TRACING OUR ANCESTORS Were they descendants of apes or of Adam? by: Frederick Haberman

"Our eyes are nolden that we cannot see things that stare us in the face until the hour arrives when the mind is ripened. Then we behold them, and the time when we saw them not is like a dream." (R.W. Emerson)

Chapter 1 MISSING LINKS

When Charles Kingsley chose the title of "Westward Ho" for his story of adventure in the age of Elizabeth, he expressed in that title that age-long urge of the race, "der Drang nach Western," as the Germans call it, to push forward towards the setting sun. It was on the astern shore that our nation was born, and gradually it spread towards the west, towards the Alleghanies and the plains of Ohio; then onwards to the Mississippi and the western prairies, and finally across the Rockies and the Sierras and down the Pacific slope to the Golden Gate. Several American authors during the Depression have reviewed those various stages and the spread of our civilization towards the Golden West and have reminded the perplexed people of America that we have reached the last frontier, as far as our material progress is concerned. But others again can see farther than their brothers, that America has reached a New and Spiritual Frontier; and so America has; beyond the Golden Gate the sun dips into the Pacific to rise again Phoenix-like very morning in the East, bringing in a New Day.

"Ephraim feedeth on wind, and FOLLOWETH AFTER THE EAST WIND..." (Hosea 12:1)

Although the sun is sinking today upon the material expansion of America, and for over three years the dark night of the Depression has overshadowed us, we may be sure that there is a morning coming, and with it a sunrise, when a new Phoenix will arise "with healing in his wings."

The story of the colonization and founding of America is so well known that it is useless even to review it here. From the East, from Europe, our ancestors came; from the British Isles, from Holland, Germany, Switzerland, France, and the Scandinavian countries came the people that gave America her character. With the history of those countries we are not concerned; we can read their story in every library. We are merely interested her in the question of the race from which they sprang, the so-called Anglo- Saxon race, and their origin. No matter how long they lived there, whether for one or for two thousand or more years, what we want to investigate here is: Where did they come from? Did they originate in Europe or did they not? If they were anything like their sons, the pioneers of America, they were not content to stay forever West. Such indeed are the facts, as every evidence we have will show. As our fathers moved westward, let us therefore retrace our coming in an easterly direction and start with the Atlantic seaboard of Western Europe.

It is a curious phenomenon that our scientists who are so interested in the origin and evolution of man should be searching all over the globe for missing links, even deep beneath the surface of the ground, going back for tens and hundreds of thousands of years, whey they know so little about the people of Europe of three and four thousands years ago and overlooked the many "missing links" lying and standing upon the ground of Western Europe. It is equally strange that our archaeologists should spend millions of dollars and years of labor digging up the ruins of Egypt and Mesopotamia, of Central America, and the Indian relics of North America, while no efforts are being made to solve the mysteries of Stonehenge and Avebury and other British stone circles. Our great Ralph Waldo Emerson even expressed his surprise at this in his essay on Stonehenge:

"The chief mystery is, that any mystery should have been allowed to settle on so remarkable a monument, in a country on which all the muses have kept their eyes now for eighteen hundred years. We are not yet too late to learn much more than is known of this structure. Some diligent Fellows or Lanyard will arrive, stone by stone, at the whole of history, by exhaustive British sense and perseverance, so whimsical in its choice of objects, which leaves its own Stonehenge or Choir Gaur to the rabbits, whilst it opens pyramids, and uncovers Ninevah. Stonehenge, in virtue of the simplicity of its plan, and its good preservation, is as if new and recent; and, a thousand years hence, men will think this age for the accurate history it will eliminate."

From the south of Portugal northward along the Bay of Biscay, in Brittany, along the western side of the British Isles, as far north as the Orkneys, and into Denmark, Sweden, and Norway we find gigantic stones and stone structures erected by the hand of early man. Several types of those structures have been defined: Menhirs or "long stones" standing on end; dolmens {table stones}, house- like structures with stone slabs or boulders for walls and roof; most of the latter, serving originally as tombs, were covered with mounds of dirt and are called tumuli.

A good description of these structures you can find in the July Number of "The National Geographic Magazine" of 1923, which also produces many beautiful illustrations of them.

"Alignments are groups of menhirs arranged in line or in several parallel lines. Cromlechs are groups of menhirs standing in a circle or an arc of a circle, more rarely a square, usually terminating an alignment or surrounding a tumulus. The dimensions are sometimes incredible. The Great Menhir near Locmariaquer, now thrown down and broken {probably by an earthquake}, was nearly seventy feet high and weighed some 375 tons. Some of the dolmens have a height of 18 to 20 feet, with roof slabs 20 by 35 feet in area and several feet thick. Baring-Gould indeed mentions one near Nevez {Finistere} 'whose capstone measured 45 feet in length and 27 in breadth and 6 feet thick.' The alignments of Carnac, in 10 to 13 parallel rows, stretch across the country for nearly five miles. The tumulus of Mount St. Michel looks like a natural knoll, dwarfing the modern chapel which crowns it. It is hard to realize that it was heaped by human hands. All menhirs, Cromlechs, and alignments were from their beginning open to the sky. Dolmens and similar constructions were all originally covered by tumuli, since removed, in many cases, in the course of farming or building operations."

The above is quoted from the magazine articles referred to, but its author makes no attempt to investigate who may have erected those gigantic structures; he is content to leave them as mysterious.

In Britain we find several ancient circles of large stone, standing on end. The best known of them are Stonehenge, Avebury, and keswick; all of them are known as Druidic circles. Avebury circle on the Wiltshire Downs is by far the largest and the most ancient of the stone circles in Britain. It is of gigantic dimensions and consists of three separate circles, two separate smaller circles within a larger one, the small ones having diameters of 325 feet and 350 feet respectively, while the larger one has a diameter of 1260 feet. The circles were composed of large unhewn sarsens {a Phoenician word for rock}, weighing from seventy to eighty tons each. Only a few of them are left; the rest were broken up in the eighteenth century by firing, and the broken pieces were used by the neighboring farmers for building purposes, as witnessed and reported by Stukely, the English antiquary of the eighteenth century. The only thing left intact about this once magnificent structure is an earth wall forty-four feet in height and one mile in circumference. No other circle in the world can compare with it in a size and construction except the one near Darab in Persia, observed by Sir William Ousely, one-time British minister to Persia.

Here is the first missing link that connects the early inhabitants of the British Isles with the people of early Asia. A second connecting link we find in the highlands of Tibet in Central Asia, where at Do-ring, which means "The Lone Stone." Prof. G.N. Roerich found an "alignment" similar to that of Carnac in Brittany. On Page 415 of his "Trails to Inmost Asia" he tells us:

"The megalithic monuments of Do-ring, situated some thirty miles south of the great salt lake of Pang-gong tscho-cha, date back to the pre-Buddhistic period of Tibetan history. They consist of important alignments of eighteen rows of erect stone slabs. Each of these alignments was drawn from east to west, having at its wester extremity a Cromlech or stone circle consisting of several menhirs arranged more or less in a circle. The menhirs are vertically planted with a crude stone table or altar in front of them. It was evidently a sanctuary of some primitive cult. But what its age and use? If one compares the famous megalithic monuments of Carnac in Brittany, to the discovered megaliths of Tibet, he is at once struck by the remarkable similarity of the two sets of monuments. The Carnac alignments are situated from east to west and have at their western extremity a Cromlech or circle of stones. The Do-ring monuments have precisely the same arrangement."

From Avebury in England to Darab in Persia, and from Carnac in Brittany to Do-ring is gained from the name of Avebury, which E.O. Gordon states, in his "Prehistoric London," is derived from "Abiri." Now, the name of "Abin" was the name given by the people of Canaan to the Israelites when they entered that land. After the Exodus, and that word is the ancient form of "Hebrews" as we shall see in Chapter VII.

Twenty miles south of Avebury Circle is located Stonehenge, the best known of British circles. It is composed of a circle of stones and an outer circular earth wall and ditch 360 feet in diameter. The circle of stones is composed on stones thirteen feet in height, set four feet apart, and was once surmounted by a continuous row of lintel stones. Only seventeen of these posts and lintels are still in position. Inside of this circle is an open circle of five trilithons or groups of two immense pillar stones 25 feet in height, surmounted by equally immense lintel stones. This group of trilithons or gates, as they appear, is open towards the northeast.

All the evidence connected with Stonehenge, as well as with other British circles, shows that those circles were erected as centers of worship and for astronomical observations. A sight taken through the post stones of the southwestern trilithon towards the northeast across the two stones, gave the exact position of the sunrise at the Summer Solstice. The farthest stone on the picture is named "the Friar's heel," a local expression, the word heel being derived from "hele," the index stone of helius, the Greek word for Sun, and over this stone the sun arose on the morning of the Summer Solstice, in the 22nd of June. Describing the scene of the sunrise, E.O. Gordaon in his "Prehistoric London" writes:

"It is not until the whole orb, slightly flattened by the refraction of the air, has come into view, that the requirements are fulfilled and then the coincidence is exact and the sun appears, as if balanced on the apex of the stone. It is perhaps possible to imagine the effect, but to an actual spectator the picture is most impressive, and the dark mass of the bowing stone as seen through the frame formed by the uprights in the center lintel of the circle, adds brilliance and completeness to the effect of a sight never to be forgotten."

However, in the many centuries that have passed since the erection of Stonehenge Circle the position of the sunrise at the Summer Solstice has changed, and as the rate of change is known to astronomers, it is possible to estimate the date for the erection of the circle. Today, the sun rises on the 22nd of June no longer over the hele, but on the south side of it. Sir Norman Lockyer, the famous astronomer and discoverer of helium, determined from that change the period of about 1700 B.C. as the time that the Stonehenge Circle was erected.

Let us consider what evidence Stonehenge Circle and its date of erection provide. Here is a structure, some of whose stones, weighing over two hundred tons, were brought 150 miles from the quarries and erected according to a definite plan and for the purpose of fixing the date and position of the summer Solstice and the other cardinal points of the compass. Our school books tell us that the early Britons of B.C. times were only skin-clad savages; yet is it possible that wild savages were able to haul large blocks of stone for over one hundred miles over solid ground and then erect them according to a specified plan and to a definite astronomical alignment? COMMON SENSE ANSWER NO!

Moreover, we can readily see that there must have been a large population in the land in those early days, for it required thousands of men to move and erect such large stones. But who were those early British astronomers and architects, and from whence did they come and where did they obtain their science?

Again the evidence is provided. Now, about the year 1700 B.C. the 18th Dynasty ruled in Egypt, at which time Israel dwelt in that land. D. Davidson in his monumental work, "The Great Pyramid," writes on page 5:

"18th Dynasty Egyptian glazed beads {not made elsewhere or by any other Egyptian dynasty than the 18th and 19th} were found at Stonehenge, together with beads of Baltic amber. Similar beads of Baltic amber were also found in Egypt in 18th and 19th dynasty remains."

Evidences like those are important missing links; yet the greatest is furnished by Sir Flinders Petrie, who found that a circle inside the great stone circle of Stonehenge has a diameter of 1163 British inches. This value, approximately 1162.6 Pyramid inches, is known by every astronomer and Pyramid student to be the diameter of the Solar Circle of 3652.42 inches circumference, or the value of the Solar year, multiplied by ten. Two deductions we must draw from this: first, the builders of Stonehenge knew the accurate value of the Solar year, and, second, they made use of the Pyramid or Polar Diameter or sacred Hebrew inch. {The present British inch is only eleven ten-thousandths smaller than the original inch}.

Next, the dimensions of Stonehenge Circle, diameter 1162.6 inches and circumference 3,652.42 inches, are the dimensions of the ancient Egyptian aurora, a unit of land measure and also represented in the dimensions of the Great Pyramid, as Mr. Davidson has shown. {Refer to Chart VII of my "Great Pyramid's Message to America"}. The conclusions we must draw, therefore, from the evidences so far are that the early Britons who built those gigantic structures in such a scientific way and to the standard of the Polar Diameter or Hebrew inch were either Hebrews themselves or progenitors of the Hebrews, as were also the builders of the Great Pyramid, which was erected by the Aryan- Phoenicians precisely one thousand years before the Stonehenge Circle.

"Lockyer has shown us," writes Davidson, "that the Pyramid builders of the 4th and 5th Egyptian Dynasties must, from their astronomical cult, have come from the region of the Euphrates. He also shows that nearly all the ancient year cults of the Nile Delta are connected with the Euphratean equinoxial year. Petrie, too, finds a Euphratean year origin for the 5th Dynasty of Egypt."

Mr. Davidson also quotes D.A. Mackenzie from the latter's work, "Ancient Man in Britain":

"At an early period in the Early Agricultural Age and before Bronzeworkings were introduced, England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland, were influenced more directly than had hitherto been the case by the high civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia, and especially by their colonies in Southwestern Asia. Mackenzie, referring to the eminent Belgian archeologist, M. Siret, also writes: 'Siret has found evidence to show that the Tree Cult of the Easterners was connected with the early megalithic monuments. The testimony of traditions associates the stone circle, etc., with the Druids.' 'We are obliged,' he writes, 'to go back to the theory of the archaeologists of a hundred years ago, who attributed the early megalithic monuments to the Druids. The instinct of our predecessors has been more penetrating than the scientific analysis which has taken its place.'"

E.O. Gordaon, author of "Prehistoric London," states on page 22:

"The footprints of these first settlers have been traced by the remains of their religious monuments {circles and mounds}, from the district north of the Persian Gulf, along the trade route of the Phoenicians, to the shores of the Mediterranean. These material remains, when taken in connection with a remarkable affinity in language, the discoveries of modern travellers and the testimony of national traditions, afford convincing proof that the original colonies came from Accad, or Accadia, the Southern Province of Babylonia. They brought with them their primitive religion. 'The first wave of the Aryan family to overspread Europe before Greeks and Romans were heard of.' The earliest recorded history of the British race takes us to Central Asia, the fertile district watered by the Tigris and Euphrates, lying between Mount Ararat on the north and the Persian Gulf on the south. To this country the ancient Chaldees, the cradle of the human race, the earliest settlers in Britain trace their origin."

All the evidence show that the early British astronomer- priests, the Druids, came from the Near East, and Professor L.A. Waddell, in his interesting work, "Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots, and Anglo-Saxons" provides the evidence from hundreds of Phoenician coins and inscriptions found in both Britain and the East that the early Britons were the sea-going Aryan-Phoenicians, who appeared in Western Europe as the Celts or Kelts, which name can also be traced to ancient Chaldea, from whence indeed they came.

Chapter II WHO WERE THE ARYANS?

It is "whimsical" indeed, as Emerson expressed it, that British archaeologists should be content in leaving the origin of their own ancient monuments shrouded in mystery and go exploring all over the world, uncovering the ruins of Asia, Africa, and America, and digging deep in the earth for evidence of missing links of primitive man. But there is a reason for their "whims." Up to 1870 several archaeologists were exploring those British antiquities, but their findings were not followed up by the investigators of the last fifty years; instead the earlier explorers and their findings have been ridiculed by modern scholars. The reason for it is not far to seek. With the coming of Darwin, Huxley, Spencer, and others the theory of Evolution occupied completely the roost of speculative philosophy and even of science. To the theory of Evolution, which demands that man developed from a primate and a savage through various stages until the Greek and Roman culture, certainly that a civilization existed in the British Isles that possessed sufficient science to erect those ancient circles is disastrous. Therefore, our modern investigators, being very anxious to follow in line with the general trend of thought, have carefully avoided exploration around the British circles; and what finds have been unearthed have been purposely ignored. But strange to say, even the orthodox groups have paid no attention to those British antiquities, but their reason for doing so will become obvious as we proceed with our study.

The question of "Aryan origin" and "Aryan race" has been brought preeminently before the public since the present German persecution of the Jews began; but it is unfortunate for the German professors, as well as ours, that {they do not know that the Jews are Khazars not Aryans} but the Germans, and in fact all of us, are Aryans.

The Jews are {believed} to be Semites, i.e., the descendants of Shem, the son of Noah. But they are not they are the descendants of Japhath the third son of Noah. Since the advent of Thomas Paine and the German higher critics of the Bible, the latter's statements have been questioned and discredited; yet modern explorations are proving the historicity of the Bible. Every since the time of Eichhorn, the German critic and Orientalist of a hundred years ago, Oriental scholars have spoken of the Semites as existing for 4000 years B.C. Now, if those scholars allow that the term Semite is derived from Shem, and Shem lived about the time of the Deluge, given by Scripture as occurring about 2344 B.C., how could the Semitic race have existed for 1500 years before that time? ================================================================= NOTE: The following portion, which is taken from "The History of the Jewish Khazars," by D.M. Dunlop, pp. 4-15.

"...Our first question here is, When did the Khazars and the Khazar name appear? There has been considerable discussion as to the relation of the Khazars to the Huns on the one hand and to the West Turks on the other. The prevalent opinion has for some time been that the Khazars emerged from the West Turkish empire. Early references to the Khazars appear about the time when the West Turks cease to be mentioned. Thus they are reported to have joined forces with the Greek Emperor Heraclius against the Persians in A.D. 627 and to have materially assisted him in the siege of Tiflis. it is a question whether the Khazars were at this time under West Turk supremacy. The chronicler Theophanes {died circa A.D. 818} who tells the story introduces them as "the Turks from the east whom they call Khazars." (Ed. Bonn, 485) On the other hand, the West Turks appear in the Greek writers simply as Turks, without special qualification. The Syriac historians mention the Khazars earlier than A.D. 627. Both Michael Syrus (Ed. Cabot, 381, col. 1, line 9) and Bar Hebraeus (Ed. Budge, 32b, col. 1, line 13) tell how, apparently in the reign of the Greek Emperor Maurcie (582-602), three brothers from "inner Scythia" marched west with 30,000 men, and when they reached the frontier of the Greeks, one of them, Bulgarios (Bar Hebraeus, Bulgaris), crossed the Don and settled within the Empire. The others occupied "the country of the Alans which is called Barsalia, " they and the former inhabitants adopting the name of Khazars from Kazarig, the eldest of the brothers. if as seems possible the story goes back to John of Ephesus (So Barthold, E.I., art. Bulghar) {died circa A.D. 586}, it is contemporary with the alleged event. It states pretty explicitly that the Khazars arrived at the Caucasus from central Asia towards the end of the 6th century. In the Greek writer Theophylact Simocatta {circa 620} we have an almost contemporary account of events among the West Turks which can hardly be unrelated to the Syriac story just mentioned. (Ed. Bonn, 282ff, Chavannes, Documents, 246ff) Speaking of a Turkish embassy to Maurice in 598, this author describes how in past years the Turks had overthrown the White Huns (Hephthalites), the Avars, and the Uigurs who lived on "the Til, which the Turks call the Black River." (Unidentified. Til is apparently the same as atil, itil, "river." Cf. Atil, Itil=the Volga. Zeuss (Die Deutschen, 713n.) denied that the Volga was meant. Marquart, followed by Chavannes (Documents, 251), suggested the Tola, a tributary of the Orkhon, which is probably too far east). These Uigurs, says Theophylact, were descended from two chiefs called Var and Hunni. They are mentioned elsewhere as the "Varchonites." (Menander Protector, ed. Bonn, 400) Some of the Uigurs escaped from the Turks, and, appearing in the West, were regarded by those whom they met as Avars, by which name they were generally known. The last part of this is confirmed by another Greek author, according to whom Justinian received representatives of Thepseudo- Avars, properly Uigurs, in A.D. 558, (Menander, ibid., 282) after which they turned to plundering and laying wast the lands of eastern and central Europe. If the derivation from Uigur is right, the word "ogre" in folklore may date from this early period. Theophylact also tells us that about the time of the Turkish embassy in 598 there was another emigration of fugitives from Asia into Europe, involving the tribes of the Tarniakh, Kotzagers, and Zabender. These were, like the previous arrivals, descendants of Var and Hunni, and they proved their kinship by joining the so- called Avars, really Uigurs, under the Khaqan of the latter. It is difficult not to see in this another version of the story given by Michael Syrus and Bar Hebraeus. The Kotzagers are undoubtedly a Bulgar group, (Cf. Marquart, Streifziige, 488) while Zabender should be the same name as Samandar, an important Khazar town, and hence correspond to Kazarig in the Syriac. Originally, it seems, Samandar derived its name from the occupying tribe. (Menander, ibid., 282) We appear to have confirmation that the Khazars had arrived in eastern Europe by the region of Maurice, having previously been in contact with the West Turks and destined to be so again. On the other hand, the older view implied that the Khazars were already on the outskirts of Europe before the rise of the Turks {circa A.D. 550}. According to this view, the affinities of the Khazars were with the Huns. When Priscus, the envoy to Attila in 448, spoke of a people subject to the Huns and living in "Scythia towards the Pontus" called Akatzir, (Priscus, ed. Bonn, 197) these were simply Aq-Khazars, i.e., White Khazars, Jordanes, writing circa 552, mentions the Akatzirs as a warlike nation, who do not practice agriculture but live by pasturing flocks and hunting. (Ed. Mommsen, 63) In view of the distinction among some Turkish and the remainder as "black," when we read in the Arab geographer Istakhri that the Khazars are of two kinds, one called Qara-Khazars (Black Khazars), the other a white kind, unnamed, (Istakhri's account of the Khazars is translated in Chapter V) it is a natural assumption that the latter are the Aq-Khazars (White Khazars). The identification of the Akatzirs with "Aq-Khazars" was rejected by Zeuss (Die Deutschen, 714-15) and Marquart (Streifziige, 41, n. 2) as impossible linguistically. Marquart further said that historically the Akatzirs as a subject race correspond rather to the Black Khazars. The alternative identification proposed is Akatzirs=Agacheri. But this may not be very different from the other, if Zeki Validi is right in thinking that the relation between the Agacheri and the Khazars was close. (Ibn-Fadlan, xxxi) There are one or two facts in favor of the older view which have not been explained away effectively. If the Khazars had nothing to do with the Akatzirs and appeared first as an off-shoot of the West Turks at the end of the 6th century, how do they come to be mentioned in the Syriac compilation of circa 569, (Rubens Duval, cited Chavannes, Documents, 250, n. 4) going under the name of Zacharias Rhetor? The form Kasar/Kasir, which here comes in a list of peoples belonging to the general neighborhood of the Caucasus, refers evidently to the Khazars. This would fit in well with their existence in the same region a century earlier. We have also the testimony of the so-called Geographer of Ravenna (? 7th century) that the Agaziri (Acatziri) of Jordanes are the Khazars. (Ed. Pinder and Parthy, 168) The Khazars, however, are nowhere represented simply as Huns. The question arises, If they were subjugated by the latter shortly before A.D. 448, as Pricus tells, how long had they existed previously? Here we must consider the views of Zeki Validi, which are put forward exclusively on the basis of Oriental sources and are quite independent of the considerations which have just been raised. He believes that he has found traces of one and the same Urgeschichte of the Turks, not only in Muslim but also in Chinese sources, the latter going as far back as the Wei dynasty (366- 558). (The Later Wei is meant (Zeki Validi's dates)). In the story the Khazars play a leading part and even claim to be authochthonous in their country. (Ibn-Fadlan, 294. Yet on the basis of the same tradition, the original home of the Khazars is represented as the lower Oxus, cf. ibid., 244, 266) Zeki Validi cites a story in Gardizi, according to which the eponymous ancestor of the Kirgiz, having killed a Roman officer, fled to the court of the Khazar Khaqan, and later went eastward till he found a permanent settlement on the Yenissei. But as the Kirgiz in early times are believed to have lived in eastern Europe and to have been south of the urals before the beginning of the Christian era, Zeki Validi would assign a corresponding date to this episode and is unwilling to allow that the mention of Khazars this early is an anachronism. (Ibn-Fadlan, 328) These are remarkable claims to make for the antiquity of the Khazars. The principal Muslim sources which Zeki Validi relies on are relatively late, Gardizi, circa A.D. 1050, and an anonymous history, the Mujmal al-Tawarikh w-al-Qisas, (Ibn-Fadlan, 311) somewhat later (though these doubtless go back to ibn-al-Muqaffa' in the 8th century, and through him to pre-Islamic Persian sources), nor does his Chinese source mention the Khazars explicitly. But the view that the Khazars existed anterior to the Huns gains some confirmation from another quarter. The Armenian History going under the name of Moses of Chorene (5th century) has a story which mentions the Khazars in the twenty years between A.D. 197 and 217. (The chronology of the text is confused, suggesting both these dates and an intermediate one. Ency. Brit. (14th ed.), s.v. Khazars, has the date 198. Carmoly (Khozars, 10, in Itineraires de la Terre Sainte, Brussels 1847) must refer to the same incident when he speaks of the Khazar Juluf, who ruled seventeen nations on the Volga, and, pursuing some rebel tribes, burst in to Armenia between A.D. 178 and 198. The source of Carmoly's information is quite unknown to me). According to this, the peoples of the north, the Khazirs and Basilians, made an agreement to break through the pass of Chor at the east end of the Caucasus "under the general and king Venasep Surhap." (In the Whistons' 18th century translation, ii, 62 (65) "sub duce ac rege eorum Venasepo Surhaco." Kutschera thought that the two kings of the Khazars were intended (Die Chasaren, Vienna 1910, 38) Having crossed the river Kur, they were met by the Armenian Valarsh with a great army and driven back northward in confusion. Some time later, on their own side of the Caucasus, the northern nations again suffered a heavy defeat. Valarsh was killed in this second battle. His son succeeded him, and under the new king the Armenians again passed the Caucasus in strength, defeating and completely subjugating the Khazirs and Basilians. One in every hundred was taken as a hostage, and a monument in Greek letters was set up to show that these nations were under the jurisdiction of Rome. This seems to be a very factual account, and by Khazirs certainly the Khazars are to be understood. it is, however, generally held that the Armenian History is wrongly ascribed to Moses of Chorene in the 5th century and should be assigned to the 9th, or at any rate the 8th, century. (For a summary of the views about Moses of Chorene, see an article by A.O. Sarkissian, J.A.O.S., Vol. 60 (1940), 73-81) This would clearly put quite a different complexion on the story of the Khazar raid. Instead of being unexceptionable evidence for the existence of the Khazars at all events in the time of Moses of Chorene, it would fall into line with other Armenian (and also Georgian (A favorable example of the Georgian accounts in Brosset, Inscriptions Georgiennes etc., M.R.A. 1840, 329) accounts which though they refer to the Khazars more or less explicitly in the first centuries of the Christian era, and even much earlier, we do not cite here. Though interesting in themselves, these accounts, in view of their imprecision and lack of confirmation, cannot be regarded as reliable. The Muslim writers provide us with a considerable amount of material which may be expected to throw light on the date of the emergence of the Khazars. As already indicated, some of this demonstrably derives from Pehlevi sources, composed before the Arab conquest of Persia. What the Arabic and Persian writers have to say about the Khazars deserves careful scrutiny, as liable to contain authentic information from an earlier time. It is not surprising that these accounts, written when the Khazar state north of the Caucasus was flourishing, distinguish them from the Turks encountered by the first generations of Muslims in central Asia. But a passage like the following, where the Khazars are set side by side with the leading types of contemporary humanity, is somewhat remarkable. In a discussion between the celebrated ibn- al-Muqaffa' and his frines the question was raised as to what nation was the most intelligent. It is significant for the low state of their culture at the time, or at least for the view held by the Arabs on the subject (ibn-al-Muqaffa' died 142/759), that the Turks and Khazars were suggested only after the claims of the Persians, Greeks, Chinese, Indians, and Negroes had been canvassed. Evidently in this respect the Turks and the Khazars shared a bad eminence. But they are given quite different characteristics: "The Turks are lean dogs, the Khazars pasturing cattle." (Ibn-'Abd-Rabbihi, al-Iqd al-Farid, ed. of A.H. 1331, Ii, 210. The anecdote is commented on by Fr. Rosenthal, Technique and Approach of Muslim Scholarship, Analecta Orientalia, 24 (1947), 72) Though the judgment is unfavorable, we get the impression of the Khazars as a distinct, even important, racial group. How far this corresponds with the fact is not certain. Suggestions have been made connecting the Khazars with the Circassian type, taken to be pale-complexioned, dark-haired, and blue-eyed, and through the Basilians or Barsilians already mentioned, with the so-called "Royal Scyths" of Herodotus. (iv, 59) All this is evidently very speculative. Apart from the passage where the Black Khazars are mentioned, described as being dusky like the Indians, and their counterparts fair and handsome, (See Istakhri's account of the Khazars in Chapter V, infra) the only available description of the race in Arabic sources is the following, apparently from ibn-Sa'id al-Maghribi: "As to the Khazars, they are to be left [north] of the inhabited earth towards the 7th clime, having over their heads the constellation of the Plough. Their land is cold and wet. Hence their complexions are white, their eyes blue, their hair flowing and predominantly reddish, their bodies large and their natures cold. Their general aspect is wild." (Bodieian MS., i, 873, fol. 71, kindly communicated by Professor Kahle) This reads like a conventional description of a northern nation, and in any case affords no kind of support for Khazar affinity with the "Circassian" type. If we are to trust the etymology of Khalil ibn- Ahmad (Yaqut, Mu'jam al-Buldan, s.v. Khazar) the Khazars may have been slant-eyed, like the Mongols, etc. Evidently nothing can be said positively in the matter. Some of the Khazars may have been fair-skined, with dark hair and blue eyes, but there is no evidence that this type prevailed from antiquity or was widely represented in Khazaria in historical times. A similar discussion on the merits of the different races is reported from the days before Muhammad, in which the speakers are the Arab Nu'man ibn-al-Mudhir of al-Hirah and Khusraw Anushirwan. The Persian gives his opinion that the Greeks, Indians, and Chinese are superior to the Arabs and so also, in spite of their low material standards of life, the Turks and the Khazars, who at least possess an organization under their kings. Here again the Khazars are juxtaposed with the great nations of the east. (Ibn- 'Abd-Rabbilu, op. cit. i, 166) It is consonant with this that tales were told of how ambassadors from the Chinese, the Turks, and the Khazars were constantly at Khusraw's gate, (Tabari, i, 899. According to ibn-Khurdadhbih, persons wishing access to the Persian court from the country of the Khazars and the Alans were detained at Bab al-Abwab (B.G.A. vi, 135)) and even that he kept three thrones of gold in his palace, which were never removed and on which none sat, reserved for the kings of Byzantium, China and the Khazars. (Ibn-al-Balkhi, Fdrs Namah (G.M.S.), 97) In general, the material in the Arabic and Persian writers with regard to the Khazars in early times falls roughly into three groups, centering respectively round the names of (a) one or other of the Hebrew patriarchs, (b) Alexander the Great, and (c) certain of the Sassanid kings, especially, Anushirwan and his immediate successors. A typical story of the first group is given by Ya'qubi in his History. (Ed. Houtsma, i, 17) After the confusion of tongues at Babel (Gen. 10:18; 11:19), the descendants of Noah came to Peleg (Gen. 10:25; 11:16-19; 1 Chr. 1:19; 1:25), son of Eber (Gen. 10:21; 10:24-25; 11:14-17; Num. 24:24; 1 Chr. 1:18-19; 1:25; 8:12; Neh. 12:20), and asked him to divide (Gen. 10:5; 10:25; 10:32; Exo. 14:21; Deut. 4:19; 32:8; 1 Chr. 1:19) the earth among them. He apportioned to the descendants of Japheth (Gen. 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18; 9:23; 9:27; 10:1-2; 10:21; 1 Chr. 1:4-5) - China, Hind, Sind, the country of the Turks and that of the Khazars, as well as Tibet, the country of the (Volga) Bulgars, Daylam, and the country neighboring on Khurasan. In another passage Ya'qubi gives a kind of sequel to this. Peleg (Gen. 10:25; 11:16-19; 1 Chr. 1:19; 1:25) having divided the earth in this fashion (Deut. 32:8), the descendants of 'Amur ibn-Tubal (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chr. 1:5; Isa. 66:19; Eze. 27:13; 32:26; 38:2-3; 39:1), a son of Japheth, went out to the northeast. One group, the descendants of Togarmah (Gen. 10:3; 1 Chr. 1:6; Eze. 27:14; 38:6), proceeding farther north, were scattered in different countries and became a number of kingdoms, among them the Burjan (Bulgars), Alans, Khazars (Ashkenaz Gen. 10:3), and Armenians. (Ed. Houtsma, i, 203, cf. Marquart, Str. 491) Similarly, according to Tabari, (i, 217-18) there were born to Japheth Jim-r (the Biblical Gomer (Gen. 10:2-3; 1 Chr. 1:5-6; Eze. 38:6; Hos. 1:3), Maw'-' (read Mawgh-gh, Magog (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chr. 1:5; Eze. 38:2; 39:6; Rev. 20:8)), Mawday (Madai (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chr. 1:5), Yawan (Javan (Gen. 10:2; 10:4; 1 Chr. 1:5; 1:7; Isa. 66:19; Eze. 27:13; 27:19)), Thubal (Tubal), Mash-j (read Mash-kh, Meshech (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chr. 1:15; 1:17; Eze. 27:13; 32:26; 38:2-3; 39:1)) and Tir-sh (Tiras (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chr. 1:5)). Of the descendants of the last were the Turks and the Khazars (Ashkenaz). There is possibly an association here with the Turgesh, survivors of the West Turks, who were defeated by the Arabs in 119/737, (H.A.R. Gibb, Arab Conquests in Central Asia, London 1923, 83ff. Cf. Chapter IV, n. 96) and disappeared as a ruling group in the same century. Tabari says curiously that of the descendants of Mawgh-gh (Magog) were Yajuj and Majuj, adding that these are to the east of the Turks and Khazars. This information would invalidate Zeki Validi's attempt to identify Gog and Magog in the Arabic writers with the Norwegians. (Ibn-Fadlan, 196ff) The name Mash-kh (Meshech) is regarded by him as probably a singular to the classical Massagetai (Massag-et). (Ibn-Fadlan, 244, n. 3) A Bashmakov emphasizes the connection of "Meshech" with the Khazars, to establish his theory of the Khazars, not as Turks from inner Asia, but what he calls a Jephetic or Alarodian group from south of the Caucasus. (Mercure de France, Vol. 229 (1931), 39ff) Evidently there is no stereotyped form of this legendary relationship of the Khazars to Japheth. The Taj-al-Artis says that according to some they are the descendants of Kash-h (? Mash-h or Mash-kh, for Meshech), son of Japheth, and according to others both the Khazars and the Saqalibah are sprung from Thubal (Tubal). Further, we read of Balanjar ibn-Japheth in ibn-al-Faqih (B.G.A., v, 289) and abu-al-Fida' (Ed. Reinaud and De Slane, 219) as the founder of the town of Balanjar. Usage leads one to suppose that this is equivalent to giving Balanjar a separate racial identity. In historical times Balanjar was a well-known Khazar center, which is even mentioned by Masudi as their capital. (Tanbih, 62) It is hardly necessary to cite more of these Japheth stories. Their JEWISH origin IS priori OBVIOUS, and Poliak has drawn attention to one version of the division of the earth, where the Hebrew words for "north" and "south" actually appear in the Arabic text. (Conversion, 3) The Iranian cycle of legend had a similar tradition, according to which the hero Afridun divided the earth among his sons, Tuj (sometimes Tur, the eponym of Turan), Salm, and Iraj. Here the Khazars appear with the Turks and the Chinese in the portion assigned to Tuj, the eldest son. (Tabari, i, 229) Some of the stories connect the Khazars with Abraham. The tale of a meeting in Khurasan between the sons of Keturah (Gen. 25:1; 25:4; 1 Chr. 1:32-33) and the Khazars (Ashkenaz Gen. 10:3) where the Khaqan is Khaqan is mentioned is quoted from the Sa'd and al-Tabari by Poliak. (Loc. cit.; Khazaria, 23, 142, 148; Cf. ibn-Sa'd, I, i, 22; Tabari I, i, 347ff)) The tradition also appears in the Meshed manuscript of ibn-al-Faqih, apparently as part of the account of Tamim ibn-Babr's journey to the Uigurs, but it goes back to Hishim al-Kalbi. (Hisham ibn-Muhammad, the authority given by ibn-Sa'd=Hisham ibn-Lohrasp al-Sa'ib al-Kalbi in ibn-al-Faqih's text (in V. Minorsky, "Tamim ibn-Bahr's Journey to the Uyghurs," B.S.O.A.S., 1948, xii/2, 282)) Zeki Validi is inclined to lay some stress on it as a real indication of the presence of the Khazars in this region at an early date. ((Ibn- Fadlan, 294) Al-Jahiz similarly refers to the legend of the sons of Abraham and Keturah settling in Khurasan but does not mention the Khazars. (Fada'il al-Atrak, transl. C.T. Harley Walker, J.R.A.S., 1915, 687) Al-Di-mashqi says that according to one tradition the Turks were the children of Abraham by Keturah, whose father belonged to the original Arab stock (al-'Arab al-'Aribah). Descendants of other sons of Abraham, namely the Soghdians and the Kirgiz, were also said to live beyond the Oxus..." ==================================================================

Orientalists claim, as does Lenomant and others, that the Semitic race, originating in Central Asia, migrated into Mesopatamia about 3000 years B.C., where they found a Turanian population, which they quickly overcame and absorbed and founded the Babylonian Empire. This migration of a superior race, coming from Central Asia, is correct; but, as Shem did not come into existence until about 2400 B.C., this race of immigrants have been badly misnamed by the scholars, for they were not the Semsites but their ancestors, the Aryans, the parent White Race, the name Aryan being derived from the Sanskirt word Arya, meaning noble. Aryan therefore means "the noble race." The Aryan is none other than the Adamic race, as we shall see presently.

A great gulf of difference seems to exist between the findings of science and the orthodox interpretation of the first eleven chapters of Genesis: scientists can find traces of man existing for a period of fifty or one hundred thousand years with reasonable certainty, while faithful readers of Scripture insist that the Bible says that the first man was created about six thousand years. ago. The mistake, however, has been with the orthodox interpretation of Genesis. Its first passage reads: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." When that beginning was is not stated; it may have bee 100, 500 or 1000 million years ago. There is no conflict here with the findings of science. But it must be noticed that there is a great difference between the principal races of mankind; between the Mongolian or Turanian race, the Negro race, and the White or Caucasian race; and there exits little relationship between the three. The White Race were unquestionably the last comers, being in every way superior to the other two and constituting their leaders and teachers. Moreover, an honest investigation of their origin will show that they appeared suddenly and with a high state of civilization.

The answer to that question is given in Genesis 1:26, where we read: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over...all the earth." If the Bible translators had translated the original Hebrew word for man, "Adam," as Adam instead of "man," there would have been no doubt that the Bible deals ONLY with the Adamic race, who were created in the likeness of God to have dominion over all the earth, i.e., over all the other primitive races. An examination of "Young's Analytical Concordance" will show that in over 500 cases the Hebrew word for man in the Old Testament is "Adam," making it self-evident that the Old Testament deals only with what its Hebrew says, the Adamites. But unfortunately THE TRANSLATORS HAVE READ THEIR ASSUMPTIONS INTO THE BOOK, as most people do.

Thus, the Old Testament gives us the best, and we may be sure the right, explanation of the existence and superiority of the Adamic or White Race. It is also well recognized that the White Race was the agricultural race, while in older times the other primitive races were chiefly nomads and hunters. This also is proven from Genesis 2:5, which states: "And there was not an Adamite to till the ground." In the second chapter of Genesis Verses 7 and 8 should read: "And the Lord formed the Adamite of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the Adamite became a living soul. And the Lord planted a garden in Eden/ and there he put the Adamite whom he had formed."

However, it also appears that the word "man" is applied only to the Adamic Race, according to Max Mueller, the great Oxford scholar, who stated:

"Man, a derivative root, means to think. From this we have the Sanskirt 'Manu,' originally the thinker, then man. The name Adam, man, a thinker, suggests that the living soul breathed into Adam raised him high above the other existing races."

Strong confirmation for our theory, if we wish to call it that, we receive from a passage in the Indian Vedas, which reads:

"Indra alone hath tamed the dusky races, and subdued them for the Aryans." Further on in our study we shall see that Indra is the early Indo- Aryan name for Jehovah. Among the dusky races are included the Chinese and other Mongolian or Turanian peoples, the Egyptians, the Negroes, and the primitive people of Europe and the British Isles. A study of Scripture and recorded civilization makes it clear that it was this Adamic or Aryan race who were God's appointed builders of civilization and the carriers of Messianic Tidings from the very beginning, as we shall see in the succeeding chapters.

Our next problem is to discover where the Adamic or Aryan Race originated. According to Scripture it began in Eden. But where was Eden? Concerning the location of Eden we read in Genesis 2:10-14:

"And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison; that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates."

Because the Euphrates is mentioned here people have assumed that Eden must have been located on the banks of the historic Euphrates river in Mesopotamia; but as the Euphrates and the Tigris merge into one river, the situation in no wise corresponds to the description given in Genesis, which states that one river went out of Eden and divided into four heads. If we wish to accept the Bible statement as descriptive and authoritative, we are compelled to look elsewhere for a group of four rivers originating from one source. Such a location of four rivers starting from one source we find on the Pamir plateau in Central Asia, between the Tian Shan mountains on the north and the Hindu Cush on the south. Cush is the original word for Ethiopia and is a word older than the division of languages. From the lakes of that plateau issue four great rivers: the Indus, the Jaxartes, the Oxus, and the Tarim. The Oxus is still called by the natives the Dagihun or Gihon; the Chitral branch of the Indus answers the description of the Pison; the Jaxartes is the original Euphrates; and the Tarim going toward the east is in all probability the Hiddekel.

Concerning this identification, Professor S.H. Buchanan on pages 125 and 126 of his work, "The World and the Book," quotes the great French Orientalist, M. Renan:

"If we search to determine the country which best satisfies the geography of the first chapters of Genesis, it is necessary to avow that all conducts us to the region of the Imaus, where the most solid inductions place the cradle of the Aryan race. There is found, as in the Paradise of Genesis, gold, precious stones, bdellium. This point is that of the world of which one is able to say with the most truth that four rivers issue from the same source. Four immense currents of water; the Indus, the Helmend, the Oxus, and the Gaxartes, take there their rise, flowing in directions the most opposite. The second chapter of Genesis presents to us a traditional geography which has no connection with the ordinary geography of the Hebrews; but which, on the contrary, offers the most astounding resemblance with the Turanian system. The Pison, which issues from the Garden of Eden, situated in the East, is very probably the high Indus, and the country of Havilah, seems well to be the country of Darda towards Chachmises, celebrated for its riches. The Gihon is the Oxus, and it is without doubt by substitution of more modern names that we find the Tigris and the Euphrates at the side of the other rivers indicated. Thus, all invites us to place the Eden of the Semites at the point of the separation of the waters of Asia; at the umbilic of the world, toward which, as with an index finger, all the races seem to point as that recognized in their most primitive traditions."

Sir Gaston Maspero, late director-general of Egyptian Antiquities in his "ancient History of the Orient," also identifies the Pamir plateau as the location of the Garden of Eden. His quotation is also taken from Professor Buchanan's book, pages 124-125:

"All have preserved mixed with the vague legends of their infancy, the memory of a primitive country where their ancestors had lived before their dispersion. This was a high mountain, or better, an immense plateau of a square figure, and so elevated that it seemed as if suspended between the heavens and the earth. From the interior flowed a great river, which soon divided itself into four arms or canals, spreading out over the four surrounding countries. There was the umbilic of the world and the cradle of humanity. The people settled between the Mediterranean and the Tigris located this legendary country in the East. The people of ancient Persia and India conceived its situation in the North. The moderns have succeeded in determining its site more exactly than the ancients had done. They have placed it in the mountains of Belurtag, near the point where the chain unites with the Himalaya. There in effect, and there only, is found a country which satisfies all the geographic descriptions preserved in the sacred books of Asia. From the Plateau of Pamir, or better, from the mountain mass of which this plateau is the center, four great rivers issue, the Indus, the Helmend, the Oxus, and the Gaxartes, which flow in directions the most diverse corresponding sufficiently in the four rivers of tradition."

NOTE: This brings to mind the Scripture which state:

"God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran..." (Habakkuk 3:3){This is not in the book I added it as food for thought.

This plateau of Pamir all the people of Asia consider to be the original Eden and the central part of the world as Professor Renan tells us, quoted by Buchanan, pages 123-124:

"Thus everything invites us to place the Eden of the Semites (Aryans) in the mountains of Belurtag, at the point where this chain unites with the Himalaya, toward the Plateau of Pamir...We are conducted to the same point, according to Brunoff, by the most ancient and authentic texts of the Zend-Avesta. The Hindu traditions also contained in the Mahabharata and the Puranas, converge to the same region. There is the true Meru (Ararat) (of the Hindus), the ture Albordj (of the Persians), the true river Arvanda, from which all rivers take their source, according to Persian tradition. There, according to the opinions of almost all the populations of Asia, is the central point of the world, the umbilic, the gate of the universe. There is the uitarakura 'the country of happiness,' of which Magesthanes writes. There is, finally the point of common attachment of the primitive geography, both of Semitic and the Indo-European races."

The Pamir plateau of today is of course a different place from what it was five or six thousand years ago. At that time the whole of Asia was lower than it is today; at that time a large inland sea covered the steppes of southern Siberia, of which the Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea are remnants; and over the now frozen steppes of northern Siberia roamed the mammoth and the sabre-toothed tiger. All the indications are that northern Siberia then had a semi-tropical climate, and ideal conditions prevailed on the Pamir Plateau. A study of our map shows that this plateau occupies a unique position; it is called "the roof of the world" and forms the watershed of Asia. The plateau itself has today an altitude of 15,000 feet, and upon it stands peaks 10,000 feet higher. Four great rivers derive their waters from the valleys or Pamirs, the lakes and glaciers of that region. The main branch of the Amu Daria or Oxus forms an outlet to Lake Victoria, several others of its tributaries flowing also form the plateau, as seen on our map. The Oxus is still called by the natives the Gihun. Both the Chitral and the Gilgit branches of the Indus have their origin close to Lake Victoria on the southern side of the Pamirs, and so also has the Yarkand River, which together with the Kashgar forms the Tarim River. The Tarim river, as will be seen, has no outlet towards the sea, but disappears in the Tarim Basin at a place that is five hundred feet below sea level. This Tarim Basin is the greatest sinkhole in the world, although it is surrounded by the highest mountain peaks in the world; yet its floor lies in many places below the level of the Indian Ocean, indicating that a great cataclysm lore the earth here in a bygone age.

The northern branch of the Tarim, the Kashgar River, flows out of the Alai valley on the northern end of the Pamir Plateau and not far from where a branch of the Oxus originates. From the same valley also flows in a northerly direction a branch of the Syr Daria or Jaxartes River, whose name indicates that it is probably the original Euphrates of the ancients. The Helmend, which Renan and Maspero identify with the Hiddekel does not have its origin on the Pamir plateau, but starts several hundred miles south of it in a valley of the Hindu Kush; but it is probable that the Kashgar river is the original Hiddekel, flowing towards the East.

Only the Pamir Plateau answers to the geographical conditions described in Genesis 4:10:

"A lake also sprang up in Eden to supply the Garden with waters, and form there it divided and became four rivers."

Fenton translation of the Bible. Such a condition exists nowhere else in Asia, four streams coming from one group of Alpine lakes, which may once have been one lake; and all the people of Asia look with awe to the "forbidden Pamirs" as the place of the original Paradise. There on the "roof of the world" is located the mythical Taurus or Alai mountains, the legendary Chinese Ques Kio or Lake of Stars and the Rang Kul or Dragon's Lake, from which the Serpent is said to have come.

Today the Pamir Plateau is uninhabited. Its high altitude of 15,000 feet or more makes it too inhospitable a place to live in; and, covering a territory of about 180 by 180 miles, it forms a blank and mysterious spot on the map of Asia.

In the next chapter we shall see that all the circumstances point to the Tarim Basin, lying just east of the Great Pamirs, as the homeland of the Adamites; both locations and their peculiarities make it evident that the cradle of the Adamic or Aryan race was located in these mysterious mountain fastness of Central Asia.

However, there are still more evidences from other sources, and indeed very substantial ones, that direct us to Central Asia as the homeland of the Aryan race; and those evidences are furnished by the roots of various languages, all of them tracing their parent stock to the Aryan. Chambers Encyclopedia, under "Aryan Race and Languages," says:

"The evidence on which a family relation has been established among these nations is that of language. Between Sanskrit (the mother of the modern Hindu dialects of Hindustan), Zend (the language of the ancient Persians), Greek (which is yet the language of Greece), Latin (the language of the Romans and the mother of the modern Romantic languages - i.e., Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian), Celtic (once the language of a great part of Europe) now confined to Wales and parts of France, Ireland, and Scotland), Gothic (which may be taken as the ancient type of the Teutonic or German languages, including English {unknown to the author, the major part of the English language was derived from the ancient Hebrew}, and of the Scandinavian), and Slavonic (spoken in a variety of dialects all over Europe Russia and a great part of Austria), the researches of philology have within the 19th century established such affinities as can be accounted for only by supposing that the nations who originally spoke them had a common origin. No one of these nations, existing or historical, can claim to be the parent nation of which the others were colonies. The relation among the languages mentioned is that of sisters, daughters of one mother, which perished, as it were, in giving them birth. No monuments of this mother-language have been preserved, nor have we any history or even tradition of the nation that spoke it. That such a people existed and spoke such a tongue is an inference of comparative philology, the process of reasoning being analogous to that followed in the kindred science of geology...By skillful interpretation of their indications, aided by the light of all other available monuments, he is able to spell out, with more or less probability, the ethnical records of the past, and thus obtain a glimpse here and there into the ray cloud that rests over the dawn of the ages. When these linguistic monuments are consulted as to the primitive seat of the Aryan nations, they point to Central Asia, somewhere probably east of the Caspian, and north of the Hindu Kush and Paropamisan Mountains. There, at a period long anterior to all European history, by tribes akin to the Finns, or perhaps to the American Indians, dwelt that mother-nation of which we have spoken. From this center, in obedience to a law of movement which has continued to act through all history, successive migrations took place towards the northwest. The first swarm formed the Celts, who seem at one time to have occupied a great part of Europe; at a considerably later epoch came the ancestors of the Italians, the Greeks, the Teutonic peoples. All these would seem to have made their way to their new settlements through Persia and Asia Minor, crossing into Europe by the Hellespont, and partly, perhaps, between the Caspian and the Black Sea. The stream that formed the Slavonic nations is thought to have taken the route by the north of the Caspian... In the most ancient Sanskrit writings (the Veda), the Hindus style themselves Aryans; and the name may be preserved in the classic Arii, a tribe of ancient Persia, and in the district Ariana. Ariana is evidently an old Persian word, preserved in the modern native name Persia, Airan or Iran. Arya, in Sanskrit, signifies 'excellent,' 'honorable,' originally 'lord of the soil,' from a root ar (Lat. arare, 'to plow'), distinguishing tillers (bearers) of the earth from the nomadic Turanians."

All this evidence, together with that of the next chapters, should suffice to identify the Aryan with the Adamic race and thus explain satisfactorily the distinctive superiority of the White Race above the primitive races.

Chapter III WHERE WAS THE DELUGE?

Orthodoxy has held until this day to the belief that the Deluge of Genesis was universal, covering the whole of the globe; yet such a belief, although apparently expressed by the translators, is, according to a careful analysis of certain facts of Scripture, an impossibility, to say nothing of the recorded facts of Egyptian and Chinese history, nor the impossibility presented by physical science. Once the question of the Deluge is settled another of the obstacles over which the critics and the scientists have stumbled is removed.

According to Ussher's Bible Chronology the Deluge occurred in the year 2348 B.C. This is correct to within four years, as Mr. Davidson has found from his careful analysis of Chinese, Babylonian, Hebrew, and Egyptian records, presented in his work, "Early Egypt, Babylonia and Central Asia." The correct date for the Deluge is from November 1, 2345 (Genesis 7:11), to November 11, 2344 B.C. (Genesis 8:14). Our Hallowe'en and All Soul's days are still kept in commemoration of the Deluge.

Let us now analyze our data. If the Deluge had been universal as orthodoxy assumes it to be, then only Noah's family, consisting of eight persons, was left alive on the whole globe. Bible chronology shows that Abraham was born about the year 2000 B.C., in ur of the Chaldeans, and ancient Chaldea was at that time a flourishing country with a large population and a certain civilization, as the excavations have shown. It is out of all reason to assume that such a population could have developed from only eight people 350 years previously. Again, as soon as Abram had been called into Canaan (Genesis, 12th chapter) he went at once into Egypt to buy grain; and there too was established a great civilization and dense population. Senusert III of the 12th Dynasty was Pharaoh at that time.

If, as some people believe, the Great Pyramid was built by Shem or Melchizedek, it was built within only two or three centuries after the Deluge, and how could Egypt have furnished the Pyramid builders with 100,000 men every three months if all human beings were destroyed by the Deluge only two centuries before?

Professor Sayce found in a bomb of the XVIIIth Egyptian Dynasty at Thebes, which ruled about 1700 B.C., pictures of Negroes, as they are today; white-skinned Aryans; brown Egyptians; and typical Mongolians. As those four types of races have remained the same in all the thirty-six centuries since then, is it reasonable to suppose that those four types could have developed during the six preceding centuries and from the eight white-skinned survivors of the Deluge?

On the ceiling of the temple of Denderah in Upper Egypt was found one of the few existing ancient representations of the constellations of the Zodiac, engraved in copper, on it we find the various star clusters grouped into constellations represented by human or animal figures, such as: Virgo, Gemini, Bootes, Cassiopeia, Leo, etc. Every one of the major groups represented by human figures show men and women of our Caucasian or Aryan type, entirely different from the Egyptian type. All these evidences show that the Egyptians were not of the Adamic or White Race, but were a separate people who had lived in the valley of the Nile for over 50,000 years B.C., as Professor Brested has found, living a primitive existence until the Pyramid age, when members of the Aryans came among them and the Egyptian civilization suddenly burst forth, as we find from its ruins.

The first Egyptian Dynasty began in 3001 B.C., with King Mena, and an uninterrupted succession of Dynasties followed until the 12th which ended in 2146 B.C., as Mr. Davidson has established. The kings of the first Dynasty instituted a series of Renewal or Sed periods of thirty years each, which they derived from an earlier civilization. At the end of each period the co-regent was appointed to carry on the succession, as "the king never dies." The last of these Sed Festivals, the 35th, was celebrated in the 2nd year of Nebtaura, the last king of the 11th Dynasty, in 2057 B.C., as Mr. Davidson has established in his "Early Egypt, Babylonia, and Central Asia, Chart 14. The Deluge took place in 2344 B.C.; it fell in the reign of Pepi II, between the 25th and 26th Sed Festival. There was an uninterrupted succession of kings for 1247 years for the first twelve Dynasties and an uninterrupted series of Sed Festivals for the first twelve Dynasties and an uninterrupted series of Sed Festivals from 3378 to 2057 B.C. Egypt felt nothing of the Deluge and knew nothing of it until the story was brought to them years later by the survivors. (Recer also the the author's Coordinated Chronology of Israel and Egypt).

Thus Egyptian chronology proves that no Deluge covered that land. As Genesis 7:20 tells us that the waters stood sixty feet above the mountain tops, and some of the mountains are over six miles in height, the waters of the Flood would have covered Egypt six miles deep. There is not enough water or moisture in existence on all the earth to accomplish that. If it did, it would have taken Egypt and every other country centuries to recover from such a catastrophe. As it is certain that no Deluge was in Egypt, there could therefore have been no universal Flood. It is useless for our friends, the Fundamentalists, to get vexed on this point and quote Scripture, which says that the earth was covered and all flesh died. The Word also says in Luke 2 "that all the world should be taxed." What is meant by this order is that all the world under Roman rule should be taxed. Rome's rule did not reach into China nor into America, and if it had the Americans would have rebelled.

When Genesis, therefore, speaks of the Flood covering the earth, it means that part of the earth in which the Adamites lived who sinned against God. The Negroes and the Mongols at that time did not know God's laws, and "where there is no law, there is no transgression," says Paul.

Valuable information we get from the Chinese sacred book of the Shu-king, which speaks of Fu-hi, the Chinese Noah. Fu-hi was "born of a rainbow;" of him it was also said that he bred and saved seven kinds of animals to be used as a sacrifice. The Chinese Shu- king, translated by W. Gorn-Old and referred to by Davidson, places the date of the Chinese Deluge within the reign of the Emperor Yaou, from 2356 to 2254., which period includes the Hebrew Deluge date of 2344 B.C. Moreover, according to Mr. Gorn-Old, the Shu-king gives the Epoch of Fu-hi as 2944 B.C., which is 1056 A.K., from 4000 B.C., the beginning of Adamic Chronology. A compilation of the dates of the Patriarchs in Genesis 5 will show that Noah was born in the 1056th year from 4000 B.C., or 2944 B.C. As this is the identical date of the Epoch of Fu-hi, the identity between Fu-hi and Noah is established. Genesis 7:11 states that the Flood commenced in the 600th year of Noah's life, which added to 1056 A.K. gives the Deluge again as 1656 A.K., or 2344 B.C.

In our previous chapter we have seen that the geographical description and Asiatic tradition fixes the Pamir Plateau as the location of the Garden of Eden. Genesis 3:24 indicates that when Adam was driven out of Eden he was driven towards the East. The fourth chapter of Genesis tells us of the murder of Abel by Cain and of God's judgment upon Cain. In the 14th verse the latter answers: "Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me." Of whom was Cain afraid? Certainly not of his father and mother. Who was "every one?" A careful analysis of these words show that Cain was driven from one "earth" into another "earth," or rather, in plain English, from one country into another. "And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden." This verse confirms it and the land into which he went was still further east, down the valley of the Kashgar river; and there he took a wife. If Adam and Eve and Cain were the only people on the earth at that time, as some folks believe, then how could Cain find a wife?

The simple answer is that Cain married a woman of the Turanian or Mongolian race, living in the land, and so did the later sons of Adam, for Scripture tells us that "the sons of God married the daughters of men." The Adamic superiority easily predominated above the other and by intermarriages among the first families soon established a race of its own, resulting in a raising of the physical standard ("There were giants in the earth in those days") and a lowering of the spiritual standard of the original Adam.

Tradition goes back before recorded history and has often proven to be more reliable than history. "Tradition can neither be made nor destroyed," said Benjamin Disraeli. The traditions of ancient Chaldea, Egypt, and China picture the first civilization as existing in a "world" surrounded by high mountains. On our Chart of Central Asia we find below the map a reconstruction of the Chaldean conception of the "world," taken from "The Dawn of Civilization," by Sir Gaston Maspero. Explaining this conception, the author says:

"The earth which forms the lower part of floor is something like an overturned boat in appearance, and hollow underneath ...The earth rises gradually from extremities to the center."

To this Mr. Davidson makes the following remark:

"This is obviously the explanation of what the Chaldeans supposed to represent the encircling seas. Just as obviously, the collapse of the crust of the central dome produced the effect described in Genesis VII: II as the breading up of the fountains of the deep."

The second figure on the Chart of Central Asia shows a cross section by D. Davidson of the Tarim Basin of Eastern Turkestan, enclosed by high mountain ranges of the Tien Shan on the northwest and the Kuen Lun on the south. It was on the Tian Shan range of the "heavenly mountains" that Fu-hi, the Chinese Noah, appeared after the Deluge, surrounded by a "rainbow" and offering sacrifices of "seven pairs" of animals (Compare this with Genesis 8:20-22). It is in Eastern Turkestan that all the conditions exist that make possible the Deluge of Genesis and the destruction of all the inhabitants within their mountain-enclosed "earth" or country.

For an accurate description of this isolated part of the world, we turn to the Encyclopedia Britannica (11th edition) and the article, "Eastern Turkestan" which states:

"Though it is in reality an elevated plateau - it is nevertheless a depression when compared with the girdle of mountains which surround it on every side except the East, and even on that side it is shut in by the crumbling remains of a once mighty mountain system, the Pe-Shan...The mountain ranges which shut off East Turkestan from the rest of the world rank among the loftiest and most difficult in Asia, and indeed in the world... During the later Tertiary period all the desert regions would appear to have been covered by an Asian Mediterranean, or at all events, by vast fresh-water lakes, a conclusion which seems to be warranted by the existence of salt-stained depressions of a lacustrine character; by traces of former lacustrine shore lines, more or less parallel and concentric; by discoveries of vast quantities of fresh-water molluse shells, the existence of dead poplars, patches of dead and moribund tamarisks, and vast expanses of withered reeds, all these crowning the tops of the jardangs, never found in the wind-scooped furrows; the presence of ripple marks of aqueous origin on the leeward side of clay terraces and in other wind-sheltered situations; and in fact, by the general conformation, contour lines, and shapes of the deserts as a whole. From the statements of old travellers, like the Venetian Marco Polo (13th century) and the Chinese Pilgrim, Hsuan Tsang (7th century), as well as other data, it is perfectly evident, not only that this country is suffering from a progressive desiccation, but that sands have actually swallowed up cultivated areas within the historical period."

To this description Mr. Davidson adds in his valuable work, "Early Egypt, Babylonia, and Central Asia," Chart 22:

"Now the only landlocked mountain-encircled area satisfying all the conditions is the mountain-encircled basin of Chinese (or Eastern) Turkestan. Here the Eastern barrier - the former mighty Pe-Shan range of mountains - has been crumbling at a rapid rate since a date long before the beginning of the Christian ear; crumbling under the action of 'desiccation,' on a large scale, and at a rate practically unknown elsewhere on the earth. The latter phenomenon forms one of the outstanding branches of investigation still of special interest and attraction to the geologist who specializes in phenomenal changes of this nature. With this phenomenal factor governing the conditions of change in the physical characteristics of Chinese Turkestan, it may be that the vast inundation in this basin, ascribed by geologists to 'the later Tertiary period,' actually occurred within the historical period (text of Chart No. 23). All the other indications point to the inundation here being that of 2345 B.C., according to the account of Genesis, the chronology of Egypt, and the tradition and date of the Chinese. This would explain the many legends still current in Chinese Turkestan of the many cities there said to have been buried under a rain of 'sand' as a Divine punishment for their inhabitants having ridiculed 'a holy man' who had rebuked them for their sins. (C.P. Skrine, 'Chinese Central Asia, pp. 189-190) Apparently the same earth movement that produced the earth- crust collapse in East Turkestan - converting the whole basin into an inland fresh-water sea - produced a slow settlement of the land surface from East Turkestan towards the Yellow Sea, causing inundations from the Hwang-Ho and its ancient delta of nine channels. The draining off through mountain fissures and channels and along the augmented streams flowing into China would also maintain throughout each year, for several generations, a supply above the normal. Thus, in 2286 B.C., 58 years after the Deluge in East Turkestan, the Emperor Yaou, in the Chinese 'Shu-king,' is represented as appealing for 'one of ability' to undertake the controlling of 'the ever-increasing flood' which 'is disastrous; spreading abroad, it encompasses the hills, and overtops the earthworks; vast and extensive it rises to heaven, the lower people sorrowing greatly.' In a footnote to his translation, Book II, Section 1, Dr. W. Gorn-Old states, 'Wang-hwant, the historian, says that 'formerly the heavens rained down incessantly, the wind blowing from the North East, and the ocean overflowing the land, submerged the country, and obliterated the course of the Nine Rivers.' Here we have the connection between the conditions of the primary Deluge and the inundation in China."

The Deluge of Genesis, therefore, was clearly the catastrophe that overwhelmed, according to the ancient tradition of East Turkestan, the "Forty cities of the Takla Makan." Not until the 3rd century B.C. did human habitation begin again in this deserted area; and there it lasted for only a few centuries, when the sands of the crumbling Pe-shan range and the Gobi desert covered that ill-fated land again.

"...It may be, then, that in the days when Sargon reigned in Babylon and Menes on the Nile, wide fertile lands and populous cities with a culture and art of their own basked in the Central Asian sun, and that the glory and the wealth of a forgotten civilization lie hid for ever under the gigantic dunes of the Takla Makan." (Chinese Central Asia, pp. 190-192)

Our Chart shows that this landlocked Adamic "earth," about one thousand miles in length, was situated east of the Garden of Eden, located in a valley of the Pamir Plateau. The mighty seismic disturbances that brought about the collapse of the Adamic "earth" and the Deluge no doubt also brought great changes to the original Paradise, rising it into the highest plateau on earth and thus changing its climate. When "the highest peaks of the mountains" were covered, water overflowed into the surrounding countries and stranded Noah's Ark on Ararat, which means "the highest peak." When Noah and his family moved into the plains of Shinar and the story of the Flood was told, the people of that country in after years naturally imagined that it was on the highest mountain to the north of them that the Ark rested and named the mount "Ararat." So also did the historic Euphrates derive its name from an eastern stream of Eden, in the same way that the English and Dutch settlers in America brought names of their fatherland with them.

Chapter IV THE PHOENICIANS

Having identified the Aryan Race with the Adamic or White Caucasian Race originating in the mountains of Central Asia, let us now turn to the so-called Phoenicians, who were known to be the leading pioneers, merchants, inventors, and mariners of antiquity, who, coming from north of the Persian Gulf, kept pushing eastward to the shores of the Mediterranean, sailing in their galleys along the coastlands of the Mediterranean, following the setting sun through the Pillars of Hercules, sailed northwestward along the Atlantic seaboard of Europe into Britain, along the coasts of Africa, rounded the Cape of Good Hope, and even crossed the Atlantic to the shores of South and Central America, as we have record of.

Let us bear in mind here that it was the Greeks who gave these ancient mariners and colonizers the name of Phoenicians; and they existed for a period of over 1000 years before the Greeks and continued in name until the Christian era, their language, the Punic, being the commercial language of antiquity, as English is today. Let us now analyze the word "Phoenician" and "Phoenicia." Professor George Rawlinson, in his "Story of Phoenicia," tells us that Phoenicia derived its name from the forests of date or Phoenix palms which grew there in great luxuriance. So far so good; but whence did the Phoenix palm derive its name? Horapollo says: "A palm branch was the symbol of the Phoenix." Yes, but what or who was the Phoenix? Sanchoniathen, the Phoenician writer, states that "Phoenix was the first Phoenician." Phoenix, then, was a man. Now, the word Phoenix is the Greek form of the Egyptian term "Pa-Hanok," the house of Enoch. In Hebrew Enoch also is Hanok. Thus the mystery of that ancient race is solved; they were the sons and descendants of Enoch and of Noah and his three sons, who after the Flood started their westward march. Their descendants have kept it up since, settled, first north of the Persian Gulf in the bushlands of Mesopotamia, where they found a dusky race in occupation of the land, the ancient Sumerians, and from thence towards the Mediterranean. (See Plate IV)

Chambers Encyclopedia in the article "Phoenicia" gives us the following account of the origin of the Phoenicians, page 136, Vol. 8:

"Two accounts have come down to us of the origin of the Phoenicians. According to Herodous, Strabo, Pliny, and others, they dwelt anciently on the shores of the Persian Gulf, whence they crossed by land into Syria, and settled on the coast of the Mediterranean. Herodotus (vii. 89) declares this to be their own account of themselves, and Strabo says that there was a similar tradition among the inhabitants of the gulf, who showed, in proof of it, Phoenician temples on some of the islands. Justin, on the contrary, in his epitome of Togus Pompeius, declares that they were driven out of their country by an earthquake, and passed to the Mediterranean."

The last account take from Justin again corroborates our story; the Phoenicians were driven out of their own country by an earthquake, which is the earthquake that caused the Deluge, when the fountains of the deep were broken up in the Tarim Basin.

The tenth and eleventh chapters of Genesis give us "the register of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japhet; "for they had sons born to them after the Deluge." I quote here from Chapter 10, the 1st verse of the Fenton translation of the Bible, which is expressed in modern English. The fifth verse reads: "From these they spread themselves over the seacoasts of the countries of the nations, each with their language amongst the gentile (heathen) tribes." Verses 31 and 32: "These are the sons of Shem, by their tribes and by their languages in their countries among the heathen. The above were the families of the sons of Noah, and their descendants, by tribes. From them they spread themselves among the nations on the earth after the Flood."

These verses give us clearly to understand that the sons of Noah spread themselves among the existing heathen nations of that time, and by their mental and physical superiority subdued and mastered them.

"All the country was agreed for settled objects. But some of them marching from the East arrived at a plain in the Bush-land and halted there." (Gen. 11:1-2) The plain in the Bush-land is the Plain of Shinar, which means Bush-land; and there arose suddenly a new civilization, started by the Aryan or "noble" race, who were considered by native Sumerians as gods. Plate IV shows an ancient statue of an aboriginal Sumerian.

Like the White Europeans settling in South Africa are called South Africans, even though the native South Africans are blacks, so are the Adamites settling in Sumeria being called Sumerians by our age generally, while in reality they should be called Accadians. The Encyclopedia Britannica under "Sumer and Accad" shows that the terms Sumerian and Accadian are interchangeable, and both refer to the people of early Mesopotamia; but it also appears that the term "Sumerians" should be applied more to the aboriginal blacks and "Accadians" to the invading Adamites. As the word Sumer is derived from Shinar, the "bush-land," it indicates therefore that Sumerian apples to the aborigines. On the other hand, the word Accad means "mountains" and corroborates our contention that the Accadians or Aryans came from the mountains.

Mr. Davidson in his notes to Chart 30 of his "Babylonia and Central Asia" says:

"The migration into Western Asia of the survivors of the parent body of the Adamic Race of Central Asia in the 23rd century B.C., begins a new chapter in the history of the race. In their land-locked 'earth' they had been 'one language and one speech.' This condition the survivors of the new race endeavored to perpetuate in their settlement in Babylonia. By building an imposing city and tower they hoped to recentralise the race. In this aim they were defeated, and were 'scattered abroad' amongst the primitive races, and the descendants of the early Adamic settlers, 'that they might not understand one another's speech.' In the 10th Chapter of Genesis therefore - in what Professor Sayce discovered to be a statement of the geographical distribution of the whole race - the race of the Gentile world are described as territorially subdivided, according to the 'families of the sons of Noah...and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.' The earliest Adamic settlers in Babylonia and Egypt introduced organized civilization into the valleys of the Tigris, Euphrates, and Nile. The low-lying river 'flats' were reclaimed from the rule of the annual flood and scientific irrigation was established to bring life and prosperity to age-long neglected swamps and alluvial wastes. The swamp age when the annual flood held its devastating rule was long afterwards remembered in Babylonia and later Babylonian references to this time confuse the ruling conditions then with the conditions of the later deluge in Central Asia. The Sumerian account of the W.B. Prism 444 therefore states that the Deluge 'entered' the land and that only five cities existed in the times described as preceding the so-called Post-dividian period. These five cities are Eridu, Badtibara, Larak, Sippar, and Suruppak. 'The beginning of history is placed at Eridu, the city of the water-god Ea (Enki), god of wisdom and mysteries. (Langdon W.B. 444 [shown on Plate XVI]) This clearly means that the first Adamic settlement was founded at Eridu on the ancient coast line of the Persian gulf, and that by the time the other four cities were all established, Babylonia had been reclaimed from the rule of the 'entering' flood."

At this time I wish to say that there are evidences which indicate that enterprising adventurers of the Admites left their Asiatic mountain home all through the sixteen centuries that preceded the Flood and established colonies in various parts of the earth. In fact, there is good reason to believe that Cain, who became a wanderer, migrated into the valley of the Euphrates as early as 3800 B.C., and brought with him the first civilization and also the Devil worship, as he was of that Evil One, the Devil, as Paul and Christ expressed it. Many historians place the beginning of Babylon at 3800 B.C. Cain is also believed to have been the originator of the Chinese Dragon worship. (Refer to Sargon the Magnificent, by Mrs. Bristowe). It is generally accepted that the kings of the first six dynasties of Egypt were of the Aryan race and with them Egypt's high civilization suddenly developed. Undoubtedly, the Minoan civilization of Crete derived its origin from early Adamic pioneers also, and of course we know today that the Great Pyramid was built three hundred years before the Deluge by an architect and master masons of the Adamites, who came into Egypt for that purpose and then departed again. Regarding this Mr. Davidson makes the following comment:

"To enable the massive works of construction that were planned in each primitive country to be executed to the building standard of the building race, the primitive native races were trained, on a mass-production basis of organization, to participate in the execution of highly skilled work, in successive relays of semi-skilled and unskilled labor. In the case of the Great Pyramid, it is essential that the unskilled native workmen should be instructed in successive stages in the art of quarrying, and in the handling and transportation, by land and water, of large masses of stone. It was necessary also that the principles of mass-masonry design and construction should be acquired by the Egyptian native workmen, and that these principles should be developed to perfection under Egyptian conditions. About two centuries passed in the acquirement of this necessary experience, an experience that comprised the experimental construction of many minor works in mass-masonry and several types of Pyramid design, before the requisite standard of workmanship was attained for the construction of the Great Pyramid. With this standard attained, the Great Pyramid was built to monumentalise the supreme achievement in mass-masonry construction within the entire span of all ages of material civilization, and to enshrine therein, in comparatively imperishable form, the Revelation of the Gospel of Salvation, and the Revelation of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth." (Refer to The Great Pyramid's Message to America)

With the coming of the Adamic survivors, the sons of Noah, whom we have identified as the Aryan-Phoenicians, begins the history of the various kingdoms of Mesopotamia. The tenth chapter of Genesis tells us in verses 8 to 10 of Nimrod, the mighty hunger: "And the capitals of his kingdom were Babel, and Ereck, and Akad, and Kalinah in the Bush-land (Shinar)." The King James Version says: "The beginning of his kingdom." In neither version is it stated that Nimrod founded these cities, but rather that he extended his rule over them, which again confirms the belief that the Adamites or Aryan-Phoenicians came into Chaldea, conquered it, and gave it the benefit of their civilization and culture. It is quite possible, indeed, that Sharrukin (Sargon) of Akad, who conquered Babylon in 2231 B.C., is the Nimrod of Scripture, the name of the Mound of Nimrod covering the remains of Nineveh commemorates his name.

It is to this period that the later Greek writers trace the origin of the Phoenicians, who began their trading and navigation first along the shores of the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, and after their occupation of Canaan along the coastlands of the Mediterranean. We must, of course, always bear in mind that in the first, second, and third centuries after the Adam Deluge, i.e., in the 23rd, 22nd, 21st and 20th centuries B.C., the Aryan- Phoenicians could not have been very numerous in population; but every one of them counted and left his influence among the natives, in the same way that the Anglo-Saxon missionaries or traders of our time leave a lasting influence, for good or bad, among the natives of Central Africa or Oceania.

From Genesis 10:6-20 it will be seen that Nimrod was a son of Ham as well as was Canaan, after whom the land of Canaan was named. As upon Ham and his descendants had fallen the curse of Noah, we can readily see that that branch of the Phoenicians most readily fell into the vices of the aboriginal Sumerians and too readily adopted the worship of Baal and all its abominations; all in the midst of an otherwise high civilization, for instance that of the Hittities, who were the sons of Heth, a son of Canaan.

Of Japheth's sons we read in Genesis 10:2-5: "The sons of Japheth; Gomer, Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Thubal, and Mesech, and Thiras. And the sons of Gomer; Ashkinaz, and Riphath, and Thogarmah. And the sons of Javan (Ion) Elishah, and Tharshish, Kittim, and the Dodanim. From these they spread themselves over the sea-coasts of the countries of the nation, each with their languages among the gentile tribes." (Fenton)

Apparently, they were the first to spread themselves along the coastlines of the countries. Three of the names are of particular interest to us here; Gomer, Javan, and Tarshish. Gomer means "darkness." Piolemy on his map of the world has England named "Javan," which seems to indicate that some of Javan's descendants settled there. After Tarshish, the son of Javan, ancient Spain was named, or, in fact, it seems the whole of the maritime possessions of ancient Israel, as we read in 1 Kings 10:22; 22:48; and 2 Chr. 9:21; and also in Jonah 1:3.

Let us now turn to the line of Shem, who was the father of the children of Heber, i.e., the Ibiri, Abiri, or Hebrews. Until this day it is common usage to think of the Hebrews as the Jews, and even learned professors and Doctors of Divinity speak of them as one and the same people. Scripture makes a sharp distinction between the houses of Israel and Judah, as the present writer has shown in his "Destinies of Israel and Judah"; and from Chapter XII of this book it will be seen that the Jews of today do not even represent the house of Judah.

The word Eber or Heber means "colonizer" in the Hebrew- Phoenician language, and it is a striking fact that his descendants, the Hebrew-Phoenicians, have been the greatest colonizers and mariners in the world, from the time that they settled in the bush-land of Chaldea twenty-two centuries B.C. until this day, dominating every race with whom they came in contact.

The centuries following the Deluge compose one of the most dynamic epochs of history, for during that time there arose along the Euphrates and Tigris the Chaldean civilization, which has baffled the archaeologists, since it arose within such a short period, like that of the Egyptian during the Pyramid age a few centuries before it; and the only explanation that can be given for the sudden development of both is that the Egyptian had its conception through the influx of the Aryan Pyramid builders before the Deluge and the Chaldean through the influx of the sons of Noah, the sons of Enoch, the Aryan-Phoenicians, among whom the Semites easily took the leading part.

This, then, explains the advanced state of scientific achievement we find in early Chaldea, particularly in mathematics and astronomy, which latter knowledge gave rise to the famous astrology of the Chaldeans, the name, in fact, being synonymous with wisdom. The early Chaldean priests were genuine astronomers; they knew the accurate value of the Solar year, divided the day into twenty-four hours, and the circle into 360 degrees. Their months consisted of thirty days each. They knew the twelve signs of the Zodiac and from its constellations developed their famous Astrology. Yet the human faces in the Zodiacal constellations show that the Zodiac did not originate in Chaldea, nor Egypt, nor India, but with the earlier Adamites, for the faces depicted are pure Aryan, like those of the Anglo-Saxons of today.

The priests of Egypt also had knowledge of the rudiments of astronomy and knew certain astronomical values; yet the existence of certain values connected with the Precision of the Equinoxes has shown to modern scholars that those peoples had rules and methods of calculation, yet did not know the principles that formed the basis for their calculations; and it is only too evident that the Egyptian, Chaldean, Indian, and Chinese astronomy is but inherited from the earlier Adamites. (For an analytical demonstration of this refer to Early Egypt, Babylonia, and Central Asia, by Mr. Davidson)

A definite statement concerning this Adamic origin of astronomy and mathematics is given by Josephus, the Jewish historian, in his "Antiquities of the Jews:

"They (the Sethites) also were the inventors of that peculiar sort of wisdom which is concerned with the heavenly bodies and their order. And that their inventions might not be lost before they were sufficiently known, upon Adam's prediction that the world was to be destroyed...they made two pillars... (one in brick; one in stone) discoveries to mankind...Now this (the pillar of stone) remains in the land of Siriad (Egypt) unto this day.' The Egyptian tradition, preserved by the Copts in the Akbar Ezzeman, states that the vision appeared to Surid 300 years before the Flood, that the Great Pyramid was built as the result of this vision and that it contained 'The wisdom and acquirements in the different arts and sciences...the sciences of arithmetic and geometry, that they might remain as records for the benefit of those who could afterward comprehend them...The position of the stars and their cycles; together with the history and chronicle of time past, of that which is to come, and every future event which would take place in Egypt.'" (D. Davidson)

This pillar in the land of Egypt is the Great Pyramid of Gizeh, built by an Adamic architect 300 years before the Flood, from 2658 to 2628 B.C. (Refer to Coordinated Chronology of Israel and Egypt by the author). Egyptian tradition tells us that the architect's name was Sisithrus or Sesorthos, which when carefully analyzed is a composition of Enoch and Noah.

The Chinese sacred volume of the Shu-king also affords confirmation that the line of Enoch and Noah were the originators of the science of astronomy. Regarding Fu-hi, who is the Chinese Noah, the Shu-king states that he "constructed astronomical tables, assigned figures to the heavenly bodies, and taught the science of their motions."

Now, Genesis 5:21-24 tells of Enoch or Hanok (Fenton translation): "And Hanok lived until the age of sixty-five years, when Methuselah was born to him. And Hanok walked with God, after Methuselah had been born to him. And the whole lifetime of Hanok was three hundred and sixty-five years. And Hanok walked with God; and he did not die, God having taken him to Himself."

It is worthy of note that the length of Enoch's life was 365 years, which is, plus one quarter, the length of the Solar year, expressed in years. This period is the ancient Phoenix cycle; four of those cycles, or 1461 years, forming one Sothic cycle, ended in 1917 B.C. (2083 A.K.), the year of the Call of Abraham. This Sothic cycle had its origin in 622 A.K., the year of Enoch's birth. (Refer to Coordinated Chronology of Israel and Egypt).

The Book of Jubilees is one of the non-canonical books of the Bible; yet it contains valuable information concerning the first 2500 years of Adamic history, ending about the time of the Exodus from Egypt. In its forth chapter we read of Enoch or Hanok:

"He was the first one among the children of men that are born on the earth to learn writing and knowledge and wisdom. And he wrote the signs of heaven according to the order of their months in a book, that the sons of men might know the time of year according to their separate months. He was the first to write a testimony, and he testified to the children of men concerning the generations of the earth, and explained the weeks of the jubilees, and made known to them the days of the years, and arranged the months and explained the Sabbaths of the years as we made them known to him. And what was and what will be he saw in a vision of the night in a dream, and as it will happen to the children of men in their generations until the day of judgment; he saw and learned everything and wrote it as a testimony and laid that testimony on the earth over all the children of men and for their generations."

At the end of Chapter II, I have quoted from Chambers Encyclopedia regarding the fact that the roots of most of our languages can be traced to the Aryan parent stock, which had its home in Central Asia. From the same Encyclopedia I quote here a paragraph from its article "Alphabet":

"To a French scholar, M. de Rouge, belongs the honor of having demonstrated the true origin of the alphabet. Several classical writers, including Plato, Diodorus, Plutarch, and Tacitus, had stated in general terms the belief or tradition of the ancient world that the Phoenicians had obtained the alphabet from Egypt, while in modern times not a few attempts had been vainly made to derive the several Phoenician letters from suitable hieroglyphic pictures. But it was only in 1859 that De rouge pointed out that the prototypes of the Phoenician letters must be sought, not in the hieroglyphics of the monuments, but in certain cursive 'hieratic' or priestly characters, so extremely ancient that they had fallen into disuse at the time of the Hebrew exodus. This form of hieratic writing is known to us almost exclusively from a single manuscript, the Payrus Prisse, as it is called, which was found in a tomb belonging to the eleventh dynasty, and is therefore much older than the shepherd kings."

Professor Waddell on page 5 of his "Aryan Origin of the Alphabet" refers to Sir Flinders Petrie, who found in the royal tombs of Menes and his First Dynasty at Abydos characters of the so-called Phoenician alphabet. This discovery proves, first, that the Egyptian hieroglyphic characters developed later than the Phoenician and, second, that the kings of the First Egyptian Dynasties were of the Aryan race. It is possible therefore that in those early Phoenician characters we have the original alphabet developed by Enoch and given to him by Divine inspiration.

Plate No. V gives us a comparative table of the Phoenician, Greek, Hebrew, and Latin alphabets, taken from Chambers Encyclopedia. It is evident from this table that both the Greek and Latin are derived from the Phoenician. The Hebrew characters have been developed since the time of Christ...Israel before that spoke the Phoenician dialect and wrote the simpler Phoenician characters. (See also Chapter VII)

The first letter of the Phoenician is Aleph and is essentially the same as our Latin letter A, only the Phoenician characters is lying on its side. It pictures the horns of a bull (Taurus) and conveys to us the fact that at the zero dating of Adamic Chronology, the 22nd of September, 4000 B.C., the Fall Equinox (nocturnal sign) lay midway between the horns of Taurus, the Bull. (For demonstration refer to Plate 48 of Davidson, The Great Pyramid). Hence Aleph, Alpha, or A is the first letter (See Plate V). From the article "Alphabet" in the Encyclopedia Britannica I quote the following passages:

"It is well known that most of the ancient nations ascribed a divine origin to their system of writing." "The native Egyptian term for writing meant 'writing heavenly words.'"

Professor Buchanan in his "The World and the Book" quotes on page 219 from "Patriarchal Age," by Smith:

"Yet the best authorities concur in ascribing the introduction of letters into Egypt to Thoth or Tent, the Hermes of Greek, and the Mercury of Latin mythology. It consequently becomes an important part of the inquiry to ascertain at that time this individual lived. As in Egyptian annals we meet with several of that name, this seems to be a difficult talk. It appears, from a general view of the subject that in the earliest age of Egyptian history, or rather print to the commencement of authentic history, a person of this name flourished, who from his great knowledge was supposed to be more than mortal. From this circumstance, when an individual in after ages appeared to surpass his contemporaries in wisdom he was said to be inspired by the spirit of Thoth, or to be another incarnation of that deity."

To Thoth the Egyptians attributed the invention of letters. As there is reason to believe that Thoth is identical to Sesorthos or Sisthrus, and as the latter, as already stated, is a composite figure of Noah and Enoch, it appears, then, that Enoch is the inventor of writing and of astronomy, or rather to him was that knowledge revealed from God, as Genesis and the Book of Jubilees tell us. And Enoch or Hanok was the first Phoenician and his house, the Pa-Hanok, were the Aryan-Phoenicians. All the coordinated evidence of Scripture, Babylonian, Egyptian, and Chinese traditions and history, the naming of the Zodiacal constellations, the monuments of language and the Great Pyramid confirm it.

Chapter V THE COVENANT RACE

The story of the translation of Enoch was later paganized into the legend of the mythical sun-bird, the Phoenix, which made its appearance at the end of every Phoenix cycle and then disappeared again to be reborn or rejuvenated. During the time of the Greeks, who themselves were Aryan-Phoenicians and did not call themselves Greeks but Danoi, Achaeans, and Hellenes, the term "Phoenician" applied chiefly to those daring adventurers who went on long voyages. Horapollo in his days gives the meaning of Phoenix as "a man returning home after a long journey."

Scholars in general seem to have overlooked the origin of the term Phoenix and therefore have failed to understand that the term applied originally to the few descendants of the survivors of the Adamic Deluge who appeared in Eastern Asia. However, as that race became more numerous and spread themselves among the aborigines, the term was applied only to those hardy mariners that sailed from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean. To that race Professor George Rawlinson pays a fine tribute in his "Story of Phoenicia," without understanding who they really are:

"The people who of all antiquity had most in common with England and the English - the people who first discovered the British Isles and made them known to mankind at large, the people who circumnavigated Africa, and caused the gold of Ophir to flow into the coffers of Solomon...The race was formed to excel, not in the field of speculation, or even of artistic perfection, but in the sphere of action and of practical ingenuity. As ship builders, as navigators, as merchants, as miners, as metallurgists, as dyers, as engravers of hard stones, as engineers, they surpassed all who preceded them, and were scarcely surpassed in later times by many. They were the great pioneers of civilization, and by their boldness, their intrepidity, and their manual dexterity, prepared the way for the triumphs of later but more advanced nations. They adventured themselves, in many cases, where none had ever gone before them, entrusted themselves to fragile boats, dared the many perils of the unknown seas, penetrated deep into untrodden continents, mixed with savages, affronted the dangers of extreme heat and extreme cold, risked their lives continually night after night and day after day, not so much stimulated by the expectation of large profits, as by the pure love of adventure; they explored all the shores of the Mediterranean, the Propontis, and the Euxine, passed the Pillars of Hercules, and launched their fleets bravely into the Atlantic, circumnavigated Africa in one direction, and reached the shores of Britain, perhaps of Norway, in another; at the same time they were, in their own homes, skilled artisans and manufacturers, weavers of delicate fabrics, inventors of dyes of unrivalled beauty, excellent metallurgists, good gem-engravers, no contemptible sculptors; while, abroad, they were the boldest navigators and the most successful traders that the Old World ever saw, worthy rivals of the Cabots and Columbus and Di Gamas and Drakes and Raleighs of later times. Active, energetic, persevering, ingenious, inventive, dexterous, not much troubled with scruples, they had all the qualities which ensure a nation, in the long run, commercial prosperity and the wealth which flows from it; while, by their natural vigor and adventurousness, their rough lives and hardy habits, they were well qualified to resist for long ages the corrupting influence of that luxury which is almost certain to follow upon the accumulation of riches."

Professor L.A. Waddle in his remarkable book, "Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots, and Anglo-Saxons," supplies us with material evidence furnished by monuments, inscriptions, and coins found in the East and in Great Britain, that a large portion of the people of the British Isles are the descendants of the seagoing Phoenicians and particularly the Barat-Phoenicians. This term of Barat is of particular interest to us.

Our Plate VI shows an ancient engraving representing the Phoenician Lady Protector of the Waters, Batati, the tutelary goddess of good fortune, the Fortune of the Romans of later days. The picture shows a seated queen with a pitcher on her head symbolizing the waters; in her right hand she holds a spear-like scepter, the Trident, and in her left a cross. She, Barati, is the Mistress of the Waves and the original of Britannia.

Of her Professor Waddell writes, on page 58 and 59 of his book:

"Her proper name is now disclosed by the Vedic hymns of the Eastern branch of the Aryan Barats to have been Barati, meaning 'Belonging to the Barats.' She is also called therein 'Brihad-the Divine' (Brihaddiva); and she seems identical with Pritvi or 'Mother-Earth.' Her especial abode was on the 'Sarasvati River,' which, I find, was the modern Sarus River of Cilicia which entered the sea at Tarsus, the 'Tarzi' of its own coins or Parth-enia, which appears to have been the first sea-port of the Barat homeland. In these Vedic hymns all the attributes of Britannia are accounted for; her tutelarship of the waters and of ships, her lighthouse on the sea, her Neptune trident (as well as the origin of Neptune himself and his name), her helmet and shield, her Cross on the shield, as well as the cornucopia, which she sometimes bears upon the Phoenician and Greco-Roman coins, taking the place of the corn-stalk on the Briton coins. In the Vedic hymns she is called 'The Great Mother (Mahi)' and 'Holy Lady of the Waters' and is hailed as 'First-Made mother' in a hymn to her son 'Napat the Son of the waters' who has a horse (thus disclosing the remote Aryan origin of the name and personality of the old Sea-god, Neptune, and his horses, and accounting for Neptune's trident in her hands). She is a 'Fire- Priestess' and 'shows the light' (thus accounting for the Lighthouse on the older British coins with Britannia)... The name 'Fortuna,' by which the Romans called this Barat tutelary goddess of Good Fortune, as well as the English word 'Fortune,' now appear to be coined from her title of 'Barati' the letter F being interchangeable dialectically with P and B, as we have seen in the Egyptian 'Fenkha' for 'Phoenic' and the Greek Pyr for Fire, and P with B; and its affix una or 'one' is now disclosed to be derived from the hitto-Sumerian ana ('one'), thus giving the title of 'The one of Barats' (or 'Fortune'). The o came in dialectically like the "w" in Prwt on the Newton Stone and the u in Brut, the name of the first Briton king in the Ancient British Chronicles, as we shall see later. 'Fortuna' was figured in identical form and symbols with Barati and Britannia and in the same associations with water. Further striking positive inscriptional proof of this Barati title for the Aryan marine tutelary (Britannia) and also of her Phoenician origin is now gained from the records of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, both the land he occupied the name of his own race - Barat, B'r't, Brit, Prat, Prut or Prydi - the B and P being interchangeable in the Phoenician, as well as the unwritten vowels. On Plate VII, Fig. 1, we have a reproduction of the Barat name as found by Professor Waddell on a Phoenician tombstone in Sardinia. This same title is also found on the Newton stone in Aberdeenshire, erected by another Barat prince, Part-olon, king of the Scots, about 400 B.C. (See Plate X) The names 'Brit-on' and 'Brit-ain' and 'Brit-ish' also are derived from this early Phoenician 'Barat' title. The former two names, we are told in the Ancient British Chronicle, as seen later, were given to the people and the country by the first king of the Britons in Britain, after his own patronymic name. The original form of the name 'Brit-on' is now disclosed to have been 'Barat-ana' or 'Brihad-ana.' Thus 'Barat-ana' or 'Brihat-ana' modernized into 'Brit-on' means 'One of the Barats or Brits.' The earlier form of the name is better preserved in the name Dun- Barton or 'Fort of the Bartons (or Britons).' We have already seen that it was spelled 'Pryd-ain' by the Cymric Welsh and Pretan-(oi) by the Greeks. But the earlier form was simply 'Barat,' in series with the 'Prwt' or 'Prat' of the Newton Stone. Similarly, 'Brit-ain' for the 'Land of the Brit,' presumes a like original 'Barat-ana' (or Brithat-ana), having for its affix the same Hitto-Sumerian ana. And this geographic use is in series with the Indo-Aryan names, Rajput-ana for 'Land of the Rajputs,' Gond-wana for 'Land of the Gonds,' etc., the Cappadocian Cataonia or 'Land of the Catti,' and the old Persian Susi-ana for 'Land of Susi,' and Airy-ana or Air-an, the older form if Ir-an or "Land of the Aryas or Aryans' for Persia. The Anglo-Saxon vagaries in spelling the name 'Britain' well illustrate the dialectic variations in spelling the name 'Britain' well illustrate the dialectic variations in spelling proper names before the introduction of printing, and before the influence of the journalistic press has only relatively recently fixed the spelling of words rigidly in one stereotyped form, an important historical fact which requires always to be born in mind when dealing with the ancient variations in spelling the same name. The Anglo-Saxons spelled the name 'Britain' in their documents never as 'Britain,' but Bryten, Bryton, Breoton, Breoten, Breten, Broten, Brittan, Britton, and Brytten."

It is of interest to know that the Irish name of Bridget is derived from Barati, as well as "brat," a bad boy; and the popular provincial English phrase of "O my eye and Betty martin" is descended from the old liturgy "O mihi Mrito-Martis." Brito-Martis is a Cretan form of the Phoenician water-goddess and Mihi or Mahi, the Aryan title of "the great earth mother" the Maia of the Greeks and Romans "the goddess of May" and of the British May-pole Festival. The maha-Barata Epics are part of the Ancient Indian Vedas, the Epics of the great Barats. And who were the Aryan- Phoenician Brats or Great Barats?

The ancient Indian Vedas refer to these people in the following passages:

"The able Panch (Phoenicians) setting out to invade the Earth, brought the whole world under their sway." (Maha-Barata Indian Epic of the Great Brats).

"The Brihat (Briton) singers belaud Indra...Indra hath raised the Sun on high in heaven...Indra leads us with single sway...The Panch (Phoenician Brihats), leaders of the Earth. Ours only, and none others' is he." (Rig Veda Hymn) {Indra, or Indara is the early Indo-Aryan name for Jehovah).

"The able Panch (Phoenici-ians) are all highly blessed, and know the Eternal Religion, the Eternal Truths of Religion and Righteousness." (Maha-Barata Epics).

They are spoken of as a Dynastic People, the same race of which we read in the Indian Vishnu Purana Epic: "His sources of subsistence are Arms and the Protection of the Earth. The Guardianship of the intimidating the bad and cherishing the good, the ruler who maintains the discipline of the different tribes secures whatever region he desires." These people were commission with the Guardianship of the earth and the protection of the weak. In other words, they were to be the leading race of civilization, and the great protective power of the world. This to essentially the same mission and destiny we find in the Old Testament bestowed upon the sons of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whose name is Israel. "But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend ...I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages...Ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein; the isles, and the inhabitants thereof." (Isaiah, Chapters 41, 42 and 49). Jehovah is here making a covenant with the inhabitants of the Isles who go down to the sea. Now the Hebrew term used here for a covenant of the people is Brith-am, which is almost identical terms with the B'r't of the Phoenician Barats. The same consonants are used; only the am is added, standing for "people" or "multitude."

The Hebrew word for covenant is Bryth or Berith. Both Young's and Strong's Bible Concordance give these terms for covenant as often as they appear in the old Testament. We are fully aware that certain scholars and theologians reject the derivation of Britain or British from the Hebrew Brith - Covenant. As, however, Professor Waddell has shown from substantial evidences that Britain is derived from the identical Hebrew-Phoenician Barat or Brit, the origin of the word Britain as well as that of the early Britons is definitely established. Professor Saddell identifies the term Barat and Brits with "Fortunate" or "Fortunate Ones," and Barat-ana as "Fortunate Land." This is therefore the pagan Phoenician equivalent to "Blessing," and those "Blessed People" in the "Fortunate Land or Islands" to whom pertain the Divine Promises.

Additional evidence regarding the derivation of the terms Brith and Brith-am is derived from the Welsh Triads, which speak of the Bryth-Y-Brithan, meaning "Covenanters of the Land of the Covenant." This is what the ancient Britons called themselves.

So also is the ish in British derived from the Phoenician and Hebrew word ish and ishi, meaning "man" or "My man." The term British, therefore, means nothing less than "Covenant Man." Some people may reject that because they want to {as they have been taught to reject such thoughts}, but we have to take the facts as they present themselves to us.

It was Brutus the Trojan who arrived in England about 1100 B.C. whose name is a variant of B'r't-ish and gave the land the name of Britain, B'r't land, Land of the Covenant. Of him we shall read more in Chapter IX.

In the twelfth chapter of Genesis we find how God called Abram out of the land of Chaldea, verses 1-3: "Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from they kindred, and from they father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing; and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed."

In the seventeenth chapter Abram's name was changed into Abraham -- Ab (father)-ra (ruling)-ham (multitude) -- which means "father of a ruling multitude." As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham: for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and they seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."

The various promises have been discussed by the present writer in his "Destinies of Israel and Judah," but I wish to quote here one more passage in which God confirmed his Covenant with Abraham to his grandson, Jacob, the father of the twelve tribes of Israel: "And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of." (Gen. 28:14-15)

All these passages show that Israel is to be the ruling race of mankind and the builders of civilization. This is also the mission entrusted to the Aryan-Phoenicians, of whom the Barat or Brits were the central stem, as Professor Waddell has found from the Indian Vedas and monumental evidences. It is very unfortunate, however, that Professor Waddell has no faith in the Bible and, as he makes the common mistake of calling Israel the Jews, he fails to see that the Barat-Phoenicians of 1500 to 1000 B.C., were mainly the Israelites. {The reader will understand this fully after reading the next chapters}. Professor Waddell's discoveries have been made from sources entirely outside of the Bible, and he is unwittingly confirming the Bible and what the present writer has established from other quarters concerning the identity of the Aryan-Phoenicians.

A passage in the Maha-Barata Epic tells us that the leading clan, the Barat-Phoenicians, traced their descent from one King Barat. "And King Barat gave them his name to the Dynastic race of which he was the founder; and so it is from him that the fame of the Dynastic people hath spread far and wide." In the Rig Veda Hymn we find a passage: "Like a Father's Name, men love to call their names." Professor Waddell on page 38 of his book says:

"And King Barat, after whom his ruling clan called themselves, was the most famous forefather of the First Phoenician Dynasty, which event, I find by the evidence, occurred about 3100 B.C."

Now, as we have already seen from other sources, the date 3100 B.C., falls within the years of Enoch, who was the father of "the house of Enoch," the Phoenicians, and we know the full identity of both King Barat and the Barats, Brits, or Britons, the Covenant Race, coming down from Enoch, Noah, Shem, Eber, Abraham, and Jacob/Israel.

It is very unfortunate that our Oriental scholars who have interested themselves with the history of the Phoenicians, like Professors George Rawlinson and Waddell, have been unable to see that they were the Adamites who survived the Deluge; yet both of these scholars testify that they were pure Monotheists, or worshippers of the One God of the Universe. Professor G. Rawlinson in his "History of the Phoenicians" says:

"Originally, when they first occupied their settlements upon the Mediterranean, or before they moved from their primitive seats upon the shores of the Persian Gulf, the Phoenicians were Monotheists...It was no idolatry; when the One God alone is acknowledged and recognized, the feeling is naturally that expressed in the Egyptian Hymn of Praise: 'He is not graven in marble; He is not beheld; His abode is not know; there is no building that can contain Him; unknown is His name in heaven; He does not manifest His form; vain are all representations.'" To this Professor Waddell adds on page 265 of his "Phoenician Origin":

"It is this pure and lofty Monotheism of the Early Phoenicians, expressed in their so-called 'Sun-worship' or "Bel- worship,' which they are now found to have cherished down the ages in the Mediterranean. From it the early Phoenician merchant princes derived their happy inspiration; they carried it with them as they ploughed the unknown seas; they invoked it in their hours of danger, and transplanted it at their various colonies and ports of call; and they carried it to Early Britain and disembarked and planted it along with their virile civilization, upon her soil about 2800 B.C., or earlier. The early Aryans appear at first to have worshipped the Sun's orb itself as the visible God. In thus selecting the Sun, it is characteristic of the scientific mind of these early Aryans that in searching for a symbol for God they fixed upon that same v