according to the account of Esdras, they appear to have at first moved in the direction of their old home; and it is possible that they originally started with the intention of returning thereto; or probably, in order to deceive the Assyrians, they started as if to return to Canaan, and when they crossed the Euphrates and were out of danger from the hosts of Medes and Persians, then they turned their journeying feet toward the polar star” – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

Elder Reynolds’s explanation takes into account the numerous prophecies that indicate that when the ten lost tribes return, they will come out of the northWhere they went is not known, and this fact has led to much speculation about their present whereabouts. The Lord has not seen fit to reveal their location, however, and until He does so, it is useless to try to identify their present locality.’

This is quite a statement, of defeat. One wonders how would the Lord reveal the tribes whereabouts… and when would He decide to? Would the Mormons be open to a source that did not derive from within their own Church? 

The Return of the Ten Tribes – emphasis mine:

‘The prophets of old saw that in the last dispensation, the dispensation of the fulness of times, would come a complete gathering and restoration of the house of Israel… though the main body of ten of the tribes is lost, there are representatives of all twelve tribes scattered throughout the earth. This statement can be explained as follows:

When Assyria attacked the Northern Kingdom, many fled to the safety of the Southern Kingdom. As the ten tribes traveled north, some stopped along the way – many possibly being scattered throughout Europe and Asia.’

According to the article, the tribes of the northern Kingdom of Israel, either just disappeared amongst the southern Kingdom of Judah, or as they travelled, numbers of them split off and vanished amongst other peoples and nations. 

The Lost Tribes to Come to Zion – emphasis mine:

‘In [the] April conference of 1916, Elder James E. Talmage… spoke of the lost tribes and their records: 

“There is a tendency among men to explain away what they don’t wish to understand in literal simplicity, and we, as Latter-day Saints are not entirely free from the taint of that tendency… Some people say that prediction is to be explained in this way: A gathering is in progress, and has been in progress from the early days of this Church; and thus the ‘Lost Tribes’ are now being gathered; but that we are not to look for the return of any body of people now unknown as to their whereabouts. True, the gathering is in progress, this is a gathering dispensation; but the prophecy stands that the tribes shall be brought forth from their hiding place… [and their] scriptures shall become one with the scriptures of the Jews, the holy Bible…”

Then in [the] October conference, Elder Talmage spoke again of the lost tribes and made this remarkable prediction: 

“The ten tribes shall come; they are not lost unto the Lord; they shall be brought forth as hath been predicted; and I say unto you there are those now living – aye, some here present – who shall live to read the records of the Lost Tribes of Israel, which shall be made one with the record of the Jews, or the Holy Bible…”  

The ten tribes, however, are to eventually receive their land inheritance with Judah … In that day will be fulfilled the statement of Jeremiah: “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers”(Jeremiah 3:18). Elder Orson Pratt stated further: 

“By and by, when all things are prepared – when the Jews have received their scourging, and Jesus has descended upon the Mount of Olives, the ten tribes will leave Zion, and will go to Palestine, to inherit the land that was given to their ancient fathers, and it will be divided amongst the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by the inspiration of the Holy [Spirit]. They will go there to dwell in peace in their own land from that time, until the earth shall pass away. But Zion, after their departure, will still remain upon the western hemisphere [the United States], and she will be crowned with glory as well as old Jerusalem [true Jerusalem, not the city by that name in the state of Israel – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe], and, as the Psalmist David says, she will become the joy of the whole earth.’

These series of articles raise a seemingly small issue, with enormous repercussions if understood incorrectly, that until now has been just that… misunderstood. The scriptures pertaining to Judah and Israel being reunited are part of the blessing that was given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The blessing wasn’t just to dwell in Canaan and that was the fulfilment – Genesis 28:14*. Punishment was promised to the Israelites if they erred grievously from the commandments, laws and statutes of the Creator – Deuteronomy 28:37, 64; Hosea 1:9; 3:4. It was prophesied that they would be sifted as a people or peoples – not individually and therefore completely lost – amongst the nations (Ezekiel 11:16). 

Isaiah 8:16-18

Common English Bible

‘Bind up the testimony; seal up the teaching among my disciples. I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden his face from the house of Jacob, and I will hope in God. Look! I and the children the Lord gave me are signs and wonders in Israel from the Lord of heavenly forces, who lives on Mount Zion.’

The remnants of the two kingdoms would eventually re-unite as Jeremiah predicted. Christianity has, due to a misidentification of Judah, erroneously believed that the Jews – who are not Judah – and Israel have not yet re-united and that it will take place after the second coming of the Son of Man. Of course, the reason why Christians believe this error, is because they have swallowed the falsehood that Judah – falsely believed to be the Jews – were never lost and that only Israel was lost. The truth of the matter is that all twelve – actually thirteen tribes – went into respective captivities. All were sifted, all migrated, all arrived in Ireland and Britain and then travelled beyond. For they have all either been in a process of leaving* the British Isles, or are experiencing different evolving political statuses with regard to their allegiance to the very kingship of Judah… which will be explained.

The nations comprising the sons of Jacob are predicted to go into captivity one more time before the advent of the Messiah and this period in the Bible is referred to as the time of Jacob’s trouble, or the Great tribulation. 

The state of Israel (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – which is not the tribe of Judah, nor does it comprise true Israelites – is not going to dwell with them, before the end of this age or afterwards. The land that the Jews have usurped from the Palestinian Arabs, will be given to the Israelites during the millennial rule of the Son of Man.

Events came to a head during the reign of King Solomon, whom we have discussed in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; articles: Thoth; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. His evil led to the splitting of the United Kingdom after his death in 930 BCE at the age of sixty-nine. Solomon was born in 999 BCE and began his reign as king in 970 BCE, initiating the building of the Temple in 966 BCE and completing it in 960 BCE. It was exactly 480 years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple – 1 Kings 6:1. King Solomon’s son, Rehoboam became king, born in 971 BCE to Solomon’s Ammonite wife, Naamah – Article: Na’amah. Rehoboam ruled seventeen years until his death at the age of fifty-eight in 913 BCE. 

The Kingdom was rent in two, when Jeroboam became king of the tear away Israelite tribes of the north. Jeroboam ruled until 910 BCE. Jeroboam was the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite (from the tribe of Ephraim) and Solomon’s servant – 1 Kings 11:26, 28. Jeroboam was a ‘mighty man of valour’ and Solomon recognising his worth, had made him ruler over all the charge of the House of Jospeh. 

It was some two hundred years later that the Kingdom of Israel went into captivity to the mighty Assyrian Empire from 721 to 718 BCE – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. Josephus confirms their existence at the time of Christ when he wrote: ‘The entire body of the ten tribes are still beyond the Euphrates, an immense multitude not to be estimated by number.’ The early Church recognised that the tribes of Israel were ‘scattered abroad’ – James 1:1. The Israelites were planted by the Assyrians, in Media – refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes, located in modern Iran (2 Kings 17:6). 

It should come as no surprise that there is considerable debate regarding certain words and terms for historical peoples and equating them with the Lost Tribes. Identity believers place great credence in them, worldly scholars are very derisory and certain historians are somewhere in between. It appears to this writer that there is some correlation and substance to the argument and that a meeting in the middle would be mature, rational and scholastically honourable. We will look at examples and the reader can deduce for themselves. The key words used in this line of reasoning are the base words Isaac and the disobedient Israelite King Omri (885 to 874 BCE). 

The full evolution of the etymological argument are the words Saxon and Celt, respectively. The words in between are numerous and varied. It is argued that the initial I of Isaac as a vowel was dropped and the name became known as Sakki, Saka, Sakka, Saaca, Sacae, Sacasone and Saxe

This word apparently, is also linked to Scyth and therefore the name Scythian. Though, the term Scythian includes other peoples that were not Israelites, such as the Turanian Scythians unrelated to the Sacae Scythians. This no doubt has led some scholars to be sceptical of equating the sons of Jacob with Scythians in general and thus they have rejected the argument in its entirety instead of recognising the subset within. The first appearance of the Scythians in Central Asia occurred during the reign of the Assyrian King Sargon between 722 to 705 BCE. Exactly the time period of the fall of the Kingdom of Israel and the subsequent flight of Israelites out of Canaan. 

The Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! Steven M Collins, 1992 – emphasis mine:

‘Herodotus, a Greek historian of the fifth century B.C., notes that the Scythians were interspersed with less civilized people. He describes the non­-civilized nations of the steppes thusly: 

“the Man­Eaters, a tribe that is entirely peculiar and not Scythian at all… [and] the Black Cloaks, another tribe which is not Scythian at all.”

Herodotus confirms the civilized qualities of the Scythians and the backwardness of the non­-Scythian tribes in the following words. 

“The Euxine Pontus [the Black Sea]… contains – except for the Scythians – the stupidest nations in the world.” 

Colonel Gawler cites Epiphanius as stating “the laws, customs, and manner of the Scythians were received by other nations as the standards of policy, civility, and polite learning.” He also cites the following from book viii, iii, 7 of Strabo’s Geography: 

“… ‘but the Scythians governed by good laws…’ And this is still the opinion entertained of them by the Greeks; for we esteem them the most sincere, the least deceitful of any people, and much more frugal and self­-relying than ourselves.” 

Zenaide Ragozin’s, Media, states: 

“…Scythians was not a race name at all, but one promiscuously used, for all remote, little known, especially nomadic peoples of the north and northeast, denoting tribes…of Turanian as of Indo­European stock: to the latter the Scythians of Russia are now universally admitted to have belonged.” 

The Scythian tag included a broad range of peoples, wherein the newly arrived Israelites were enveloped. Unlike the rest, these Scythians – the future Saxons – exhibited traits of a civilised, not an uncouth society, which were respected by their fellow ‘cultured’ relatives descended from Moab and Ammon (the French today), the later Greeks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran

Words derived from Omri, include: Ghomri, Kimerioi, Khumri and Cymry which likely easily evolved into the terms Cimmerii, Cimmerian and later, Celt. A similar tribe in Central Asia were known as the Massagetae, possibly associated with Jospeh’s son Manasseh – Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. The ‘c’ in Cimmerian is pronounced with an ‘s’ which is remarkably similar to the capital of the northern Kingdom of Israel, Samaria. The original Samarians had been taken captive by Assyria and transplanted to the cities of the Medes. These ‘Simmerians’ had appeared out of nowhere, yet an historical account states that the Assyrian King Esarhaddon in 674 BCE confronted an alliance of Median and ‘newly-arrived Cimmerian’ forces.* 

Samuel Lysons in his book, Our British Ancestors: Who and What Were They? 1865, linked the Cimmerians ‘to be the same people with the Gauls or Celts under a different name.’ Historian George Rawlinson wrote: ‘We have reasonable grounds for regarding the Gimirri, or Cimmerians, who first appeared on the confines of Assyria and Media in the seventh century B.C., and the Sacae of the Behistun Rock, nearly two centuries later, as identical with the Beth-Khumree of Samaria, or the Ten Tribes of the House of Israel.’ 

Danish linguistic scholar Anne Kristensen confirms: ‘There is scarcely reason, any longer, to doubt the exciting and verily astonishing assertion propounded by the students of the Ten Tribes that the Israelites deported from Bit Humria, of the House of ‘Omri, are identical with the Gimirraja of the Assyrian sources. Everything indicates that Israelite deportees did not vanish from the picture but that, abroad, under new conditions, they continued to leave their mark on history.’

There were two main branches of Celts. The Goidelic Celts from whom the Gaels of Ireland descend and the Brythonic (or Brittonic) Celts from whom the Welsh and a proportion of the people of Brittany in France descend – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gadthe Celtic Tribes. 

The famous King Darius of Persia, inscribed on a rock in northern Iran: ‘This kingdom that I hold is from Sakka (the region where the Israelites lived) which is beyond Sogdiana to Kush and from India to Sardis.’ Those scholars who disagree with equating any of the Scythians or Cimmerians with the lost tribes, do not then provide an alternative, viable identity (apart from scattering); so it is a little difficult to entertain their arguments in a serious vein. 

Amos 7:16

English Standard Version

Now therefore hear the word of the Lord. You say, ‘Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not preach against the house of Isaac.’^

Jeremiah 3:11-12

English Standard Version

‘And the Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel has shown herself more righteous than treacherous Judah. Go, and proclaim these words toward the north”, and say, “Return, faithless Israel, declares the Lord. I will not look on you in anger, for I am merciful”, declares the Lord; “I will not be angry forever.”

We learn from the prophet Amos that the Israelites, specifically the Kingdom of Israel were known by the names Israel and Isaac. From the prophet Jeremiah, we find out that tribes of Israel were living due north of Jerusalem, not to the north east as those who were transplanted to the cities of the Medes. This is a different body of people, located in the Black Sea region. 

Certain Scythians migrated westward from Central Asia to southern Russia, Ukraine and eastern Europe. Approximately 300 to 100 BCE these Scythians migrated north west to Scandinavia. The Cimmerians steered a more southerly route through the Caucasus region and Asia Minor. At the time of Paul, the early church congregation of the Galatians (directly linked to the word Gaul), were believed to comprise Israelites (Cimmerians), from the ‘lost sheep of the House of Israel.’ About 650 BCE the first waves of Cimmerians migrated westwards through southern Europe, arriving in Gaul in northern France, then venturing onto Britain. The Scythians and Cimmerians were infinitely kinsmen, with the Encyclopaedia Britannica calling the Cimmerians** a ‘Scythian tribe.’ 

Historian Tamara Rice confirms: ‘The Scythians did not become a recognizable national entity much before the eighth century B.C… By the seventh century B.C. they had established themselves firmly in southern Russia… Assyrian documents place their appearance there in the time of King Sargon (722-705 B.C.), a date which closely corresponds with that of the establishment of the first group of Scythians in southern Russia.’

Boris Piotrovsky adds: ‘Two groups, Cimmerians** and Scythians, seem to be referred to in Urartean and Assyrian texts, but it is not always clear whether the terms indicate two distinct peoples or simply mounted nomads… The Assyrians used Cimmerians* in their army as mercenaries; with a legal document dated 679 B.C. referring to an Assyrian ‘commander of the Cimmerian regiment’, but in other Assyrian documents they are called “the seed of runaways who know neither vows to the gods nor oaths.”

When the Kingdom of Urartu (refer Chapter XVII Lud & Iran) crumbled, the Scythians established themselves in northern Persia (modern Iran), occupying Urartu and setting up a capital at Sak-iz (Isaac?). 

Origin, Yair Davidiy – capitalisation his, emphasis & bold mine:

‘In addition to exile by land there was also an enforced maritime transportation: Amos (4:3) refers to the “cows of Bashan” “in the mountain of Samaria” (Amos 4:1) many of whom will be taken away in sailing vessels and the rest shall be cast “into the palace”. “Into the palace” has been translated from the Hebrew word “Harmona” which is also translatable as meaning “To the Mountain of Mannae”… Mannae was in the general area of Armenia to which Jewish and local sources say the  Israelites were taken . 

Amos said: HEAR, THIS WORD, YE KINE OF BASHAN, THAT ARE IN THE MOUNTAIN OF SAMARIA, WHICH OPPRESS THE POOR, WHICH CRUSH THE NEEDY, WHO SAY TO THEIR HUSBANDS, BRING, AND LET US DRINK… HE WILL TAKE YOU AWAY IN BIG SHIPS AND THOSE WHO REMAIN IN FISHING BOATS. EACH WOMAN WILL BE CARRIED STRAIGHT OUT THROUGH THE BREACHES AND CAST OUT BEYOND THE MOUNTAINS OF MANNAE” (Amos 4:1-3). The words rendered… as “BIG SHIPS” [Hebrew: “tsinot”] and as “FISHING BOATS” [“sirot-dugah”] are direct translations from the Hebrew. 

The verse in the Hebrew Bible may therefore be understood as saying that one part of the exiles would be taken away in large and small sailing vessels and another part would be exiled to Mannae where the exiled Israelite “Cimmerians” and Scythians indeed appeared. “Isles of the Sea” [refers]… primarily to the Isles of Britain. Getting to the “Isles of the Sea” entails travel by boat. 

The expressions “Isles of the Sea” (Isaiah 11:11), “Way of the Sea” (Isaiah 9:10), “large boats”, and “fishing-boats” (Amos 4:1-3) in connection with the exile of Northern Israel is consistent with transportation by sea which was logistically possible at that time and had been effected in other cases by Phoenician seafarers. Israelites had participated in Phoenician seafaring ventures. 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel were conquered and exiled… by the Assyrian [monarch], Tiglathpileser. The later Assyrian rulers Shalmaneser, Sargon, and Sennacherib were responsible for exiling the remainder. Tiglathpileser (745-727 BCE) had been responsible for transforming the Assyrian Empire from a powerful but decaying entity to [a] major world power. Prior to his reign Assyria had been seriously threatened by the kingdom of Urartu to the north of Assyria. Urartu was centered around Lake Van (in Armenia), and had exercised suzerainty over Mannae, over the region of Gozan at the headwaters of the Khabur river, and also over parts of Cilicia with its port of Anatolian Tarsis. 

The Assyrians took their cavalry horses to Mannae for training. Mannae was between Assyria and Urartu and linked to both of them. It was one of the major places to which Israelites had been exiled. Mannae was also one of the first regions from which the Cimmerians were first reported, “The Cimmerians went forth from the midst of Mannae,” says an Assyrian inscription. Mannae was also destined to become a Scythian centre.

The Scythians were one and the same people as the Cimmerians or at any rate Scythians and Cimmerians were: “… two groups of people who seem inclined to operate in the same geographical zones, and whose names seem to be interchangeable already in the Assyrian sources”. There were three main groups of people in the Cimmerian and Scythian forces: Cimmerians, Scyths, and Guti or Goths.’

The Guti (or Goths) were not Israelites – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil

Davidiy: ‘Cimmerians and Scyths were frequently confused with each other by foreigners and by historians. “SAKAI” is the name later given in Persian inscriptions to the Scyths. In Afghanistan the appellation, “SAK” (from Saka) was much later understood to be a form of the Hebrew “Isaac”. Other names applied to the Scythians such as Zohak (by the Persians), and Ishkuzai (by the Assyrians) support the “Isaac” equation. 

Van Loon identifies a people in north Armenia (near Lake Leninkan close to the border with Iberia in Georgia) named “ISQI-GULU” as Scythians. “ISQI-GULU” is the equivalent of “ISAACI-Golu”! i.e. “The Exiles of Isaac” since “Golu” in Hebrew connotes ‘exiled”. Variations of the name Isaac were applied to the Scythians who in many respects were identical with (or identified as) the Cimmerians. A city named after the Cimmerians and called Gymrias or Gamir was to be found in the ISQI-GULU area. This city in Armenian was later referred to as “Kumayri” and this name is considered a sign of Cimmerian presence as well as being an alternate Assyrian pronunciation of “Omri” which was the name they gave to northern Israel.

In a few inscriptions the Scythians are referred to as Iskuzai (Ishkuzai) or Askuzai (Ashkuzai) though usually they are called either Sakai or Uman Manda or Gimiri like the Cimmerians. M.N. van Loon wished to emphasize this point: “It should be made clear from the start that the terms ‘Cimmerian’ and ‘Scythian’ were interchangeable: in Akkadian the name Iskuzai (Asguzai) occurs only exceptionally. Gimirrai (Gamir) was the normal designation for ‘Cimmerians’ as well as ‘Scythians’ in Akkadian.”

Both Cimmerians and Scyths were combinations in differing proportions of the same groups. The Cimmerians (i.e. West Scythians) were defeated by the Assyrians and disappeared. The East Scythians (Sakai) remained however for a time in the Middle East area, gained control of the Assyrian Empire, and eventually took the leading role in devastating the Assyrian cities. They too were destined to suffer defeat (at the hands of their Median and Babylonian allies who betrayed and ambushed them) and to be driven northwards, beyond the Caucasus Mountains into the steppe areas of southern Russia (“Scythia”) whence they ultimately continued westward into Europe. 

The Cimmerians were driven westward. They invaded Phrygia, Lydia, and Ionia. These States were all in modern day Turkey. Ultimately the Cimmerians to the west of Assyria were to be defeated and to leave the area of Turkey, crossing the Bosporus and advancing into Europe. They became the dominant factor of Celtic civilization, the Galatae of Gaul, the Cimbri of Scandinavia, and the Cymry of Britain. Homer and other Greeks reported Cimmerians in Britain at an early date. 

The Scythians in the north split into two sections, one was to the north of the Caucasus west of the Caspian Sea and the other was east of the Caspian. The Scythians in the west at an early stage sent offshoots into Europe who joined the Cimmerians already there. Later the Western Scythians migrated to Scandinavia, which at first was named “Scath-anavia” in their honor, and to Germany. The Mesopotamians and Persians called all of the Scythians “Sakae”, while the Greeks called them “Scythians”. 

Modern historians in order to distinguish between the two sections of Scythians often use the term “Scythian” to refer to those Scythians from west of the Caspian Sea and north of the Caucasus, while “Sakae” is used for those situated east of the Caspian. The Scythian-Sakae were also known as “Sexe” and as “Saxon” and the Anglo-Saxons emerged from them. 

Diodorus Siculus (32:4 7) linked the Cimmerians of old, the Galatians, and the Cimbri altogether. Plutarch (in “Marius”) reported the opinion that the Cimmerians, Cimbri, and Scythians, were in effect all members of the one nation whom he calls “Celto- Scythians”. Homer placed the Cimmerians in the British Isles as did a poem allegedly written ca. 500 BCE by the Greek Orpheus. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (891 CE) begins by saying that the Britons came from Armenia and the Picts* (of Scotland) from the south of Scythia. “Armenia” is the land of Urartu wherein the Cimmerians had sojourned and from which as an historically identifiable entity they emerged. The idea that the Scots* came from Scythia is found in most legendary accounts of Ireland and Scotland. 

FOR, LO, I WILL COMMAND, AND I WILL SIFT THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AMONG ALL NATIONS, LIKE AS CORN IS SIFTED IN A SIEVE, YET SHALL NOT THE LEAST GRAIN FALL UPON THE EARTH [Amos 9:9].

In east Scythia there had existed settlements of numerous civilized peoples of so-called “Nordic” appearance who disappeared shortly before the Barbarians were first recorded in Western Europe. The “Barbarians” had traditions that they came from Scythia and their artistic styles are actually identical to those known from the Scythian areas. 

They had similar “Shamanistic” Scythian religious beliefs and customs; they wore the same armor, and fought with the same tactics, and they had the same tribal names in the same formations relative to each other as they would later have in the west. The Scythian peoples were destined to disappear from Scythia in the period between 300 BCE to ca. 600 CE. Just as the Scythians were leaving Scythia, they began to appear in the west as “Barbarians” largely after passing through Scandinavia, Pannonia (Hungary), and Germany. 

The Scythian-Gothic nations had emerged from Scythia. In east Scythia, at least in the area east of the Caspian Sea whence the Sacae (Anglo-Saxons) were once centered, Aramaic was spoken. Aramaic is closely related to Hebrew. Some of the Israelite Tribes had spoken Aramaic while others used a type of Hebrew influenced by Aramaic, or Aramaic influenced by Hebrew. Aramaic was one of the official languages of the Assyrian Empire.

The Old Anglo-Saxon English language is a composite dialect and contains many Hebrew words. Linguistically, the west Barbarians may originally have spoken Hebrew or a related Semitic dialect. There is nothing to obviate such a possibility since new languages were sometimes learnt and old ones forgotten in historical experience. The Normans, for instance, came from Scandinavia and settled en-masse in Normandy, France, but within two generations they had forgotten their parent language and knew only French! 

The Germanic languages probably did not exist before 500 BCE. They first appeared in Northern Germany and then spread outwards through conquest and cultural assimilation. It is generally agreed that approximately one-third of all early Germanic vocabulary is of an unknown (non-Indo-European) origin. These languages experienced changes in sounds and grammatical points that are symptomatic of Semitic tongues. Terry Blodgett proved that this additional element was Hebrew. Hebrew speakers must have been part of, or absorbed into, whatever originated the Germanic languages. The people in question had little or no relationship with the present day inhabitants of Germany other than a linguistic connection dating from the time when one group ruled over the other. 

FOR I WILL NO MORE HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; BUT I WILL UTTERLY TAKE THEM AWAY (Hosea 1:6). Judah was not to be exiled with the Ten Tribes, BUT I WILL HAVE MERCY UPON THE HOUSE OF JUDA [Hosea 1:7]. The third child is called “Lo-Ammi” meaning “Not-My-People”. At first the Ten Tribes will be rejected and exiled but later God will return and accept them [Hosea 11:12].

EPHRAIM COMPASSETH ME ABOUT WITH LIES, AND THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL WITH DECEIT: BUT JUDAH YET RULETH WITH GOD, AND IS FAITHFUL WITH THE SAINTS.’

The last sentence is key, in that it is not referring to Canaan but rather Judah’s new home far and away to the northwest of their former lands.

The link between the term Saka and Isaac is explained by Steven Collins as far older in origin than the seventh century BCE – emphasis mine:

‘There are very ancient records of correspondence from Canaanite rulers to the Egyptian Pharaohs desperately calling for help against the powerful invasions of a people called the “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” “Aberi” or “Saga.” These ancient letters were preserved on the famous “Amarna Tablets,” and they apparently record the invasion of Canaan by the Israelites under Joshua! The “Haberi,” “Khaberi,” or “Aberi” are the Hebrews, and the “Saga” are the Saka (the people of Isaac), albeit expressed in Canaanite terms.

Mrs. Sydney Bristowe, in Oldest Letters in the World, wrote in 1923 concerning the Amarna Tablets: 

“The great importance of the Amarna Tablets has not been recognized because apparently, the [translators] have been unwilling to admit that the Israelites are mentioned upon them and that they tell of the conquest of Palestine by Joshua! The translations shown with the tablets now in the British Museum, give little idea of the interest of the letters, the name Haberi, Khaberi or Aberi is hardly seen in these translations, yet that name, appears frequently in the tablets and leading philologists certify that it stands for the Hebrews (Israelites). See Encyclopaedia Brittanica Edition 11, Volume 10, page 78.

Another name mentioned upon the tablets is Saga which is said to be identical with Haberi (Knudtzon, Die El­ Amarna Tafeln, page 51), and is proved to be so by the fact that it occurs upon the Behistan Rock in Persia where, according to Sir Henry Rawlinson, it represents the Israelites (the Sakai or ‘House of Isaac’). 

Dr. Hall (of the British Museum) admits the fact that the tablets tell of the Israelite’s conquest of Palestine, for he writes: “We may definitely, if we accept the identification of the Khabiru as the Hebrews, say that in the Tel-­el­-Amarna letters, we have Joshua’s conquest seen from the Egyptian and Canaanite point of view’ (Ancient History of the Near East, page 409).” 

“It seems very probable that the ‘SA­GAZ’… and… the Khabiru who devastated Canaan… are no other than the invading Hebrews and other desert tribes allied with them… (and after presenting a philological analysis supporting this conclusion, he adds)… In my own, view, the probabilities are all in favour of the identification.” 

‘Herodotus is cited above as stating that the Persians called all Scythians “Sacae (or Saka),” which is the equivalent of the Hebrew/Israelite “Saga” in the much older Amarna Tablets. It appears that the Canaanites knew the Israelite invaders were the “seed of Isaac,” but rendered this name as “Saga” instead of “Saka,” as did the Persians. (The letters “g” and “k” are closely ­related guttural phonetic sounds.) The above evidence that Canaanite and Assyrian sources indicate that the Israelites were known by the name of Isaac prior to their departure from Palestine confirms that it is their descendants who bore the name of Isaac in Scythia after their arrival in Asia.’

Steven Collins continues with various identifying points on the Scythians and their Israelite connection. He also recounts the Scythian’s invasion of Assyria, Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine, beginning in 624 BCE, ultimately contributing to Assyria’s fall as an empire in 612 BCE, with the defeat of their capital Nineveh at the hands of the Medes, Babylonians and… Scythians.

Noteworthy is the fact that the Scythians attacked Calah, burning it, which was the headquarters of the Assyrian army. Revenge against Assyria was one motive for their advance, the second was the liberation of Canaan and their kin, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. 

What is attention grabbing is that the Scythian march through Syria and Palestine was relatively bloodless and the sparing of Jerusalem peculiarly stands out. This only really makes sense if the Scythian hordes were there to liberate their previous homeland and in particular their brother tribes. Wild Asiatic nomads who were in Palestine for the first time, would not have blazed their way through Assyria to then spare city after city of the territory of Judah. 

Herodotus records that ‘for twenty-eight years [624-596 BCE]… the Scythians were masters of Asia…’ This time frame includes the reign of righteous King Josiah (640-609 BCE) of Judah – as well as the life of Jeremiah the prophet – and his reforms to return to the Mosaic Law and restore the Temple in his eighteenth year (622 BCE) – refer rticle: The Ark of God.

Scythian is a Greek term, thus in the Bible, the Scythians (or Sacae) are referred to as the children of Israel in 2 Chronicles 35:17-18. Steven Collins states regarding the withdrawal of the Scythians from Palestine and Mesopotamia, that they would have realised that Canaan was not the Land of Milk and Honey it once was and now principally occupied by hostile foreign people, which they had no desire to subjugate or rule over, with their ‘unwanted customs and lifestyles.’ 

Added to this, was their large population numbers and the compactness of Palestine as an unrealistic region for a people who liked ‘wide open spaces’ to farm their flocks and herds, or to maintain their isolationism policies. Collins quotes Herodotus – emphasis & bold mine – who describes the Scythians as people who:

“… dreadfully avoid the use of foreign customs, and especially those of the Greeks… So careful are the Scythians to guard their own customs, and such are the penalties (Herodotus refers to the death penalty* for pagan religious activity) that they impose on those who take to foreign customs over and above their own.”

‘… evidence of the Israelite origins of the Scythians is found in this comment of Herodotus about the Scythians: “They make no offerings of pigs, nor will they keep them at all in their country.” Such a prohibition is very consistent with the long­standing Hebrew custom of forbidding the use of swine for either consumption or sacrifice because it was an “unclean” animal (Deuteronomy 14:7­8)’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gadthe Celtic Tribes; and article: Red or Green?

‘Another interesting point is that Herodotus records that one of the Scythian kings was named “Saulius.” Given the Hebrew/Israelite background of the Scythians, it would appear that the namesake of this Scythian king was Saul, the first Hebrew king (I Samuel 9). 

Herodotus also records that the Scythians were very zealous in forbidding idolatry and the worship of “foreign gods.” In one instance, King Saulius of Scythia executed* his own brother for participating in the rites of a Greek “mother-goddess” festival and wearing “images” associated with the mother­-goddess…’ – refer article: Asherah.

‘The fact that the Scythians executed, without mercy, even their own rulers and royalty who worshipped the mother­-goddess or other pagan gods (or who kept “images” of such gods and goddesses) shows there was a very strict law among the Scythians against idolatry. Combining the fact that idolatry was a capital offense with the Scythian custom of avoiding swine flesh, it is clear that the Scythians were faithfully practicing two key features of the laws of God given to the Israelites under Moses. This further confirms that many of the Israelites of the ten tribes had experienced a “revival” in their new homeland near the Black Sea. 

Herodotus also records that “The Scythians themselves say that their nation is the youngest of all the nations... [and]… from their first king… to the crossing of Darius into Scythia was, in all, one thousand years-­no more, but just so many.” Colonel Gawler analyzes Herodotus-­record as follows: “Now Darius’ expedition against the Scythians was about 500 B.C., and 1000 years before that brings us to the time of Moses.” Significantly, the Scythians traced their origin as a nation to the approximate time of Moses. It was after the Exodus [in 1446 BCE], under Moses that the Hebrews truly became a nation with their own distinct culture and laws.’ 

The Persian Empire had two major conflicts with the Scythians, one was instigated by Cyrus the Great who reigned from 559 to 530 BCE, against the eastern Scyths, who were situated east of the Caspian Sea and lead by the dominant tribe the Massagetae, which culminated in Cyrus’s death. These tribes comprised the two and a half tribes who had been taken into captivity by the Assyrians prior to the eventual fall of Samaria and are listed in 1 Chronicles 5:26, ESV: ‘So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, the spirit of Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and he took them into exile, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of [East] Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan…’ 

Steven Collins elucidates:

‘Herodotus records that this Persian­-Scythian war resulted from Persian aggression, writing that Cyrus “set his heart on subduing the Massagetae.” The Massagetae were living in peace at the time, and Cyrus launched a war of aggression on them to force them to be his subjects. When Persia’s invasion was imminent, Queen Tomyris sent the following message to Cyrus: “King of the Medes, cease to be so eager to do what you are doing… rule over your own people, and endure to look upon us governing ours” – Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey.

‘It is noteworthy that the Scythians were willing to “live and let live,” but Persia persisted in its aggression. After some initial fighting, Queen Tomyris of the Massagetae offered Cyrus a second chance to cease hostilities and go back to his own land, but warned that “If you do not so, I swear by the sun, the lord of the Massagetae, that, for all your insatiability of blood, I will give you your fill of it.”

… Herodotus described the ensuing battle. 

“Tomyris, since Cyrus would not listen to her, gathered all her host together and fought him. Of all the battles that were fought among the barbarians, I judge this to have been the severest, and indeed my information is that it is so. Long they remained fighting in close combat, and neither side would flee. But finally the Massagetae got the upper hand. Then most of the Persian army died on the spot and, among them, Cyrus himself… Tomyris sought out his corpse among the Persian dead, and…she filled a skin with human blood and fixed his head in the skin, and, insulting over the dead, she said:

‘I am alive and [a] conqueror, but you have… [robbed] me of my son (Tomyris’ son died in the war)… Now… I will give you your fill of blood, even as I threatened.”

‘We do not know the total casualties in this war, but they must have been immense. Persia ruled a vast area and could assemble armies of over a million men. The army which Xerxes assembled against the Greeks was 1,700,000 men, and the army of Darius [522-486 BCE] against the Black Sea Scythians was 700,000 men. Since the expedition against the Massagetae was led by King Cyrus himself, one would expect his army to have numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Yet the Massagetae utterly crushed the Persian army.

It is strange that modern history stresses the histories of the Assyrian and Persian Empires, but in the three great wars fought between their empires and the Scythians, the Scythians decisively won all three. History teaches much about the losers of these wars, but rarely mentions the victorious Scythians.’

A map of the Medo-Persian empire at its extant – note the two enclaves of Israelites, the Massagetae and the Parthians

The Parthians were mentioned briefly in the preceding chapter. For those who would like to pursue the subject of the Parthians, Steven Collins book, Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! is an excellent starting point; where he devotes two full chapters. Though an accord on his final conclusions regarding specific identities is not reached. Even so, his in-depth and pains taking research and presentation is invaluable, being a comprehensive contribution to the subject of the Israelite identity.

In summary: the Parthian Empire sat adjacent to the Roman Empire and as a geo-political counter weight held it in check. Parthia was no small region, for it stretched some nineteen hundred miles east to west and one thousand miles from north to south.

As we have discovered, the Romans are one and the same as the nation of Germany today and their descent is from Abraham’s first son, Ishmael – Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. It is no small coincidence, that the Saxon and Celtic peoples have challenged and curbed the German nation’s warlike aspirations twice in the preceding century, so was their relationship similar during the days of Rome. 

Though Rome invaded ancient Britain, it was never an easy occupation on its western extremity and similarly, on its far eastern border lay a strong empire that remained outside Rome’s control. The genetic, cultural and linguistic ties between the Parthians and (Sacae) Scythians is beyond question and though allies, it was not always a friendly relationship.

What is worth highlighting, is the fascinating connection between Judah and the Parthians. One of the early capitals of Parthia was Dara. Dara (1 Chronicles 2:3-6) was a son of Zerah (or Zarah), who was in turn one of Judah’s sons. Zarah was supplanted at the time of his birth by his twin brother Phares (also Pharez or Perez); as Esau was by Jacob. The name Phares is found repeatedly throughout Parthia. Phares was the ancestor of King David. 

Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… emphasis mine:

‘A Parthian king who ruled in the area of West India was named Gondophares, and several kings ruling over the Caucasus mountain kingdom of Iberia [Caucasus Mountains] were named Pharasmanes Strabo records that the Iberians [from Eber, Genesis 10:21-25] were the kinsmen of the Scythians… many kings of Parthia itself had names indicating that they were also royal members of the Davidic line of Judah. Such names include the key consonants of PH­R­S in Hellenized forms of their Parthian names (such Parthian royal names as Phraates, Phraortes, and Phraataces are examples).’

Collins shows how the Greeks interchanged the consonants B and P and thus the similarity between certain words is significant, particularly as the vowels may change, though the consonants do not. Parthia is PRTH which could easily be BRTH – as in the Hebrew word for covenant, berith. Thus words associated with the peoples of Britain are ostensibly linked and derive from a seemingly common source for BRTH. The Britannic Islands are synonymous with the Greek name Pretannic, from PRT and Parthia with Brithia (or B’rithia). 

It was from Parthia that the wise men had travelled to visit the young Jesus. It may be more than coincidence that a people from Judah, were visiting their rightful king from… the tribe of Judah – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. Specifically, the wise men were actually priests of the tribe of Levi. Though Levi was to be scattered amongst Israel, we will find that they have remained predominantly with the associated tribes of the former Kingdom of Judah in larger numbers… those tribes being the houses of Judah, Benjamin and Simeon – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

Recall that within the tribe of Judah, there had been splits early on. There were those who had been taken captive by the Chaldean Babylonians and there were others who had returned to Jerusalem as we have learnt in the preceding chapter. It was these self same people of Judah which the Parthian peoples, also from Judah, came to assist during their decades long struggle against the Seleucids. 

Their King Phraates I, had captured the Caspian gates for Parthia and his successor, Mithridates I, expanded the Parthian region through not just warfare but by clever organisation and diplomacy. He died in 136 BCE and his son Phraates II inherited a new, formidable empire. In 129 BCE the Seleucid Greeks attacked the fledgling empire with 400,000 troops against 120,000. Though soundly defeated repeatedly, the Parthian doggedness – reminiscent of the British bulldog spirit – culminated in the death of the Seleucid monarch, Antiochus and 300,000 of his troops. An historic turning point, for the Seleucid empire began to fail, squeezed between the growing powers of Rome and Parthia. This provided the opportunity for the Maccabees to assert their independence and temporary dominion over the Idumean Edomites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Collins mentions that ‘the Parthians treated [the conquered Seleucids] mercifully and their royal household intermarried.’ Not unlike the Trojans and Dardanians as discussed in Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The strong family ties between Lot and Judah should be no surprise as the relationship in modern times between France and Britain was replicated in the Angevin monarchs and the one hundred years war. 

A further parallel indicating the Parthians were primarily from the tribe of Judah, is that they enlisted the assistance of their allies and kin, the Scythians. The Scythians arrived late and they became suspicious that the Parthians had acted preemptively on purpose to secure the spoils of war for themselves. While the Parthians were reluctant to share, since the Scythians had not taken part. This reneging on promised payment led to their resounding loss at the hands of the more numerous Scythians, with the Parthian king dying. This is interesting for two reasons. 

Firstly, as described by Steven Collins:

The whole event is strikingly similar to one described in the Bible (Judges 11­ & 12). 

After winning a great victory over the Ammonites, Jephthah and an army of Gileadites (the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben and Gad) were confronted by an army of Ephraimites which was upset that it had not been able to participate in the battle (and missed out on the booty). 

The usually allied brother tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh then fought each other in a needless battle over war booty… making this Parthian ­Scythian battle a rerun of the war in Judges 12. After the warfare the Scythians (satisfied by their possession of war booty and the death of the Parthian king who “cheated” them) retired into their own land. This confirms the Scythians had no territorial designs against their Parthian kinsmen and were content simply “to teach the Parthians a lesson.” Nevertheless, Parthia had now replaced the Seleucids as the dominant power in south­central Asia…’

Secondly, the Scythians included the main body of Israelites, led by the sons of Joseph. This wave of Scythian people eventually migrated to Scandinavia, the Low countries and northern Germany, later to be known as Angles, the predominant and most numerous Saxon tribe. Following them were the Parthians, who migrated from Sweden into northern Denmark, becoming the Jutes with their territory called Jutland, on the Cimbric (Cymric*) Peninsula. 

The two separate migrations of the tribe of Judah – the first as the Parthians and the second as the remnant of Judah from Judea, forced to flee at the same time as the Idumeans of Edom, when Titus attacked Judea in 70 CE – subsequently led to two distinct invasions into Britain, by Judah’s descendants.

First, the Jutes who settled in the south of England when they entered Britain. The main areas including Kent – as did the second wave known as Normans in 1066 CE, in Hastings – and also the Isle of Wight, Sussex and Hampshire. We will study the Jutes and Normans closely, for both are of the House of Judah. 

When the Parthian Empire fell in 226 CE, the Arsacid dynasty of Parthian kings and their people found refuge in Armenia until 429 CE, as ‘the first Christian nation in the world [not Rome]. Christianity was officially proclaimed in 301 A.D. as the national religion of Armenia’ – source: William McBirnie. The former Scythians now known as Saxons – comprising the Angles, Frisians and Jutes – began invading Britain about 450 CE… the Jutes primarily identifying as the former Parthians. 

Some researchers link the Getae with the Goths, which is correct and they appear to be part of the wider Scythian umbrella – as Gothic, ‘Germanic’ peoples – though ascribing the label Goth to the Israelites is incorrect – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The consonants GTH comprising the word Goth, may well be linked to the word Gott or God as proposed by some and just as possibly, to Aram’s son Gether, also GTH. The Goths appeared in western Europe before the Saxons as they lived to the west of them and were forced to migrate as the Saxon-Scythians pressed upon them, who in turn were forced to move by the migration of the disintegrating Parthian nation. 

The word German, has its roots in the word Kerman. The Kermans lived in the Parthian province of Carmania. They became known as Germanii and as they travelled west they were eventually known as Germans and their territory Germania, which was then applied to the majority of tribes who had headed westwards into northwestern Europe. Notice the similarity between the words Carmania (C-arm[e]nia) and Armenia. Pliny confirms that the once labelled Scythians, were now called Germans: ‘the name of the Scythians has altogether been transferred to the Sarmatae and the Germans.’ 

The Welsh, a name given them by the Saxons, meaning foreigner is not the name they called themselves. Their name for Wales is Cymru* from cymri (or cimri) – the name for the Welsh – a name relating to the Cimmerians. The term ‘cymric’ refers to the Brythonic group of Celtic languages, consisting of Welsh, Cornish and Breton in Brittany, France. There is another related Celtic language group Gaelic, found in Ireland and Scotland.  

The rest of the ‘Celtic’ world who are not Israelite, though are descended from Abraham or his brother Haran are the Germanic lowland peoples of the Netherlands and Belgium – with the Alpine peoples of Switzerland. The Israelites who had constituted the Parthian Empire as discussed in Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe, later migrated across northern Europe and are known to historians as Jutes. Whereas the remaining (British) Saxons or Germans – not to be confused with the Deutsch ‘Germans’ (or Saxons) of Germany – are the descendants of the Sacae Scythians. 

Ptolemy (85-165 CE) said there were: ‘a Scythian people sprung from the Sakai named Saxones.’ It is over one hundred years later in 286 CE that we hear of not only Franks – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran – living on the Cimbric Peninsula, but also of an advance, early wave of Saxon ‘pirates’. The Saxons, led by the dominant Angle tribe, dwelt in Denmark, northern Germany and the northern Netherlands. Included with the Angles were the Saxon tribes, the Frisians and Jutes. These peoples left their names behind them in Frisia, Jutland and mentioned earlier three German states with Saxony as part of their name, as well as the French province Al-sace. The English rendition of ‘Saxon’ is with an X, though the German spelling is with a C: such as Sachsisch or Sachse, based on the Sac-root from Sacae

Recall, the Saxons invaded the British mainland beginning 450 CE. Again, they were a Germanic speaking people as opposed to the earlier Celts. The word Saxon in German is Sachsen; Low German, Sassen; and in Dutch, Saksen. The Dutch female first name Saskia, originally meant ‘A Saxon woman.’ Sharon Turner in his History of the Anglo-Saxons reckons Saka-Suna or the Sons of Sakai abbreviated into Saksun, is the same sound as Sax-on and appears a reasonable and plausible etymology for the word Saxon.

When Jacob passes on the birthright blessing to Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, he says:

“The Angel who has redeemed me from all evil, Bless the lads; Let my name be named upon them, And the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac;^ And let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth” – Genesis 48:16, NKJV.

This is a pivotal verse, for the sons of Joseph are associated with the names of Israel, Abraham and specifically in this case, Isaac. The link with the name Saxon will be explored further in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. We will discover just how massive a clue to their geographic location in the world it is, from the phrase ‘in the midst of the earth.’ 

Steven Collins stresses the slowness of ancient peoples travels: ‘… migrations took place at the speed of an oxcart, and took decades or centuries to accomplish. These migrating people needed to stop periodically to grow crops, hunt game or steal from other nations to feed their families. Undoubtedly, a large percentage of the elderly and the infirm died along the way. Wars (with native populations or each other) would have caused more casualties. Since the number of mouths to feed was at times greater than the food which was available, some starved. During severe shortages, they may have had to eat their horses, livestock, and seed grains. A nation on the move has few options. If it cannot obtain food peacefully, it has no choice but to take it by warfare or piracy from someone else. 

If its people have success in warfare, they can prosper for a time. However, if it displaces another nation, that other nation must then look for a weaker nation to displace. Some tribes had to accept mercenary service to other nations in order to feed their own people. A tribe could think it had found security in a new location only to be dislodged by a stronger tribe moving into their area. It was a difficult time, as many nations and tribes were migrating and jostling each other for living space.’ 

There is biblical support for the Israelite migration through Europe in a northwestern trajectory, finally arriving at a set of isles located off a mainland coast.

Isaiah 24:15

New King James Version

‘Therefore glorify the Lord in the dawning light, The name of the Lord God of Israel in the coastlands of the sea.’

Isaiah 42:4, 12

Christian Standard Bible

“He will not grow weak or be discouraged until he has established justice on earth. The coasts and islands will wait for his instruction”… Let them give glory to the Lord and declare his praise in the coasts and islands.

Isaiah 49:1, 12

Amplified Bible

‘Listen to Me [the Messiah], O islands and coastlands, And pay attention, you peoples from far away… Behold, these shall come from afar, and behold, these from the north and from the west

Isaiah 51:5

Amplified Bible

“My righteousness (justice) is near, My salvation has gone forth, And My arms will judge the peoples; The islands and coastlands will wait for Me, And they will wait with hope and confident expectation for My arm.”

Jeremiah 31:10

New King James Version

Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, And declare it in the isles [H339 – ‘iy: coast, island, shore] afar off, and say, ‘He who scattered Israel will gather him, And keep him as a shepherd does his flock.’

Acts 1:8

King James Version

‘… ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.’

The Hebrew world translated isles (islands and coastlands), means ‘a habitable spot (as desirable), dry land, a coast, an island.’ This description does not pertain to the Israelites in Canaan, but rather where they have ended up. It is patently evident that they are on Islands, far away from Palestine – in ‘the north and west.’ In this case, an Atlantic archipelago – a people living remotely, far away and ignorant of biblical truth and the true nature of the Son of Man. The Creator calls out to them to return to Him.

Unbelievingly, Britain gradually began a reconciliation, beginning with the British royal family in the early first century, igniting again during the sixteenth century Reformation, though it is some way from escaping spiritual darkness, as the majority do not believe and of those who do, a minority truly understand or honour the true Christ – refer Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. It is an ongoing process which will culminate climatically during the time of Jacob’s trouble. 

Moses Margouliouth, a Jewish scholar of the nineteenth century, in his History of the Jews wrote:

‘It may not be out of place to state that the isles afar off mentioned in chapter 31 of Jeremiah were supposed by the ancients to be Britannia, Scotia, and Hibernia, the isles often visited we know by the merchant mariners of Phoenicia whose fleets included ships and crews drawn from the tribes of Dan, Asher and Zebulun of the coastal areas of the Land of Israel.’

Jeremiah 31:9, 21

English Standard Version

With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn… “Set up road markers for yourself; make yourself guideposts; consider well the highway, the road by which you went…”

Ephraim is counted as the Creator’s firstborn and charged with leaving a migratory trail. Aside from the terms, Saxon and Angle, a peculiar coincidence is the building of stone monuments called Dolmens. Dolmens are stone monuments made of two or more big upright stones with a single large stone lying across them. Their purpose is uncertain and like the pyramids most erroneously claim they were tombs. They could represent a doorway or portal of some kind – articles: Monoliths of the Nephilim*; and Belphegor.

The most widely known dolmens are found in northwestern Europe, particularly in the regions of Brittany, France, southern Scandinavia, Britain, Ireland and the Low Countries. As there are over five thousand dolmens documented in the Golan of northern Israel, this makes dolmens – if not erected by giants* – possible signposts of the Israelites. Dolmens are also found in Portugal and Spain in the Iberian Peninsula. The word Iber-ia is likely linked to the word Hebrew, for it is recognised as having derived from a grandson of Arphaxad, called Eber – Genesis 10:21-25. 

Researchers have regularly drawn attention, to the word British which resembles two Hebrew words beriyth-iysh (or Brith-ish) which translates as ‘covenant man.’ The Bible often refers to this [Old] covenant (or agreement) the Eternal made with ancient Israel through Moses (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 4:13), aside from the ones which preceded it with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – refer article; The Sabbath Secrecy. 

The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… found! Steven M Collins, 1992: 

‘The early British chroniclers record that a King Brutus came from the Eastern Mediterranean with hundreds of ships to colonize the large island on the northwest of the European land mass, and gave it the name “Briton” or “Brittania.” The approximate date for this event is 1103 B.C., a time just prior to the beginning of the first millennium B.C. Although Brutus is attributed a Trojan ancestry in the ancient accounts, he bore the Hebrew word B­R­T in his name (Brutus), and applied the same Hebrew word (B­R­T) to their new homeland (Briton). Brutus’ name identified him as a member of the “Covenant People,” and in naming his new land “Briton,” he was claiming it as a territory for the “Covenant People.” That a Trojan leader bore an important Hebrew root word in his name argues that Israelites were present among the inhabitants of ancient Troy’ – refer Troy, Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. 

Britain in its Perfect Luster (Cambria Triumphans), Percy Enderbie, 1661:

‘In the time of King Edward I [1272 to 1307]. At Lincolne, where (was) held a Parliament, after much diligent search of antiquities… letters were sent to the Pope of Rome, sealed with an hundred seals and witnesses… wherein is declared and justified that in the time of Hely (Eli) [born 1144, died 1046 BCE – Eli became a Judge at age 58 in 1086 BCE for forty years: 1 Samuel 4:14-18] and Samuel the Prophet [born 1090, died 1015 BCE in the tenth year of King Saul’s reign – Samuel became a Judge at age 44 in 1046 BCE for thirty-one years], Brutus a Trojan landed here, and by his own name called the Country Britannia, before named Albion.’

Brutus has a window of forty-four years from the birth of Samuel to the death of Eli – or four years from Samuel’s birth until Eli becoming a Judge – to have arrived in Britain. Thus circa 1100 BCE is credible. Brutus (or Brwt) is credited as the first king of Britain, descended from Aeneas of the Trojan Royal House of Zarah, son of Judah. The same Aeneas from whom the early Roman emperors also claimed descent. The word Brython or Brwth-ayn is ‘Brwt with the Celtic augmentative or plural suffix.’ 

The Trojan Origins of European Royalty! John D Keyser – capitals & emphasis his, bold mine:

‘The legends claim that the oldest town in the land of Troy (the Troad) was founded by Teucer, who was a son of the Scamander (a stream of Crete, according to John Tzetzes, the 12th century Byzantine poet and grammarian) and the nymph Idaea. During the reign of Teucer, DARDANUS – son of Zeus and the nymph Electra – drifted from the island of Samothrace in the Aegean to the Troad, following a great deluge in the Mediterranean area. 

After he arrived in the Troad, Dardanus received a grant of land from Teucer and married his daughter Batea, shortly thereafter founding the city of DARDANIA at the foot of MOUNT IDA. On the death of Teucer, Dardanus succeeded him as king, and called the whole land DARDANIA.

He sired Erichthonius, who begat TROS by Astyoche, daughter of Simois. Tros named the country TROY (after himself) and the people TROES (TROJANS). By Callirrhoe, daughter of Scamander, Tros had three sons – Ilus, Assaracus and Ganymede. From two of Tros’ sons – Ilus and Assaracus – sprang TWO SEPARATE LINES; [1] Ilus, Laomedon, Priam, Hector; and [2] Assaracus, Capys, Anchises, Aeneas.

After building the city of Dardanus in the Troad, DARDA established his ROYAL LINE in the land, which continued as follows:

1/. DARDANUS (DARDA)

2/. ERICTANUS

3/. TROS

4/. ILUS

5/. LAOMEDON

6/. PRIAMUS (PRIAM)

Priam’s reign ended in 1181 – the year the Trojans were crushed in the First Trojan war by their brethren the Greeks. AENEAS, of the royal line, escaped the destruction of Troy and made his way to ITALY. The story of his migration is found in the Aeneid, written by the Roman historian Virgil. Funk and Wagnalls New Encyclopedia outlines the story:

“The AENEID is a mythical (according to the “experts”) work in twelve books, describing the wanderings of the hero AENEAS and a small band of TROJANS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas escaped from Troy with the images of his ancestral gods, carrying his aged father on his shoulders, and leading his young son ASCANIUS by the hand, but in the confusion of his hasty flight he lost his wife, Creusa. He collected a FLEET OF TWENTY VESSELS, and sailed with the surviving Trojans to THRACE, where they began building a city. Aeneas subsequently abandoned his plan of a settlement there and went to CRETE, but was driven from that island by a pestilence. 

After visiting EPIRUS and SICILY (where his father died), Aeneas was shipwrecked on THE COAST OF AFRICA and welcomed by DIDO, Queen of CARTHAGE. After a time he again set sail; Dido, who had fallen in love with him, was heartbroken by his departure and committed suicide. After visiting SICILY again and stopping at CUMAE, ON THE BAY OF NAPLES, he landed at the MOUTH OF THE TIBER RIVER, SEVEN YEARS after the fall of Troy. Aeneas was welcomed by LATINUS, KING OF LATIUM. 

Lavinia, the daughter of Latinus, was destined to marry a stranger, but her mother Amata had promised to give her in marriage to TURNUS, King of the Rutulians. A war ensued, which terminated with the defeat and death of Turnus, thus making possible the marriage of Aeneas and Lavinia. Aeneas died three years later, and his son ASCANIUS FOUNDED ALBA LONGA, the mother city of Rome” (Volume I. MCMLXXV, page 196).’

‘The Compendium of World History records that “the refugees of the First Trojan War settled… in Italy. They founded Lavinium two years after the First Trojan War – that is, in 1179 [BCE] – and later the city of Alba (the site of the Pope’s summer palace today) at the time of the Second Trojan War in 1149. The TROJAN ROYAL HOUSE founded in Italy a line of kings that reigned in Alba from 1178 until 753, when the center of government passed to Rome.”

The Annals of the Romans relate that after Aeneas founded Alba, he married a woman who bore him a son named SILVIUS. Silvius, in turn, married; and when his new wife became pregnant, Aeneas sent word to him that he was sending a wizard to examine the wife and try and determine whether the baby was male or female. After examining Silvius’ wife, the wizard returned to his home, but was killed by ASCANIUS because of his prophecy foretelling that the woman had a male in her womb who would be the child of death – for, as the story goes, the male-child would eventually kill his father and mother and be a scourge to all mankind.

During the birth of the child, Silvius’ wife died, and the boy was reared by the father and named BRITTO (BRUTUS). Many years later, fulfilling the wizard’s prophecy, the young man BRITTO killed his father by accident while practicing archery with some friends. Because of this terrible accident, BRUTUS was DRIVEN FROM ITALY and came TO THE ISLANDS OF THE TYRRHENE SEA. According to Herman L. Hoeh:

“A son, BRUTUS, expelled from Italy returned to the Aegean area and organized the ENSLAVED TROJANS, LYDIANS AND MAEONIANS. The Greeks were defeated and TROY WAS RECAPTURED. With the recapture of Troy in 1149 the list of Sea Powers of the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean began. According to the terms of the treaty with the Greeks BRUTUS MIGRATED, with all who wished to follow him, VIA THE MEDITERRANEAN INTO BRITAIN” (Compendium of World History. Volume I, page 454).

The tradition of Brutus’ migration to Britain was never questioned until the last century, when German scholars and rationalists decided that the story related in Homer’s Iliad of the siege and destruction of Troy by the Greeks, and the subsequent dispersion of the Trojan princes, was nothing but a “Poet’s dream” and a “mythological myth.” The coming of Brutus to Britain was therefore pronounced to be [a] “fabulous” legend that had no foundation in fact.

The following quotation from Drych y Prifoesedd (“The Mirror of the Principal Ages”), by Theophilus Efans of Llangammarch, Wales, sheds light on the origin of the discredit thrown upon the historical value of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings about Brutus. 

There might be reason for uncertainty if the statements of Geoffrey of Monmouth stood alone, but when we find them constantly corroborated in the old manuscripts as well as by Welsh writers of repute, there is absolutely no reason to dismiss them as “Monkish fables”! Notice – 

“The first reason for denying the coming of BRUTUS into this island of Britain was this. When Jeffrey ap Arthur, Lord Bishop of Llandaff (Geoffrey of Monmouth), died, an Englishman of the name of Gwilym Bach (little William or William the Less) arrived… who desired Dafydd ab Owen, Prince of Gwynedd, to make him bishop in Jeffrey’s place about the year 1169 A.D. But when it was not to the mind of Dafydd ab Owen to grant him his request the man went home full of hatred and commenced to exercise his mind how best to despise and malign not only the memory of the bishop, who was lying in his grave, but also the whole of the Welsh nation. THIS GWILYM BACH, OUT OF MALICE BECAUSE HE WAS REFUSED THE BISHOPRIC OF LLANDAFF, WAS THE FIRST TO DENY THE COMING OF BRUTUS HERE.

“Gwilym Bach says without shame, that no one had ever mentioned the coming of Brutus and his men from Caerdroia to this island until Jeffrey ap Arthur fabricated the tale out of his own imagination, but this is a statement or charge TOO NAKED AND FLIMSY WITHOUT ANY FOUNDATION AND AGAINST ALL AUTHORITY. Because Jeffrey ap Arthur did nothing but translate the Welsh Chronicles into Latin, so that the educated of the country might read them. And long, long before the time of Jeffrey one of the poems (penhillion) of Taliesin makes clear the CONSENSUS OF OPINION of his fellow-countrymen in regard to the matter, and he wrote about the year 566 A.D.” (Quoted in Prehistoric London, by E. O. Gordon. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA 1985, page 9).

After leaving the Aegean area Brutus “MIGRATED TO MALTA, and there was advised to reestablish his people in ‘the Great White Island‘ (an early name for BRITAIN due to its chalk cliffs). This advice is recorded in an archaic Greek form on the Temple of Diana in CAER TROIA (New Troy).” (Jacob’s Pillar, page 26).

‘Where BRUTUS and his people traveled to next is preserved by the British historian Nennius, who states that “Aeneas… arrived in GAUL (modern FRANCE), WHERE HE FOUNDED THE CITY OF TOURS, which is called Turnis…” (Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals, translated by John Morris. Phillimore, London and Chichester. 1980. Page 19). Nennius then says that “later he CAME TO THIS ISLAND, which is named BRITANNIA from his name, and filled it with his race, and dwelt there”.

The arrival of the Trojans in Britain is traced by E. Raymond Capt:

“The descendants of DARDA (DARDANNES or DANAANS) ruled ancient TROY for several hundred years, until the city was destroyed in the famous ‘Siege of Troy.’ 

AENEAS, the last of the ROYAL BLOOD, (Zarah-Judah) collected the remnants of his nation and traveled with them to ITALY. There he married the daughter of LATINUS, king of the Latins, and subsequently FOUNDED THE GREAT ROMAN EMPIRE. Aeneas’ GRANDSON, BRUTUS with a large part of the TROJANS migrated to ‘the GREAT WHITE ISLAND’… Tradition says that on the way to the ‘White Island’ Brutus came across FOUR OTHER TROJAN COLONIES UPON THE COAST OF SPAIN and persuaded them to join him.

‘At TOTNES on the RIVER DART [in England], twelve miles inland from TORBAY (the oldest seaport in South Devon) is an historical STONE that commemorates the coming of BRUTUS to Britain. (Circa 1103 B.C.) The stone is known as the ‘BRUTUS STONE,’ the tradition being that the TROJAN PRINCE set foot upon it when he first landed. The WELSH RECORDS state that THREE TRIBES OF HIS COUNTRYMEN received Brutus and his company as BRETHREN and proclaimed Brutus KING at a national convention of the whole island. His THREE SONS, born after his arrival in Britain were named after the three tribes – LOCRINUS [England], CAMBER [Wales], and ALBAN [Scotland]. Brutus’ name HEADS THE ROLE in all the genealogies of the British kings, preserved as faithfully as were those of the kings of Israel and Judah” (Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets, page 65-66).’

E. Raymond Capt continues by saying:

“Brutus founded the city of ‘CAER TROIA,’ or ‘NEW TROY.’ The Romans later called it ‘LONDINUM,’ now known as LONDON. The actual date of the founding of the city is suggested in the Welsh bardic literature: ‘And when BRUTUS had finished the building of the city, and had strengthened it with walls and castles, he consecrated them and made inflexible laws for the governance of such as should dwell there peacefully, and he put protection on the city and granted privilege to it. At this time, BELI THE PRIEST RULED IN JUDEA [1086-1046 BCE], and the Ark of the Covenant was in captivity to the Philistines [in 1046 BCE]’ (The Welsh Bruts) – Article: The Ark of God.

‘The reference, in the quotation above, to BELI THE PRIEST, is obviously of ELI of the First Book of Samuel. Such remote prehistoric antiquity of the site of London is CONFIRMED by the numerous archaeological remains found there, not only of the Stone Age and Early Bronze Ages, but even of the Old Stone Age. This indicates that it was already a settlement at the time when BRUTUS selected it for the site of his new capital of “NEW TROY.”

Within the last century or so an entirely new light has been cast upon the prehistoric history of London and its mounds, by Schliemann’s discoveries at Hissarlik – the ancient TROY in the north-west of Asia Minor. States author E. O. Gordon: “No longer need the story be regarded as fabulous, that Brutus the Trojan, the grandson of Aeneas (the hero of Virgil’s great epic), gave the name of CAER TROIA, TROYNOVANT or NEW TROY, to London. In site and surroundings… there seems to have been considerable resemblance between the historic Troy on the Scamander and New Troy on the Thames. 

On the plains of Troy to-day may be seen numerous conical mounds rising from out of the lagoons and swamps that environed the citadel hill of Hissarlik, akin to those that dominated the marshes, round about the Caer and Porth of London, in prehistoric times” (Prehistoric London, page 83).

The Bible Research Handbook verifies the authenticity of the legends of Brutus:

“Various details of circumstantial evidence appear to lend their support to the legend of the TROJAN SETTLEMENT OF BRITAIN. Ancient Irish accounts relate that a PARTHOLANUS, whose life was in important respects SIMILAR to that of BRUTUS, reached over our islands at a very early date’ – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – The Celtic tribes. ‘Caesar’s ‘Commentaries,’ which tell of a people called TRINOBANTES, who lived in the vicinity of what is now MIDDLESEX AND HERTFORDSHIRE, seem clearly to bear out the story of the TROJANS having founded TROJA NOVA, later called TRINOVANTUM, and eventually LONDON”.

The Link, a magazine of the Christian Israel Foundation, mentions other confirming historians:

“According to FIRM ancient legends, transmitted both by British and by Continental writers, a TROJAN COLONY, led by one BRUTUS, settled in the BRITISH ISLES not long after the fall of TROY in 1184 B.C., and established the line of early BRITISH KINGS from which the famous CARACTACUS and BOADICEA were in due course descended” – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation.

‘BRUTUS (or BRUT) OF TROY, grandson of AENEAS, left Troy, after the defeat of his countrymen by the Greeks, and with a band of followers journeyed to Britain by way of ITALY, where he FOUNDED LONDON, calling it NEW TROY. These traditions are chronicled by GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH, WACE, LAYAMON and OTHER EARLY HISTORIANS. There is support also from the writings of MATTHEW OF PARIS. 

Although Geoffrey of Monmouth’s evidence in particular is discounted in certain quarters, THE BRUTUS STORY WAS CURRENT LONG BEFORE GEOFFREY’S TIME, so that whatever may have been added by him in the way of imaginative detail, at least he did NOT invent the basic tradition. 

The evidence was certainly sufficient to convince the famous Lord Chief Justice Coke of the 17th century, for he wrote: ‘The original laws of this land were composed of such elements as BRUTUS (THE TROJAN) FIRST SELECTED FROM THE ANCIENT TROJAN AND GREEK INSTITUTIONS.’ In support of him, Lord Chancellor Fortescue, in his work on the Laws of England, states: ‘THE KINGDOM OF BRITAIN HAD ITS ORIGINAL INSTITUTIONS FROM BRUTUS OF THE TROJANS’

David Williamson, in his book Kings and Queens of Britain, comments on the authenticity of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s writings and equates their veracity to the books of the Old Testament:

“Geoffrey of Monmouth, writing in the first half of the twelfth century, sought to tell the story of Britain from its… FOUNDATION BY BRUTUS THE TROJAN until the coming of the Saxons… Geoffrey claimed that his History of the Kings of Britain was translated from ‘a certain very ancient book written in the British language’ which had been given to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. It was dedicated to two of the LEADING NOBLEMEN of the day, Robert, Earl of Gloucester (died 1147) [a]… son of King Henry I, and Waleran, Count of Mellent (died 1166). In it he tells of the wanderings of BRUTUS, the great-grandson of AENEAS [timescale wise this is more accurate than a son or grandson which we have read in other sources in this article], forced to leave Italy after accidentally killing his father and eventually, after many adventures, COMING TO ALBION, which he renamed BRITAIN from his own name, after driving out the aboriginal giants.

The story continues with the… deeds of BRUTUS’ DESCENDANTS and successors FROM ABOUT 1100 B.C. until the coming of the Romans… Lewis Thorp’s introduction to his translation of Geoffrey’s History points out that it might ‘be said to bear the SAME RELATIONSHIP to the story of the early British inhabitants of our own island as do the seventeen historical books in the OLD TESTAMENT, from Genesis to Esther, to the early history of the ISRAELITES in Palestine” (Dorset Press, N.Y. 1992, page 8).

‘In the manuscript section of the British Library lies an old document – MS43968 – that used to be kept in Windsor Castle. This particular chart gives the descent of the British Royal Family from ADAM THROUGH BRUTUS. Also, charts published by the Covenant Publishing Co., Ltd., by W. M. H. Milner entitled The Royal House of Britain and by M. H. Gayer entitled The Heritage of the Anglo-Saxon Race both trace the ancestry of the Royal House THROUGH SEVERAL LINES OF DESCENT FROM THE PATRIARCH JUDAH – INCLUDING BRUTUS who is shown as a descendant of Judah’s son Zarah’ – refer article: The Life & death of Charles III.

‘Every British schoolboy knew by heart the letter British king Caractacus sent to Claudius Caesar’ – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation. ‘But not many know about the letter, written about a century earlier, from King Cassibellaunus to Julius Caesar. This letter is quoted in full by Geoffrey of Monmouth, who possessed an ancient manuscript from BRITTANY that evidently contained the letter. Geoffrey quotes widely from this manuscript in his historical work. The letter reads as follows:

“Cassibelaun, king of the Britains, to Caius Julius Caesar. We cannot but wonder, Caesar, at the avarice of the Roman people, since their insatiable thirst after money cannot let us alone whom the dangers of the ocean have placed in a manner out of the world; but they must have the presumption to covet our substance, which we have hitherto enjoy’d in quiet. Neither is this indeed sufficient: we must also prefer subjection and slavery to them, before the enjoyment of our native liberty. 

Your demand therefore, Caesar, is scandalous, since the SAME VEIN OF NOBILITY, FLOWS FROM AENEAS, IN BRITONS [Israelites descended from Jacob and Isaac] AND ROMANS [Ishmaelites descended from Isaac’s half brother, Ishmael], and ONE AND THE SAME CHAIN OF CONSANGUINITY SHINES IN BOTH [both descended from Abraham]: which ought to be a band of firm union and friendship.

That was what you should have demanded of us, and not slavery: we have learned to admit of the one, but never to bear the other. And so much have we been accustomed to liberty, that we are perfectly ignorant what it is to submit to slavery. And if even the gods themselves should attempt to deprive us of our liberty, we would to the utmost of our power resist them in defense of it. Know then, Caesar, that we are ready to fight for that and our kingdom if, as you threaten, you shall attempt to invade Britain.”

‘The reference in this letter to AENEAS provides support for the fact that the ancient British royal line STEMMED FROM TROY, as did, traditionally, the descent of certain of the EARLY RULERS OF ROME. And, as we have already seen, the tradition that the TROJAN LEADERS WERE JUDAHITES is upheld by testimony from many quarters.

Cassibellaunus was not the only king of Britain who knew of his Trojan blood-line. [So did] Edward I, who removed the Stone of Destiny from Scone in Scotland to London… “The Irish and Scottish kings, Fergus and EDWARD HIMSELF were all DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH: in fact it is said that EDWARD [I] used to boast of his DESCENT FROM THE TROJANS!” (Co-Incidences? Pointers to Our Heritage, by Brigadier G. Wilson).

William F. Skene, author of a book on the Stone of Destiny, states that “the KING OF ENGLAND, by whom the kingdom of Scotland was derived from ALBANACTUS, THE YOUNGEST SON OF BRUTUS, THE EPONYMUS OF THE BRITONS, while that of ENGLAND WAS DERIVED FROM LOCRINUS, THE ELDEST SON.” (The Coronation Stone, page 21). Even James I [of England and James VI of Scotland] knew of his background, and let it be known on several occasions that he was descended from Brutus!’

The promised Abrahamic Covenant Blessing, included (1) a large number of descendants; (2) a plurality of nations; (3) a great nation; (4) a royal dynasty; (5) incredible prosperity; (6) and the possession of the ‘gates of their enemies’ – in other words, military superiority (Genesis 13:16, 17:2-7, 22:15-17).

These promises were passed on to Isaac (Genesis 17:21), to Jacob (Genesis 27:19-33), now named Israel, and then primarily to his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh, as well as his son, Judah – Genesis 48:14-20; 49:8-12. 

There are no other body of peoples which fit these criteria – including those proposed by the Black Hebrew Israelite movement – than the British and Irish… Celtic, Saxon and Viking peoples who comprise the modern nations of England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the peoples in South Africa of British descent and by extension, Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia. 

The Black Hebrew Israelites claim Africans are the descendants of the ancient Israelites and that African Americans are the tribe of Judah. Yet while they may be able to incorrectly claim points one and two above – as could a number of other peoples – which African nation has fulfilled points three, four, five and six?

 It may seem peculiar or coincidental that the nations of the United Kingdom and the United States of America should grow into the powers they became as if out of nowhere. In the Book of Leviticus, the Creator clearly defines that blessings would be given for obedience and removal of said blessings for disobedience. The Creator promised a vast period of struggle should they fall, which they did and then a re-birth so-to-speak, in the latter days. Not because of their inherent goodness, but because of the Eternal’s unconditional promise to faithful Abraham.

Herman Hoeh and Herbert Armstrong explain the punishment promise.

‘Israel was promised great national blessings, including national greatness if they would obey God. But God also promised that if they obstinately refused to obey Him, if they refused to follow His laws and let Him rule their lives, then He would punish them for a period called seven times (Leviticus 26). 

The Bible itself defines this period of seven times… [in] Revelation the twelfth chapter… compare verses 6 and 14 you will see that the word time in prophecy simply means a year, hence seven times would be seven years or 2520 days. Now let’s notice another key. In Numbers 14:34, God said Israel would bear their iniquities in the wilderness after the number of days they searched the land of Canaan, forty days, each day for a year. 

Then seven times or 2520 prophetic days would equal 2520 literal years! This period of seven times or 2520 years punishment did come upon Israel because they went their own ways and would not submit to the rule of God. Israel went into captivity about 721 B.C. and did not become a great people again until their times of punishment ceased about 1800 A.D. At that time the descendants of the ancient House of Israel – America and Britain and the democratic peoples of the world – began to rise to such wealth and power as the world has never enjoyed before all because of the promises made to Abraham’ – Herman Hoeh, 1955.

‘Now continue in Leviticus 26: “And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins” (verse 18). This expression “seven times” is translated into the English from a Hebrew word which conveys a dual meaning. The original Hebrew word Moses wrote is shibah. It is defined as “seven times,” and also as :sevenfold.” The “seven times” implies duration or continuation of punishment. But the word also conveys the meaning of “sevenfold,” or seven times greater intensity of punishment – as a punishment that is sevenfold more intense. In this sense, the meaning would be the same as in Daniel 3:19, where King Nebuchadnezzar, in a rage, commanded that the furnace into which Daniel’s three friends were to be thrown should be made seven times hotter. 

Now understand the “seven times” – or seven prophetic “times.” For this is a prophecy. In prophecy, a “time” is a prophetic 360-day year. And, during Israel’s punishment, each day represented a year being fulfilled… But when that 2520-year withholding of the birthright had expired, God was faithful to His unconditional promise to Abraham! Not because of any British or American goodness, superiority, or worthiness, but because of God’s faithfulness to His promise, beginning in 1800 these two birthright peoples suddenly burst forth as the greatest world powers in all history!’ – Herbert W Armstrong, 1980.

In 1800 the Acts of Union occurred whereby the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was created. Thus began a century of expansion unlike anything ever witnessed before. It was also the same century, in which the United States threw off the royal sovereignty of the United Kingdom and began its own meteoritic rise to greatness. There were many acquisitions for the United Kingdom; a number of significant ones listed below…

1800 – Malta: Protectorate (sea gate) acquired by conquest
1806 – Cape of Good Hope: sea gate taken from the Dutch 

1815 – Ceylon: (Sri Lanka), acquired 

1825 – Tasmania: (formerly Van Diemen’s Land) formed into a colony
1832 – Western Australia: formed into a colony
1836 – South Australia: formed into a province 

1841 – Hong Kong: sea gate taken from the Chinese
1841 – New Zealand: formed into a separate colony
1849 – The Punjab: formally annexed
1851 – Victoria: formed into a colony
1858 – India: transferred to the Crown
1859 – Queensland: formed into a colony

1874 – Fiji: formed into a colony
1876 – Queen publicly proclaimed Empress of India
1878 – Cyprus: (sea gate) possession taken from the Ottoman Empire

The territorial expansion of the British Empire, led to the expression that: “the sun never set” on its possessions. In fact ‘in 1913, 412 million people lived under the control of the British Empire, twenty-three percent of the world’s population at that time. It remains the largest empire in human history and at the peak of its power in 1920, it covered an astonishing 13.71 million square miles – that’s close to a quarter of the world’s land area’ – N McCarthy, The Biggest Empires In Human History, 2019. 

Today, the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland retain the following:

Fourteen British Overseas Territories:

Anguilla
Bermuda
British Antarctic Territory
British Indian Ocean Territory
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Falkland Islands
Gibraltar
Montserrat
Pitcairn Islands
Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha

South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands

Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia Turks and Caicos Islands

Three Crown dependencies:

Guernsey (Alderney, Sark), Jersey and the Isle of Man

The issue with thinking Judah is a small or persecuted nation and that it would be fragmented during the latter days, only then gaining a homeland or national status, all seemingly based on scripture; still remains an incorrect interpretation of key verses. Plus, the perpetuation of this error has hidden the singular most important key to unlocking the Bible regarding future events: the true identity of the tribe of Judah, which has gone tragically unnoticed – Revelation 3:7. These identifying signs are the markers for Esau (Edom), not Judah – Malachi 1:2-4, Obadiah 1-21, John 8:39-45. Judah is the royal tribe, with a ruling orb, sceptre and crown to prove it. A monarchy which has dominated royal lines throughout Europe and the thrones they sit on. 

Blessed with national wealth and prosperity, giving birth to daughter nations and like the Parthians with a propensity to govern, to organise and rule, expanding as an empire; so too have the people who were known as Jutes and Normans. Yet, combining and in time using the name of their half brother tribe the Angli, forming the Angle name and becoming Angl-and and the Angl-ish.

For the Tribe of Judah is England and their descendants, the English.

Alternative options provided by those researchers who have deduced there is a problem with ascribing Judah to the Jews, are then non-plussed at who to then turn. Those who accurately identify the Jews with Edom, are then hindered in their argument by not providing a viable solution.

Alternative explanations for the descendants of Judah observed in other works include: Scotland; Ireland; and Germany. Yet Germany is Ishmael – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar – and Scotland and Ireland are both too small to fulfil the biblical verses in either the historic or prophetic contexts ascribed to the prominent House of Judah. 

Seeking to gain the attention of the Houses of Judah and Israel is a thankless task, as the prophet Ezekiel was warned, but now is the time for the truth of their identity to be made known…

Ezekiel 33:30-33

Living Bible

“Son of dust, your people are whispering behind your back. They talk about you in their houses and whisper about you at the doors, saying, ‘Come on, let’s have some fun! Let’s go hear him tell us what the Lord is saying!’ So they come as though they are sincere and sit before you listening. But they have no intention of doing what I tell them to; they talk very sweetly about loving the Lord, but with their hearts they are loving their money. You are very entertaining to them, like someone who sings lovely songs with a beautiful voice or plays well on an instrument. They hear what you say but don’t pay any attention to it! But when all these terrible things happen to them – as they will – then they will know a prophet has been among them.”

Ezekiel 2:3-7

English Standard Version

‘And he said to me, “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to nations [plural] of rebels, who have rebelled against me. They and their fathers have transgressed against me to this very day. The descendants also are impudent and stubborn: I send you to them, and you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God.’ And whether they hear or refuse to hear (for they are a rebellious house) they will know that a prophet has been among them. And you, son of man, be not afraid of them, nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions. Be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house. And you shall speak my words to them, whether they hear or refuse to hear…”

Ezekiel 3:4-6

English Standard Version

‘And he said to me, “Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak wit my words to them.

For you are not sent to a people of foreign speech and a hard language, but to the house of Israel – not to many peoples of foreign speech and a hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely, if I sent you to such, they would listen to you.’

Ezekiel had been commissioned to speak to the Israelite people who all spoke the same language. Thus identity writers who teach that a number of nations in Europe with different languages are Israelite are incorrect. Today, the Israelites all speak English and that is how to begin identifying each individual tribe.

The English more than any other peoples, have migrated all over the world. By this, not those of ‘English’ descent in the United States or Australia for example, but rather those people who are British citizens, living in nations such as Spain or China and known as Ex-pats.

Isaiah 11:12

English Standard Version

‘He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.’

As we progress, the logic and truth of England’s real identity will become apparent and relentlessly convincing. Readers who may struggle the most are those entrenched in the paradigm that the Jews – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe – are Judah and England is Ephraim and the apparent ease that verses applicable to Judah and Ephraim appear to fit the modern nation states of Israel and England.

Once we investigate a little deeper and more thoroughly, it will be clear that the relationship the Jews and England share and their historical alignment is actually entirely indicative of Edom and Judah, the most spoken about relationship in scripture. The relationship between say Turkey as Edom and the Jews as Judah falls inadequately short in aligning literally every single verse in the Bible. This jig-saw pattern does not work… simply, the former does. 

It is worth noting a few key points in identifying true Israel and by extension Judah, which the Jews are not able to fulfil.

1. Jeremiah 31:33 shows that Israel was to come under the liberation of the New Covenant. The orthodox Jew remains under the shackles and imperfection of the old Law.

2. Hosea 1:10 states that Israelites were to become the sons of God, in accepting the Messiah. The Jewish people continue to reject Him as the Saviour and await a different messiah (Revelation 13:1-18)

3. Israel was to have a monarchy that would last forever – Jeremiah 33: 17. The Jewish people have no sovereign monarch on the earth.

4. Isaiah 54:17 and Leviticus 26:6-8, say that Israel was to be immune from defeat in major wars – not including individual battles and minor conflicts – yet the Jews have suffered an endless tide of either persecution or death prior to the formation of the state of Israel. 

We are first introduced to Judah in Genesis 29:35 ESV: ‘And [Leah] conceived again and bore a son, and said, “This time I will praise the Lord.” Therefore she called his name Judah. Then she ceased bearing.’ Leah had Judah, her fourth son and then experienced a gap of a number of years, before giving birth to her remaining three children in quick succession. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

Judah meaning: ‘Praised, Let [God] Be Praised’ from the verb yada, to praise

The original Judah is Jacob’s fourth son with Leah (Genesis 29:35). Judah becomes prominent when his three brothers Reuben, Simeon and Levi forfeit their places in the hierarchy (Reuben sleeps with Bilhah – Genesis 35:22, and Simeon and Levi avenge their sister Dinah’s rape by killing the entire male population of the village of Shechem, and looting the place – Genesis 34:25).

It should be noted that the feminine form of this name, Judith, occurs a generation earlier than Judah and may very well be the original (meaning that the name Judah is derived from Judith and not vice versa). Judith is the [‘Hittite’] aunt of Judah, married to Judah’s uncle Esau. 

Other Judahs are: A postexilic Levite (Ezra 3:9); A Levite who divorces his foreign wife in the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:23); A postexilic overseer (Nehemiah 11:9); A Levite who returns with Zerubbabel (Nehemiah 12:8); A postexilic leader (Nehemiah 12:34); A priestly musician (Nehemiah 12:36).

The name Judah transliterated into Greek is Iouda, and occurs as such 7 times in the New Testament… The name Judas is the Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Judah.

When Leah gave birth to Judah she names him such by saying, “This time I will praise the Lord”. Perhaps she meant that she realized that her first three sons weren’t going to bring her closer to Jacob, and she should redirect her focus to God. Formally, the name Judah does not contain the appellative (Yah) = (Yahu) = (Yu), which in turn are abbreviated forms of the Tetragrammaton; the name of the Lord: YHWH, but no member of a Hebrew audience would fail to notice that the first two letters of the name Judah form (Yah). 

And if the letter (daleth) would be omitted from the name Judah, the very name (YHWH) would appear. For the meaning of the name Judah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Let Him (God) Be Praised.’

Popular English names include Judith, Judy and Jude. When Joseph has a dream of his preeminence over his family and naively declares it to everyone, his brothers conspire against him. They decide to kill him, though Reuben suggests leaving him in a pit, so that he can secretly return to save him and take him back to his father. Was Reuben trying to atone for his sleeping with Bilhah and thus return to his father Jacob’s good books or was it a truly altruistic gesture. Either way, Judah steps into the starring role… 

Genesis 37:23-35

English Standard Version

23 ‘So when Joseph came to his brothers, they stripped him of his robe, the robe of many colors that he wore. 24 And they took him and threw him into a pit. The pit was empty; there was no water in it. 25 Then they sat down to eat. And looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, with their camels bearing gum, balm, and myrrh, on their way to carry it down to Egypt. 

26 Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we kill our brother and conceal his blood? 27 Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers listened to him.

28 Then Midianite traders passed by [refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar]. And they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt.

29 When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that Joseph was not in the pit, he tore his clothes 30 and returned to his brothers and said, “The boy is gone, and I, where shall I go?” 31 Then they took Joseph’s robe and slaughtered a goat and dipped the robe in the blood. 32 And they sent the robe of many colors and brought it to their father and said, “This we have found; please identify whether it is your son’s robe or not.” 33 And he identified it and said, “It is my son’s robe. A fierce animal has devoured him. Joseph is without doubt torn to pieces.”

34 Then Jacob tore his garments and put sackcloth on his loins and mourned for his son many days. 35 All his sons and all his daughters [H1323 – bath: daughter, girl] rose up to comfort him, but he refused to be comforted and said, “No, I shall go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.’

We learn that Jacob may have had daughters in the plural. Thus, Dinah being mentioned with Zebulun gives further credence to her being his twin. It also means that her escapade with Shechem and the recounting of it, shows she may have stood out from her sisters. Alternatively, the Hebrew word bath can infer daughters-in-law. Joseph was seventeen when this event occurred and the year was 1709 BCE. Reuben was born in 1752 BCE and Judah in 1746 BCE; they were forty-three and thirty-seven years of age respectively, according to an unconventional chronology. 

The act against Joseph is all the more cruel as we are not speaking of teenage boys or young men in their twenties with hot heads. These were older men, coldly plotting a young lads fate. 

Judah meanwhile, reasons that culpability is substantially reduced if they cast Joseph to the whims of others rather than physically killing him themselves. Was this a gesture of kindness in sparing Joseph’s life, or was it to only ensure escape for blame for his possible death. Judah displays a wily solution to the problem in a similar fashion to how his father would; while standing to make an investment from the transaction. Apart from Joseph, no other son of Jacob has a chapter devoted to them in the Book of Genesis. The next chapter in Genesis describes Judah’s hit and miss love life.

Genesis 38:1-30

English Standard Version

1 ‘It happened at that time that Judah went down [or away] from his brothers and turned aside to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. 2 There Judah saw the daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua. He took her and went in to her, 3 and she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Er. 4 She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 5 Yet again she bore a son, and she called his name Shelah. Judah was in Chezib when she bore him.

6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death. 8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” 

9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also. 11 Then Judah said to Tamar his daughter-in-law, “Remain a widow in your father’s house, till Shelah my son grows up” – for he feared that he would die, like his brothers. So Tamar went and remained in her father’s house.’

Judah separated himself from his brothers. We learn he is his own man. Judah may not have desired the women from his family of Nahor or Haran, or perhaps he was rebelling and seeking adventure. He did not make a sound choice, reflective of his Uncle Esau. Notice Judah named his first son and Shua’s daughter named the next two. It is not clear whether Shua’s daughter was a. a black Canaanite woman; b. if she was from one of the Nephilim descended clans; or c. neither.

The Book of Jubilees 34:20 gives her name as Betasu’el; while later in the book of Chronicles, her name is revealed as Bath-shua. Judah takes an invested interest again in the son he named, when he chooses Er’s wife for him. We do not know who Tamar is and her lineage not being stated is unusual, though the Book of Jasher provides information.

Book of Jasher 45:4, 23

4 ‘… Judah went at that time to Adulam, and he came to a man of Adulam, and his name was Hirah, and Judah saw there the daughter of a man from Canaan, and her name was Aliyath, the daughter of Shua, and he took her, and came to her, and Aliyath bare unto Judah, Er, Onan and Shiloh; three sons.

23 And in those days Judah went to the house of Shem and took Tamar the daughter [descendant] of Elam [refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey], the son of Shem, for a wife for his first born Er.’

It would be impossible using an unconventional chronology for Tamar to be the literal daughter of Elam, so a descendant would be applicable. As Er and Onan are both put to death, first without a reason given and then with a punishment that seemingly doesn’t fit the crime; Nephilim dalliance could possibly answer why her sons were evil.

Against this, is that Shelah is also born by Shua’s daughter. This writer would lean to considering that Shelah was half Israelite and half black Canaanite. For the events to unfold and add up mathematically, so that Pharez’s sons Hezron and Hamul are counted as part of the seventy souls who travelled with Jacob into Egypt, Judah would have to have married Shua’s daughter circa 1727 BCE and not in 1709 BCE as intimated in verse one. A year before Joseph was born in fact in 1726 BCE. This means Er and Onan were contemporaries of Joseph being born circa 1727 and 1726 BCE. Perhaps a motivation for Judah in sparing Joseph’s life. Er marrying Tamar in approximately 1709 BCE and then Onan in 1708 BCE.

Genesis: 12 ‘In the course of time the wife of Judah, Shua’s daughter, died [between 1708-1706 BCE]. When Judah was comforted, he went up to Timnah to his sheepshearers, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. 13 And when Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to shear his sheep,” 14 she took off her widow’s garments and covered herself with a veil, wrapping herself up, and sat at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that Shelah was grown up, and she had not been given to him in marriage.

15 When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. 16 He turned to her at the roadside and said, “Come, let me come in to you,” for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. She said, “What will you give me, that you may come in to me?” 17 He answered, “I will send you a young goat from the flock.” And she said, “If you give me a pledge, until you send it” – 18 He said, “What pledge shall I give you?” She replied, “Your signet and your cord and your staff that is in your hand.” So he gave them to her and went in to her, and she conceived by him. 19 Then she arose and went away, and taking off her veil she put on the garments of her widowhood.’

Judah and Tamar

Shelah would have been born circa 1725 BCE and by 1707 BCE was old enough to marry Tamar. For whatever reason, Judah had not given Tamar to Shelah. Tamar took matters in her own hands, made easier by her attraction for Judah, circa 1706 BCE.

Genesis: 20 When Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite to take back the pledge from the woman’s hand, he did not find her. 21 And he asked the men of the place, “Where is the cult prostitute who was at Enaim at the roadside?” And they said, “No cult prostitute has been here.” 22 So he returned to Judah and said, “I have not found her. Also, the men of the place said, ‘No cult prostitute has been here.’” 23 And Judah replied, “Let her keep the things as her own, or we shall be laughed at. You see, I sent this young goat, and you did not find her.”

24 About three months later Judah was told, “Tamar your daughter-in-law has been immoral.  Moreover, she is pregnant by immorality.” And Judah said, “Bring her out, and let her be burned.” 25 As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law, “By the man to whom these belong, I am pregnant.” And she said, “Please identify whose these are, the signet and the cord and the staff.” 26 Then Judah identified them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not know her again.

27 When the time of her labor came, there were twins in her womb. 28 And when she was in labor, one put out a hand, and the midwife took and tied a scarlet thread on his hand, saying, “This one came out first.” 29 But as he drew back his hand, behold, his brother came out [reminiscent of Esau and Jacob’s birth]. And she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” Therefore his name was called Perez. 30 Afterward his brother came out with the scarlet thread on his hand, and his name was called Zerah.

Recall Judah’s wife, Bath-shua was dead and so Judah was a widow when he visited a prostitute. Judah was possibly not attracted to Tamar enough to marry Tamar, nor would it have been conventional to marry his son’s former wife. Their new sons, Pharez and Zarah were born out of wedlock circa 1705 BCE. Pharez was the ancestor of both King David and the Messiah. 

The name Tamar means ‘palm’ or ‘palm tree.’ Er is interesting as it can mean ‘aroused, wild ass, watching’ and ‘watcher.’ A clue to a Nephilim interest? The verb ‘arar means ‘to strip and accumulate.’ Onan is also enlightening as it can mean ‘trouble, vigor, vigorous, strong’ and ‘iniquity.’ Shelah means ‘to send.’ Pharez means ‘a breach, to break through’ and Zarah means ‘rising, rising of light, dawn, break out.’ Pharez and Zarah both coincidentally mean to ‘break through’ or ‘break out.’ 

Due to severe famine, Jacob sends his sons to Egypt excepting Benjamin. Of course, Joseph has never met Benjamin. Joseph makes a pretext to withhold Simeon and requests the brothers return with the youngest brother Benjamin – who was born some twenty-seven years after Joseph circa 1699 BCE and is about twelve years of age.

Genesis 43:1-14

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now the famine was severe in the land. 2 And when they had eaten the grain that they had brought from Egypt, their father said to them, “Go again, buy us a little food.”

3 But Judah said to him, “The man solemnly warned us, saying, ‘You shall not see my face unless your brother is with you.’ 4 If you will send our brother with us, we will go down and buy you food. 5 But if you will not send him, we will not go down…

6 Israel said, “Why did you treat me so badly as to tell the man that you had another brother?” 7 They replied, “The man questioned us carefully about ourselves and our kindred, saying, ‘Is your father still alive? Do you have another brother?’ What we told him was in answer to these questions. 

Could we in any way know that he would say, ‘Bring your brother down’?” 8 And Judah said to Israel his father, “Send the boy with me, and we will arise and go, that we may live and not die, both we and you and also our little ones.

I will be a pledge of his safety. From my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever. 10 If we had not delayed, we would now have returned twice.”

11 Then their father Israel said to them, “If it must be so, then do this: take some of the choice fruits of the land in your bags, and carry a present down to the man, a little balm and a little honey, gum, myrrh, pistachio nuts, and almonds. 12 Take double the money with you. Carry back with you the money that was returned in the mouth of your sacks. Perhaps it was an oversight. 13 Take also your brother, and arise, go again to the man. 14 May God Almighty grant you mercy before the man, and may he send back your other brother and Benjamin. And as for me, if I am bereaved of my children, I am bereaved.”

Poor Jacob with two sons at risk now, Simeon and Benjamin. It is highly prophetic that Judah should wish to take Joseph’s only full-blood brother and protect him. We will learn that Judah and Benjamin’s peoples have developed a very close relationship over the centuries, albeit turbulent at times, it has been a strong bond that was the heart, soul and core of the Kingdom of Judah. 

The descendants of Judah have also had a protective hand over Simeon’s descendants and so the story of Judah fetching Simeon and protecting him with Benjamin’s safe return home is heavy with dual symbolism. The brothers return to Egypt and feast with Joseph. Joseph tests them on the return journey by hiding a ‘stolen’ cup in Benjamin’s bags; so they should return to Egypt yet again.

Genesis 44:14-34

English Standard Version

14 ‘When Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, he was still there. They fell before him to the ground. 15 Joseph said to them, “What deed is this that you have done? Do you not know that a man like me can indeed practice divination?”

16 And Judah said, “What shall we say to my lord? What shall we speak? Or how can we clear ourselves? God has found out the guilt of your servants; behold, we are my lord’s servants, both we and he also in whose hand the cup has been found.”

17 But he said, “Far be it from me that I should do so! Only the man in whose hand the cup was found shall be my servant. But as for you, go up in peace to your father.”

Joseph is certainly getting good measure of playful revenge on his brothers, saying he can divine and cornering them to leave behind Benjamin. Notice in all the exchanges with Joseph, it is not the elder brothers, Reuben, Simeon or Levi taking the lead, it is Judah who is speaking on all of their behalf.

18 ‘Then Judah went up to him and said, “Oh, my lord, please let your servant speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not your anger burn against your servant, for you are like Pharaoh himself.’

Judah confronts Joseph

19 ‘My lord asked his servants, saying, ‘Have you a father, or a brother?’ 20 And we said to my lord, ‘We have a father, an old man, and a young brother, the child of his old age. His brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother’s children, and his father loves him.’ 21 Then you said to your servants, ‘Bring him down to me, that I may set my eyes on him.’ 22 We said to my lord, ‘The boy cannot leave his father, for if he should leave his father, his father would die.’ 23 Then you said to your servants, ‘Unless your youngest brother comes down with you, you shall not see my face again.’

24 “When we went back to your servant my father, we told him the words of my lord. 25 And when our father said, ‘Go again, buy us a little food,’ 26 we said, ‘We cannot go down. If our youngest brother goes with us, then we will go down. For we cannot see the man’s face unless our youngest brother is with us.’ 27 Then your servant my father said to us, ‘You know that my wife bore me two sons. 28 One left me, and I said, “Surely he has been torn to pieces,” and I have never seen him since. 29 If you take this one also from me, and harm happens to him, you will bring down my gray hairs in evil to Sheol.’

30 “Now therefore, as soon as I come to your servant my father, and the boy is not with us, then, as his life is bound up in the boy’s life, 31 as soon as he sees that the boy is not with us, he will die, and your servants will bring down the gray hairs of your servant our father with sorrow to Sheol. 32 For your servant became a pledge of safety for the boy to my father, saying, ‘If I do not bring him back to you, then I shall bear the blame before my father all my life.’ 

33 Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a servant to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers. 34 For how can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? I fear to see the evil that would find my father.”

Judah has deliberately laid it on thick here and making the point as dramatically as possible, in that he cannot under any circumstances leave Benjamin behind. It is at this point, that Joseph cannot keep up the charade and reveals his identity in an emotional reunion. Plans are agreed for Jacob’s family to move to Lower Egypt, the Nile delta situated in the north of Egypt.

Genesis 46:28-29

English Standard Version

‘[Jacob] had sent Judah ahead of him to Joseph to show the way before him in Goshen, and they came into the land of Goshen. Then Joseph prepared his chariot and went up to meet Israel his father in Goshen…’ 

We shall return to this dramatic reconciliation in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes. In Genesis chapter forty-nine, Jacob gathers his sons prior to his death and gives a specific prophecy – which in turn are insightful identifying signs – for each son and their descendants. In Deuteronomy chapter thirty-three, Moses gives additional revealing prophecies for the respective tribes.

Genesis 49:8

The Voice

“… Judah, your brothers will praise you. Your hand will firmly grasp the neck of your enemy, and your brothers will bow down before you in respect.”

England has certainly had the upper hand over their enemies. It has not lost a war since the American War of Independence in 1812. Before that, it lost a handful of battles with Scotland, though winning the pivotal majority. The United States on the other hand has had greater highs – influencing the outcome of both World Wars – and also greater lows, stalemates or losses in the Korean and Vietnam wars. England’s daughter nations have all looked to the Mother country in recognition of their origin and support. Similarly, the English speaking Celtic-Saxon-Viking peoples have given their allegiance to England in having the English King (or Queen) as their own. It cannot be said that any country has ever bowed down to the Jewish nation. 

Three countries have shaken off this obligation of fealty to the Monarch and formed Republics – the United States of America, South Africa and the Republic of Ireland. They represent Israelite tribes who do not wish to be subservient or subject to Judah’s monarchy. Though in the case of America, a ‘special relationship’ continues. Nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand are self-governing democracy’s which readily claim the King, as their Monarch – albeit Australia more reluctantly and possibly heading towards a republican future the earliest of the three. 

The remaining three nations are tied exclusively with Judah and the throne in a Union. They comprise the Kingdom of Scotland; the state of Northern Ireland; and the nation of Wales – a principality until 1543, yet nation status only made official in 2011. Wales constitutes with England since 1542, the Kingdom of England. With the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, driven by the English majority, it remains to be seen if Scotland will take the path toward becoming an independent democracy or a Republic. This issue is significant and will become apparent when we discuss their identity.

Deuteronomy 33:7

English Standard Version

“… Hear, O Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in to his people. With your hands contend for him, and be a help against his adversaries.”

New English Translation

… May his power be great, and may you help him against his foes.

King James Version

… let his hands be sufficient for him…

Good News Translation

… listen to their cry for help; Unite them again with the other tribes [of Israel]. Fight for them, Lord, And help them against their enemies.

The peoples of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, South Africa (Rhodesia), Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States – with the exception of the Irish Republic – all came to England’s call in their darkest hours during the Great War and the Second World War. The loss of life, freely given to assist Judah’s cause was of great sacrifice, particularly from the smaller of Judah’s brother nations. Conversely, the Israelite people of the colonies around the world which became nations in their own right have all originated from the prominent nation on the largest of the British Isles: England. England is surrounded by water, as Judah is described in the Book of Isaiah. While the original territory of Judah was tellingly landlocked.

Isaiah 48:1

King James Version

‘Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness’ [for England is gradually becoming a Godless land].

In Deuteronomy 33:7, the Hebrew word H7227 – rab for sufficient, means ‘power, contend.’ The word is translated as sufficient sixty-two times, spread across eleven translations. In the KJV it is translated as: many 190 times; great 118; much 36; captain 24; more 12; multitude 7; mighty 5; and greatly 3 times. It also means ‘abounding in, more numerous than, strong, greater than, exceedingly’ and ‘chief.’ Abundant as in ‘quantity, size, age, number, rank’ and multitude as in ‘plenteous, populous’ and a ‘prince.’

These definitions reveal that many would assist Judah. Though the context is that may his (Judah’s) power be great, as in plenteous and strong.

England has a population of 58,440,915 people; is a great nation economically and militarily; and was once a major power, a prototype superpower while it possessed a global empire; though now it is a shadow of itself as a regional power and head of a Commonwealth of nations, reflecting the residue of its former overseas empire – refer article: 2050

The United Kingdom – spear headed by England – has the sixth largest economy in the world, with a GDP of $3.84 trillion in 2025. The United Kingdom economy is driven by a large service sector, particularly in finance, insurance and business services (recall Judah making money from selling Joseph). In the 1990s the United Kingdom was fourth in the world, subsequently passed by China and India.

‘… the following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in UK global shipments during 2021.

  1. Machinery including computers: US$67.6 billion 
  2. Gems, precious metals: $65.7 billion 
  3. Vehicles: $40.1 billion 
  4. Mineral fuels including oil: $33.7 billion 
  5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $26.4 billion 
  6. Pharmaceuticals: $23.3 billion 
  7. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $20.4 billion 
  8. Aircraft, spacecraft: $13.9 billion 
  9. Plastics, plastic articles: $12.3 billion 
  10. Organic chemicals: $11 billion 

Gems and precious metals represents the fastest-growing among the top 10 export categories, up by 53.2% year over year since 2020 propelled by higher international sales of gold and platinum. In second place for improving export sales was mineral fuels including oil which was up by 27.8%.’

In the Global Innovation Index for 2023, the UK was ranked the fourth most innovative country in the world – across 80 indicators in seven categories. Recall, Germany was ranked number eight and Switzerland number one.

The post-exilic writer (or compiler) of 1 Chronicles, likely Ezra, wrote:

1 Chronicles 5:2

Amplified Bible

‘Though Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came (David) the leader (and eventually the Messiah), yet the birthright was Joseph’s…’

How did Judah prevail? During the leadership of Moses, the tribe of Judah became the strongest tribe. The census in Numbers chapter one shows that Judah was the leading tribe in population and in men who could go to war for Israel – Numbers 1:2-3, 27. 

After the death of Joshua, the Creator chose the tribe of Judah to take the lead in conquering the Canaanite-Nephilim nations who were living in the land which had been promised to the sons of Jacob – Judges 1:2. The first chapter of Judges recounts that the tribe of Judah was the most passionate in driving out the Canaanites in the southern half of the land of Canaan. Notably, they were the only tribe to actually drive out the Canaanites in their territory, fulfilling the Creator’s command. 

Israel was numbered by David in a census and it reveals an army of considerable size. A standing army of a million and half men is formidable even by todays standards. Notice the proportion of slightly over forty percent, that was contributed by Judah; much above an average of nearly just over eleven percent if nine tribes (not including Levi and Benjamin) contributed some 630,000 men.

1 Chronicles 21:5

English Standard Version

‘And Joab gave the sum of the numbering of the people to David. In all Israel there were 1,100,000 men who drew the sword, and in Judah 470,000 who drew the sword.’

During the time of King David, the tabernacle of the Eternal had long been in Shiloh in the territory of Ephraim, but David set the stage for the temple to be built on Mount Zion in Jerusalem. 

Psalm 78:67-70

New King James Version

‘Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph, And did not choose the tribe of Ephraim, But chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loved. And He built His sanctuary like the heights, Like the earth which He has established forever. He also chose David His servant, And took him from the sheepfolds…’

The Creator chose Jerusalem – principally Mount Zion across from the Mount of Olives – in Judah, for His dwelling to be located… and chose David and his family, to hold the sceptre of kingship within the tribe of Judah. 

Judah was a warrior^^ nation. The English too, are a warrior nation, with a reputation well founded for bulldog doggedness, stubbornness, determined resolve and do-or-die, true grit. These are characteristics shared by ancient Judah and modern England alike. England’s power has waned some since its military dominance during the nineteenth century and its economic peak in 1913. Even so, it would be a brave nation indeed to poke the Lion of Judah, as the verse following in Genesis forty-nine reveals. 

While the above refers to the Patriarch Jacob, it could easily and just as accurately depict Judah and his descendants.

Why did the Creator choose Judah? Judah, the tribe he holds dear and loves. Judah did not seem to have the charisma or genuineness of Joseph, though the Eternal sees the heart and He must have perceived a strong warrior spirit in Judah and recognised someone with strength of character and determination; likening him to a young lion who would stand and fight. These qualities later evident in his descendant David and in the English people as a whole, must have influenced the Eternal’s desire to choose Judah to be His lawgiver and the tribe from which His Son would later be born – Hebrews 7:14. 

David was undoubtedly inspired by this passage in Genesis forty-nine to twice say in the Psalms that ‘Judah is My lawgiver’ – Psalms 60:7; 108:8. 

The tribe of Judah has not only been a lawgiver, but a preserver of the Creator’s law and message. Paul said, “What advantage then has the Jew [from true Judah]? … Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles – that which was spoken or commanded – of God” – Romans 3:1-2. 

It is the English who disseminated the Bible to a wider public more than any other nation – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. Not the Jews, who have faithfully preserved the Torah but disdain the New Testament and the Saviour who is central to it. Nor has the preservation of the Jewish calendar, erroneously called the Hebrew or sacred calendar by some, fulfilled Paul’s words. In a separate study we will learn the incredible and shocking truth about the Jewish calendar as well as the Gregorian-Julian calendar foisted on our modern world – refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy.

Genesis 49:9 

New Life Version

Judah is a young lion. Like a lion full of meat, you have become great, my son. He lies down and sleeps like a lion. And as a lion, who is willing to wake him?”

The Message

… Look at him, crouched like a lion, king of beasts; who dares mess with him?

When Jacob gave his dying blessing to his twelve sons, he associated each of them with an animal, object or a personal characteristic which became either an emblem of the tribe descended from him, or an identifying sign. The Lion, the emblem of Jacob’s fourth son Judah, is of special importance. This lion, in a couchant (lying down) position, became the emblem of the tribe of Judah; then, in a passant position (walking position with foreleg raised), it was an emblem of the Camp of Judah.

Later, with the addition of a crown, it was the emblem of the Royal House and throne of Judah. Finally, as a rampant lion (standing on hind legs with both forelegs elevated) posture with a crown, it became the symbol of the two Houses which comprise the Kingdom of Judah. For inspiration was drawn from the rampant Lion Royal standard of Scotland.

Kingdom of Scotland Coat of Arms – God me Defend – incorporating the Royal Banner of the Royal Arms, the Lion Rampant of Scotland 

The Lion and the Unicorn, United Church of God – emphasis mine:

‘Moses said of Joseph: “His glory is like a firstborn bull, and his horns (weapons) are like the horns of a wild ox” (Deuteronomy 33:17). Where the New King James Version has “a wild ox,” the earlier King James had “unicorns.” Certainly a bovine animal was intended – tying back to the “bull” in the earlier part of the verse. Indeed, the medieval unicorn idea is believed by some to have been inspired by the Arabian oryx. Viewed from the side, particularly from a distance, these animals appear to have a single long horn. And sometimes they actually have only one. Consider also that unicorns, though portrayed with horse faces, have antelope hooves and long, lion-like tails – as oryx also have. The bull or unicorn thus became the symbol of Joseph – particularly of Ephraim. 

As is widely understood, the lion became the tribal emblem of Judah directly connected to kingship

This was fitting, of course, since the lion is known as the “king of beasts” – and from Judah was to come the king of Israel, David, and ultimately the King of Kings, Jesus Christ. Jesus is even referred to as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (Revelation 5:5). 

… the lion, as the emblem of Judah, was the symbol of the house of David. Notice how David’s son Solomon utilized this imagery to represent the greatest dynasty on earth: “The king made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with pure gold. The throne had six steps, with a footstool of gold, which were fastened to the throne (and the top of the throne was round at the back); there were armrests on either side of the place of the seat, and two lions stood beside the armrests. Twelve lions stood there, one on each side of the six steps; nothing like this had been made for any other kingdom” (2 Chronicles 9:17-19; 1 Kings 10:18-20). 

One source explains: “King James VI of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I when she died childless in 1603, effectively uniting Scotland and England beneath one rule. The Scottish Royal Arms had up to that point used two unicorns as shield supporters. The English Arms had used a variety of supporters, but most frequently had included a lion. In a tactful gesture then, he placed a lion upon the left of the new Arms, and a unicorn upon the right.” 

National motto of Scotland: Nemo me impune lacessit, meaning: No one provokes me with impunity.

United Church of God: “This was a potent bit of symbolism, for both the lion and the unicorn had long been thought to be deadly enemies: both regarded as king of the beasts, the unicorn rules through harmony while the lion rules through might, It came to symbolise a reconciliation between the Scottish unicorn and the English lion that the two should share the rule.”

This significant moment in history saw the rejoining of the Houses of Benjamin and of Judah into the formation of the ancient Kingdom of Judah. Thus the unification of the two separate Kingdoms of Scotland and England transformed them into the United Kingdom of Great Britain. 

United Church of God: ‘… between the lion and unicorn is a garter around the central shield said to represent the Order of the Garter, an ancient order of knighthood of which the British monarch is sovereign. On the garter appear the Old French words, “Honi soit qui mal y pense,” which means, “Evil to him who thinks evil” – toward Britain that is. Is this not nearly the same as “cursed is he that curseth thee” in Numbers 24, a promise given in the same context as the lion and unicorn in Scripture? Surely this is no mere coincidence.

Beneath the shield and animals appears the motto of the sovereign, “Dieu et mon droit,” meaning, “God and my right,” that is, the right of kingly succession (as David’s line has by God’s promise) or right of birth… This was the military password chosen by King Richard I in 1198, but its origins may go even further back. In any event, it would seem to be more than happenstance that such is the royal motto of Britain.

And there is more. Upon the shield of the arms appear the golden passant lions of England – passant meaning walking with farther forepaw raised. Actually, these lions are considered to be running across the shield in a crouched position – stalking prey and attacking. Says one source: “Lions have appeared in our Royal Arms since the introduction of Heraldry. It is said that Henry II’s arms originally consisted of two lions, and that he added a third on marriage [in 1152]” (Patrick Montague-Smith, The Royal Line of Succession, Pitkin, 1968, page 2).’

‘The two lions had been the emblem of William the Conqueror prior to 1066 (Jiri Louda and Michael Maclagan, Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, 1981, page 16). William was apparently of the… line of Zerah, and may even have been of Davidic lineage’ – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. ‘The two golden lions could perhaps be reminiscent of the gilded lions upon the sides of Solomon’s throne’ – representing Pharez and Zarah.

‘When… Edward I took the Stone of Destiny from Scotland in 1296, he “ordered his goldsmith to make a fair bronze chair to contain it… The coronation chair, which still stands in Westminster Abbey today, has been used in almost all English coronations since that of Edward II in 1307. We are told that it was made by Walter of Durham in 1299… (who) was paid… for the carving and painting of two wooden leopards (‘leopard’ being the medieval term for a running as opposed to rampant lion) – kings of England during that period liked being shown with their feet resting on leopards (that is, lions), perhaps to model their throne on descriptions of King Solomon’s which had two lions standing by the stays” (Pat Gerber, Stone of Destiny, 1997, page 105).’

Judah is described as a lion cub, a lioness; and a lion. We will see links between the lion cub and the tribe of Dan and the association between Judah’s lion and the tribe of Gad. Both the symbols of a Dragon, via the Tudors of Wales and the Unicorn from the Stuarts of Scotland have been secondary symbols of England; though its prime and true symbol is the Lion as evidenced in heraldry and the Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.

Numbers 23:22-24; 24:8-9

King James Version

‘God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn. Surely there is no enchantment against Jacob, neither is there any divination against Israel: according to this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought! Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood^^ of the slain.

God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows [superior military strength]. He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir* him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee.’

The state of Israel and the Jewish people could not be honestly described in this fashion. They do not have the military might which Great Britain has possessed in the past or currently has at its disposal. The royal motto in Old French, is Dieu et mon Droit, meaning: God and my Right. The right to rule as the royal tribe of Judah. Balaam was hired to curse Israel and ended up blessing them and cursing anyone who cursed them.

Genesis 49:10 

Good News Translation

Judah will hold the royal scepter, And his descendants will always rule. Nations will bring him tribute And bow in obedience before him.”

1599 Geneva Bible

The Sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh [the Messiah] come, and the people shall be gathered unto him.

Ancient Jewish authorities interpret ‘Shiloh’ as a compound of shel and loh meaning, ‘to whom it belongs.’ Judah would always be identified with a monarchy, a throne and royal dynasties of kings and queens. This again, is not something that can be attributed to the Jewish people. To argue that the Jews are Judah, but some ‘Jews of Judah’ are the royal family in England, presiding over the tribe of Ephraim is not scriptural and exemplifies the classic forcing of a piece of the jig-saw puzzle that well and truly does not fit. In the Bible (and historically), Ephraim distanced himself from Judah and its monarchy and has only gone and done the same in our modern age as we shall discover. Ephraim doesn’t sit right underneath Judah’s monarch, forever ruled by them. This situation is not described or predicted in the scriptures.  

The Son of Man was prophesied to descend from Judah and He did – one proof of his credentials as the Messiah. David was promised that he would always have an eligible descendant to sit on the throne of Judah, not that that there would necessarily always be someone from his line on the throne – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

Psalm 89:3-4

English Standard Version

You have said, I have made a covenant with my chosen one; I have sworn to David my servant: ‘I will establish your offspring forever, and build your throne for all generations.’

Jeremiah 33:17, ESV: “For thus says the Lord: David shall never [H3808 – lo: not, no] lack [H3772 – karath: want, fail] a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel…’ It could be written that ‘… David would never be without or fail to have, a descendant to sit on the throne…’ Verse eighteen says the exact same thing regarding levitical priests always being available to offer burnt offerings, meat offerings and sacrifices. Yet the Levitical priesthood ended with Christ’s sacrifice – Hebrews 7:11-14.

The Hebrew word used for fail is karath, and is translated in the KJV as cut off (145 times), make (85), cut down (23), cut (9), fail (6), destroy (4), want (3), covenanted (2) and hew (2). The word also means ‘to cut asunder… by implication, to destroy or consume; specifically, to covenant (i.e make an alliance, or bargain…) make a league, to permit to perish.’ 

1 Kings 9:5

New King James Version

‘… then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, as I promised David your father, saying, ‘You shall not fail to have a man on [H5921 – meal: upon] the throne [H3678 – keceh: seat (of honour), stool] of Israel.’

This verse states descendants of David would sit on the throne perpetually. Yet the following verse says the monarchy would end if Solomon or his descendants did not follow the Eternal like David had. Regrettably, Solomon turned aside from the Eternal and both Israel and Judah went into captivity and were transplanted from the Promised Land – Articles: Na’amah; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

The current King and his son and grandson, the future heirs to the throne have a mixed pedigree consisting primarily of German-Jewish ancestry. Therefore, the inclusion of any pure English bloodline through the Saxon Jutes or the later Normans, all the way back to David himself, no matter how slight of a percentage, would it seems, accidentally fulfil the promise. Yet, the likelihood of this being the case is just as slim a chance – as discussed in the articles: The Ark of God; and The Life & Death of Charles III.

For while there is reason to believe the line of Zarah may presently have representation in the crown in some percentage form; a line of descent from Pharez – which included David and the Messiah – does not have convincing support (Article: The Life & Death of Charles III).

‘Bow in obedience’ is a direct reference to other people – nations, Gentiles – towards Judah. This has also been fulfilled in the vast Empire Britain built and accumulated; the vestiges of which still remain in the British Commonwealth of nations today.

Genesis 49:11

Common English Bible

He ties his male donkey to the vine, the colt of his female donkey to the vines branches. He washes his clothes in wine, his garments in the blood of grapes.”

While Judah did not protest as loudly as Ishmael – the modern Germans – during the Protestant Reformation and the breaking away from the Universal Church of the Chaldeans – the modern Italians – and though Judah has not proclaimed their faith, their belief or Christianity as loudly as their brother, the United States; they did before anyone else, translate editions of the word of God into English, which irrevocably opened the Bible to the masses so that they could determine for themselves whether organised religion was teaching them the truth or not – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

John Wycliffe is credited with providing the first translation of the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate in 1384. His translation began a revolution, enabling the ordinary people to finally access the Bible in a language they could understand – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. So profound was the revolution Wycliffe ignited, he is called, ‘The Morning Star of the Reformation.’ Later, William Tyndale translated into English from the original Hebrew and Greek much of the scriptures, most notably the New Testament in 1525. In 1611, King James I of England (James VI Scotland) provided an updated English version which remains the standard till this day.

Jacob describes a rich blessing for Judah, in that his descendants will be satiated. Yet, it is interesting to note that Judah’s garments are not white as snow signifying purity and life (Revelation 3:5); but drenched in the blood red of sin and death – Isaiah 63:2-3.

Genesis 49:12

King James Version

His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.”

An apt description online of Judah’s inheritance in the promised land: 

‘The tribe of Judah received as its inheritance the largest and most [impressive] portion in the inmost and highest region of the land of Canaan – a mountainous district, yet rich and fertile in ancient times, [where] mountain sides would have been carefully terraced and covered with flourishing vineyards and olive groves. It was thus able to support a teeming population and a greater number of important cities and towns… [compared to] any other part of Palestine. [There] was Hebron, the most ancient capital of the country, and Jerusalem with Zion and the Temple, representing the heart and lungs of the nation… Here, then, throned the “lion of Judah” on his mountains, surrounded by Dan in the west and Reuben in the east; by Simeon to the south and Benjamin to the north.’

In the Book of Lamentations we find that the Nazarites – consecrated persons typically from Judah – were exceedingly fair: ‘Her Nazirites were brighter than snow And whiter than milk; They were more ruddy in body than rubies, Like sapphire in their appearance (blue eyes?)’ – Lamentations 4:7, NKJV. 

The colours of England coincidently or not, are in fact, red and white. The Red Rose of England… the national sports teams colours of predominantly white and a splash of red. The War of the Roses between the white rose of Yorkshire and the red rose of Lancashire. The national flag consisting of a white background, overlaid with the red St Georges cross.

Red wine in the Bible symbolises Christ’s blood; white raiment symbolises purity, sanctification and forgiveness achieved through the shedding and application of his blood. England a Christian people, accepted the sacrifice of Christ the earliest of any nation – Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation

Yet, as with the preceding verse (11), verse 12 signifies Judah’s greed, so that his eyes will become bloodshot from too much wine (alcohol) and his teeth would drip with imbibing an excess of milk (dairy).

William Blake wrote an exceptionally insightful poem entitled, Jerusalem (“And did those feet in ancient time”):

And did those feet in ancient time Walk upon Englands mountains green:

And was the holy Lamb of God, On Englands pleasant pastures seen!

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

And was Jerusalem builded here, Among these dark Satanic Mills?

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

Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold! Bring me my Chariot of fire!

I will not cease from Mental Fight, Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand:

Till we have built Jerusalem, In Englands green and pleasant Land.

A poignant and truly accurate portrayal, for as we progress we will substantiate that ‘those feet in ancient time’ truly did walk on England’s soil (Appendix VIII: When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation) and that as Judah, the modern counterpart of Jerusalem is fulfilled in the capital of England: London.

As an important aside, anywhere in the scriptures Jerusalem is stated in a prophetic context – though not historical – it means London, not the city of Jerusalem in the state of Israel today. In the Book of Revelation, Jerusalem in Israel is called ‘the great city’ or in other passages of the Bible it is in fact, Bozrah the capital of Edom. 

City of London Coat of Arms – O Lord, guide us (Master, direct us).

But which lord to guide and direct the capital (Jerusalem) in Judah? The Eternal Creator or the adversarial Dragon – refer article: Asherah.

Prophetically, Jerusalem is always London. An accurate understanding of Judah’s capital and Edom’s capital and thus the true intent of prophetic scriptures is only obtained if Jerusalem is decoded as London and Bozrah as Jerusalem. According to modern identity adherents who teach Judah is the state of Israel and Edom is Turkey for example; they would then have to attribute Bozrah of Edom to either Turkey’s capital, Ankara or possibly its major city, Istanbul. When scriptures are read using either of these cities and the city of Jerusalem in Israel, the relationship does not fit smoothly, make sense or elucidate prophecy in any meaningful manner. 

English men

Prior to Isaac’s death in 1697 BCE at the age of one hundred and eighty, Jacob visits his father with his sons Levi and Judah. Jacob would have been one hundred and twenty, Levi, fifty-one and Judah, forty-nine.

Book of Jubilees 31:4-11, 18-23

31:4 ‘And Isaac said: ‘Let my son Jacob come, and let me see him before I die.’ 5 And Jacob went to his father Isaac and to his mother Rebecca, to the house of his father Abraham, and he took two of his sons with him, Levi and Judah… 6 And Rebecca came forth from the tower to the front of it to kiss Jacob and embrace him; for her spirit had revived when she heard: ‘Behold Jacob your son has come’; and she kissed him. 7 And she saw his two sons, and she recognised them, and said to him: ‘Are these your sons, my son?’ and she embraced them and kissed them, and blessed them, saying: ‘In you shall the seed of Abraham become illustrious, and you shall prove a blessing on the earth.’ 8 And Jacob went in to Isaac his father, to the chamber where he lay, and his two sons were with him, and he took the hand of his father, and stooping down he kissed him, and Isaac clung to the neck of Jacob his son, and wept upon his neck.

9 And the darkness left the eyes of Isaac, and he saw the two sons of Jacob, Levi, and Judah, and he said: Are these your sons, my son? for they are like you.’ 10 And he said to him that they were truly his sons: ‘And you have truly seen that they are truly my sons’. 11 And they came near to him, and he turned and kissed them and embraced them both together. 

18 And to Judah he said: ‘May Yahweh give you strength and power To tread down all that hate you; A prince shall you be, you and one of your sons [Pharez], over the sons of Jacob [the Monarchy]; May your name and the name of your sons [including Zarah and Shelah] go forth and traverse every land and region.

19 Then shall the Gentiles fear before your face, and all the nations shall quake [And all the peoples shall quake]. In you shall be the help of Jacob, And in you be found the Yeshua of Israel [the Messiah]. 20 And when you sit on the throne of honor of your righteousness, There shall be great [peace] for all the seed of the sons of the beloved; Blessed be he that blesses you, And all that hate you and afflict you and curse you Shall be rooted out and destroyed from the earth and be accursed.’

21 And turning he kissed him again and embraced him, and rejoiced greatly; for he had seen the sons of Jacob his son in very truth. 22 And Jacob went forth from between his feet and fell down and bowed down to him, and he blessed them and rested there with Isaac his father that night, and they [ate] and drank with joy. 23 And he made the two sons of Jacob sleep, the one on his right hand and the other on his left, and it was counted to him for righteousness.’

English women

Jacob understood that Levi and Judah were selected for separate roles from the birthright promise going to his son Joseph. Of course, it was still ten years away before Jacob learns that Joseph is in fact alive in Egypt. One wonders who the alternative birthright recipient would have been should Joseph have been truly dead. Perhaps youngest son, Benjamin. Eventually, it is Jacob who in turn blesses Joseph’s sons Manasseh and Ephraim, slightly reminisce of the blessing by Isaac on his grandsons, Levi and Judah. We will return to Levi’s blessing in the following chapter. 

Notice Judah’s blessing from Isaac includes the power to overcome his enemies and the promise of a royal line which would rule over his brothers. No other nation has fulfilled these promises like England. Nor have any other people ‘traversed every land and region’ in the world in such manner as to take their culture, religion, language and colonialism to the furthest parts of the globe as the English have done.

In the Book of Chronicles we learn of additional descendants of Judah.

1 Chronicles 4:1-23

English Standard Version

1 ‘The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, Carmi, Hur, and Shobal. 2 Reaiah the son of Shobal fathered Jahath, and Jahath fathered Ahumai and Lahad. 

… These were the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. 5 Ashhur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives, Helah and Naarah; 6 Naarah bore him Ahuzzam, Hepher, Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. 7 The sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan…

9 Jabez was more honorable than his brothers; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, “Because I bore him in pain.” 10 Jabez called upon the God of Israel, saying, “Oh that you would bless me and enlarge my border, and that your hand might be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not bring me pain!” And God granted what he asked. 

… The sons of Kenaz [a shared family name with Esau and his grandson Kenaz from Eliphaz]: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath and Meonothai. 14 Meonothai fathered Ophrah; and Seraiah fathered Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, so-called because they were craftsmen. 15 The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the son of Elah: Kenaz. 

… 17 The sons of Ezrah: Jether, Mered, Epher [a shared family name with Midian], and Jalon. These are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa. 18 And his Judahite wife bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco… 19 The sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the fathers of Keilah the Garmite and Eshtemoa the Maacathite…

21 The sons of Shelah the son of Judah: Er the father of Lecah, Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the clans of the house of linen workers at Beth-ashbea; 22 and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who ruled in Moab and returned to Lehem (now the records are ancient). 23 These were the potters who were inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah. They lived there in the king’s service.’ 

Hezron was Pharez’s first son, but listed separately. Notice an Ashhur [like Asshur] is a family name and Jabez is a classic case, ‘if you don’t ask, you don’t receive’ in reverse. Recall the sons of Kenaz** in the section on Midian in Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. 

The mention of a Caleb, is not Joshua’s friend but the son of Hezron. When did Mered marry Pharaoh’s daughter? During the time of Joseph, before a new Pharaoh who began the Israelite slavery, or later still. Shelah was the only surviving son of Judah and his wife Bath-shua. He named his first son after his eldest brother, Er who died. If Saraph ruled in nearby Moab, he may have married a Moabite woman of high birth. In the second and third chapters of Chronicles, further genealogy for Judah is recorded including Judah’s highest profile personality aside from Christ, King David.

1 Chronicles 2:1-55

English Standard Version

1 ‘These are the sons of Israel… Judah… The sons of Judah: Er, Onan and Shelah; these three Bath-shua the Canaanite bore to him. Now Er, Judah’s firstborn, was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death. 4 His daughter-in-law Tamar also bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five* sons in all. 

5 The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul. 

6 The sons of Zerah: Zimri, Ethan [everflowing, perennial], Heman [faithful], Calcol [Sustenance, to make perfect or whole], and Dara [the arm], five in all. 

7 The son of Carmi [son of Zimri]: Achan, the troubler of Israel, who broke faith in the matter of the devoted thing [Joshua 6 & 7]; 8 and Ethan’s son was Azariah.

English man and woman

Zarah’s five sons were born circa 1685 to 1675 BCE: Calcol in 1677 BCE and Dara (or Darda) in 1675 BCE. Calcol is credited with either founding Athens or influencing its rise to prominence and power and Darda similarly with Troy as discussed earlier – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. They were extremely intelligent, capable men according to the Book of Kings.

1 Kings 4:29-31

English Standard Version

29 ‘And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore, 30 so that Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt.

31 For he was wiser than all other men, wiser than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, Calcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol, and his fame was in all the surrounding nations.’

1 Chronicles: 9 The sons of Hezron that were born to him: Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai [Caleb].

10 Ram fathered Amminadab, and Amminadab fathered Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah. 11 Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz,

12 Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse. 13 Jesse fathered Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third, 14 Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, 15 Ozem the sixth,

David the seventh’ – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

16 ‘And their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. The sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, Joab, and Asahel, three. 17 Abigail bore Amasa, and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.

David later married an Abigail, of the same name as his sister. His sister married an Ishmaelite, the equivalent of a German today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. A close scrutiny of the Germans and English, results in a conclusion that they are different sides of the same coin. David’s lineage is through Judah’s eldest twin son with Tamar, Pharez and then his eldest son, Hezron and Hezron’s grandson, Ram. Ultimately, David was the eleventh generation from Judah and fourteenth from Abraham, and Boaz was his great grandfather with Ruth the Moabite, his great grandmother – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

1 Chronicles: 18 ‘Caleb the son of Hezron fathered children by his wife Azubah, and by Jerioth; and these were her sons: Jesher, Shobab, and Ardon. 19 When Azubah died, Caleb married Ephrath, who bore him Hur…

21 Afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir [son of Manasseh] the father of Gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], whom he married when he was sixty years old, and she bore him Segub [1].

22 And Segub fathered Jair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23 But Geshur^ and Aram took from them Havvoth-jair, Kenath, and its villages, sixty towns. All these were descendants of Machir, the father of Gilead. 24 After the death of Hezron, [his son] Caleb went in to Ephrathah [step mother, the daughter of Machir], the wife of Hezron his father, and she bore him Ashhur [2], the father of Tekoa.’

Gilead was the brother of Machir’s daughter Ephrathah* who married Hezron from Judah. The tribe of Manasseh split in two during the division of Canaan by the sons of Jacob during 1406 to 1400 BCE. Half of Manasseh stayed on the west side of the river Jordan with the tribe of Ephraim and from now on were known as the half tribe of West Manasseh, or collectively with Ephraim as either Joseph or Samaria

The other half journeyed to the east of the River Jordan and lived in Gilead to the north of two other tribes which journeyed east, Gad and Reuben. This second half from now on were known as the half tribe of East Manasseh, Manasseh, or simply as Gilead. This early injection of two royal lines of Judah (Hezron/Segub and Caleb/Asshur both by Ephrathah) into the half tribe of East Manasseh, altered their genome and personality traits dynamic. We will find that this half of Manasseh are staunchly pro-royal and Judah-like, diametrically opposite to their kith and kin who live with Ephraim. This split within Manasseh is paramount in understanding where Manasseh’s inheritance is in the world today and has been crucially missed in identity research circles – refer Chapter XXXIII – Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes.

25 ‘The sons of Jerahmeel, the firstborn of Hezron: Ram, his firstborn, Bunah, Oren, Ozem, and Ahijah.

26 Jerahmeel also had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27 The sons of Ram, the firstborn of Jerahmeel: Maaz, Jamin, and Eker. 28 The sons of Onam: Shammai and Jada. The sons of Shammai: Nadab and Abishur. 29 The name of Abishur’s wife was Abihail, and she bore him Ahban and Molid. 30 The sons of Nadab: Seled and Appaim; and Seled died childless. 31 The son of Appaim: Ishi. The son of Ishi: Sheshan… 34 Now Sheshan had no sons, only daughters, but Sheshan had an Egyptian slave whose name was Jarha. 35 So Sheshan gave his daughter in marriage to Jarha his slave, and she bore him Attai…

The sons of Hur the firstborn* of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim, 51 Salma, the father of Bethlehem… 

55 The clans also of the scribes who lived at Jabez: the Tirathites, the Shimeathites and the Sucathites. These are the Kenites** who came from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

1 Chronicles 3:1-19

English Standard Version

These are the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron: 

the firstborn, Amnon [1], by Ahinoam the Jezreelite; 

the second, Daniel [2], by Abigail the Carmelite, 

2 the third, Absalom [3], whose mother was Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur;^ 

the fourth, Adonijah [4], whose mother was Haggith; 

3 the fifth, Shephatiah [5], by Abital; 

the sixth, Ithream [6], by his wife Eglah; 

4 six were born to him in Hebron, where he reigned for seven years and six months. And he [then] reigned thirty-three years in Jerusalem. 

5 These were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea [7], Shobab [8], Nathan [9] and Solomon [10], four by Bath-shua [Bathsheba], the daughter of Ammiel; 

6 then Ibhar [11], Elishama [12], Eliphelet [13], 7 Nogah [14], Nepheg [15], Japhia [16], 8 Elishama [17], Eliada [18], and Eliphelet [19], nine. 9 All these were David’s sons, besides the sons of the concubines, and Tamar was their sister.

Nineteen sons and one daughter at the very least, born to King David and not a good one among them it would seem. None are recorded as righteous. We have addressed King Solomon and his tragic downfall – Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut; and article: Na’amah. While it appears above that Solomon was David’s tenth son, he was actually his seventh – refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

We will look at Absalom, who was about as wicked as one could be.

10 ‘The son of Solomon was Rehoboam [1st king of Judah],

Abijah [2] his son, Asa [3] his son, Jehoshaphat [4] his son, 11 Joram [5] his son, Ahaziah [6] his son, Joash [7] his son, 12 Amaziah [8] his son, Azariah [9] his son, Jotham [10] his son, 13 Ahaz [11] his son, Hezekiah [12] his son, Manasseh [13] his son, 14 Amon [14] his son, Josiah [15] his son. 

15 The sons of Josiah: Johanan the firstborn [Jehoahaz, 2 Kings 23:31 (16)], the second Jehoiakim [formerly Eliakim, name changed by Pharaoh Neco (2 Kings 23:34, 36) (17)], the third Zedekiah*, the fourth Shallum

16 The descendants of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son [Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:6, 8-9) (18)], Zedekiah [Zedekiah formerly Mattaniah had his name changed by Nebuchadnezzar and was Jehoiachin’s uncle. Jehoiachin surrendered himself to save Jerusalem and was succeeded by Zedekiah, 2 Kings 24:17 (19)] his son;

17 and the sons of Jeconiah, the captive: Shealtiel his son, 18 Malchiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah; 19 and the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel [son of Shealtiel and not Pedaiah – Ezra 3:2, 8; 5:2. Nehemiah 12:1, Haggai 1:1, 12, 14] and Shimei; and the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam and Hananiah, and Shelomith was their sister…’ 

The descendants of Solomon, were the kings of the Kingdom of Judah until King Zedekiah who was taken into Babylonian captivity in 587 BCE. Zerubbabel returned to rebuild portions of Jerusalem beginning in 539 BCE under the Persian King Cyrus II decree. In contrast with the tribes of Israel having never really been lost, being recognisable for many centuries; it has paradoxically, been the Tribe of Judah who has remained hidden, while in plain sight. 

Judah, the really Lost Tribe, Don Robson, 2011 – emphasis & bold mine

‘Recently, I have been reviewing books that I have read in the past and I find that the treatment by many scholars of the exile of Judah correctly defined the details while leaving the readers confused. I feel that this is an important issue because many look to the Jews of Palestine to fulfill the prophecies concerning Judah. The most important point of confusion is the expected union with Israel when Christ returns and His angels gather His people from the ends of the earth into His kingdom to rule with Him for a thousand years. It seems to me rather unlikely that a people who have denied Christ, the King of the Kingdom, for two thousand years will be given such a reprieve when Jesus said that many that call Him Lord will be told, “Depart from me, you that do iniquity; I never knew you.”

A further complication concerning Judah, is that the tribe’s entire history does not occur in Scripture. You will recall from the Bible story that the midwife tied a scarlet thread to Zarah’s hand before it was withdrawn and Pharez was born. His name means “a breach”. 

So, undoubtedly there was conflict over who should be the oldest of the twins, since “the scepter would not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes whose right it is.” At that time, Pharez was deemed to be the older which led to Jesse, David, Solomon and Christ.

The breach had a secondary reaction. The Tribe of Zarah left Egypt before the exodus under Moses, branching into two groups under Zarah’s two sons, Calcol and Darda. Calcol led his group to Ireland where he established the line of Irish kings. Darda took his group into Asia Minor naming the Dardanelles and founding Troy. 

The Greeks, actually the Tribe of Dan [?], defeated the Trojans and the remnant was led into Britain under their King Brute (or Brutus). The name Brute became Brit and the people became known as Britons. So we have one half of the Tribe of Judah settled in Ireland and Britain. But that is not all!

After the Kingdom of Solomon was divided into two parts under his son Rehoboam, Sennacherib of Assyria launched his campaign of conquest. First he conquered Gad, Reuben and the half tribe of [East] Manasseh, deporting them to the land of the Medes. Then, he attacked Samaria and likewise deported them. Phase three was to attack all the fenced cities of Judah, which included the Tribe of Benjamin, where he was again successful, deporting 200,150 men. Women and children would augment this number by at least five times.

Phase four was to defeat Jerusalem but it never happened. God had other plans! The angel of the Lord in the night destroyed Sennacherib’s army and he returned to Assyria where his sons murdered him. God had to protect a remnant of His people to receive the Lord Jesus Christ at the First Advent. The attacks continued until Nebuchadnezzar defeated and destroyed Jerusalem. They were then deported to Babylon for seventy years, until Darius decreed that they could return home and rebuild Jerusalem and the temple. About 50,000 Jews [Judah] returned and their families are listed in Scripture. 

So, the 200,150 men of Judah and Benjamin were united with the ten tribes and migrated westward with their brothers. Those of the tribe of Judah were known as Jutes and made their way through Jutland to Britain where the Zarah tribe had migrated… a major part of the Tribe of Judah, 200,150 men migrated westward with the ten tribes, and Benjamin… although… writers insist on speaking of the migration of the ten tribes, it was in fact all twelve tribes except those who opted to stay in Babylon and the 50,000 who returned to rebuild Jerusalem.

We all know the prophecy of the two sticks, one marked for Israel and one marked for Judah. The Lord used that means, through the prophet, to tell of the reunion that would/did occur in due course in the British Isles. The union is history! It’s the union of Jacob. Its reality is shown in the flag, the Union Jack! That is the reason that James’ epistle begins with the greeting, “James, a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes [not ten, actually thirteen] which are scattered abroad, greeting.”

Robson’s article is unique and the only one found which recognises not just the truth of Israel and Judah’s regathering this side of the millennium, but also its occurrence before the return of Christ; resulting in a pivotal piece of eschatological understanding. It is extremely difficult to deny this regathering of Israel and Judah, once we have discussed all thirteen tribes and their locations, one by one, in this and following chapters.

Ezekiel 37:15-22

English Standard Version

15 ‘The word of the Lord came to me: 16 “Son of man, take a stick and write on it, ‘For Judah, and the people of Israel associated with him’; then take another stick and write on it, “For Joseph (the stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with him.’ 17 And join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand. 18 And when your people say to you, ‘Will you not tell us what you mean by these?’

19 say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am about to take the stick of Joseph (that is in the hand of Ephraim) and the tribes of Israel associated with him. And I will join with it the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in my hand. 20 When the sticks on which you write are in your hand before their eyes, 21 then say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all around, and bring them to their own land [Britain and Ireland; and ultimately a return to ancient Israel in the Millennium].

22 And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. And one king [Judah-England] shall be king over them all, and they shall be no longer two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms.’

The Israelite tribes closely associated with Judah in the past were Benjamin, Levi and in the most part Simeon also. Today, they include: Benjamin, Levi, Simeon and Reuben. The principal tribes associated closely with Joseph (or Ephraim and West Manasseh) today, are the half tribe of East Manasseh, Asher and Naphtali. The tribes of Issachar, Zebulun and Gad are not close to either, though would fall into the Ephraim stick as opposed to Judah’s.

Don Robson writes an insightful article – highlighting two pivotal points in decoding scripture – in that firstly, the Jews of Israel are not the tribe of Judah. While the Zarah and Pharez lines may have competed for the privilege of royal supremacy and intertwined, evidence indicates Zarah has been predominant – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The tribe of Zarah and particularly his three youngest sons, Heman, Calcol and Dara struck out early from Egypt prior to the years of servitude, heading to Greece, Ireland and Britain. The second pivotal point is that the tribe of Judah was split, so that the actual main body of them forged the Parthian Empire, to then migrate following behind the Sacae-Scythians – which contained the Angles and Frisians, later known as Saxons – as the Jutes from Judah. 

A number of readers will be aware of the Tea-Tephi tradition regarding how the Pharez line joined the Zarah line from Judah in Ireland. It is a great story, though it has holes in it, that relegate the account to over zealous scholarship, at best. This does not mean the whole story should be dismissed; as with all tales, the kernel of truth is within to extract. 

The tribes of Israel and Judah did re-combine in their respective invasions into Britain from 450 to 600 CE, 700 to 800 CE and again in 1066. There was a formal level of union three times, when the union of the crowns between England and Scotland occurred in 1603; when the same two kingdoms unified their parliaments in 1707; and thirdly when England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and (the Republic of) Ireland united in 1800. 

An important part of the puzzle to add to Robson’s points and what completes the Judaic panorama of migration, is that the remnant of Judah that returned from captivity to Jerusalem and who then fled Judea (Idumea) after 70 CE and the sacking of Jerusalem by Titus, were considerably behind their brother tribes. They travelled the same migratory paths as their brethren, west and then north. This last vestige of Judah eventually settled in Scandinavia like the tribes before them and in time travelled southwards. They were northmen, norsemen and settled in France, where these people of the north subsequently became known as Normans. 

In 1066, some five hundred years after the Jutes, the Normans under William the Bastard – later, the Conqueror – containing a retinue of Israelite stragglers from other tribes and also consisting of a warrior-aristocracy, invaded southern Briton at Hastings in Kent in 1066. The Norman aristocracy – including Robert the Bruce’s family (of Scotland) – travelled throughout England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and became the dominant, ruling noble families of the British Isles. 

The understanding of who Judah is, where Judah is and their possession of the royal orb and sceptre of the Messianic throne, is the integral key that unlocks the entire Holy Bible. In the Book of Revelation and the seven separate letters written to seven consecutive church eras of the true body of Christ – a little flock, the elect of God and all the saints – there is a pointed clue to when the revealing of Israel’s true identity would begin. It is now an era passed and we urgently find ourselves in the seventh and final era of the true church of God’s history – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days. 

The letter to the last era is rather condemning; for the people of this age are self-righteous in that they know they are blessed with spiritual knowledge, yet have failed to fully ‘contend for the faith once delivered’ as addressed by Jude; for they arrogantly think they have the sum of all the knowledge they need. Revelation 3:17-18, ESV: ‘For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.’ 

1 Peter 1:5-7

English Standard Version

‘… who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith – more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire – may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.’

They have forgotten that one is too continually grow in grace (or favour) and knowledge – 2 Peter 3:18.

Revelation 3:7

New Century Version

‘To the Church in Philadelphia [the sixth era of seven] Write this to the angel of the church in Philadelphia:

“This is what the One [the Son of Man] who is holy and true, who holds the key of David, says. When he opens a door, no one can close it. And when he closes it, no one can open it.”

The person who holds this key is the Son of Man. He also holds the ‘keys of Hades and Death’ – Revelation 1:18. The beginning of interest in the identity of Israel as we have discussed, began about five hundred years ago. The central core of its doctrine is valid, the trunk of the tree so-to-speak and a few branches here and there. The endeavour now, is too correct, or prune the other branches, allowing for all the twigs, leaves and flowers to be added and to grow into a fulness of completion. 

The open doors, signify a powerful and effective preaching of the word of God by the true church, of the gospel of the Kingdom of God and thereby the knowledge and process of how to enter the kingdom – as was bestowed upon the apostle Peter. The key of David is thus linked with this open door for the true gospel message and in turn the response of those who heed. The key of David is associated with the knowledge of the throne of David and where the modern nations of the houses of Israel and Judah are today.

For Christ said to the twelve disciples: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand” – Matthew 10:5-7, ESV.

A key unlocks a door. A door to a room or a house which invariably contains valuable items, or in this case, knowledge. A key is important and it is not entrusted to just anyone. There are a few passages regarding keys in the Bible. We will look at those which are pertinent.

The first is regarding the returned exiles from Babylon to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the second temple. 

1 Chronicles 9:21-27

English Standard Version

21 ‘Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was gatekeeper at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 22 All these, who were chosen as gatekeepers at the thresholds, were 212 [men]. They were enrolled by genealogies in their villages. David and Samuel the seer established them in their office of trust. 23 So they and their sons were in charge of the gates of the house of the Lord, that is, the house of the tent, as guards. 24 The gatekeepers were on the four sides, east, west, north, and south. 

25 And their kinsmen who were in their villages were obligated to come in every seven days, in turn, to be with these, 26 for the four chief gatekeepers, who were Levites, were entrusted to be over the chambers and the treasures of the house of God. 27 And they lodged around the house of God, for on them lay the duty of watching, and they had charge of opening it every morning.’

These keys entrusted to the Levites, protected the treasures of the house (or temple) of God.

Matthew 16:18-19

English Standard Version

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock. I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Peter is given the proverbial keys to the Kingdom. It is he who is entrusted with the authority in heading the way to salvation in the inter-testament era leading to the New Covenant’s future establishment for all – Jeremiah 31:31-33. Yet this authority was not solely reserved for Peter as erroneously taught by the Catholic Church in endeavouring to maintain an unscriptural supreme pontiff – John 20:21-23. 

The Key of David is mentioned one other time in the Book of Isaiah. 

Isaiah 22:1-25

English Standard Version

1 ‘The oracle concerning the valley of vision.

What do you mean that you have gone up, all of you, to the housetops… Your slain are not slain with the sword or dead in battle. 3 All your leaders have fled together; without the bow they were captured. All of you who were found were captured, though they had fled far away. 5 For the Lord God of hosts has a day of tumult and trampling and confusion in the valley of vision… He has taken away the covering of Judah.

In that day you looked to the weapons of the House of the Forest, 9 and you saw that the breaches of the city of David were many… But you did not look to him who did it, or see him who planned it long ago.’

In 1 Kings 7:1-12, it says King Solomon took thirteen years to build his own Palace – circa 970 to 957 BCE. Compared to six years, to construct the Temple from 966 to 960 BCE. There were various rooms in the palace, such as the Hall of Pillars and the Hall of the Throne. All of these were built with ‘cedars from Lebanon’ and costly stones and jewels cut to measure.

2 ‘He built the House of the Forest of Lebanon. Its length was a hundred cubits [about 150 feet] and its breadth fifty cubits and its height thirty cubits, and it was built on four rows of cedar pillars, with cedar beams on the pillars. 3 And it was covered with cedar above the chambers that were on the forty-five pillars, fifteen in each row. 4 There were window frames in three rows, and window opposite window in three tiers. 5 All the doorways and windows had square frames, and window was opposite window in three tiers.’

In 1 Kings 10:17, Solomon put three hundred shields made of gold in to the House of the Forest. The room was designed for weapons, though treasure seems to be included as we learn from the thirteenth king of Judah, Hezekiah.

Isaiah 39:1-3

English Standard Version

1 ‘At that time Merodach-baladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent envoys with letters and a present to Hezekiah, for he heard that he had been sick and had recovered. 2 And Hezekiah welcomed them gladly.

And he showed them his treasure house, the silver, the gold, the spices, the precious oil, his whole armory, all that was found in his storehouses. There was nothing in his house or in all his realm that Hezekiah did not show them. 3 Then Isaiah the prophet came to King Hezekiah, and said to him, “What did these men say? And from where did they come to you?” Hezekiah said, “They have come to me from a far country, from Babylon.”

The Kingdom of Judah trusted in its own weapons and not the Creator. King Hezekiah naively shows his riches and weapons in front of envoys from Babylon – blind to the planned attack of the Chaldeans years later.

Isaiah: 12 ‘In that day the Lord God of hosts called for weeping and mourning, for baldness and wearing sackcloth; 13 and behold, joy and gladness, killing oxen and slaughtering sheep, eating flesh and drinking wine. “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” 14 The Lord of hosts has revealed himself in my ears: “Surely this iniquity will not be atoned for you until you die,” says the Lord God of hosts.

15 Thus says the Lord God of hosts, “Come, go to this steward, to Shebna, who is over the household, and say to him: 16 What have you to do here, and whom have you here, that you have cut out here a tomb for yourself, you who cut out a tomb on the height and carve a dwelling for yourself in the rock? [much like Edom – Obadiah 1:3]

17 Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you 18 and whirl you around and around, and throw you like a ball into a wide land. There you shall die, and there shall be your glorious chariots, you shame of your master’s house. 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your station.’ 

Shebna was a historical figure (Isaiah 36:3, 2 Kings 18:37), though as ‘in that day’ is used, this is a future prophecy during the Day of the Lord. The description of Shebna is about a scribe, a steward, an advisor to the throne – or even possibly an evil king himself. It could be someone more sinister – an angelic being (or Nephilim) at the time of the end, who may be a religious figure like the son of perdition – in the spiritual house of God, the Church. 

Isaiah: 20 ‘In that day I will call my servant Eliakim [meaning: God will establish, whom God sets up] the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.’ 

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for ‘key’ is maphteach and defined by Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible, as, ‘key opener, opening.’ In the New Testament, the Greek word for ‘key’ as used in Revelation 3:7, is kleis – a feminine word, defined by Young’s as simply, ‘a key.’ 

Eliakim is either a righteous steward or king after the deposed Shebna, or more likely the Son of Man taking His rightful seat. Eliakim was a historical figure as well, who became the ‘steward or prefect over the palace, as had been foretold by Isaiah (compare 2 Kings 18:18; Isaiah 36:3, 22; 37:2).’ The context of the passage speaks about the rulership of the house of David over Israel. ‘Originally, Shebna had been in a trustworthy position in the king’s rule. The Nelson Study Bible explains “the steward had the key that gave him an audience with the king.” Since Eliakim is given the same key as the Son of Man in Revelation, one could assume Eliakim is the returned Messiah, that the King is the Ancient of Days and that Shebna is the Adversary.

Isaiah: 23 ‘And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house.’

The covenant the Creator made with David, was because he kept God’s Law. Isaiah 55:3, describes the new or ‘everlasting’ covenant as ‘the sure [secure] mercies of David.’

Isaiah: 24 ‘And they will hang on him the whole honor of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 In that day, declares the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way, and it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will be cut off, for the Lord has spoken.’

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, states:

‘key’ – emblem of his office over the house; to ‘open’ or ‘shut’; access rested with him… keys are sometimes carried in the East, hanging from the kerchief on the shoulder. But the phrase is rather figurative for sustaining the government on one’s shoulders. Eliakim, as his name implies, is here plainly a type of… Christ, the Son of ‘David’… he that hath the key of David – the antitype of Eliakim, to whom the ‘key,’ the emblem of authority ‘over the house of David’ was transferred from Shebna, who was removed from the office of chamberlain or treasurer, as unworthy of it.

Christ, the Heir of the throne of David, shall supplant all the less worthy stewards who have abused their trust in God’s spiritual house, and ‘shall reign over the house of Jacob,’ literal and spiritual (Luke 1:32, 33), ‘for ever,’ ‘as a Son over His own house’ (Hebrews 3:2-6). It rests with Christ to open or shut the heavenly palace (the heavenly Jerusalem, verse 12, which will come down to this earth; Revelation 21:9-10), deciding who is, and who is not, to be admitted: as He also opens, or shuts… ‘having the keys of hell (the grave) and death (ch. 1:18).’

The Broadman Bible Commentary states: ‘To say that Christ is the one who has the key of David is to affirm his messianic authority to admit or exclude from the messianic kingdom.’

Christ bears the key to open the door to the kingdom and those who have been chosen to be granted entrance are the people Christ instructed the apostles to go to and whom mirrored his own ministry… He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” – Matthew 15:24, ESV.

2 Samuel 7:10

English Standard Version

And I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, so that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more…’

There can be no doubt that the sifted and transplanted sons of Jacob ended up in either the larger Isle of Albion or the smaller Isle of Erin – Jeremiah 31:10. Planted so far away from their original home in a new wilderness to explore and civilise, any thought of their old homeland and their past life or identity were well and truly forgotten. Fulfilling their appointed destiny by becoming a great people from a multitude of nations, with a resurrection of a mighty royal kingdom, were still a millennia distant in the future – Genesis 48:19; 49:8-10 (Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes). 

The sons of Jacob had rejected a Divine Theocracy with their Creator and Protector, insisting on a human king just like all the nations surrounding them. Saul was chosen and while not from a royal line and the tribe of Benjamin, ‘he was permitted to reign, for the [Eternal] determined to give the people the desire of their hearts.’

In easing into the next section on Benjamin, it is worth noting at this point the identity of the tribe – with the exception of Simeon – most closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The youngest tribe of Benjamin with their warlike proficiency, aligned warrior ethos and almost symbiotic attachment with Judah are today, the peoples of Scotland. We will study Scotland’s descent from Benjamin in depth to confirm its proposed identity. 

Beginning with Saul, who was born in 1070 BCE and his son Jonathan who was born circa 1050 BCE. Jonathan was ten years older than David who was born in 1040 BCE, some six years after the death of the Danite Judge, Samson – Article: Samson

1 Samuel 9:1-2, 15-16, 21; 10:1, 5-12, 17, 20, 23-24; 11:14-15

English Standard Version

1 ‘There was a man of Benjamin whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel, son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, a Benjaminite, a man [H1368 – gibbowr: mighty, strong, valiant] of wealth [H2428 – chayil: power, might, strength]. 

2 And he had a son whose name was Saul, a handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable] young [H970 – bachuwr: chosen, youthful – not in age (for he was forty-four), rather as in vigour – a warrior] man. There was not a man among the people of Israel more handsome than he. From his shoulders upward he was taller than any of the people.

15 Now the day before Saul came, the Lord had revealed to Samuel: 16 “Tomorrow about this time I will send to you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over my people Israel. He shall save my people from the hand of the Philistines. 21 Saul answered, “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least of the tribes of Israel? And is not my clan the humblest of all the clans of the tribe of Benjamin? Why then have you spoken to me in this way?”

1 Then Samuel took a flask of oil and poured it on his head and kissed him and said, “Has not the Lord anointed you to be prince over his people Israel? [1026 BCE] And you shall reign over the people of the Lord [1025 to 1010 BCE] and you will save them from the hand of their surrounding enemies. And this shall be the sign to you that the Lord has anointed you to be prince over his heritage. 

5 And there, as soon as you come to the city, you will meet a group of prophets coming down from the high place with harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre before them, prophesying. 6 Then the Spirit of the Lord will rush upon you, and you will prophesy with them and be turned into another man.

7 Now when these signs meet you, do what your hand finds to do, for God is with you… 9 When he turned his back to leave Samuel, God gave him another heart. And all these signs came to pass that day. 10 When they came to Gibeah, behold, a group of prophets met him, and the Spirit of God rushed upon him, and he prophesied among them. 11 And when all who knew him previously saw how he prophesied with the prophets, the people said to one another, “What has come over the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?” 12 And a man of the place answered, “And who is their father?” [Samuel in essence adopts Saul, becoming his spiritual guardian].

17 Now Samuel called the people together to the Lord at Mizpah. 20 Then Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken by lot. 23 Then they ran and took him from there. And when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward. 24 And Samuel said to all the people, “Do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people.” And all the people shouted, “Long live the king!”

14 Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and there renew the kingdom.” 15 So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before the Lord in Gilgal [in 1025 BCE]. There they sacrificed peace offerings before the Lord, and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly.’

Saul’s sons born to him were Jonathan, Ishvi and Malchi-shua. His daughters were Merab, who in turn had five sons and Michal. Saul’s wife was called Ahinoam – 1 Samuel 14-49-50. In 1 Chronicles 8:33, Ishvi is not mentioned (perhaps he died?) and two other sons are now included, Abinadab and Eshbaal or Ish-baal. 2 Samuel 21:8 reveals that Saul had a concubine named Rizpah and she bore two sons: Armani and Mephibosheth (or Ish-bosheth). 

In approximately 1026 BCE, Israel gathers at Mizpah to witness an historic event; the first anointed Prince of Israel. It had been at Mizpah, that the decision against the tribe of Benjamin was made which nearly had them exterminated – Judges 20:1-48. In 1025 BCE Jabesh Gilead is besieged by the Ammonites. Saul breaks the deadlock with a 330,000 man army and later at Gilgal, Saul is crowned King. 

There is academic debate as to the length of Saul’s reign. Both David and Solomon ruled for forty years and one assumption is that Saul ruled for the same length of time. The confusion begins in I Samuel and is compounded in the Book of Acts.

1 Samuel 13:1-4 

English Standard Version

‘Saul lived for one year and then became king, and when he had reigned for two years over Israel,

2 Saul chose three thousand men of Israel. Two thousand were with Saul in Michmash and the hill country of Bethel, and a thousand were with Jonathan in Gibeah of Benjamin. The rest of the people he sent home, every man to his tent. 3 Jonathan defeated the garrison of the Philistines that was at Geba, and the Philistines heard of it…’

The New English Translation tackles the problem with: ‘Saul was (thirty) [45] years old when he began to reign; he ruled over Israel for (forty) [15] years.’ Curved brackets NET figures, straight brackets proposed revised figures. The verse appears to say Saul only reigned two years. Many think a numeral has been missed from the two, so that the figure should be, if not 2 or 10… 12, 20, 22, 30, 32, 40 or 42. To this writer, the verse seems to say that a year had passed between Saul’s anointing at Mizpah and his crowning at Gilgal. Then two years into his reign in 1023 BCE he staged his Philistine campaign with Jonathan.

Acts 13:21

English Standard Version

‘Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.’

Acts 13:21, records a speech by Paul, saying God gave Israel Saul, who ‘ruled’ for forty years. It is possible that Paul’s intention was to say that David – who he goes on to mention immediately afterwards – reigned for forty years, and that the clause has become misplaced from one sentence to the other. If one considers the ages of Saul, Jonathan and David, coupled with their births and life spans, there are incongruities for a very short reign of ten years or less and also for one of twenty years or more. So the balance of probability favours a reign specifically of twelve to fifteen years. This means that the basic points of information and reasonable suppositions about the lives of the individuals concerned can be met, whilst also agreeing with the tradition Josephus knew.

1 Samuel 7:1-2

English Standard Version

‘And the men of Kiriath-jearim came and took up the ark of the Lord and brought it to the house of Abinadab on the hill. And they consecrated his son Eleazar to have charge of the ark of the Lord. From the day that the ark was lodged at Kiriath-jearim, a long time passed, some twenty years, and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord’ – Article: The Ark of God.

From the book of first Samuel, we learn the Ark of the Covenant was at Kiriath-jearim for approximately twenty years. It was removed from Abinadab’s house following David’s conquest of Jerusalem. Prior to his moving his capital to Jerusalem, David had reigned in Hebron for seven and a half years from 1010 to 1003 BCE after the death of Saul – II Samuel 5:5. Crucially, the ark was moved to Kirjath Jearim before Saul began to reign in 1025 BCE. Thus the ark was in Kirjath Jearim for about twenty-two years – giving a reign for Saul of close to fifteen years.

Later in 1023 BCE, Jonathan has more success, single-handedly defeating twenty Philistines after scaling cliffs at Michmash (1 Samuel 14:1-52); while his father continues waging a war against Moab, Ammon, Edom and the kings of Zobah. In 1022 BCE, a landmark and eventful year, Saul completes or rather doesn’t complete his ill-fated campaign against the Amalekites – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. Saul defeats the Amalekites with a 210,000 man army, yet contravenes clear instructions from the Eternal in allowing their King Agag to live and in the process loses his own kingship – I Samuel 15:1-35. It is in the same year by a quirk of fate, that young David enters the service of Saul in the palace and unknown to Saul, is his anointed successor by Samuel and the future king – 1 Samuel 16:1-23. 

A new Pharaoh in Egypt began his reign in 1022 BCE: Ahmose I – the 1st king of the XVIII dynasty. He ruled till 998 BCE, during the reigns of Saul and David and was the brother of Kamose, who ruled three, possibly five years, as the last king of the XVII Dynasty. Kamose had embarked on a campaign of driving the Hyksos – aka the Amalekites – from Egypt; which was completed by Ahmose during the same period King Saul defeated King Agag. Gerard Gertoux writes regarding Kamose:

‘Kamose thus acted as representative of the young Ahmose. In the past, until the 5th dynasty, pharaohs were enthroned only with a Horus name. In time, the complete titulature had five names, but only two were actually used, enthronement name and birth name. Birth name aside, which did not change (except for some additional laudatory), other names could be changed to indicate a new political or religious program. For Kamose his first Horus name was “He who appears on his throne”, the second “He who subdues the two Lands” and the third “He who nourishes the two Lands”. These 3 names match his 3 years of reign.’

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 257-271, 281 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Saul was chosen because of his military record. Saul captured the tablets of the Law back from the famous Goliath, an insult that Goliath would not forget. 

Saul was the bravest Israelite, a … hero… He was as strong as a lion… with his tall and handsome appearance. Saul’s original name was Labaya, meaning “great lion of Yaw(weh),” but he was renamed Saul, meaning “asked for,” as the people of Israel asked God for a king so they could be like other nations. Scripture records Saul as… a man without equal, a head taller than any of the others. He was the son of a high-ranking [though small clan] chieftain Kish, son of Abiel… son of Zeror, son of Becorath, son of Aphiah, son of Benjamin… but Saul was not Samuel’s choice.’ 

In 1887, three hundred and eighty clay tablets were discovered at Tell el-Amarna in central Egypt. They were letters written by the foreign rulers of city-states in the cuneiform script of the Akkadian language. The prime name of interest to biblical scholars in the Amarna Tablets was Labayu, the ‘Lion Man’ who held sway over central Canaan, actively fighting against the Philistines. Transposing the Amarna Tablets from the thirteenth century BCE of the conventional chronology to the tenth century BCE of the revised chronology of David Rohl, the life of Labayu is a close match for the biblical record of the first king of the Israelites: Saul. 

EA 252, a letter of warning from Labayu to the pharaoh, was studied extensively in the early 1940s by William F Albright, an American archaeologist. He determined that the writer of the tablet knew little of the Akkadian language, the common correspondence between countries in that time period. The language used was Hebrew, it was then translated idiomatically into Akkadian. The letter revealed it was from an ‘untutored or uneducated man from humble beginnings’ who became a powerful ruler, exactly fitting the profile of King Saul of Israel.

Gary Wayne: ‘Saul was chosen by God, sent to Samuel to anoint, and drafted to rescue the Israelites from the oppression of the Philistines… Samuel saw in Saul his capacity to lead; ruthlessness; willingness to murder, lie, extort in the name of policy; and the ability to play off courtiers against each other… Saul was the antithesis of Samuel and everything he stood for… Samuel warned… the king would war regularly, taking their sons; taking the best of the daughters; taking their land and trade to feed, arm, and look after his armies and taxing a tenth of everything to pay for these armies. Additionally, Saul did not have the backing of the nobility, simply because Saul did not possess his own great wealth. 

At Saul’s anointing, Samuel recommissioned Israel to obliterate the Amalekites. No one… was to be spared… [neither] livestock… even the possessions of the Amalekites were not to be looted. Everything… to be utterly destroyed. The instructions should not have been a source of confusion for any reason… but God’s judgement was not carried forth to the letter of the edict. Lack of complete obedience resulted in devastating consequences for Saul and his… descendants… Saul only fought the Amalekites because he was forced to… Saul was easily persuaded to keep the spoils of war… [violating] his covenant with God. Saul was never totally committed to slaughter all the Amalekites from the face of the earth. Saul chose to spare some of the Amalekites… in addition to the prized and valued animals. 

Saul further spared Agag because Saul admired the tall and handsome king… if Saul found Agag to [be] tall, one wonders just how big Agag actually was. Consequently, Samuel denounced Saul [and slew Agag, himself]… 

God removed the right of succession for Saul’s sons to the throne… and therefore the lineage of the Messiah… The Messianic bloodline and the everlasting throne were to be transplanted to the tribe of Judah, just as it had been originally prophesied in Genesis… it was Saul’s vassal army of Amalekites… which was protecting the back of Saul’s army during a later battle against the philistines… [who then] betrayed Saul, permitting the Philistines to encircle and assault the Israelites, wounding Saul… Saul then fell on his own sword, killing himself. Saul’s and his son’s bodies were hung unceremoniously by the Philistines at Beth Shan… stripped… from his armour, cutting off Saul’s head; they then hung Saul’s head and his armour in the temple of Dagon, the father of Baal… David eventually confiscated the bones of Saul and Jonathan, burying them in a tomb of Saul’s father, Kish, at Zela in Benjamin.

… Saul did not totally annihilate the Amalekites, for the book of Samuel records David fought the Amalekites (1 Samuel 8:12), destroying them at Ziklag (1 Samuel 30:1-31)… while the KJV records this victory as a complete “slaughter of the Amalekites” (2 Samuel 1:1).’ 

Psalm 9:5-6

English Standard Version

‘You have rebuked the nations; you have made the wicked perish; you have blotted out their name forever and ever. The enemy came to an end in everlasting ruins; their cities you rooted out; the very memory of them has perished.’

Wayne: ‘This passage can only be interpreted and attributed to the Amalekites. During the reign of Hezekiah of Judah, the Simeonite sons of Ishi invaded the hill country of Seir, killing the remaining Amalekites who had escaped. One would expect that this final blow finished off whatever remnant of Amalekite culture and society that had somehow survived from David’s genocidal purge… neither history or the Bible ever again records Amalekites as a nation. Secular history has forgotten the Amalekites, as though they never existed; only the bible has maintained their existence as a witness to the world.’ 

It is worth noting at this point the identity of a tribe closely associated with the tribe of Judah and forming with them, the Kingdom of Judah. The Simeonite sons of Ishi who took matters in their own hands – bit of a character trait – are the modern Welsh. We will study Wales as Simeon in depth in the following chapter to confirm their proposed identity.

Wayne: ‘Listed among names of antediluvian Nephilim was the name Amalek. He was noted as the twin brother to Samael [a Giant, not the leader of the fallen Angels]… for Amalek was the forefather of Seir… Amalek was the prominent antediluvian Sumerian king Akalum-Dug, understanding that Akalum was Sumerian for the infamous, evil “Lamech,” which found its true anagram in producing the name Amalek… another variant name of a king to Amalek: Anam’ Melech… Anam’ Melech was worshipped by the [Babylonians]… Melech… is Hebrew for “king,” as in Molech/Malech, the god of the Canaanites, son of Baal, who required the sacrifice of children in his worship… Anam’ Malech also required the sacrifice of children. One of Samael’s [the Giant] wives, [was] Naamah. Naamah was… [the] daughter of Lamech (Amalek)…’ – refer articles: Belphegor; and Na’amah.

Wayne: ‘The Armana Letters recorded a tenth-century BCE strong man and Apiru leader who emerged from Hebron to capture Jerusalem. This then is the probable Gentile record of David’s rise to power… an Aramaic inscription,* dating back to the ninth century BCE, discovered in 1993 CE, in the ruins of the ancient city of Dan, clearly recorded the words House of David.” David was the first of the true dynastic bloodline leading to Christ nearly 1,000 years later, on whom God built his earthly but royal government that Jesus would later inherit. David is also from the dynastic bloodline that all spurious royal bloodlines now desperately strive to align themselves with, in order to further enhance their own perceived pedigree and credibility’ – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe.

The House of David was well known in the ninth century BCE. The name of King David appears among toponyms of the south of Palestine on the list of Pharaoh Shoshenq I as, ‘[the heights?] of David.’ We can have confidence that King David was a flesh and blood historical figure. Archaeologists who deny his existence or the extent of the influence of the kingdom of David, are exhibiting bad faith, literally and figuratively in the face of clear evidence.

‘Lines 8-10* of the Tel Dan Stele. Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 

8. king of Israel, and I killed [Ahaz]yahu son of [Jehoram kin-] 

9. -g [of the] HouseofDavid. And I set [……………………………..] 

10. their land …[……………………………………………………………………….] 

Ahazyahu (887-885) [853-852 BCE] and Jehoram (897-886) [852-841] were kings of Israel “House-of-David” (2 Kings 8:28-9:29) 

Lines 30-31 of the Mesha Stele. Musée du Louvre, Paris. 

30. [the temple of Made]ba and the temple of Diblaten and the temple of Baal-meon; and I established there
31. [……………] the sheep of the land. And the House [of D]avid dwelt in Horonen 

32. [……………] and Chemosh said to me: “Go down! Fight against Horonen.” And I went down, and [… Mesha (900-870) was King of Moab (2 Kings 3:4-27) and succeeded his father Chemoshyat (930-900).’ 

Kings David and Solomon Chronological, Historical and Archaeological Evidence, Gerard Gertoux, 2015 – emphasis mine: 

The David and Solomon’s kingdoms are no longer considered as historical by minimalist archaeologists. According to Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman, for example, authors of The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, at the time of the kingdoms of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was populated by only a few hundred residents or less, which is insufficient for an empire stretching from the Euphrates to Eilath. They suggest that due to religious prejudice, the authors of the Bible suppressed the achievements of the Omrides. Some Biblical minimalists like Thomas L. Thompson go further, arguing that Jerusalem became a city and capable of being a state capital only in the mid-seventh century.

Likewise, Finkelstein and others consider the claimed size of Solomon’s temple implausible. A review of methods and arguments used by these minimalists shows that they are impostors for writing history. The historical testimonies dated by a chronology anchored on absolute dates (backbone of history) are replaced by archaeological remains dated by carbon-14 (backbone of modern myths). The goal of these unfounded claims is clearly the charring of biblical accounts. 

One of the most fiercely debated issues in Biblical Archaeology today involves the historicity of the Bible and biblical chronology in the period of the United Monarchy in Jerusalem. Most of the evidence for this period of David and Solomon is found in the Bible, and there is a decided lack of archaeological evidence to correlate the biblical narrative. Most archaeologists take the view that the Bible is a narrative of mythology interwoven with some historical elements; whereas some historians believe that the Bible, along with archaeological evidence, can be a valid historical source. This dichotomy of viewpoints is further divided into questions of chronology rebuilt from historical synchronisms dated by astronomy for historians, versus archaeological remains dated by Carbon-14 for archaeologists, and above all the reliability of ancient narratives. 

When the current conditions for excavation in Jerusalem and the complexity of occupational deposition are considered, it is not so unusual that there is little evidence of Davidic and Solomonic Jerusalem. The area of the citadel of the City of David is currently beneath private homes; therefore very little excavation has been done. Similarly, the Temple Mount covers the site of the Solomonic Temple, where it is impossible for religious and political reasons to conduct even an archaeological survey.

Two factors in occupational deposition are important to consider: first of all, in hilly regions like Jerusalem, it is most practical to remove the earlier construction phases and debris down to bedrock when building new structures. Second, uninterrupted settlement, from the 10th to the early 6th centuries BCE, leaves less of an archaeological footprint than would a period of destruction or invasion, so it is understandable that there would be less data from this period. 

The Biblical Minimalist point of view hinges on the belief that the Book of Kings was written in the Persian period. Therefore it is a product of many scribal errors and different authors, which means that any historical value is hidden in layers of confusion. Niels Peter Lemche, one of the main proponents of this school, also makes the case that the concept of “history” is an essentially modern term. 

Thus trying to read the Bible as a historical text in the modern sense of the term is a vexed enterprise from the start, because the Bible was written in a tradition of story-telling and religious worship, not with the intention of relating facts in a “history.” 

They assert that the United Monarchy and the figures of David and Solomon are legendary, but not historical. The Biblical Maximalist perspective is that enough of the textual and archaeological evidence converges to make the Bible plausible as a historical source. They don’t necessarily say that every element of the Bible can be proven; William Dever goes so far as to say that David and Solomon may not have been historical figures. But there is enough socio-archaeological data to make conclusions about the rise of statehood in the 10th century BCE, which is a centralized power like the United Monarchy.

The main problem with the Biblical Minimalist point of view is that there are too many correlations of the biblical narrative to other Near Eastern sources. For example, the Pharaoh Shishak’s destruction of Megiddo is recorded in the Bible, and his actual victory stele are found at Megiddo and in the temple of Karnak; we also have the later Babylonian lists of Israelite Kings, which correlates with biblical narrative. These correlations fall after the United Monarchy, but both suggest a continuity with institutions of Kingship and the office of the court scribe.

The description of the Solomonic Temple in the Bible is so much like the MB Age Temple and the 8th century Syrian Temple at Tell Tainat (which was also constructed by Phoenician craftsmen), that it is highly unlikely that it could be fictitious. 

The only monumental architecture from this time period is the Stepped-Stone structure from the eastern slope of the City of David. It could have functioned as a large supporting structure, for a fortification wall or platform that might be part of the citadel of David. It was built on top of Late Bronze Age II terrace systems, with Israelite houses built into it, and Hellenistic-Roman period wall built on the highest part of the slope. 

The original excavations by Kathleen Kenyon concluded that the underlying terraces and Stepped-Stone Structures were contemporaneous and should be dated to LB II. But the ceramic data from a sealed context points to an Iron Age date for the Stepped-Stone Structure, and the stratigraphic data clearly shows it to have been constructed around and deeper than some portions of the terrace system. This would negate the idea that the terrace system was to function as the foundation of the Stepped-Stone structure.

To look beyond Jerusalem itself for archaeological and textual evidence of the Davidic and Solomonic reigns, refer to the Tel Dan inscription and the six-chambered gate. The Tel Dan inscription mentions “Beth David” (BYTDWD) or House of David as a place name; it is a Semitic tradition to name a city after the founder. There has been some questioning of the authenticity of this inscription, namely by epigraphers who take the lack of a word divider as evidence of a forgery. But the Aramaic of the inscription as well as the palaeography and orthography are correct.’

The New Egyptian Chronology – A revised Egyptian chronology results in startling new archeological discoveries which authenticate Old Testament histories, David Reagan – emphasis mine:

‘… [David] Rohl points out that a review of ancient documents, using the New Chronology, may have produced letters referring to David as well as letters written to the Egyptian court by King Saul of Israel! The documents, known as “The Amarna Letters”… mainly consist of letters sent to the pharaoh by foreign kings. Now, no one has ever searched these tablets for letters from the United Monarchy of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon)… So, Rohl went to these documents with the expectation of finding correspondence from the new Hebrew kingdom an expectation no one else had ever had.

The first thing he ran across were letters from city-state rulers of Palestine that contained copious references to a group of marauders called the “Habiru.” These references are obviously speaking of Hebrews, and they have always puzzled scholars because the conventional chronology placed these letters a century before the Exodus. But the New Chronology places them during the reign of King Saul when David and his mighty men kept alive by pillaging the countryside. Rohl concludes that these letters relate to David and his soldiers of fortune who hired themselves out as mercenaries.

Rohl’s second discovery was a series of letters written by a King Labayu of the hill country north of Jerusalem. His name means “Great Lion of Yaweh. Rohl believes this was the true name of King Saul and that Saul was his hypocoristic name (nickname).’

A clue to Saul’s other name is found in Psalm 57:4 NIV, penned by David while he was hiding from Saul’s men in the cave of En-Gedi [1 Samuel 24:2-3]: “I am in the midst of lions [H3833 – lebaim]; I am forced to dwell among ravenous beasts – men whose teeth are spears and arrows, whose tongues are sharp swords.”

Reagan: ‘Rohl reviews the letters in detail to show that they describe events that parallel incidents during the reign of Saul.’ 

In EA 252, the rebellious King Saul warns Pharaoh off by saying: “If an ant is struck, does it not fight back and bite the hand of the man who struck it?”

Reagan: ‘These remarkable letters some by Saul and some by his son, Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 2:8) contain references to Ayab (Joab, commander of David’s forces)’

EA 256: “Say to Yanhamu (the official representative of Pharaoh in Palestine), my lord: Message of Mutbaal (Canaanite from of Ishbaal, son of Saul), your servant. I Fall at the feet of my lord. How can it be said in your presence, Mutbaal has fled. He has hidden Ayab? How can the king of Pella (Israelite stronghold across the Jordan River) flee… I swear Ayab is not in Pella. In fact, he has been in the field (on campaign) for 2 months…”

Reagan: ‘and also to Benenima, Dadua, and Yishuya. Rohl concludes from what is said in the letters the Benenima is Baanah, one of Israel’s tribal chieftains who later assassinates Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 4). He concludes that Dadua is David and that Yishuya is David’s father, Jesse (Yishay in Hebrew). The evidence he presents in behalf of these conclusions is fascinating and convincing.’

There may be truth to Saul being a secondary name as in the Hebrew, from the verb sha’al, it means ‘to ask’ or ‘ask for.’ The Habiru were originally considered by academics to be stateless wanderers and later by biblical scholars as the Hebrews themselves. Now, the link is specifically with David’s mercenary army of Hebrews who carried out assaults upon the Philistines. Recall in 1 Samuel 13:1-5, Jonathan defeated the Philistines at Geba. This event was also mentioned by Labayu in letter EA 252. In 1 Samuel 20:30-34, Saul reprimands his son Jonathan for consorting with David; in EA 254, his third letter to Pharaoh, Labayu does the same.

King Saul

1 Samuel 20:30-34

English Standard Version

‘Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman, do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness?’

This terminology does not reveal an intimate relationship between Jonathan and David, but rather that Jonathan was sexually attracted to David.

‘For as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, neither you nor your kingdom shall be established. Therefore send and bring him to me, for he shall surely die.”

Then Jonathan answered Saul his father, “Why should he be put to death? What has he done?” But Saul hurled his spear at him to strike him. So Jonathan knew that his father was determined to put David to death. And Jonathan rose from the table in fierce anger and ate no food the second day of the month’ – Second day of the New Moon, refer article: The Calendar Conspiracy – ‘for he was grieved for David, because his father had disgraced him.’

Regarding the legendary encounter between David and Goliath, it is recommend reading Chapter thirty-seven, David and Goliath by Gary Wayne, in its entirety. Within the Genesis 6 Conspiracy, it is ten pages of a riveting portrait of David at the least and at best, it is a rewarding and insightful exegesis. Quoting a few key passages as reproducing the complete chapter is regrettably, not practical. David fights Goliath in 1022 BCE at the battle with the Philistines at Sochoh. The word used for youth is the Hebrew word H5288 – na’ar. A similar word is used for Joseph at the same age of seventeen – 1 Samuel 17:33, Genesis 37:2.

Wayne: ‘David was a complex individual, who was strapped with all the weight and pressure for the future of humankind. God selected David for this role because of what was in David’s heart, not for his perfection… the heart that was true and zealous in pursuit of God. The role David was selected to play in Israel’s destiny was not that of a peacemaker. David was a warrior king, selected to subdue the enemies of Israel. It was David who established Jerusalem as the heart and soul of Israel. It was David who battled his entire life, enabling Solomon to become the peaceful king of wisdom. And it was Solomon who was permitted to build the holy temple, not David, because of the blood that was on the warrior hands of David… [for he] became famous for being the great warrior king, not the peace-giving priest king Solomon was. David slew 200 Philistines, delivering their foreskins to Saul as the price to marry Michal, Saul’s daughter… David was the Lion trait, and Solomon was the Lamb aspect, foreshadowing the dual nature of the true Messiah, Jesus. 

Surprisingly, Goliath, according to Jewish legends, was related to David, for Goliath was the grandson of one of David’s relatives Orpah, related to Ruth, from whom David received his royal, Messianic bloodline. Ruth married Boaz, who begat Obed, who begat Jesse, the father of David… both Ruth and Orpah… were no ordinary Moabites, for both… were the daughters of the king of Moab, Eglon. Apparently, King Eglon had prudent respect for Israel and permitted the marriages of his princess daughters to Kilion/Chilion and Mahlon [the sons of Naomi and Elimelech]. Orpah then returned [circa 1284 BCE] to the royal household after Naomi went back to Bethlehem with Ruth. This then makes Goliath a third generation cousin to David, as Goliath was the grandson of Orpah… Goliath was born… along with four other giants… from one mother alone… Goliath [the Gittitie] was from Gath and… there were five potentates of Philistia that reigned in Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath. Philstines recounted these five potentates as Avvites. 

The book of 2 Samuel listed four other prominent giants… Ishi-Benob, Saph, Lahmi brother of Goliath, and a six-fingered and six-toed giant named Sippai. Goliath would have simply been the fifth Nephilim/Gibborim reigning in Gath… [a] land where the descendants of Rapha [the Rephaim] lived. The original term utilized was the five [rulers] seranim of the Philistine Pentaplos. Seranim is thought to have been adopted from the Philistines into the Hebrew language… [and is linked] etymologically with the Greek word tyrannos, or “tyrant.” The first ruler who was called Tyrannos in Greek literature was Gyges, the king of Lydia. Greek Titans were known variantly as Gyges… the root word for giant and gigantic.’

1 Samuel 17:40

English Standard Version

‘Then he took his staff in his hand and chose five smooth stones from the brook and put them in his shepherd’s pouch. His sling was in his hand, and he approached the Philistine.’

Wayne makes an enlightening observation on David methodically selecting five stones for his sling, prior to engaging with Goliath. Did David show a lack of confidence in picking five stones, with four as back up, if he missed with the first? Rather, David selected one stone each for the five (giant) potentates from the five principle Philistine cities, who must have all been in attendance with the Philistine army that day, led by Goliath. In case they decided to step forward, David was prepared. Wayne also highlights the fact that the sling shot was not an inferior soldiers weapon of choice but rather, it was an integral item in armies of the day, including the Egyptians and Assyrians. The sling could kill a man up to six hundred feet away. It had a greater range than a bow, was more accurate than an arrow and more deadly when it struck the intended target.

1 Chronicles 12:2

English Standard Version

‘They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’

Judges 20:13-18

English Standard Version

13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.” But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men [elite soldiers].

16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war. 18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”

Wayne: ‘… David is translated from Hebrew as both “beloved” and/or… even “chieftain”… in the Mari Letters or Tablets, references are made to plundering Benjamites and its leader by the title Dawidum, meaning “leader.”… David was never his real name.. in fact, [it] was a title, “the Davidum,” like an emperor or a Caesar, and this title stuck in history as his name. All later kings of Judah were then known… as Davidums. Rohl suggests that David’s original given name was “Elhanan,” (who killed Goliath) [meaning: ‘God has been gracious’] the youngest son of Yishuya, Jesse.’

After David’s sensational and unexpected victory over Goliath, a deep and lasting friendship (1 Samuel 18:1-7) ensues with Saul’s son Jonathan, who is ten years older than David. Circa 1020 BCE, David at age twenty marries Saul’s youngest daughter Michal and pays a dowry of two hundred Philistine foreskins. A year later, David defeats the Philistines which initiates the beginning of Saul’s jealousy and hatred towards him. David is driven away from the palace in 1016 BCE after six years of service and now embarks on seven years as a fugitive, wanderer, bandit and mercenary from the age of twenty-three till thirty when he becomes king of Judah. 

David and Jonathan’s final parting is movingly heartfelt, as Jonathan makes ‘a covenant of friendship with the house of David, whom he recognised as Saul’s successor.’

Samuel 20:41-42

New English Translation

‘When the servant had left, David got up from beside the mound, knelt with his face to the ground, and bowed three times. Then they kissed each other and they both wept, especially David.* 

Jonathan said to David, “Go in peace, for the two of us have sworn together in the name of the Lord saying, ‘The Lord will be between me and you and between my descendants [from Benjamin] and your descendants [from Pharez, Judah] forever.”

2 Samuel 1:26

English Standard Version

“I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was extraordinary, surpassing the love of women.”

David’s words about his deep and rewarding friendship with Jonathan have been viewed by some to intimate a bisexuality on David’s part. There is nothing in the Hebrew wording or phrasing to reach that conclusion. On the other hand, there is nothing to counter it either.* The wording is remarkably flowery and overflowing towards Jonathan. It was perhaps the bromance of the millennia. It is said that when Saul had talked with David, ‘the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.’ Great was Jonathan’s devotion to David, that the two entered ‘a solemn covenant of friendship.’ 

David had refused to wear king Saul’s armour. He tried it on, but took it off again, for he could not use the heavy gear in accommodating his battle style; though he did not refuse Jonathan’s armour. Wayne: ‘David assumed the garments and weapons of Jonathan, and was thus prepared to be acknowledged, even by Jonathan himself, as the real heir [and the future] king of the land. The two became inseparable friends while David was kept at the court of Saul. It is easy to see why the young prince should become so fond of David, whom he could well regard as an equal in courage, one worthy of love.

Indeed, David, whose… [meaning is] “Beloved,” seems to have inspired both love and hero-worship. Jonathan, in the isolation which his royal station brought with it, was in need of a friend. His father was a moody man with a dangerous temper whose consciousness of weakness made him suspicious and touchy about his dignity, and was not the kind of father to invite confidences. The relations of Jonathan and his father had been strained ever since Saul had nearly put his son to death for inadvertently disobeying one of his thoughtless orders. (I Samuel 14).’

David was a very handsome man who was beloved by all, especially women, for it was they who chanted that ‘Saul has slain his thousands and David his ten thousands!’ David did have a voracious sexual appetite, for he was an insatiable collector of women, particularly other men’s wives. David’s treachery against Uriah for his wife Bathsheba the most notable. It was also a turning point in David’s life and for the nation of Israel, as both were plagued by violence afterwards. For these actions, the Creator promised the sword would not depart from his very own house and evil would arise, as it surely did with the story of Amnon, Tamar and Absalom. 

2 Samuel 12:7-15

English Standard Version

7 ‘Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. 8 And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more. 9 Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and… have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. 

10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised [H959 – bazah: disdain, hold in contempt, to be despicable] me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.’ 11 Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. 12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.’

13 David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die.” 15 Then Nathan went to his house.’

With all this, David was quick to admit his sin and repent. Sparing his own life in consequence, for the Creator said David had despised and scorned Him. David had broken three commandments, in 1. coveting another man’s wife; 2. committing adultery with her; and then 3. conspiring to murder her husband. 

David was a complex man, repeatedly showing his spirituality in being a ‘man after God’s own heart’, yet compelled by his physicality to violence and immorality, to the point that the Creator said: ‘…You may not build a house for my name, for you are a man of war and have shed blood’ – 1 Chronicles 28:3, ESV. David left his mark on Israel as his name is mentioned more than a thousand times in the Bible. One Bible scholar remarked that ‘the religion of ancient Israel ought to be called “Davidism” because of the king’s essential role in the history and theology of [the nation].’ This is likely a truism and with Moses; David surely left an indelible mark on all who met him, knew him or were governed by him. 

Circa 1012 BCE David cut a piece off the fabric of Saul’s robe while he took a rest in a cave which David happened to be hiding. In 1011 BCE the Philistines invade the land and Saul quits his pursuit of David. David also marries Abigail. Samuel died in 1010 BCE at the age of eighty-seven. In the same year, Saul and Jonathan died in the battle with the Philistines at Mount Gilboa. Saul was sixty years old, Jonathan forty years of age and David was thirty years old – 2 Samuel 5:4. 

From 1010 to 1008 BCE Saul’s son Ish-bosheth ruled Israel – 2 Samuel 2:10-11. Meanwhile, David ruled Judah from Hebron from 1010 BCE to 1003 BCE. David ruled both Israel and Judah from 1003 BCE to 970 BCE, making Jerusalem his capital – 2 Samuel 5:5. David was a contemporary of Pharaoh Amenhotep I (or Djeserkare) the 2nd king of the XVIII dynasty, who reigned from 998 to 978 BCE. David’s son by Bathsheba, Solomon, was born in 999 BCE. 

After Saul’s downfall and removal, David, a son from the royal line of Pharez, was enthroned and to him were reiterated the promises concerning the royal line, which had been passed to his forebear Judah. 

Ruth 4:18-22

English Standard Version

‘Now these are the generations of Perez: Perez fathered Hezron, Hezron fathered Ram, Ram fathered Amminadab, Amminadab fathered Nahshon, Nahshon fathered Salmon, Salmon fathered Boaz, Boaz fathered Obed, Obed fathered Jesse, and Jesse fathered David.

Exodus 6:23

English Standard Version

‘Aaron took as his wife Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab [Great grandson of Pharez, son of Judah] and the sister of Nahshon, and she bore him Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar.’

David’s ancestry from Pharez, son of Judah; with Nashon’s sister, Elisheba marrying Moses brother, Aaron, setting a precedent for a royal line of Judah marrying not just a family from Levi, but the levitical priesthood.

Judah’s Sceptre & Josephs Birthright, J H Allen, 1902 – emphasis mine:

‘When the Sceptre covenant was confirmed to David, the Lord gave the message through Nathan the prophet in these words: “When thy days be fufilIed, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He [Solomon] shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men. But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: Thy throne shall be established forever,” (2 Samuel 7:12-16). 

David was so impressed with the magnitude of this prophecy and with the period of time which it covered that he went in and sat before the Lord, pondering over it, until in wonderment he exclaimed: “Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house that thou hast brought me hitherto? And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God: but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come…” (2 Samuel 7:18,19). “And now, O Lord God, the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish it forever, and do as thou hast said.” 

When the temple was finished, Solomon, standing before the altar of the Lord, in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and with uplifted hands spread toward heaven, in that wonderful prayer at the dedication of the temple, said: 

“The Lord hath performed his word that he spake; and I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised, and have built an house for the name of the Lord God of Israel… There is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servant… who hast kept with thy servant David my father that which thou promisest him; thou speakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day. Therefore now, Lord God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying: There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel,” (I Kings 8:20-25). 

By this prayer we see that Solomon understood that the throne, the kingdom, and the lineal house of David should stand forever.’

Jeremiah 33:22-26

Common English Bible

‘And just as the stars in the sky can’t be numbered and the sand on the shore can’t be counted, so I will increase the descendants of my servant David and the Levites who minister before me. Then the Lord’s word came to Jeremiah: Aren’t you aware of what people are saying: “The Lord has rejected the two families that he had chosen”? [Aaron’s and David’s] They are insulting my people as if they no longer belong to me. The Lord proclaims: I would no sooner break my covenant with day and night or the laws of heaven and earth than I would reject the descendants of Jacob and my servant David and his descendants as rulers for the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I will restore the captives and have compassion on them.’

David’s descendants were to be numerous. He had at least nineteen sons for a start, though in reality many more – Article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The population of England is large and so a small but sizeable percentage must descend from King David. Judah had three sons who lived, therefore the majority of English people descend from one of these three lineages. Shelah had five sons as did Zarah, while Pharez had two, with his firstborn Hezron being David’s ancestor. Hezron had one son and David’s line is from Hezron’s son Jerahmeel and his firstborn son Ram.

It is worth noting that David’s royal line would have ruled not just Jacob’s sons but other sons of Abraham, if Solomon and the kings of Judah descended from him had remained faithful. It was a conditional promise and as we will discover, the evidence of the British monarchy, particularly during the reign of Queen Victoria, having related family and ruling monarchs throughout the whole of northwestern Europe and beyond over the last few centuries was not a fulfilment of the Pharez line, but rather from that of Zarah – and a reversal of the original breach in the womb .

From 1025 BCE to 930 BCE, the united Kingdom of Israel became the pre-eminent power of the Mesopotamian, North African, Caucasus and the South, Central and Western Asian world. With a huge standing Army and the naval superiority of the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon as integral allies, they were unchallenged – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. It required considerable economic wealth to maintain an army of a million and a half men, three thousand years ago. 

Where was Assyria during this period? Secular history has recorded that Assyria’s Empire went into eclipse or ‘confusion’ as some encyclopaedias describe it, between circa 1100 to 900 BCE. Halley’s Bible Handbook states, that ancient Israel was considerably stronger than Assyria, Babylon or Egypt. The very same period as Israel’s golden age under David and Solomon. It is conveniently glossed over in historical texts, if it is even covered at all. Just as the Parthian Empire is ignored or down played. 

What happened to Assyria? – refer Chapter XX Will the real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. It may have been defeated in a war against Israel’s army. Ancient history has remained quiet on this event because Assyria was a bit player in the confrontation. First Chronicles chapters nineteen and twenty describe an Ammonite revolt and their amassing wide support from practically all of Israel’s adversaries – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The participants are listed in Psalm eighty-three. The chapter is dual, in that – though the verses are not ostensibly prophetic – the same group of peoples will unite to attack and defeat the principal Israelite nations, including Judah-England just prior to the Great Tribulation. The nations involved are predominantly from western Europe and will be part of a German led United States of Europe which allies with modern day Asshur (or Assyria), the Russians; who are also the final fulfilment of the biblical King of the North – Articles: Four Kings & One Queen; and 2050

In the past confrontation, Ammon created a pretext for war. There were thirty-two thousand chariots arrayed against Israel alone. How many foot soldiers to add to this number? There were an unknown number of men from Mesopotamia and Syria which included a number of unidentified people fighting with Ammon against Israel – refer Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. In verse nine of chapter nineteen, we learn it was a confederacy of sorts with a number of different nations intent on destroying Israel, for it states their kings had come to either watch the battle or take part. The battle was on two fronts, with the Ammonites leading one attack and the Aramaean Syrians, the secondary assault. 

One imagines this war was either early in David’s reign, hoping to take out the new king quickly and knock Israel off its feet after Saul’s defeat and death by the Philistines; or alternatively after Israel began flourishing under King David and Israel became a growing concern to her neighbours. This was not mercenary guerrilla warfare but a full scale war of declared national commitment against Israel. David’s army led by Joab won the first battle and then the next. 

Many Psalms in the Book of Psalms are credited to David (75), particularly the early ones. Seventy-three are noted in the Psalms; while Psalm 2 is attributed to David in Acts 4:25 and Psalm 95 is attributed to David in Hebrews 4:7. The others written by David include: 3-9; 11-32; 34-41; 51-65; 68-70; 86; 101; 103; 108-110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138-145. 

Psalm 83 is credited to Asaph, as are eleven other Psalms to Asaph or his family – 50, 73-83. The Psalms are written typically by Levites or Judah’s descendants. 

The sons of Korah (from Levi) wrote (11) – 42, 44-49, 84-85, 87-88. Heman, son of Zarah wrote (1) – 88 and Solomon (2) – 72, 127. Moses wrote (1) – 90; Ethan the Ezrahite son of Zarah (1) – 89; and anonymous authorship account for forty-eight psalms.

Psalm 83:1-12

Common English Bible

1 ‘God, don’t be silent! Don’t be quiet or sit still, God, 2  because – look! – your enemies are growling; those who hate you are acting arrogantly. 3 They concoct crafty plans against your own people; they plot against the people you favor. 4 “Come on,” they say, “let’s wipe them out as a nation! Let the name Israel be remembered no more!” 5 They plot with a single-minded heart; they make a covenant against you.

6 They are the clans of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites, 7 Gebal, Ammon, Amalek, Philistia along with the citizens of Tyre. 8 Assyria too has joined them – they are the strong arm for Lot’s children. Selah

9 Do to them what you did to Midian, to Sisera, and to Jabin at the Kishon River. 10 They were destroyed at Endor; they became fertilizer for the ground. 11 Make their officials like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna – 12 those who said, “Let’s take God’s pastures for ourselves.”

Victory for King David and his army, probably meant the conspiring nations paid tribute and were vassal states, including Assyria. This means the territory controlled by Israel would have stretched from Egypt in the West, deep in the Arabian Peninsula in the South and beyond Assyria in the North. Steven Collins has documented the extent of the Israelite empire at this time. As Israel was closely aligned with the Phoenicians, the name Israel is invariably hidden within their name by historians. The mention of Tyre in the list of nations, would lean to the war being earlier in David’s kingship, before the closeness formed between Hiram of Tyre and King Solomon during his reign. 

The Phoenician Empire was not just dominant in the Mediterranean Sea, but they were present in substantial numbers in the British Isles, the West Coast of Europe, Africa and North America; particularly during the period of about 1100 to 800 BCE. The fact that much of this mercantile, commerce rich expansion was coupled with the Kingdom of Israel has been conveniently pushed to the sidelines. It would explain why Assyria was dormant on the world stage during the same period. 

First Chronicles chapter twenty-two relates that David accumulated ‘so much bronze and iron’ for the Temple of God, ‘it [couldn’t] be weighed.’ Warrner Keller in his book The Bible is History, states: ‘Israel was using the Bessemer system of smelting, which was not re-discovered until recently in the modern era… Essian Gebar was the Pittsburgh of ancient Palestine.’ No where else in Mesopotamia has a comparable smelting facility been found; showing ancient Israel was more than just a backward agricultural nation, but rather an industrial leader. 

Dr. Barry Fells in Bronze Age America, gives evidence that millions of tons of copper ore was taken from mines near Lake Superior in North America between circa 2000 to 1000 BCE. The ore apparently ran out, for there is no evidence it was mined after then; whether it ran out or could not be mined economically. There is no evidence the copper was used in the America’s, yet curiously, there is also no record as to where exactly all this copper came from that was smelted in Palestine. 

The list of nations in Psalm eighty-three have invariably been explained as a very compact geographic area today; consisting of a number of inconsequential nations on the world stage militarily, that frankly, just does not make sense. When one understands, that the verses are not speaking just about the diminutive state of Israel, or the many equally small Arab nations which encircle it, then a clearer more accurate, more concerning scenario, presents itself. The passage also does not specify the Kingdoms of Judah or Israel, thus revealing it is either a joint scenario for both in the future or directed at the united Kingdom of Israel in the past. Derek Walker gives a breakdown of possible identities from either an historical or prophetic interpretation. Not to cast the spotlight on Walker detrimentally, only it is a good example for it closely matches other Bible students and commentators. 

Walker: ‘The ancient list of nations in Psalm 83:4-8 enumerates almost all the modern Islamic nations that oppose [the state of] Israel’s existence.

Edom – from Esau, the brother of Jacob (Jordan and the ‘Palestinians’) 

Ishmaelites – descended from Ishmael, son of Hagar (the Arabs) 

Moab – son of Lot (Jordan east of the Dead Sea) 

Hagarenes – descendants of Hagar (Egypt) 

Gebal – ancient Byblus (north of Beirut, Lebanon)

Ammon – son of Lot (capital of Jordan) 

Amalek – descended from Esau (Arabs south of Israel) 

Philistines – from Ham (Palestinians on the Gaza strip, Hamas) 

Tyre – a Phoenician city (Lebanon. Hezbolah) 

Assur – founded Assyria (Syria and Northern Iraq) 

Children of Lot – Moab and Ammon (Jordan)’

One can observe the doubling up of Lebanon and the Palestinians. Lebanon cannot be Gebal and Tyre. The Palestinians cannot be Edom and the Philistines. Asshur cannot be Syria and Iraq. When we studied Asshur we discovered the might and strength of ancient Assyria; peoples descended from Shem not Ham and who dwell in the north today. Coincidentally, though Jordan is incorrect, Moab and Ammon do both dwell together and Ammon is the principal people surrounding their capital – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The interpretation for Ishmael as the Arabs is the exception to just small nations, as is the Hagarenes as Egypt. 

Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar, provide information dispelling the erroneous teaching about the self-claimed Arab lineage; who are a Hamitic people and do not descend from Ishmael, a descendent of Shem.

The same list with rightful identities, as shown and evidenced in preceding chapters:

Edom:         Israel
Ishmael:     Germany
Moab:         Central, Southern France
Hagarenes (Hagrites): Austria, Southeast Germany
Gebal          (Byblos): ?
Ammon:     Northwest France, Paris (possibly including French Quebec)
Amalek:      Scattered Jews, particularly in the United States
Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – principally Mexico, Colombia, Argentina
Tyre:            Brazil
Asshur:        Russia
Lot:              France

This interpretation for Psalm eighty-three may appear as unreasonable to readers, as the first does to this writer. What we first hear or learn becomes ingrained and we perceive it as truth. Though it is our version of truth, influenced by our own perspective, knowledge, thoughts, feelings and motives. The reality is that the state of Israel is not being punished here; it will in fact be orchestrating events, with the help of its allies. It is the nations of modern Israel, descended from Jacob that the Bible reveals will be chastised. This grouping of nations that Lot and Edom take the lead in organising, is a formidable array, including Germany, Mexico, Brazil, Russia and France, which if pooling their future economic and military power against the weakened nations of Israel in the future, including England or what is left of the United Kingdom, then this alliance has the ability to remove their influence from the world stage. 

In chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut, we addressed the disintegration of King Solomon from a wise and righteous ruler to a foolish evil one, when he allowed his wives to turn him towards worshipping other gods and particularly to practicing child sacrifice – articles: Na’amah; Seventh Son of a Seventh Son; and Thoth. In chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia, we also observed Isaac and the dramatic unfolding of a near disastrous event in his and his father’s life with the instruction to be sacrificed. The hope of a resurrection, was the only way the story could begin to have a positive ending – 1 Corinthians 15:12-23.

Possibly not well known, is King David’s association with human sacrifice.

2 Samuel 21:1-9

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year. And David sought the face of the Lord. 

And the Lord said, “There is bloodguilt on Saul and on his house, because he put the Gibeonites to death.” 2 So the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel but of the remnant of the Amorites. Although the people of Israel had sworn to spare them, Saul had sought to strike them down in his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah. 3 And David said to the Gibeonites, “What shall I do for you? And how shall I make atonement, that you may bless the heritage of the Lord?” 

4 The Gibeonites said to him, “It is not a matter of silver or gold between us and Saul or his house; neither is it for us to put any man to death in Israel”… 5 They said to the king, “The man who consumed us and planned to destroy us, so that we should have no place in all the territory of Israel, 6 let seven of his sons be given to us, so that we may hang them before the Lord at Gibeah of Saul, the chosen of the Lord.” And the king said, “I will give them.”

7 But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Saul’s son Jonathan, because of the oath of the Lord that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul. 8 The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth [not the son of Jonathan]; and the five sons of Merab the daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite; 9 and he gave them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them on the mountain before the Lord, and the seven of them perished together. They were put to death in the first days of harvest, at the beginning of barley harvest.’

Recall, the Gibeonites had tricked the Israelites in letting them live and to remain untouched. They are linked to the Amorites and the Elioud giant descended peoples of Canaan – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega*. Saul had broken the promise in his zeal to impress. The famine was not going to lift until retribution was delivered. David shrewdly selected two of Saul’s sons and five grandsons, omitting Jonathan’s son. 

The kingdoms of Israel and Judah were guilty of child sacrifice under certain wicked kings – 2 Kings 17:16-18. The most infamous royalty were King Ahab of Israel, monarch from 874 to 853 BCE and his Phoenician wife Jezebel, a Princess and daughter of the King of Tyre – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. 

1 Kings 16:33-34

English Standard Version

‘And Ahab made an Asherah [the ‘Queen of Heaven’ – Mother Goddess and original consort of the Eternal*]. Ahab did more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel who were before him. In his days Hiel of Bethel built Jericho. He laid its foundation at the cost of Abiram his firstborn, and set up its gates at the cost of his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord, which he spoke by Joshua the son of Nun.’

Ahab practiced ‘foundation sacrifice.’ To protect a structure from evil powers, a person was murdered and buried in the foundation of a city or building – sometimes the victim was walled in alive. 

King Ahaz of Judah ‘burned his son as an offering’ – 2 Kings 16:2-3. As did his wicked grandson, King Manasseh, 2 Kings 21:6, ESV: ‘And he burned his son as an offering and used fortune-telling and omens and dealt with mediums and with necromancers. He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger.’ The Prophet Jeremiah wrote concerning Judah, just prior to their fall, punishment and captivity.

Jeremiah 19:4-9

English Standard Version

4 ‘Because the people have forsaken me and have profaned this place by making offerings in it to other gods whom neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah have known; and because they have filled this place with the blood of innocents, 5 and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree… 6 therefore, behold, days are coming, declares the Lord, when this place shall no more be called Topheth, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

7 And in this place I will make void the plans of Judah and Jerusalem, and will cause their people to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hand of those who seek their life. I will give their dead bodies for food to the birds of the air and to the beasts of the earth… 9 And I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and their daughters, and everyone shall eat the flesh of his neighbor in the siege and in the distress, with which their enemies and those who seek their life afflict them.’

A grim picture which turned into reality, of which both Jeremiah and Ezekiel remark, as well as the Prophet Micah who between 745 and 725 BCE, predicted what their enemies would do to them.

Ezekiel 5:9-10

English Standard Version

‘And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again. Therefore fathers shall eat their sons in your midst, and sons shall eat their fathers. And I will execute judgments on you, and any of you who survive I will scatter to all the winds. 

Micah 3:2-3

Revised Standard Version

‘you [Israel’s enemies] who hate the good and love the evil, who tear the skin from off my people, and their flesh from off their bones; who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron.’

The Prophet Ezekiel who lived during and after the Babylonian exile of Judah was also condemning of child sacrifice. 

Ezekiel 16:20-21; 20:30-31

English Standard Version

20 ‘And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter 21 that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?’

Ezekiel 20:25-26

Revised Standard Version

25 ‘Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; 26 and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the Lord.’ 

30 “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: Will you defile yourselves after the manner of your fathers and go whoring after their detestable things? 31 When you present your gifts and offer up your children in fire, you defile yourselves with all your idols to this day…”

The Eternal admits that the intricate and numerous laws in the sacrificial system, were never able to give them eternal life; in fact they infuriated them, so they then were given licence to offer human sacrifices of their first-born, in the hope they would be appalled and actually turn to Him spiritually, not through physical rites. Yet sacrificing their children to other gods was wholly unacceptable, for it broke the first commandment: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.’ As well as the sixth commandment: ‘You shall not murder.’

Psalm 106:35-39

Common English Bible

35 ‘Instead, they got mixed up with the nations, learning what they did 36 and serving those false gods, which became a trap for them. 37 They sacrificed their own sons and daughters to demons! 38 They shed innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters – the ones they sacrificed to Canaan’s false gods – so the land was defiled by the bloodshed. 39 They made themselves unclean by what they did; they prostituted themselves by their actions’ – Article: Belphegor.

In the preceding section (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) and regarding Noah (Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla) we addressed the gene for red hair, its link to Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b and its appearance primarily in the descendants of Esau and Jacob. Revisiting this subject, let’s add the aspect of the sons of Jacob stemming from Shem and thus being a European, western, white people.

As stated earlier, the identity movement – Black Hebrew Israelites – claims African Americans are descendants of the Israelites, specifically the tribe of Judah. Anyone who has had the fortitude in patiently reading preceding chapters will appreciate how off the mark this teaching (theory) is. This question is not about racial superiority; it is simply understanding and identifying the peoples of Noah’s family and who they are today. It is not important what colour a person’s skin is, biblically. Yet it does matter who they actually are; if one wishes to appreciate and understand past history and biblical predictions for the future regarding specific nations and peoples.

1 Samuel 16:12

English Standard Version

‘And he sent and brought him in. Now [David] was ruddy [H132 – ‘admoniy: red, in complexion and hair, like Esau] and had beautiful [H3303 – yapheh: fair, light, bright] eyes [H5869 – ‘ayin: countenance, presence] and was handsome [H2896 – towb: good, pleasant, agreeable, beautiful]… [interlinear adds: ‘to look to’, H7210 – ro’iy: appearance, to look at, sight]…’

The Message version: ‘…He was brought in, the very picture of health – bright-eyed, good-looking…’ the Tanakh version says: ‘… [David] was ruddy-cheeked, bright-eyed, and handsome…’ and the Good News Translation describes David as ‘… a handsome, healthy young man, and his eyes sparkled…’

David was not just fair complexioned, with piercing eyes; he was easy on the eye as well. The Hebrew word ‘admoniy means to have fair skin and light hair; in that the hair and complexion is red, reddish or ruddy. When Goliath first spies David, he looks in disdain at what he perceives as a pretty boy… not up to the task. 1 Samuel 17:42, ESV: ‘And when the Philistine looked and saw David, he disdained him, for he was but a youth, ruddy and handsome in appearance.’ David’s daughter was also fair, or beautiful – like her ancestors, Sarah and Rebekah and relative Rachel, whom we have discussed previously.

2 Samuel 13:1

King James Version

‘And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair [H3303 – yapheh: beautiful, bright] sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her.’

Amnon was David’s eldest son and Absalom his third son by a different wife. Amnon was Tamar’s half-brother. David’s son Solomon is also described as white and ruddy, that is as very fair skinned; yet his hair is not red but rather jet black.

Song of Solomon 5:10-15

King James Version

‘My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand. His head is as the most fine gold [light coloured], his locks are bushy, and black as a raven. His eyes are as the eyes of doves [grey] by the rivers of waters, washed with milk [white], and fitly set… his belly is as bright ivory [off white] overlaid with sapphires [blue]… his countenance is as Lebanon [white], excellent as the cedars.’

Rachel’s father’s name Laban is a crucial clue. His name means white. Laban is pronounced as lavan. The same root word is in Lebanon, l’vanon, the snowcapped white Lebanese Mountains, including the infamous Mount Hermon. The name Laban hints of skin the colour of white, which is whiter or fairer than usual. A brown skinned people may not call a lighter individual white, but a white coloured people could, if someone was very white or fair and possibly red haired. Only two per cent of the world’s population have red hair and the highest percentage of the world’s redheads live in the United Kingdom, Ireland and Australia. 

As the Israelites descend in part from Laban’s sister Rebekah, it follows that they are a white people, not black as some maintain. We have discussed Esau and his being ruddy (or red) like David. Esau though, had very fair skin at birth and his body was covered in a caul-like mass of red hair. Red haired Esau, with white skinned Uncle Laban, indicates that the Israelites are one of a number of white peoples who descend from Abraham. 

When Job was struck with painful boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head, he said that his skin grew black and fell from him – Job 2:7-8; 30:30. As we learned in the preceding chapter, Job was related to Laban as he was also descended from Nahor and thus his affliction turned his white skin, black. 

The continuation of 1 Samuel chapter thirteen is about Amnon, who was twenty years of age in 990 BCE and was conspiring to ensnare Tamar – about age eighteen – in his private quarters to bake for him while pretending to be ill. He then raped her and his life-long obsession for his half-sister turns to hatred. After defiling his virgin half-sister, he banishes her. Absalom, who was also eighteen years old, learns of the matter and takes her in to his home. David finally hears of the crime and is very angry. Even so, he does not take any action. 

Is this because there is no proof of witnesses, or perhaps David’s sin with Bathsheba meant he felt a hypocrite with a son acting in like measure. His hesitancy led to Absalom meting out justice instead, which then led ultimately to a decline in Absalom’s respect towards his father. Two years later the opportunity presented itself for Absalom to have his servants kill Amnon. Absalom then fled the royal court and stayed in Geshur as a guest of King Ammihud, his maternal grandfather – 1 Chronicles 3:2. In the meantime, David misses Absalom. In chapter fourteen, Joab on David’s behalf, facilitates the return of Absalom to Jerusalem, though at David’s request, he is to live in separate quarters. After two years, Absalom requests a meeting with his father, which David agrees.

2 Samuel 14:24-33

English Standard Version

24 ‘And the king said, “Let him dwell apart in his own house; he is not to come into my presence…” 25 Now in all Israel there was no one so much to be praised for his handsome appearance as Absalom. From the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. 

26 And when he cut the hair of his head (for at the end of every year he used to cut it; when it was heavy on him, he cut it), he weighed the hair of his head, two hundred shekels by the king’s weight [the equivalent of five pounds]. 27 There were born to Absalom three sons, and one daughter whose name was Tamar [named after her Aunt]. She was a beautiful woman.

28 So Absalom lived two full years in Jerusalem, without coming into the king’s presence. 29 Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the king… “Now therefore let me go into the presence of the king, and if there is guilt in me, let him put me to death.” 33 Then Joab went to the king and told him, and he summoned Absalom. So he came to the king and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king, and the king kissed Absalom.’

In Chapter fifteen of 2 Samuel, after a further four years, Absalom gains in popularity with the people and instigates a coup, banishing the king, his father David in 979 BCE. 

2 Samuel 15:1-6

English Standard Version

‘After this Absalom got himself a chariot and horses, and fifty men to run before him. And Absalom used to rise early and stand beside the way of the gate. And when any man had a dispute to come before the king for judgment, Absalom would call to him and say, “From what city are you?” And when he said, “Your servant is of such and such a tribe in Israel,” Absalom would say to him, “See, your claims are good and right, but there is no man designated by the king to hear you.”

Then Absalom would say, “Oh that I were judge in the land! Then every man with a dispute or cause might come to me, and I would give him justice.” And whenever a man came near to pay homage to him, he would put out his hand and take hold of him and kiss him. Thus Absalom did to all of Israel who came to the king for judgment. So Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel.’

This was no normal banishment as respected biblical scholar Ernest Martin highlights.

Secrets of Golgotha, Ernest L Martin, 1996, pages 130-132 – emphasis mine:

‘It was… at Bethphage where death sentences were validated for rebellious leaders of the nation as in Deuteronomy 17:8-13, and where excommunications of the extremely wicked took place (because excommunications required a person to be legally barred from entering the Camp of Israel in the future… Since Jesus was recognised as an Elder in Israel, he was consistently called “Rabbi” by the people (John 1:49; 6:25), the final judgement to condemn him to death had to be made at Bethphage to satisfy the legal demands that were enforced in the time of Jesus… 

Talmudic scholars… state that Jesus was accused and convicted by the Sanhedrin of practising magic and leading Israel astray… Jesus was “put out of the Camp of Israel”… from the point of view of the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem, Jesus died on the tree of crucifixion as a Gentile, not as an Israelite! 

We are told that David himself was exiled from his throne, exiled from his capital city Jerusalem, and… even excommunicated from being an Israelite. This happened to David when his own son Absolam betrayed him and took over the kingdom and the hearts of the people of Israel… [and] the Ark of God… was sent to be with Absolam… David was [also] cursed and called a “Son of Belial” (which signified an exceptionally evil person)… Absolam… [then] ordered that his father David be slain. Psalm 22 must have been written at this time… “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me.”

Psalm 22:22-23

Common English Bible

‘I [King David] will declare your name to my brothers and sisters; I will praise you in the very center of the congregation! All of you who revere the Lord – praise him! All of you who are Jacob’s descendants – honor him! All of you who are all Israel’s offspring – stand in awe of him!’

2 Samuel 17:1-4

English Standard Version

‘Moreover, Ahithophel said to Absalom, “Let me choose twelve thousand men, and I will arise and pursue David tonight. I will come upon him while he is weary and discouraged and throw him into a panic, and all the people who are with him will flee. I will strike down only the king, and I will bring all the people back to you as a bride comes home to her husband. You seek the life of only one man, and all the people will be at peace.” 4 And the advice seemed right in the eyes of Absalom and all the elders of Israel.’

In Chapter eighteen, things come to a head as Absalom’s forces meet David’s army. 

2 Samuel 18:5-17, 33

English Standard Version

5 ‘And the king ordered Joab and Abishai and Ittai, “Deal gently for my sake with the young man Absalom.” And all the people heard when the king gave orders to all the commanders about Absalom. 6 So the army went out into the field against Israel, and the battle was fought in the forest of Ephraim. 7 And the men of Israel were defeated there by the servants of David, and the loss there was great on that day, twenty thousand men. 8 The battle spread over the face of all the country, and the forest devoured[?] more people that day than the sword.

9 And Absalom happened to meet the servants of David. Absalom was riding on his mule, and the mule went under the thick branches of a great oak, and his head [long hair] caught fast in the oak, and he was suspended between heaven and earth, while the mule that was under him went on… 14 Joab… took three javelins in his hand and thrust them into the heart of Absalom while he was still alive in the oak. 15 And ten young men, Joab’s armor-bearers, surrounded Absalom and struck him and killed him.

16 Then Joab blew the trumpet, and the troops came back from pursuing Israel, for Joab restrained them. 17 And they took Absalom and threw him into a great pit in the forest and raised over him a very great heap of stones. And all Israel fled every one to his own home. 33 And the king was deeply moved and went up to the chamber over the gate and wept. And as he went, he said, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”

Absalom’s demise at age twenty-nine, is not taken well by David, even after all he had done against his father. One can’t help but wonder if David had acted against Amnon, would events have taken a different course. Possibly, the episode with Amnon exacerbated or accelerated thoughts that were already in Absalom’s mind towards King David. The encounter shows how human we all are and how brittle relationships can be when put under pressure. Plus, though David was a man after God’s own heart, he did not always act wisely, or have an easy ride as a consequence.

Acts 13:22

English Standard Version

‘And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king, of whom he testified and said, ‘I have found in David the son of Jesse a man after my heart, who will do all my will.’

David’s name may be a later appellation as claimed, as in the Hebrew it derives from the noun dod, meaning ‘beloved.’ As David’s reign drew to a close, it didn’t become any easier for him with his other sons also conspiring for the right to succeed David as King of Israel. The nation’s leadership and Army were divided on the succession. Solomon was crowned king while his half­ brother Adonijah was plotting to be king with the cooperation of Joab, the Army’s commander-in-chief and Abiathar the High Priest. Meanwhile, Nathan the prophet, Zadok the priest, and Benaiah, the head of David’s personal retinue of bodyguards remained loyal to Solomon – I Kings 1:5­-8. 

Bathsheba was instrumental in having Solomon anointed and coronated. Though David had created history’s first recorded ‘hit list’ which he gave to Solomon as one of his final acts as King of Israel. One Bible scholar calling it “a last will and testament worthy of a dying Mafia capo.” Solomon wasted no time in having Adonijah and Joab executed, while banishing Abiathar the High Priest from his office – I Kings 2:26-35. In both cases, the executioner was Benaiah, the captain of David’s bodyguard. King David died soon after Solomon’s coronation in 970 BCE, after saying: “I have appointed [Solomon] to be ruler over Israel and Judah” – 1 Kings 1:35.

David lives on today in the famous song by Leonard Cohen, Hallelujah which celebrates David’s checkered life and sexual exploits with Bathsheba. More than three hundred versions of the song have been recorded, about a man who wrote at least seventy-five songs and poems himself in the Book of Psalms.

It was a far happier or at least peaceful period for the monarchy in Solomon’s reign during 970 to 930 BCE, capped with the completion of the magnificent Temple in 960 BCE – refer article: The Ark of God.

1 Kings 4:20-26

English Standard Version

20 ‘Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. 21 Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. 22 Solomon’s provision for one day was thirty cors of fine flour and sixty cors of meal, 23 ten fat oxen, and twenty pasture-fed cattle, a hundred sheep, besides deer, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened fowl. 24 For he had dominion over all the region west of the Euphrates from Tiphsah to Gaza, over all the kings west of the Euphrates. And he had peace on all sides around him. 25 And Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan [in the far North] even to Beersheba, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon. 26 Solomon also had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots, and 12,000 horsemen.’

Solomon’s name is appropriate, as in Hebrew, it derives from the verb shalem, meaning ‘to be’ and ‘make whole, complete’ or ‘peace.’ It was during the forty years of King Solomon’s reign that the Israelite Kingdom peaked in prosperity and economic power. As it was so short-lived, there is understandably less evidence of its place amongst the great empires that book-end it in history – the Egyptians in the South and the Assyrians to the North. Steven M Collins book, The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel… Found! is recommended as a good starting point for those interested in delving deeper. 

It was during Solomon’s reign that the events of the Book of Solomon occur. We have studied the Queen of Sheba in Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. After the Pharaoh concurrent with David’s reign Amenhotep I, there followed Thutmose I from 978 to 972 BCE and Thutmose II from 972 to 960 BCE. Queen Hatshepsut (or Maatkare) – as the Queen of Sheba and from an Indian-Cushite bloodline – reigned from 960 to 945 BCE, the fifth Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty. The beginning of her reign coincided with the completion of the Temple and ten years into Solomon’s reign. Solomon’s reputation for wisdom, building projects, handsomeness and an all round ladies man would have reached the Queen’s attention. 

Her visit to King Solomon would have likely been sometime shortly after 960 BCE. King Solomon would have been about forty years of age. Hatshepsut was the second known female ruler of Egypt. She may have ruled jointly with her nephew Thutmose III during the early part of his reign. The Queen is famous for her expedition to Punt – the land of Israel – documented on her famous Mortuary Temple at Deir el-Bahari. She, like Solomon was a prolific builder and built many temples and monuments, as well as re-establishing trade networks. Hatshepsut ruled during the height of Egypt’s power and was the daughter of Thutmose I and had been the wife of her brother Thutmose II. 

After Hatshepsut, the famous Pharaoh Thutmose III ruled from 945 to 912 BCE, being another contemporary of Solomon. He was considered a military genius, creating the largest empire Egypt had ever witnessed. It is believed Thutmose III conquered three hundred and fifty cities; though before the end of his reign, he mysteriously and inexplicably expunged Hatshepsut’s name and image from temples and monuments. 

A crucial part of the unconventional chronology is the accurate dating of the Exodus and the 4th year of Solomon’s reign. Not unique to this writer, findings by independent academics, scholars and researchers confirm an Exodus date of 1446 BCE and Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The Bible states that there were four hundred and eighty years between the Exodus and the beginning of the Temple in Solomon’s fourth year: 1446 – 480 = 966.

1 Kings 6:1

English Standard Version

‘In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month [April/May], he began to build the house of the Lord.’

After the death of Solomon, the nation of Israel became divided. Solomon’s son Rehoboam was born in 971 BCE and he ruled for seventeen years until 913 BCE. Rehoboam refused to ease the burden of taxes, imposed by his father. 

As Rehoboam took the other tack and threatened to make life worse for the people… Ten tribes (Ephraim, half tribe of West Manasseh, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan, Gad, Rueben and the half tribe of East Manasseh) separated in 926 BCE, becoming the northern kingdom of Israel with its capital city in Samaria – 1 Kings 12:12-14. The tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and much of Levi stayed with Rehoboam and became the southern kingdom of Judah, with Jerusalem as its capital. 

1 Kings 11:31

Common English Bible

‘He said to Jeroboam, “Take ten pieces, because Israel’s God, the Lord, has said, ‘Look, I am about to tear the kingdom from Solomon’s hand. I will give you ten tribes.’

The northern Kingdom of Israel, under the leadership of Jeroboam from the tribe of Ephraim immediately went into idolatry, turning away from worshipping the Creator. Jeroboam died in 910 BCE after ruling for sixteen years. After two hundred years with a succession of some twenty evil kings and none that were righteous, the Israelite tribes went into dispersal or national captivity in stages, at the hands of the Assyrian Empire – refer Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia

The southern Kingdom of Judah didn’t fare much better, though they did have six to eight righteous kings out of about twenty, ‘who served the Lord’ and who would institute reforms, lasting over a hundred years after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel. The Eternal sent prophets to warn of their slide into idolatry, but much like today, the people would not listen – Ezekiel 33:30-33. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin were taken into captivity also in several waves of deportations, by the Chaldean Babylonians. 

Ezekiel 23:22-25

English Standard Version

22 ‘Therefore, O Oholibah, thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I will stir up against you your lovers from whom you turned in disgust, and I will bring them against you from every side: 23 the Babylonians [descendants located primarily in Central and Southern Italy today] and all the Chaldeans [ancestors of Northern (and a proportion of Central) Italians], Pekod and Shoa and Koa, and all the Assyrians [ancestors of the Russians] with them, desirable young men, governors and commanders all of them, officers and men of renown, all of them riding on horses.

24 And they shall come against you from the north with chariots and wagons and a host of peoples. They shall set themselves against you on every side with buckler, shield, and helmet; and I will commit the judgment to them, and they shall judge you according to their judgments. 25 And I will direct my jealousy against you, that they may deal with you in fury. They shall cut off your nose and your ears, and your survivors shall fall by the sword. They shall seize your sons and your daughters, and your survivors shall be devoured by fire.’

The kings of Judah – the Dynasty of King David – ruled for some three hundred and forty-four years, from 930 to 586 BCE.

Kings of JudahGood or BadYears of ReignBooks of KingsBook of Chronicles
RehoboamEvil17 yearsI Kings 12:1II Chronicles 10:1
AbijahEvil3 yearsI Kings 15:1II Chronicles 13:1
AsaRighteous41 yearsI Kings 15:9II Chronicles 14:1
JehoshaphatRighteous25 yearsI Kings 22:41II Chronicles 17:1
JehoramEvil8 yearsI Kings 22:50II Chronicles 21:1
AhaziahEvil1 yearII Kings 8:24II Chronicles 22:1
AthaliahQueen
II Kings 11:1II Chronicles 22:10
JoashRighteous/Evil40 yearsII Kings 11:4II Chronicles 23:1
AmaziahRighteous/Evil29 yearsII Kings 14:1II Chronicles 25:1
UzziahRighteous52 yearsII Kings 15:1II Chronicles 26:1
JothamRighteous16 yearsII Kings 15:32II Chronicles 27:1
AhazEvil16 yearsII Kings 15:38II Chronicles 28:1
HezekiahRighteous29 yearsII Kings 18:1II Chronicles 29:1
ManassehEvil55 yearsII Kings 21:1II Chronicles 33:1
AmonEvil2 yearsII Kings 21:19II Chronicles 33:21
JosiahRighteous31 yearsII Kings 22:1II Chronicles 34:1
JehoahazEvil3 monthsII Kings 23:31II Chronicles 36:1
JehoiakimEvil11 yearsII Kings 23:36II Chronicles 36:4
JehoiakinEvil3 monthsII Kings 24:6II Chronicles 36:9
ZedekiahEvil11 yearsII Kings 24:17II Chronicles 36:11

Joash began as righteous and as with Solomon turned to evil in his old age, as did his son Amaziah. Manasseh was especially evil, building altars to foreign gods like Solomon had done. Manasseh even murdered his own son, in a sacrificial fire – 2 Kings 21:11-16. He also had the longest reign at fifty-five years. King Jehoiakim was also known as Eliakim. Recall an Elikaim son of Hilkiah replaces the evil steward Shebna. The final king, Zedekiah was originally known as Mattaniah.

Nota bene

Since the completion of this chapter, it has come to the attention of its writer that elements from the following extracts are incorrect. Rather than rewrite the entire section – for much of the information addressed contains merit – any points requiring caution or correction have been added in parentheses or italics.

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

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

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

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

‘In the fifty-second chapter of Jeremiah there is a statement of these events, to which, after recording the fact concerning the king’s being carried to Babylon in chains, there is added the following: “And the king of Babylon… put him in prison till the day of his death,” (Jeremiah 52:11). 

When those events occurred which resulted in the overthrow of the Zedekiah branch of the royal house, a climax was reached, not only in the history of all those things which were involved in the Davidic covenant, but also in that predestined work, for the accomplishment of which God sanctified and sent Jeremiah into this world.’ 

“Then Ishmael carried away captive all the residue of the people that were in Mizpah, even the King’s Daughters, and all the people that remained in Mizpah, whom Nebuzar-adan, the captain of the guard, has committed to Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam; and Ishmael, the son of Nethaniah, carried them away captive and departed to go over to the Ammonites. But Johanan, the son of Kareah, and all the captains of the forces took all the remnant of Judah that were returned from all the nations whither they had been driven, to dwell in the land of Judah; even men, women and children, and the KING’S DAUGHTERS, and every person that Nebuzaradan, the captain, had left with Gedeliah, the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, and JEREMIAH, the prophet, and Baruch, the son of Neriah. So they came into the land of Egypt; for they obeyed not the voice of the Lord. Thus came they even to Tahpanhes,” (Jeremiah 43:5-8). 

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

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

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

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

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

Allen: ‘By consulting the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis we will find a record of the conception and birth of twin boys, whose conception and birth were both accompanied by such extraordinary circumstances that the question of their parentage is forever settled; for Tamar, the mother, did willingly stoop in order that she might conquer Judah, the father, and compel him to do justice by her. The never-to-be-forgotten manner in which Judah was forced to acknowledge that those children were his offspring and that their mother was more righteous than he, does most certainly place the fact of their royal lineage beyond the possibility of cavil. 

When the mother was in travail and after the midwife had been summoned, there was the presentation of a hand. Then, for some reason either human or Divine, the midwife knew that twins were in the womb. So, in order that she might know and be able to testify which was born first, she fastened a scarlet thread on the outstretched hand. Since Judah’s was the royal family in Israel, and the law of primogeniture prevailed among them, it was essential that this distinction should be made so that at the proper time the first born or eldest son might ascend the throne. 

After the scarlet thread had been made secure on the little hand it was drawn back and the brother was born first. Upon seeing this the midwife exclaimed: “How hast thou broken forth?” Then, seemingly, she was filled with the spirit of prophecy and said: “This breach be upon thee,” and because of this prophetic utterance he was given the name of Pharez, i.e., “A Breach.” Afterward his brother, who had the scarlet thread upon his hand, was born, and his name was called Zarah, i.e., “The seed.” 

The very fact that Pharez was really born first would exalt him, and it eventually did exalt his heirs, to the throne of Israel, for King David was a son of Judah through the line of Pharez. But just so surely as this son of Judah and father of David, who was the first one of the line to sit upon that throne, was given the name of Pharez, just so surely must we expect – with that little hand of the scarlet thread waving prophetically before them – that a breach should occur somewhere along that family line.

The immediate posterity of this “Prince of the Scarlet Thread” is given as follows: “And the sons of Zarah; Zimri and Ethan and Heman and Calcol and Dara, five of them in all,” (I Chronicles 2:6). Thus the direct posterity of Zarah was five, while that of Pharez was only two. For the reason that our Lord sprang out of Judah, through the line of Pharez, the unbroken genealogy of that family is given in the sacred records; but the genealogy of the Zarah family is given only intermittently. 

One thing is made quite clear in the Bible concerning the sons of Zarah, and that is, that they were famous for their intelligence and wisdom, for it was only the great God-given wisdom of Solomon which is declared to have risen above theirs, as is seen by the following: And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding… and Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the East, for he was wiser than all men – than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara,” (I Kings 4:29, 31). Furthermore, we find that two of them, Ethan and Heman, were also noted singers, as we find by consulting the fifteenth chapter of First Kings and the nineteenth verse. By noting the titles of the eighty-eighth and eighty-ninth Psalms we also see that one of them was composed by “Heman the Ezrahite,” and that the other was the song of “Ethan the Ezrahite.”

The celebrated leaders of Zarah’s family were called the ‘sons of Mahol.’ Several commentaries explain that Mahol is not a proper name but an appellation describing skills common to these men. Adam Clarke writes that the term signified dance or music and that a son of Mahol was a person particularly gifted in music. It is worth drawing a comparison with the popular musical output of England which has been far above its population ratio, compared with the other two nations which have in the same regard either dominated or proportionately exceeded above their size: the United States and Scotland respectively.

At a certain point, when there was a Pharaoh – probably Amenemhet II (Nubkhaure), the 3rd King of the 12th Dynasty from 1593 to 1558 BCE –  ‘who did not know Joseph’ and the Israelites were no longer welcome in Egypt, it appears that a number of the wealthy and powerful Israelites left Egypt by ship. Danites were already exploring the Aegean sea and islands beyond; with the ruling aristocratic Zarahites leaving Egypt before the situation reached a crisis point, heading in the same direction. The unprivileged masses were left behind to go into slavery. 

The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus circa 80 to 20 BCE, speaks of several Israelite flights from Egypt during this period, most notably into Greece under two key Israelite leaders, Danaus of the tribe of Dan and Cadmus. Walsh writes that the Egyptians, claimed a number of colonies were ‘spread from Egypt over all the inhabited world’ and exiles led by Danaus ‘settled… the oldest city of Greece, Argos.’ Ancient sources verify Danaus captured and developed Argos, known as the Danaidae. Ancient Greek literature refer to these ‘Egyptian’ explorers as Danaans (or Danai), who reached as far as Mace-don-ia. 

History records that the Greek city of Athens was founded by Cecrops and that colonists arrived from Sais, Egypt, located in the Nile Delta. Walsh notes that “some scholars maintain that Cecrops is none other that Chalcol of the Zarah branch of Judah.” Adding: “Like their Phoenician counterparts, the seafaring Danites and Zarahites spread colonies throughout the Mediterranean. It is even said that Chalcol planted a royal dynasty of Irish kings in Ulster. Indeed, the ancient Greeks spoke highly of the Irish… Diodorus says that the [Irish] ‘are most friendly disposed toward the Greeks, especially towards the Athenians [fellow Israelites].”

Calcol’s brother, Darda (from Dara), as mentioned in Chapter XXVI* The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon and Haran, is said to have founded the city of Troy. British History Traced from Egypt and Palestine, L G A Roberts, page 27:

“Dardanus is said to have built Troy about thirty-four years [circa 1480 BCE] before the Exodus in 1446 BCE.” As Darda was born circa 1675 BCE, the dating is amiss. Some scholars explain that Darda is in fact Dara due to a scribal error of omitting the Hebrew letter Dalet, or the English D, based on the fact a double Resh is not possible in the Hebrew language. The Hebrew letters Dalet and Resh are very similar and easily confused. Capt writes: “the descendants of Darda ruled ancient Troy for some one hundred years.”

Prior to the Moabites and Ammonites who were a. the later Trojans of Troy and b. the Dardanians. These same peoples resurfaced as Greco-Macedonians and ultimately as the Franks*.

The Tojan Origins of European Royalty, John D Keyser – capitalisation and emphasis his:

‘The early migration of Darda is noted in the book How Israel Came to Britain:

“Actually, groups of Israelites began to migrate away from the main body BEFORE THE ISRAEL NATION WAS FORMED – while, as a people, they were STILL IN BONDAGE IN EGYPT. 

One of these groups under the leadership of Calcol, a prince of the tribe of Judah, went westward across the Mediterranean eventually settling in Ulster [Northern Ireland]. ANOTHER, under the leadership of DARDANUS, a brother of Calcol, CROSSED TO ASIA MINOR to found the Kingdom later known as TROY.”

‘Author Roberts also reveals that “Mr. W. E. Gladstone says that the Siege of Troy was undertaken by DANAI (the Greeks) against DARDANAI (the Trojans), and THESE WERE ORIGINALLY ONE…”

In Symbols of Our Celto-Saxon Heritage, by W. H. Bennett, we learn more about the migration of DARDANUS from Egypt to the Troad:

“With these things in mind, let us now turn to that other part of ZARA’S DESCENDANTS which FLED OUT OF EGYPT under the leadership… (of) DARDA… the group which he led went NORTHWARD across the Mediterranean Sea to the northwest corner of what we now call ASIA MINOR. There, under the rule of DARDA (DARDANUS) they established a Kingdom, later called TROY, on the southern shore of that narrow body of water which bears his name to this day – DARDANELLES”

Details of DARDA’S voyage to the Troad (as found in the Greek legends) are revealed in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

“DARDANUS, in Greek legend, son of Zeus and the Pleiad Electra, mythical FOUNDER OF DARDANUS on the Hellespont and ANCESTOR OF THE DARDANS of the Troad and, through AENEAS, of THE ROMANS. His original home was supposed to have been Arcadia. Having slain his brother Iasius or Iasion (according to some legends, Iasius was struck by lightning), DARDANUS FLED ACROSS THE SEA. He first stopped at SAMOTHRACE, and, when the island was VISITED BY A FLOOD, CROSSED OVER TO THE TROAD. Being hospitably received by Teucer, he married his daughter Batea and became THE FOUNDER OF THE ROYAL HOUSE OF TROY.”

Actually, the FIRST stopover for Dardanus, on his way to the Troad, was CRETE! Notice what Herman L. Hoeh says in his discussion of the Early Bronze Age: “‘Early Bronze I’ – ends in 1477 [BCE] with VIOLENT DESTRUCTION everywhere in WESTERN ANATOLIA and AT TROY; 1477 [?] marks the conquest of the Troad by DARDANUS AND THE TEUCRIANS FROM CRETE…” (Compendium of World History, Volume I, 1962, page 470).

‘The flood or deluge mentioned by the Encyclopedia Britannica and others is prominent in the Greek legends of Dardanus. At the time of the Exodus [in 1446 BCE] tremendous events of a cataclysmic nature occurred in the Mediterranean area. Caius Julius Solinus, in his work Polyhistor, notes that “following the DELUGE which is reported to have occurred in the days of Ogyges, a heavy night spread over the globe.”

Heavy DELUGES of rain are reported in the works of early Arab historians – all the result of massive upheavals in earth and sky. The great volcanic explosion of the island of Thera in the Aegean Sea occurred around this time and would have caused huge tidal waves or tsunamis throughout the Mediterranean. It seems apparent, therefore, that Dardanus left Egypt before the Exodus, spending some time in CRETE before voyaging on to Samothrace.’

Apparently, Queen Elizabeth I was aware of her Trojan roots and she was in competition with the Scottish Bruce to find the Book of Enoch. She also wanted to visit Troy itself, as the place of her ancestors. It is recorded that she failed to retrieve the Book of Enoch by searching the Nile, but the Bruce it is said, did locate the book. 

Raymond Capt continues regarding the Zarahite expansion westwards to Italy and Spain – emphasis mine: 

“Historical records tell of the westward migration of the descendants of Chalcol along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea establishing Iberian [Hiberi] trading settlements. One settlement, now called Saragossa, in the Ebro [from Hebrew (and Eber)] Valley in Spain, was originally known as Zara-gassa, meaning the “Stronghold of Zarah.” The Italian island known as Sardinia, retains elements of both Dan and ZarahZar-din-ia.

“From Spain they continued westward as far as Ireland. The Iberians gave their name to Ireland, calling the island Iberne… which was subsequently Latinised to Hibernia, a name that still adheres to Ireland… [as do the smaller western offshore islands known as the Hebrides]. Many historical records point to Israel’s presence (particularly Dan and Judah) in Ireland at a very early date… Writers such as Petanius and Hecatoeus… speak of the Danai as being Hebrew people, originally from Egypt, who colonized Ireland… the ancient Irish, called the Danai… separated from Israel around the time of the Exodus from Egypt, [and substantially before] crossed to Greece, and then [later] invaded Ireland.”

Ancient Athenians, comprising Zarahites descended from Calcol took the Greek city of Miletus. The Milesians became linked with these descendants from Judah. The line of Calcol after the settling of Miletus, established a Milesian royal dynasty in Ulster. Archives give an account of Milesian conquerors of Ireland belonging to the “scarlet branch of Judah” – a red hand circled with a scarlet cord of the Zarahites – who subjugated the Tuatha de Danann. The Tuatha de Danann and the Milesians were kinsmen, who long ages prior had separated from the main Hebrew stem as Dan and Judah from Zarah and Calcol. These same descendants of Calcol are recorded as specifically being led by a Gathelus Miledh, also known as Gaedal (or Gaidelon), a son or rather a descendant, of Cecrops, none other than Calcol. 

It is alleged that prior to the Exodus, he went to Egypt after murdering a man. Gathelus apparently assisted the pharaoh in his fight against the Ethiopians of Cush, Boece states: Gathelus winning “a great victory for Pharo against the Moris,” [derived from Mauri, the same root word in the country named Mauritania in North Africa today] – from The Chronicles of Scotland, 1537. Gathelus was then given the hand of the Pharaoh’s daughter Scota in marriage, where they had two sons. 

We will return to this mysterious Pharaoh and unmask his identity; which has alluded scholars for centuries. Keating states Gathelus befriended Moses, for Moses had healed Gathelus from a deadly snakebite. After living seven years in Egypt, Gathelus fled at the outset of the ten plagues, prior to the destruction of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea in 1446 BCE; travelling westward, leading the contingent of Zarahites for a period of forty-two years, while travelling to France and then Iberia. Settling in the northwest – including present day Portu-gal: Portingall = Port-of-the-Gal** – founding the Brigantium kingdom, centred in present day Santiago de Compostela in Gal-icia on the northwest coast of Spain, just north of modern Portugal. 

After Gathelus died circa 1404 BCE, his widow Scota, along with their sons, voyaged northwestwards to the Emerald Isle. Five of her eight sons died in a storm related ship wreck upon arrival, with herself being killed in the battle that ensued with the native Irish, the Tuatha de Danann. It was a surviving son Eremon, who founded the Kingdom of Ulster shortly after the Exodus; the first king of the Milesian Scots, son of Gathelus Miledh and Scota – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

Historians erroneously include the Milesians with those Celts known as Gaels. We will discover that the Gaels who migrated into Ireland are a different tribe of Israel. The Milesians were in fact forerunners of the Celtic tribes which would wind their various paths either across Europe from central Asia or via the Mediterranean and Iberia, blending in one great Gaelic stream into the isles of Erin and Albion. 

J H Allen: ‘It is not at all unlikely and would be but natural that the Zimri who overthrew Baasha, the third King of Israel (not Judah), belonged to the posterity of Zimri, the first-born son of Zarah, son of Judah and twin brother of Pharez. For, as we have shown, the seed of Jacob were at that time divided into two kingdoms, with the posterity of Pharez on the throne ruling over the kingdom of Judah. How natural it would be for the then living members of that family to think, and to say: “This is the long foretold breach for which we have been taught to look. This is the time to assert our royal prerogatives, take the throne, and rule over this the house of Israel.” Culling from a genealogical diagram… we have the following: 

“Judah, begat Zarah; Zarah, begat Ethan; Ethan, begat Mahol; Mahol*, begat Calcol; Calcol, begat Gadhol; Gadhol, begat Easru; Easru, begat Sru; Sru, begat Heber Scot*; Heber Scot, begat Boamhain; Boamhain, begat Ayhaimhain; Ayhaimhain, begat Tait; Tait, begat Aghenoin; Aghenoin, begat Feabla Glas; Feabla Glas, begat Neanuail; Neanuail, begat Nuaghadh; Nuaghadh, begat Alloid; Alloid, begat Earchada, Earchada, begat Deagfatha; Deagfatha, begat Bratha; Bratha, begat Broegan; Broegan, begat Bille; Bille, begat Gallam (or William, the conqueror of Ireland); Gallam, begat Herremon, (who married Tea Tephi*) and Heber and Ambergin his two brothers.”

There is undoubtedly a dose of poetic licence* in this family tree. The name Tea Tephi is legitimately disputed as to whether it is real or a fictionalised composite name. Like Tea Tephi, the accuracy of the name Heber Scot is questionable. Ethan was a brother of Calcol, not his grandfather.

Allen: ‘In giving this genealogy we have given the direct line from father through only one son, but some of these men were the fathers of more than one son. Sru, for instance, the father of Heber Scot, had two other sons. Tait, who begat Aghenoin, had a son by the name of Heber. The fact that there are three Hebers in this branch of the royal family is most significant, for that is the name from which comes one of the national names of their race, i.e., Hebrews. 

… it is generally conceded that there are two distinct phases to the Hebrew story of Ireland. The one is that concerning Jeremiah and the king’s daughters, and the other is that which is told in the Milesian records [?], in which we have the story of the prince who married one of Jeremiah’s wards. The Milesian story takes its rise in Egypt and Palestine amid the scenes of Israel’s infancy. Now we are ready to call your attention to two other names in the genealogy of Zarah’s royal house… Easru and Sru, for in the Milesian records the descendants of these men, and some of their predecessors, were called by a name which to this day means the children of the Red (or scarlet) Branch. 

The prince in the Bible story, as given in Ezekiel’s riddle, is called a young twig, and the highest branch of the high cedar, and, after Zedekiah’s sons were slain, it was not possible to find a prince who was eligible to sit on that throne unless he belonged to the line of the scarlet thread, for the other line, from which Christ came… [were] in Babylon. Hence these children of the “Red Branch” must have belonged to the Scarlet-thread branch of the royal family. The Milesian records also call them Curaithe na Cruabh ruadh,” the “Knights of the Red Branch.” 

“The term Milesian is derived from the medieval title of Gall-am**, the conqueror of Ireland, who was called Milesius, or the Milesian, i.e., the soldier, a term derived from the Latin miles, whence we derive our word militia.” – Totten. “Furthermore, these knights of the Red Branch, of whom Gallam, the conquering Milesian, was one, called themselves Craunnogs, or ‘the crowned.’ The true meaning of their name is ‘Tree tops,’ for it comes from words common to all dialects: craun ‘a tree,’ and og ‘a tuft’ or ‘termination.’ We use the same word for a ‘crown,’ as they did, and the very use of it in common language would be enough to verify this identity of race were there not other reasons in their history and legends to establish it conclusively.” – Totten. 

‘One hundred years ago Joseph Ben Jacob, a Celt, and a Catholic, in a work called “Precursory Proofs,” said: “Among the five equestrian orders of ancient Ireland was one called Craobh-ruadh (the Red Branch). The origin of this order was so very ancient that all attempts at explanation have hitherto failed. Some suppose that it originated from the Ulster arms, which are ‘luna, a hand sinister, couped at the wrist, Mars.’ But these admit it should in such case be called crobhruadh, or of the bloody hand.” 

This man was really proving the Hebrew and Egyptian origin of the Irish Celts, but was applying all the evidence that he found to Joseph, knowing nothing of the story of the breach in the royal family of Judah, and of the exaltation of the Scarlet Branch, who landed in the plantation of Ulster. Else he would have known where to place the meaning of that ensignum of the red, or bloody, hand “couped at the wrist” with a scarlet thread which found its way into the royal arms of Ulster. 

The prophet Nahum, while speaking of “the excellency of Israel,” says: “The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet” [Nahum 2:3]. Scarlet is the characteristic color of the English army, and they certainly wore “red coats” during the Revolutionary War.

We were recently in an English city, and we took particular note of the scarlet thread, or stripe which ran up the front, around the neck, down the arms and up the pantaloon legs of the uniform of the post men of the province. 

A British consul once told us that every official order he received was tied with a scarlet thread, and showed us one which he had just received. This same thing is true also with all English officials, to whom written orders are sent, and from this custom comes that well-known political and diplomatical metaphor, “Red-tape.” 

We have also learned, from sources which we deem authentic, that a scarlet thread is woven into the material from which all ropes are manufactured, which are to be used in the construction of vessels for the British government, or navy. This is done so that under and all circumstances these vessels may be identified as the property of Great Britain, even though they be sunk in many fathoms of water at the bottom of the sea.’

The red (or scarlet) thread is a massive clue to the English identity, yet seekers of true biblical identities have been blinded by the Jews are Judah ‘red herring’ so that this sign for Judah has been seen instead, as just a reflection of a small group or handful of people nestled in a wider body of people called Ephraim. The Jews are Edom (refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe), while Judah is England and the revealing of the true identity of Ephraim in Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes, will leave no doubt.

The Modern Descendants of Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… until the coming of the Saxons [Angles, Jutes and Frisians] into South Britain (England)… a RAMPANT RED LION was the emblem of ALL Britain. With the coming of the Saxons its use in England as a national emblem was discontinued, being replaced by the emblems brought in by the Saxons and Normans. Nevertheless, in North Britain (Scotland) it [remained] the chief emblem – as found in the Scottish Standard.’ 

The temporary dropping of the Judaic Lion as a symbol at this time is due to the fact the Saxons, though containing Jutes from Judah, were also comprised of the main body of Joseph, the Angles. Numerically, they dominated the political landscape of Britain south of Alba. Scotland still retained the rampant Lion as it was predominantly Benjamin, maintaining a close attachment with the royal family line of Zarah (1)^ from Judah. The Jutes and Normans on the other hand, also included the family lines of Judah’s other two sons, Shelah (2)^ and Pharez (3)^, with all three populating England and their subsequent symbol, the royal standard comprising the Three^ Passant Lions.

Bennet & Keyser: ‘Further, it was also the ancestral emblem of the Royal Houses of several of the ancient principalities of Wales for instance Bleddyn ap Cynfyn who died in 1075 A.D.’ – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.

‘A color variant of this emblem appears in the Arms of several of the other ancient Welsh Royal Houses. Even in England it, or a color variant of it, appears in a few municipal Arms and in a much larger number of family Arms.

Important, too, is the fact that the Rampant Red Lion emblem appears in the heraldry of the Netherlands – either on the shield or as a supporter – in the provincial Arms of South Holland, North Holland, Utrecht, Zeeland, Limburgh and Overijssel; and in the municipal Arms of some fifty other places’ – refer Midian, Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

‘… we have presented evidence of the ancient usage of the Red Hand… and… the Rampant Red Lion… for at least 1,500 years before the coming of the Saxons into Britain… emblems of the Zara… branch of the Israelitish Tribe of Judah…’

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

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

Anything open to conjecture or unsubstantiated is numbered above and investigated in the article: The Ark of God.

On the occasion of Queen Victoria’s coronation, June 28th, 1837, an article appeared in the London Sun, which gives a description of the coronation chair and the coronation stone, as follows: 

“This chair, commonly called St. Edward’s chair, is an ancient seat of solid hardwood, with back and sides of the same, variously painted, in which the kings of Scotland were in former periods constantly crowned, but, having been brought out of the kingdom by Edward I, in the year 1296, after he had totally overcome John Baliol, king of Scots, it has ever since remained in the Abbey of Westminster, and has been the chair in which the succeeding kings and queens of this realm have been inaugurated.

It is in height six feet and seven inches, in breadth at the bottom thirty-eight inches, and in depth twenty-four inches; from the seat to the bottom is twenty-five inches; the breadth of the seat within the sides is twenty-eight inches, and the depth eighteen inches. At nine inches from the ground is a board, supported at the four corners by as many lions.”

“Between the seat and this board is enclosed a stone, commonly called Jacob’s, or the fatal Marble, Stone, which is an oblong of about twenty-two inches in length, thirteen inches broad and eleven inches deep; of a steel color, mixed with some veins of red.”

Hollingshed’s Chronicles confirms: “When our king [Edward I]… understanding that all was at peace and quiet [in Scotland], he turned to the Abbey of Scone… where he took the stone, called the Regal of Scotland…”

London Sun: “History relates that it is the stone whereon the patriarch Jacob laid his head in the plains of Luz… this stone was conveyed into Ireland [on the Hill of Tara] by way of Spain about 700 years before Christ. From there it was taken into Scotland by King Fergus [with the Royal Milesian Scots], about 370 years later; and in the year 350 B.C., it was placed in the abbey of Scone, by King Kenneth, who caused a prophetical verse to be engraved upon it, of which the following is a translation:

‘Should fate not fail, where’er this stone is found, The Scots shall monarch of that realm be crowned.’

“This antique regal chair, having (together with the golden sceptre and crown of Scotland) been solemnly offered by King Edward I to St. Edward the Confessor, in the year 1297 (from whence it derives the appellation of St. Edward’s chair), has ever since been kept in the chapel called by his name; with a tablet affixed to it, whereon several Latin verses are written, in old English characters… The stone maintains its usual place under the seat of the chair.” 

The Fatal Stone (Liag Fail) presently resides in Perth, Scotland.

Prior to the time that King Kenneth had his verse engraved on the Coronation Stone, there was a prophetic verse which had attached itself to it, which Sir Walter Scott has rendered as follows: 

“Unless the fates are faithless grown, And prophet’s voice be vain, Where’er is found this sacred stone The Wanderers’ Race shall reign.”

Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996:

‘The British believed that their rulers were coronated (i.e. received the right to rule) on the stone of Jacob: They therefore, it is inferred, thought that the right of their rulers to Empire came from the Promise to Jacob.’

While the original stone Jacob used to lay his head may still exist (Genesis 28:18) – whether it made a journey to Ireland or not from the promised land – testing on the Stone of Scone revealed it is a replacement for the original Israelite coronation stone, hewn out of a quarry in Scotland and did not originate from the Middle East – Article: The Ark of God.

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

As with John Harden Allen, anything open to conjecture is numbered for the readers benefit.

‘The THRONE of BRITAIN is the oldest in Europe and it has preserved the same fundamental coronation service as far as records go back from Egferth in 785 A.D. That is for [1240] years. It is identical to the Bible’s coronation service: The anointing with oil (1 Kings 1:34), the crown of pure gold (Psalm 21:3), sitting on or “at his pillar” (stone) (2 Chronicles 23:13), presented with a Bible (Deuteronomy 17:14), given bracelets of St. George (2 Samuel 1:10) [1], the shout, “God save the king” (1 Samuel 10:24) and an oath between king and people to obey [God] (2 Chronicles 23:16). This is proof the British are the HOUSE of ISRAEL [and England, the house of Judah]. 

The reason St. Edward’s crown has the twelve stones of the high priest’s breastplate on it is because the King [or Queen] of England is also the head of the Church of England, just as Christ is both king (Luke 1:32-33) and high priest (Hebrews 4:14). That is why the King of England is given one SCEPTER and one ROD. Kings have SCEPTERS (Psalm 45:6). Aaron had a ROD that budded (Hebrews 9:4).

Why has the THRONE of BRITAIN lasted so long? Because Genesis 49:10 says, “The SCEPTER shall NOT DEPART from Judah… until Shiloh (“Peace”) come.” Christ is the “Prince of Shiloh” (Peace) (Isaiah 9:6) and hasn’t come back yet so the THRONE of Judah must still exist. Later in 2 Samuel 7:16 God said to David, “thy THRONE shall be established FOREVER” (1 Chronicles 17:14). 

Jeremiah 33:17 says, “David shall NEVER LACK a successor (a man or woman) to sit upon the THRONE of the house of ISRAEL” (KJV; NEB; 1 Kings 9:5; 2 Chronicles 13:5). “I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure FOREVER, and his THRONE as the SUN before me. It shall be established FOREVER like the MOON” (Psalm 89:35-37). 

Where? “On the THRONE of ISRAEL” (1 Kings 2:4). This promise pertained to the Pharez line of David’s house through Hezron (1 Chronicles 4:1), not Hamul (1 Chronicles 2:5). Jesus Christ was of this Pharez-scepter-kingly line (Luke 1:32) and [from Judah] (John 4:9; Heb.7:14) but refused to accept the rulership of the world at his first coming (Matthew 4:9). Christ will “sit on his (David’s) THRONE” (Isa.9:7; Acts 2:30) at his second coming (Revelation 11:15). So [Judah] must rule today on a THRONE wherever the LOST TEN TRIBES of ISRAEL [rather Judah] are located. Christ can’t come back to a non-existent THRONE (Luke 1:31-32; Jeremiah 33:20-21)… how many nations in the world today even have a THRONE besides BRITAIN?’

Most are located in northwestern Europe and are related to the British throne – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

‘But Zarah wasn’t excluded from the rulership blessing. In fact, the last Davidic king mentioned in succession was Zedekiah of Judah who was dethroned in 585 B.C. Also, “the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah” (Jeremiah 39:6). In Jeremiah 52:11 we also read that Zedekiah was beginning, in 585 B.C., [Israel and Judah’s] seven times of national punishment and Jeremiah was commanded to “root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down” (Jeremiah 1:10) the royalty of the Pharez line in Judah. Why Jeremiah? Because Josiah “married Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah” [2] (Jeremiah 1:1). Their son was Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17). But after this “went Jeremiah … to Mizpeh” (Jeremiah 40:6) where King Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS were (41:10).

Apparently Nebuchadnezzar didn’t know that Hebrew law permitted the PRINCESS to inherit the throne when there were no male descendants (Numbers 27:8). He didn’t harm Zedekiah’s DAUGHTERS or take them to Babylon. Now “the king’s DAUGHTERS… and Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch… came into the land of Egypt” (Jeremiah 43:5-7). When they arrived in Tahpanhes (meaning “secret flight”), the Eternal warned Jeremiah that Babylon’s king would soon overrun Egypt also, and destroy the remnant of Judah there so Jeremiah returned “into the land of Judah” (Jeremiah 44:28). 

“To this day Tahpanhes or modern Tell Defneh (the [fortress] mound) is called the PALACE of the JEW’S DAUGHTER” (The History of Egypt by Sir Flinders Petrie) – Qasr Bint el Yehudi. 

Jeremiah 43:9-10 mentions hiding stones at the entry of Pharaoh Hophra’s house. He had offered protection to these Jews (Jeremiah 44:30) and Jeremiah predicts the conquest of Egypt and the death of this monarch (Ezra 30:10,19). This actually came to pass a few years later when Pharaoh Hophra was murdered by enemies from within his own nation – “them that seek his life.” Sir Flinders Petrie found this very pavement in June 1866. After tearing down the throne of PHAREZ Judah, Jeremiah was commissioned “to build, and to plant” (Jeremiah 1:10) as the prophecy said, “the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward; For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a remnant, and they that escape out of Mount Zion” (Isaiah 37:31-32). 

This remnant was the royal DAUGHTERS (2 Kings 19:30-31). In Ezekiel 21:25 we read that the royalty would CHANGE. The Eternal says, “take off the crown: this (crown) shall not be the same: EXALT him that is LOW, and ABASE him that is HIGH.” So Judah’s son PHAREZ was ABASED and ZARAH was EXALTED. The nation of JUDAH had been HIGH and ISRAEL LOW (Hosea 3:4). Now the positions were REVERSED.’ 

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

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

‘The daughters were planted “In the mountain of the height of ISRAEL” (Ezekiel 17:24). But where was LOST ISRAEL? We know that Jeremiah was sent to “the kings of the ISLES which are beyond the sea” (Jeremiah 25:15-22; 31:10). Just as the prophecy said, “I will appoint a PLACE for my people Israel, and will plant them” (2 Samuel 7:10). Not only the tribes, but also the royalty.

The parable of Ezekiel 17 (encoded so no Babylonian spy could understand) describes this whole episode. Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh were the two “EAGLES.” The “HIGH CEDAR” is the royal house of David. The “HIGHEST BRANCH” was Zedekiah. The “TENDER ONE” of the “YOUNG TWIGS” was the young crown princess. The Hebrew word here used for “tender” is feminine, in contrast to the masculine form of the same word in Isaiah 53:2. After the transplanting to a “HIGH MOUNTAIN” which was Israel (verse 23) in IRELAND, this feminine twig would “bring forth boughs, bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar” which means that many royal descendants would come from it.

Through his grandmother, Matilda of Scotland, descent is claimed from the daughter of Zedekiah for Henry the Second, Henry Plantagenet of England [3]. His surname means “a twig.” And “under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing” meaning nations of every race… The “TREES of the FIELD” are kings and peoples of the world. The ancient Chronicles of IRELAND (Leabhar Gabhala; Keating’s History of Ireland) inform us [4] that a sage named “Ollam Fodla” (“Wonderful Prophet”) came from Egypt by way of Spain about six centuries B.C., and that he landed on the northeast coast of IRELAND where Carrickfergus is now. He brought with him a princess [4a] called “Tamar Tephi” (“Beautiful Palm”) and a secretary/scribe [4b] named “Simon Brug” or “Bruch.” Also a massive, strongly secured, and mysterious chest which they regarded with utmost reverence and guarded with zealous care (Ark of Covenant) [5] and a large, rough stone [6] and golden banner with a red lion on it [7]. 

Perhaps the Ark and the two tables of stone lie buried in the Hill of Tara (2 Maccabees 2:7) [8]. Irish poetry and folklore [9] identify Ollam Fodla as JEREMIAH [9a] and Tamar Tephi [9b] as the DAUGHTER of ZEDEKIAH. 

Ancient Irish poetry [10] is full of praises for Tamar Tephi and tells of her lofty birth, her stormy life in Jerusalem and at Tahpanhes in Egypt, her voyage to Spain and from there to Ireland. It is also claimed that Tamar Tephi’s younger sister SCOTTA, who was with JEREMIAH on the first lap of the journey, never reached Ireland because she married a Celto-Scythian MILESIAN prince in Spain. Tamar Tephi married the Irish king called Eochaidh Heremon of ZARAH JUDAH [11] after he agreed to give up Baal idolatry and worship Yahweh according to the two tables of law and provide a school for ollamhs.’

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

‘This is how the two lines became united. Just as Jeremiah 31:22 prophesied, “a woman shall go about seeking for the husband.” They came on a ship belonging to the Iberian DANAAN [the tribe of Dan].’

Both Danite and Phoenician traders had explored and colonised the Britannic Isles in the time of King Solomon. The Danites had originally arrived in Ireland considerably earlier than 1000 BCE and before the Milesians in circa 1404 BCE. As mentioned, there is evidence they were not only visiting the Isles in the time of Israel’s Judges, for the tribe of Dan is criticised by Deborah who governed Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, for being ‘away at sea’ during a protracted local conflict (Judges 5:17); but also as far back when the Israelites were in Egypt. Danites like the sons of Zarah, had struck out early to explore the Aegean, the Grecian Peninsula, Italy, Iberia and on to the Isle of Erin.

‘When Jeremiah reached Tara Ireland, about 580 B.C., he established the “Mur-ollamain” (Hebrew: “School of the Prophets”). Also the Iodhan Moran was created (Hebrew: “Chief Justice”) and the Rectaire (Hebrew: “the Judge”). On the Four Courts at Dublin (the Supreme Court of Ireland) is a statue of the Prophet JEREMIAH [12]. To this very day, JEREMIAH’S burial place is pointed out on Devenish Island, in Lough Erne, two and a half miles below Enniskillen, Co. Fermanagh. The tomb is hewn out of solid rock. It has been known through the centuries as “JEREMIAH’S TOMB.” He was the real SAINT PATRIARCH – a name later corrupted to “St. Patrick” by Catholics.’

For further information regarding the authenticity of Jeremiah travelling to Ireland and the true identity of Ollamh Fodhla, refer article: The Ark of God.

‘From the union of Heremon and Tea Tephi came a long line of IRISH monarchs extending over a period of more than one thousand years. The SCOTCH monarchs were descended from the Irish kings. The last Scottish king, James VI of Scotland, became James I of ENGLAND, and from him the [former] Queen of Great Britain is descended. King Heremon and Queen Tamar Tephi were crowned at TARA (Hebrew. “TORAH”) upon the Lia Fail [13], (Hebrew: STONE of DESTINY) of Israel, just as the kings of Judah had been for centuries. It was as this time that the “HARP of DAVID” became part of the royal heraldic symbolism on family crests and flags since David was the Pharez line. Nathan told King David that “the sword shall never depart from thine house, because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah, the Hittite, to be thy wife” (2 Samuel 12:10). This is why the royal houses of Europe have suffered so many bloody revolutions and murders.’

There is energetic debate regarding the person of Zedekiah’s daughter. Whether she really existed or is a myth. Her name appears to be a composite, which has aided the weakening of her credentials as a real person. Some call her Tea or Tamar. Tephi appears to be the common denominator in each case – refer article: The Ark of God.

Ezekiel 17:2-24

English Standard Version

2 “Son of man, propound a riddle, and speak a parable to the house of Israel; 3 say, Thus says the Lord God: A great eagle [Nebuchadnezzar II] with great wings and long pinions, rich in plumage of many colors, came to Lebanon and took the top of the cedar [Jeconiah*]. 4 He broke off the topmost of its young twigs [princes] and carried it to a land of trade [Chaldea] and set it in a city of merchants [Babylon]. 5 Then he took of the seed of the land [Zedekiah, the king’s Uncle*] and planted it in fertile soil. He placed it beside abundant waters… 6 and it sprouted and became a low spreading vine, and its branches turned toward him, and its roots remained where it stood… 7 “And there was another great eagle with great wings [Egypt] and much plumage, and behold, this vine bent its roots toward him and shot forth its branches toward him from the bed where it was planted, that he might water it.” 

It was the Pharaoh of Egypt, with whom Zedekiah made an alliance. Pharaoh sent an army to raise a siege of Jerusalem in 588 BCE – 2 Chronicles 36:13; Jeremiah 37:5; Jeremiah 37:7. Pharaoh had a great army and Zedekiah leaned on his support and protection. ‘Zedekiah was courting the favour of Egypt while he owed his very position to the bounty of Babylon.’

Ezekiel: 9 “Say, Thus says the Lord God: Will it thrive? Will he not pull up its roots and cut off its fruit, so that it withers, so that all its fresh sprouting leaves wither? It will not take a strong arm or many people to pull it from its roots. 10 Behold, it is planted; will it thrive? Will it not utterly wither when the east wind strikes it – wither away on the bed where it sprouted?”

‘Zedekiah, besides the obligation of an oath, was bound to the king of Babylon by the ties of gratitude, as he owed all he possessed to him.’ Though his sons and nobles were put to the sword.

Ezekiel: … 12 “Say now to the rebellious house, Do you not know what these things mean? Tell them, behold, the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem, and took her king and her princes and brought them to him to Babylon. 13 And he took one of the royal offspring and made a covenant with him, putting him under oath (the chief men of the land he had taken away), 14 that the kingdom might be humble and not lift itself up, and keep his covenant that it might stand.”

‘… Jeconiah and all his princes and officers: see 2 Kings 24:12… Judging them unfit to be trusted any more with any office or power in their own country… taken from among the royal seed Mattaniah, [Jeconiah’s] brother, and advanced him to the throne in Jerusalem, 2 Kings 24:17… A solemn agreement, on terms acceded to and approved by Mattaniah… An oath of fealty: when Nebuchadnezzar caused Mattaniah to enter into this covenant and oath, he changed his name to Zedekiah, which word signifies, the justice of God, to express that God would avenge the crime of this restored captive, if he should break the covenant into which he had entered, and perjure himself… 2 Kings 24:17… Zedekiah being made only a tributary king, consequently was not in as honourable a condition as his predecessors had been in; but yet the keeping of his covenant was the only means, under present circumstances, to support himself and his government.’

Ezekiel: 15 ‘But he rebelled against him by sending his ambassadors to Egypt, that they might give him horses and a large army. Will he thrive? Can one escape who does such things? Can he break the covenant and yet escape? 16 “As I live, declares the Lord God, surely in the place where the king dwells who made him king, whose oath he despised, and whose covenant with him he broke, in Babylon he shall die. 17 Pharaoh [Hophra – Jeremiah 44:30; 37:5] with his mighty army and great company will not help him in war, when mounds are cast up and siege walls built to cut off many lives. 

18 He despised the oath in breaking the covenant, and behold, he gave his hand and did all these things; he shall not escape. 19 Therefore thus says the Lord God: As I live, surely it is my oath that he despised, and my covenant that he broke. I will return it upon his head. 20 I will spread my net over him, and he shall be taken in my snare, and I will bring him to Babylon and enter into judgment with him there for the treachery he has committed against me. 21 And all the pick of his troops shall fall by the sword, and the survivors shall be scattered to every wind, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken.’

Many commentators misinterpret the meaning in not applying it to Zedekiah, but rather the prophecy signifying Jeconiah’s descendant Zerubbabel, who later returned to Judea from the Babylonian exile as governor. He was only a governor under the Persians, not ruling in majesty as a king over ‘birds of every sort’ or many other peoples. Nor was he cut out from Judah when the nation and royal family stood as a tall (Lebanon) cedar, but long after the nation had been carried away into captivity. 

With the problematic interpretation when using Zerubbabel, other commentators view the prophecy as messianic, for the Messiah would come from the line of David. When Christ lived, neither Judah nor its royal family could be symbolised by a tall cedar, as the area was occupied by the Romans and no Davidic king had ruled there for more than five hundred years. The bringing down of a high tree and exalting the low tree does not fit such an analogy. So the explanation is given that Christ descended, Himself a branch from the replanting in Jerusalem. For the true genealogy of Christ, refer article: Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Ezekiel: 22 Thus says the Lord God: “I myself will take a sprig from the lofty top of the cedar and will set it out. I will break off from the topmost of its young twigs [Zedekiah’s daughters] a tender one [Tephi], and I myself will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. 23 On the mountain height of Israel will I plant it [Ulster], that it may bear branches and produce fruit and become a noble cedar. And under it will dwell every kind of bird; in the shade of its branches birds of every sort will nest [British Empire]. 24 And all the trees of the field shall know that I am the Lord; I bring low the high tree [line of Pharez – Zedekiah], and make high the low tree [line of Zarah – Eochaidh], dry up the green tree, and make the dry tree flourish. I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it.”

In summary, quoting from The Life & Death of Charles III:

‘The simple fact of the matter is the throne of David came to an end with Jehoiachin. Thus whether one of Zedekiah’s daughters intermarried with a Milesian king in Ireland or not, does not have bearing on a Davidic line of kings. Merely that a line of Pharez may or may not have entered Scotland with the Milesian Scots and their Zarah descended kings.  

Thus a reinterpretation or rather a re-explanation is required regarding the account of the birth of Zarah and Pharez in Genesis 38:27-30. While Zarah’s hand appeared first and was tied with a scarlet thread, his hand retracted and his twin Pharez was actually born first. Commentators have read this as Pharez having preeminence over Zarah’s line. With Zarah being secondary to Pharez, probably because David and Christ were descended from Pharez and Zarah was born second, even though technically first. Though it would seem that the Zarah line has always been preeminent as evidenced by the scarlet thread and red hand symbols prevalent in Ireland, Scotland and England. 

For all we know, the Pharez line may not have figured in royal lines at all, or seldom at best. Perhaps multiple lines from Zarah’s five sons – Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara – are the true royal lines, with the Hezron line from Pharez giving birth to David and Christ the anomaly and a one time only event. It means pivotal rulers such as Hengist the Jute and the Norman, William the Conqueror were never a line descended from David. Whether they were of Pharez even, may be of little consequence, with a descent from Zarah actually being relevant. With Edward I and James VI/I claiming a Trojan and therefore Zarah descent, adding credence to this line of reasoning. 

The question of whether King Charles III is a descendant of King David is comprehensively answered in the article by John D Keyser entitled: Does King Charles III Sit On a Throne of David? Keyser states: ‘The bottom line is, though, that the reign of the Davidic line in Jerusalem is TEMPORARILY INTERRUPTED’ until Christ’s return. He concludes: ‘Nevertheless, the royal line of Judah (through Zarah) DID go to Ireland… thus fulfilling the prophecy in Genesis 49:10: “The scepter shall NOT depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh comes…”

When the Danes (or Dene), peacefully migrated southwards from southern Sweden, they impinged on the Jutes and to the south of them, the Frisians and Angles. The Danes – not to be confused with the tribe of Dan or modern day Denmark – are one and the same as the later Danish Vikings, a distinct and separate tribe – refer Chapter XXXII Issachar, Zebulun, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes.

The Danes had been part of a Scandinavian tribal collective which had suffered divisions in the fourth and fifth centuries, thus beginning the splitting of the Israelite Danish Vikings, from the remaining ‘Danes’ (Medan) and Swedes (Shuah) who descend from Abraham and his second wife, Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia. Thus they entered Jutland, formerly the Cimbric Peninsula derived from Cymric, in the fifth century, forcing the Saxons tribes west towards Britain. As the Angles were allies of the Danes and their kin, they chose migration rather than warfare. 

A Danish kingdom seems to have been established by the late fifth century, but the earliest records of its kings is fragmentary and allusive. It was a distinct state as opposed to Scania still surviving in southern Sweden. Identity adherents subscribe to the tribe of Dan leaving their name, as in, Dans-mark. It would seem the Dan part may have some credence, whereas the mark part is explained in that the march of the Danes – ‘a march, mark, or mierce being a borderland territory’ – was ostensibly the no-man’s land between them and the tribes which lay to the South, following the exodus to Britain by the Angles, Frisians and Jutes. This name became normalised as Denmark. 

Similar border states included Mercia in the west of England which bordered Wales, the North March of Eastern Germany, Finnmark in Norway and the Ostmark of what is now Austria. 

The Jutes certainly lent their name to Jutland, the mainland peninsula now comprising Denmark. Though most people think of the Saxons or the dominant Saxon tribe the Angles, when they consider the populating of Britain south of the Caledonian Picts and east of the Cymric Britons circa 450 to 650 CE, there were two other notable tribes which entered Britain. One was the Frisians – composed of two separate sons of Jacob, Issachar and Zebulun – and the second was the first wave of the tribe of Judah who entered Britain known as the Jutes. Notice in a moment who was first Saxon tribe into Britain out of the three. As well as those who remained in Scandinavia; the Geats and Wulfings, from whom respectively the modern Danes and Norwegians descend today.

Kingdoms of Europe: An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Ruling Monarchs from Ancient Times to the Present, Gene Gurney, 1982, page 129 – emphasis mine: 

‘Most of the country was conquered by these Teutons [Saxons], of whom the principle tribes were the Angles, Saxons [Frisians], and Jutes, who finally fused into one people, under the name of Anglo-Saxons, or Angles or English, while that portion of Britain in which they made their home was called England. The first of these Teutonic kingdoms was founded in Kent. A despairing British chieftain or king, Vortigern… to save his people from their northern foes [the Picts]… invited the Teutons to come to his aid. 

Two well-known Jutish Vikings, Hengist and Horsa, accepted the invitation with their followers, and in the year 449 landed on the island of Thanet, the southeastern extremity of… England…’

Fromkin and Rodman explain the etymology of the words Judah and Jute

An Introduction to Language, Victoria Fromkin & Robert Rodman, 1988, page 315 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The German linguist Jakob Grimm (of fairy-tale fame)… published a four-volume treatise (1819-1822) that specified the regular sound correspondences among Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, and the Germanic languages. It was not only the similarities that intrigued Grimm and other linguists, but the systematic nature of the differences… Grimm pointed out that certain phonological changes that did not take place in Sanskrit, Greek, or Latin must have occurred early in the history of the Germanic languages. Because the changes were so strikingly regular, they became known as Grimm’s Law’ … (one example of which is) d->t … voiced stops become voiceless.’

The people known as the Jutes and Juten (or Yuten) – for the letter J is pronounced as Y in German and the Scandinavian languages – would originally have been recognised as Juden (or Yuden). Ironically, Juden became the German word used for the Jews. 

Key to Northwest European Origins, Raymond F McNair, 1963 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘Note carefully the following statements made by Jessel regarding the Jews and Benjamites: 

“We find in the Bible many references to the fighting power of the Benjamin, and we find them also always in alliance with Yahuds. Together these white races held in subjection the coloured people, the natives of Canaan. JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the Amurra (“AMORITES”) and the Kheta of the Egyptian monuments (ibid., p. 118).” 

‘Jessel thinks that the settlements in the British Isles which had built the cromlechs were the same people as the Palestinian Amorites. He plainly says that “JUDAH and BENJAMIN are the AMURRA” whom the Egyptians had depicted. Also, did you notice that Jessel spoke of the “YAHUDS” and the “BENJAMIN” as “these WHITE races”? He also spoke of the native CANAANITES as “the COLOURED people” – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. ‘Truly, the native Canaanites were dark or colored in comparison with the people of the tribes of Judah (the Yahuds) and the Benjamin (Benjamites).’

A close relationship has existed between the peoples descended from Judah and Benjamin as Jessel points out. Though their identity as Amorites is open to question – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. Added to this is that while original Canaanites were dark coloured, the Canaanites at the time of the Israelites were predominately white and or Nephilim (and Elioud giant) descended – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Horsa in 455 CE was killed during the Battle of Aegaelsthrep (Aylesford) along with the British King Vortigern. Vortigern’s son, Catigern was also killed in the fighting. Horsa’s brother Hengist survived and was victorious, declaring himself King of Kent – reigning from 455 to 488 CE. Hengist and Horsa were the Jutish leaders of a population that quickly expanded in southern England, with their Nobles gaining influence and becoming the longest established aristocratic families of the Saxon population. 

Some claim that Hengist and Horsa could trace their descent from Woden (or Odin), making them royal descendants of Zarah. The neighbouring kingdom of Sussex was founded by Aelle in 477 CE and in 495 Cerdic and his son Cynric landed in the south of England. By 519, Cerdic had become the first king of Wessex. His son Cynric took Wiltshire in 552 and defeated the Britons in 556. In 575, the Angles founded the Kingdom of East Anglia and later Mercia in 586. 

After the reigns of Hengest and his son Aesc (or Oisc), little is known of Kentish history from 512 CE until the reign of Aethelberht from 560 to 616, who by 595 had become overlord of all the kingdoms south of the River Humber. His wife Bertha, daughter of Charibert the Frankish king of Paris, was a Christian and it may have been for that reason that Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine’s mission to Aethelberht’s court in 597. Aethelberht, after his conversion and as the first Christian king in Britain in 601, donated a place of residence in Canterbury for the missionaries and hence this became the first and senior archiepiscopal see for the English church that would later be known as Anglican – refer Appendix VIII When the Creator came to dwell with His Creation; and article: The Seven Churches: A Message for the Church of God in the latter Days

Kent waned in power and from 825 CE Kent was a province of Wessex, whose kings became kings of all England by the tenth century – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III. The social organisation of Kent exhibited many distinctive features, which supports the statement of the Venerable Bede that ‘its inhabitants were a different tribe from the Angles… namely the Jutes. Instead of two classes of nobles, or gesithcund, as in Wessex and Mercia, Kent had only one, the eorlcund; and the Kentish ceorl, or peasant, was [interestingly from a Judah perspective] a person of considerably greater substance than those elsewhere.’ 

The main area of intrusion by the Jutes into England matches in large part, the area of England historically known as the Home Counties. Generally speaking, the Home Counties are Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Middlesex, Surrey, East Sussex and West Sussex. There is no official designation to these counties as a unified group. The description is more of a social and demographic way to identify the stomping grounds of the traditional English middle and upper classes. Sometimes parts of Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire, Hampshire and even Dorset are included. The Jutes for instance, did settle in Hampshire after their arrival and thus a classification of Saxon or Wessex can be misleading, as the Jutes are and were Saxons. 

Aethelred I became king of Wessex and Kent in 866 CE and was the son of Aethelwulf. The Kingdom of Wessex heartland was in the area of the modern county of Hampshire. As it grew, it covered all of the country south of the river Thames from the borders of Kent and Sussex to the Tamar River. By the tenth century, the Kingdom of Dumnonia, west of the Tamar, was under West Saxon rule. Notice the Judah family name of Tamar, the mother of Pharez and Zarah and recall Tamar, a daughter of King David. 

Aethelred’s reign was a long struggle against the Danes. In the year of his succession a large Danish force landed in East Anglia and in the year 868, Aethelred and his brother Alfred went to help Burgred of Mercia against this host, but the Mercians soon made peace with their foes. 

In 871, the Danes encamped at Reading, where they defeated Aethelred and his brother, but later in the year the English won a great victory at Aescesdun. Two weeks later they were defeated again, this time at Basing but partially revived their fortunes with a further victory at Maeretun (perhaps Marden in Wiltshire). 

In Easter of the same year Aethelred died and was buried at Wimborne. His brother Alfred, also spelled Aelfred, was Alfred the Great – born in 849 and dying in 899 – he became the new King of Wessex for twenty-eight years. He prevented England from falling to the Danes and promoted learning and literacy. It was during these events in southern England the heartland of Judah, that Kenneth McAlpine, hundreds of miles to the North, united the Scots and Picts, forming the Kingdom of Scotland and hastening the emergence of Benjamin from the shadows.

The second wave of the tribe of Judah, the Northmen known as Normans arrived from Normandy, France where they and a residue of other tribes had dwelt for some two hundred years. The historic Battle of Hastings in 1066 CE with the killing of King Harold, began the Norman Conquest of England under William the Conqueror – formerly the Bastard and son of Robert I – who was crowned at Westminster Abbey on December 25, 1066. William I was born in 1028 and died in 1087. Arthur kemp states:

‘One of William the Conqueror’s first undertakings was a survey of England. This resulted in the famous Domesday Book which was a full account of all property and wealth in that country at the beginning of the eleventh century… it’s detail is staggering, including even the smallest villages; the number of mills, fisheries, animals; and the sizes of all woodlands and meadows.’

William was succeeded by his son, William II who was known as William Rufus or William the Red, due to his reddish hair. These descendants of Judah acted with authority and used their wealth, power and influence to great effect. Were they aristocratic lines of Pharez? More likely still, they were from Zarah – refer article: The Life & Death of Charles III. Their impact was immediate and it was severe.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, Volume 29, page 33: ‘The major change, was the subordination of England to a Norman aristocracy. William distributed estates to his followers (barons from Normandy) on a piecemeal basis as the lands were conquered.’ 

In Search of the Dark Ages, Michael Wood, 1987, page 233 – emphasis mine: 

‘The redistribution of land after the Norman Conquest has been called a tenurial revolution of the most far-reaching kind and a catastrophe for the higher orders of English society from which they never recovered. The record of Domesday Book, completed only twenty years after Hastings, shows that though some Englishmen still held considerable estates, very few held any position of influence. 

It has been estimated that only eight per cent of the land was still held by [existing] English [Nobles] in 1086 [a mere twenty years after the conquest]. 

There is much evidence for a widespread emigration of Englishmen into other countries, into Denmark, into Scotland and, most remarkably of all, to Greece and the Byzantine empire where there is good contemporary evidence that large numbers of Englishmen took service with the emperor in Constantinople in the generation following Hastings.’

This new order of Norman nobility swiftly took control of not just England, but also Scotland – for instance through Robert the Bruce’s ancestors – and Wales, as well as Ireland’s nobility. These Norsemen or Northmen Vikings who had settled in France, spoke Frankish, a form of French and had already entwined themselves within the ruling class of France, setting up for the future Angevin Monarchs and therefore a controlling influence over Ammon and Moab, not unlike Darda and the Trojans some two and half millennia previously – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran*. 

In 911 CE, the Frankish King Charles had ceded land to the Normans in return for their loyalty and protection against other Viking incursions, naming their chief Rollo, a Duke. Time Frame AD 800-1000: Fury of the Northmen, Time Life Books, 1988, page 38: ‘His Vikings melded into the local culture much more rapidly than in England. They took local women as wives and concubines and watched their children grow up speaking the Frankish tongue.’ 

As discussed, the Sicambrians or Franks were part of the Teutonic invasions of Europe, which had followed on the heels of the Celtic ingress. Royal Genealogies or the Genealogical Tables of Emperors, Kings, and Princes, from Adam to These Times, James Anderson, page 611: ‘The Sicambrian Kings, Antenor, of the House of Troy, King of the Cimmerians, 443 B.C.’ We have learned how the Franks descend from Ammon and Moab, sons of Abraham’s nephew Lot. 

Intermarriage between their people and Judah was a union between family, with a pedigree going back all the way to the Triad. Similarly, a number of these Frankish Nobles may well have been from ruling families of Israel already – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

The Frankish nobility had blended with the older Gaulish nobility from Celtic times and the Gauls had intermarried with the noble Romans descended from Ishmael prior to that. Roman nobility claimed to trace its descent from Aeneas of the house of Troy. Whichever the specific lineage, the closeness of the related German, French and British lines is without question, as our studies on Ammon, Moab and Ishmael have shown – refer* Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. 

The Angevins were the first three Plantagent kings of England: Henry II from 1154 to 1189 – the husband of Eleanor of Aquitaine – Richard the Lionheart from 1189 to 1199 and John the Bad from 1199 to 1216, the king who infamously signed the Magna Carta. On the 25 November 1120, the White Ship carrying William Adelin sank, killing all three hundred people aboard, bar one. William was the future monarch and eldest son of Henry I. Henry was the youngest son of William the Conqueror. The death of William left one child, Empress Matilda, wife of Holy Roman Emperor, Henry V. Five years later, Henry V died and Matilda returned to Normandy and was named Henry I’s successor. 

After 1066, the rise of the Anglo-Norman aristocracy depended on the preeminence of the Duchy of Normandy. It was a jewel of wealth and power, desired by every royal descendant. Henry I had taken it by force from his older brother, William Rufus (William II). 

To secure its southern border, William Adelin had married the daughter of the Count of Anjou, who also controlled the adjacent counties of Maine and Touraine. King Henry I now arranged the marriage of his widowed daughter who was twenty-six, to the eldest son of the Count of Anjou, Geoffrey Plantagenet who was fourteen. They hated each other, yet still produced three sons. Though Matilda’s cousin Stephen of Blois – the Nephew of Henry I – had usurped the throne in 1135, Geoffrey worked tirelessly to win it back for her. Following Stephen’s death in 1154, their eldest son ascended the throne as Henry II, King of England. England came to be ruled not by the son of an Anglo-Norman king, but rather, by the son of an Angevin Count and his Norman empress.

Henry possessed a larger proportion of France than the King of France himself – see map above. Hence  it led to inevitable conflict, with King John being defeated in the Anglo-French War of 1213 to 1214, by Philip II of France. John lost control of most of the continental possessions apart from Gascony in southern Aquitaine. 

This defeat set the scene for further conflict and the Hundred Year’s War lasting between 1337 and 1453. A conflict over the French throne between the English royal House of Plantagenet and the French royal House of Valois. Eventually, the House of Valois retained control of France, ending the intertwined French and English monarchies, so that they remained separate. 

This close, yet antagonistic relationship between Judah, Ammon and Moab was mirrored millennias earlier between the Trojans and Greek Athenians. 

Of the Kings and Queens of England, it is interesting to note some of the Houses and how many monarchs each have contributed. Working back, the current House of Windsor or rather Saxe-Coburg-Gotha combined with the House of Hanover which preceded it – both being German-Jewish in ancestry, descending from Ishmael and Edom (Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe) – have provided ten Kings and two Queens – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III

Twelve monarchs in total from George I in 1714 to the current monarch, Charles III from 2023. 

The House preceding were the Stewarts of Scotland. Producing seven Monarchs in total, including two Queens from James I in 1603 to Anne in 1702. The next House was that of the Tudors of Wales. Five Monarchs in total, including two Queens from Henry VII in 1485 to Elizabeth I in 1558. Then we arrive at the Plantagenets deriving from the Angevins of France and their branches, the Houses of York and Lancaster, which provided eleven kings from Henry III in 1216 to Richard III in 1483. Before that as mentioned, the three Angevin Kings of Henry II, Richard I and John. 

We finally arrive at the Norman Kings derived from the Norse Vikings, consisting of William I, his son William II from 1087 to 1100 and William I’s grandson, Henry I from 1100 to 1135. 

It is these three kings, nearly one thousand years ago that we could possibly perceive as being a genuine line of Judah. All the subsequent lines have had varying degrees of descent from the tribe via Zarah reduced by the foreign royal lines injected from Ammon and Moab of France; in part perhaps from Simeon of Wales and Benjamin of Scotland; and without question the Ishmael-Edomite mix from Germany. The unmistakable fact, is that admixture within these lines again means the percentage of Judaic blood is just that, a minority percentage

The current royals may have a smidgeon of a Judah bloodline, but the reality is, that the English throne which includes the ancestry of French Angevins, a Dutch William of Orange, William III and two German-Jewish Houses, is not very English and hasn’t been for a very long time.

Does this negate the legitimacy of the British throne being the Davidic throne? No. Does it contradict a descendant of David being available to sit on the throne? No. After an Edomite overturn, does it signify we have entered the end game of foretold events? Yes. 

The Duke of York, who became King George VI of England from 11 December 1936 until his death on February 6, 1952, reportedly wrote in 1922: ‘… I am sure the British Israelite business is true. I have read a lot about it lately and everything no matter how large or small points to our being “the chosen race” – Letter, 1922, facsimile printed in The Independent, April 6, 1996.’ The last King of England until the recent ascension of Charles III, believed in Britain’s Israelite past and its modern identity.

Royal Coat of Arms of Elizabeth I – Always the same (Ever the Same)

It is coincidence indeed that the first Queen Elizabeth reigned during the rapid growth of England as a chrysalis empire, with the planting of new Colonies in the Americas; while her namesake Queen Elizabeth II – Elizabeth I of Scotland and daughter of George VI – should witness the rapid dissolution of Britain’s empire and collapse of her once unrivalled power.

Nota Bene

The original section which followed concerning Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare has been removed. The material is reproduced in its entirety in the article ‘The Shakespeare Shadow’ and is now available there for the interested reader.

The English King Edward I conquered Wales in 1282. In order to appease the Welsh, the king’s eldest son was made the Prince of Wales, a title which still exists today. The two countries became unified in 1536, with the Kingdom of England incorporating Wales. The Kingdom of England ceased being a separate sovereign state on May 1, 1707, when the Acts of Union put into effect, the terms agreed in the Treaty of Union the previous year. The resulting Kingdom of Great Britain born from a political union with the Kingdom of Scotland. To accommodate the union for both, institutions such as the law and national churches remained separate. 

It is interesting to note that the unique relationship between England and Wales, as Judah and Simeon is revealed in the Bible and we will address this in the following chapter. Similarly with Scotland as Benjamin, with whom we will study next. Of all the territories, colonies or nations which England acquired during the evolution of its empire; the Kingdom of Scotland was the only country that was not conquered; occupied; seized as a protectorate; purchased; bargained and traded for or acquired by treaty. 

Turning points for England were its imperial expansion in the sixteenth century, particularly during Elizabeth I’s reign during 1558 to 1603 and the colonies springing up in North America, leading to a prominent and powerful nation comprising many peoples. Considerable value was attached to these fledgling colonies and the wealth which they provided to Britain and the crown. 

Another turning point was the Spanish Armada in 1588, sent by Spain to bring Great Britain into line with Catholic Europe. After the disastrous Spanish navy’s expedition, England eventually rose to become the world’s dominant sea and naval power during the nineteenth century. 

A notable decision by Elizabeth I was the expulsion of all Black Africans from England in 1601. From 1555 the first Black slaves were imported into England via the ports of Liverpool and Bristol. By 1601 there were officially twenty thousand Black slaves in London. A significant Black presence, unlike America, was delayed until increased immigration from African colonies occurred in the twentieth century. 

Author Paul Johnson describes the awakening of Judah’s lawgiving destiny and calling to fulfil its commission, through the enterprise of building an empire – emphasis mine:

‘However, the fact that England had declared itself an empire invalidated the papal award in official English eyes, a judgment made formal by Queen Elizabeth I’s chief minister, Sir William Cecil, who told the Spanish Ambassador that English settlers were free to claim for the Crown any territory in the Americas not yet settled. The term “the British Empire” came into use at about the same time. It was given a religious underpinning by the widespread belief in England, made explicit in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, the most popular book in Elizabethan and Jacobean England after the Bible, that for historical reasons the English [true Judah] had succeeded the discredited Jews [false Judah] as the Elect Nation, had vindicated their claim by the Reformation, and had a global mission to carry thus-purified Christianity throughout the world’ – refer article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

When James VI of Scotland became James I due to Elizabeth being ‘childless’ – an irony as James was the son of Mary Stuart who had been executed by Elizabeth I in 1567 (for both Elizabeth and James were direct descendants of the first Tudor monarch, Henry VII as Elizabeth was his granddaughter and James his great-great grandson. Henry’s sister Margaret, married the King of Scotland, James IV. They had a son, James V, who married and had a daughter, Mary, who became the Queen of Scots; making her Elizabeth’s second cousin. James VI was the son of Mary, Queen of Scots and therefore a third cousin to Elizabeth) – England expanded under the Stuart House in trade, finance and prosperity; developing Europe’s largest merchant fleet.

The United Kingdom played a major role in the advancement of civilisation, taking a significantly leading role in advocating democracy; in the writing of great literature; and the addition of landmark scientific development. During the nineteenth century, the British Empire covered over one quarter of the surface of the earth and its share of the world’s wealth by GDP, was a similar percentage. 

The newly formed Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707 led to the combined output from the Royal Society and other English enterprises – with the Scottish Enlightenment – in creating numerous innovations in science and engineering. Coupled with the enormous growth in overseas trade, which was ably protected by the British Navy, this paved the way for the unabated expansion of the British Empire. It also drove the Industrial Revolution; ‘a period of profound change in the socioeconomic and cultural conditions of England, resulting in industrialised agriculture, manufacture, engineering and mining, as well as new and pioneering road, rail and water networks to facilitate their expansion and development.’ 

This period also saw the presence and contribution of an intellectual giant and one of the greatest scientists and thinkers the world has ever known: Isaac Newton – who lived from 1642 to 1726. Kemp says: ‘Newton was a prestigious natural philosopher and mathematician who invented the mathematical system known as calculus and was author of the laws of motion and gravitation. Newton’s works… saw England dominate the world’s stage with scientific and intellectual thought – a situation of eminence which contributed to the domination of the physical world by the British.’ 

The opening of Northwest England’s Bridgewater Canal in 1761 began the canal age in Britain and in 1825 ‘the world’s first permanent steam locomotive-hauled passenger railway, the Stockton and Darlington Railway opened to the public. The Scottish scientist ‘James Watt had perfected the steam engine, enabling mechanisation on a scale never before seen. By 1830, the Industrial Revolution had turned Britain into the foremost industrial power in the world.’ 

Great Britain’s power was no better displayed than at the Battle of Trafalgar on land by the Duke of Wellington and at sea by Lord Nelson when the naval engagement between the British Royal Navy, comprising twenty-seven battle ships and the combined fleets of the French and Spanish Navies, with thirty-three battle ships during the the Napoleonic Wars resulted in their decisive victories. It was at this time, in the early 1800s during the fight against Napoleon’s France for hegemony of Europe, which ‘fostered a concept of Britishness and a united national British people’ shared by the English, Welsh and Scots.

In 1851, London became the biggest and most populous metropolitan area in the world with two and a half million people, achieving considerable prestige, as the financial hub of the world. During the Victorian era, the occupation of India underscored the historical link between Cush and Judah – Numbers 12:1; 2 Kings 19:9; Jeremiah 39:15; 2 Samuel 18:21, 32 – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Many British officers stationed in India, brought back Indian wives to Britain and Ireland. This admixture is evident in an Indian-origin blood disorder which is now found in Britain.

Power shifts in Europe led to World War I (Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar), with hundreds of thousands of English soldiers lost, fighting for the United Kingdom and its Allies. Two decades later in  World War II, the United Kingdom stood up to the same European aggressor again, its cousin Ishmael. 

Following the war, the British experienced rapid decolonisation and a once powerful Empire of substance dissolving into an impotent Commonwealth of form only. A major contribution was from Frank Whittle’s development of the jet engine which transformed air travel. 

March of the Titans, The Isle of Influence – England, Scotland and Wales, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 207 – emphasis mine:

‘Even its most vehement detractors will admit that the nation of Great Britain has been one of the foremost countries of present-day Western civilization. Its achievements are legion – at one stage its empire existed on all the continents of the world except Antarctica. Its language became the second most widely spoken language on earth (after Chinese); its writers, poets, and playwrights are acknowledged as some of the greatest of all time, and its history and culture have become ingrained in the traditions of many people on earth. Britain was also directly responsible for the initial mass settlement of the North American continent that, together with immigrants from the rest of Europe, created the giant that became America. The Industrial Revolution, which it spearheaded, shaped the infrastructure of the current world. Yet it is a small island, slightly more than half the size of France. 

The history of this island of kings and queens is a remarkable one… During the twentieth century there has been significant population movement to England, mostly from other parts of the British Isles, as well as from the Commonwealth; primarily from the Indian subcontinent. In the past two decades while a member of the European Union, increased numbers of people from Eastern Europe have also moved to the United Kingdom. Also in recent decades, the administration of the United Kingdom has moved towards devolved governance in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 

England and Wales continue to exist as a jurisdiction within the United Kingdom. One result of devolution has stimulated a greater emphasis on a more English specific identity and patriotism that has been subsumed in a British identity for the past two centuries. 

The name ‘England’… is derived from the Old English name Englaland, which means ‘land of the Angles.’ The Angles came from the Anglia peninsula in the Bay of Kiel area, the present-day German state of Schleswig-Holstein of the Baltic Sea as opposed to the Jutes, dwelling further north. ‘The earliest recorded use of the term, as “Engla londe”, is in the late-ninth-century translation into Old English of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English people. The term was then used in a different sense to the modern one, meaning “the land inhabited by the English”, and it included English people in what is now south-east Scotland but was then part of the English kingdom of Northumbria.’

A number of the separatist movements in Europe involve the family of Abraham and in large part include the ‘Celtic fringes.’ Brittany has strong links with Cornwall. Both have strong regional identities, with similar looking flags. 

The old Brittany flag (above) and the flag of Cornwall (Below)

In the first century work by Tacitus, Germania, the first reference to the Angles is used in the Latin as Anglii. The etymology of the tribal name itself is disputed by scholars. Some suggesting that it derives from the shape of the Angeln peninsula, or an angular shape. ‘How and why a term derived from the name of a tribe that was less significant than others, such as the Saxons, came to be used for the entire country and its people is not known, but it seems this is related to the custom of calling the Germanic people in Britain Angli Saxones or English Saxons to distinguish them from continental Saxons (Eald-Seaxe) of Old Saxony between the Weser and Eider rivers in Northern Germany.’ 

There is no mystery, for it is worth re-iterating that the Germanic tribes of the Angles – constituting two tribes of Israel, Manasseh and Ephraim – the Jutes and the Frisians, again representing two Israelite tribes, were collectively, the Saxons. The Angles were the dominant tribe in numbers, so their name lingering in Britain their home for centuries, from the name for their previous home is not a surprise. Non-Celtic Britain, is in fact the land of the Jutes of Judah; like Jutland from Jute-land in northern Denmark. Similarly in Scottish Gaelic, the term Saxon is the name given to the English of Sassenach. Alternatively, the Welsh name for the English is Sasseneg.

Loegria is a romantic name for England related to the Welsh word for England, Lloegr in Arthurain legend. Albion is also applied to England in a poetic capacity; though its original meaning is the island of Great Britain as a whole, with its derivative Alba, referring to Scotland in the north. 

The St George’s Cross has been the national flag of England since the thirteenth century. Originally the flag was used by the maritime Republic of Genoa and Richard I paid a tribute to the Doge of Genoa from 1190 onwards so that English ships could fly the flag as a means of protection when entering the Mediterranean. The red cross was also a symbol for the Crusaders in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Tudor Rose is England’s national floral emblem and was adopted as a national emblem of England around the time of the War of the Roses as a symbol of peace – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. It is a combined white rose of the Yorkists and the red rose of the Lancastrians – cadet branches of the Plantagenets who went to war over control of the nation (in 1455), just two years after the Hundred Years War ended in 1453. 

In a series of civil wars, the first at St Albans on May 22, 1455, with terrible loss of life and almost extinguishing the male lines, it ended on August 22 1485 at the battle of Bosworth Field where usurper Richard III of York died and a total of over one hundred thousand men lay dead. The House of Tudor had allied with the House of Lancaster. It was Henry Tudor who defeated Richard III, assumed the throne as Henry VII and married Elizabeth of York, the eldest daughter and the sole heir of Edward IV, uniting the rival claims. 

The oak tree is a symbol of England, representing strength and endurance as is the British bulldog, representing an indomitable tenacity. The Royal Arms of England, with a national coat of arms featuring three lions, originated with its adoption by Richard the Lion Heart in 1198. It provides one of the most prominent symbols of England and unsurprisingly, it is similar to the traditional arms of Normandy.

England does not have an official designated national anthem, as the United Kingdom as a whole uses God Save the Queen. Though the following songs are often considered unofficial English anthems: Jerusalem; Land of Hope and Glory; Rule Britannia; and I vow to Thee, My Country

One subject that is well rooted in prehistory is that of giants in Britain – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; and articles: Nephilim & Elioud Giants I & II

The Giants of Ancient Albion & the Legendary Founding of Prehistoric Britain, Hugh Newman, 2017 – emphasis mine:

‘Giants are at the heart of national folklore concerning the founding of Britain, and archaic traditions state they have inhabited the country since deep antiquity… a lost legacy of extremely tall and powerful individuals who once ruled this part of the world.

Britain’s oldest acknowledged name is thought to be taken from a prehistoric giant king called ‘Albion’ who made his way to the island after being banished from his homeland of Greece. “He was begotten by the sea-god whom the Greeks called Poseidon, the Romans Neptune.” In Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, by Raphael Holinshed, Albion and the giants were said to have gradually consolidated their position in Britain, ruling the land for hundreds or possibly thousands of years.

After a long reign, Albion went to the south of France… to help his army defeat Hercules. To ensure winning, Hercules summoned his father Zeus and a shower of stones fell from the sky. These were used as weapons against Albion and he was defeated… the giant race of Britain continued for hundreds more years, although their numbers decreased and ended up at [the] southwestern tip of Cornwall, until the arrival of Brutus after the Trojan wars. However, Britain’s original name could also be from a Greek giantess called ‘Albina’:

“The Chronicles of Britain, written by John de Wavrin between 1445 and 1455, relate that in the time of Jahir, the third judge of Israel after Joshua, Lady Albine and her sisters came to, and settled in, an island which they named Albion after her, and which afterwards got the name of Britain.”

Jair was the eighth Judge from 1118 to 1096 BCE. This appears too late, while the third Judge was actually Shamgar who ruled an undisclosed period of time of perhaps twenty years from 1204 to 1184 BCE – falling between the second Judge Ehud (1284-1204 BCE) and the fourth Judge Deborah (1184-1144 BCE). This would be about one hundred years before the arrival of Brutus.

Newman: “While they were living there the devil assumed the shape of a man, and dwelt among the wicked women, and by [them] had issue great and terrible giants and giantesses, who afterwards much increased and multiplied, and occupied the land for a long time, namely, until the arrival of Brutus, who conquered them [circa 1100 BCE].”

‘The story of Albina has variations. Most versions agree that her father had thirty-three wicked daughters, but he managed to find thirty-three husbands to curb their unruly ways. The daughters were displeased and under the leadership of their eldest sister Alba (also Albina, or Albine) they plotted to cut the throats of their husbands as they slept.”

“For this crime they were set adrift in a boat with half a year’s rations, and after a long and dreadful journey they arrived at a great island that came to be named Albion, after the eldest. Here they stayed, and with the assistance of demons… “mated with”… [populating] the wild, windswept islands with a race of giants”

‘… and with their offspring a new ruling giant elite were founded. These giants are evidenced in the story by huge bones that were said to be unearthed in the country during the 1400s’ – Article: Nephilim & Elioud Giants II.

‘Geoffrey of Monmouth’s influential 12th century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain)… [claims] thousands of years after the giants had populated the island, Brutus and other warriors fleeing the Trojan wars landed on the coast of Albion and legend states that the modern name of Britain comes from Brutus. Geoffrey asserts that he translated the Historia into Latin (in about 1136) from “a very ancient book in the British tongue,” that was loaned to him by Walter, Archdeacon of Oxford. What this book was, has had scholars debating for centuries, but it could have been the Historia Brittonum (History of the Britons) from the ninth century, written by Nennius, a monk from Bangor, Wales. This is likely, as he covered many Arthurian myths, including the giants of ancient Albion. An important section of Geoffrey’s text has Brutus and his men realizing that Albion was already partly populated by unexpectedly tall foes: “It was uninhabited except for a few giants… they drove the giants whom they had discovered into the caves in the mountains.” After scaring off the giants and launching attacks on the titans, the land was then divided up and Corineus was given the southwest area of Cornwall to rule, named after the great warrior.’

“Corineus experienced great pleasure from wrestling with the giants, of whom there were far more there than in any of the districts which had been distributed among his comrades. Among the others there was a particularly repulsive one, called Gogmagog, who was twelve feet tall.”

‘Other chroniclers state that he was in fact twelve cubits tall, so this would have made him 18 feet (5.5 meters) tall. Gogmagog was described as being so strong that he could uproot an oak tree and shake it like a hazel wand… the ferocious giant attacked Corineus’ camp with twenty of his kin. This turned into an all-out battle and Corineus and his men called on their local allies and eventually defeated them in a bloody conflict. Brutus chose to keep one of the giants alive, as he wanted to witness a wrestling match between Gogmagog and Corineus. During the tightly fought match, Gogmagog broke three of Corineus’ ribs, and he was so enraged, he hoisted Gogmagog up on his shoulders with superhuman strength and ran to the cliff where he threw him off to his death. His body smashed into many pieces after hitting sharp rocks and stained the water red, that “was so discolored with his blood as to continue tinged with it for a long time.” The cliff from which he was thrown became known as Langnagog or ‘The Giants Leap’. 

It was on Plymouth Hoe that became the legendary place that the wrestling occurred because it was recorded in 1486 that a giant turf-cut figure was carved depicting two figures, one of them being Gogmagog.

… the names of Gog and Magog first appear in the Hebrew Bible with reference to Magog, son of Japheth in the Book of Genesis, then Gog, the king of Magog, appears in the Old Testament in Ezekiel (38:2) as the instigator of a terrible battle. Gog was referred to as being a person and Magog was the land he was from’ – Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

‘Similar stories are echoed in the Book of Revelation and the Qur’an. The tradition is sparse and confused as Gog and Magog are presented as men, supernatural beings (giants and demons), national groups or lands, and appear widely in other folklore and mythology. For example, Gogmagog and Gogmaegot are identified with giants in Spencer’s Faerie Queen (1590) and in the medieval legends of [Arthur]. The names even reached Cambridge in Eastern England where the hilly area became known as the ‘Gog Magog Hills’, where interestingly, some taller than average skeletons were unearthed in the 1800s.

After defeating the giants, Brutus travelled all over the country to find a suitable spot to rule from. He decided on the River Thames and founded the city of Troia Nova, or New Troy, which became Trinovantum, we now know as London, with his captured giant in tow. Another, later version of the story describes how the giants Gog and Magog were two people and were taken prisoners and forced to become porters at the Royal Palace, now the London Guildhall. The effigies of Gog and Magog have remained at the Guildhall since the reign of Henry V. In The Gigantick History of the Two Famous Giants of Guildhall (1741) it proclaims that Gogmagog and Corineus were in fact two giants:

“Corineus and Gogmagog were two brave giants who richly valued their honour and exerted their whole strength and force in the defence of their liberty and country; so the City of London, by placing these, their representatives in their Guildhall, emblematically declare, that they will, like mighty giants defend the honour of their country and liberties of this their City; which excels all others, as much as those huge giants exceed in stature the common bulk of mankind.”

‘The defeat of Gogmagog by Corineus was the beginning of the end for the remaining giants, and the few that remained turned up again [in] the tales of Jack-the-Giant-Killer and Cormoran (mainly based in Cornwall), while others were said to have fled to Dartmoor and the mountains of Wales… the stories of Jack-the-Giant-Killer are worthy of a mention. The violent chronicles of Britain’s most famous giant hunter stretch far back into prehistory, to the times when the giants and humans were attempting to co-exist, before the arrival of Brutus. Mainly based in Cornwall, his exploits lingered across the whole of Britain. He was presented as a clever young man who often outwitted his gargantuan foes.

The most famous story is that he defeated the terrible Cormoran on St Michael’s Mount. By blowing a horn loudly, he caused the giant to come rushing out, but it fell into a deep pit that Jack had prepared and covered with twigs. Cormoran was then hacked to death by Jack. The other stories continue in this vein, and it was only when the printing press became widespread in the Victorian age that the story was toned down, and it transformed into the children’s classic Jack and the Beanstalk… there are thousands of legends of giants throughout Britain… Their physical strength and stature became exaggerated as their deeds pass into legend, but in a strange twist, it is often in the same locations that actual giant skeletons and bones were reportedly unearthed. Here are a few intriguing examples:

St. Michael’s Mount: A prehistoric eight-foot (2.4 meter) skeleton was unearthed from a dungeon on the island 250 years ago, that may well be the giant that Jack was said to have slayed.

“The Annual Register for 1761 tells us that in March of that year, as a miner was working at Tregoney, in Cornwall, in a new mine, he accidentally discovered a stone coffin, on which were some inscribed characters. Within it was the skeleton of a man of gigantic size, which, on the admission of the air, mouldered into dust. One tooth, two inches and a half long, and thick in proportion, remained whole. The length of the coffin was eleven feet three inches, and its depth was three feet nine inches.”

Devonshire – This is the area where Gogmagog was thrown off the cliff by Corineus: “A stone coffin in Devonshire contained a thigh-bone belonging to a man eight feet nine inches high.”

‘Later in Histories giants reappear in the stories of the Welsh wizard, Merlin. He tells the King that in a distant epoch, giants transported huge trilithons from North Africa to Killarus in Ireland, where “The Giant’s Dance” was positioned. Later, they were transported to Salisbury Plain by mysterious means. However, huge skeletons have also been discovered in the mounds in the local landscape. In Journey into South Wales (1802) George Lipscomb reported: “a skeleton which measured fourteen feet ten inches in length.” In A Theological, Biblical, and Ecclesiastical Dictionary (1830), it describes a nine foot four inch (284.48 cm) skeleton unearthed near Salisbury in 1719. It also recounts a mound named ‘Giant’s Grave’ next to St Edmunds Church, just a few miles from Stonehenge – Article: Monoliths of the Nephilim*.

The authors have collated over 150 accounts of giant bones, skeletons and skulls throughout the British Isles… the founding of Britain is still shrouded in mystery… the stories of the giants seem to go very far back. The Legends and [foundational] myths of Britain are… strongly associated [with] these local titans… [who] could have been responsible* for the thousands of megalithic constructions that grace this ancient landscape.’

An article by an identity adherent addresses the debate regarding who the Jews really are; maintaining the inaccurate status quo. As the subject has been addressed in depth in the preceding chapter, the matter will not be laboured, though a few points are worth mentioning in highlighting the inaccuracy of labelling the Jews as the tribe of Judah. 

An initial thought was, to whom do they ascribe Edom? After some investigating, it was learned that the author supports the common belief that Edom is Turkey today. We have likewise already discussed Turkey in length – refer Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey; and Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes

One reason given was the ‘fulfilment of Zephaniah’s Prophecy’.

Zephaniah 2:1-15

King James Version

1 ‘Gather yourselves together, yea, gather together, O nation not desired;

2 Before the decree bring forth, before the day pass as the chaff, before the fierce anger of the Lord come upon you, before the day of the Lord’s anger come upon you… 4 For Gaza shall be forsaken, and Ashkelon a desolation: they shall drive out Ashdod at the noon day, and Ekron shall be rooted up. 5 Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the Lord is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant. 6 And the sea coast shall be dwellings and cottages for shepherds, and folds for flocks.

7 And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah; they shall feed thereupon: in the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening: for the Lord their God shall visit them, and turn away their captivity.

8 I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border. 9 Therefore as I live, saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them. 10 This shall they have for their pride, because they have reproached and magnified themselves against the people of the Lord of hosts.

11 The Lord will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen. 12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword. 13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh [the capital of Asshur] a desolation, and dry like a wilderness…

15 This is the rejoicing city [the capital of Edom, Bozrah] that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.’

Zephaniah chapter two is speaking about the future Day of the Lord, which is His divine wrath. A reading of the verses shows that many nations are going to experience His vengeance and destruction, including the mighty Assyrians of Russia – the King of the North – and Cush of India, the Queen of the South – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia; and Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. 

The Creator is angry with certain nations due to their involvement in bringing the Israelite peoples into tribulation, such as the French from Moab and Ammon – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The reason this chapter in Zephaniah is not speaking about Palestinian Arabs, Jews and the state of Israel, is because as stated in point number two in the introduction, every nation has migrated. It was only Edom who was prophesied to return and ‘rebuild the ruins’ of the once Promised Land.

Thus, the nations being targeted in this chapter are all in their modern day locations. The Philistine peoples – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America – are located along the coastal strips of Central and Southern America. Zephaniah Chapter two is not evidence that the Jews are Judah. Any Biblical references to Jerusalem, including Zion and the Mount of Olives, are always in reference to Judah’s capital, not the city called Jerusalem today in Israel. That city is called Bozrah in the Bible, or the Great city in Revelation, or as Zephaniah describes it, ‘the rejoicing city’ that arrogantly thought it was safe, yet was made ‘desolate’ – which includes the Abomination of Desolation

One other reason cited is that, ‘the Jews are not a Christian people.’ The author states: ‘Some material sent to me argues that “the Jews can’t be an Israelite tribe because they did not become Christians like the rest of the tribes.”’ We have discussed the fact that the English were the first ‘Christian’ nation in Britain and in ancient Parthia, as well as disseminating both Testaments of the Bible to the world – Article: The Seven Churches – A Message for the Church of God in the Latter Days.

The crux of this argument is held up by the Jews being Judah, hence they are not Christian like all the Israelite nations. Of course, the English as Judah are in fact ‘Christian’ and the Jews not being Christian, is explained by the fact they are rebellious Esau, who have deliberately fought against the Messiah and the Christian tenets in all their forms. 

A different article, states the following in their introduction regarding those who believe the Jews are not from the tribe of Judah – emphasis mine: 

“[They]… claim that the present-day Jews are not descended from Judah-but rather from Edomites or other people. Some… of these reprobates say the true descendants of Judah are the Germans, others say they are the Africans! Perhaps it was the Germans or the Afro-Americans who really killed Jesus. Maybe it was an African-German Conspiracy? These claims about the Jews not belonging to Judah are stupid but they do have some influence some times” – because the seed of truth is evident, even though the answer promulgated is incorrect.

Their conclusion is thus, though this writer remains wholly unconvinced by their logic: 

“As we said the… Biblical Proofs are a sample. It is possible that similar evidence could be adduced from every few verses of the Bible. The Jews are Judah! The Bible says[?] they are… Only the Jews are universally recognized as “Judah” [that does not make it so]. The very name “Jew” is a shortened form of Judah… only the Jews possess all[?] the prophesied characteristics of Judah.”

The Jews are not a sizeable people (1) with a prominent – let alone any – Monarchy (2). Nor have they been rejoined (3) with their brothers in the Isles to the Northwest (4) as prophesied.  

‘There is a Biblical Principle that everyone is created in the way that they would want to be if they had been given the choice and known the options. We are each and all most suited to be ourselves.’

The tribe of Benjamin has been partially discussed and a precursory picture of his descendants has been steadily growing. Benjamin is the nation of Scotland… and now we can add the extra details in fully painting an intriguing character, as well as the colourful nation of the Scots. The identification of Scotland was not as straight forward as one might assume, even once England was correctly understood as Judah. 

Reasons for this were:

a. There are three tribes aside from Levi, who had a close association with Judah: Benjamin, Simeon and Dan. Yet Scotland and Wales are only two nations.

b. Understanding the special relationship of Scotland as a separate kingdom from England and the unique status of Wales – only officially being recognised a nation in 2011 – only aided in making the identification more difficult.

c. Scotland could have been Benjamin or Dan but not Simeon, for reasons that will be made clear. Wales could have been Benjamin, Simeon or Dan. Going round in circles for many years was the result. The very last nations in the identity jig-saw puzzle, were Benjamin, Simeon and Dan, yet one would have thought once Judah was understood, they would have simply fell into place. The unknown key, was understanding the tribe of Dan and it is because of this, that Dan will be left to be explained in the final chapter – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

d. Identity adherents have identified Benjamin historically with Norway or Iceland and it has also been linked with Belgium and the Normans. Close and warm, not cold but incorrect. This writer’s research considered Canada as a possible answer for Benjamin’s identity. Latterly, there is growing popularity to identify the Scots ironically, with the tribe of Judah. 

The Scottish Saltire

Two factors which have distracted researchers in interpreting the sons of Jacob correctly, have been that they were ascribing Abraham and Keturah’s sons identities to the sons of Jacob – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia*

Secondly, everyone seems to forget Judah and Benjamin are inextricably linked – like ‘a hand and glove.’ Where one is, so will the other be found. Of course, the massive red herring of the Jews being Judah, was also going to make the correct connection next to impossible – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe. 

An online contributor stated: ‘Here are some comments from the late Dr. Hoeh (I left out Ephraim, Manasseh, and Judah as they have more coverage elsewhere).’ From, Location of the Tribes of Israel, Herman Hoeh, circa 1950. Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah are always deemed very obvious; yet believers remain unaware that the pairings respectively with England, the United States and the Jews are all completely incorrect. 

“Benjamin constitutes Norway and Iceland. The Icelandic people in reality a colony of Norwegians [1]. Benjamin was given to David because Jerusalem, David’s capital, was in the tribe of Benjamin, not Judah. God said He would give David light in Jerusalem (I Kings 11:36). This verse could not refer to Judah which did not have to be given to the Jewish House of David [2].

Benjamin was told to flee the destruction of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 6:1) which many of them did. Benjamin is compared to “a wolf that raveneth; in the morning he devoureth the prey, and at even he divideth the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). This is certainly an apt description of the Vikings who pillaged Northern Europe, and even Mediterranean regions. Almost all Viking raids came from Norway [3].

It is also significant that Benjamin, the smallest tribe, still is the smallest today [4]. There are fewer Norwegians (plus 148 thousand from Iceland) than any other Israelite nation [5]. (Moses’ blessing in Deuteronomy 33[:12] has particular reference to this fact that Jerusalem was in the tribe of Benjamin.) [6]”

Though this writer is indebted to Dr Hoeh (1928-2004) for his pioneering research as a spring board for investigation, it is for all the wrong reasons. It is a foundation that had to be torn apart and rebuilt. What is regrettable, is that thousands of people have believed these findings at face value and have then never questioned whether they were actually right. How can this writer’s research be the first to question their validity forty years later and to then present them some thirty years further on? 

The Icelanders are a nation in their own right (1), not an appendage of Norway*. David’s House and his tribe was (and is) Judah, not Jewish (2). The Vikings as we shall learn were descended from other Israelite tribes (3).

Benjamin is described as ‘little’, in that he was the youngest – Psalm 68:27, H6810 – tsa`iyr. When Saul says: “Am I not a Benjaminite, from the least [H6996 – qatan] of the tribes of Israel?” – 1 Samuel 9:21, he is saying his tribe was ‘unimportant’ and ‘insignificant.’ (4). The tribe of Reuben was predicted to be the smallest tribe – Deuteronomy 33:6. Beside the fact that Norwegians* are not a son of Jacob, Dr Hoeh has entirely omitted any consideration of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, New Zealand and the British descended peoples living in South Africa (and Zimbabwe), whom all have smaller populations than Norway (5).

The city of Jerusalem, formerly Jebus, was originally in Benjamin’s territory, though no scripture says that in the future a similar configuration would occur (6). Ostensibly, it appears Benjamin would be promised to Judah forever, yet this only applied while the Israelites were in the promised land. In fact, the city eventually transferred location and its inhabitants to Judah – Zechariah 12:7-9, Isaiah 3:1, 8. The city of Jerusalem today is London, firmly planted in the heart of Judah and England (Zechariah 12:2), Far removed from the territory of Benjamin in Scotland. It is in fact the tribe of Simeon which shared a closer relationship with Judah in the past and does presently – Joshua 19:9.

We learned that Benjamin lost his mother Rachel at birth… a character defining, tough break; which made him independent and strong. He was also considerably younger than his eleven brothers. 

Benjamin had not even met his elder brother Joseph until his visit to Egypt in 1687, when he was about twelve and Joseph was thirty-nine years old. Joseph had been born twenty-seven years earlier than Benjamin in 1726 BCE. Reuben, the eldest was now sixty-five years of age and Zebulun the third youngest was fifty-three. One can understand Jacob’s heartfelt pain in any possibility of losing Benjamin, after the devastating early losses of Joseph and then Rachel. There is an aura of sadness and vicissitude surrounding Benjamin that continued to envelope his people and is evident in the Scots up and till today. Perhaps it explains their unbridled sense of humour, coupled with their poignant philosophical insight. 

In the scriptures, aside from the tribe of Judah, there are more prominent personalities written about from the tribe of Benjamin than any other and interestingly, they heavily favour the righteous rather than the wicked. King Saul is on the incorrect side of the Eternal’s favour as was his New Testament namesake Saul, who became Paul – refer article: The Pauline Paradox. When reading the large body of scripture attributed to Paul, one can’t help but imagine a Scottish accent and vocal mannerisms through his forceful and emotive messages arising from the pages of the Bible. 

The righteous Benjaminites include, the beautiful Esther (refer Chapter IV Central Asia – Madai & the Medes; and Chapter XVIII Elam & Turkey); faithful Mordecai; loyal Jonathan the son of King Saul; and the brave Ehud, second Judge of Israel from 1284 to 1204 BCE.

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The name Benjamin meaning: Son Of The Right Hand, Son Of The South. From (1) the noun (ben), son, and (2) the noun (yamin), right hand.

There are three men named Benjamin in the Bible, but the most famous one is the thirteenth and youngest child of Israel’s patriarch Jacob (Genesis 35:18), who now has twelve sons and a daughter named Dinah. Benjamin is the second son of Rachel – the first being Joseph – and she dies giving birth to him.

An often neglected curiosity is the disproportionally important role of the tribe of Benjamin in the development of Israel, or even the very pattern of redemption displayed by the Bible: The city of Jerusalem was originally assigned to Benjamin (Joshua 18:28, Judges 1:21). The tribe of Benjamin was decimated after the atrocities committed in Gibeah (Judges 19-21) but still, a generation later Israel’s first king was from the surviving remnant of Benjamin (1 Samuel 9:1). Mordecai, whose adopted daughter Esther helped to avoid Israel’s annihilation, was a Benjaminite (Esther 2:5). And… Paul, who authored half the New Testament, was from the tribe of Benjamin as well (Philippians 3:5). 

The other men named Benjamin are: A descendant of the original Benjamin, namely a son of Bilhan, son of Jediael, (1 Chronicles 7:10). A son of Harim, who had married and probably divorced a foreign woman during the purge of Ezra (Ezra 10:32).’

Genesis 35:16-19

English Standard Version

16 ‘Then they journeyed from Bethel. When they were still some distance from Ephrath, Rachel went into labor, and she had hard labor. 

17 And when her labor was at its hardest, the midwife said to her, “Do not fear, for you have another son.” 18 And as her soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni [son of my sorrow]; but his father called him Benjamin. 19 So Rachel died, and she was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem)…’

Benjamin was born circa 1699 BCE in late October, early November. The Book of Jubilees recounts his birth.

Book of Jubilees 32:3-16, 30-34

32:3 ‘And in those days Rachel became pregnant with her son Benjamin. And Jacob counted his sons from him upwards and Levi fell to the portion of Yahweh, and his father clothed him in the garments of the priesthood and filled his hands. 4 And on the fifteenth of this month [the weekly Sabbath and first day of the feast of Tabernacles* – seventh month: September/October], he brought to the altar fourteen oxen from amongst the cattle, and twenty-eight rams, and forty-nine sheep, and seven lambs, and twenty-one kids of the goats as a burnt-offering on the altar of sacrifice, well pleasing for a sweet savor before Yahweh. 11 This ordinance is written that it may be fulfilled from year to year in eating the second tithe* before Yahweh in the place where it has been chosen, and nothing shall remain over from it from this year to the year following.

16 And on the following night, on the twenty-second day of this month [the Sabbath and the Last Great Day of the feast], Jacob resolved to build that place, and to surround the court with a wall, and to sanctify it… 30 And in the night, on the twenty-third of this month, Deborah Rebecca’s nurse died, and they buried her beneath the city under the oak of the river, and he called the name of this place, ‘The river of Deborah,’ and the oak, ‘The oak of the mourning of Deborah.’ 33 And Rachel bare a son in the night, and called his name ‘Son of my sorrow’; for she suffered in giving him birth: but his father called his name Benjamin, on the eleventh of the eighth month [October/November]… 34 And Rachel died there and she was buried in the land of Ephrath, the same is Bethlehem, and Jacob built a pillar on the grave of Rachel, on the road above her grave.’

In Genesis chapter forty-nine we read and studied the blessing given by Jacob to Judah and the uncanny directness of his words in describing the attributes and destiny of Judah and his descendants. The same applies for all of Jacob’s sons. How strange that the words have always been there so-to-speak, yet looking ‘through a glass darkly’ (1 Corinthians 13:12) means the understanding of them has remained allusive. 

Genesis 49:1-2, 27

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then Jacob called his sons and said, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what shall happen to you in days to come. 2 “Assemble and listen, O sons of Jacob, listen to Israel your father. 

27 “Benjamin is a ravenous [H2963 – taraph] wolf, in the morning [H1242 – boqer: ‘beginning of day’, ‘coming of sunrise’] devouring [H398 – ‘akal: ‘eat, consume, slay’] the prey [H5706 – ad] and at evening [H6153 – ereb: evening, sunset] dividing [H2505 – chalaq] the spoil.

The Hebrew word for raven or ravenous means: ‘to tear, rend’ and ‘to be torn in pieces’ to ‘provide food’. The KJV translates it as, tear six times; ravening three; catch twice; feed once; and prey once. An act of aggression, violence and taking by force. The Hebrew word for prey means as well as prey, ‘booty.’ Booty as in what is won ‘in the sense of the aim of an attack.’ The Hebrew word for divide means: ‘to share, plunder, apportion’ and ‘distribute.’ In the King James Bible it is translated as, divide forty times; flatter six; part five; distribute four; portion once; and received once. 

The Amplified Bible says; ‘The tribe of Benjamin invariably displayed courage and ferocity, particularly in their war with the other tribes.’ A quick perusal of any history of the Scots and the Picts before them for they are the same people with a different name, will quickly affirm their prowess in both war and any situation necessitating survival.

CEB: Benjamin is a wolf who hunts…

NCV: … In the morning he eats what he has caught, and in the evening he divides what he has taken.

NIRV: … In the morning he eats what he has killed. In the evening he shares what he has stolen.

TLB: Benjamin is a wolf that prowls. He devours his enemies in the morning, and in the evening divides the loot.

ISV: Benjamin is vicious like a wolf; what he kills in the morning he devours in the evening.

CEV: Benjamin, you are a fierce wolf, destroying your enemies morning and evening.

This verse reveals two key identifying markers. First, the tribe of Benjamin were fearless survivors – as evidenced in the war with the other twelve tribes – and second, they have had to scrap for survival, sharing the spoil won. Scottish people, unlike the harsh stereotype of being stingy, which is a reflection of the Highlander perhaps, not the Lowland Scot are in fact a generous people and look after their own. This dangerous element of Benjamin’s nature was exhibited by the ancient Pictish nation. 

Arthur Kemp in his seminal work, March of the Titans, 1991 & 2016, pages 207-208, states – emphasis mine:

‘… the Celts in the far north of the country – particularly the Picts – continued to be troublesome for the Roman Britons. The emperor Hadrian finally built a wall in 122-123 AD across northern Britain to try and keep them out. After Hadrian’s death, the emperor Antonius built a new wall some one hundred miles north in an attempt to extend Roman control further north. By 164, this new wall – known as the Antonine Wall – had been abandoned and the border reverted to Hadrian’s Wall once again. Scotland never fell under Roman rule, and the Picts continued to be a thorn in the side of the Romans until the very end of Roman rule in Britain.’

The Scots as part of the United Kingdom have also shared in the spoil, in the immense economic benefits of building and maintaining an Empire with England and as their name signifies, Benjamin as the son of the right hand has sat at the right hand of Judah. For wherever Judah grew a ‘choice vine’ – Genesis 49:11 – planting a new colony, it was a Benjaminite who was invariably the Governor or representative for the Crown in the expanding colonies, dominions and territories of the British Empire. 

English writer Sir Walter Besant:

“Wherever the pilgrim turns his feet, he finds Scotsmen in the forefront of civilization and letters. They are the premiers in every colony, professors in every university, teachers, editors, lawyers, engineers and merchants – everything, and always at the front.”

This relationship is supported by Moses in his final blessing to the tribes before he passed away.

Deuteronomy 33:1-2, 12

English Standard Version

1 ‘This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the people of Israel before his death. 2 He said… 

12 Of Benjamin he said, “The beloved [H3039 – ydiyd: ‘loved, beloved, well loved’] of the Lord dwells in safety [H983 – betach]… [by him]. The High God surrounds [H2653 – chophaph] him all day long [H3117 – yowm], and dwells between his shoulders [in his heart].”

The Hebrew word for safety means: ‘a place of refuge, securely’ and ‘security’, ‘without care’ and with ‘confidence.’ The Hebrew word for surrounds is translated as: cover, enclose, shelter and shield. The Hebrew meaning for all day is: a whole day, ‘from sunrise to sunset.’ It is translated in the KJV as: day 2,008 times; time 64]; ever 18; continually 10; and always 4 times. 

The location of Scotland is certainly a relatively safe portion of the globe to reside, though Benjamin is protected also in their close association with Judah and more vitally in the protection that the Creator affords them. Wales understandably, could not contend with the numerical strength of the English. Nor does it make sense on paper that Scotland should have withheld the might of England to remain an independent kingdom without intervention. Yet it is only as the tribe of Benjamin, that Scotland’s relationship with England (Judah) does.

It is worth mentioning that the Hebrew word for beloved is the English word for the name David. While England-Judah has not had a king called David; Scotland-Benjamin has had two: David I (1113-1124) and David II (1329-1371).

CEB: He said to Benjamin: “The Lord’s dearest one rests safely on him. The Lord always shields him; he rests on God’s chest.”

GNT: About the tribe of Benjamin he said: “This is the tribe the Lord loves and protects; He guards them all the day long, And he dwells in their midst.”

NLT: Moses said this about the tribe of Benjamin: “The people of Benjamin are loved by the Lord and live in safety beside him. He surrounds them continuously and preserves them from every harm.”

There can be no denying the affection from the Creator towards Benjamin. He is beloved in the same way the Eternal has extended towards King David and the tribe of Judah. In the Book of Judges, Deborah a married Prophetess and fourth Judge of Israel from 1184 to 1144 BCE, gives further insight into the sons of Jacob. In this case, with Benjamin we do not learn anything of consequence, apart from their being sandwiched between their nephews, Ephraim and the half tribe of East Manasseh from Machir.

Judges 5:1-3, 14

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day: 2 That the leaders took the lead in Israel, that the people offered themselves willingly, bless the Lord! 3 “Hear, O kings; give ear, O princes;

From Ephraim their root they marched down into the valley, following you, Benjamin, with your kinsmen; from Machir marched down the commanders…”

Deborah ostensibly from the tribe of Ephraim, though more likely from the tribe of Naphtali had followed the Benjamite Judge Ehud who had died in 1204 BCE. In the interim twenty years, the Israelites had gone astray and were being cruelly oppressed by Jabin the King of Canaan. His commander Sisera had nine hundred chariots made with iron. Deborah decided to go on the offensive and enlisted the help of Barak from the tribe of Naphtali. They ultimately defeated Jabin the Canaanite and Sisera, with forty years of peace ensuing. 

The Book of Judges also recounts a rather ugly story in the history of Israel which shows two wrongs do not make a right. The tribe of Benjamin showed a mis-directed stubbornness and tenacity, though one has to admire their sheer gaul and solidarity. The remainder of the sons of Jacob exhibited equal stubbornness and unity; and to think a tribe was on the verge of total annihilation is incredible. Reason won over emotion and the tribe of Benjamin barely survived. In time, they became a highly valued component of a United Kingdom of Israel and later the Kingdom of Judah. 

Judges 19:1-30

English Standard Version

1 ‘In those days, when there was no king in Israel [and prior to the first Judge, Othniel in 1342 BCE] , a certain Levite was sojourning [circa 1351 BCE] in the remote parts of the hill country of Ephraim, who took to himself a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. 2 And his concubine was unfaithful* to him, and she went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah, and was there some four months. 3 Then her husband arose and went after her, to speak kindly to her and bring her back… And she brought him into her father’s house. And when the girl’s father saw him, he came with joy to meet him. 4 And his father-in-law, the girl’s father, made him stay… 9 And when the man and his concubine and his servant rose up to depart, his father-in-law, the girl’s father, said to him, “Behold, now the day has waned toward evening. Please, spend the night. Behold, the day draws to its close. Lodge here and let your heart be merry, and tomorrow you shall arise early in the morning for your journey, and go home.”

10 But the man would not spend the night [fateful decision number one].

He rose up and departed and arrived opposite Jebus (that is, Jerusalem). He had with him a couple of saddled donkeys, and his concubine was with him. 11 When they were near Jebus, the day was nearly over, and the servant said to his master, “Come now, let us turn aside to this city of the Jebusites and spend the night in it.”

12 And his master said to him, “We will not turn aside into the city of foreigners, who do not belong to the people of Israel… [fateful decision number two]

And the sun went down on them near Gibeah, which belongs to Benjamin, 15 and they turned aside there, to go in and spend the night at Gibeah [fateful decision number three].

And he went in and sat down in the open square of the city, for no one took them into his house to spend the night.

16 And behold, an old man was coming from his work in the field at evening. The man was from the hill country of Ephraim, and he was sojourning in Gibeah… 20 And the old man said, “Peace be to you; I will care for all your wants. Only, do not spend the night in the square.” 

22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.” [a very similar situation to the one we encountered with Lot – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran]

23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. 24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.” 25 But the men would not listen to him.

So the man seized his concubine and made her* [retribution?] go out to them [fateful decision number four].

And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. 26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, until it was light.

27 And her master rose up in the morning, and when he opened the doors of the house and went out to go on his way, behold, there was his concubine lying at the door of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up, let us be going.” But there was no answer. Then he put her on the donkey, and the man rose up and went away to his home.

29 And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and taking hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. 30 And all who saw it said, “Such a thing has never happened or been seen from the day that the people of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt until this day; consider it, take counsel, and speak.”

Judges 20:1-48

English Standard Version

1 ‘Then all the people of Israel came out, from Dan to Beersheba, including the land of Gilead, and the congregation assembled as one man to the Lord at Mizpah. 2 And the chiefs of all the people, of all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God, 400,000 men on foot that drew the sword.

3 (Now the people of Benjamin heard that the people of Israel had gone up to Mizpah.) And the people of Israel said, “Tell us, how did this evil happen?” 4 And the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said, “I came to Gibeah that belongs to Benjamin, I and my concubine, to spend the night. 5 And the leaders of Gibeah [meaning hill, high] rose against me and surrounded the house against me by night. They meant to kill me, and they violated my concubine, and she is dead… they have committed abomination and outrage in Israel.

7 Behold, you people of Israel, all of you, give your advice and counsel here”… this is what we will do to Gibeah: we will go up against it by lot, 10 and we will take ten men of a hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, and a hundred of a thousand, and a thousand of ten thousand, to bring provisions for the people, that when they come they may repay Gibeah of Benjamin for all the outrage that they have committed in Israel.” 11 So all the men of Israel gathered against the city, united as one man.

12 And the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, “What evil is this that has taken place among you? 13 Now therefore give up the men, the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and purge evil from Israel.”

But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brothers, the people of Israel. 14 Then the people of Benjamin came together out of the cities to Gibeah to go out to battle against the people of Israel. 15 And the people of Benjamin mustered out of their cities on that day 26,000 men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who mustered 700 chosen men. 16 Among all these were 700 chosen men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. 17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war.

18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Judah shall go up first.”

19 Then the people of Israel rose in the morning and encamped against Gibeah. 20 And the men of Israel went out to fight against Benjamin, and the men of Israel drew up the battle line against them at Gibeah. 21 The people of Benjamin came out of Gibeah and destroyed on that day 22,000 men of the Israelites [from the tribe of Judah]. 22 But the people, the men of Israel, took courage, and again formed the battle line in the same place where they had formed it on the first day. 23 And the people of Israel went up and wept before the Lord until the evening. And they inquired of the Lord, “Shall we again draw near to fight against our brothers, the people of Benjamin?” And the Lord said, “Go up against them.”

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

29 So Israel set men in ambush around Gibeah. 30 And the people of Israel went up against the people of Benjamin on the third day and set themselves in array against Gibeah, as at other times. 31 And the people of Benjamin went out against the people and were drawn away from the city. And as at other times they began to strike and kill some of the people in the highways, one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah, and in the open country, about thirty men of Israel. 32 And the people of Benjamin said, “They are routed before us, as at the first.” But the people of Israel said, “Let us flee and draw them away from the city to the highways.” 

33 And all the men of Israel rose up out of their place and set themselves in array at Baal-tamar, and the men of Israel who were in ambush rushed out of their place from Maareh-geba. 34 And there came against Gibeah 10,000 chosen men out of all Israel, and the battle was hard, but the Benjaminites did not know that disaster was close upon them. 35 And the Lord defeated Benjamin before Israel, and the people of Israel destroyed 25,100^ men of Benjamin that day. All these were men who drew the sword. 36 So the people of Benjamin saw that they were defeated.

The men of Israel gave ground to Benjamin, because they trusted the men in ambush whom they had set against Gibeah. 37 Then the men in ambush hurried and rushed against Gibeah; the men in ambush moved out and struck all the city with the edge of the sword… 43 Surrounding the Benjaminites, they pursued them and trod them down from Nohah as far as opposite Gibeah on the east. 44 Eighteen thousand men of Benjamin fell, all of them men of valor. 45 And they turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon. Five thousand men of them were cut down in the highways. And they were pursued hard to Gidom, and 2,000 men of them were struck down. 46 So all who fell that day of Benjamin were 25,000^ men who drew the sword, all of them men of valor.

47 But 600 men turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon and remained at the rock of Rimmon four months.

48 And the men of Israel turned back against the people of Benjamin and struck them with the edge of the sword, the city, men and beasts and all that they found. And all the towns that they found they set on fire.’

Judges 21:1-25

English Standard Version

1 ‘Now the men of Israel had sworn at Mizpah, “No one of us shall give his daughter in marriage to Benjamin.”

2 And the people came to Bethel and sat there till evening before God, and they lifted up their voices and wept bitterly. 3 And they said, “O Lord, the God of Israel, why has this happened in Israel, that today there should be one tribe lacking in Israel?” 4 And the next day the people rose early and built there an altar and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings…

6 And the people of Israel had compassion for Benjamin their brother and said, “One tribe is cut off from Israel this day. 7 What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them any of our daughters for wives?”

8 And they said, “What one is there of the tribes of Israel that did not come up to the Lord to Mizpah?” And behold, no one had come to the camp from Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], to the assembly. 9 For when the people were mustered, behold, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead was there. 10 So the congregation sent 12,000 of their bravest men there and commanded them, “Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones. 11 This is what you shall do: every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction.”

12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins who had not known a man by lying with him, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. 13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the people of Benjamin who were at the rock of Rimmon and proclaimed peace to them. 

14 And Benjamin returned at that time. And they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead [half tribe of East Manasseh], but they were not enough for them. 15 And the people had compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.

16 Then the elders of the congregation said, “What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?” 17 And they said, “There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe not be blotted out from Israel.

18 Yet we cannot give them wives from our daughters.” For the people of Israel had sworn, “Cursed be he who gives a wife to Benjamin.” 19 So they said, “Behold, there is the yearly feast [of Tabernacles] of the Lord at Shiloh [in Ephraim], which is north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.”

20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, “Go and lie in ambush in the vineyards 21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.’” 23 And the people of Benjamin did so and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off. Then they went and returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and lived in them. 

25 In those days there was no king [or Judge] in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.’

A dramatic and devastating turn of events with Judah leading the charge for Israel against their future ally, Benjamin. The tribes of Israel showed more mercy to Benjamin than Benjamin did for the Levite and his dead concubine. The wives provided for the remaining six hundred Benjamite men, were 400 from East Manasseh and 200 from Ephraim the sons of Joseph, their only full blood brother. The genetic gene pool forever changed in Benjamin, though less than if the wives had come from a half brother. Note the skill and ambidextrousness, of the Benjamite men in warfare and battle, particularly with the bow and sling. 

1 Samuel 20:19-20

English Standard Version

‘On the third day go down quickly to the place where you hid yourself when the matter was in hand, and remain beside the stone heap. And I [Jonathan] will shoot three arrows to the side of it, as though I shot at a mark.’ 

2 Samuel 1:22

English Standard Version

“From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not empty.”

1 Chronicles 12:1-2

English Standard Version

‘Now these are the men who came to David at Ziklag, while he could not move about freely because of Saul the son of Kish. And they were among the mighty men who helped him in war. They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul’s kinsmen.’

A 2009 study showed that the Netherlands had the highest percentage for left handedness (to go along with their high average for height), of 13.2%. The average percentage worldwide is approximately 10%. Second was the United States with 13.1%; Belgium 13.1%; Canada fourth, 12.8%; the United Kingdom fifth, 12.2%; and Ireland sixth, 11.7%. A breakdown for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remains allusive at time of writing.

Switzerland is next, 11.6%; France, 11.1%; Denmark 11%; Italy, 10.5%; Sweden 10.4%; Norway 10.2%; Germany, 9.8%; Spain, 9.6% and then well below the world average, Russia with 6%, India, 5.2%, Japan, 4.7%, China 3.5% and Mexico 2.5%. It is interesting to note that the family of Abraham displays this trait in the top six nations represented and ten of the top thirteen; with the other three descended from Abraham’s brothers Haran and Nahor. 

As France (refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran; and article: Rhesus Negative Blood Factor) is high on the list as well, could there be a link between being left handed and the rhesus negative blood type?

Data does support rh- people being more likely to be left handed. Scotland is interesting when studying frequencies of rh- people because of it strong variation of numbers based on locations. According to ‘Distribution of the ABO and rhesus (D) blood groups in the north of Scotland’ by Elizabeth S Brown, ‘people in the region of Inverness top the list of rh negative people in Scotland with a whopping 30.44%.’ 

Then, is there a link between left handedness and lactose tolerance, which is also highest amongst northwestern Europeans – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Recent studies have confirmed increased verbal skills in left handed people, plus a higher percentage of left handers excelling in sport; thus likely translating to superior combat skills.

2 Chronicles 17:17

English Standard Version

‘Of Benjamin: Eliada, a mighty man of valor, with 200,000 men armed with bow and shield…’

2 Chronicles 14:8

English Standard Version

‘And Asa had an army of 300,000 from Judah, armed with large* shields and spears, and 280,000 men from Benjamin that carried shields and drew bows. All these were mighty men of valor.’

The Normans used long* shields as was typical of the Vikings, whereas the Britons used round shields. 

2 Chronicles 15:7-9

English Standard Version

7 But you, take courage! Do not let your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.” 8 As soon as Asa [King of Judah] heard these words, the prophecy of Azariah the son of Oded, he took courage and put away the detestable idols from all the land of Judah and Benjamin and from the cities that he had taken in the hill country of Ephraim, and he repaired the altar of the Lord that was in front of the vestibule of the house of the Lord. 9 And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and those from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon who were residing with them, for great numbers had deserted to him from Israel when they saw that the Lord his God was with him.’

Ezra 4:1

English Standard Version

‘Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to the Lord…’

The land of Benjamin was a distinct territory yet always attached to Judah.

Jeremiah 1:1; 37:11-13

English Standard Version

1 ‘The words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, one of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin… 11 Now when the Chaldean army had withdrawn from Jerusalem at the approach of Pharaoh’s army, 12 Jeremiah set out from Jerusalem to go to the land of Benjamin to receive his portion there among the people. 13 When he was at the Benjamin Gate, a sentry there named Irijah the son of Shelemiah, son of Hananiah, seized Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “You are deserting to the Chaldeans.”

As mentioned earlier, the Eternal promised David that the tribe of Benjamin would be reserved for his descendants in Canaan, with Judah.

1 Kings 11:29-32

English Standard Version

‘And at that time, when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him on the road. Now Ahijah had dressed himself in a new garment, and the two of them were alone in the open country. Then Ahijah laid hold of the new garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces.

And he said to Jeroboam [first king of Kingdom of Israel], “Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Behold, I am about to tear the kingdom from the hand of Solomon and will give you ten tribes 

(but he shall have one tribe [apart from Judah], for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel)…’

2 Chronicles 21:7

English Standard Version

‘Yet the Lord was not willing to destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and since he had promised to give a lamp to him and to his sons [the line of Judaic kings from David until the captivity (1010 to 586 BCE] forever.’

1 Kings 15:4

English Standard Version

‘Nevertheless, for David’s sake the Lord his God gave him a lamp in Jerusalem, setting up his son after him, and establishing Jerusalem…’

There is a prophecy for Benjamin receiving a different and bigger territory in a future re-division of land. Benjamin is the youngest son and tribe, not the smallest as some translations state. The Books of Jasher and Jubilees give Benjamin’s wives names and Benjamin’s sons are listed.

Obadiah 1:19 

English Standard Version

‘Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah shall possess the land of the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria, and Benjamin shall possess Gilead [presently the half tribe of East Manasseh].’

Psalm 68:27

Christian Standard Bible

‘There is Benjamin, the youngest, leading them, the rulers of Judah in their assembly, the rulers of Zebulun, the rulers of Naphtali.’

Book of Jubilees 34:20

‘And after Joseph perished, the sons of Jacob took unto themselves wives… and the name of Benjamin’s wife, ‘Ijasaka.

Book of Jasher 45:21-22

21 ‘… Jacob sent to Aram, the son of Zoba, the son of Terah, and he took for his son Benjamin Mechalia the daughter of Aram, and she came to the land of Canaan to the house of Jacob; and Benjamin was ten years old [?] when he took [betrothed?] Mechalia the daughter of Aram for a wife. 

22 And Mechalia conceived and bare unto Benjamin

Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera* and Naaman, five sons;

and Benjamin went afterward and took for a wife Aribath, the daughter of Shomron, the son [descendant] of Abraham, in addition to his first wife, and he was eighteen years old; and Aribath bare unto Benjamin

Achi, Vosh, Mupim, Chupim, and Ord; five sons.’

Benjamin’s first wife was possibly arranged for him when he was ten. As he was Jacob’s favourite in the absence of Jospeh, this is plausible. A descent from Terah, Abraham’s father would mean Mechalia was family even if she was not from Abraham’s brothers Nahor or Haran (though Zoba is linked with Nahor) – refer Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans. For example, both Isaac’s and Jacob’s wives were from the family of Nahor and Abraham’s wife from Haran.

If accurate, Benjamin taking a second wife (and possibly a third) meant Benjamin’s sons had half brothers; which may explain the divide between Highlander and Lowlander Scot, or even between the west of Scotland and the East. As there is no record of a son called Shomron from Abraham, it may well mean descent from Abraham indirectly for Aribath from either Ishmael (German) or the sons of Abraham with his second wife, Keturah (Scandinavian [Icelandic], Dutch, Flemish, Walloon [Luxembourgish]).

This is interesting regarding Benjamin’s second wife Aribath, in the fact that Scotland and Scandinavia have not only a shared geo-political history but also an ethnic influence in ‘recent’ centuries, which may parallel an earlier one.

Genesis 46:21

English Standard Version

‘And the sons of Benjamin: Bela [swallow], Becher [family name of Ephraim], Ashbel [capture], Gera*, Naaman [grace], Ehi, Rosh [7], Muppim, Huppim, and Ard.’

Numbers 26:38-41

English Standard Version

38 ‘The sons of Benjamin according to their clans: of

Bela, the clan of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the clan of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the clan of the Ahiramites; 39 of Shephupham, the clan of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the clan of the Huphamites. 

40 And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the clan of the Ardites; of Naaman, the clan of the Naamites. 41 These are the sons of Benjamin according to their clans, and those listed were 45,600.’

1 Chronicles 7:6-12 

English Standard Version

6 ‘The sons of Benjamin:

Bela, Becher, and Jediael, three. 

7 The sons of Bela: Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, and Iri, five, heads of fathers’ houses, mighty warriors. And their enrollment by genealogies was 22,034. 

8 The sons of Becher: Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Elioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, Abijah [7], Anathoth, and Alemeth.

All these were the sons of Becher. 9 And their enrollment by genealogies, according to their generations, as heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, was 20,200. 

10 The son of Jediael: Bilhan. And the sons of Bilhan:

Jeush [family name of Esau], Benjamin, Ehud*, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish [family name of Javan], and Ahishahar [7].

11 All these were the sons of Jediael according to the heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, 17,200, able to go to war. 

12 And Shuppim and Huppim were the sons of Ir, Hushim the son of Aher.’

Ehud* was the second Judge of Israel for eighty years from 1284 to 1204 BCE – Judges 3:12-30. His name means strong. Ehud is described as the left handed son of Gera* from Benjamin (Judges 3:15).

1 Chronicles 8:1-5, 33-34

English Standard Version

‘Benjamin fathered Bela his firstborn, Ashbel the second, Aharah the third, 2 Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. 3 And Bela had sons: Addar, Gera*, Abihud, 4 Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah, 5 Gera* [7], Shephuphan, and Huram.

33 Ner was the father of Kish, Kish of Saul, Saul of Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal; 34 and the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal; and Merib-baal was the father of Micah.’

Genesis lists ten sons; Numbers lists five sons; I Chronicles seven lists three sons; and chapter eight which includes Saul’s genealogy, unhelpfully lists five sons. Even if one assumes the change from five to three was due to the Israelite civil war against Benjamin’s tribe – it doesn’t explain the drop from ten to five in the first place – and if the six hundred men remaining were from Bela, Becher and Jediel (apart from Bela the one consistent son, the firstborn in all four references), Becher is missing from the second and fourth references and Jediel is only mentioned once, unless he is Ashbel. Even Muppim seems to have turned into Shuppim.

That said, the Book of Jasher tallies with the Book of Genesis in agreeing there were ten sons of Benjamin. Their alignment is explained in Jasher as two sets of five sons from two different women – Mechalia and Aribath.

Yet the scriptural conflict extends to the judge Ehud; so that his parentage is from either Bilhan or Gera, of which there are more than one Gera listed, being it would seem a popular family name. Perhaps there were two Ehud’s? It is an unusual name, so could there have been two men called the same? Then, why is only one listed?

The answer may begin to lay with Benjamin having more than one wife; or probably later editing for whatever reason in the genealogies listed in Numbers and Chronicles.

A connection between Rosh and the clan Ross is likely, and also Ard-encaple with Benjamin’s tenth son, Ard. Ard means ‘wanderer, fugitive’ from the verb ‘arad, ‘to flee’ or ‘be free.’ Rosh means ‘head, chief’ or ‘top’ – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. Interestingly, the name Ross, means: ‘up-land peninsula’, ‘promontory head-land’ and may also be derived from the Gaelic word for ‘red.’ 

Speaking of red… we discussed earlier in this chapter the Red Hand of Ulster and its symbolism for the red hand of Zarah. An identification of this symbol with the tribe of Judah’s ‘second’, albeit in reality first royal line – the other being Pharez – continues with a transfer from Northern Ireland into Scotland. 

The Modern Descendants of Zara-Judah, W H Bennet and John D Keyser – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘… three of Ulster’s six counties (as well as the towns of Bangor and Dungannon) have the Red Hand as a part of their official emblems… since the division of Ireland in 1920 the official Arms of Northern Ireland show the Red Hand alone without the Scarlet Cord, but this in no way alters the fact that the ancient and traditional emblem of Ulster was – and still is – a Red Hand circled by a Scarlet Cord. The use of the Red Hand as [an]… emblem is not confined to just Ulster – or even to just Ireland. 

In Scotland it is found in the Arms of several of the old families and in those of at least fourteen of the Clan Chiefs: Davidson, MacBain, MacDonell, MacIntosh, MacKinnon, MacLean, MacLachlan, MacNeil, MacNaughten, MacPherson, MacGillivray, MacDonald of Sleat, Clanranald, and Shaw of Rothiemurchus… A color variant of this emblem appears in several more: The Earldom of Fife; Abernethy, Lord Saltoun; Dundas; Duff, Farquharson; Guthrie; Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell; Leslie; Lindsay; MacBain; MacIntosh; MacLachlan; Clanranald; Maitland, Earl of Lauderdale; Moncreiffe… Shaw of Rothiemurchus; Spens of Lathallan; Stuart, Marquis of Bute; and Wemyss.

It is also important to note that the Rampant Red Lion appears on the Royal Standard and on the shield in the Royal Arms.’

Though Scotland is the tribe of Benjamin, the prevalence of the Red Hand of Zarah is evidence of a royal line of Judah, threaded within the Benjamite nation. It should not be a surprise then, that outside of England-Judah, the strongest symbolism of Judah’s royal pedigree would be exhibited in the other ‘royal nation’: Scotland-Benjamin.

Bennet & Keyser: ‘… how is it that the Scots who later invaded what is now called Scotland in 501 A.D. also have among their emblems the Red Hand that has been associated with Ulster since around 1350 B.C.?in the Register House in Edinburgh, Scotland there is an ancient document called the Declaration of Arbroath, which consists of an official letter sent to the Pope by the Parliament of Scotland in 1320 A.D. and signed by King Robert the Bruce and some thirty of the Scottish nobles, in which it is clearly stated that this branch of the Scots came… from Scythia after living for a long period of time in Spain. 

The Scottish Declaration of Independence was sent to Pope John XXII “by the Scottish Estates in Parliament assembled in the Abbey of Aberbrothock under the Presidency of King Robert the Bruce” and declared: 

“We know, Most Holy Father and Lord, and from the chronicles and books of the ancients gather, that among other illustrious nations, ours, to wit the nation of the Scots, has been distinguished by many honors; which passing from the greater Scythia through the Mediterranean Sea and Pillars of Hercules, and sojourning in Spain among the most savage tribes through a long course of time, could nowhere be subjugated by any people however barbarous; and coming thence one thousand two hundred years after the outgoing of the people of Israel, they, by many victories and infinite toil, acquired for themselves the possessions in the west which they now hold..” 

‘… it could be argued that this “outgoing of the people of Israel” refers to the fall of Israel and the deportation of the Ten Tribes to Assyria, rather than the exodus of Israel from Egypt. If this refers to the Exodus – which occurred somewhere around the year 1487 B.C. [1446 BCE] – then this means that the Scots, if they came into what is now Scotland 1,200 years later, must have arrived there around the year 287 B.C. – whereas Scottish history shows that they did not arrive until approximately 500 A.D. If the deportation of Israel to Assyria is meant (which was completed in 718 B.C.) then this branch of the Scots arrived in Scotland in 483 A.D. (or a few more years later as indicated in the 1703 translation of the Declaration of Arbroath), which brings us very close to the year 501 A.D. which Scottish history gives as the date the Scots did indeed arrive.’

The authors use reasoning to arrive at a date of circa 500 CE to fit the Scots arrival, though the date for circa 246 BCE just may be actually accurate. For the migration of Milesian Scots into Caledonia-Alba-Pictland were led by the lineage of Zarah kings from Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin. Yet these peoples were preceded centuries before by tribes known as the Cruithne or Pritani from Ulster; who were the very inhabitants the Milesian Scots found in Pictland. It was these peoples, the Picts also from the tribe of Benjamin, whom the Scots intermarried with and amalgamated the royal lines.

Bennet & Keyser” ‘… we should note that the Red Hand, as it appears in Scottish heraldry, is NOT encircled by a Scarlet Cord as was the ancient Ulster emblem. However, despite this slight difference, it is obvious that the Red hand (sometimes pink) as it appears in Scottish heraldry and the Red Hand of Ulster are the same emblem… it becomes evident that the Red Hand must have been an ANCESTRAL EMBLEM which both branches of the Scots brought with them from some ancient homeland. Of even GREATER IMPORTANCE is the fact that the Scots dated the arrival of a later branch in Scotland from an event in the history of Israel. This is something they would be very UNLIKELY to do unless they themselves were Israelites. 

Further, they say they came from Scythia, which is the place to which the [Israelites]… migrated after their departure from Assyria. In view of the origin of the Red Hand emblem recorded in Genesis 38, and in the fact that a Red Hand thereby became one of the emblems of the descendants of Zara-Judah, we have to conclude that the people who brought the Red Hand to Ulster so long ago, and the Scots who later brought it to Scotland… had a COMMON ORIGIN in the Zara branch of the… Tribe of Judah. Finally, in consideration of the heraldic significance of the Red Hand, we should note that, as descendants of Zara-Judah, the first settlers in Ulster were also entitled to use the Rampant Red Lion. 

In the official Arms of Northern Ireland we indeed see that it holds an important place therein. Another point of interest in these Arms is that the Red Hand has as its background a six-pointed star which is reminiscent of the form of the hexagram or Shield of David whose significance is another story.’

We will return to the points raised in the last two sentences – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. As yes, the hexagram star is really the sinister Seal of Solomon, a symbol of Edom – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega; Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son.

Even if one wishes to contend who the Scots and by extension the Picts are, one is left in no doubt that Scotland with England, comprise two of the thirteen tribes of Israel, for Joseph split into two tribes: Ephraim with West Manasseh is one – invariably called Ephraim, Joseph or Samaria – and East Manasseh; otherwise known as Gilead, Machir or Manasseh, is the other.

Counties of England, Wales and Scotland

It is also worth mentioning that the arrival of the Gaelic Scots of Dal Riata and the merging with the Picts and subsequently combining the two royal lines; Scot with Pict and the emergence of the new Kingdom of Alba, did not make the Picts as a people or nation disappear. It did not change the Pictish nation into a Scottish nation. The Picts were and are the predominant peoples of ancient Caledonia or Pictland; otherwise known as Pictavia

Again, the Dal Riata Scots contained both the residue of the tribe of Benjamin from Ulster and the line of Zarah from the Milesians, who ascended the throne of Pictavia and the governorship of the Pictish people. What changed was the name, so that Scot and Scotland were now the identifiable names of the ‘northern Britons.’ The Irish name Scot inherited from the Zarah-Milesians had been transferred to the Benjamite-Picts; just as the name of the Saxon Anglii’s, became the name of the Judaic-Jutes.

Queen Elizabeth II Royal Coat of Arms of The United Kingdom – God and My Right (to rule)

A sizeable clue and indicator of identity is language, as stated in the Introduction. Celtic languages were divided into two main groups – Continental Celtic and Insular Celtic. The Continental Celtic languages spoken on the continent fell into two main dialects – Gaullish and Celto-Iberian. The Gaulish language covered the ancient Celtic people living in Gaul, that is all of France, Belgium, the Low Countries, parts of Switzerland and Austria, the Alps and the northern parts of Italy. As there were many different Gaulish tribes, it is assumed the Gauls may have had numerous dialects. 

Celto-Iberian was spoken on the Iberian Peninsula, in mostly north and central Spain; principally between the Ebero and Tagus rivers. Both Iberia-Spain and Gaul-France were locations where the sons of Jacob dwelt before migrating to Erin-Ireland. The Israelites as mentioned have always been known as Hebrews, after their forebear Eber, descended from Arphaxad, the third son of Shem. Thus the words Iber-ia, Hiber-nia and Hebri-des in Ireland and Scotland are clues to the whereabouts of these Hebrews. 

Another major location for the Celts as mentioned, were those who dwelt in Asia Minor from the mid-second century BCE known as the Galatians. The region was called Galatia, a Roman protectorate which Paul visited and wrote letters to the believers dwelling in the region – refer article: The Sabbath Secrecy. The Celtic Galatians originated from the ancient Cimmerians. They travelled overland from the Middle East via the Danube valley and throughout Gaul. 

They in turn invaded Spain and merged with the Hebrew elements already residing there – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes. ‘Circa 700 to 500 BCE Ireland was settled by a people who employed concentrated hill forts which usage is often associated with Celtic, Halstatt culture. They produced many varied bronze and gold products and had connections as far afield as Scandinavia, the Greek Isles and the Syrian coast. From 200 BCE to 300 CE a new group introduced into Ireland ring forts similar to those known in northern Portugal and Spanish Galicia.’

Scottish men

All Continental Celtic languages are extinct, with next to nothing known about them. Insular Celtic is well documented. Insular Celtic refers to the languages spoken in the British Isles and Brittany in north-western France. Insular Celtic was divided into two broad groups, in which modern Celtic languages have derived: Brythonic (British) and Goidelic (Irish/Scottish). Brythonic is also called P-Celtic and includes Welsh, Cornish and Breton spoken in France. 

After the Romans departed and with the Saxons settling in Britain, the Celtic Britons were pressed into the regions where they are still living today. The Cornish people, replete with their own language remained in Cornwall, south-west England. Welsh had been spoken throughout England and southern Scotland. Some of the Welsh speaking Britons fled across the channel to the Armorican Peninsula, now known as Brittany. However, Bretons language evolution made it unintelligible with Welsh. 

The Goidelic languages are referred to as Q-Celtic languages, comprising of Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic and Manx in the Isle of Man. It is not certain if Ireland had ever spoken P-Celtic languages before the arrival of the Gaelic Celts. As the Simeon Welsh are linked to Ireland anciently, it may well be possible. 

The ruling lineage of the Scotti in Ireland was from Zarah of Judah and Ireland was likewise known as Scotia. When the Milesian Scots comprising the royal line of Zarah with the remainder of the tribe of Benjamin, invaded and colonised Argyll in the western reaches of Caledonia, they established the Dal Riada kingdom. 

The Scots warred and then intermingled with the Picts, and that is the reason why Scotland speaks a Gaelic language, sharing strong cultural, historical, ethnic, mythological and folkloric ties to Ireland. People from Ireland settled on the Isle of Man, in about the fifth century, displacing the P-Celtic language spoken there. Irish invaders also established the Dyfed kingdom in southwestern Wales. Dyfed is not far removed from Dafydd, which is Welsh for David and David is the patron saint of Wales.

Scottish women

Archaeology reveals that there were people living in both Ireland and Britain before the arrival of the P and Q Celtic people. These pre-Celtic people are incorrectly thought to be involved in the megalithic cultures; erecting large standing stones and megalithic tombs. Examples are Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England and the Giants causeway between Ulster and Alba – refer article: Monoliths of the Nephilim. The presence of giants has been touched upon and they were a common theme in Britain and Ireland to contend with, as they had been opponents in Canaan for the sons of Jacob. 

There are a number of routes which early peoples may have sailed in entering the British Isles, thus identifying where certain peoples came ashore is difficult. Many just suddenly turn up in records. Migrating people could have travelled to Ireland’s eastern shore, directly from Britain via the Continent. Simeon may have entered from this direction. It is documented that the Gaels migrated into Ireland from the south having come from Spain. Whereas the Vikings landed upon the northern shores of Ireland and Scotland from Norway via the Hebrides Islands and the Orkney Islands. 

Scottish man and woman

It is not clear to historians where the Picts originated, whether they arrived from Scandinavia or Ireland; as the Picts left no records. It is not known what the Picts even called themselves. The Romans called them Picti or ‘painted ones.’ The Picts were renowned for painting themselves blue and tattooing much of their bodies. A frightening sight in Battle. Many Scottish rugby union supporters also paint their faces blue on match days. The tartan kilts are a cloth of colours and one wonders if these are a throwback to their brother Joseph’s coat of many colours which Jacob had given him.

The Picts are descendants of the Celtic Caledonii tribe. In the Q-Celtic language of Irish Gaelic, the Picts were called Cruthini, Cruithni, Cruithini, Cruthin and Cruthni. While in P-Celtic, the Picts were called Preteni or Pretani. We will endeavour to answer this question about their route, by tracking the Cruithni. 

The Ulster Kingdoms: 3 – Dalriada (Causeway Coast and Glens Districts), Dr Ian Adamson OBE:

‘The Epidian Cruthin or Epidii (Greek Επίδιοι) were an ancient British people, known from a mention of them by Ptolemy the geographer c. 150. The name Epidii includes the Gallo-Brittonic root epos, meaning horse (Compare with Old Gaelic ech). It may, perhaps, be related to the Horse-goddess Epona. They inhabited the modern-day regions of Argyll and Kintyre, as well as the islands of Islay and Jura…’

There is a link between the Pict, the Cruthin, the Epidii (horse) and the prominent Scottish heraldic symbol, the Unicorn

Notice the head of a horse at the top of the map of Scotland. To the left (west) behind the back of its head are the Outer Hebrides and above its nose (north) are situated the Orkney Islands.

Ireland was called Ierna by the second century geographer Ptolemy and Hiberia by the Romans. An early people of Ierna were known as the Iverni, which has been identified with the Erainn (or Erin). The Belgae, a tribe who lived in Gaul, between the Seine and Marne, established a southern kingdom in Britain, before Caesar’s campaign in Gaul. They then migrated to Ireland with one scholar arguing that the Erainn could identify with the Belgae. This view has been discredited by most other scholars, though this writer would not be so quick to dismiss it.

Biblical writer Yair Davidy proposes a link between Benjamin, Belgium, the Belgae and Benjamin’s eldest son, Bela; saying that in ancient Hebrew it was pronounced ‘Belagh.’ We will discover that the Bela-Belgae link is not necessarily associated with Benjamin directly or solely, but also with the tribe of Reuben – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes

Another Irish people were the Lagin who followed the Erainn, settling mostly in Leinster and in Connacht and according to their own legends, they had migrated  from Armorica – Brittany. The Gaels (or Goidels) cited as the last invaders and known as the Feni, are incorrectly equated with the Milesians in the Lebor Gabala – Book of Invasions. The Feni (or Gaels) migrated to Ireland directly from Iberia. Irish and Scottish Celtic legends state that their ancestors, the Hiberi, came from the Middle East via Gallaecia in Spain.

La Tour d’Auvergne, 1801 quotes Dionysus who spoke of Bretons in ancient times living near the Pillars of Hercules (the Straits of Gibraltar), close to Gades – derived from the tribe of Gad – and close to Tartessos (etymologically linked with the son of Javan – refer Chapter IX Tarshish & Japan). Dionysus states the Gauls had once occupied a province of Lusitania (in Portugal) which was called Britonia. Ephoros of Thyme, circa 350 BCE said the Hebraic Celts had ruled Gades, eventually leaving Spain moving to Gaul, Britain and Ireland. 

Lost Israelite Identity, The Israelite Origin of Celtic Races, Yair Davidy, 1996 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Thomas F. O’Rahilly (“Early Irish History And Mythology”, Dublin, 1971, Eire) compared traditional accounts of peoples who invaded Ireland with the results of research in his own time and came to the conclusion that the invaders of Ireland could be divided into four [streams]: 

  1. The Cruthin and Picts: The Cruthin were mainly in [Northern] Ireland but clans believing they were descended from them were also to be found in Connaught (the West) and Leinster (southeast). They struggled with the Ulaid for control of Ulster until both were subdued by the People of Neal. The Picts of Northern Scotland were also known as Cruthen. Scottish tradition said that the Picts came from Scythia, went to [Northern] Ireland, and from there moved to Scotland…
  2. The Erain or Builg referred to as the Fer Bolg. They equal the Belgae of the Continent and Britain. Included with them were the Osraige, Iar and Ulaid.  
  3. The Laginian invaders also known as Gabair. They included the Lagin, Domain, and Galioin. They came from Armorica (Brittany) in Gaul and conquered much of Leinster (southeast) and Connacht (west). There may be a link between the Domnain and the Dana [the tribe of Dan*]. 
  4. The Goidels [or Gaels]. These are identical with the Hiberi, Scotti, and Milesians… Amongst the Milesians were The Ue Ne’ll (Irish for descendants of Niall; Ue pronounced ‘Ee’). Niel was a High King of Ireland who died about 405. The Ue Ne’ll ruled* over all Ireland and parts of Scotland. Their descendants are concentrated in the Northwest of Ireland though also numerous throughout Ulster. They are marked by a unique Y haplogroup DNA marker* of their own a sub-section of R1b.’

The name Gael is synonymous with Goidel, while Hiberi is with Scotti; and all four with Milesian. The Milesians are a separate and distinct tribe of Israel, as opposed to the partially misleading appellations which include the Zarah clan from the tribe of Judah: Royal Milesians or Milesian Scots.

We will discuss the Goidels (Hibernians) in the next chapter. Similarly, the Belgae (Fir Bolg) are the same as the Ulaid and a specific tribe, one that had an historic association previously with the Gaels in the distant past in Canaan and still does today in modern Ireland. The Laginians are more mysterious and a link with the tribe of Dan is worth considering, as are the Ue Ne’ll. 

The Cruithni were living first in Ireland, prior to Scotland. The direction of the Benjamites migration path appears to mirror most other tribes in sailing from the continent directly to Ireland, before moving to Britain. With the Fir Bolg, the Tuatha de Danann and the Hiberi; Erin became a crowded Isle for all these peoples and hence why the Cruithne after dwelling in Ulster, eventually completed their migration from Ireland to join their Pictish brethren in Caledonia-Alba, with the Milesians as the Dalriada Scots

The Picts are thought to have first arrived in Britain circa 1100 BCE. We will return to the Cruithne Picts and their arrival in Britain in the following chapter. It was the arrival of the Romans much later, which roused the Caledonian tribes of Alba to insurrection. The savageness of their hostility resulted in the Romans erecting Hadrian’s Wall. The eventual withdrawal of the Romans, led to the Picts raiding northern and middle England. Hence the British King Vortigern inviting the Jutes to counter these Pictish excursions in 449 CE. The coincidental irony not lost with the Simeonite British king inviting the tribe of Judah to counter the threat from the tribe of Benjamin.

The Angles of Bernicia over ran British kingdoms including Deira, which combined with Bernicia and was called Northumbria. The Picts were a tributary to Northumbria until the reign of Brideimac (or Bridei III) son of Beli I [Bela?] from 672 to 693 CE. The Angles under their king Ecgfrith, suffered a severe defeat at the battle of Dun Nectain in 685, which halted the Angles northward expansion. The Picts resolutely sent the Angles back to southern Britain. The first recorded Pictish king was Vipoig who reigned from 311 to 341 CE. 

By the mid-ninth century the Danish Vikings had destroyed the kingdoms of Dal Riata and Northumbria and greatly diminished the power of the Kingdoms of Strathclyde; founding the Kingdom of York. During a major battle in 839 CE, the Vikings killed the King of Fortriu, Eogan man Oengusa. After this, Cinaed mac Alpin otherwise known as Kenneth I MacAlpin a Milesian Scot with a Pictish mother, became king of the Picts from 848 to 858 CE. He united the Picts and the Scots and together these tribes formed the new Kingdom of Scotland. They then defeated the Danish Vikings. In 1018 at the Battle of Carham, the Scots defeated Northumbria with their southernmost borders established under the reign of Duncan I from 1034 to 1040 CE. Internal turmoil and civil wars led to Duncan’s assassination by Macbeth of Shakespeare fame (Article: The Shakespeare Shadow), steward of Ross and Moray, ruling from 1040 to 1057 CE. 

A series of border conflicts between 1138 and 1237 ensued between the Scots and the English for they incorporated a number of Israelite tribes by this stage. Represented by the Jutes, Angles, Frisians, Danes and Normans. The Scots were defeated and Northumbria was incorporated into English territory. Fifty years of peace was followed by the death of Alexander III in 1286. With the infant Margaret as the closest relative and thirteen other distant relatives all laying claim to the throne, a melee broke out, plunging the nation into chaos. In 1292, Edward I of England interceded, placing John de Baliol on the throne. Unrest resulted from his intervention and choice of ruler with the Battle of Dunbar in 1296. The Scots were defeated by the English and Baliol deposed. Scotland was placed under English military occupation – Article: The Life & Death of Charles III.

In 1297, Scottish Nobleman and rebel freedom fighter William Wallace, recruited a Scottish army, defeating the English at the Battle of Stirling. The English struck back in 1298, winning the Battle of Falkirk. Guerrilla warfare ensued, with Wallace declared a treasonous outlaw in 1304. In 1305, Wallace was betrayed and handed over to the English who hung, drew and quartered him in London.

The most well known king of Scotland between Kenneth I and James VI is Robert the Bruce from 1306 to 1329. A descendant of the Norman conquest and famous for taking up the mantle of Scottish resistance and his part in halting England’s designs in subduing the Scottish kingdom to their rule. It was a tussle between Judah and Benjamin, for Benjamin’s right to be a distinct nation, a separate kingdom. The battle of Bannockburn and the defeat of Edward II’s army, was the pivotal highlight of Robert’s reign in 1314. Conflict between the two kingdoms endured until 1328, when the Treaty of Northampton eventually recognised Scottish independence. 

Robert the Bruce

The Picts spoke Insular Celtic languages; with the Pict dialects being related to the southern Brythonic languages. Place names prove the existence of historic Pictish settlements in Scotland. The Brythonic prefixes, Aber; Llan; and Pit in modern place names indicate regions inhabited by Picts from the past. For instance: Aberdeen, Lhanbryde and Pitmedden. Medieval Welsh traditions credited the founding of the Royal dynasty of Gwynedd as well as their principal royal families, the Houses of Aber-ffraw and Din-efur to the Pictish chieftain Cunedda Wledig ap Edern. He was a ‘sub-King… who ruled Manau Gododdin on the Firth of Forth around Clackmannan’ and who lived circa 386 to 460 CE. His grandfather’s name was Padern Beisrudd, meaning Paternus of the ‘red tunic’ or the scarlet cloak.

During the fifth century, Pictish came under increasing pressure and influence from the Gaelic language of Dal Riata until its eventual replacement. Pictish influenced the development of modern Scottish Gaelic by influencing the syntax of Scottish Gaelic and therefore, bears greater similarity to the Brythonic language than does Irish Gaelic. Toponymist William Watson, conducted research of Scottish place names and concluded that the Pictish language was a northern extension of British and that Gaelic was later introduced from Ireland. Today, Scottish Gaelic unlike Irish, maintains a substantial closeness to Brythonic loan words and uses a verbal system modelled on the same pattern as Welsh. 

What this highlights is the fact that the Picts and Cymry were earlier and original inhabitants of Ireland (with Dan and Reuben) and later Britain; with the Gaels – though fellow Israelites – not from either of the tribes of Benjamin and Simeon, arriving considerably later and speaking an Irish Gaelic that was demonstrably different from the Brythonic related Pictish and Welsh tongues.

Edinburgh

The history of the modern Scot is one of invention and influence far beyond the size of its population. They are credited in shaping modern capitalism and democracy. Victorian historian, John Anthony Froude: 

“No people so few in number have scored so deep a mark in the world’s history as the Scots have done.” 

How the Scots invented the Modern World. The True Story of how Western Europe’s Poorest Nation Created our Modern World and Everything in it, by Arthur Herman is a landmark work.

Notice in the title the reference to the poorest nation on one hand and the creation of a modern world on the other reflecting the ravening wolf who would share the spoil – Genesis 49:27.

“… This is the story of how the Scots created the basic idea of modernity. It will show how that idea transformed their own culture and society in the eighteenth century, and how they carried it with them wherever they went. Obviously, the Scots did not do everything by themselves: other nations – Germans, French, English, Italians, Russians, and many others – have their place in the making of the modern world. But it is the Scots more than anyone else who have created the lens through which we see the final product. 

When we gaze out on a contemporary world shaped by technology, capitalism, and modern democracy, and struggle to find our place as individuals in it, we are in effect viewing the world as the Scots did… The story of Scotland in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of hard-earned triumph and heart-rending tragedy, spilled blood and ruined lives, as well as of great achievement.”

Another work detailing the Scots creative genius; their massive influence on the world stage; and capacity for effective administration is When Scotland Ruled the World by Stewart Lamont. The last chapter includes observations on the Scottish psyche – emphasis mine:

‘Scots are fighters. Their belligerence may or may not take a violent or military form. It might simply be the wish to fight for rights or a principle. Scots are proud of being fighters, but they are also sentimental. Scots have a reputation for being quarrelsome over religion. The motto ‘Who dares meddle with me?’ is more than an echo… in the motto ‘Who Dares, Wins’ adopted by the crack troops of the Special Air Service (SAS), founded by a Scot, David Stirling. Their fighting instincts are defensive rather than provocative, and he is at his best when fighting to defend a principle than to enlarge his power or dominion. We do not like money to be wasted, nor do we admire those who have it in abundance.’

To list every Scottish invention would be too long. Some interesting and landmark accomplishments include:

Macintosh Raincoat
Tarmac Road surfaces
Rubber tyres
Adhesive postage stamps
Telephone

Incandescent Light Bulb

Flushing Lavatory
Pedal Bicycle

Kaleidoscope

Colour Photography
Television
Breach-loading rifle

Hypodermic Syringe

Lawnmower

Steam Engine

Oil Refinery

Refrigerator

Electric Clock
Penicillin

Insulin Discovery
Chloroform Anaesthetic

Radiation Therapy 

Genetic Cloning

Finger Printing
Grand piano
First British War Memorial

SAS

Radar
Logarithms and decimal point

Encyclopaedia Britannica
Modern Capitalism 

Bank of England
First Savings Bank

Cash Machine
Co-op principle of distributing dividends

Edinburgh

Scotland’s top export products for 2025:

1 Whisky

2 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals

3 Electrical machinery

4 Chemical products

5 Food and beverages

6 Machinery and mechanical appliances

7 Aluminum and aluminum products

8 Iron and steel

9 Organic chemicals

10 Pharmaceuticals

The top ten export items represented 98.9% of Scotland’s total export value for 2025. The fastest-growing export categories were Whisky, $10.5 billion (28.6%); Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals, $7.2 billion (19.4%); and Electrical machinery, $4.5 billion (12.1%).

Two important points concerning the genetic inheritance and homogeneity of the British people need to be understood. One may be difficult to agree with and for most perhaps, one will be near impossible to assimilate. Firstly, though the twelve tribes, plus the half tribe of East Manasseh were taken into captivity; deported and transplanted; migrated different routes in tribal packs or separately; as well as journeying of their own accord prior to captivity; they did not become ‘watered down’ enough to lose their family relatedness and commonality of genetic lineage. In other words, the prime Haplogroup variants reveal that all the Celts, Saxons and Vikings who entered Britain in their numerous waves and collectively became known as Britons, are all the same stock of people. Not a mongrel nation as some proclaim. They once included the thirteen tribes who amalgamated as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and then later as Great Britain and Northern Ireland. This homogeneity was noted anciently.

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 114-115 – emphasis mine:

The Roman historian Tacitus, writing… the first century… on the racial nature of the Germans [Saxons]:

“I concur in opinion with those who deem the Germans never [rather less than other nations] to have intermarried with other nations but to be a pure and unmixed race, stamped with a distinct character. Hence a family likeness pervades the whole, though their numbers are great. Their eyes are stern and blue, their hair ruddy, and their bodies large.”

The map above creates the impression that Scotland is a mish mash of peoples. Yet the reality is that the Scottish nation descends predominantly from the tribe of Benjamin, composed of Picts and Scots, whom in essence were two waves of the same peoples. Angles and Britons were pressed southwards into England. So much so that the Geordies of Newcastle (and Tyneside) are probably a mix of Benjamin and Judah at the least or predominantly Benjamin at the most. Granted, Scotland has been partially influenced genetically with Norse migration and we will discover the presence of another Israelite tribe in Scotland’s borders – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

Scientists in an Oxford University study learned that Britain can be divided into seventeen distinct genetic clans. There was a surprise in that the Cornish for instance are genetically more similar to other English groups than they are to the Welsh. This is due to the fact that the early Britons in Cornwall – in the main – migrated to Brittany, France. Therefore the Cornish majority today are the same people as the Saxon ancestors of the Jutes and thus related to the rest of England populated principally by Jutes and Normans.

People whose grandparents had all been born near each other and were white European in origin had been examined. A further surprise for the scientists was remarkably, many of these modern day clans found in the same parts of the country as the tribes and kingdoms that were established from the sixth century, confirmed that little had changed on the genetic landscape for almost fifteen hundred years. 

Which leads to the second matter. As there are five nations located in the islands constituting the British Isles – Britain and Ireland – how does that mathematically square with a total of thirteen tribes. Where are the other eight? These other tribes migrated to the United States of America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa – including Zimbabwe, formerly Rhodesia.

The opposite is true of what all identity experts, teachers and adherents have believed. The Celtic-Saxon-Viking descended peoples in America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are not the same people as the English in England; or the Scots of Scotland, the Irish of Ireland and the Welsh in Wales. They are all individual tribes and peoples in their own right with their own unique nations. This has not been understood before and is pivotal in locating the sons of Jacob and identifying them correctly. Up until now, the Israelite tribes not linked to Joseph have been incorrectly labelled as living in northwestern Europe or conversely, that they are all living in the United States of America. 

The map above highlights the predominance of lighter eyes, whether blue, grey or green in not just northwestern Europe but also stretching into central and eastern Europe. It is clear to see, that the highest percentages (80%+) are not based on ethnicity alone, but on latitude. Whereas 50% to 79% exhibits more flexibility and extends further south in Europe regardless of latitude. The lower figure (20-40%) in the south of England (and Wales) may well reflect increased admixture with immigrants from the Indian sub-continent, Africa, the Caribbean and southeastern Europe.

Within those nations broadly termed Celtic, scientists have viewed them as one race with two deviations of language. In fact, this study confirmed that the Celts share language, history and culture but not the exact DNA.

The Celtic Myth Exposed: ‘Despite their claims to a cultural kinship, the Celtic peoples do not form a single group… Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Cornwall have a very different genetic make-up. The Cornish have DNA that is much more similar to that of other English groups than to the Welsh or the Scots. Oxford University geneticist Professor Peter Donnelly said: “One might have expected those groups to be quite similar genetically because they were Celtic. But while [we] see distinct groups in those regions they are amongst the most different.” Archaeologist Professor Mark Robinson said: “I had assumed that there was going to be this uniform Celtic fringe extending from Cornwall through to Wales into Scotland. And this has very definitely not been the case.”

Light (blond) hair relative percentages mirror lighter eyes. Though this time 50% to 100% of people with light hair covers a far more concentrated area than that for light eyes. The rarity of red hair in Europe generally, with the highest proportions in the North west may have a bearing. Again, the south of England with Wales exhibit less fair haired people than Ireland, Scotland and Northern England. An aspect aside from immigration admixture is that both Judah and Simeon took Canaanite wives – Genesis 38:2; 46:10. This may have affected the English and Welsh gene pool towards darker hair and swarthier skin.

As we have learned the nations of northwestern Europe are in fact descended from Abraham and Keturah – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia – and though we are now going to identify all the remaining tribes in subsequent chapters, it leaves one open ended question. Studies (aside from the United States in part) have not been conducted for Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders and the British in South Africa that this writer is aware – because they are possibly not recognised as distinct peoples. They are understandably though incorrectly, perceived as being either English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh. Thus, studies on the peoples of the Celtic-Saxon-Viking nations of the New World are waiting to be conducted as no priority has been attached to them. 

Of course, we are still two tribes short for those performing mental arithmetic. In fact, we are actually three tribes short. There are five nations in the British Isles and five nations in the New World, yet there are in fact fourteen tribal divisions to account for. Jacob had twelve sons, therefore we are looking for twelve nations who all speak English; having given allegiance to the Monarchy of England in the past, or continue to do so today. 

Joseph was divided into two, Manasseh and Ephraim, making thirteen. Manasseh then split into two, the half tribes of East and West Manasseh, resulting in fourteen. The East remained separate and the West joined with Ephraim to form one entity, Joseph – with fourteen returning to thirteen. 

Simeon and Levi were punished for their cruelty and prophesied they would be scattered within Israel, therefore thirteen goes back down to eleven. Later, when lots were being apportioned in the promised land, the tribe of Judah said to Simeon: their allotment was generous and that Simeon could share with them. Eleven tribe allotments became twelve. A careful reading of Bible verses reveal that the two full brothers, Issachar and Zebulun would primarily share an inheritance. The hunt for twelve nations becomes eleven. Finally, we arrive at the enigmatic tribe of Dan. His inheritance is shrouded in mystery – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe. For now, eleven becomes ten. 

Therefore, ten nations must exist in the world; who speak a common tongue; share a similar ancestral heritage; and have an existing or past relationship with the monarchy of England. 

Those ten countries include: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. These ten nations are comprised of twelve identifiable tribes for two nations contain two tribes each; plus two scattered tribes within them, totalling fourteen tribes or tribal divisions. It is worth stating that though the peoples of Britain are different one from another as brothers and half brothers would be expected to be, they are more similar to each other compared to their kith and kin on the continent. 

Briefly, for new readers, the principle paternal (Y-DNA) Haplogroup for northwestern European men is R1b. It is the Y sex chromosome passed only from fathers to sons. The main mutations we are concerned with are the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21), found in Germany, Scandinavia, Benelux and England; and the Atlantic-Celtic M529 (L21), found in Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Other primary R1b Haplogroup lineages include the Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28), found in France, Italy and Switzerland; and the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 found in Iberia.

The people of Orkney are the most distinct in the United Kingdom, a result of six hundred years of Norwegian rule. Y-DNA Haplogroup N1c1 is essentially nonexistent in the British Isles compared to Scandinavia and other Nordic nations in the Artic circle, such as Finland, as the British share closer genetic commonalities with Belgium and the Netherlands than they do with Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. 

Y-DNA Haplogroup I1 is the most common type of Haplogroup I in northern European men and its highest levels are found in Scandinavia and Finland, where it can represent over 35% of the Y chromosomes. I1 is Associated with Norse ethnicity and is found in all the regions invaded by ancient Germanic tribes as well as the Vikings. After Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in nations such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands; which all exhibit between ten and twenty percent I1 lineages. Recall that I1 and I2a2 are both northern European identifying Haplogroups as opposed to I2a1, which is associated with south-eastern Europe. 

In other words, Haplogroup I1 and I2a2 have higher concentrations in the nations who descend from the Patriarch Abraham. But, this does not mean that males with these Haplogroups are direct descendants of Abraham. For we would expect his descendants to carry R1b and specifically the U106 sub-clade. Haplogroup I is an older ‘European’ Haplogroup which both predates and originates Haplogroup R. Thus, male Haplogroup I carriers are exhibiting an older and separate ancestor lineage which predates Abraham though is still descended from Abraham’s ancestor, Arphaxad.

Eupedia: ‘Fair hair was another physical trait associated with the Indo-Europeans. In contrast, the genes for blue eyes were already present among Mesolithic Europeans belonging to Y-haplogroup I. 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.’

Scots are ol’ blue eyes, says study, The Herald, David Leask, 2014 – emphasis mine: 

‘A major new study of the DNA of the British Isles has found the highest level of the gene that causes the light iris colour in Edinburgh, the Lothians and Borders. Fifty-seven percent in the south-east of Scotland have the OCA2 gene, compared with 48 percent in the rest of the country – a figure that also happens to be the average for the UK and Republic of Ireland. The blue-eye gene was just 35 per cent in south-west England, 41 per cent in east England and 45 per cent in Wales… places where blue eyes are more common than not are in a swathe of territory running across northern Germany [Ishmael], northern Poland [Joktan], all three Baltic states [Joktan], Finland [Arphaxad], central Sweden [Abraham and Keturah] and much of northern Russia [Asshur]. Overall across Britain, the eye colour breakdown is 48 percent blue, 30 percent green and 22 percent brown.’

A study conducted by Bryan Sykes broke mtDNA mitochondrial results into twelve haplogroups for various regions of the isles: H, J, T, I, V, W, X and U and within U: U2, U3, U4 and U5. 

Sykes discovered that the maternal Haplogroup pattern was similar throughout England but there was a distinct trend from east and north to west and south. Minor Haplogroups, were primarily found in the east of England. Sykes found Haplogroup H to be dominant in Ireland and Wales. In fact, studies of ancient DNA have corroborated ‘that ancient Britons and Anglo-Saxon settlers carried a variety of mtDNA haplogroups, though type H was common in both.’ Also highlighted were a few differences between north, mid and south Wales. There was a clear closer link between north and mid Wales than either had with the south. If the people of South Wales are descended from Simeon, it poses the question of who are the people to the north. The same as Judah and the English, or someone else altogether? 

Sykes designated five main Y-DNA Haplogroups for various regions of Britain and Ireland: R1b, R1a, I, E1b1b and J. According to Bryan Sykes: “… although the Romans ruled from AD 43 until 410, they left a tiny genetic footprint.” Two reasons for this. First any intermarriage would have been minimal and a very long time ago. 

Secondly, as the Romans were descended from Ishmael or modern Germany, the family similarity would not reveal any surprises in DNA and Haplogroup sequencing. Only R1b is indicative of the Abrahamic peoples. Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 have been addressed; R1a is a reflection of admixture with peoples of Eastern Europe in the distant past, whether Slavic (Joktan) or Russian (Asshur); and E1b1b (North Africa, Canaan), J2 and J1 are evidence of intermixing with Arab and related peoples, whether including Southern European variants from admixture or mutations originating with Middle Eastern (J1) and West Asian (J2) males. 

Haplogroup R1b is dominant throughout Western Europe. The most common R1b sub-clade in Britain, particularly England is R1b-U106 (or S21), which reaches its highest frequencies in the North Sea areas such as southern and eastern England, the Netherlands and Denmark. Due to its distribution, this sub-clade is often associated with the Saxon migrations. Ancient DNA has shown that it was also unsurprisingly, present in Roman Britain. For the Romans as Ishmael, also carried the U106 sub-clade as the Germans do today – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar

In contrast, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and north western England are dominated by R1b-L21, which is also located in north western France, the North coast of Spain and western Norway, a residue from the slave trade. This lineage is often associated with the historic Celts, as the Iberian and Gaulish regions where it was once predominant have had a significant Celtic language presence into the modern period, as well as relating to a Celtic cultural identity. R1b-L21 was also present among Celtic Britons in eastern England prior to the Saxon and Viking invasions, as well as allegedly from Roman soldiers stationed in ancient York.

If such is the case, then is L21 (M529) older or more recent than U106? This writer remains unconvinced in the exact thread of the R1b genetic tree at its tail end – that is, its most recent mutations (see above). Briefly, the Atlantic Celtic M529 would seem logically to be either next to the Proto-Germanic U106 (beneath L11) or deriving from U106. Similarly, the Italo-Gaulish U152 would also seem better placed deriving from L11 and located between the Proto-Germanic U106 and (the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 stemming from) P312.

Of the nine royal dynasties since the first king of all Britain, Athelstan from 924 to 939 CE, who defeated the Danes, Vikings, Scots and Britons at the bloody battle of Brunanburh, only two dynasties paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup is known for certain. 

Comprehensive studies are required for the Houses of Knytlinga, with Patriarch Harthacnut I King of Denmark from 880 to 936; Wessex, with Patriarch Egbert from 770 to 839; Norman, with William I and Patriarch Robert I (Rollo father of William) Duke of Normandy from 846 to 931 (refer article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo spaiens); Plantagenet, with Edward I and Patriarch Geoffrey Ferole II of Gastinois from 1000 to 1046; Tudor, with Elizabeth I and Patriarch Ednyfed Fychan from 1170 to 1246; and Hannover, with Victoria and Patriarch George of Brunswick from 1582 to 1641. 

Whereas, Mountbatten, with Patriarch John II of Oldenburg from 1272 to 1301 is listed as R1b, and Windsor, with Elizabeth II and Patriarch Dietrich I of Wettin from 916 to 976, as specifically the Germanic R1b-U106 (Z305) and the Stuarts, with James I and Patriarch Alan FitzFlaad from 1070 to 1114, as the Celtic R1b-L21 (L745).

Haplogroup I is a grouping of several distinct and distantly related lineages. Within Britain, the most common sub-clade as mentioned is I1, which also occurs frequently in northwestern continental Europe and southern Scandinavia. It has been associated with the settlement of the Saxons and Vikings, as an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ male from northern England who died between the seventh and tenth centuries was determined to have belonged to Haplogroup I1. The truth is that I1 is a far earlier Haplogroup which predates the Saxons, but still would have been carried by certain males migrating into Britain during and after the Saxon and Viking invasions.

Haplogroup R1a, as the cousin (or more accurately the sibling) of R1b, is most common in Eastern Europe – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans. Approximately nine percent of Scottish men belong to the Norwegian R1a sub-clade Z284, which peaks at over 30% in Shetland and Orkney. If attributable to the Viking incursions, then this would be a result of admixture – originally deriving from a male ancestor of an eastern European. For the true Israelite Norsemen would have been a lineage dominant in R1b. 

Haplogroups E1b1b, J1 and J2 are more frequent throughout Southern Europe through admixture with peoples found in North Africa and the Middle East. Each are rare in Northern Europe. E1b1b for instance – found in high levels amongst Arab males and in Sub-Saharan East Africa – is found in 1.5% of Scots, 2% of English, 3.5% of Dutch, 5% of Flemish and 5.5% of Germans. In contrast, It reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovo at 47.5% and in Greece at 30%.

The constant reader will recall that Haplogroups J1 (Middle Eastern and Arabian) and J2 (Near East and West Asia) are indicative of a lineage from Ham (Mizra and Phut); whereas E1b1b is a lineage from Canaan. Y-DNA Haplogroup E1b1b is a result of intermixing with men of an African descent (E1b1a and E1b1b). Thus any man – whether a Berber from North Africa or a Slav from southern Europe – if he possesses E1b1b, it reveals he had a paternal ancestor at one point who was African (Black).

Scottish Genetics: Abstracts and Summaries, Kevin Alan Brook – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Contrary to amateurish speculations and misinterpretations of genetic data, Scots do not descend from the Israelites in any amount.’

A confident and dogmatic statement aimed at those who are perceived as academically stretched and intellectually challenged… to even think the Scots could be a tribe of Israel – the audacity and ignorance of such a conjecture. The full irony being that they actually are a tribe of Israel, with evidence overwhelmingly pointing to the tribe of Benjamin. Unless of course, one is basing data on the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish Haplogroup clusters from admixture discussed in the previous chapter – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe

Brook: ‘R1b-M269, which originated in western Europe, is an important Y-DNA haplogroup found among Scottish men who participate in Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish Y-DNA Project”. Other members of that project who have unbroken Scottish patrilineal ancestry carry other Y-DNA haplogroups, including E-M2, E1b1b1-M35, E1b1b1a1b-V13, G-M201, I-M170, I1d-L22, I1d-P109, I1-M253, I2a-L160, I2a-M423, I2a-P37.2, and J2-M172, among others.’

Yet none of these are indicative of a true male Scot. For Haplogroups E and J are a result of admixture with Canaan and Ham and Haplogroups G and I, while indicative of the line of Shem and related, are older Haplogroups predating Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  

Brook: ‘Members of Family Tree DNA’s “Scottish mtDNA Project” whose matrilines are Scottish carry a wide variety of mtDNA haplogroups, including H (38.38%), I, J (8.64%), K, T (7.63%), U4, U5, V (4.26%), W, X…

About 13 percent of Scots have red hair, and 40 percent of Scots carry at least one red hair mutation. Their red hair is determined by allele settings on their melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene in combination with 8 additional genes that determine whether the MC1R gene is turned on…

… Bryan Sykes “mtDNA and the Islands of the North Atlantic: Estimating the Proportions of Norse and Gaelic Ancestry.” American Journal of Human Genetics 68:3 (March 2001): pages 723-737. First published online on February 1, 2001.

“This study of mitochondrial DNA compares mainland Scots with Scottish islanders (including Western Islands and the Isle of Skye, plus Orcadians from the Orkney Islands), Icelanders, Norwegians, and many other European ethnicities. Figure 5 [not shown] shows Scots [Benjamin] clustering close to the English [Judah] and the Welsh [Simeon].”

The Scots, English and Welsh all share the same father, Jacob; while the English and Welsh, share the same mother, Leah.

You might be a Pict If… 2013 – emphasis & bold mine :

‘… a new SNP, S530… It’s also called SNP L1335… [a Y-DNA R1b-L21 sub-clade] has been discovered and it is a Pict marker… [the] marker is evidence that the Picts are living among us today and can be identified genetically… 10% of the 1000 Scottish men tested carry this marker, while it is found in only [0.8%] of English men and about 3% of the men in Northern Ireland… [but it is only seen once in more than two hundred men from the Republic of Ireland]… this marker is 10 times more prevalent in men with Scottish grandfathers than men with English grandfathers… What was surprising… was the really huge difference between Scotland and England.’

Benjamin and Judah share the same father, though their mothers are Rachel and Leah respectively and so as half brothers, possess more lee way for genetic differences. Coupled with this was the six hundred Benjamite men bottleneck and their subsequent taking of wives initially from the half tribe of East Manasseh and then regularly from Ephraim until their numbers swelled. 

The top ten mtDNA Haplogroups for England and Scotland and a comparison with near family: the Flemish of Belgium, the Dutch of the Netherlands, the Germans and the French. That is: the descendants from Sheba, Midian, Ishmael and Lot respectively.

England: H [44.7%] – J [11.5%] – U5 [9.1%] – K [7.8%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – I [4%] – HV0+V [3.2%] – U [2.7]

Scotland: H [44%] – J [12.7%] – U5 [8.1%] – K [6.9%] – 

T2 [5.9%] – HV0+V [3%] U4 [2.8%] – X [2.5%] 

Flanders: H [46.9%] – K [12.1%] – T2 [ 9.4%] – 

J [6%] – U [5.4% ] – U5 [3.4%] – W [3.3%] – HV0+V [2.7%] 

Netherlands: H [45%] – T2 [12%] – J [11%] – K [10%] – 

HV0+V [8%] – U5 [7.5%] – U4 [6.5%] – I [2.5%] – W [2.5%]

Germany: H [45%] – J [9%] – U5 [8.8%] – T2 [7.8%] – 

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

France: H [44.3%] – K [8.7%] – U5 [8.2%] – J [7.7%] – 

T2 [6.2%] – HV0+V [5%] – U4 [2.5%] – I [2%] 

England:        H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Scotland:       H – J – U5 – K – T2 

Germany:      H – J – U5 – T2 – K

France:           H – K – U5 – J – T2 

Flemish:         H – K – T2 – J – U

Netherlands: H – T2 – J – K – HV0+V 

The predominant maternal Haplogroups overall are H, J, U5, K and T2 across these six countries – much like the rest of Europe. Specific sub-clades for Haplogroup H found in England or otherwise Britain include: H3b, H3k,  H5a6, H5c, H5d, H5e, H5p, H17c, H23, H24, H34, H35, H39, H47, H48, H52, H56, H58, H59, H66, H76, H80, H83 and H87; and in Scotland: H1i, H3i, H27c and H67. The other common maternal groups in Britain in lesser percentages compared with Haplogroup H, include: J1, J2, K1a, U5a1, T1a and T2b.

The comparison of the top five to ten mtDNA Haplogroups shows that England and Scotland are more closely aligned as expected with regard to similar frequency. It is Germany which mirrors their sequence most closely, followed by France and the Flemish, with the Netherlands the least similar of the six close family members composed from Judah, Benjamin, Ishmael, Moab and Ammon, Sheba and Midian. 

Recall that Abraham’s wife Sarah was his niece from his brother Haran, the grandfather of Moab and Ammon. The German similarity reveals that Hagar was not just Pharaohs’s daughter but descended from stock similar to Abraham and Sarah – refer Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar. The lesser similarity with Sheba and Midian indicates that Keturah was not as closely related and lends itself to the theory that she may have been descended from another line of Peleg or more likely via Arphaxad’s other sons, Anar or Ashcol – refer Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

From an autosomal DNA perspective a slightly different picture is portrayed, where the English and Scottish are most closely related to the Dutch and Germans and then Belgium and France, not withstanding Scandinavia.

                           H       HV0+V      J          K         T2      U4       U5        T1

France             44            5             8          9           6         3          8          2

Scotland          44            3           13          7           6         3          8          2

England           45            3           12          8          6         2           9          2

Netherlands   45            8            11        10         12         7          8          3     

Germany         45            4             9          7           8         3          9          3

Norway            46            4           11          5           8          3        11          2

Sweden            46            5             8         6           4          3        12          3

Denmark         47            4           13          9           6         2          6          2

Flanders          47            3             6        12           9         3          3          2

Sephardim      56            9             5          8

The pairings show the gradual mtDNA distancing from England and Scotland by their related neighbours. England and Scotland are very similar, for they have mothers who are sisters. Their percentage variation is minimal as expected. Frequency wise, the Netherlands, Germany and France are not only similar with each other, but also with their cousins across the channel. The addition of family from Abraham and Keturah in Scandinavia highlights their closeness with their brothers in the Benelux nations as well as with cousins Ishmael, Benjamin and Judah. 

The Sephardic Jew who is a truer representation and purer line of Esau, is the other main family member who does not seem out of place with their twin and uncles, even with higher Haplogroup H levels. The Welsh who have experienced less admixture, also carry a higher percentage for Haplogroup H, with the highest concentration in Europe at 59.8%. The only other percentage higher than the Sephardim is found amongst the Spanish in Galicia with 58.5%. 

The table below is a continuation of the table of nations descended from Shem studied to date, with the addition of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                            H       J      T2      K      HV        U5    HV0+V

Sephardim       56      5                  8         8                         9

Switzerland      48     12      9        5       0.4          7            5

Bel-Lux             47       6       9      12     0.7           3            3

Denmark          47     13       6        9                      6            4

Norway             46     11       8        5      0.2         11            4

Sweden             46      8       4        6      0.5         12            5

Netherlands     45     11      12      10                      8           8

Germany           45      9       8        7     0.5            9           4

Austria              45      9       8        9     0.8            9           2

England            45    13       6         8                      9            3

Scotland           44    13       6         7     0.2            8           3

France               44     8       6         9         3           8           5

Brazil                 44     11                            2                        11

Portugal            44      7       6        6      0.1           7            5

Spain                 44      7       6        6      0.7           8           8

Poland               44     8       7         4         1          10           5

Russia               41      8        7        4          2         10           4

Greece               41     10      7         5          3           5        1.8

Italy                  40      8        8       8           3           5           3

Ukraine            39      8        8        5          4         10           4

Iceland             38    14      10      10          4           8           2

Romania          37     11        5        8          2           7           4

Finland            36      6        2        5                     21            7

Turkey              31      9        4        6          5          3         0.7

Ashkenazim    23      7        5      32          5          2            4

Iran                   17     14        5         7         7          3         0.6

A pattern has consistently emerged showing the percentage levels of the main European mt-DNA Haplogroup H, generally increasing as one heads west across Europe. The addition of two of Jacob’s sons, Judah and Benjamin shows that Scotland and England go against type as their westerly position in Europe is not mirrored by the level of mtDNA Haplogroup H. The Sephardim remain the highest carriers of Haplogroup H with 56%. Both England and Scotland have higher frequencies of Haplogroup J at 13%, similar with Denmark (13%) and Switzerland (12%) with only Iceland and Iran (14%) exhibiting higher. Finland still possesses the highest level of U5 at 21%, while the Ashkenazim exhibit the highest level of K at 32%. The highest carriers of T2 are the Netherlands with 12%, followed by Iceland (10%). 

The English and Scots as shown in the PCA or principal component analysis graph above are at once on the periphery of other European countries on one hand, reflected in their isolated geographic location, yet remain sandwiched between near relatives, the Scandinavians and Germans as well as the Benelux and French.

Regarding Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b: Haplogroup R-M269 is the sub-clade of human Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b which is defined by the SNP marker M269. According to ISOGG 2020 it is phylogenetically classified as R1b1a1b (now R1b1a1a2). R-M269 is the most common European Haplogroup in the genetic composition of mainly Western Europe; increasing in frequency from an east to west gradient. For instance in Poland, it is found in 22.7% of the male population, compared to Wales at 92.3%. It is carried by over 110 million European men. 

Scientists propose that the age of the M269 mutation is somewhere between 4,000 to 10,000 years ago. This time frame is plausible and neatly fits with the birth of Peleg and hence the beginning of the R1b mutation, circa 7727 BCE, according to an unconventional chronology. The most recently significant R1b mutations originated with Abraham and his descendants beginning with his birth in 1977 BCE.

The sub-Haplogroup of R1b, U106 (S21), is frequent in central to western Europe, reaching 66.8% in Germany; while the sub-lineage R-S116 (P312) is the most frequent in the Iberian Peninsula. R-U152 (S28) is more frequent in France and Italy; R-U198 in England; and R-M529 (L21) in the Celtic nations of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

As we progress through the descendants of Shem, the levels of R1b vary and gradually increase. We will keep a record of the levels for the two main R1b sub-Haplogroups – M269 and U106 – for some of the nations we will study. 

Italy – the Iberian Peninsula not withstanding – was the first nation with their main Y-DNA Haplogroup being R1b and it showed a marked difference with eastern Europe. It is worth mentioning that the North to south axis is as important as the East to west and so this explains why for instance Poland has slightly higher percentages of both clades of R1b than Russia as it is further west. Comparably, the Czech Republic displays a higher level of R-U106 than Italy (due to admixture with Germany) which is further south; yet less R-M269 overall as it is the descendants of Peleg and Aram which have the highest levels of R1b – refer Chapter XV The Philistines: Latino-Hispano America; and Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

France             R-M269    52%   –  R-U106      7%

Swiss               R-M269    58%   –  R-U106     13%

Netherlands   R-M269    54%   –  R-U106     35%

Denmark        R-M269    34%   –  R-U106      17%

Austria            R-M269    27%   –  R-U106      23%

Germany        R-M269   43% – R-U106      19%

England          R-M269   57% – R-U106   20%

With the addition of England (a) we see that the English possess similar levels of R-M269 as the Swiss (b), Dutch (c), Italians (d) and French (e). Regarding the more specific Germanic R-U106, they are at the higher end, though the Netherlands and Austria have even higher percentages and Germany (f) and Denmark (g) share comparable levels. It is clear that England is closely related to all these nations. Clarity is intensified when one appreciates that they equate to: Judah (a), Haran (b), Midian (c), Nahor (d), Moab (e), Ammon (e), Ishmael (f) and Medan (g) respectively – all of Abraham’s direct or extended family tree.

Overall, England has a higher percentage of both M269 and its sub-Haplogroup U106, compared to its related near neighbours, aside from the Dutch. In Cornwall, R-M269 is as high as 78% and in the Midlands, Leicestershire’s frequency is 62%. 

Downstream from M269, sub-Haplogroup L165 equates to northern England; L11 to central England; L1 to southern and eastern England; M529 is found in England and principally the Celtic nations including Scotland; and L1335 is deemed Pictish.

The English R1b variants include sub-clades of the Proto-Germanic U106 (S21) at 19% to 20% of the male population; the Atlantic Celtic M529 (L21) at 12%; The Italo-Gaulish U152 (S28) at 6%; the Ibero-Atlantic DF27 (S250) at 6%; DF19 (S232) at 1% – a sister clade to ZZ11, from which DF27 and U152 derive – and other sub-clades account for 13% of the total R1b in England. 

Germany’s breakdown of R1B includes similar sub-clades as England, with U106 at 18%; L21 at 5%; U152 at 9%; DF27 and DF19 combined on 9%; and other sub-clades account for 3%. The Germans and English have almost the exact level of Germanic R1b. The logical difference is that England has more Celtic ancestry and Germany has more influence from Alpine ancestry. 

England and Scotland’s Y-DNA Haplogroups:

England:  R1b [67%] – I1 [14%] – 

R1a [4.5%] – I2a2 [4.5%] – J2 [3.5%] – I2a1 [2.5%]  –

E1b1b [2%] – G2a [1.5%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

Scotland: R1b [72.5%] – I1 [9%] – R1a [8.5%] – 

I2a2 [4%] – J2 [2%] – E1b1b [1.5%] – I2a1 [1%] –

G2a [0.5%] – T1a [0.5%] – Q [0.5%]

England:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 –

J2 – I2a1 – E1b1b – G2a – T1a – Q

Scotland:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 –

J2 – E1b1b – I2a1 – G2a – T1a – Q

The sequencing is almost a mirror image, though the variations in R1b sub-clades are what make England, English and Scotland, Scottish. Two separate, distinct, identities, tribes, peoples, nations and kingdoms. A breakdown of the Haplogroups for the major regions of England and Scotland and the percentages for the defining marker paternal Haplogroup R1b; key Haplogroups I1 and I2a2 and to a lesser extent R1a (from admixture) – compared with the national average above.

Cornwall & Devon:   R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – G – J2 – E1b –

I2a1 – J1 – T

Northeast England:  R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – G – J2 – E1b –

J1 – Q – I2a1 

Southwest England: R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 – J1 – T – Q

West Midlands:         R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 

Home Counties:        R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – J2 –

G – I2a1 – J1 – T – Q

East Anglia:                R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – G – E1b –

I2a1 – J2 – J1 

Cornwall & Devon:   R1b 75.5% – I1 8% – I2a2 3.5% – R1a 4%  

Southwest England: R1b 72% – I1 15% – I2a2 4% – R1a 5%   

Home Counties         R1b 68% – I1 10.5% – I2a2 4.5% – R1a 3.5%

Northeast England   R1b 65% – I1 14.5% – I2a2 4% – R1a 5%   

West Midlands          R1b 66% – I1 17.5% – I2a2 5% – R1a 3%   

East Anglia                 R1b 56.5% – I1 19.5% – I2a2 8% – R1a 5%   

Northeast Scotland: R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – I2a1 – J2 

Southern Scotland:  R1b – I1 – I2a2 – R1a – E1b – I2a1 –

J2 – G – J1

Western Scotland:    R1b – I1 – R1a – I2a2 – I2a1 –

E1b – J2 

Orkney:                       R1b – R1a – I1 – I2a2 – I2a1 – T1a

Shetland:                    R1b – R1a – I1 – Q – I2a2 – T1a 

Western Scotland:    R1b 72% – I1 8.5% – I2a2 6.5% – R1a 7.5% 

Northeast Scotland: R1b 69.5% – I1 13% – I2a2 6.5% – R1a 4% 

Shetlands:                  R1b 68.5% – I1 13.5% – I2a2 0.5% – R1a 15.5% 

Orkney:                       R1b 62% – I1 10.5% – I2a2 2% – R1a 22.5% 

Southern Scotland:   R1b 57% – I1 19.5% – I2a2 11% – R1a 3.5% 

Colour code: Red = England; Blue = Scotland.

                                          R1b       I1      I2a2     R1a     

Cornwall & Devon          76         8          4          4           

Southwest England        72        15          4          5              

Western Scotland           72         9           7          8            

Northeast Scotland        70        13          7          4          

Shetlands                         69        14      0.5         16     

Home Counties               68        11          5          4        

West Midlands                66        18         5           3       

Northeast England         65        15         4           5      

Orkneys                            62         11         2         23           

East Anglia                       57       20          8          5       

Southern Scotland          57       20         11          4        

A comparison of England and Scotland, reveals that though different they are similar. Most commentators regard the English and Lowland Scot as being the same. As if, geography, accent and culture divides them rather than ethnicity. 

Recall, that Haplogroup R1b is indicative of Western Europe and embraces all of Abraham’s descendants as well as that of his two brothers. Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a is distinctly related to the peoples of Eastern Europe and beyond and is found in considerably lower levels heading from Central to Western Europe. Haplogroup I1 is strongly attached to north western Europe and hence the higher levels in Scotland and England. Similarly, I2a2 is primarily a north western European sub-clade of I2.

Comparing the English regions, highlights that R1b and I1 are the two dominant Haplogroups in each case and similarly for mainland Scotland, apart from the Orkney and Shetland Islands. Shetland and Orkney reveal Norse influence with the higher levels of R1a (only through previous admixture) and a truer reflection by the older I1 Haplogroup.

The high population regions comprising the Home Counties, West Midlands and the Northeast are all comparable and match England’s overall percentages. East Anglia stands out as different from the rest of England. It is this area which has experienced the biggest depletion of male population due to migration, particularly to America and also bore the brunt of the successive invasions by the Saxon tribes from the Continent. Southern Scotland mirrors East Anglia in England regarding Haplogroup percentages in R1b and I1. With less invaders who introduced Haplogroup R1b remaining, while exhibiting higher levels of I1 and I2a2, as probable evidence of the original male population prior to the Scottish tribes arrival. 

Comparing the English and Scottish Y-DNA Haplogroups, with their Nordic, Benelux, German cousins and Jewish twin brother.

Colour code: Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                           R1b      R1a       I1       I2a1    I2a2      E1b1b     J2      J1     

Sweden              22        16         37         2           4            3          3                     

Sephardim        30          4                                                  9        23       20

Norway              32        26        32                       5            1       0.5                    

Denmark           33        15         34         2           6            3          3                   

Iceland               42        23        29                      4          

Germany           45         16        16          2           5            6           5                    

Netherlands      49         4          17         1            7            4          4       0.5        

Frisians              55         7        [34]                                    2        [1]  

Wallonia            60         7          11         2            5            6          2                   

Luxembourg     61          3           3         3            6            5          8          3       

Flanders            61          4         12          3            5            5          4          1         

England             67          5         14          3          5             2          4          

Scotland             73          9          9           1          4            2           2           

A difference displayed in the similarity of Y-DNA to mtDNA is that the Flemish are more similar with England and Scotland, whereas it was Germany, then the Flemish and Dutch least in the mtDNA Haplogroup sequence percentages. This time regarding the male Y chromosome, it is the Flemish who are closest, then the Dutch and Germany last.

Whereas the other sons of Abraham dwelling in Scandinavia are more akin with the Sephardim with lower R1b percentages. The Nordic nations have far higher levels of I1 and R1a, revealing different paternal bloodlines resulting from even more extensive admixture than the Germanic peoples to the South in Germany and which includes the English and Scottish.

Continuing the Y-DNA comparison table from previous chapters with the addition of Jacob’s sons Judah and Benjamin.

Colour code: Green = Nahor and Haran; Blue = Keturah and Ishmael; Yellow = Esau; Red = Jacob.

                          J        J1      J2     E1b1b    G      R1a     R1b      R1    

Georgia          43      16       27         2        30        9        10       19 

Sephardim    43      20      23         9        [8]       4        30       34  

Ashkenazim  38      19       19       21       [10]    10         12       22 

Armenia         33      11       22        6         12         5        30      35  

Turkey            33       9       24       11         11         8        16       24 

Iran                 32       9       23         7        10       16        10       26

Greece            26       3       23        21         6        12        16       28

Italy                19        3       16       14          9         4        39       43

Romania        15        1       14        14          3       18        16       34

Portugal         13        3       10       14          7         2        56       58

Luxembourg  11        3         8         5          6         3        61       64

Brazil              10                 10        11          5         4        54      58

Spain              10        2         8         7          3         2        69       71     

Austria           10        1         9         8          8        19       32       51

France             8         2        6         8          6         3        59       62

Ukraine           5         1         5         7          3       44         8        52

Germany         5                   5         6           5       16        45       61

Flanders          5         1        4          5          4         4       61       65

Netherlands   4         1        3          4          5         4       49       53

Switzerland    4     0.5        3          8          8        4        50       54

Poland             3                   3          4          2       58       13        71

Russia              3                   3         3           1       46         6        52

England           4                   4         2           2        5        67       72

Denmark         3                   3         3           3       15        33       48

Sweden            3                   3         3           1       16        22       38

Wallonia          2                   2         6           6        7        60       67

Scotland          2                   2         2        0.5        9        73       82

Frisians         1.4                              2                     7         55       62

Norway         0.5               0.5         1           1        26       32       58

Iceland                                                                    23       42       65

Finland                                         0.5                       5         4         9

Georgia continues as one bookend with the highest Haplogroup J2 and G2a percentages. While the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew, both eclipse Georgia’s J1 levels, with the Sephardim equaling the total Haplogroup J percentage of Georgia and the Ashkenazi Jew possessing the highest percentage of E1b1b with Greece. These Haplogroups aside from G (Shem) are indicative of Arab and related peoples who descend from Ham or Canaan and not Shem.

Finland is the opposite bookend, with no Haplogroup J or G2a and the lowest R1 levels. Poland exhibits the highest percentage of R1a and Spain’s total R1 is equalled by Poland, though in opposite percentages for R1a and R1b. Both England and Scotland carry a higher percentage of combined R1 than Poland and Spain and Scotland replaces Spain with the highest frequency of R1b in Europe. 

It tends to be the countries on the periphery of Europe and its extreme outer edges such as Finland, Spain, Greece or even Georgia which possess the most or least amounts of specific paternal Haplogroups. Scotland is an additional example supporting this fact.

Focussing on the key Y-DNA Haplogroups associated with the majority of the European nations, Haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 segment Europe roughly into quarters. Haplogroup R1b is dominant in the West; R1a in the East; I1 and I2a2 in the North and west; with I2a1 in the South and east. Added to this, is N1c1 from admixture with Japheth, prevalent in northern Europe and in counter balance to Haplogroups J2 and J1 derived from Ham, which are more common in southern Europe.

                         R1a       R1b        I1      I2a1       I2a2     N1c

Portugal          1.5         56           2       1.5           5          

Spain                  2         69        1.5          5           1

Luxembourg     3         61           3          3           6              

France                3         59          9           3          4            

Switzerland       4         50        14           2          8          1

Netherlands      4         49        17            1          7               

Flanders            4          61        12            3          5

Brazil                  4         54                      [9]            

Italy                     4        39          5            3          3         

Sephardim         4        30         [1]                             

Finland               5          4         28                    0.5       62

England              5        67         14           3           5        

Frisians               7        55       [34]           

Wallonia             7        60         11           2           5

Scotland             9         73          9           1           4         

Turkey                8         16           1            4     0.5         4  

Ashkenazim     10         12        [4]                              0.2

Greece               12         16          4          10      1.5      

Denmark          15         33        34            2        6         1

Sweden             16         22        37            2        4         7

Germany          16         45        16             2        5         1

Iran                   16         10                      0.5                    1           

Romania          18         16          4           28        3         2

Austria             19         32        12              7        3      0.5

Iceland             23        42        29                        4         1

Norway             26       32        32                         5        3

Ukraine            44          8         5             21     0.5        6

Russia               46         6          5             11                 23

Poland              58        13          9              6         2        4

The comparison table shifts in emphasis when northern (with the exception of N1c) European Y-DNA Haplogroups from Shem – comprising the intermediate, yet relatively old Haplogroups of I1 and I2a2 – are included.

Finnish men possess the highest levels of N1c1, while the highest percentage of I1 is found in Sweden. Switzerland retains the highest levels of I2a2. Scotland now becomes the bookend for the western most nations in Europe with the highest percentage of R1b and Finland at the other end of the nations in Europe with the lowest R1b level.

Thank you constant reader for staying the course. It has been and remains a roller coaster ride of surprises and shocks to challenge even the most open minded of individuals. Of all the thirty-four chapters comprising The Noachian Legacy, none more than the present one contains permutations of such far reaching prophetic profundity and necessary historical revision, as the truth regarding the biblical identity of the tribe of Judah.

It is the most vital key there is in completely explaining the entire biblical narrative.

Many will deny and scorn the material laid before you and the majority (perhaps) will not be ready to embrace the power and plain speaking of the points presented. Yet in time – prior to the return of the Messiah – it is prayerfully and faithfully hoped that a growing proportion of the English people will learn about their true identity. In so doing, unlocking vast portions of the Word written expressly to them; encouraging, exhorting and edifying those who now understand they are the tribe the Eternal loves in England’s green and pleasant land.

It is fittingly, Scotland’s historic bard and England’s greatest playwright who ably provide the final words:

“My dear, my native soil! For whom my warmest wish to Heav’n is sent, Long may thy hardy sons of rustic toil Be blest with health, and peace, and sweet content!”

Rabbie Burns

“This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle… This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”

William Shakespeare (Richard II, Act 2, Scene 1)

… anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.

Revelation 3:18-20 New King James Version

Call to Me, and I will answer you. I will tell you of great things, things beyond what you can imagine, things you could never have known.

Jeremiah 33:3 The Voice

“When a man who is honestly mistaken hears or sees the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.”

Richard Humpal

“People say they love truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true.”

Robert Ringer

“Cowardice asks the question: Is it safe? 

Expediency asks the question: Is it politic? 

Vanity asks the question: Is it popular? 

But conscience asks the question: Is it right? 

And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it simply because it is right.” 

Martin Luther King Junior 

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

Addendum

As well intentioned as the map below portrays the modern descendants of Jacob’s sons, it is entirely incorrect.

Constant readers will recognise how the nations of Northwest Europe are the offspring of Abraham, whether by his wife Keturah (Benelux, Scandinavia and Iceland) or Sarah’s handmaid, Hagar (Germany and Austria) – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia; Chapter XXVIII The True Identity and Origin of Germans & Austrians – Ishmael & Hagar.

While the French descend from Abraham’s nephew, Lot and the Swiss from Abraham’s brother, Haran – Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran.

The chapters which follow will elucidate on the exact locations for Judah and Benjamin’s brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Gad, Zebulun, Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim and Dan – Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; Chapter XXXII Zebulun, Issachar, Asher & Naphtali – the Antipodean Tribes; Chapter XXXIII Manasseh & Ephraim – the Birthright Tribes; Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut

Chapter XIII

Cush is the eldest son of Ham, having a close affinity with Phut; the third-born and not widely recognised, youngest of Ham’s sons – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator. Five sons are attributed to Cush. Cush and Phut have historically been entwined and in the Bible are mentioned numerous times together; similar to what we learned, regarding Magog, Tubal and Meshech in Chapter Ten, though with a twist. 

Herman Hoeh continues his invaluable platform of research in Origin of the Nations, 1957 – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘This puzzle is easily solved! Bordering on the Black Sea in the Colchis (near eastern Turkey today) lived in ancient times “dark-skinned people”, according to historians. This circumstance puzzled even the ancients who thought all black people ought to live in Africa! Black people living in what today is the Caucasus of Russia is merely a confirmation of the fact that civilization commenced with Nimrod, a black man, in Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10). His kingdom spread northward from Babel to this very region!’

Nimrod will form a separate study in a dedicated chapter. His identity will be unravelled and the assumption he was Black will be questioned and answered – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; and articles: Thoth; and The Pyramid Perplexity.

Hoeh: ‘When the Assyrians carried Egyptians and Ethiopians captive (Isaiah 20), many were undoubtedly planted in this very region where the remnants of Nimrod’s empire had long remained… These people practiced circumcision – just as the [Black] Aborigines of Australia do today! From this region a few hundred miles northwest of Babylon comes the [Black] race [Negritos and Melanesians] of Southeast Asia.

In II Chronicles 12:3 we read of the Sukkiim who came out of Africa into Palestine. We hear no more of them in Africa. But Herodotus tells us that they journeyed to Colchis by the Black Sea… In this region we find the mention of Sukhum… and of the dark-skinned Sakai. They gave their name to the Caspian Sea, which the ancients called “Sikim”… A large province in India also is named Sikkim after them…

The Sakai are scattered throughout Southeast Asia. They journeyed with the sons of Gomer. One of the proofs that Gomer is in Asia, but not in Europe, is this fact that the [Black people] who lived in the land of Gomer near Babylon now live in Southeast Asia! In ancient Colchis also lived the Aeetas… Where are the Aeetas today? In the Philippines where some of the sons of Gomer [rather, Javan] also are… The really important reason for knowing where these [Black] people journeyed is that they help us solve the riddle where the sons of Gomer are today!’ – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia.

Australian Aborigine men

Hoeh: ‘A most intriguing question is the origin of the [Black African]… Part of the black race stems from Cush (Genesis 10:6). Cush means black in Hebrew (YOUNG’s CONCORDANCE). The word “Cush” is often translated into English by the word “Ethiopia”, but not all Cushites live in Ethiopia (an independent nation in East Africa). The Greeks called the children of Cush “Ethiopians”. That’s why we use the word in English.’

Australian Aborigine women

Hoeh: ‘Cush first settled around ancient Babylon (Genesis 10:8-10). The children of Cush were the original Babylonians, not the Chaldeans who are in Southern Europe today. From Babylon, Cush spread far and wide. Most of the black children of Cush migrated across central Arabia and around the southern coast of Arabia to East Africa. The Egyptians called East Africa, south of Syene, “Kosh”. The Chaldeans and the Assyrians called it “Kushu”… Not all Scriptures refer to the Cushite who settled in East Africa.’

Dravidian women

‘Cush also had sons who went east into Asia rather than Africa. Here is what Herodotus wrote: The Ethiopians from the sun-rise (for [there are] two kinds)… were marshalled with the Indians, and did not at all differ from [them] in appearance but only in their language, and their hair. For the eastern Ethiopians are straight-haired; but those of (Africa) have hair more curly than that of any other people [the Black African is a different line and not descended from Cush – refer Chapter XII Canaan & African. These Ethiopians from Asia were accounted (almost the same as the Indian [of India]) (Polymnia, section 20).’

Dravidian men

The Brown people of South India and Ceylon [Sri Lanka] are the descendants of Cush! Historians call them Dravidians today. The ancients called them SIBAE… Their Bible name was Seba (Genesis 10:7). Josephus, the Jewish historian, recognized an eastern and a western Cush – one in Asia, the other in Africa (ANTIQUITIES. VI, 2). Herodotus calls them “Asiatic Ethiopians” (Thalia, section 94). The word translated “Ethiopia”, in Ezekiel 38:5 should be properly translated “Cush”. It refers primarily to the Asiatic Cush, India today.’

The Aborigines of Australia are related to the Negritos of South East Asia and they in turn with the Indians from India – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The similarity of the Aborigine facial characteristics with the Dravidian peoples of Southern India and Sri Lanka is too palpable to ignore. Herman Hoeh provides applicable and insightful information, yet with some incorrect conclusions.

Though the Black African is not descended from Cush but rather Canaan; the peoples from Southern India as explained by Dr Hoeh are descended from Cush – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. In fact, Cush’s sons have spread even further afield. Cush once lived in East Africa, though they are not there now. There is no east-west split of Cush today. This would make Bible verses confusing, not knowing which Cush is intended? Cush’s descendants were not the original Babylonians. The meaning of Cush has been problematic, regardless of Youngs Concordance definition as ‘black.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The origin of the name Cush is irretrievably obscure, and none of the translators have more to say about it than that it is related to Ethiopia, and having a dark countenance. The prophet Jeremiah rhetorically asks, “Can the Cushite change his skin?” (Jeremiah 13:23), which may or may not suggest that the Cushites were known for being black. Still, this says very little about the meaning of the name Cush. Klein’s Etymological dictionary of the Hebrew Language lists a word written similar to Ethiopia, meaning spindle (with poetic function of ‘horn’?) [the Horn of Africa, present day Ethiopia is southwards from where the descendants of Cush settled], but he gives no applications to try the word. The Septuagint translates this name with a compilation of derivatives of the Greek verb ‘to scorch,’ and noun ‘countenance’.

However, the Hebrew word for black is (sahar). The heth and rosh in this word are so dominant that the name Cush can hardly have come from it. Allowing this would link Cush to pretty much any other word that contains a shin. Like the word (yshsh; weak, impotent, aged) for instance, which makes a far more plausible candidate as a repeated letter often falls away and the yod alternates with the waw. In concert with the common Hebrew particle (ke; as if, like), the name would mean As If He Were Weak.

And then there is the root (yshh; meaning uncertain), which yields the noun (tushiya), meaning wisdom, sound knowledge, which would yield the meaning of Cush as As If He Were Getting Smarter… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads A Black Countenance, Full Of Darkness, but also submits… “the etymology is most uncertain”. NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Black.’

Not only do we lack a clear definition for the name Cush, the word has caused editors confusion in translating Cush in the Bible. It is invariably translated as either Cush, Cushan, Cushim or Cushi – either with a capital C or K.

The following article by Peter Unseth, details inadvertently attributing biblical names to current political boundaries and the usage of the word Cush – emphasis mine.

Hebrew Kush: Sudan, Ethiopia, or Where?

‘Some published sources have acknowledged that Biblical kush was in what is now Egypt and Sudan… [and] I have found no actual evidence that the Kingdom of Kush indeed ruled any parts of the territory in modern Ethiopia. Much of the translators’ tendency to translate kush by a term that has modern day political significance stems from the Septuagint’s use of the word Aithiopia. At the time the Septuagint was translated, this was indeed a correct Greek term to use in translating kush. 

If kush is translated as “Ethiopia”, the question arises: “Ethiopia’s borders at which point in time?” But in the centuries and decades since such early translations as the KJV, the use of “Ethiopia” in translating kush into English has become less and less of a legitimate choice. Translators too often retained the word “Ethiopia”, overlooking the fact that there has been a change in what was referred to between the use of English “Ethiopia” in earlier centuries (when the English meaning of Ethiopia was very similar to that of Greek Aithiopia) and the word “Ethiopia” in common usage of 20th century English (and a number of the world’s languages).

… the kingdom of kush was not within the borders of present day Ethiopia, but rather within the borders of Sudan and Egypt. 

So we must conclude that the use of “Ethiopia” in English translations (and other languages) today leads readers to the erroneous conclusion that the Biblical references were to people and places actually within the delineated borders of the present state of Ethiopia.

I have studied over 30 English translations, charting their translations of kush in 21 verses. Their choices were generally from one of four terms: “kush”, “Ethiopia”, “Nubia”, “Sudan”… problems have resulted from kush being translated by a term that has present day political significance… ordinary readers have simply not understood the text correctly. They have assumed that the word referred to an area that coincided with the borders of a modern state. This confusion is increased when different versions use words referring to different states. My friend who grew up on the Ethiopian-Sudanese border was genuinely perplexed and wanted to know “Which country does the Bible refer to in Psalm 68:31, Ethiopia or Sudan?”

… Biblical prophecy has been applied to the wrong parts of the world as a result of terms with political significance’ – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen.

‘Writers unduly influenced by translations have misunderstood the Biblical text and interpreted prophecies as applying to the present states of Ethiopia or Sudan. Writing about Biblical prophecy, Otis wrote “Persia [Elam], Ethiopia (Cush), Libya [Phut] … are all easily identifiable with modern nations”…

In summary, the Old Testament references to kush do not refer specifically or exclusively to the present states of Sudan, Ethiopia, or any other political entity in Africa, and should not be translated with terms that would refer to such political states. The word kush should be translated in a way that is faithful to the text and as clear as possible to the reader. This will generally mean that the word will have to be translated by different words or phrases, according to the particular context and language.’

The difficulty in translating Cush is removed when their identity is understood. Cush’s sons include a number of nations. The simplicity of the matter is that everywhere ‘Cush’ is stated, it can simply be replaced with India. Leaving Nimrod for now, the five sons of Cush as given in Genesis 10:6-7 ESV are: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca. Raamah had two sons and they are Sheba and Dedan.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘There’s only one Seba in the Bible… (Genesis 10:7). There seems to be something secretive about this name. Neither BDB Theological Dictionary nor NOBSE Study Bible Name List dares to even hint at an interpretation. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names ignores any Hebrew words that may have to do with the name Seba and goes after an Arabic cognate and concludes Eminent.

… to a Hebrew audience the name Seba sounded very clearly like it came from the verb (saba), meaning to imbibe… and is mostly associated with strong liquor and heavy drinking. Noun (sobe) means a drink… Whatever the original name was intended to convey, to a Hebrew audience the name Seba must have looked like Drunkard. According to Klein’s Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language, the name Seba means He Drank Wine.’

Isaiah 43:3

English Standard Version

‘For I am the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Saviour. I give Egypt [Mizra] as your ransom, Cush [India] and Seba in exchange for you.’

Isaiah 45.14 

New Century Version

The Lord says, “The goods made in Egypt [Mizra] and Cush [India] and the tall people of Seba will come to you and will become yours. The Sabeans will walk behind you, coming along in chains. They will bow down before you and pray to you, saying, ‘God is with you, and there is no other God’.”

Psalm 72:10

English Standard Version

‘May the kings of Tarshish [Japan] and of the coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba and Seba bring gifts!’

Seba is included with their neighbour, India. A clue is given regarding their height. The Tamils of Sri Lanka are taller than either Indian Tamils or Indians in general. Seba and the Sabeans are the peoples of modern day Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka has a population of 23,196,132 people. Cush’s sons together, boast a population far bigger than China’s combination of Magog, Tubal and Meshech.

Sri Lankan man and woman

Who is India in Bible Prophecy? Kelly McDonald, 2016: ‘An interesting fact… the Hebrew names for Ivory, Ape, and Peacock come from the Tamal language… (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, 1884).’

According to Abarim, Havilah in Hebrew means: ‘Circle’ and from the verb hul, ‘to whirl’, the verb hawa, ‘to gather into a symbiosis’ and the verb laha, ‘to languish’ and by extension, a ‘languishing village’, or an ‘exhausted revelation’.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The name Havilah is assigned three different times in the Bible: It is first mentioned as a land that contains both gold and the river Pishon, one of four rivers of Eden (Genesis 2:11). The people of Ishmael settled there (Genesis 25:18) and [King] Saul drove out the Amalekites from there (1 Samuel 15:7). 

The land [of] Havilah was probably named in retrospect, as the territory of one of the two human Havilahs… we surmise that the Pishon may have been named after the Indus River… that the story of the four rivers most generally tells of the evolution of human civilization… Also note that in Genesis 2:11 the name Havilah is preceded by the definite article or article of approach: the or onto Havilah. [1] A son of Cush, (Genesis 10:7). [2] A son of Joktan, the son of Eber (Genesis 10:29).’

The people of Ishmael for example, settled adjacent to the Havilah of Joktan^ descended from Shem; not the Havilah from Cush, the son of Ham.

Abarim: ‘The name Havilah probably comes from the root group (hul I & II) and can be interpreted in many ways: Verb (hul I) denotes a whirling in circular motions… noun (hol), mining sand, the noun (hil), meaning pain so bad that it makes one writhe (specifically childbirth)… verb (hul II) means to be strong… derived noun (hayil) means might.

When the letter waw is a consonant (as it is in the name Havilah) it is a completely different letter than when it is a vowel (as in the verb), and there must be a very good reason why a vowel changes to a consonant (the same problem occurs with the name David). Perhaps it is to deliberately point at some other words. 

Perhaps to the verb (hawa): means to lay out in order to live collectively, and describes investing one’s personal sovereignty into a living collective… to prostrate, which is to submit oneself wholly and bodily to a collective or to a leader… another form of laying out is in proclaiming information that will lead to greater oneness among the hearers… the noun (ahawa) meaning brotherhood.

For a meaning of the name Havilah… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has… Trembling* (with pain).’

Genesis 2:10-14

New English Translation

‘Now a river flows from Eden to water the orchard, and from there it divides into four headstreams. The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through [Hebrew: it is that which goes around] entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is pure; pearls and lapis lazuli are also there). The name of the second river** is Gihon; it runs through the entire land of Cush [India]. The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates.’

Though it is tempting to assume the Havilah in question is that of Cush, because Cush is mentioned in the next verse; it is actually Havilah, the son of Joktan^ who is being referenced and which has a connection with Assyria – refer Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia.

Flags of Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

Today, Havilah is the nation of Bangladesh. Coincidently, it has so many rivers and water ways that regular and devastating flooding causes much pain* to its 175,122,990 inhabitants.

Assignment Point – emphasis mine:

‘Bangladesh is a land of rivers. In fact, the pride of Bangladesh is her rivers with one of the largest networks in the world. In spite of being a very small country, Bangladesh has an amazing number of about 700 rivers. Most of the rivers… rise from the Himalayan range and fall into the Bay of Bengal. 

The rivers of Bangladesh consist of tiny hilly streams, winding seasonal creeks, muddy canals, some truly magnificent rivers, and their tributaries. In some places, such as Patuakhali, Barisal, and Sundarbans… the watercourses are so plentiful that they form a veritable maze… Bangladesh has [coincidently] predominantly four major river systems – 1) the Brahmaputra-Jamuna, 2) the Ganges-Padma,** 3) the Surma-Meghna, and 4) the Chittagong region river system.’

The synchronous four main river systems many millennia apart is notable; with the Gihon river running through the ‘entire land of Cush’ possibly synonymous with the Ganges River? The original location of Eden and its Garden will be investigated in a subsequent chapter – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega

Man and woman from Bangladesh

Sabtah and Sabteca, the third and fifth sons of Cush, are not mentioned outside of Genesis Ten and 1 Chronicles One.

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine:  

‘Sabtah is a son of Cush… In Genesis 10:7 his name is spelled [one way] but in 1 Chronicles 1:9 it’s spelled [differently as Sabta] which appears to be an Aramaic spelling. The etymology of the name Sabtah and that of his brother Sabteca is unclear. Both names start out with [a letter] which does not occur in Hebrew. 

Neither BDB Theological Dictionary nor NOBSE Study Bible Name List attempt to interpret these names but Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names proposes relations with an Arabic verb, which transliterated into Hebrew would form [a word sabat] which means to beat or to break. Jones… states that this name means Breaking Through, and adds: i.e. a terror to foes. But perhaps a Hebrew audience that wasn’t aware of Arabic roots, would have associated our name Sabtah with the Hebrew root (sabab), meaning to turn or go around, encircle… the verb (sabab) describes a going in a circular motion: to turn, turnabout, turn into or to encircle. Nouns (mesab) and (musab) describe that which surrounds (i.e. a wall*)’

Abarim note Sabteca means in Hebrew: ‘Beating, Encircle Depression’, from an unused verb sabat, ‘to beat or break’ like Sabtah.

Abarim Publications:

‘From (1) the verb (sabab), to turn or encircle, and (2) the verb (ka’a), to be disheartened… the name Sabteca ends with (k-a), the meaning of which can also not be retrieved. The verb (ka’a) is a rare verb… The even rarer adjective (ka’eh) means cowed.’

Sabtah and Sabteca are a nation and a territory – possibly a future state – which are both encircled by being landlocked and thus represented by modern day Nepal with a population of 29,626,817 people [acting as a wall* along the mountainous border of India and China] and Kashmir, the disputed and disheartened territory located in the north of India and Pakistan. 

Kashmir’s population is an estimated 15,427,841 people. Notice the spelling of Kash-mir and to the north east of Kashmir, above Pakistan, there is the Hindu Kush Mountain range. The Indian administered region of Kashmir, the union territories of Jammu and Kashmir have 12,541,302 people. The Pakistani territory of Azad Kashmir has 2,016,192 people and the Chinese region of Gilgit-Baltistan, has 870,347 people (approximate figures).

In 2 Chronicles 12.2-3 ESV, we are introduced for the first and only time to the Sukki, Sukkites or Sukkiim as mentioned by Dr Hoeh. 

‘In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, because they had been unfaithful to the Lord, Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem with 1,200 chariots and 60,000 horsemen. And the people were without number who came with him from Egypt [Mizra] – Libyans [Lubim], Sukkiim, and Ethiopians [India].’

This was a military alliance with Egypt against King Rehoboam of the Kingdom of Judah. Sukki or Sikki, means ‘booth dwellers’ with the connotation of being nomadic. The word has a similarity to the people of the Punjab, India who adhere to the Sik-h or Sikhism religion. Interestingly, the men let their hair grow, without cutting and wear turbans to keep it covered. Similar to a nazarite vow in the Old Testament and the Danite Judge Samson, who did not cut his hair – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe

The Sukki are mentioned sandwiched between Phut and Cush and are a people in their own right, similar to Ararat and Minni, studied earlier – refer Chapter V Gomer: Continental South Asia. The Sukki equate to the nation of Afghanistan today. Afghanistan’s population is 43,524,735 people. The Pashtuns make up the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan, comprising between 38% and 42% of the country’s population. Their main territory Pashtunistan, is between the Hindu Kush mountains in Afghanistan and the Indus River in neighbouring Pakistan, where there, they are the second largest ethnic Group. 

Flag of Afghanistan 

“India is not a nation, nor a country. It is a subcontinent of nationalities” – Muhammad Ali-Jinnah.

We will now turn our attention to the sub-Continent of India and study scriptures pertaining to Raamah and his sons Sheba and Dedan.

Raamah in Hebrew means: ‘Trembling, thundering’, from the verb ra’am and ‘to thunder’. Quite applicable, when one imagines the enormous multitude of Indians and the noisy tumult their voices and footfalls make. India’s population alone, is a staggering 1,460,438,388 people and set to overtake China during the first half of this century (this occurred in April 2023).

Abarim Publications – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The one and only Raamah in the Bible is a son of Cush… (Genesis 10:7). After his brief appearance in Genesis 10, and the parallel text of 1 Chronicles 1:9, where his name is spelled (Raama), we hear no more of this person. The unused verb (ra’am) probably meant to roll like thunder… appears to be a rare word to describe a horse’s mane, perhaps in the sense of its rolling or whipping. For a meaning of the name Raamah, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Trembling. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Thundering.

There are two completely different names in the Bible that both transliterate into English as Sheba – We’ll call our two different names Sheba I (spelled with an ayin) and Sheba II (spelled with an aleph):

Sheba I: ‘Seven, Oath’ from (shaba), seven, or to swear.

The name Sheba-with-ayin is ascribed to: A town in Simeon (Joshua 19:2). A Benjaminite (2 Samuel 20:1). A Gadite (1 Chronicles 5:13). This name Sheba is identical to the words (sheba’), meaning seven and (shaba’), meaning to swear (an oath): has to do with… the act of binding with an oath… (seven seals or seven bonds).

Sheba II: Unknown, but perhaps Man, Drunk, Captive, Splinter

The name Sheba-with-aleph belongs to: [1] A son of Raamah… (Genesis 10:7). [2] A son of Joktan, who is the brother of Peleg (Genesis 10:28). [3] A son of Jokshan, son of Abraham and Keturah.* Sheba is also a region or nation of which the queen journeyed to Solomon 1 Kings 10:1;  Matthew 12.42).’

This raises an important point, which has been a stumbling-stone for many commentators and researchers: the fact there are two Sheba and Dedan relationships in the Bible; plus a third individual in the Table of Nations, called Sheba.* Also, Dedan is very much like Dodan, the son of Javan. Understandably, it has been confusing for researchers. One from Ham and two separate Shebas from Shem. This has led some to consider an editorial slip-up and that all are one-and-the-same. Rather than accepting they are listed for a reason and the possibility they were just popular names of the day, like we have our more commonly used first names today. As we identity them on our journey, we will see that they are all separate personalities.

Abarim: ‘This name Sheba is according to Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names comparable with an Ethiopic word meaning ‘man’. And so, for a meaning of this name Sheba, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Man. BDB Theological Dictionary sees relations with a verb that means to make campaign or expedition, but lists (saba), meaning to imbibe (see the name Seba).

The name may even have to do with (shaba) to take captive. The noun is used in the Aramaic Talmud to mean splinter, a possible derivative (says BDB Theological Dictionary) from the unused (shbb I & II), which yields (shebabim, from root I), splinters, and (shabib, from root II), flame.

Dedan: Leading Gently, from the verb (dada), to move or lead slowly. The name Dedan comes possibly from the Hebrew noun (dd), meaning breast or nipple… For a meaning of the name Dedan, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names goes with (dada) and reads Leading Forward, i.e. great increase of family. The NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Low…’

For further meanings, please refer back to Rodan and Dodan’s descendants from Javan in Chapter Seven. A ‘great increase of family’ is certainly applicable to India. The Sons of Raamah have populated India; Sheba to the north and Dedan to the south. 

In Ezekiel 27:12-24 NET, describing trading with Tyre, we have references to Sheba and Dedan from Cush, as well as from Abraham. We can ascertain who is whom from the context of who is mentioned with them from an ethnic and geographical view. Recall point number one in the Introduction.

12 “Tarshish [Japan] was your trade partner because of your abundant wealth; they exchanged silver, iron, tin, and lead for your products. 

13 Javan [Archipelago South East Asia], Tubal [Eastern Coastal China], and Meshech [Southern Central China] were your clients; they exchanged slaves and bronze items for your merchandise. 14 Beth Togarmah [North (South) Korea] exchanged horses, chargers, and mules for your products. 15 The Dedanites [Southern India] were your clients. Many coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] were your customers; they paid you with ivory tusks and ebony… 22 The merchants of Sheba [Northern India] and Raamah [all India] engaged in trade with you; they traded the best kinds of spices along with precious stones and gold for your products. 

20 Dedan [Abraham] was your client in saddle cloths for riding. 21 Arabia [Joktan, Abraham and Keturah] and all the princes of Kedar [Ishmael] were your trade partners; for lambs, rams, and goats they traded with you. 23 Haran, Kanneh, Eden [Haran], merchants from Sheba [Abraham], Asshur [Russia], and Kilmad were your clients. 24 They traded with you choice garments, purple [feature of Tyre and Phoenicians] clothes and embroidered work, and multicolored carpets bound and reinforced with cords; these were among your merchandise.”

The second stated Dedan and the second Sheba are related to Abraham and the peoples mentioned with them are descended from Shem. Sheba and Dedan of Raamah and Cush are in bold. The mention of ‘precious stones’ is worth noting as India’s second biggest export is Gems and precious metals. Peter Unseth, comments on this in the article we read earlier – emphasis & bold mine:

‘In Job 28:19, in a reference to the surpassing quality of a topaz, Job speaks of the “topaz of kush”. (The identification of the exact stone is not precise.) There are no topaz (or other similar gems) found in Ethiopia [but there is in India], at least not in the quantity to be known outside of the immediate area. The point of the reference to Kush is to assert its quality, the particular geography of its origin is not the point of the passage [disagree, as it is part of the point]. “Here the place name probably designates the quality of the gem and not its place of origin”(Reyburn 1992:512) Following this line of reasoning, GNB translates this “the finest topaz”.’

Once we understand where the modern descendants of Cush are located today, this verse is remarkable in its accuracy. It is actually stating a precious gem, from the present geographic location of Cush. Topaz is found in India and anciently, it was one of twelve precious stones esteemed in Indian culture and medicine.

Job 28:19

New Century Version

‘The topaz from Cush cannot compare to wisdom; it cannot be bought with the purest gold.’

Diamond mining extends back into Indian antiquity. Anciently, India was the source of nearly all the world’s known diamonds. In fact, until the discovery of diamonds in Brazil in 1726, India was the only place where diamonds were mined.

Psalm 72:10, 15

English Standard Version

‘May the kings of Tarshish [Japan] and of the coastlands [East Asia and South East Asia] render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba [Northern India] and Seba [Sri Lanka] bring gifts! Long may he live; may gold of Sheba be given to him…’

India is number four in the world, in the top ten countries with the most natural resources. India’s mining sector contributes 11% of the country’s industrial GDP and 2.5% of its total Gross Domestic Product. In 2010 the mining and metal industry was worth over $106.4 billion. India’s coal reserves are the fourth largest in the world and its other natural resources include ‘bauxite, chromite, diamonds, limestone, natural gas, petroleum, and titanium ore. India provides over 12% of global thorium, over 60% of global mica production, and is the leading producer of manganese ore.’

In Ezekiel 38:13 ESV – India, as we saw earlier with Japan, stands against the great Chinese military alliance of the far future. This is in keeping with current geo-political alliances. Both Japan and India favour a relationship with the United States, South Korea and Taiwan. Whereas China aligns with Russia, North Korea and Pakistan.

Sheba and Dedan [Northern and Southern India] and the merchants of Tarshish [Japan] and all its leaders will say to you, ‘Have you come to seize spoil? Have you assembled your hosts to carry off plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods, to seize great spoil?’ – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech.

Joel 3:8

Young’s Literal Translation

‘And have sold your sons and your daughters into the hand of the sons of Judah, And they have sold them to Shabeans [H7615 from H7614, Sheba: Genesis 10:7], unto a nation far off…

Most translations say Sabeans as in Seba, meaning Sri Lanka. It should read Sheba, as the people involved are being sold to a powerful nation and thus, India makes contextual sense. Sheba is also shown to be dominant over his brother Dedan in the scriptures. The relationship with Judah is also a significant clue to the identity of both Sheba and Judah – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Chapter eighteen of Isaiah is dedicated to Cush. Verse 1 and 2 ESV:

‘Ah, land of whirring wings [Havilah] that is beyond the rivers of Cush [such as the Ganga (Ganges), Godavari, Brahmaputra and Krishna, the four longest rivers], which sends ambassadors by the sea, in vessels of papyrus on the waters! 

Go, you swift messengers, to a nation tall and smooth [Dedan (Seba)], to a people feared near and far, a nation mighty [India] and conquering, whose land the rivers divide [India a country crisscrossed by nine major rivers].’

Ezekiel 30:3-5, 9

English Standard Version

3 ‘For the day is near, the day of the Lord is near; it will be a day of clouds [veiled reference to Magog-China], a time of doom for the nations. 4 A sword shall come upon Egypt [Mizra], and anguish shall be in Cush, when the slain fall in Egypt, and her wealth is carried away [by the King of the North], and her foundations are torn down. 5 Cush, and Put*, and Lud, and all Arabia, and Libya* and the people of the land that is in league, shall fall with them by the sword. 9 “On that day messengers shall go out from me in ships to terrify the unsuspecting people of Cush, and anguish shall come upon them on the day of Egypt’s doom; for, behold, it comes!’

Ezekiel 38:1-2,5-6

English Standard Version

‘The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, set your face toward Gog [the ruler], of the land of Magog [Northern China], the chief prince of Meshech [Southern Central China] and Tubal [Eastern Coastal China], and prophesy against him… Persia [Elam], Cush, and Put are with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Gomer [Continental South East Asia] and all his hordes; Beth-togarmah [(North) Korea] from the uttermost parts of the north with all his hordes – many peoples are with you.’

We learned in verse thirteen that Cush, comprising Sheba and Dedan with Tarshish-Japan are not aligned with Magog-China in the yet future, powerful military alliance. Though verse 5 says Cush is an ally. India presumably begins in the alliance, to then later withdraw.

Other noteworthy verses regarding Cush, include: Isaiah 20:1-6, Jeremiah 46:9, Ezekiel 27:10; 29:10, Habakkuk 3:7, Amos 9:7, Nahum 3:9 and Zephaniah 2:12.

Steven Collins, an experienced and knowledgable Identity researcher concurs with an identification of Sheba and Dedan with India; for he states on his website: 

“Sheba and Dedan” are increasingly looking like the nation of modern India, as is discussed in my May 2, 2007 Prophecy Blog entry entitled “Will India and the USA Become Allies?” India is a large democracy with an English-speaking history from its membership in the British Empire [and Commonwealth]. It is increasingly being drawn toward the West via economic ties as well as mutual concerns about Islamic terrorism [within Pakistan and Afghanistan] and the rapid militarization of China.’

India is one of a handful of nations named by name in the Old Testament – Esther 1:1; 8:9. The verses in question relate to the time of the Medo-Persian Empire; marking the kingdom’s boundary from Ethiopia in the West to India in the East – one the past location for the descendants of Cush, the other the present location. The Hebrew word is Hoduw (H1912), signifying ‘the country surrounding the Indus’ and ‘Hodu’ – that is, Hindu-stan.

Jeremiah 13:23

English Standard Version

‘Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots…’

The people of Cush were identifiable by their darker skin. We read the following regarding the third wife of Moses. Presumably, his second wife had died at this point and Moses sister and brother took umbrage. 

Numbers 12:1-3, 9-11

English Standard Version

‘Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married… And they said, “Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?” And the Lord heard it. Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against them, and he departed. When the cloud removed from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, like snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. And Aaron said to Moses, “Oh, my lord, do not punish us because we have done foolishly and have sinned.’ 

It is ironic that Miriam’s condemnation of Moses taking a dark skinned wife, led to her becoming as white as snow. We read in 1 Kings and also the Song of Solomon – all eight chapters – about Solomon meeting the Queen of Sheba. Judging from the accounts, they were quite enamoured with each other.

1 Kings 10: 1-13 

English Standard Version

‘Now when the queen of Sheba [who reigned from 960 to 945 BCE] heard of the fame of Solomon [who reigned from 970 to 930 BCE] concerning the name of the Lord, she came to test him with hard questions [circa 955 BCE]. 2 She came to Jerusalem with a very great retinue, with camels bearing spices and very much gold and precious stones. And when she came to Solomon, she told him all that was on her mind. 3 And Solomon answered all her questions; there was nothing hidden from the king that he could not explain to her. 4 And when the queen of Sheba had seen all the wisdom of Solomon, the house^ that he had built [Temple completed in 959 BCE – 1 Kings 6:38], 5 the food of his table, the seating of his officials, and the attendance of his servants, their clothing, his cupbearers, and his burnt offerings that he offered at the house of the Lord, there was no more breath in her.

6 And she said to the king, “The report was true that I heard in my own land of your words and of your wisdom, 7 but I did not believe the reports until I came and my own eyes had seen it. And behold, the half was not told me. Your wisdom and prosperity surpass the report that I heard. 8 Happy are your men! Happy are your servants, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! 9 Blessed be the Lord your God, who has delighted in you and set you on the throne of Israel! Because the Lord loved Israel forever, he has made you king, that you may execute justice and righteousness.”

10 Then she gave the king 120 talents of gold, and a very great quantity of spices and precious stones. Never again came such an abundance of spices as these that the queen of Sheba gave to King Solomon. 11 Moreover, the fleet of Hiram, which brought gold from Ophir, brought from Ophir a very great amount of almug wood and precious stones. 12 And the king made of the almug wood supports for the house^ of the Lord [Temple construction began in 966 BCE] and for the king’s house, also lyres and harps for the singers. No such almug wood has come or been seen to this day. 13 And King Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon. So she turned and went back to her own land with her servants.’

Song of Solomon 1:5-6

New English Translation

‘I am dark [H7838 – shachowr: Black, jet black, dusky] but lovely, O maidens of Jerusalem, dark like the tents of Qedar [Kedar, son of Ishmael], lovely like the tent curtains of Salmah. Do not stare at me because I am dark [H7840 – scharyah: blackish, swarthy], for the sun has burned [scorched] my skin [not literally, but figuratively].’

Footnotes:

‘The [second use of the] term “dark” does not appear in the Hebrew in this line but is supplied in the translation from the preceding line for the sake of clarity. The terms “black but beautiful” in the A-line are broken up – the B-line picks up on “black” and the C-line picks up on “beautiful.” The Beloved was “black” like the rugged tents of Qedar woven from the wool of black goats, but “beautiful” as the decorative inner tent-curtains of King Solomon (J. L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry, 40; W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 181).’

In an article entitlted, The Dynasty of Moses and the Queen of Sheba, Hope of Israel Ministries, adds fascinating details of an amazing forerunner romance that preceded Solomon and the Queen of Sheba – capitalisation theirs, emphasis mine:

‘In the book of Deuteronomy… God made Moses an amazing promise. After Israel had sinned, and made a golden calf to worship, Yehovah was furious. He declared to Moses: “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiffnecked people: Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation MIGHTIER AND GREATER THAN THEY” (Deuteronomy 9:13-14). Moses, however, interceded for the people, and turned away… God’s wrath from them (verses 18-19, 22-29).

However, prior to Moses leaving Egypt, the Jewish historian Josephus points out that he had been a great general who led Pharaoh’s army to victory over the kingdom of Ethiopia, which had conquered most of Egypt. While attacking the Ethiopian capital city, Tharbis, the daughter of the king of Ethiopia, became enamoured of Moses, seeing his valiant exploits, and bargained to deliver the city into his hands if he would but marry her. Moses agreed, and she fulfilled her promise – and Moses married her, and fulfilled the obligation of a husband to her, causing her to become pregnant (Josephus, Antiquities, II, x). This occurred sometime before 1532 B.C., when Moses was driven out of Egypt for slaying an Egyptian (Exodus 2: 11-15). The vitally important royal city where this conflict culminated was “Saba”.’

Moses will be the subject of study in another chapter – refer Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes; and Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? Accordingly, Moses was born later than the article proposes – in 1526 BCE. Moses fled from Egypt at forty years of age in 1486 BCE. His campaign in Cush would have been circa 1506 to 1496 BCE – refer Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology.

Josephus relates:

“… he came upon the Ethiopians before they expected him; and, joining battle with them, he beat them, and deprived them of the hopes they had of success against the Egyptians, and went on in overthrowing their cities, and indeed made a great slaughter of these Ethiopians… the Ethiopians were in danger of being reduced to slavery, and all sorts of destruction; and at length they retired to SABA, which was a royal city of Ethiopia, which Cambyses afterward named MEROE, after the name of his own sister. The place was to be beseiged with very great difficulty, since it was both encompassed by the Nile quite round, and the other rivers...” (Antiquities II, X, 2). ‘The Greek historian Herodotus spoke of Meroe, or Saba, as “… a great city, the name of which is MEROE. This city is said to be the mother of all Ethiopia” (The History, pages 142-143, quoted in The Sign and the Seal, page 448).

When Egyptian history is properly restored and reconstructed, this event means that Moses’ son by Queen Tharbis became the progenitor of a line of Ethiopian [Cushite] kings. When Israel left Egypt in 1492 B.C., [1446 BCE] the land of Egypt was in a shambles – utterly destroyed, as the Papyrus Ipuwer states with awesome clarity in describing the plagues which fell upon that land – including the plague of blood. The papyrus also shows that invaders from the east, the Hyksos, conquered northern Egypt (lower Egypt) and dominated the region as cruel “shepherd kings” for about 500 years. These “Hyksos” were the Amalekites who fought the children of Israel in Sinai as they left Egypt (Exodus 18). They were not thrown out of Egypt until the reign of king Saul of Israel, who conquered the Amalekites in Arabia (I Samuel 15), and Samuel the prophet slew their king Agag (vs. 32-33) [refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth Tribe].

At this same time, the famous and powerful Eighteenth Dynasty arose in southern Egypt and Ethiopia – a dynasty of dark-skinned kings and queens! Among the famous kings of this powerful dynasty, which overthrew the Hyksos and conquered northern (lower) Egypt, Immanuel Velikovsky writes in Ages in Chaos: “The kingdom of Egypt, after regaining independence under AHMOSE, a contemporary of Saul, also achieved grandeur and glory under Amenhotep I, THUTMOSE I, Hatshepsut, and THUTMOSE III. Egypt, devastated and destitute in the centuries under the rule of the Hyksos, rapidly grew in riches” (page 103).

Notice the strange sounding names of this line of kings from southern Egypt and Ethiopia – they contain the name of their ancestor, who was none other than the Biblical MOSES! Why would Egyptian kings of the [2nd] most powerful dynasty that ever ruled Egypt be called by the name of Moses, and be named after Moses? Because this dynasty of kings and queens was descended from Tharbis, who became Queen of Ethiopia, and her husband was none other than Moses!’

The first Pharaoh to incorporate moses as part of his name was a regional Pharaoh during the period of the Exodus, Pharaoh Dudimose I who reigned from 1450 to 1446 BCE. Though he was contemporaneous with Moses, he was not the Pharaoh of the Exodus as we shall discover – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact?

Some commentators have stated ‘moses’ is merely a title or rank rather than a personal name, so as to minimise or eliminate Moses from Egypt’s historical record. It is probable it became a title during and after the famous Moses had left his mark on Egyptian history.

‘As Josephus writes, after she delivered up the impregnable city of Saba to Moses, “No sooner was the agreement made, but it took effect immediately; and when Moses had cut off the Ethiopians, he gave thanks to God, and consummated his marriage, and led the Egyptians back to their own land” (Antiquities II, x, 2).

Notice! The royal city where this marriage was consummated was “Saba.” Saba can be none other than the same as Sheba! Thus, the Queen of Sheba, whom Josephus says was the Queen of Ethiopia and Egypt, who visited Solomon in 992 B.C., [circa 958 to 945 BCE] roughly 540 years after Moses married the Ethiopian princess, came from this same royal city of Saba-Sheba. This means that she was a royal descendant of Moses and Tharbis, the daughter of the king of Ethiopia – a descendant of Moses!

… God fulfilled his promise to make a powerful dynasty of kings from the loins of Moses. And in the days of Solomon, the Queen of Sheba – Hatshepsut [ruler of Egypt from 960 to 945 BCE], her Egyptian name, or Makeda, her Ethiopian name – like Tharbis, her ancestor, had a love affair or romance with a Hebrew leader, King Solomon. Thereby the royal lines of Moses [from the tribe of Levi] and David [from the tribe of Judah] became intertwined, and have ruled in the nation of Ethiopia [higher castes in the people of Cush] ever since…

The very name “Hatshepsut” itself may be indicative of the fact that this famous Queen, who visited the land of Punt, the “Divine Land,” and who built a temple on the banks of the Nile at Thebes in upper Egypt patterned after Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, was indeed the Queen of Sheba. “Ha,” in Hebrew, means “the.” “Sut is a suffix which may relate to royalty. Thus her actual name is “Shep,” but nominatives are often interchangeable, and it could be rendered “Sheb,” that is, SHEBA – thus her very name could mean, “The Sheba Queen,” or “The Queen of Sheba.”

Interestingly, historians know that the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt, at its most powerful, was a [black] dynasty – that is, Ethiopian or Nubian! On page 105 of his book Ages in Chaos, Velikovsky has a plate showing the visage of Queen Hatshepsut, courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is a regal looking statue showing her distinctive Ethiopian features, or a mixture of Ethiopian and Semitic – but of course, for she was the descendant of Tharbis and Moses!

Was Hatshepsut the same person as the Queen of Sheba, or the Queen of Ethiopia, as Josephus states clearly that the Queen of Sheba was? The Ethiopian name of this Queen, who visited Solomon and had a son by him, was Makeda. Did Hatshepsut have this as her personal name? Velikovsky quotes the Karnak obelisk, in Breasted, Records, volume II, section 325, in its description of the famous Egyptian Queen Hatshepsut: “Thy name reaches as far as the circuit of heaven, the fame of MAKERE (Hatshepsut) encircles the sea” (Ages in Chaos, page 105).

Makere is clearly the same name as Makeda, the Ethiopian name for the Queen of Sheba or Saba. The term “Sheba” or “Saba” refers to the name of the famous Ethiopian royal city at the confluence of the Nile and two other Ethiopian rivers, at the upper reaches of the Nile! The word “Ethiopia” is a Greek word meaning “burnt faces.” The Hebrew word Cush, translated as “Ethiopia,” was used in Biblical times to refer to “the entire Nile Valley south of Egypt, including Nubia and Abyssinia” (Edward Ullendorff, Ethiopia and the Bible, page 5, quoted in The Sign and the Seal, page 450). 

The 1955 Revised Constitution of Ethiopia confirms the age-old monarchy’s Divine Right to rule. It states: “The Imperial dignity shall remain perpetually attached to the line of Haile Selassie I, whose line descends without interruption from the dynasty of Menelik I, son of the Queen of Ethiopia, the Queen of Sheba, and King Solomon of Jerusalem…” (ibid., page 24). Haile Selassie, the former Emperor of Ethiopia, claimed to be the 225th direct line descendant of Menelik I, the son of the Queen of Sheba or Saba, the royal city and “mother” city of all Ethiopia. Thus her Biblical name, “Queen of Sheba,” actually helps to prove her true identity!’

The above claim of lineage by Haile Selassie from the nation of Ethiopia, is included for interest and not proof – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Though if the claim is correct, Selassie’s Y-DNA Haplogroup would be the same as King Solomon… and that would be R1b. If Moses’s first wife was a descendant from Cush, then it is not such a random act for Moses to later take another Cushite woman as his third wife. 

Was Hatshepsut the Queen of Sheba – or Merely the Queen of Theba? By Emmet Sweeney – emphasis mine:

‘In the Old Testament she is named simply “Queen of Sheba,” but in the Gospel of Matthew [12.42] she is called “Queen of the South”. Both these titles point directly to Egypt.

In the Book of Daniel the Ptolemaic pharaoh is named “King of the South” on several occasions. It may be that this was not the most common biblical designation for the Egyptian ruler, but its occurrence in Daniel, without any explanatory comments, proves beyond question that it was a commonly-used expression. And the king of the south shall be strong… and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north… and shall also carry captives into Egypt… So the king of the south shall come into his own kingdom and return to his own land (Daniel 11, v. 5-9).

It should be noted that the Book of Daniel is generally dated to the first century BC, whilst the Gospel of Matthew seems to have been written in the third quarter of the first century AD’ – not necessarily, refer article: The Pauline Paradox. ‘Evidently, during this century or two, “monarch of the south” was an accepted term for the Egyptian ruler… Hatshepsut was… very definitely a Queen of the South. She was also, as we shall now see, a Queen of Sheba.

The capital of Egypt during the Eighteenth Dynasty was the mighty city of Thebes. Modern Egyptologists still use this name, which is derived from the Greeks. Where the Greeks got it has always been a mystery, since the native name of the metropolis, in the hieroglyphs, is read as Wa-se or Wa-she (actually, the glyphs used are that of the scepter – written as Uas-t by Budge – and that of a plant and an arm – written as Shema or Sh-a by Budge: thus Uas-sha or Was-sha). 

… Lisa Liel of Israel, an authority on both hieroglyphic and cuneiform scripts, pointed out to me that in her opinion the word should be read as Se-wa or She-wa, since the spellings of hieroglyphic names vary and in addition are often written not precisely as they should be pronounced. In fact, spellings often had more to do with aesthetics or religious sentiment than with strict phonetics. Thus the name Tutankhamen is actually written as Amen-tutankh (since the god’s name had to come first) and the names of the Senwosret pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty appear in the hieroglyphs as Wsr-t-sn’ – Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus and the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? ‘One might also note that various pharaohs whose names are made up of the elements Ka-nefer-re are alternately named Nefer-ka-ra (in actual fact the name appears in the hieroglyphs normally as Ra-nefer-ka). 

Now, if Thebes’ Egyptian name is really Shewa (Sheba) then a whole host of hitherto mysterious facts become comprehensible. First and foremost, we now know where the Greeks got the word Thebes (Theba). A normal linguistic mutation (lisping) turns “s” or “sh” into “th.” Thus for example the Persians called Assyria, Athuria. Secondly, we know why Josephus called the capital of Ethiopia (i.e. Upper Egypt/Nubia) by the name Saba or Shaba. Finally, we understand the significance of the name of another cult shrine of the god Amon – the oasis of Siwa.

Thus the two titles by which the Queen of Sheba is known in the biblical story clearly identify her as a queen of Egypt’ – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen. ‘Yet the connection between Egypt and the terms Queen of Sheba and Queen of the South still however leaves us with the question: Why did the biblical authors prefer these terms to “Egypt”? One possible answer, which may or may not be of value, is that the Jewish chroniclers were keenly aware of the Nubian (ie “Ethiopian”) origin of the Eighteenth Dynasty. To call the Queen of Sheba an Egyptian would thus, perhaps, have been (in their minds at least) a slight inaccuracy. 

We recall here that a generation or so after the time of Solomon, Israel was attacked by an “Ethiopian” ruler named Zerah. Everyone, even mainstream scholars, agree that this “Ethiopian” king was an Egyptian pharaoh (he is said to have brought an army of Libyans [Phut] and Ethiopians [Cush] against Israel), and the present writer agrees with Velikovsky in identifying this man with Amenhotep II [7th king of the 18th Dynasty 912-887 BCE] – a man whose Nubian ethnic identity is very clear in the portrayals of him that have survived.’

There are scholars and commentators who refute Hatshephut being the same person as the Queen of Sheba and the biblical narrative as authentic; but in so doing, do not provide a viable, believable or provable alternative. 

Matthew 12:42

Amplified Bible

‘The Queen of the South (Sheba) will stand up [as a witness] at the judgment against this generation [the last generation], and will condemn it because she came from the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdom of Solomon; and now, something greater than Solomon is here [the Messiah].’

The term Queen of the South is a tantalising clue as it confirms the status of India on the world stage, while at the same time excluding it from the future confederation of Islamic nations incorporating the King of the South: Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia and possibly Bangladesh – refer article: Four Kings & One Queen

Anil Gupta predicts that India will become a superpower this century and that due to ‘India’s functional institutions of democracy, it will emerge as a desirable, entrepreneurial and resource and energy-efficient… full-fledged economic superpower by 2025′ – refer article: 2050. India did briefly become the world’s fastest growing economy in 2015 but since 2018 growth has declined beneath China’s. Robyn Meredith notes that ‘some of India’s achievements, such as working to dismantle the centuries-old caste system and maintaining the world’s largest diverse democracy, are historically unprecedented.’ 

Fareed Zakaria offers that India’s young population allied with the second[?] largest English speaking population in the world could give India an advantage over China. Thus by 2050, India’s per capita income could rise by twenty times its current level. Another strength, is that India has maintained a democratic government, lasting for over seventy years, providing long-term stability and in the process giving India a stable name. Clyde Prestowitz founder and president of the Economic Strategy Institute and former counselor to the Secretary of Commerce in the Ronald Reagan administration, said: “It is going to be India’s century. India is going to be the biggest economy in the world. It is going to be the biggest superpower of the 21st century.”

Parag Khanna believes India along with China will grow ever stronger as the West stagnates. Though he stresses that India is lagging behind by several decades in development and ‘strategic appetite.’ He added that India is “big but not important” as it has a successful professional class, yet many millions of its citizens still live in abject poverty. Khanna also wrote that it ‘matters that China borders a dozen more countries than India and is not hemmed in by a vast ocean and the world’s tallest mountains.’ Manjari Chatterjee Miller, at Boston University ‘argues that India is a “would-be” great power but “resists its own rise” and that “India’s inability to develop top-down, long-term strategies means that it cannot systematically consider the implications of its growing power. So long as this remains the case, the country will not play the role in global affairs that many expect.”

These summations are quite accurate regarding India’s destiny, for while it is surely a world power, whether gauged economically or militarily, it does not and will not fulfil overt superpower status. In other words, its effectiveness in shaping the world’s direction; building enough strategic allies; or its diplomatic influence are limited in comparison with the United States or China. Even in the future, it will be a Latin confederation; an Islamic alliance; and a resurrected Russian empire in tandem with a German led United States of Europe, which will dominate global politics and trade.

Some readers will have been doing mental cartwheels from the moment it was suggested India is composed of two brothers, Sheba and Dedan. As the ‘Aryans’ of northern India appear to be physically, diametrically opposite and in stark contrast with the Dravidians of southern India. How could they possibly be blood brothers? 

It is quite a hot topic and subject of debate regarding how different the two peoples of India appear to be… or are they? We will hope to understand this question by the end of the section on Cush.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary [third edition 2009], the name ‘India’ is derived from the Classical Latin of India; a reference to South Asia and the region to its east. Derived successively from Hellenistic Greek for India, the ancient Greek Indos, the Old Persian Hindush – an eastern province of the Achaemenid empire – and finally, the Sanskrit, Sindhu, or ‘river’, for the Indus River. The ancient Greeks referred to India as Indoi; translated as ‘The people of the Indus.’ The term Bharat, mentioned in Indian epic poetry and India’s Constitution is used by many Indian languages. The modern rendering of the historical name Bharatavarsha – which applied to a region of the Gangetic Vally – is Hindustan, a Middle Persian name for India, introduced during the Mughal Empire. Its meaning varied between referring to a region encompassing present day northern India with Pakistan, and to India in its near entirety.

India has the fifth largest economy in the world and a projected GDP of $4.27 trillion for 2025 – 6.5% higher than in 2024. With its large population, India has the lowest per capita GDP amongst the twenty-five biggest economies in the world, though is the third largest by purchasing power parity, or PPP with $9.56 trillion. With an average annual GDP growth rate of 5.8% over the past two decades, India is one of the world’s fastest-growing economies. ‘India’s economy is a mixture of traditional village farming and handicrafts alongside booming modern industry and mechanized agriculture. India is a major exporter of technology services and business outsourcing, and the service sector makes up a large share of its economic output. Liberalization of India’s economy since the 1990’s has boosted economic growth, but inflexible business regulation, widespread corruption, and persistent poverty pose challenges to ongoing expansion.’ India is truly a global economic power in the making, in the vein of china.

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

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$56.4 billion 
  2. Gems, precious metals: $38.2 billion 
  3. Machinery including computers: $24.2 billion 
  4. Iron, steel: $21.2 billion 
  5. Organic chemicals: $21.2 billion 
  6. Pharmaceuticals: $19.5 billion 
  7. Vehicles: $18.9 billion 
  8. Electrical machinery, equipment: $18.8 billion 
  9. Cereals: $12.4 billion 
  10. Cotton: $10 billion 

Mineral fuels including oil was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 104.1% from 2020 to 2021. That product category was propelled by higher international revenues from India’s exported refined petroleum oil. In second place for improving export sales was iron and steel via a 99.4% gain.’

Of the nations with the largest gold reserves, India ranks ninth, one place behind Japan. It has 687.8 tonnes, which represents 6.5 percent of its foreign reserves. The Bank of India in fact, has one of the largest stores of gold in the world and India is the ‘second largest consumer of the precious metal, and is one of the most reliable drivers of global demand.’

After World War I – in which one million Indians served – a new period began in India. The British brought reforms but also repressive legislation, leading to a deepening Indian preoccupation with self-rule. A non-violent movement of non-co-operation began. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi would become its leader, figurehead and enduring symbol. At this time there was also an upsurge of Muslim nationalism. Ultimately, independence was achieved in 1947; tempered by the partition of the British Indian Empire into two independent states: a Hindu majority Dominion of India and a Muslim majority Dominion of Pakistan. Havoc ensued with ‘unprecedented migration amid large-scale loss of life.’

Online Encyclopaedia: ‘Economic liberalisation, which began in the 1990s, has created a large urban middle class, transformed India into one of the world’s fastest growing economies, and increased its geopolitical clout. Indian movies, music, and spiritual teachings play an increasing role in global culture. Yet, India is also shaped by seemingly unyielding poverty, both rural and urban; by religious and caste-related violence, by Maoist-inspired Naxalite insurgencies; and by separatism in Jammu and Kashmir and… unresolved territorial disputes with’ [both] China and… Pakistan.

India has two major language families, Indo-Aryan spoken by about 74% of the population and Dravidian, spoken by 24% of the population. ‘Other languages spoken in India come from the Austroasiatic and Sino-Tibetan language families. India has no national language. Hindi, with the largest number of speakers, is the official language of the government. English is used extensively in business and administration…’ 

There are approximately 245 million native speakers of Dravidian languages. Dravidian speakers form the majority of the population of Southern India descended from Dedan* and are also found in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Bhutan. The origins of the Dravidians are considered a ‘very complex subject of research and debate.’ 

The origin of the Sanskrit word dravida is Tamil. Sanskrit tradition used the word to denote the geographical region of Southern India and according to one source, dravida in Sanskrit means ‘surrounded by water’ or a ‘Peninsula.’

‘Epigraphic evidence of an ethnic group termed as such is found in ancient India where a number of inscriptions have come to light datable from the sixth to the fifth century BCE mentioning Damela or Dameda* persons.

‘Dravidian grammatical impact on the structure and syntax of Indo-Aryan languages is considered far greater than the Indo-Aryan grammatical impact on Dravidian. Some linguists explain this anomaly by arguing that Middle Indo-Aryan and New Indo-Aryan were built on a Dravidian substratum. There are also hundreds of Dravidian loanwords in Indo-Aryan languages, and vice versa.

Studies have shown that the Indian subcontinent houses two major ancestral components: ‘the Ancestral North Indians (ANI) which is broadly related to West Eurasians and the Ancestral South Indians (ASI) which is clearly distinct from ANI. Later, a component termed “AASI” (found to be the predominant element in ASI), was distinguished in subsequent studies.’

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine: 

‘As no “ASI” or “AASI” ancient DNA is available, the indigenous Andamanese (exemplified by the Onge, a possibly distantly related population native to the Andaman Islands) is used as an (imperfect) proxy. The two groups (ANI and ASI) extensively mixed in India between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE-100 CE). 

In fact, Dr. David Reich states that sometime between 1,900 and 4,200 years ago, “profound, pervasive convulsive mixture [between the ANI and ASI] occurred, affecting every Indo-European and Dravidian group in India without exception. “Because of this mixing, according to Reich et al., both ANI and ASI ancestry are found all over the subcontinent (in both northern and southern India) in varying proportions, and that “ANI ancestry ranges from 39-71% in India, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers”.

According to a large craniometric study (Raghavan and Bulbeck et al. 2013) the native populations of India and Sri Lanka have distinct craniometric and anthropologic ancestry. Both southern and northern groups are most similar to each other also show deep relations to populations of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa [not really Europe, partially North Africa and mainly the Middle East]. The study further showed that the native South Asians, north and south, form a unique group distinct from “Australo-Melanesians”. However Raghavan and Bulbeck et al., while noting the differences of South Asian from Andamanese and Australoid crania, while also noting the distinctiveness… between South Asian and Andamanese crania, explain that this is not in conflict with genetic evidence showing a partial common ancestry and genetic affinity between South Asians and the native Andamanese, stating that “the differences may be in part due the greater craniometric specialisation of South Asians compared to Andamanese.”

The Andamanese are Negrito peoples living on islands in the southeastern region of the Bay of Bengal in Southeast Asia. They are related to the Negritos and Melanesians of the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Australia, amongst other islands. 

As stated above and highly significant for the Andamanese [AASI] – and by implication all Melanesians – is the admittance that the cranial structure of an Australian Aborigine for example even though bigger, is still in genetic proportion to a person from Southern India [ASI]. 

Compare a Dravidian and an Aborigine, side-by-side and the resemblance** is clear, as stated earlier. It is interesting to note that it was identified that the Polynesian-Micronesian and Filipino peoples are linked respectively with Rodan and Dodan from Javan – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. The Negritos are descended from Dedan. Coincidently or not so, the highest number of Negrito peoples from Dedan, are located in Dodan of the Philippines. As researchers have claimed, there has been significant admixture between Polynesians descended from Japheth and Melanesians from Ham via inter-marriage, with their Haplogroups supporting this blend.

As we have digressed; let’s look at the Negritos, before returning to India and Cush. 

Online Encyclopaedia – emphasis mine: 

‘The main paternal haplogroup of the Negritos is K2b in the form of its rare primary clades K2b1 and P (a.k.a. K2b2 or P-P295). Most Aeta males (60%) carry K-P397 (K2b1), which is otherwise uncommon in the Philippines and is strongly associated with the indigenous peoples of Melanesia and Micronesia. Basal P is rare outside the Aeta and some other groups within Maritime Southeast Asia. Some Negrito populations are Haplogroup D-M174, a branch of D-M174 among Andaman Islanders, as well as Haplogroup O-P31 [M268 O1b] which is also common among the now Austroasiatic-speaking Negrito peoples, such as the Maniq and the Semang in Malaysia. The Onge and all the Adamanan Islanders belong strictly to the mitochondrial Haplogroup M. It is also the predominant marker of other Negrito tribes as well as Aboriginal Australians and Papuans. Analysis of mtDNA, which is inherited exclusively by maternal descent, confirms the above results. All Onge belong to mtDNA M, which is unique to Onge people.

A 2009 study by the Anthropological Survey of India and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute identified seven genomes from 26 isolated “relic tribes” from the Indian mainland, such as the Baiga tribe, which share “two synonymous polymorphisms with the M42 haplogroup, which is specific to Australian Aborigines”. These were specific mtDNA mutations that are shared exclusively** by Australian aborigines and these Indian tribes, and no other known human groupings.

Bulbeck (2013) shows the Andamanese maternal mtDNA is entirely mitochondrial Haplogroup M. Their Y-DNA belongs to the D haplogroup, which has only been found in Japan and Tibet at low frequencies outside of the Andaman Islands, a fact that underscores the insularity of these tribes.

The word Negrito is the Spanish diminutive of negro, used to mean “little black person”. Many online dictionaries give the plural in English as either “Negritos” or “Negritoes”, without preference. The plural in Spanish is “Negritos”. This usage was coined by 16th-century Spanish missionaries operating in the Philippines, and was borrowed by other European travellers and colonialists across Austronesia to label various peoples perceived as sharing relatively small physical stature and dark skin. Contemporary usage of an alternative Spanish epithet, Negrillos, also tended to bundle these peoples with the pygmy peoples of Central Africa, based on perceived similarities in stature and complexion. (Historically, the label Negrito has also been used to refer to African pygmies.)’

Indian men

Dispersals Into India by Rene J Herrera & Ralph Garcia-Bertrand. In Ancestral DNA, Human Origins, and Migrations, 2018 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘All the mtDNA lineages outside Africa are derived from three deep-rooted (old) founder haplogroups: M, N, and R. This is reminiscent of what is seen in relation to the Y chromosome in which all haplogroups in Eurasia descend from three ancient haplogroups, C, D, and F. In addition, both uniparental genomes (genetic makeup) in the populations of India exhibit little recent mtDNA and Y chromosome impact from non-Indian-Eurasian groups, and no evidence of extinction or replacement of the original settlers has been observed…’

This is an important comment as it reveals that the Indian sub-continent is composed of specific peoples, especially applicable to the north in that they have not been diluted as significantly by Aryan peoples that have invaded and dwelt in Northern India, as many researchers, historians and anthropologists claim.

The very similar ages of haplogroups M, N, and R, 61,300, 64,100, and 65,500 ya, respectively [rather in reverse, let alone the inaccurate length of each by over fifty thousand years], are congruent with a single early migration, possibly made up of several hundred migrants. Also, it is noteworthy that several subhaplogroups derived from the M, N, and R parent mtDNA types exhibit dates of origins very similar to the parent haplogroups themselves.’

The mtDNA super Haplogroup M and its super sub Haplogroups N and R equate to the split of maternal Haplogroup L3 from L0 to L6. Haplogroups which derived from these parent Haplogroups, tangible in the offspring of the grandchildren of Noah, could therefore, exhibit dates of origins very similar to the parent Haplogroups themselves.

‘This condition suggests that the mutations that define the subhaplogroups of M, N, and R occurred soon after the arrival of AMHs to the subcontinent [Yes, this is correct]. It is also likely that population expansion events took place soon after the colonization of South Asia by AMHs [yes indeed]. These dispersals clearly extended beyond the borders of the Indian subcontinent and into the rest of Eurasia. These initial population expansion events… resulted in a fivefold increase in the population. 

Yet, signals of additional secondary expansions from the Near East to India involving lineages W, U7, [both mtDNA and recent mutations] and R2 [Y-DNA and most recent mutation]… are evident, dating to more recent time periods (about 30,000 to 20,000 ya) [plausibly half these dates].^

These younger population expansion episodes coincide with humid epochs prior to the LGM 18,000 ya [rather post-flood and since 10,837 BCE]. Also this radiation and increment in population density coincides with the emergence of a novel, more refined, and sophisticated lithic tradition in India known as the geometric microlithic technology.

There are a number of other parallelisms between Y chromosome and mtDNA inheritance in AMHs with regard to the peopling of South Asia. For example, both sets of uniparental genetic systems indicate that the dispersals that led to the peopling of South Asia occurred soon after sapiens exited Africa [the Ark] in a speedy migration [toward India and the Indus Valley, circa 10,500 BCE] and beyond to the east [West and Mesopotamia, circa 10,000 to 9,000 BCE]. 

The absence of nucleotide differences in the coding (gene-containing) mtDNA among South Asian, Southeast Asian, and Oceania groups is congruent with a scenario of a brisk dissemination eastward occurring during a time span of thousands of years rather than tens of thousands of years. If the dispersal had been slow, the DNA would have been able to accumulate mutations during the trip.’

This time frame fits the period following the Flood, for the dissemination for all the grandsons of Noah and not just Cush’s gene pool. That is, thousands of years had passed since 10,837 BCE rather than tens of thousands of years, which would have been indicative prior to the Flood – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The mtDNA Haplogroups M, N and R and their descendent groups are mutations evident after the Flood, filtering from Noah’s three sons and their wives who carried L0.^

‘As with the Y chromosome haplogroups, the mtDNA lineages generally exhibit genetic uniformity among extant Indian populations across language, caste, and tribal groups. This suggests that the arrival of the primal mtDNA types took place before the creation and partitioning of caste and tribal groups. Also, the mtDNA M lineage characterizes populations of East Eurasia [Japheth], including South Asia [Ham], whereas West Eurasian [Shem] populations feature mtDNA haplogroups N and R and their derivatives.

It is worth noting that a coastal route is also supported by both uniparental genetic markers. Specifically, the absence of mtDNA haplogroup M in contemporaneous Levantine populations suggests that AMHs carrying the mitochondrial M type de-parted Northeast Africa via the Southern route (the Horn of Africa) and continued through the littoral of Iran, Pakistan, and India to the east. The other suprahaplogroup, type N, predominantly of West Eurasia, could have traveled with migrants using the southern (Horn of Africa) or northern (Sinai Peninsula) route, which then moved into the Levant and westward.

Today the most common mtDNA types in the subcontinent are M, R, and U. Haplogroup U is a descendant of R. The ancient M haplogroup and its sublineages constitute about 60% of the overall Indian populace. 

M is found at 58% among the cast groups [northern India] and 72% amid the tribes [southern India], with a demic increase toward the south and east of India. As a suprahaplogroup, M contributes considerably to the genetic diversity of the subcontinent. The other 40% of mtDNAs in India belong to suprahaplogroup R.’

Indian women

An online Encyclopaedia remarks on pertinent points regarding Indian lactose tolerance – emphasis & bold mine:

‘According to Gallego Romero et al. (2011), their research on lactose tolerance in India suggests that “the west Eurasian genetic contribution identified by Reich et al. (2009) principally reflects gene flow from Iran and the Middle East.” Gallego Romero notes that Indians who are lactose-tolerant show a genetic pattern regarding this tolerance which is “characteristic of the common European mutation. “According to Romero, this suggests that “the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago [post-Flood]. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found.”

Asko Parpola, who regards the Harappans to have been Dravidian, notes that Mehrgarh (7000 BCE to c. 2500 BCE), to the west of the Indus River valley, is a precursor of the Indus Valley Civilisation, whose inhabitants migrated into the Indus Valley and became the Indus Valley Civilisation’ – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. It is one of the earliest sites with evidence of farming and herding in South Asia. According to Mondal et al. 2017, based on paternal DNA analysis, Indians are most closely related to Southern Europeans [only through admixture] and people in the Levant and that this relation existed already before Steppe migration: These results suggest that the European-related ancestry in Indian populations might be much older and more complex than anticipated…

Two genetic studies (Shinde et al. 2019 and Narasimhan et al. 2019,) analysing remains from the Indus Valley civilisation (of parts of Bronze Age Northwest India and East Pakistan), found them to have a mixture of ancestry… The analysed samples of both studies have little to none of the “Steppe ancestry” component associated with later Indo-European migrations into India. The authors found that the respective amounts of those ancestries varied significantly between individuals, and concluded that more samples are needed to get the full picture of Indian population* history.’

Lactose tolerance, associated with European peoples is a clue to the fact that Indians though not a European people, but rather a Hamitic line… have a palpable injection of European DNA. This is the reason why there is variance amongst individuals and not a uniform pattern of admixture throughout the Indian population.* Before we address how this admixture originated, a brief description of Lactose and what intolerance to it means.

Lactose is milk sugar and is an essential component of breast milk. Its digestion is made possible by an enzyme, called lactase, which breaks down lactose as simple sugars which are then absorbed into the bloodstream. In most mammals, the production of the lactase enzyme reduces significantly after weaning. Older children and adults become lactose intolerant. This applies to most of the worlds population. Some people possess a genetic mutation that allows the production of lactase through adulthood. This is called lactase persistence (LP). 

Lactase persistence is particularly common among Northwest Europeans descended from the ancient Celtic, Nordic and Germanic people. The highest incidence for the lactase persistence alleles, are found among the Scandinavia nations; Sweden, Denmark, Norway; the Dutch and British, comprising England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; and the Irish and Basque peoples. 

Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b men in Western European are thought to be the first people on Earth to successfully domesticate cattle and to develop a lifestyle based on cattle husbandry and herding – Genesis 30:29. It is known that most herding societies consumed some animal milk and made cheese from it, as cheese contains less lactose and is easier to digest for lactose intolerant people. Speculations among geneticists and evolutionary biologists regarding the origin of the lactase persistence allele in Europeans are ongoing. The origin of the mutation may have been present at low frequencies in the human gene pool before it underwent positive selective pressure among cattle-herding societies. 

The LP allele was found at a frequency of 27% among thirteen individuals from the Lichtenstein Cave in Germany. They belonged to the Urnfield culture and were a mix of Y-Haplogroups R1b, R1a and I2a2. Today, the LP allele is proportional to the percentage of R1b and to a lesser extent R1a, found in a population. In the British Isles, the Low Countries and southwest Scandinavia LP is the highest in the world – the combined percentage of R1a and R1b generally exceeds 70% of these populations. In Iberia, the highest percentage of LP is observed among the Basques, who have the highest percentage of R1b in Europe. In Italy, LP is most common in the north, in proportion to R1b levels. The lowest incidence of LP in Europe is found in Southern Italy, Greece and the Balkans – the regions which have the least R1b lineages.

The Indian population – a people descended from Ham – shows evidence of the presence of a mutation for Lactase persistence universally associated with Shem’s descendants. How did this happen? One of the biggest misconceptions in ethnology and the identity movement, is the belief that the peoples of North Africa, the Middle East and South[west] Asia are akin to European peoples. The Arabs claim to be descended from Ishmael, Abraham’s first son and this has certainly muddied the waters – refer Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia; and Chapter XXVIII The True Identity & Origin of Germany & Austria – Ishmael & Hagar. The Indians are labelled Aryans and this has definitely clouded the issue. 

The word Aryan, refers to the region of present day Iran and etymologically, Iran and Aryan are the same word. The European peoples who once lived there, later encroached on the region now located in northern India. The peoples of Northern India and Cush in turn, have had that name ascribed to them. Northern Indians do exhibit skin tones and facial characteristics that are Aryan, received through admixture. Are the Indians themselves Aryan… no they are not. 

We have covered considerable material thus far, which has shown that even though there is a difference between Northern and Southern Indians – this description is preferred to: Aryan, Indo-European, Caste, Dravidian or Tribal, (which only confound further) and we would expect some difference, for they are the brothers Sheba and Dedan – we have also observed that they are related, even before any admixture. What is overtly apparent with some of the Northern population, is the evidence of a fusion of European ancestry.

There are two aspects in answering this question. The first is presented by Arthur Kemp in March of the Titans, 1991 & 2016, pages 36-37, 38 – emphasis mine:

‘Around 2000 BC, a sun worshipping Indo-European tribe calling themselves Aryans invaded central Asia and occupied territory as far as the north of India… [using] the Sanskrit written language. By the middle of the sixth century BC the Persian Empire [had] incorporated Aryana into its boundaries… During the first century AD, the Kushans, an Asiatic race, occupied Aryana… [later] Another branch of the Aryans penetrated as far east as India, where they settled and built a civilization. The invading Aryans were more advanced and referred to the conquered Indians as “Dasyu” – the “dark ones” or slaves. 

… a clear distinction was drawn between the two types of people in the Indus River Valley: the “fair” conquering immigrants and the “dark” native people. Within three hundred years… physical mixing… [led to] two racial classes… [and] membership in each class was determined solely by the color of an individual’s skin. This became known as the caste system. The word “caste” was… from the Latin word cactus, meaning pure. The original Sanskrit… was “varna” which means color… the caste system became more… complex, till four major divisions were created… with the highest caste, the Brahmans… being the lightest in color, and the Sudas or “untouchables” being the darkest.

The… Aryan… legacy lives on in the language, religion, and poetry of India – and the caste system. Blue or grey eyes can, however, still be found in the Indian upper classes, which tend to be concentrated in the northern parts of [the] country… Many of these lighter colored Indians become successful actors and actresses in India’s film industry which is nicknamed “bollywood.”

An online definition of the term caste: ‘caste is not originally an Indian word, though it is now widely used, both in English and in Indian languages. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is derived from the Portuguese casta, meaning “race, lineage, breed” and, originally, “pure or unmixed (stock or breed)”. There is no exact translation in Indian languages, but varna and jati are the two most approximate terms.’

The second aspect stems from those Bible verses we looked at earlier about the third wife of Moses, who was a Cushite and King Solomon’s love affair with the Queen of Sheba – Hatshepsut of Egypt, also a Cushite – his one true love. Moses had a child with his first wife, the King’s daughter and Hatshepsut was descended from Moses. It is highly probable Moses and his third wife had children. He also had two sons with his second wife, Zipporah the Midianite. 

Even though Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines [1 Kings 11:3, 43], it doesn’t say that he truly loved any of them. Only one son, Rehoboam who became King of Judah after Solomon died, is mentioned in scripture with two daughters [1 Kings 4:11, 15], Taphath and Basemath – also the name of a daughter of Ishmael, who became a wife of Esau – refer Chapter XXIX Esau: The Thirteenth tribe. What is astonishing, is that only three children are mentioned, when Solomon must have had many, many children from so many wives. The Kebra Nagast contains a legend that Solomon sired a son with the Queen of Sheba and that she returned to her own land long before this child was born.

Moses was descended from the priestly tribe of Levi and Solomon was from the royal line of the tribe of Judah. The lines of Moses and Solomon intertwining, while mixing with Cush, creates descendants from either a priestly or a joint priestly and royal line – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes and Chapter XXXI Reuben, Simeon, Levi & Gad – the Celtic Tribes.*

It would certainly be plausible for the royalty of Cush in desiring to protect and elevate those descendants and in so doing, contributing to the evolution of the caste system, to perpetuate these two lines. It also adds explanation to the lightness of skin that the Indians of higher castes exhibit and the physiological impact on Cush’s physiognomy and caste culture. This introduction of not only a priestly line, but also a royal line, would account for the caste system’s emphasis of the two highest, wealthier castes; of first priests – the Brahmins – and second rulers, the Kshatriyas or Rajanyas.

We will look at this further when studying Jacob’s sons and address a coincidence too striking to ignore, in the comparison of not only Cush’s historical association with Judah and Levi, but also its relationship* with them today.

Returning to King Solomon’s children and the seemingly glaring omission of them in the Bible. Scripture does offer an answer, though an unpalatable one. It helps to understand why there are no genealogical lists for Solomon’s sons as there are for Saul and David in the Bible and why Solomon is not included in Hebrews chapter eleven as a man of faith. The chapter reads as a hall of fame for heroes of the Old Testament. Yet Solomon is omitted. We have touched on 1 Kings eleven, regarding Solomon’s wives and concubines:

1 Kings 11:1-13

English Standard Version

‘Now King Solomon loved [or lusted after] many foreign women, along with the daughter of Pharaoh [Hatshepsut]: 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. 3 He had 700 wives, who were princesses [from royalty], and 300 concubines. And his wives turned away his heart. For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father. 

5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth [Ishtar] the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom [Molech] the abomination of the Ammonites’ – refer article: Na’amah. 6 ‘So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did not wholly follow the Lord, as David his father had done. 7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab’ – refer article: Belphegor – ‘and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.** 8 And so he did for all his foreign wives, who made offerings and sacrificed to their gods. 9 And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart had turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice 10 and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods. But he did not keep what the Lord commanded’ – refer articles: Thoth; and Seventh Son of a Seventh Son

11 ‘Therefore the Lord said to Solomon, “Since this has been your practice and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes that I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant. 12 Yet for the sake of David your father I will not do it in your days, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son. 13 However, I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son [Rehoboam], for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem that I have chosen.”

Worshipers of gods such as Chemosh and Molech practiced human sacrifice: the inhumane sacrificing of babies. Chemosh, Molech or Milcom, are names for gods within the pantheon of Ba’al. The Jewish Encylopaedia maintains that Solomon built a temple to Chemosh on the Mount of Olives** which remained in use for over four hundred years, from circa 940 to 540 BCE.

Deuteronomy 12:29-31

English Standard Version

29 “When the Lord your God cuts off before you the nations whom you go in to dispossess, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land, 30 take care that you be not ensnared to follow them, after they have been destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? – that I also may do the same.’ 31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.’

Idols were composed of metal and fierce furnaces were heated inside the sculpture so it became cremation-level-hot. Worshipers placed babies onto the idol’s outstretched hands whereupon they burned to death. The hands could be winched so that the hands raised and then dropped the sacrifice into the idol’s mouth as if it were eating.

King Solomon’s Worshipful Offering to Molech – Illustration from the 1897 Bible Pictures and What They Teach Us by Charles Foster.

Isaiah 57:5-10

English Standard Version

‘… you who burn with lust [through sexual rituals and magic] among the oaks, under every green tree [of Asherah – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega], who slaughter your children in the valleys, under the clefts of the rocks’ – Article: Belphegor. ‘On a high and lofty mountain [Nephilim related] you have set your bed, and there you went up to offer sacrifice… 

You journeyed to the king [Solomon] with oil and multiplied your perfumes; you sent your envoys far off, and sent down even to Sheol [the Earth as hell]. You were wearied with the length of your way, but you did not say, “It is hopeless”; you found new life for your strength, and so you were not faint.’

Leviticus 20:1-5

English Standard Version

20 The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Say to the people of Israel, Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones. 3 I myself will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given one of his children to Molech, to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name. 4 And if the people of the land do at all close their eyes to that man when he gives one of his children to Molech, and do not put him to death, 5 then I will set my face against that man and against his clan and will cut them off from among their people, him and all who follow him in whoring after Molech.”

Atrocity of the highest order and we can understand why the Creator became wrathful with Solomon and why the Kingdom of Israel later fragmented into two – the separate kingdoms of Israel and Judah – and if the false idol temple remained in Jerusalem for some four hundred years, this takes us to the time period when Judah ultimately fell in 587 and 586 BCE, with their punishment leading to captivity. 

These sacrificial ceremonies were ancient and practised by Nimrod and the Nephilim before him. We will also find that a specific son of Jacob had and still continues, a propensity for these occult practices and that the powerful and prevalent backdrop of child sacrifice, looms large as a dark shadow over the account of the God who demanded Abraham to offer up his son Isaac – refer Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe; and Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Finally, recall when we studied Tiras in Chapter III; sources claimed he had a descendant called Cushni, who had granddaughters that had married into Cush, Phut and Canaan’s families. It may explain the differences between North American Indians and those from Central and South America. It also connects the American Indian by more than just a name with their counterparts in the Indian sub-Continent.

Next, is Ham’s ostensibly third son Phut; the people who comprise the nation of Pakistan.

Flags of India and Pakistan

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957 – emphasis mine:

‘Ham had another son, Phut or Put – it is spelled both ways in the Bible. Here is what Josephus writes about the people of Phut. “Phut also was the founder of Libya (by which he means [North] Africa), and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself: there is also a river in the country of the Moors which bears that name; whence it is that… the Grecian historiographers mention (Africa) by the appellation of Phut”. Put, then, is the father of the west and central Africans, where the true [Black people] live today. The Egyptians called the region of the Sudan (which was south of Egypt) by the name of Pet. The Babylonians and Persians called a similar region “Putu”.

Notice, however, that Put is named before Canaan in the tenth chapter of Genesis and in I Chronicles 1. Put was originally settled just south of Asia Minor, between Mizraim and the city of Hamath of the Canaanites. From this region Phut spread west and south to Africa, and also east! Numerous sons of Put early settled into the western region of Mesopotamia, a few hundred miles from ancient Babylon. This is the original center of Hindi, the language of northern and central India. This is the same region that some of the sons of Abraham and Keturah settled.

The people who were settled in this region were uprooted by the Assyrians and driven east into India. In India the highest castes were not only called Brahmins, but also Rajputs. The word “Rajput” means “king or chief of Put.” The Indians of Central and North India – being slightly mixed with white stock – vary from light to dark brown. The Rajputs are the most noted warriors of India. The word “Phut” or “Put” means a warrior in Hebrew.

The word Phut is not properly translated “Libya” in Ezekiel 38:5. It should be translated Put or Phut, as given in the margin. The people of Phut are those of India. Of the four sons of Ham, only Cush bears a name which means “black”. Just as some of the sons of Cush are brown, so some of the children of Phut mutated racially into black. But this is not all of the story. What is the origin of all the black people of the Isles of Southeast Asia and Australia?’

Derek walker – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Both Gesenius… and Brown… identify Put as Libya. The first settlement of Put was called Libya by the ancient historians Josephus and Pliny. The Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, called the Septuagint, translates Put as Libya in about 165 BC. Biblically, Put (or Putt) is the region west of Egypt. This is the nation of Libya. Most modern scholars agree with this interpretation. The descendants of Put migrated to the land west of Egypt and became the source of the North African Arab nations, such as Libya, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco.’

The political state of Libya, has a population of 7,438,483 people. Whereas Phut is prophesied as a growing economic and military power. North African Libya is not ideally placed to fulfil the Bible verses ascribed to it. Nor is it near Cush, which we have identified as principally India. The exact same issues with ascribing ‘Ethiopia’ or Kush to the African nation of Ethiopia are mirrored in attributing ‘Libya’ or Phut to the African Arab State of Libya. Aside from all three being sons of Ham, both Phut and Cush have nothing to do with the Africans; in that the Black peoples are descended from Canaan, not Phut or Cush. The meaning of Phut aside from Hoeh’s definition of ‘warrior’ is unclear, though according to Abarim may mean a ‘gift’, from the verb put, ‘to give’. 

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘This name is spelled the same as the verb put, to give… There is nothing in Hebrew that looks like this name. If this name indeed derives from the Egyptian verb put, it would mean Gift… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… reads Extension. NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Foreign Archers…’

The Book of Jasher 7:12 provides names for Phut’s sons:

And the sons of Phut were Gebul, Hadan, Benah and Adan.

The name Pakistan – in Urdu (and Persian) – means a land abounding in the pure and a land in which the pure abound. While the word pak means ‘pure’ and stan, ‘land’; Pakistan is apparently an acronym. ‘The P is for Punjab, A is for Afghania… K for Kashmir, S for Sindh and T stands for ‘tan’, as in Baluchistan. From these five distinct regions, each with their own language, one state was formed, but not a nation’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 197.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has the fifth highest population in the world, with 254,194,809 people and the second largest Muslim population after Indonesia. It is ranked among the emerging and growth leading N-11 economies of the world. ‘Pakistan’s political history since independence has been characterised by periods of military rule, political instability and conflicts with India.’

Pakistan has the sixth largest standing armed forces in the world. ‘The United States, Turkey, and China maintain close military relations and regularly export military equipment and technology transfer to Pakistan. Joint logistics and major war games are occasionally carried out by the militaries of China and Turkey.’

Urdu, the lingua franca and a symbol of Muslim identity and national unity is the national language understood by over 75% of Pakistanis. It is the main medium of communication in the country; yet the primary language of only 7% of Pakistan’s population.’ Urdu and English are the recognised official languages of Pakistan; even though Punjabi is the most common language overall, being the first language for 40% of Pakistan’s population.

Pakistan’s principle exports:

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

  1. Miscellaneous textiles, worn clothing: US$5.5 billion 
  2. Knit or crochet clothing, accessories: $4.5 billion 
  3. Cotton: $3.4 billion 
  4. Clothing, accessories (not knit or crochet): $3.4 billion
  5. Cereals: $2.3 billion 
  6. Copper: $818.3 million 
  7. Leather/animal gut articles: $697.6 million 
  8. Fruits, nuts: $492.9 million 
  9. Salt, sulphur, stone, cement: $484.7 million 
  10. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $437 million 

Copper was the fastest grower among Pakistan’s top 10 export categories, up by 87.9% from 2020 to 2021. In second place for improving export sales was knitted or crocheted clothing and accessories via a 46.8% gain.’ 

Jeremiah 46:9

English Standard Version

‘Advance, O horses, and rage, O chariots! Let the warriors go out: men of Cush [India] and Put [Pakistan] who handle the shield, men of Lud, skilled in handling the bow.’

Cush and Phut historically have been closely tied, similar to Magog, Tubal and Meshech – refer Chapter X China: Magog, Tubal & Meshech. Cush and Phut, though often mentioned together; give no scriptural clue that they are one people in similar fashion with China and three brothers within its borders. Therefore, it is fascinating that they were one amalgamated people for so many centuries; with the fundamental difference being religion as the motivation in their separation and partition. 

In this regard, Pakistan has closer ties to its fellow Arabic and Islamic neighbours. Note Ezekiel 38:5 ESV:

‘Persia [Turkey], Cush [India], and Put [Pakistan] are with them, all of them with shield and helmet…’

We have just read about Pakistan’s relationship with Turkey and China in connection with military technology and tactical manoeuvres. The future military alliance with China, includes Pakistan with other key Islamic States, such as Turkey and Iran. In Daniel eleven and the prophecy involving successive Kings of the North and South throughout history, a future King of the North retaliates to an attack by the King of the South and subsequently subjugates Egypt [Mizra], Cush [India] and Phut [Pakistan], verse 43 ESV:

‘He [the King of the North] shall become ruler of the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt [Mizra], and the Libyans and the Cushites shall follow in his train.’

Ezekiel 27:10

New English Translation

‘Men of Persia [Turkey] , Lud, and Put [H6316 – Puwt: meaning: a bow] were in your army, men of war. They hung shield and helmet on you; they gave you your splendor.’

2 Chronicles 16:8

New English Translation

‘Did not the Cushites and Libyans [H3864 – meaning: empty hearted, afflicted] have a huge army with chariots and a very large number of horsemen?’

Recall 2 Chronicles 12:3, which we looked at earlier. It also says Libyan or Lubim instead of Phut. 

There are a couple of verses regarding Phut, which appear to state him twice. They are distinct and different terms, yet describing similar people.

Nahum 3:9

New English Translation

‘Cush [Ethiopia] and Egypt [Mizra] had limitless strength; Put [H6316] and the Libyans [Lubim H3864] were among her allies.’

Ezekiel 30:5

New King James Version

“Ethiopia [Cush], Libya [Phut], Lydia [Lud], all the mingled people, Chub [H3552 – Lehab], and the men of the lands who are allied, shall fall with them by the sword.”

We will delve into this more fully in the next chapter; for now though, the Lub-im or Lehab [H3853] are similarly related peoples descended from a different son of Ham, who have intermingled with Phut in Pakistan. We have seen the difficulty in defining a meaning for Phut. Not so for Lehab [H3853] – mentioned in the Genesis ten and 1 Chronicles table of nations – which in Hebrew means: ‘Flames, flaming’ from the noun lahab, ‘flame.’

Abarim Publications – emphasis mine: 

‘The unused verb (lahab) probably meant to flame or burn. Nouns (lahab) and (lehaba) mean flame, but also denoted the blade or a sword or tip of a spear. For a meaning of the name Lehabim, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads Flaming. Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has Flames, or more interpretative, Scorching Heat. There is, of course, no telling why [they] were named or known as suchperhaps they… were arms dealers [many a true word spoken in jest].’

In keeping with the definition of Lehab, Pakistan is a zealous Islamic nation; supportive of terrorism training; and entertains a militaristic bias, which will only intensify in the future.

Pakistani man and woman 

The partition of India was brutal. ‘By 1947 the forces of post-colonial nationalism and religious separatism broke the subcontinent into two, and later three major pieces: India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. An extraordinary movement of people followed as millions of Muslims fled the new borders of India, heading west to Pakistan, with millions of Hindus and Sikhs coming the other way. It was carnage. Riots broke out across both countries as Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and others turned on each other in panic and fear… at least a million people died and 15 million were displaced’ – Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 194-195.

Marshall: ‘India and Pakistan can agree on one thing: neither wants the other one around. Each country fairly bristles with antagonism… so how they manage this unwanted relationship is a matter of life and death on a scale of tens of millions… Pakistan appears to define itself by its opposition to India, while India, despite obsessing about Pakistan, defines itself in many ways, including that of being an emerging world power with a growing economy… They have fought four major wars and many skirmishes. Modern Pakistan and India were born in fire; next time the fire could kill them.’

Perhaps it is India’s long held mistrust of both China and Pakistan which influences its decision to pull out – with Japan who does not join for similar reasons (China and the Koreas) – from the East Asian and South Asian alliance in the far future – Ezekiel 38:5, 13.

Deep common ancestry of Indian and western-Eurasian mitochondrial DNA lineages, multiple authors, 1999 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘About a fifth of the human gene pool belongs largely either to Indo-European or Dravidic speaking people inhabiting the Indian peninsula. The ‘Caucasoid share’ in their gene pool is thought to be related predominantly to the Indo-European speakers. 

A commonly held hypothesis, albeit not the only one, suggests a massive Indo-Aryan invasion to India some 4,000 years ago. Recent limited analysis of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of Indian populations has been interpreted as supporting this concept. Here, this interpretation is questioned. We found an extensive deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe. Only a small fraction of the ‘Caucasoid-specific’ mtDNA lineages found in Indian populations can be ascribed to a relatively recent admixture.

The diagram is an outline of this Indian mtDNA tree within the background of the previously defined global mtDNA lineage clusters (haplogroups)… all of the Indian mtDNA lineages we inferred can be seen as deriving from the African mtDNA lineage cluster L3a… We found that more than 80% of the Indian mtDNA lineages belong to either Asian-specific haplogroup M (60.4%) or western-Eurasian-specific haplogroups H, I, J, K, U and W (20.5%), while the remaining 19.1% of lineages do not belong to any of the previously established mtDNA haplogroups. We note that haplogroup K should now be considered a sub-cluster of haplogroup U.’

‘The skeleton network of Indian lineage clusters on the background of continent-specific mtDNA haplogroups. Red, Indians; green, western Eurasians; yellow, eastern Eurasians; blue, Africans. Haplogroup frequencies are proportional to node sizes. 

All Indian, eastern-Eurasian and western-Eurasian mtDNA lineages coalesce finally to the African node L3a. The former are shown magnified to account for higher mtDNA diversity in sub-Saharan Africans. The most likely root of the tree is indicated within a pan-African cluster L1. The dashed line leading from the African external node L3a to the Eurasian mtDNA varieties identifies the position of L3a in the magnified part of the tree.

The first and the most profound layer of overlap between the western-Eurasian and the Indian mtDNA lineages relates to haplogroup U, a complex mtDNA lineage cluster with an estimated age of 51,000 – 67,000 years. Until now, this haplogroup has not been reported to occur in India nor east of India and was considered a western-Eurasian-specific haplogroup. Surprisingly, we found that haplogroup U is the second most frequent haplogroup in India as it is in Europe. Nevertheless, the spread of haplogroup U subclusters in Europe and India differs profoundly. The dominant subcluster in India is U2. Although rare in Europe, the South-Asian form differs from the western-Eurasian one: western-Eurasian U2 includes a further characteristic transversion at nucleotide position (np) 16,129, which is absent in Indian U2 varieties. We calculated the coalescence age essentially as described in and estimate the split between the Indian and western-Eurasian U2 lineages as 53,000 ± 4,000 years before present (BP). 

We note that U5, the most frequent and ancient subcluster of haplogroup U in Europe, has an almost identical coalescence age estimate. Still, despite their equally deep time depth, the Indian U2 has not penetrated western Eurasia, and the European U5 has almost not reached India.’

This proves that the Indian, whether northern or southern with primarily mtDNA Haplogroup U2, is not Indo-European or Aryan – as with U5 – but a specific, separate people who have descended from Ham not Shem. Yet, while they share a common paternal ancestor in Noah and a maternal ancestor in his wife, Emzara; at some point the maternal lineage deriving from – Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk and then – Cush, shared a female ancestor with Shem’s descendants.

‘Reconstruction of haplogroup U lineages found in India. Green bold lines, the background of previously characterized haplogroup U lineages from western Eurasia; red lines, lineages and haplotypes found only in India; pink nodes, Dravidic speakers [south]; blue nodes, Hindi speakers [north]. 

Subcluster U7 is another variety of haplogroup U present in India. Unlike the Indian U2, it has been sampled, albeit rarely, in southern Europe, the Near East and (according to HVR I sequence identification only) also in Central Asia. We calculated the coalescence age of this subcluster in India as… considerably younger than that for U2.

Typical western-Eurasian mtDNA lineages found in [primarly northern] India belong to haplogroups H, I, J, T, X and to subclusters U1, U4, U5 and K of haplogroup U. Frequencies of these lineages in Indian populations are more than an order of magnitude lower than in Europe: 5.2% versus 70%, respectively. This finding might be explained by gene flow… Nevertheless, we note that the frequency of these mtDNA haplogroups reveals neither a strong north-south, nor language-based gradient: they are found both among Hindi speakers from Uttar Pradesh (6%) and Dravidians of Andhra Pradesh (4%). 

Assuming that they are largely of western-Eurasian origin, we may ask when their spread in India started. To assign a tentative date for their introduction, we calculated the averaged minimal distance of the corresponding mtDNA hypervariable region sequences in Indians from the branches shared with western Eurasians. We obtained a value for the statistic ρ equal to 0.46, consistent with a divergence time of 9,300 ± 3,000 years BP [the post-flood epoch and the subsequent re-populating of the Earth]. 

This is an average over an unknown number of various founders and, therefore, does not tell us whether there were one or many migration waves, or whether there was a continuous long-lasting gradual admixture. Their low frequency but still general spread all over India plus the estimated time scale, does not support a recent massive Indo-Aryan invasion, at least as far as maternally inherited genetic lineages are concerned. We note, however, that within an error margin this time estimate is consistent with the arrival to India of cereals domesticated in the Fertile Crescent. Furthermore, the spread of these western-Eurasian-specific mtDNA clusters also among Dravidic-speaking populations of India lends credence to the suggested linguistic connection between Elamite [Indo-Iranian] and Dravidic populations.’

The article draws an important distinction between the time frames of maternal and paternal admixture. So that a maternal infusion of West Eurasian genes stems back to the age following the global flood cataclysm – Article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. This would have occurred between 12,000 years to 9,000 years ago – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla; and Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Whereas a paternal genetic influx in the Indian gene pool appears to have been a far more recent event.

‘Thus, we have shown that the overwhelming majority [but not all] of the so-called western-Eurasian-specific mtDNA lineages in Indian populations, estimated here to be carried by more than a hundred million contemporary Indians, belong in fact to an Indian-specific variety of [a] haplogroup U [mutation] of a late Pleistocene origin. The latter exhibits a direct common phylogenetic origin with its sister groups found in western Eurasia, but it should not be interpreted in terms of a recent admixture of western Caucasoids with Indians caused by a putative Indo-Aryan invasion 3,000–4,000 years BP. From the deep time depth of the split between the predominant Indian and European haplogroup U varieties, it could be speculated that haplogroup U arose in neither of the two regions. This split could have already happened in Africa, for example, in Ethiopia, where haplogroup U was recently described.’

Not in Africa necessarily, but certainly back to the subsequent split or alternate U Haplogroup mutations from a common maternal descendant post-flood, within the past 12,000 years. 

‘Although there is no strong evidence yet for the presence of anatomically modern humans in India before 35,000-40,000 years ago, the earliest estimates of the presence of modern humans in Australia make it very likely that the subcontinent served as a pathway for east-ward migration of modern humans somewhat earlier and that it could have been inhabited by them en route, as suggested by the ‘Southern Route’ hypothesis. Our coalescence age estimate for the mtDNA sub-cluster U2 overlaps not only with the corresponding value for the European U5, but with the suggested coalescence age of the Indian-specific subset of the predominantly Asian haplogroup M lineages as well. 

Taken together, these data suggest that a common denominator – most likely beneficial climate conditions [post Last Glacial Maximum] – led to the expansion of populations all over Eurasia [post-flood], including the ancestors [Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk, Cush’s wife and an unknown maternal ancestor from Shem] of those who now encompass most of the mtDNA genome pool of the extant Indians. 

Furthermore, this specific distribution of mtDNA varieties in India compared with the distribution observed among Mongoloids and the Caucasoid populations of western Eurasia is, at present, best explained by two separate late Pleistocene migrations of modern humans to India. One of them, possibly arriving by the southern route, brought to India [by] an ancestral population carrying haplogroup M and was spread further eastward. The second migration brought the ancestors of haplogroup U [U2, U7]. 

Although the admixture of these major waves started perhaps very early – explaining the spread of these major mtDNA varieties all over the subcontinent – it is likely that it happened after the carriers of haplogroup M found their way further east, explaining the absence of haplogroup U lineages among Mongoloid populations studied so far.’

Recall the defining mtDNA Haplogroups for Japheth’s descendants also include M [M7] and then uniquely F, A and D. Though it was the relatively recent Haplogroup B mutations [B4, B5] which were prevalent in varying frequencies amongst all seven of his son’s descendants today in Central Asia, East Asia and the Americas. In the previous chapter, it was shown how support for Canaan being a fourth and separate genetic line was evident in their ancient defining mtDNA Haplogroups L0 through to L6 – Chapter XII Canaan & Africa. Though it is L3, which is the most frequent maternal lineage amongst sub-Saharan Africans.

The article’s conclusion is based on evolution and the ‘out of Africa’ theory; whereas the reality lay with the off the Ark scenario; in that both Ham and Shem’s wives, Na’eltama’uk and Sedeqetelebab – and not forgetting Japheth’s wife ‘Adataneses – who carried the genetic DNA for the mitochondria M super-Haplogroup; which later mutated into the sub-super Haplogroup R. Meaning, both may have carried the relevant specific mtDNA for the various U Haplogroups – deriving from R – in their respective lines. If this is not the case, then the only other explanation is that a descendant of Shem intermixed with that of Cush’s line. Either way, it would explain the corresponding U Haplogroup mutations, U2 and U7 for Cush and Phut and U5 for Shem being of course, a similar age.

The main mtDNA Haplogroups in India include: 

M 51% – U 19% – R 12% – H 5% – HV 3% – W 3% – N 2% 

plus C, F, K, J, T, A, D, L2, B, I, L0, L1 and X which total less than 1%

The Lambadis nomads of India carry the highest levels of Y-DNA R1b and their mtDNA Haplogroups percentages are: 

M 64% – R 13% – U 12%

plus H, V, T, J, N, X, K and W which comprise 8%. 

The Sri Lankan mtDNA Haplogroups:

M 58% – U 18% – R 14% and H to W comprising 8%. 

The Bengali in Bangladesh, mtDNA Haplogroups: 

M 67% – U 13% – R 9% and H to W of 6%.

                           M       U        R 

India                 51       19       12

Lambadis        64       12       13

Sri Lanka         58      18       14

Bangladesh     67     13        9

The M macro-Haplogroup in India includes many subgroups, ‘that differ profoundly from other sublineages in East Asia…’ as well as Central Asia. This is because these peoples are descended from Japheth as we have studied, whereas the Indians and related peoples, are descended from Ham. Subgroup M2, including M2a and M2b, is lower in the north of India and higher in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. M3a is highest in northwestern India; while M4a peaks in Pakistan and Kashmir. M6a and M6b are found in Kashmir, the Bay of Bengal and Sri Lanka. M18 is found throughout South Asia, whereas M25 is less frequent. 

R2 is common throughout the sub-continent and R5 as well, peaking in the southwest of India. R6 is widespread at low rates across India, peaking among Tamils and Kashmiris. Related group W, is found in the northwest of India, peaking in the Punjab and Kashmir. U2 is sparsely distributed, particularly in the northern half of India; though it is found in southwest Arabia. U2a has high density in both Pakistan and northwest India. U2b is found in Sri Lanka and also Oman, as is U2i. U2c is prominent in Bangladesh and West Bengal in India. U7 is significant in Pakistan and the Punjab, with its highest presence in near neighbour Iran.

Indian man and woman

Retina, Y Haplogroups, Fifth Edition, 2013, M Cristina Kenney & Nitin Udar – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Clade C was found in Central Asia, South Asia, and East Asia… C2 [now C1b3a – M38] is found in New Guinea, Melanesia… C4 [now C1b3b – M347] appears to be restricted among aboriginal Australians and is dominant in that population. C5 [now C1b1a1 – M356] has a significant presence in India.

Haplogroup F is the parent of haplogroups from G to R; however excluding these common haplogroups, the minor clades F, F1, and F2, seem to appear in the Indian continent…

Until now, haplogroup H [L901] has not been well studied, members of this haplogroup were mainly found in the Indian continent [H1a]…

Haplogroup L [M20] is found mainly in India and Pakistan, as well as in the Middle East and, very occasionally, in Europe, particularly in Mediterranean countries… 

The highest frequencies of haplogroup M [P256] are shown in Melanesia, being restricted to the geographical distribution of Papuan languages…

The P [P295] clade is the parent of haplogroups Q and R, and is rarely found. It has been detected at low frequencies in the Caucasus and India [P1 – M45]…’

The major South Asian and Indian Y-DNA Haplogroups in order are R1a, H, L, R2 and J2. According to studies undertaken between 2003 and 2010, R1a-Z93 as shown below, is prevalent throughout Central Asia, Southern Asia and West Asia. Meaning it is shared by Japheth’s descendants from Madai; the Hamitic peoples of India; as well as the Persians of Iran from Shem. It is important to remember that R1a is the result of admixture in the male population and originates in Shem’s line and not Ham’s.

R2 on the other hand as shown below, is restricted to Southern Asia. It is a mutation peculiar to this region and not linked to the European R1a.

Haplogroup L is found in India, Pakistan and further west, to include the Near and Middle East. Haplogroup J2 is a complex and complicated mutation to explain – Article: Y-DNA Adam & mtDNA Eve: The Genesis & Evolution of Homo sapiens; and Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia . While J2 is found in men of the Middle East, West Asia and Southern Europe, it appears to be a defining paternal Haplogroup for descendants of Phut in Pakistan.

Haplogroup H is the one Haplogroup that is nearly entirely restricted to South Asia and particularly indicative of Indian men. Y-DNA Haplogroup H is found at a high frequency, as the major indigenous paternal lineage and the defining marker Haplogroup for Indian males. It is rarely found outside of South Asia, with traces found in men of southeastern Europe and the Arabs of the Levant. All three branches of H [H1, L902; H2 and H3] are found in South Asia.

Haplogroup H1a [M69, M370] is found extensively in Southern India at approximately 28% and in Northern India at approximately 25%, showing their common heritage as the sons of Raamah. While in Pakistan, it is the reverse and is tellingly, much less frequent.

Haplogroup J2 is present in South Asia as J2a-M410 and J2b-M102. Overall, it is found in higher percentages in Pakistan than India; giving it some commonality with the Arab nations to its west and showing its distinctiveness from India. Haplogroup L is far more frequent in the south of India compared to the north, with rates of up to 68% in Karnataka as opposed to 2% to 7% in northern India. Overall, Pakistan nationally, has slightly less Haplogroup L than India. 

Haplogroup O1b [O-K18 from M248] is somewhat mysterious as it is heavily associated with the East Asians and Southeast Asians as we have learned in preceding chapters, yet it is found at varying frequencies in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh for instance. Recall, the Melanesians also exhibit O1 which is believed to have derived from admixture with the Polynesian – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. Observe the sharp divide between the Haplogroup R1 of Central and South Asia with Haplogroup O in East Asia and South East Asia.

R1a is thought to have originated circa 25,000 years ago – though more likely, quarter the number to closer to 6,250 ya – with its sub-clade M417 or M198 diversifying circa 5,500 ya, with a distribution of its sub-clades R-Z282 and R-Z280 in Central and Eastern Europe and R1a-Z93’s sub-Haplogroup M750 being exclusive of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. As this Haplogroup is found in Occidental and Oriental Eurasia as well as South Asia, it is a topic of much debate as to its origin geographically. 

This is a blind, as the premise is based on evolutionary migration from Africa and or Australia; rather than a post-diluvian migration from Kashmir; then the Indus Valley region; and later Mesopotamia and Arabia – Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla

The simple answer is that one son of Noah carried the potential for Y-DNA Haplogroup R; with Japheth’s and Ham’s children either inheriting or receiving R1a by admixture – Chapter III Central Asia – Madai & the Medes. While R2 and R2a are Haplogroups found in South Asia with at least 90% of R-M124 found in the region and R1 or M173 with R* or M207, are found in Bali, Indonesia; the specific eastern European branch of R1a is R-M458 and it is with these men that R1a is the original defining marker Haplogroup – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

A recent genetic study by Yelmen et al. in 2019, shows that modern South Asian populations are close to each other and distinct from populations outside of South Asia or the lands comprising Cush. Analysis performed by Mondal in 2017, concluded that closest neighbour studies revealed that Indian Y-DNA paternal lineages are close to southern European populations and that ‘European-related ancestry in Indian populations might be much older and more complex than anticipated, and might originate from the first wave of agriculturists or even earlier.’ 

This finding supports the lines of Shem and Cush intermixing as we have learned. The relationships of Moses and King Solomon validate this in the least, while a greater numeric past influence from migrations and admixture at the most. The exact when and where this happened, may be found to seriously run contrary to the current Aryan invasion circa 2000 BCE theory.

A major 2009 study by Reich, used 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers; hypothesizing ‘that the modern South Asian population was the result of admixture between two genetically divergent ancestral populations… These two “reconstructed” ancient populations he termed “Ancestral South Indians” (ASI) and “Ancestral North Indians” (ANI).’ Reich stated: “ANI ancestry is significantly higher in Indo-European than Dravidian speakers, suggesting that the ancestral ASI may have spoken a Dravidian language before mixing with the ANI.” Both the ANI and ASI ancestry is distributed all across the subcontinent in varying degrees, with “ANI ancestry [ranging] from 39-71% in India, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers.”

Two studies based on autosomal markers – by Watkins in 2005 and Kivislid in  2003 – concluded that ‘Indian caste and tribal populations have a common ancestry.’ A 2004 study by Viswanathan et al. on ‘genetic structure and affinities among tribal populations of southern India concludes:

“Genetic differentiation was high and genetic distances were not significantly correlated with geographic distances. Genetic drift therefore probably played a significant role in shaping the patterns of genetic variation observed in southern Indian tribal populations. Otherwise, analyses of population relationships showed that all Indian and South Asian populations are still similar to one another, regardless of phenotypic [genetic and environmental] characteristics, and do not show any particular affinities to Africans. We conclude that the phenotypic similarities of some Indian groups to Africans do not reflect a close relationship between these groups, but are better explained by convergence.” 

The matter of the African being descended from Canaan and the Indian from Cush shows they are half brothers, conventionally from the same father, Ham. Though there is a case for Canaan being a fourth son of Noah and a half-brother of Ham via Ham’s wife Na’eltama’uk. Autosomal DNA, Y-DNA and mtDNA Haplogroups support this theory – refer Chapter XI Ham Aequator; and Chapter XII Canaan & Africa.

Granted, their prime respective Haplogroups of E1b1a and H1a bear little resemblance. Though surprisingly, we find that it is not Cush and Phut which share a similar ethnic legacy, but rather it is Mizra and Phut who are similar siblings through Haplogroups J1 and J2 respectively. For Ham’s remaining son Mizra, possesses a paternal Haplogroup closely related to Phut – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia. The Southern and Northern Indians are similar as brothers as their true shared Y-DNA Haplogroups of primarily H and secondarily L indicate. We cannot know how they differed exactly, though it is clear that Indo-European admixture has altered the Haplogroup percentages for the Northern Indian as we will learn.

Less frequent Haplogroups found in Indian men include: T, F, P, C, R1b, G, E1b1a and Q. Indians in the United Kingdom have also exhibited, E1b1b and J1.

Afghanistan’s Y-DNA Haplogroups are represented by its majority group the Pashtun, comprising some 40% of the population. Overall, Afghanistan has more in common with Pakistan than India, or even the other nations of South Asia. The mysterious Sukkim do not have a sequence close to any of Cush’s sons, apart from one. In Pakistan, the Punjabs comprise 50% of the population and the Pashtuns 15%. The Punjabs of India are located in the northwest of the country and account for approximately twenty million people.

Jammu and Kashmir Haplogroups are based on the Indian Gujars; who comprise 20 to 30% of the population. The southern Indians or Dravidians, comprise 25% of India’s population – of which, the two largest groups are the Telugus and the Tamils, with approximately eighty million people each. The Nepalese Haplogroups are based on the Terai Hindus.

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

Jammu & Kashmir:   R1a – L – H – R2 – K – J – F – R1 – Q – C

Nepal:                           R1a – C – H – J – R2 

Afghanistan: R1a [51%] – Q [18.4%] – L [12.2%] – H [6.1%] –

G [6.1%] – J [2%] – R2 [2%] – C [2%]

Kashmir Gujars: R1a [40.9%] – L [16.3%] – H [10.2%] – R2 [8.2%] –

K [8.2%] – J [6.1%] – F [4%] – R1 [2%] – Q [2%] – C [2%]

Nepal: R1a [69.2%] – C [11.5%] – H [3.8%] – J [3.8%] – R2 [3.8%]

The Nepalese Hindus as Sabtah, show the influence of Central and East Asia with a higher percentage of Haplogroup C. Aside from Haplogroup Q, Afghanistan as the Sukkim and Kashmir as Sabteca, are more closely aligned in the key Cushite Haplogroups of H and L than any other people in the region – with the exception of Pakistan.

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

Dravidian:          H – R1a – J – L – F – R2 – G – C – Q – R1b

Southern India: H – R1a – R2 – J – L – T – F – C – P – R1b 

Sri Lanka:           R1a – L – H – J – R2 – F – P – K

Eastern India:    R1a – H – R2 – J – T – F – P – L – C

Bangladesh: H [35.7%] – R1a [21.4%] – J [11.9%] – R2 [7.1%] –

C [7.1%] – L [4.8%] – G [4.7%]  – Q [2.4%] 

Dravidians: H [32.9%] – R1a [26.7%] – J [19.7%] – L [11.6%] –

F [9.3%] – R2 [ 6.2%] – G [ 2.3%] – C [1.7%] – Q [0.3%] – R1b [0.3%]

Southern India: H [27.5%] – R1a [26.7%] – R2 [21.5%] – J [19.7%] –

L [10.8%] – T [5.1%] – F [4%] – C [1.9%] – P [1.6%] – R1b [0.3%]

Sri Lanka: R1a [27%] – L [19%] – H [15%] – J [14%] –

R2 [ 12%] – F [9%] – P [3%] – K [1%] 

Eastern India: R1a [23.2%] – H [19.3%] – R2 [15.5%] – J [4.1%] –

T [3.8%] – F [2.7%] – P [2.7%] – L [1.9%] – C [o.8%]  

The Bangladeshi Y-DNA Haplogroups are based on the Bangladesh Bengalis. We can appreciate the identities of Havilah, Dedan and Seba are more aligned to each other than to the first group of Sukki, Sabtah and Sabteca. As we will find repeatedly, some peoples have a closer Haplogroup sequence affinity with a cousin than a brother, who may also be somewhat removed geographically. Hence, one would expect Bangladesh and Eastern India to have more in common – or Eastern India with Southern India in comparison – as Sri Lanka and the Dravidian of Southern India; but as can be seen, it is in fact Eastern India and Sri Lanka that align more closely in paternal Haplogroup frequencies.

There is a relative resemblance between Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Dravidian Indians inhabiting Southern and Eastern India. All three peoples are generally the darker skinned peoples of Cush as the result of far less admixture. Hence, little surprise that the northern Indians – 72% of India’s population – possess a contrasting Haplogroup footprint compared to these three.

Notice above top, that while Pakistanis are similar to Indians they are clearly distinct from them. See above bottom, how looking closely, the data for Pakistan differs from that of India and sits clearly between India and that of North Africa and the Middle East.

Northern India:             R1a – H – R2 – J – L – F – G – R1b

Indian Upper Castes:   R1a – H – L – J – R2 – F – P – C – R1b

India Punjab:                 R1a – J – L – R1b – H – R2 – C

Lambadi:                         R1b – C – L – H – R1a – J – F – P 

Northern India: R1a [48.9%] – H [24.5%] – R2 [11.1%] – J [7.8%] –

L [1.7%] – F [1.1%] – G [0.6%] – R1b [0.6%] 

Upper Castes: R1a [30.5%] – H [23.3%] – L [11.4%] – J [10%] –

R2 [9%] – F [1.9%] – P [1.9%] – C [0.9%] – R1b [0.5%] 

Punjabi Indian: R1a [47%] – J [21.2%] – L [12.1%] – R1b [7.6%] –

H [5.7%] – R2 [4.6%] – C [3%] 

Lambadis: R1b [37.1%] – C [17.1%] – L [17.1%] – H [8.6%] –

R1a [8.6%] – J [5.7%] – F [2.9%] – P [2.9%] 

A comparison of the Haplogroup sequences for the Northern Indian, the upper castes, the Punjab and the Lombadis. Apart from the Lombadi Nomads and their anomaly of a high frequency R1b, the highest levels of R1b in India are in the Punjab. This could be a hint at the lines that have entered amongst others, from people like the priestly line of Moses** and a royal line from King Solomon.* The upper castes overall have a trace of R1b at 0.5%, as does northern India as a whole. 

It is important to note that excluding R1a from admixture, it is Haplogroup H which is the dominant male Haplogroup in Northern India as it is in Southern India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Whereas for the Punjabi Indian it is Haplogroup J2, which is also the prime Haplogroup for the men descended from Phut in Pakistan.

As R1b is indicative of a western European line of descent, this information alerts us to the fact that any link to the tribes of Judah* and Levi** – and by implication other sons of Jacob, as well as relatives of his – will point to them being found dwelling in Western Europe. 

The average percentages for Y-DNA Haplogroups for the vast nation of India and its myriad peoples.

India:    R1a – H – O2 – L – R2 – J2 – T1 – F – P – C – R1b – G

India: R1a [28.3%] – H [23%] – L [17.5%] – R2 [ 9.3%] – J2 [9.1%] – 

T [3.1%] – F [3%] – P [2.7%] – C [1.4%] – R1b [0.5%] –

G [0.1%] – Q [0.4%]

Strains of R1a and J2 are found extensively outside of India and its related neighbours. Haplogroups L and R2 though found outside of South Asia, are still predominant in the Indian sub-Continent. These four Haplogroups are all significant Haplogroups in India; yet, it is Haplogroup H1a which is the defining marker Haplogroup for Indian men and related peoples. 

The Punjabi have a percentage of 8% for R1b. The Punjabi in Pakistan by comparison, do not have any R1b. If Pakistan was a son of Cush and not Phut, one would expect to find evidence of R1b, as it is even found in the Dravidian. Interestingly, the Pathans – originally Pashtuns from Afghanistan who are refugees in the Punjab region of Pakistan – comprising 15% of the population, have a similar percentage of R1b with the Punjabs of India.

Pathans Pakistan:  R1a – H – L – R2 – G – R1b – Q – R – C

Pathans Pakistan: R1a [38.1%] – H [14.3%] – L [9.5%] – R2 [9.5%] –

G [9.5%] – R1b [9.5%] – Q [9.5%] – R [4.8%] – C [4.8%]

Recall, we looked at the noticeable difference between the Indo-European Indians of the North and the Dravidian Indians of the South. Whether it be physical characteristics, skin tone, culture and so forth, they appear too different to be the full brothers, Sheba and Dedan from Raamah their father.

Yet, we learned that they are related and their autosomal DNA supports this premise. The higher level in northern India’s R1a, a result from intermixing, as well as a corresponding lower level in R2, J and perhaps L. The Northern Indians retain similar levels of H with the south of India – the very Haplogroup which is unique to the Cushite peoples of South Asia.

Northern India: R1a [48.9%] – H [24.5%] – R2 [11.1%] – J [7.8%] –

L [1.7%] 

Southern India: H [27.5%] – R1a [26.7%] – R2 [21.5%] – J [19.7%] –

L [10.8%] 

Pakistan’s Punjab majority and the smaller Pashtun peoples are relatively alike.

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

Pakistan Pashtun:     R1a – L – G – J – Q – H – F – T

Pakistan Punjabi: R1a [ 35.4%] – J [27.1%] – R2 [12.5%] – G [ 8.3%] –

H [6.3%] – L [4.2%] – Q [4.2%] – C [2%] 

Pakistan Pashtun: R1a [44.8%] – L [12.5%] – G [11.5%] – J [6.2%] –

Q [5.2%] – H [4.2%] – F [2.1%] – T [1%] 

Comparing the Punjab of Pakistan and India and also the Pashtun of Pakistan and Afghanistan, we find that they are related, yet ostensibly different. There is a crossover so that some descendants of Phut say, are still living in the Indian Punjab; but, even though they have the same name, many are clearly not the same peoples. The Punjabis who left India for Pakistan are descended from Phut and not from Cush. The lack of any R1b and far less frequency of Haplogroup H, reflect a different lineage; as does the difference in Haplogroup G between say Pakistan and India. Note that Y-DNA Haplogroup G is not indicative of the descendants of Cush and Phut as are H, L and J2, but rather an early paternal lineage of Shem.

Punjabi Indian: R1a [47%] – J [21.2%] – L [12.1%] – R1b [7.6%] –

H [5.7%] – R2 [4.6%] – C [3%] 

Pakistan Punjabi: R1a [ 35.4%] – J [27.1%] – R2 [12.5%] – G [ 8.3%] –

H [6.3%] – L [4.2%] – Q [4.2%] – C [2%] 

Afghanistan: R1a [51%] – Q [18.4%] – L [12.2%] – H [6.1%] – G [6.1%] –

J [2%] – R2 [2%] – C [2%]

Pakistan Pashtun: R1a [44.8%] – L [12.5%] – G [11.5%] – J [6.2%] –

Q [5.2%] – H [4.2%] – F [2.1%] – T [1%] 

Comparing Pakistan with India, highlights the fact that rather than being another descendant nation of Cush; Pakistan is descended from Phut. The Haplogroup sequencing, frequency, concentrations and percentages do not match the five main regions of Cush’s male descendants: India, Jammu and Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.

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

India:             R1a – H – L – R2 – J2 – T – F – P – C – R1b – G – Q

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

G [6.2%] – Q [3.4%] – C [3%] 

India: R1a [28.3%] – H [23%] – L [17.5%] – R2 [ 9.3%] – J2 [9.1%] – 

T [3.1%] – F [3%] – P [2.7%] – C [1.4%] – R1b [0.5%] – G [0.1%] – Q [0.4%]

The obvious difference between these two great peoples is India’s higher levels of defining Haplogroup H and Pakistan’s higher levels of Haplogroup J2. The higher percentage of J will be investigated in the following chapter – Chapter XIV Mizra: North Africa & Arabia.

The comparison table shows the principle Y-DNA marker Haplogroups for the peoples of South Asia – the actual defining marker Haplogroup for each in bold.

                               H         R1a       R2        L         J

Afghanistan          6          51          2         12        2

Pakistan                6          37          8         12      20

Sri Lanka             15          27        12         19      14

India                     23         28          9        18        9

Bangladesh         36         21          7 5      12

Constant readers will notice that no paternal Haplogroups are evident from Canaan’s line – E1b1a, E1b1b, A, B, E2, E1a – thus supporting a distinct and separate lineage from Noah rather than Ham and bearing no obvious link with the cluster of Haplogroups indicative of Ham’s sons: H, J1, J2 and L.

Aside from the Sukki of Afghanistan with Haplogroup L, Pakistan with J2 does not fit neatly with the rest of South Asia and H1a. Instead, Pakistan as Phut is in contrast with the descendants of Cush and though admixture has occurred between the two, Pakistan leans towards West Asia; the clues being the difference in Haplogroups H and J. It is interesting to note that as Haplogroup H increases in these nations, the corresponding level of R1a from admixture decreases.

It is Haplogroup L which presents an interesting enigma in that it does not form a uniform pattern in its distribution. It would be tempting to say it highlights a divide in India with Haplogroup H – represented by Sheba and Dedan. Though the higher percentages of the paternal Haplogroup L in both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka would seem to contradict this theory. Perhaps L as a more recent mutation, it will continue to outgrow H1a over time and become the defining marker for Cush instead of Haplogroup H – as might be the case currently in Sri Lanka and in time, India also.

While it appears Sheba equates to Northern India and Dedan to Southern India, the possibility remains that they are the other way around and Southern India is Sheba, adjacent to the similar peoples of Seba in Sri Lanka. Note the preponderance of words beginning with the letter P associated with Phut: Pathan, Pashtun, Punjab and Pakistan.

Recall, that there appears to be more than one Libya in scripture. We will study the Lubim in the next chapter and find they are actually part of the Pakistan nation. The clue is the prominence of Haplogroup J. 

We will discover in the next section that Haplogroup J is found liberally in those men of Arabic and related descent. The sons of Cush exhibit this Haplogroup through admixture with related peoples descended from Ham. The fact that Pakistan has J at higher frequencies, is due in part to an Arabic admixture embedded within the peoples of Phut.

Proverbs 9:9 New Century Version

Teach the wise, and they will become even wiser; teach good people, and they will learn even more.

“Majority wins, but majority is not necessarily right and sometimes majority is awfully wrong.” 

Amit Kalantri

“The public will believe anything, so long as it is not founded on truth.” 

Edith Sitwell

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

Tarshish & Japan

Chapter IX

Javan’s second son Tarshish, figures prominently in the Bible. He lived the furthest of all his brothers; somewhat similar to Togarmah separating from Gomer’s other sons – Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas. Tarshish grew wealthy through trade and is synonymous with shipping. Of all the eastern peoples, Tarshish had a strong orientation to the West, enduring until the present day. There is only one candidate remaining in East Asia who could fulfil Tarshish’s identity as a maritime island nation inherited from Javan. The people descended from Tarshish today, comprise the people of Japan.

The Origin of the Nations, Herman Hoeh, 1957:

‘Tarshish first settled in Asia Minor. The city of Tarsus was named after him. Here… Paul was born. From Tarsus the tribe spread into Spain and northern Portugal, founding the famous port of Tartessus – the Tarshish of the Old Testament history of Solomon’s time…’

During Solomon’s reign from 970 to 930 BCE, the people of Tartessus were Phoenicians and not the descendants of Tarshish who founded the city. The following regions are attributed to Tarshish and are all plausible cities and ports established during trading expeditions and migrations in the ancient past, as we have formerly noted with Kittim in the Mediterranean – refer Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. 

The Targum of Jonathan renders Tarshish as Carthage in north Africa, though a biblical commentator Samuel Bochart, read it as Tartessos in ancient Hispania on the Iberian Peninsula, near Huelva and Sevilla today. Jewish scholar, Isaac Abarbanel, described Tarshish as ‘the city known in earlier times as Carthage and today called Tunis.’ An earlier identification had been with the inland town of Tarsus in Cilicia of south-central Turkey. American scholars William Albright and Frank Cross suggested Tarshish was located in Sardinia because of the discovery of the Nora Stone, whose Phoenician inscription mentions Tarshish.

Nineteenth century commentators proposed Tarshish was fulfilled in Britain, including proponent Alfred Dunkin. This idea stemmed from the fact that Tarshish is recorded to have been a trader in tin, silver, gold and lead which had all been mined in Cornwall. Britain is still reputed to be the ‘Merchants of Tarshish’ today by some Christian believers; which is weighted with irony, due to the many points of similarity between Japan and Britain.

Much could be written on the fascinating inter-relatedness of Japan and Great Britain – Island nations on the periphery of continents; part of yet separate, from their neighbours geographically and ideologically; strong self-identity; cultural icons; empires; military and economic powers; sea-faring and maritime states; ship builders; inventors; traders… world influencers – Article: 2050.

Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:

‘… within Church of God circles [some] have… speculated that the Japanese may have descended from Ashkenaz [Vietnam], a son of Gomer (Generations of Japheth. Church of God News… 1965) or Togarmah [North Korea and South Korea], another of Gomer’s [sons]; the… Plain Truth magazine stated, “Japan is Tarshish of Asia in Bible prophecy” (Plache R F, Lexander G L. Japan’s New Role in Asia. Plain Truth, April 1968, page 27).

Steven M Collins in his book, The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! 1992, proposes three explanations on the Biblical Tarshish – emphasis mine:

‘The King James Version of the Bible records in I Kings 10:22 that King Solomon “had at sea a navy of Tharshish” (other versions simply say “Tarshish”). One possibility is that Solomon had a fleet of ships based in Spain because Tartessus (in ancient Spain) is often identified as “Tarshish”… “ships of Tarshish” were recorded as having made voyages to the New World… It is also significant to note that I Kings 10:22 is the Bible’s first mention of “ships of Tarshish.” I Kings 10:22 may be a reference to a Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain which became the homeport of a major… fleet during Solomon’s reign. If so, Tartessus (or Tarshish) was a jumping-­off point for voyages throughout the Atlantic… [and] that a reference to “ships of Tarshish” identified the fleet that Israel (together with Tyre and Sidon) had based in ancient Spain. 

The second explanation considers the possibility that the extra “h” in the word Tharshish identifies this navy with one of the clans of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, which was named “Tharshish” (I Chronicles 7:10). Since “Tharshish” is an Israelite name, the Bible’s reference to “ships of Tharshish” could mean that this navy was primarily crewed by members of this branch of the tribe of Benjamin. It is also possible that the term “ships of Tarshish” later came to describe a particular class of sea­going vessels used by the Phoenicians. This possibility is supported by the reference in I Kings 22:48 that over a century later Judah’s King Jehoshaphat tried to “make” a fleet composed of “ships of Tarshish” for basing in the Red Sea port of Ezion­geber.’ 

This is an insightful observation, as we will learn that modern day Benjamin does indeed have a strong ship building legacy – refer Chapter XXX Judah & Benjamin – the Regal Tribes.

Collins: ‘Some readers might wonder whether the “ships of Tarshish” belonged to the Japhethic tribe of Tarshish mentioned in Genesis 10:4. While that would seem to be a possibility at first, the fact that the Tartessian “Tarshish” was located in the direction that Jonah sailed to Tarshish, and the fact that the Iberian “Tarshish” spoke a dialect of Phoenician (a Semitic language) argues for a Semitic origin for Solomon’s “ships of Tharshish” and the Iberian “Tarshish.” Further­more, there is no biblical evidence of any close cooperation between King Solomon’s Israelites and the Japhethic nation of Tarshish. Since Barry Fell’s book, America B.C. gives evidence of “the ships of Tarshish” being involved in ancient explorations of North America, this also argues that the biblical “Tarshish” was located proximate to the Atlantic Ocean (such as in ancient Spain).’ 

Tarshish may well be the city port, located in Spain. 

Recall, we learned with Kittim, in the preceding chapter, that the verse in Daniel detailing a naval fleet setting sail from Kittim is not a reference to the West, or to Rome, or even Italy, but as the verse states, it is a direct reference to the Kittim the descendants of Javan. Albeit, it is a future prophecy. The difference here, is that the ‘ships of Tarshish’ are detailing a current event; though it is the ships of Tarshish stated, not Tarshish the port. With that in mind, there are verses which record a round trip to Tarshish being considerably further than merely from Canaan to Spain. 

Bochart suggested eastern localities for the ports of Ophir and Tarshish during King Solomon’s reign, specifically the Tamilakkam continent: present day Southern India and Northern Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, where the Dravidians were famous for their gold, pearls, ivory and peacock trade.

1 Kings 10:22

English Standard Version

‘For the king [Solomon] had a fleet of ships of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram [the Phoenician]. Once every three years the fleet of ships of Tarshish used to come bringing gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks.’

Contrary to Collins dismissing a relationship with Tarshish the nation, this verse may well be supporting an economic arrangement with the Tarshish of the East – rather than the city-port, of the western Mediterranean. If the visits were this infrequent, it supports Tarshish was all the way around the Earth, either in Japan or East Asia – some 5,656 miles from the Israelite Kingdom – and their ships were collecting exotic items throughout Southeast Asia and India en route. See 2 Chronicles 9:21, 1 Kings 22:48 and 2 Chronicles 20-36-37.

Psalm 72:10

New Century Version

‘Let the kings of Tarshish and the faraway lands bring him [King Solomon] gifts. Let the kings of Sheba and Seba [a grandson and a son of Cush respectively] bring their presents to him.’

Jeremiah 10:9

English Standard Version

‘Beaten silver is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz. They are the work of the craftsman and of the hands of the goldsmith; their clothing is violet and purple; they are all the work of skilled men.’

The Japanese are a highly skilled people with an economy reflecting their talent, work ethic, technological prowess and subsequent wealth. 

The reference to violet and particularly purple, lends itself to either the Phoenicians – refer Chapter XII Canaan & Africa – or it is exemplifying the quality of the workmanship, the products and the fitness for royalty, such as for King Solomon himself. Either way, it cannot be ignored, that Tarshish was linked to ‘faraway’ lands – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia – and with ‘Sheba and Seba’ of Cush – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut. Both associations are clues to Tarshish being located a great distance away, as in Asia and not the western Mediterranean.

Ezekiel 27:12,25

English Standard Version

‘Tarshish did business with you because of your great wealth of every kind; silver, iron, tin, and lead they exchanged for your wares…The ships of Tarshish traveled for you [Tyre] with your merchandise. So you were filled and heavily laden in the heart of the seas.’

Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi:

‘In sixteenth-century Japan, the production of gold and particularly silver grew so significantly that it left a mark on world economic history. Indeed, Japan may have accounted for as much as one-third of the world’s silver output at the end of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth century’ – Kozo Yamamura, editor, The Cambridge History of Japan, pages 60-61.

‘The warlords of this period encouraged gold and silver mining as a source of funds, leading to the discovery and development of many more mines. Most of the daimyos held large stocks of gold and silver bullion and gold dust. Nobunaga, (1534-82, the ‘Japanese Attila’), and Hideyoshi (1535-98, a brilliant commander and statesman), both had great reserves of bullion collected in their castles and used gold freely and ostentatiously to impress the world with their magnificence’ – George Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, pages 339-340.

Isaiah 23:1, 6, 10, 14

English Standard Version

‘The oracle concerning [the fall of] Tyre.

Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for Tyre is laid waste, without house or harbor! From the land of Kittim [Indonesia] it is revealed to them… Cross over to Tarshish; wail, O inhabitants of the coast! Cross over your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish; there is no restraint anymore… Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for your stronghold is laid waste.’

The fall of Tyre – a key trading partner – impacts both East Asia and Southeast Asia. Notice Tarshish and Kittim, two brothers in the far East, are linked together. This is not referring to a Phoenician port in the Mediterranean. 

Isaiah 66:19

English Standard Version

‘… and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud [fourth son of Shem], who draw the bow, to Tubal [fifth son of Japheth] and Javan, to the coastlands far away [archipelago Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines], that have not heard my fame or seen my glory [non-Christian countries]. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.’

Ezekiel 38:13

New English Translation

‘Sheba and Dedan [grandsons of Cush] and the traders of Tarshish with all its young warriors [Hebrew: lions, the East Asian ‘Tiger Economies’] will say to you, “Have you come to loot? Have you assembled your armies to plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to haul away a great amount of spoils?”

Tarshish, an economic and military power with Cush, stands against the great military alliance comprising Magog, Meshech, Tubal and Gomer – which includes the continental Southeast Asian nations of Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, with Togarmah, of North Korea and possibly, South Korea – and does not join with them.

Jonah 1:1-3

New English Translation

‘The Lord’s message came to Jonah son of Amittai, “Go immediately to Nineveh, that large [Hebrew – gadol: great, populous, mighty, powerful, fierce] capital city, and announce judgment against its people because their wickedness has come to my attention.”

Instead, Jonah immediately headed off to Tarshish to escape the commission from the Lord. He traveled to Joppa and found a merchant ship heading to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went aboard it to go with them to Tarshish, far away from the Lord.’

Jonah understandably, was not keen to go to Nineveh in northern Mesopotamia, the very capital of the mighty Assyrian Empire. The equivalent assignment today would be travelling to Russia and preaching a message of sin and repentance to the Russian people in Moscow… daunting indeed – Chapter XX Will the Real Assyria Stand Up: Asshur & Russia. There is a humorous element to Jonah boarding a vessel that would not just take him away, but take him to the furthest reaches logistically possible. The furthest destination was Tarshish. 

Similarly, for most people today, travelling to Japan would be going to the ends of the earth. Japan is so far east, it is in the west so-to-speak. It can even be seen to be far west, depending on which direction one is heading. For example, viewed from the United States – Isaiah 2:16; 60:9.

Psalm 48:7

Common English Bible

‘… or like the east wind [from the Pacific] when it smashes the ships of Tarshish [Japan].’

Exodus 28:20

King James Version

‘And the fourth row a beryl [H8658 – tarshiysh: a precious stone or gem], and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their in closings.’

The Hebrew term tarshish is a homonym, occurring seven times in the Bible and translated beryl in older English versions. It is also the name of a gem stone associated with the Tribe of Asher, which has been identified by the Septuagint and by Josephus as the ‘gold stone’ possibly linked to the chrysolite – a gold, yellow colour – or yellow jasper.

Well known varieties of beryl include emerald and aquamarine. The meaning of Beryl in Sanskrit is a ‘light green semi-precious gemstone’ and in Italian, ‘blue green from the sea.’ It is often colourless* or translucent, though impurities give it colours ranging from green to blue, yellow, red the rarest, and even black. It is the first stone on the fourth row of the priestly breastplate – Exodus 28:20. See also, Ezekiel 1:16 and Daniel 10:6. 

Tarshish in Hebrew means: ‘his Excellency’ and ‘breaking, subjection’. The connotation includes a ‘white dove’ or being ‘dove-white’ and a ‘search for alabaster’. The verb rashash means to ‘beat down, shatter’, the noun shayish ‘white alabaster’, the noun tor, ‘dove’.


Tarshish has a similar definition as Riphath, Togarmah and Kittim in the element of either ‘beating or breaking.’ This shows their familial ties and perhaps somewhat of a future warning.

Abarim  Publications – emphasis mine:

‘The name Tarshish (or Tharshish according to some translations) is assigned five times in the Bible: The first Tarshish is a son of Javan son of Japheth, son of Noah (Genesis 10:4). This name is spelled (Tarshishah) in 1 Chronicles 1:7, but the -ah ending may in fact stem from a locative suffix that means toward or unto, so that it could refer to the range of the sons of Javan: all the way to Tarshish. 

Most famous is Tarshish the city famed for its wealth and merchant fleet… but which location is unknown…

A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 7:10).

One of seven Persian princes (Esther 1:14). Note that the name of one of two aspiring assassins of king Ahasuerus, namely Teresh (Esther 2:21), seems like a truncated version of Tarshish. And both may have something to do with the Persian governmental title tirshatha, usually translated with “governor” (Ezra 2:63, Nehemiah 7:65).

The Hebrew name of a certain precious stone (perhaps yellow jasper, says BDB Theological Dictionary, but translated chrysolite by NIV and beryl by NAS) is also tarshish…

These names (and noun) Tarshish come from different languages and have different etymologies. The Persian prince was probably known as Tarshata, meaning His Excellency (says BDB Theological Dictionary). Another suggestion is a relation to the word tarsta, meaning the feared or revered (BDB Theological Dictionary). 

… Jones translates the name Tarshish with Breaking or Subjection, and the prefix taw would denote a thorough destruction or an ongoing one. But although Tarshish is mentioned here and there as subject of God’s wrath (Psalm 48:7, Isaiah 2:16, 23:1), it is mostly known for its great success in the economic arena. Isaiah even predicts that Tarshish is not going to be simply destroyed, as were Sodom and Gomorrah, but that its legacy will one day be employed to service God (Isaiah 60:9). It is unlikely that the name Tarshish is supposed to be linked to a verb that denotes defeat and destruction. Note that the shish-part of the name Tarshish looks a lot like the word (shayish), meaning alabaster a mostly translucent or white crystal:

The beryl stone is transparent* in its purest form, though it can also amongst all the other colours stated, be white.

‘There’s an odd correlation between the color white and the number six. The nouns… shesh… and… shayish… mean alabaster, which is a whitish translucent material. The identical word… shesh… means six. The noun… shushan… describes the lily, which has six leaves and is… white. The adjective… yashesh… means old or white haired. The verb… tur… means to explore or survey and associates with a broad, circular or sweeping motion. Noun… tor… appears to describe a circular braid of hair.’ 

On a personal note, I am reminded of the Japanese symbol, the Cherry blossom. One of my vivid memories after being fortunate to visit Tokyo in 1989, was all the beautiful white – and not to forget pink – tree blossom. The ‘circular braid’ is reminiscent of ancient Samurai warriors and modern Sumo wrestlers, with their long braided hair. The related Polynesians and also the Amerindians from Tiras, wore their hair in a similar fashion.

Japan comprises an amazing archipelago of 6,852 islands covering 145,937 square miles. The country’s five main islands from north to south, are Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu and Okinawa. Tokyo is both the capital and largest city.

Other major cities include Yokohama, Osaka, Nagoya, Sapporo, Fukuoka, Kobe and Kyoto. Japan is the 11th most populous country in the world, as well as one of the most densely populated and urbanised. About three quarters of the country’s terrain is mountainous, concentrating its population of 123,294,298 people on narrow coastal plains. The Greater Tokyo area has approximately thirty-six million residents – the most populous metropolitan area, or mega-city in the world.

The first mention of the archipelago appear in Chinese chronicles from the first century CE. Between the fourth and ninth centuries, the kingdoms of Japan were unified under an emperor and beginning in the twelfth century political power was held by a series of military dictators, the Shoguns and feudal lords, known as Daimyo; each enforced by a class of warrior nobility, the Samurai. A century long period of civil war ended in reunification in 1603 under the Tokugawa Shogunat.

A lengthy isolationist foreign policy was then enacted until 1854, when a United States fleet forced Japan to open trade – the awakening and emergence of the great trading nation of Tarshish – to the West, which led to the end of the shogunate and the restoration of imperial power in 1868. Japan adopted a Western styled constitution and pursued a program of industrialisation and modernisation.

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, page 235: ‘By the beginning of the twentieth century Japan was an industrial power with the third-largest navy in the world, and in 1905 it defeated the Russians in a war fought on land and sea. However, the very same island-nation geography that had allowed it to remain isolated was now giving it no choice but to engage with the world. The problem was that it chose to engage militarily.

Both the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War were fought to thwart Chinese and Russian influence in Korea. Japan considered Korea to be, in the words of its Prussian military advisor, Major Klemens Meckel, ‘A dagger pointed at the heart of Japan’. Controlling the Peninsula removed the threat, and controlling Manchuria made sure the hand of China, and to a lesser extent Russia, could not get near the dagger’s handle.’

In 1937, Japan invaded China and by 1941 it had entered World War II as an Axis power. After suffering defeat in the Pacific theatre of war, Japan surrendered in 1945. After World War II, Japan experienced impressive economic growth – boosted by American investment and loans – becoming the second largest economy in the world by 1990, before being surpassed by China in 2010. A leader in the automotive and electronics industries, Japan has made considerable contributions to science and technology.

Japan is a great power and maintains Self-Defence Forces which rank as the world’s 4th most powerful military. During the 1980s, political pundits and economic analysts predicted Japan achieving superpower status; due to its population, GDP and economic growth. It was thought, as with China today that Japan would eventually surpass the economy of the United States. Japan is considered a cultural superpower in terms of its large-scale influence in food, ‘electronics, automobiles, music, video games and anime.’ Japan has faced an ongoing period of stagnation since the 1990s, an ageing population since the early 2000s and serious population decline beginning in 2011, all of which has eroded its potential as a superpower.

Japan’s name in Japanese is written using ‘the kanji 日本 and pronounced Nippon or Nihon’ and was adopted in the early 8th century. Prior to this, the country was known ‘in China as Wa (倭) and in Japan by the endonym Yamato.’ The characters 日本 mean a ‘sun origin’, which is in reference to Japan’s far eastern location and the source of the western epithet ‘Land of the Rising Sun.’ The official name of the Japanese flag is Nisshoki, which means the ‘sun-mark flag’, though most people call it Hinomaru, meaning ‘circle of the sun’, for the circle in the centre of the flag represents the sun. The flag of Japan isn’t white and red, it is actually white and crimson. The first documented use of the flag of Japan was in 701 CE and was mentioned in the Shoku Nihongi, ‘a classical Japanese history text, which credited Emperor Mommu with the flag’s use.’

The name Japan is based on Chinese pronunciation and was introduced to European languages through trade. In the 13th century, Marco Polo recorded the early Mandarin or Wu Chinese pronunciation as Cipangu. 

Japanese Flag (above) and Naval Ensign (below)

The old Malay name for Japan, Japang or Japun, was borrowed from a southern coastal Chinese dialect and encountered by Portuguese traders in Southeast Asia, who brought the word to Europe in the early 16th century. An interesting coincidental similarity exists between the the English word, Jap-an and the biblical name of their forefather, Jap-heth. The first version of the name in English appeared in a book published in 1577, which spelled the name as Giapan in a translation of a 1565 Portuguese letter.

Japan leads the world in robotics production and use; supplying approximately 55% of the world’s total. The Japanese consumer electronics industry once the strongest in the world, now faces stiff competition from South Korea, the United States and China. Japan remains a major leader in the video gaming industry, with the United States. 

On the index of most technological nations in the world, Japan is number one. Japanese scientists have made enormous contributions in the following fields: automobiles, electronics, machinery, earthquake engineering, optics, industrial robotics, metals and semi-conductors. Japanese researchers have won numerous Noble Prizes in recognition for their superior contribution in technological pursuits.

Japan is the fourth largest economy in the world; its projected GDP is $4.39 trillion for 2025. Effective co-operation between government and industry, coupled with advanced technological know-how have built Japan’s manufacturing and export-oriented economy. Japan is low in natural resources and dependent on energy imports, particularly after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and a general shutdown of its nuclear power industry.

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

  1. Machinery including computers: US$147.1 billion
  2. Vehicles: $137.8 billion
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $117.9 billion 
  4. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $43 billion 
  5. Iron, steel: $34.6 billion 
  6. Plastics, plastic articles: $30.3 billion 
  7. Organic chemicals: $18.3 billion 
  8. Other chemical goods: $14.6 billion 
  9. Gems, precious metals: $14.3 billion 
  10. Copper: $12.9 billion 

Iron and steel as materials represent the fastest growers among the top 10 export categories, up by 51.9% since 2020. In second place for improving export sales was copper which appreciated 37.7%.’ In 2020, Ships and boats at $10.8 billion was listed at number ten.

Japan is a member of the prestigious intergovernmental G7 Group of nations. These are the major industrialised nations, who drive the world economy, monetary issues and policy. Japan’s inclusion is significant as it is the only descendant of Japheth and the only nation from East Asia or outside the European and North American spheres. Major nations not included are Russia (11th) due to its expulsion from the G8 in 2014 because of its annexation of the Ukraine and the Crimea; as well as the less developed major economies of China (2nd), India (5th) and Brazil (9th). The other nations of the G7 include: the United States of America (1), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (6), France (7), Italy (8) and Canada (10).

Japan in the Bible, Peter Salemi – emphasis mine:

‘It appears that the sons of Tarshish originally settled in southern Asia Minor, giving their name to the city of Tarsus. The traditions of ancient Japan claim its people were led to the “Land of the Rising Sun” by a three legged crow – the “sun crow” representing the sun deity in the ancient Far East. Surprisingly, the rare imagery of three-legged birds as sun symbols has also been found on coins of Asia Minor, where sat Tarsus.

A.L. Sadler, a professor of Oriental Studies at the University of Sydney, wrote in his 1946 book A Short History of Japan: “… Some Japanese ethnologists favour the theory that the Yamato came from Central Asia” (pp. xi-xii).’ Support for this premise is the paternal Y-DNA Haplogroup D, which is prevalent in two countries: Tibet and Japan.

Salemi: ‘The peoples of Persia called those descended from Javan in Asia Minor, Yuna or Yuana (Rapson 1914 : 86). Tarshish migrated with Kittim’ – Chapter VIII Kittim & Indonesia. ‘They stayed with Kittim for a time in northern China. The Chinese… Yuan Empire and Yuanan region take their names from Javan, father of Tarshish. In China, along the coast, there was a people called the Three Han by the early Chinese writers. Han may be a derivation of Javan or Yahan. They were recognized as being a very different people to the rest of the Chinese. The three were the Ma-Han, Shon-Han and the Pien-Han.

There is, as Bishop writes, a very close relationship between them and the people who settled Japan (Bishop 1925: 556). Their culture may be described as partly Chinese and partly central Asian (ibid, 558). Hurlimann traces them back to central Asia (Hurlimann 1970: 90) and Japanese traditions maintain they originated in the far west of Asia. (Odlum 1937: 17).

Colin in his Native Races and Their Customs writes: “The principle settler in these archipeligoes was Tharsis, son of Java, together with his brothers. (quoted in The Philippine Islands 1493-1898). Of further interest is the statement in a Japanese document compiled in 720 AD, the Nihon Shoki; (The Chronicles of Japan), that Ninigi, a forefather of their race, had four sons. This may have been Javan, who also had four sons. From one of these sons descended the Japanese emperor Jemmu Tenno. This son was named Po-wori which means “Fire Bender” and may be compared to Tarshish which means “smelter” or “refiner”.

Japan’s role in Biblical Prophecy, Steve M Collins, 2007 – emphasis mine:

‘… Tarshish… A huge clue as to their modern identity is that Ezekiel 38:13 calls them “the merchants of Tarshish.” Their entire nation is so closely linked to merchandising goods to others that they are called a nation of “merchants”… Japan pioneered the export-driven model of mercantile sales to other nations as a national policy. This trait was so well-known that the nation was sometimes called “Japan, Inc.” in media articles… also prophesied [is] that there would be “young lions” that would be closely linked to the “merchants of Tarshish” in the latter days. 

There are a number of smaller Asian nations on the Pacific Rim which have copied the mercantile, export-driven success of the Japanese nation. These nations are even called the “young tiger” nations or “young tiger” economies of Asia. The “young tiger” nations include such nations as South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand… Japan is an island nation and it lives at the doorstep of two powerful nations: Russia and China. Japan has fought wars with both nations, and China bears a vengeful grudge against Japan as a result of World War II. Russia seized Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands after World War II and its retention of these formerly Japanese islands is a bone of contention between Russia and Japan. Japan cannot hope to make allies of these nations. Therefore, Japan must side with the USA and the West by default. However, Japan and the USA have grown to be genuine allies in the period after World War II. The USA was not a harsh conqueror of Japan. 

The USA (in Japan’s post-World War period of reconstruction) preserved Japan’s monarchy, treated the Japanese people and their culture with respect and laid the foundation for Japan’s mercantile success by blending Western, democratic institutions with Japan’s own unique culture. Japan has become a trusted ally and friend and it becoming an ever-more important nation in the Western alliance.

An article… in… The Economist… stated that Japan: ‘seeks closer ties with democratic India’ – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut – ‘and recently formalized a security alliance of sorts, only Japan’s second, with Australia… in addition to becoming an ally of Australia, Japan “sought a new partnership with India while building security ties with South east Asia,” and that “the main catalyst for the security pact (is) the rise of China.”

Japan, Its Biblical Past and Future, Bob Thiel, 2007:

“Ise is the most venerated shrine in Japan, representing the indigenous religion, Shinto, and the mythical origins of the Japanese people. The sacred mirror is kept at Ise… individuals, who claim to have seen the mirror, agree that the horizontal writing on the bronze back is distinctly un-Japanese in style and resembles ancient Hebrew or Aramaic, spawning theories that connect the Japanese people to the ancient… [Israelite] tribes who vanished from history after the Assyrian conquest in 722 BC.

Scholars have found similarities in ancient Hebrew and Japanese ceremonies, priest apparel, the structure and layout of shrines, language used in ancient texts, and the three imperial regalia having been used as tokens of authority. It has also been argued that the Ise Shrine symbol, carved into the stone lamps surrounding the complex, is the Star of David.”

Theiel: ‘Perhaps it should be mentioned that in Japan there has long been a small Caucasian group who has been there for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It is possible that they had some contact with the Middle East and brought that knowledge with them when they [ended] up in Japan.’

A significant identification of Tarshish in the past was its interaction with the descendants of Shem through extensive trade and its western cultural leanings; considerably more so than any other descendant of Japheth. In modern times, Japan has repeated this assimilation of all things western to become technologically almost more western than the West. It is ironic that this began after centuries of self-imposed isolation beginning in 1624, after the Japanese government refused a Spanish trading delegation to step on Japanese soil. Japan reluctantly came out of isolation due to American intervention and displays of naval sea power during 1853 to 1864. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, pages 374-376 – emphasis mine:

‘The Japanese government then began copying everything they saw in… European nations, a pattern for which their country later became famous. French army officers were paid to enter Japan to remodel the Japanese army while British naval officers were paid to reorganise the Japanese Navy. Dutch engineers were paid to supervise the construction of the first major Western style public works and infrastructure… and Japanese officials were sent abroad to study the… workings of [European] governments and to select their best features for duplication in Japan.

The new Japanese parliament [opened] in 1891, modelled directly on [European] parliaments… The Japanese constitution was drawn up by a specially-appointed commission under a samurai nobleman, Ito Hirobumi, who in 1882 sent missions to the US, Britain, France, Spain and Germany to observe their democratic systems. Eventually, the German model (and the Prussian variant in particular) was selected and implemented…

A new penal code was modelled on that of France, and a ministry of education, based on that of the United States, was established in 1871 to develop a system of universal education. Rapid industrialisation, under government direction, accompanied… political development and by 1890, Japan had completely revised its criminal, civil, and commercial law codes to match the European and American models.

By the end of the twentieth century, both Japan and China had developed into industrial giants, responsible for the production (but not the invention) of the majority of day-to-day appliances and convenience goods used all over the world. Both nations… practice immigration policies designed to preserve their racial homogeneity… unlike the … Western nations. Japan… famously refused to take Vietnamese boat people refugees of the 1970s and 1980s unless they were racially compatible with the existing Japanese population. This strict, racially-based immigration policy is Japan[‘s]… formula for long-term survival and progress. If maintained, this policy will ensure that they escape the fate of Western nations who have abandoned such policies.’

Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall, 2016 & 2019, pages 239-240:

‘It is China that keeps Japanese leaders awake at night and keeps them close to the USA, diplomatically and militarily. Japanese statisticians fear that the population will shrink to under 100 million by the middle of the century. If the current birth rate continues, it is even possible that by 2110 the population will have fallen below the 50 million it was in 1910… Japan, itself a re-militarising power with a quietly hawkish outlook, is going to require friends in the neighbourhood… this means the US 7th fleet will remain in the Bay of Tokyo and US Marines will remain in Okinawa, guarding the paths in and out of the Pacific and the China Sea… The waters can be expected to be rough.’

Japanese men

Japanese society is linguistically, ethnically and culturally homogeneous, composed of 98.1%^^ ethnic Japanese. The most dominant native ethnic group is the Yamato. Primary minority groups include: the indigenous Ainu and Ryukyuan people and also Brazilians, mostly of Japanese descent. We will return to the Brazilian connection – Chapter XXIII Aram & Tyre: Spain, Portugal & Brazil. The Japanese population is rapidly ageing and predicted to drop to only ninety-five million people by 2050.

A study by Hideaki Kanzawa, showed that the Jomon of Hokkaido and Honshu – the first of three peoples to have migrated into Japan – have a genome that is commonly found in Arctic populations but is rare in Yamato people.^^ According to Mitsuru Sakitani, the Jomon are an admixture of two distinct ethnic groups: a more ancient group, carriers of Y chromosome D-M55 – D1a2a – and a more recent group, carriers of Y chromosome C-M8 – C1a1 – ‘that migrated to Japan about 13,000 years ago.’

Haplogroup D1a2a, originates in the Japanese archipelago and is distinct from other D-branches, with five unique mutations not found in the D1 Haplogroups. Scientists also propose that Haplogroup C1a1 originated about 12,000 years ago, which aligns with the start of the Jomon period. Haplogroup D1a2a is found in approximately 20% to 40% of the male population and Haplogroup C1a1 in about 6% of modern Japanese men. According to a 2011 study, all major East Asian mtDNA lineages expanded prior to 8000 BCE, except for two Japanese lineages of D4b2b1 and M7a1a expanding circa 5000 BCE, again during the Jomon Period.

It is interesting that the timeline presented by scientists for the spreading and fanning out of the relevant ancient C and D Haplogroup mutations, mirror the dates of key events in our ancient past. The ending of the last ice age with the Flood in 10,837 BCE; according to an unconventional chronology – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World – and the birth of Tarshish sometime after this; as well as the ‘time of Peleg’ circa 6755 BCE. We will investigate Peleg and the Tower of Babel, when we study Nimrod; Shem’s third son Arphaxad; and Abraham’s eldest brother, Nahor – refer Chapter XXI The Incredible Identity, Origin & Destiny of Nimrod; Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: The Balts, Slavs & the Balkans; and Chapter XXV Italy: Nahor & the Chaldeans.

Some readers will be aware that the early Haplogroups are often given as originating much further back than 13,000 years ago. The pre-flood world’s chronology and the vast difference in human longevity – due in large part to environmental factors – is a missing key in understanding the time frames of the antediluvian world. It will be a shock for some and others will be incredulous, as initially I was too, in the knowledge that before the flood, human ages were of immense length. 

A different method of counting was used – the sexagesimal system of the Sumerians, based on multiples of 60 as touched upon in Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla – and not the metric decimal system based on multiples of 10, we use today or the imperial system based on multiples of 12; a descendant of the Sumerian counting system. The biblical ages of the pre-flood patriarchs appear to have been manipulated – making them easier to mentally digest – after the flood, resulting in our real pre-history being extraordinarily hidden. The king lists for ancient rulers length of reigns, for instance in Sumer are fantastically long. Many thousands of years for individual rulers. Historians have just dismissed them as fanciful and created a completely erroneous timeline of history more in accord with those who squeeze all creation and mankind’s history into a mere six thousand years, based on a misguided interpretation of an edited biblical chronology – refer article: Na’amah.

The longevity of humans post-flood though considerable until the time of Abraham, were not nearly as long as prior to the flood – refer article: The Younger Dryas Stadial: Ending of the Earth… Beginning of the World. A result of the flood and the changes in the earth’s atmosphere, gravity and electro-magnetism was to reduce human life-span. The alternative explanation, is genetic manipulation. From Abraham’s birth in 1977 BCE, we have witnessed human longevity reduce dramatically again to a ‘maximum’ of what we are now familiar with, of approximately one hundred and twenty years. 

Genesis 6:3

New Century Version

The Lord said, “My Spirit will not remain in human beings forever, because they are flesh. They will live only 120 years.”

This verse is actually predicting how much time was left before the Deluge flooded the Earth, though it has been interpreted that it refers to the length of a human’s life, and since the patriarch Joseph at least, this has been true – Genesis 50:22. It is one of the reasons – perhaps the principal argument – in which the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, was able to convince Eve in taking the ‘fruit’ from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; deceiving her and Adam regarding the truth about life and death… subtly twisting what the Creator had taught. Adam and Eve didn’t die and in fact, lived for millennia – Article: DEATH: A Dead End or a New beginning?

Thus the promise of dying was delayed considerably, to the point of them appearing to almost live forever; though ultimately death came for them, with the tragic lie of the Serpent being eventually exposed – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega*.

When scientists propose the earliest Haplogroups divided and sub-divided between 20,000 to 60,000 thousand years ago for example, this is inaccurate because Noah was born circa 17,000 BCE and possessed the entire genome for the races and Y-DNA Haplogroup A, which then mutationally diverged with his three son’s descendants and so on. Noah’s sons were born circa 12,000 BCE – Genesis 5.32, 9.28, 11.10-11. Adam and his wife, [Mitochondrial] Eve, were formed nearly thirty thousand years ago, circa 27,000 BCE and the line from which Noah descended was from their son Seth, who was born circa 26,097 BCE. We will comprehensively study the antediluvian age in a separate chapter,* as well as an unconventional chronology for the history of humankind – Appendix IV: An Unconventional Chronology

Japanese women

It is believed the Yayoi people – the second group of people to migrate into Japan – were migrants to the Japanese archipelago from Korea or China during the Yayoi period from 1000 to 300 BCE. They are seen as the direct ancestors of the modern Yamato, the majority of Japanese, as well as the Ryukyuan. It is estimated that modern Japanese share on average about 90% of their genome with the Yayoi. There was a third period of major migration, during the Kofun period from 250 to 538 CE.

Ancient DNA rewrites early Japanese history – modern day populations have tripartite genetic origin, Trinity College Dublin, 2021: 

‘Ancient DNA extracted from human bones has rewritten early Japanese history by underlining that modern day populations in Japan have a tripartite genetic origin – a finding that refines previously accepted views of a dual genomic ancestry. Twelve newly sequenced ancient Japanese genomes show that modern day populations do indeed show the genetic signatures of early indigenous Jomon hunter-gatherer-fishers and immigrant Yayoi farmers – but also add a third genetic component that is linked to the Kofun peoples, whose culture spread in Japan between the 3rd and 7th centuries.’

A 2007 study by Nonaka, reported that the frequencies of the D1, [O1b], and O2** lineages in Japan were 38.8%, 33.5%,* and 16.7% respectively, constituting approximately 90% of the Japanese [male] population. It is thought that the Yayoi mainly belonged to Haplogroup O-M176 [O1b2] found in 32%* of present day Japanese males; Haplogroup O-M122 [O2, formerly O3]; Haplogroup O-K18 [F2320 – O1b1]; and Haplogroup O-M119 [O1a] which are all typical for East Asian and Southeast Asians. 

Mitsueu Sakitani, suggests that Haplogroup O1b2, which is common in today’s Japanese, Koreans, and some Manchu, and O1a are one of the carriers of Yangtze civilisation. As the Yangtze civilisation declined, several tribes crossed westward and northerly, to the Shandong peninsula, the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago. One study labels Haplogroup O1b1, a major Austroasiatic paternal lineage and the Haplogroup O1b2 of Koreans and the Japanese as a ‘para-Austroasiatic’ paternal lineage.

A study in 2018, confirmed that the modern Japanese are predominantly descendants of the Yayoi and that they largely displaced the local Jomon. The mitochondrial chromosomes of modern Japanese are nearly identical with the Yayoi and differ significantly from the Jomon population. It is estimated that the majority of Japanese have about 12% Jomon ancestry or less.^ A more recent study by Gakihari in 2019, estimates the gene-flow from the Jomon into modern Japanese people at only 3.3%.^

Further studies report: ‘A 2011 SNP consortium study done by the Chinese Academy of Science and Max Planck Society consisting of 1,719 DNA samples determined that Koreans and Japanese clustered near to each other, confirming the findings of an earlier study that Koreans and Japanese are related.

However, the Japanese were found to be genetically closer to Southeast Asian populations as evident by a genetic position that is significantly closer towards Southeast Asian populations on the principal component analysis (PCA) chart. Some Japanese individuals are also genetically closer to Southeast Asian and Melanesian populations when compared to other East Asians such as Koreans and Han Chinese, indicating possible genetic interactions between Japanese and these populations.

A 2008 study about genome-wide SNPs of East Asians by Chao Tian et al. reported that… the Japanese are relatively genetically distant from Han Chinese, compared to Koreans. Another study (2017) shows a relative strong relation between all East and Southeast Asians.’

We would expect to see the evidence of a link between Tarshish and his brothers located in archipelago Southeast Asia. Nor is it a surprise that the Japanese have DNA in common with Koreans and Chinese, for two reasons. First, they are originally blood brothers, then becoming cousins all stemming from Japheth and second, there would have been noticeable admixture if the Japanese migrated through China, possibly Taiwan and then the Korean peninsula. Similar transference occurred when Koreans migrated through China and some travelled to the Japanese Islands; as well as Chinese traders who visited both Korea and Japan. 

The key in answering the Japanese identity, is not with the Japanese clustering with Koreans descended from Gomer, but rather their closer genetic link with South East Asians also descended from Javan.

Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis mine:

‘This survey of Y chromosome SNPs in Asia reveals a set of 41 haplogroups, 19 of which are present in Japan. Three haplogroups are almost entirely restricted to the Japanese archipelago: haplogroup D-P37.1 and its descendants (D-P37.1*, D-M116.1*, D.M125*, and D-P42), O-47z, and C-M8. 

These lineages account for 34.7, 22.0, and 5.4% of Japanese Y chromosomes, respectively, and may have originated on the Japanese archipelago. The Japanese population also has high frequencies of other haplogroup O lineages that are shared mainly with Southeast Asian populations, and C lineages that are shared primarily with northern Asians. In this section, we make the case that these Y chromosome lineages descend from different ancestral populations that gave rise to the Jomon and Yayoi cultures.

We plotted the frequencies of haplogroups D, O-P31 [O1b], and O-M122 [O2] in each of our six Japanese samples against the approximate geographic distances of each of these populations from Kyushu Island. Together, these haplogroups account for 86.9% of Japanese Y chromosomes. There is a U-shaped cline for haplogroup D, and inverted U-shaped patterns for haplogroups in clade O. Based on the frequencies of these two clades, we estimate the Jomon contribution to modern Japanese to be 40.3%,^ with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%). On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly, there is no evidence for Yayoi lineages in the Ainu [only Jomon].

The highest frequency of continental D lineages is found in central Asia (especially in Tibet (50.4%). Evidence for shared ancestry between Tibetans and Japanese is seen in the MDS plot. The survival of ancient lineages within haplogroup D in Tibetans and Japanese may well reflect long periods of isolation for both groups. Interestingly, a Y-SNP survey of Andaman Islanders found a very high frequency of haplogroup D-M174* chromosomes in this isolated population…’

The connection between higher levels of Y-DNA Haplogroup D and isolated, endogamic Asian populations is important. The Tibetans have been secluded from external contact and mixture for centuries as have the Japanese. The fact that Tibet and Japan – two very isolated regions – possess an ancient and prime Haplogroup, with a high percentage cannot be a coincidence. 

‘The other postulated Japanese Paleolithic founding haplogroup, C-M8 [C1a1], is associated with Y-STR haplotypes that are related to Indian and central Asian C chromosomes. The presence of NO* chromosomes in Japan also may be an indication of a remnant Tibetan ancestry. A recent mtDNA study revealed direct connections of Japanese haplotypes with Tibet, parallel to those found for the Y chromosome. Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage. This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet.

Our data also support the hypothesis that other Y haplogroups, such as lineages within haplogroup O-M122 (i.e., O-M134 and O-LINE), as well as the O-M95 lineage within O-P31, entered Japan with the Yayoi expansion. 

High frequencies of these lineages in southwestern Japan, Korea, and Southeast Asian populations likely explain the affinity of these populations in the MDS plot. The entire O haplogroup has been proposed to have a Southeast Asian origin (Su et al. 1999; Kayser et al. 2000; Capelli et al. 2001; Karafet et al. 2001). In fact, nearly all lineages within the O-M175 clade… except O-SRY465 and O-47z, are present at their highest frequencies (e.g., O-M95, O-P31*, M122*, O-LINE, O-M119) in southeastern Asia/Oceania, and have been proposed to have southern Chinese origins…’

This is a significant parallel connection between the related peoples of Korea and continental South East Asia and Japan and archipelago South East Asia. Togarmah of Korea is closely connected to Ashkenaz of Vietnam and Riphath of Cambodia, as Tarshish of Japan is related to Elishah of Malaysia, Dodan of the Philippines and the Kittim from Indonesia.

While the ancient Y-DNA Haplogroup D is almost entirely indicative of descendants from Japheth, it is found in a small number of males descending from Ham.

Phylogentic Tree by ISOGG (Version 14.151)

DE (YAP) Nigeria, Guinea-Bissau, Caribbean, Tibet

D (CTS3946) 

D1 (M174) East Asia, Andaman Islands, Central Asia, Mainland Southeast Asia 

D1a (CTS11577) 

D1a1 (F6251/Z27276) 

 – D1a1a (M15) Mainland China, Tibet, Altai Republic 

 – D1a1b (P99) Mainland China, Tibet, Mongol, Central Asia 

D1a2 (Z3660) 

 – D1a2a (M55) Japan (Yamato) 

 – D1a2b (Y34637) Andaman Islands (Onge and Jarawa) 

D1b (L1378) Philippines (Ryukyuan and Ainu of Japan)

D2 (A5580.2) Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Syria, African Americans 

Wa-pedia – emphasis mine:

‘The origins of the Japanese people is not entirely clear yet. It is common for Japanese people to think that Japan is not part of Asia since it is an island, cut off from the continent’ – akin to the British who are alienated from Europe; whether in customs, culture, politics or national identity. ‘This tells a lot about how they see themselves in relation to their neighbours. But in spite of what the Japanese may think of themselves, they do not have extraterrestrial origins, and are indeed related to several peoples in Asia.’ Many a word spoken in jest – refer articles: Homo neanderthalensis I, II, III & IV.

‘Kenichi Shinoda (2003) found Chinese-looking maternal lineages (haplogroups A, B, F, M8a and M10) in the Kanto region dating from the late Jōmon period mixed with typical Jōmon lineages (M7a, N9b)… this could indicate that farmers from mainland China colonised Japan several millennia before the Yayoi invasion, which would explain why the Japanese also possess typically South Chinese Y-haplogroups not found in Korea, such as O1a, O2a [now O1b], O3a1c [now O2a1c1 – F18] and O3a2 [now O2a2 – P201].

Haplogroup C is another extremely old lineage that… spread over most of Eurasia. Two subclades of C are found in Japan: C1a1 (aka C-M8, formerly C1) and C2a (aka C-M93, formerly C3). Both are likely to have been in the Japanese archipelago since the first human beings reached the region… Haplogroup C1a seems to have split… in the middle of Eurasia, one group going west to Europe, and the other east to Japan. C1a2 is now nearly extinct in Europe. C1a1 is particularly common in Okinawa (7%), Shikoku (10%) and Tohoku (10%), but is apparently absent from Hokkaido and Kyushu.’

An explanation for this occurrence, would be that Tarshish migrated through Asia as the other sons of Japheth – particular via Tibet – though like their sea-faring, maritime bothers descended from Javan – for example the Maori from Rodanim – a portion likely travelled via the Mediterranean, heading south past the eastern coast of Africa, beneath South Asia, around Southeast Asia and north past China to Japan. Paternal Haplogroup C1 is more commonly associated with Central Asia and the North, while Haplogroup C2 in the East and Amerindian men of the Americas.

Wa-pedia: ‘Haplogroup C2a, representing also 3% of the population, is typically found among the Mongols, Manchus, Koreans and Siberians, which suggest a propagation by the Yayoi farmers. The last surviving tribes of ‘pure’ Ainu people, living on the island of Sakhalin in Russia, just north of Hokkaido, possess 15% of C2a (the remaining 85% being D1b [D1a2a]). There is therefore a good chance that C2a could also have come to Japan from Siberia through Sakhalin and Hokkaido. C2a is indeed found at both extremities of the country, peaking in Kyushu (8%), Hokkaido (5%), but is rare in central Japan, which supports the theory of two separate points of entry.

Over 40% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup D, a paternal lineage… 

Its first carriers would have migrated along the coasts of the Indian Ocean, from the Arabian peninsula all the way to Indonesia, then following the chain of islands up through the Philippines and using the land bridge from Taiwan through the present-day Ryukyu islands to Japan.’

When studying the Bible verses regarding Tarshish, we contemplated that the outposts of Tarshish from the mediterranean via India and Southeast Asia could lead to Japan. Therefore, not only were the various locations given for Tarshish ports accurate, they also provide a trail of Tarshish’s descendants all the way to Japan over a period of about 5,500 years – leading to the Yayoi entry into Japan by at least circa 1000 BCE.

Wa-pedia: ‘Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a] (aka D-M55 or D-M64.1, formerly known as D2)… is found almost exclusively in Japan, with a small minority in places who have had historical ties with Japan, such as Korea. 

D1b is most common in Hokkaido (60-65%)… If D1b colonised Japan from the north, it would explain why its frequency is highest in northern Japan and, conversely also why [allegedly] pre-LGM [last glacial maximum] lineages like C1a1 survived better in southern Japan…

The only other variety of D identified among the Japanese is D1a1[a] (D-M15), which only makes up 0.5% of the Japanese male population. This haplogroup is particularly common among some ethnic groups from Southwest China and Indochina, such as the Hmong and Ksingmul in Laos… and the Yao people in Guanxi and Vietnam. Tibetans carry about 54% of haplogroup D.

Andaman Islanders belong to the basal D*. It means that their most recent common ancestors goes back tens of thousands of years. In other words the genetic gap between these ethnic groups is immense, despite false appearances of belonging to a common haplogroup.

Haplogroup D1b [D1a2a]… [is thought to have] formed 45,000 [13,000] years ago, [after the Flood cataclysm bottleneck], but the most recent common ancestor of Japanese D1b members lived 23,000 [circa 10,000] years ago [or less after the births of Japheth and Ham’s sons] which means that other D1b branches may have become extinct outside Japan. Haplogroup D1b is found among the Ryukyuans as well as the Ainus, and is thought to have been the dominant paternal lineage of the Jōmon people.

Almost exactly half of Japanese men belong to haplogroup O, a paternal lineage of Paleolithic Sino-Korean origin that is now found all over East and Southeast Asia. Haplogroup [O1b2 – M176*] (aka O-SRY465) is found especially in Manchuria, Korea and Japan, and very probably came to Japan with the Yayoi people. It reaches its highest frequency in western Japan (35%) and is least common in Hokkaido (12.5%) and Okinawa (22%). In the rest of the country its frequency is around 30%.

Approximately two thirds of the Japanese [O1b – M268] belong to the [O1b2] subclade, which is much less common in Korea and Manchuria… Haplogroup [O1b2] (SRY465, M176): Found almost exclusively among the Korean, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese and Indonesian. Haplogroup  O-47z [O1b2a1a1 – F1204; a sub-clade of OK10 from O-M176*]: Found frequently among Japanese and Ryukyuans, with a moderate distribution among Indonesians, Koreans, Manchus, Thais, and Vietnamese.

Haplogroup [O2] (aka O-M122) is the main Han Chinese paternal lineage. It is an extremely diverse lineage, with numerous subclades, including many associated with the expansion of agriculture from northern China. Most of them are found in Korea and would have been part of the Yayoi migration to Japan. 

Within Japan, it reaches a maximum frequency in Okinawa (16%),** a region with low Yayoi ancestry. Its frequency among non-Okinawan Japanese is of 10-15%, about twice higher than in Korea, a fact that cannot be explained by the Yayoi invasion. 

A negligible percentage of the Japanese belong to haplogroup O1a (aka O-M119), a lineage especially common in southern China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, and haplogroup O2a1 (aka O-M95 [L127]), which is found in south-west China, Indochina, around Malaysia and in central-eastern India. Both of them might have also have come with South Chinese Neolithic farmers during the Jomon period.

Approximately 3% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup N, a lineage that is thought to have originated in China… but underwent a serious population bottleneck during the Last Glacial Maximum, and re-expanded after that. Japanese people belong to N1… Haplogroup N1 was found at high frequency (26 out of 70 samples, or 37%) in Neolithic and Bronze Age remains (4500-700 BCE) from the West Liao River valley in Northeast China (Manchuria) by Yinqui Cui et al. (2013). Among the Neolithic samples, haplogroup N1 represented two thirds of the samples from the Hongshan culture (4700-2900 BCE) and all the samples from the Xiaoheyan culture (3000-2200 BCE). 

Haplogroup N1c is found especially among Uralic and Turkic peoples…  including among the Finns, Estonians and Sami in Northeast Europe, and among the Turks in Central Asia and Turkey. It is found at low frequencies in Korea and could have arrived with the Yayoi people. 

A comparison of Malay (Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu) and Japanese languages reveals a few uncanny similarities. Apart from the very similar phonetics in both languages, the same hierarchical differences exist in personal pronouns. For example ‘you’ can be either anda or kamu in Malay, and anata and kimi in Japanese. 

Not only are the meaning and usage of each identical, but they also sound almost the same. Likewise, the Japanese verb suki (to like) translates suka in Malay. The chances that this is a pure coincidence is extremely low, and may reveal a common origin. Furthermore, in both languages the plural can be formed by simply doubling the word. For instance, in Japanese hito means ‘person’, while hitobito means ‘people’. Likewise ware means ‘I’ or ‘you’, whereas wareware means ‘we’. Doubling of words in Japanese is so common that there is a special character used only to mean the word is doubled (々) in written Japanese. In Malay, this way of forming the plural is almost systematic (person is orang, while people is orang-orang). Furthermore, expressions like ittekimasu, itteirashai, tadaima and okaeri, used to greet someone who leaves or enter a place, and which have no equivalent in Indo-European languages, have exact equivalents in Malay/Indonesian (selamat jalan, selamat tinggal…). One could wonder how Malay and Japanese ever came to share such basic vocabulary and grammatical features, considering that there is no known historical migration from one region to other.’

The preceding paragraph is truly incredible, if one did not suspect a common ancestor linking Tarshish-Japan with Elishah-Malaysia. Though the constant reader will already know the obvious linguistic and ethnic tie between two such seemingly separate peoples geographically, is easily, logically and reasonably explained; for they share the same father, Javan – Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia. As we have learned with Togarmah-Korea and Ashkenaz-Vietnam, both sons of Gomer, a genetic link proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the familial bond of sibling brothers.

Wa-pedia: ‘The Palaeolithic Jōmon people are thought to have arrived from Austronesia during the Ice Age. The original inhabitants of Indonesia and the Philippines might have been related to Dravidians of Southern India – refer Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia.

Y-haplogroup C, which has been associated with the first migration of modern humans… towards Asia, is relatively frequent in Kerala (southern tip of India) and Borneo. These early Austronesians are thought to have been the ancestors of the Ice Age settlers of Japan (Y-haplogroups C1a1 and D1b [D1a2a). The common root of the two languages must be more recent, and indeed there is one migration that could explain the connection between the two groups: the Neolithic Austronesian expansion from southern China.’

Recall in Chapter VII Javan: Archipelago South East Asia & Polynesia; where the Polynesians descended from Rodan and the Melanesian and Negritos peoples were investigated. The suspicion was that the physiognomy of these people, particularly the Australian Aborigine was similar to the Dravidian Indians. We will return to this question as the evidence indicates the Melanesians are not descended from Japheth, but rather from Ham – refer Chapter XIII India & Pakistan: Cush & Phut.

Wa-pedia: ‘From approximately 5,000 BCE, South Chinese farmers expanded southward to Taiwan and Southeast Asia, bringing Y-haplogroups [O1a, O1b and O2] to the region, which are still the dominant paternal lineages today. There is evidence of farming in Taiwan at least from 4000 BCE, but agriculturalists would probably have arrived earlier considering that the Neolithic reached the Philippines circa 5000 BCE, and Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia around 4,000 BCE… the same migration could have followed the Ryukyu archipelago until Kyushu, then colonised Honshu and Shikoku. In fact, there is no good reason why these seafaring farmers would travel as far as Indonesia and not to Japan, which is much closer.

Many more Japanese words could be of Austronesian origin. The linguist David B. Solnit estimates that among 111 common Japanese words he analysed, 28% had Austronesian cognates only, while 40% had Altaic cognates, 23% competing cognates, and 9% no cognate in either. Considering that the various branches of Proto-Austronesian split over 6,000 or 7,000 years ago, longer than Indo-European languages, it is not surprising that even languages that are undeniably classified as Austronesian… have evolved very diverging vocabularies today (except Polynesian languages, which only started to diversify with the Polynesian expansion 2,000 years ago).

It is generally more useful to look at the Proto-Autronesian root of words rather than to try to find direct matches between modern Japanese and modern Austronesian languages. For example, the Proto-Austronesian root for fish is *sikan, which gave sakana in Japanese (and maybe also ika, which means squid), ikan in Malay, ika in Fijian, and isda in Tagalog. Cases of high lexical-semantic retention over six millennia like kamu/kimi, anda/anata and suka/suki are extremely rare. The Austronesian connection with Japanese was first suggested in 1924 by the Dutch linguist Dirk van Hinloopen Labberton. 

Many linguists have since proposed the hypothesis that the Japonic language family evolved from an Austronesian substratum (Jōmon) onto which was added an Altaic superstratum (Yayoi).

However, if Austronesian speakers came to Japan with South Chinese Neolithic agriculturalists, the original Jomon people would have spoken another language, either one of Siberian origin, in light of the mtDNA ties between Jomon and Ainu people and eastern Siberians, or a language isolate, reflecting the uniqueness of the Jomon paternal lineage. Therefore, Middle and Late Jomon people would already have spoken a hybrid language. Likewise, the Koguryoic Korean language of the Yayoi people would also be a hybrid incorporating Altaic elements of Mongolian origin into an older Korean substratum of Paleosiberian origin. 

Since the 6th century CE, the Japanese started incorporating words from Chinese after adopting Buddhism and Chinese characters, in the same way that English absorbed a huge amount of Norman French and Latin words in the late Middle Ages [a further Japanese and British similarity]… approximately half of the Japanese vocabulary is of Chinese origin. This explains why Japanese does not neatly fit in one or even two linguistic families, but is a hybrid of at least five separate sources: aboriginal Jomon, Austronesian, Korean, Altaic and Chinese.

Cultural and religious similarities also exist between Japan and Austronesia… most ethnic Malays and Indonesians are Muslim, but traditional religion survives in some islands, including Bali, which practices a syncretic form of Hinduism and aninism. Basically, Balinese religion is a form of Hinduism that has incorporated the aboriginal animistic religion. The parallel with Japan is obvious for people familiar with this culture. 

Japanese Shintoism is also a form of animism, and is practised side-by-side with Buddhism, a religion derived from Hinduism, sometimes blending the two religions in a syncretism known as Shinbutso-shugo. The relation between Hinduism and Buddhism is irrelevant here, and both are relatively recent imports in historical times. Before that, however, Jomon people and Neolithic Austronesians would have practised a very similar form of animism.

Japanese matsuri (festivals) resemble so much Balinese ones that one could wonder if one was not copied from the other. During cremations in Bali, the dead body is carried on a portable shrine, very much in the way that the Japanese carry their mikoshi. Balinese funerals are joyful and people swinging the portable shrine in the streets and making loud noise to scare the evil spirits. There are lots of other cultural similarities between ancient cultures of Indonesia and Japan. For example, both Balinese temples and Japanese shrines, as well as traditional Japanese and Balinese houses have a wall surrounding them, originally meant to prevent evil spirits from penetrating the property. Despite the radical changes that Indonesian culture underwent after the introduction of Islam and Christianity, and the changes that Buddhism brought to Japan, it is still possible to observe clear similarities between the supposed original prehistoric cultures of the two archipelagoes.’

This is at once incredible yet not, for we would expect more similarities between Japan and its related kin in Malaysia, Indonesia and by extension the Philippines and Polynesia; whether culturally, linguistically or ethnically, rather than with China or even Korea. The Koreans and Chinese are cousins, whereas the language and cultural similarities with the Malay peoples supports the proposition that the Japanese as Tarshish, are the brother of Elishah of Malaysia, Kittim of Indonesia, Dodan of the Philippines and Rodan of Polynesia. Recall, an earlier quote from Chapter VI Togarmah & the Koreas.

Wa-pedia: ‘The study…[of]… Jung et al. (2010) said…that Koreans are genetically homogenous. The study said that the affinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asian with an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… all of the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dual pattern of Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian origins. The study said that Koreans and Japanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.’

The principle Japanese mtDNA Haplogroups include: 

D4 [34%] – M7 [12.5%] – B4 [7.5%] – G [7.5%] – A [7%] – N9 [7%] – F [5.5%]

– B5 [4.5%]

A comparison of mtDNA Haplogroups common throughout Southeast Asia such as M7, B5 and F1 show that the percentages decrease in both estranged northern nations. Japan and Korea have similar levels and more closely match the Philippines, which happens to be located between the northern two and the southern nations of Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand who all have higher percentages overall.

Even though mtDNA Haplogroup D is the primary maternal Haplogroup in the Koreas as well as in Japan and Haplogroups M and F figure prominently, it is as noted in previous chapters, Haplogroup B which as the common thread binds the descendants of Japheth from Tiras, Madai, Gomer and Javan.  

The principal Y-DNA Haplogroups for the minority peoples in Japan: the Ainus descended from the Jomon; and the Ryukyuans, descended from the Yayoi

Region / HaplogroupCD1bNO1aO1bO2QOthers
Ainus (n=20)15%85%0%0%0%0%0%0%
Ryukyuans (n=132)8.5%45.5%1.5%1.5%23%19%0%1%

Notice the males of the Ainus and Ryukyuans both carry D1b which is found in the Philippines. 

The Y-DNA Haplogroups for the Yamato majority of Japan.

D1a2 – O1b – O2 – C1a1 – C2a – N1c2 – O1a – D1a1 – Q 

Japan: D1a2 [39%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C1a1 [3.5%]

– C2a [3.5%] – N1c2 [2%] – O1a [1.5%] – D1a1 [0.5%] – Q [0.1%] 

A simplified percentage sequence for the Y-DNA Haplogroups.

Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1 [31.5%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%] – Q [0.1%]

The Japanese possess the key Oriental and East Asian Haplogroups O and C [with the absence of K]; while exhibiting the lesser marker Haplogroups, N and Q. The very high percentage of Y-DNA Haplogroup D is unique amongst the descendants of Japheth with the only other peoples bearing similar high levels, the Tibetans of Tibet.

Japan:           D1 – O1b – O2 – C – N – O1a – Q 

Malaysia:      O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F

Indonesia:    O2 – O1b – O1a – C – K – D1

Korea:            O2 – O1b – C – N – O1a – D1 – Q – K

Vietnam:       O2 – O1b – Q – O1a – C – D1 – N 

Philippines:  O2 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

A comparison of Japan with a selection of the nations studied thus far reveals the similarity of the East Asian peoples descended from Japheth’s sons Javan and Gomer; while at the same time highlighting the unique and different paternal heritages. The Japanese are clearly distinct with high levels of D1. The second major Japanese Haplogroup is O1b and so it is Malaysia – which has O1b as their principle group – that is ostensibly closer to the Japanese – as shown on the PCA graph below. We have already learned about the close linguistic ties between the two peoples.

The other four nations, two from Javan – Indonesia and the Philippines – and two from Gomer, all share O2a1 as their prime Haplogroup and so are further removed from the peoples residing on the Japanese isles.

Japan: D1a [39.5%] – O1b [30%] – O2 [19%] – C [7%] – N [2%]

– O1a [1.5%] – Q [0.1%]

Malaysia: O1b [32%] – O2 [30%] – O1a [8%] – K [8%] – C [6%]

– F [6%] 

Korea: O2 – [42.1%] – O1b [ 33.1%] – C [12.9%] – N [3.8%]

– O1a [3.1%] – D1 [ 2.5%] – Q [1.8%] – K [0.5%] 

Vietnam: O2 – [40%] – O1b [32.9%] – Q [7.1%] – O1a [5.7%]

– C [4.3%] – D1 [2.9%] – N [2.9%] 

Philippines: O2 – [39%] – O1a [28%] – K [20%] – C [5%]

– O1b [3%]

Comparing the defining marker Haplogroups of O, C and K, with the addition of Japan. The four main descendants of Javan have a distinct Y-DNA Haplogroup sequence; yet in these core groups, Japan and Malaysia bridge a closer gap overall with the Philippines and Indonesia bridging the other, albeit not as closely.

Taiwan:           O1a  [66%]   O1b  [11%]     O2a1  [11%]   C   [0.4%]

Korea:              O1a    [3%]   O1b [33%]     O2a1 [42%]   C   [13%]   K  [0.5%] 

Vietnam:         O1a    [6%]   O1b  [33%]    O2a1  [40%]  C     [4%] 

Philippines:    O1a  [28%]   O1b    [3%]    O2a1  [39%]  C     [5%]   K [20%]  

Indonesia:      O1a   [18%]   O1b  [23%]    O2a1  [29%]  C   [13%]   K   [3%] 

Malaysia:        O1a    [8%]   O1b  [32%]     O2a1 [30%]   C    [6%]   K   [8%] 

Japan:             O1a  [1.5%]   O1b  [30%]    O2a1  [19%]   C     [7%]    

Togarmah is estranged from his brothers in continental southeast Asia and of those brothers, Ararat, Minni, Riphath and Diphath, it is Ashkenaz with whom the clear closer genetic tie is shared – Chapter V Gomer: Continental South East Asia. Similarly, Tarshish is estranged from his brothers in archipelago Southeast Asia; yet in stark contrast with Togarmah, none of his brothers, whether Kittim, Dodan or Rodan is similar. It is Elishah that the semblance of a closer genetic tie is exhibited. 

Continuing the comparison table begun in Chapter IV of those peoples of Japhetic lineal descent; with samples from Tiras, Madai, Gomer, Javan’s sons and the addition of Tarshish.

                                     O     O2a1   O1a   O1b     C      D       K       Q  N

NA Amerindian                                                    6                        77

Cook Islands              5                                       83                 8

Kazakhstan                8                                      40                10       2  7

Micronesia                 9                                       19               65

Japan:                        51       19     1.5      30        7     40               0.1   2

Sulawesi                    51       17      21       13      22                  7      

Tonga                        60                                      23                  1

Borneo                      66       36       9       21      22

Indonesia                 69       29      18      23      13     0.5       3     

Malaysia                   70       30        8      32       6                  8

Philippines               70      39      28        3        5                20

Sumatra                    72      40      18       14        5       2         4  

Vietnam                    79      40        6      33        4        3                7  3

South Korea             79      42        3      33      13     2.5     0.5      2   4

Bali                            84        7       18      59        2                   1   0.4         

Java                           88      23      23      42        2                  2  

Taiwan:                     88      11      66       11     0.4        

The five regions of Indonesia are retained due to the diversity of its large population. Immediately, a number of points concerning the Japanese are apparent.

First, the Japanese are one of the few peoples to have minute trace levels of the interconnecting Haplogroup, K. 

Second, the minute percentage of Haplogroup O1a compared with their eastern relatives. In so doing, a percentage for total Haplogroup O which would otherwise be comparable with Malaysia at 70% does not exist. 

Third, though the Japanese possess an average level of O1b, similar to South Korea and Malaysia, they have a much lower level of O2, in keeping with much of Indonesia. Especially similar to the Indonesian island Sulawesi, with O2 and total Haplogroup O percentages matching. 

Fourth, this is due to a higher percentage in a Haplogroup other than O, like Sulawesi. For Sulawesi it is Haplogroup C and for Japan, it is Haplogroup D.

Fifth, the dominance of D in the men of Japan as the defining paternal marker Haplogroup puts them along side those other peoples which are defined by a Haplogroup other than O: and not with the Taiwan aborigines with 66% in O1a; Bali with 59% in O1b; or South Korea with 42% in O2. 

Those peoples include, the Cook Islander men with 83% of Haplogroup C; Micronesia with 65% of K; and the North American Indian males with 77% of Q. In fact, no one else – excepting Tibet – has any percentage above 3% for D1. Japan is glaringly unique in the Japheth lineage. A study of the Japanese themselves only bears out their singularity in all aspects amongst East Asian peoples.

The next chapter concludes the study on Japheth’s children and what a finale it is.

Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.

Ecclesiastes 1:10 New Century Version

“The more obvious a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards.”

Arthur Koestler 1905 – 1983

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