THE ANGLO-SAXON PEOPLE – (2)
This is the second part of an article taken from the book entitled, “Only One Road, ” by the Hon. L.H. Hollins. During the 1940’s he was Minister for Public Instruction and Minister for Labour in Victoria. He was also author of the book “Democracy at the Crossroads. ” In future issues of “Look Up” further extracts of “Only One Road” will be printed. This book is one of many examples that show a number of prominent people in the past had an understanding of the Identity Teaching.
SHORTLY after the fall of the Babylonian Empire, Cyrus, king of Persia, issued his famous decree which ended Judah’s seventy-year captivity, and permitted the remnant of Judah, Benjamin and Levi to return to Palestine. In the year 534 BC, a miserable remnant, numbering fewer than fifty thousand, returned to build “the house of the Lord in Jerusalem.” The great mass of the people, including most of the princes, had no desire to rebuild the temple, preferring rather to remain in Babylonia – where they were prospering.
By contrast, the history of Israel after their dispersion to Media, and subsequent trek to Ar-sareth, is a closed book. We should not be surprised at this for two reasons. Firstly, when they were cast off (Hosea 1:9) they lost their proud name of Israel, because they were no longer ruling with God (or more correctly, “God rules” – Ed.) Almost immediately, thereafter, we find them using the name “Beth-Saac” or “House of Isaac” (Amos 7:16), thus fulfilling the age-old promise, “in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” Secondly, the people of Israel were to lose their identity, and be “swallowed up” among the nations, (Hosea 8:8). Clearly, Israel could never have become the “Lost Ten Tribes” (In reality 12 tribes – Ed.) had they retained the God-given name “Israel.”
As Israel was only to lose their identity for a time, it is not without significance that this very change of name gives us a clue to their present whereabouts. Such clue leads to the word “Saxon” which is, according to etymologists of standing, derived from the word “Sacae,” and the word Sacae in turn from “Isaac Sons” or “Sons of Isaac.” Supporting this view there is a tradition of long standing among the people of Germany that the Saxons are descended from the Sacae and the belief has been recorded by both the great Camden and John Milton, the former in his Britannia, and the latter in his History of England. Camden writes:
“The origin and etymology of the Saxons, like those of other nations, have been involved in fable … Each of these writers adopts the opinion most agreeable to them; I mean not to controvert any of them, but that of the most learned Germans seems most probable and worthy to be embraced, which makes the Saxons descended from the Sacae, the most considerable people of Asia, and to be so called quasi Sacasones, q.d. Sons of the Sacae, and to have gradually overspread Europe from Scythia or Sarmatia Asiatica, with the Getae, Suevi, Daci and others. ”
The word “Sacae” may reasonably be deduced from “Isaac,” for in Hebrew the “I” virtually disappears, and the latter name is pronounced more like “Tsak.” The name takes the form “Sahak” in Armenian, and appears in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th edition, as the name of a Patriarch.
Numerous early writers mention a people called Sacae. Herodotus informs us that the Persians called all Scythians Sacae. The Sacae are now believed to be the Ashguzai of the Assyrian inscriptions of the period of Esar-Haddon, and to have lived on the borders of Assyria. Their name was given to a fertile part of Armenia which they occupied Sacasena. The descent of the Saxons from these Sacae has already been outlined; and it is interesting to observe that in the writings of Albinas, the learned tutor of Charlemagne, the Saxons are called Saxi.
The Behistun inscriptions of Darius the Great shows that the people called Sacae in the Persian language were known as Gi-mi-ri in the Babylonian tongue. These people first appeared on the northern borders of Assyria in the time of Sargon, who met his death at their hands. Rawlinson has seen in their name a “Semitic equivalent” for the tribes. It is reasonable to identify these people with the Khumri or Ghomri (as given by Pinches), or members of the House of Omri, placed in these regions by Tiglath-Pileser.
Having determined at least some of the new names by which the people of Israel were known in captivity, we are now in a position to follow their migrations by means of the “waymarks” they were instructed to set up, (Jer. 31:21). As these wanderings extended over a period in excess of two thousand years, we must retrace our steps somewhat to discover the real beginning of this movement. Even during the Egyptian bondage, the tribe of Dan began to move out. In the centuries that followed, particularly after the division of the kingdom in 975 BC (938 BC – Ed.), this movement became more pronounced. Fortunately for us who would follow their travels, they consistently practised the tribal custom of naming places after their father Dan, (Jud. 18:29). Witness the great number of districts, towns and rivers that are to be found along the coasts of the Mediterranean, throughout Europe, and in Great Britain which have the prefix “Dan,” or some modification of it, in their name.
Naturally Dan, the maritime tribe (Jud. 5:17), was the first to pioneer the sea route to Britain. Although many proofs of this could be given, the following should suffice. We have “Mauritania (now Algeria in North Africa), which, in the Hebrew tongue, means ‘The Plains of the Danites,’ Lusitania (now Portugal) which means ‘a settlement or colony of Dan,’ Sardinia (Sar-don-i) meaning ‘immigrant, or detached Danites,’ and Iberia (now Spain), which comes from ‘Ibhri,’ one of the earliest names given to the Hebrew people.” By travelling west through the Pillars of Hercules (Strait of Gibraltar) and then north, the Danite Phoenicians established colonies in Dannonii (now Cornwall), Hibernia (now Ireland), and Danmares (now Denmark) at a very early date.
 
 These early migrations, and trading voyages to and from the “isles of the west” (British Isles), must have left an indelible impression on the minds of the Hebrew people. So long as the sea route was the only one open to them, they must travel west and north to get to their destination. When, however, we come to trace the main body of Israelites in their travels through Europe, many centuries later, we find that they consistently moved “north and west,” and so eventually reached the “appointed place,” (2 Sam. 7: 10). Was this due to a conscious desire to reach a known haven somewhere to the north-west of their homeland, or to forces over which they had no control? Quite frankly, all the evidence points to the fact that the latter was the case.
As proof of this, their first move after being taken into captivity, was to pass around the Caspian into Europe both by northerly and southerly routes, the Cimmerians passing through Armenia and the Caucasus, and the Sacae across the steppes of Russia to the east and north, where they were forced into Europe by the pressure of the Huns who were moving west at the time. Late in this movement, Attila contributed to forcing these tribes farther to the West.
Conforming to custom, the people of Israel, following the escape from northern Assyria, left many waymarks behind as they pursued their way from Asia, through Europe, into Britain. How some of them escaped and left a waymark in the process is explained by Major Weldon in his Origin of the English. It seems that during the Battle of Carchemish (Jer. 46:2), when the Medes defeated the Assyrians, some of the Tribes took advantage of their captors’ difficulties, and went out by way of a gap in the Caucasian mountains, which to this day bears the name “The Gate of Israel.”
Leaving Assyria behind, we follow the age-old trail which leads to the district north-west of the Black Sea, formerly known as Ar-sareth. Not only did Israel leave many waymarks in this region, but we may still find the River Sareth, which is a tributary of the Danube (Dan-ube). Of the waymarks found in this area, ancient tomb stones carrying Hebrew inscriptions are perhaps the most noteworthy. In the Crimea numbers of tombstones with Hebrew inscriptions have been found. Their evidence links the region with the migrations of Israel. One of these inscriptions reads:
“I Jehuda ben Mose ha-Nagolon. Of the East country, ben Jehuda ha-Gibbor, of the tribe of Napthali, of the generation of Schillem, who went into exile with the exiles who were driven away with Hosea, the king of Israel, together with the tribes of Simeon and Dan and some of the generations of other tribes … when I returned from wandering in the land of their exile and from journeying in the dwelling places of the descendants of their generations in their resting place of the land of Krim. … ”
Obviously, to trace in any detail the wanderings of the “Lost Tribes,” after they were “scattered” from the Black Sea area, would require much more space than is available in the compass of this work. We must content ourselves, therefore, with but a brief summary of the waymarks left by the separate bands as they made their way through central and northern Europe to reach finally the shores of Britain. As in southern Europe the tribe of Dan appears to have taken a prominent part in the matter of leaving waymarks This is borne out by the following names culled from Dan: Lost and Found by H.H. Pain. In Europe we may find the Danube, the Danaster (D’niester) the Danapris (D’nieper), the Russian Don, the Rhodan (Rhone), Danzig on the Co-Dan Gulf (Baltic), and Danmerk (Denmark). To these may be added Danau, the Danan, Daninn, the Danetz and many others too numerous to mention.
About 360 A.D. these “separate bands” or tribes began their so-called “invasions” of Britain. They came as complete strangers to one another, speaking different languages, and at widely separated dates. And what is more, this movement of people only ended with the Norman Conquest, in 1066. During this period of vast unsettlement, kindred tribes literally fought their way into the country under the name of Celts, Scots, Picts, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, Vikings and Normans. That they were of the same stock, and came from the very region – the Black Sea region – to which we positively traced the “Lost Ten (12) Tribes” can now be demonstrated.
Indeed, many world-famed authorities hold that the Anglo-Saxons of today can be traced with certainty to the Sacae (whom we identified as Israel) of the Black Sea region. To quote three – Sharon Turner, the historian, states:
“The Anglo-Saxons, Lowland Scotch, Normans, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes, Germans, Dutch, Belgians, Lombards and Franks, have all sprung from that great fountain of the human race, which we have distinguished by the terms Scythian, German or Gothic. ”
Dr. George Moore wrote:
“The name of Goth … was probably transferred from Palestine to the neighbourhood of the Caspian Sea, where the Gatae and the Sacae, the Goths and Saxons, are historically found together. ”
Again, M. du Challu, the eminent Frenchman, in his work, The Viking Age, declares:
“A careful perusal of the Eddas and Sagas will enable with the help of the ancient Greek and Latin writers, and without any serious break in the chain of events, to make out a fairly continuous history which throws considerable light on the progenitors of the English-speaking peoples, their migrations northward from their old home on the shores of the Black Sea, their religion, and the settlement of Scandinavia, of England, and of other countries. ”
Should further proof be needed the famous “Scottish Declaration of Independence,” which was drawn up by Bernard de Linton, Chancellor of Scotland in the year 1320, should prove of value. Preserved as it is in the Register House, Edinburgh, this historic document bearing the seals of all the Scottish barons of the day was signed by Robert the Bruce and addressed to Pope John XXII after he attempted to secure Scottish submission to Edward II of England. It reads:
“We know, Most Holy Father and Lord, and from the chronicles and books of the ancients gather, that among other illustrious nations, ours, to wit the nation of the Scots, has been distinguished by many honours; which, passing from the greater Scythia through the Mediterranean Sea and Pillars of Hercules, and sojourned in Spain among the most savage tribes through a long course of time, could nowhere be subjugated by any people, however barbarous; and coming thence one thousand two hundred years after the outgoing of the people of Israel, they, by many victories and infinite toil, acquired for themselves the possessions in the West which they now hold … In their Kingdom one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, no stranger intervening, have reigned. ”
That all the people who came into the British Isles in the years AD 360 to 1066, together with those who came by the Mediterranean route many centuries earlier, were of the same stock is now the opinion of those best qualified to speak. For instance, Professor Huxley in his Racial Origins, says:
“The invasion of the Saxons, the Goths, the Danes, and the Normans, changed the language of Britain, but added no new physical element. Therefore, we should not talk any more of Celts and Saxons, for they are all one. I never lose an opportunity of rooting up the false idea that the Celts and Saxons are different races. ”
And Professor Freeman, Regius Professor of History at Oxford, in his Origin of the English Nation, states:
“Tribe after tribe, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Frisians, poured across the sea to make new homes in the Isle of Britain…. Thus grew up the English nation – a nation formed by the union of various tribes of the same stock. The Dane hardly needed assimilation; he was another kindred tribe, coming later than the others. Even the Norman was a kinsman. “
Confirmation of this tremendous fact also comes from those versed in the science of craniology. After stating that “the shape of the head is one of the best available tests of race known,” Professor W Z. Ripley in his work Races of Europe, declared:
“The most remarkable trait of the population of the British Isles is its head-form; and especially the uniformity in this respect, which is everywhere manifested. … The indices (cephalic) all lie between seventy-seven and seventy-nine, with the possible exception of the middle and western parts of Scotland, where they may fall to seventy-six … Compared with the results obtained elsewhere in Central Europe they are remarkable. Here in the British Isles it is practically uniform from end to end. ”
Additional proof comes from a study of the early languages spoken in the British Isles. Professor T. Nicholas in his work, The Pedigree of the English Peoples, wrote:
‘A comparison of the various languages spoken in Britain, Ireland and Gaul in the time of Caesar, in so far as their elements are now ascertainable, leads infallibly to the conclusion that those tribes and ‘nations’ who spoke them, though torn asunder by dissension, and widely separated by locality, constituted substantially but one people. “
Again, William Tyndale who translated the Bible into English, said:
“The English tongue agreeth with the Hebrew a thousand times more than with the Latin. “
One last proof before we conclude this chapter. The people of Israel were to be punished for a period of “Seven Times.” Now it has been established by students of prophecy that a “time,” in prophetic language, means 360 years. 360 multiplied by 7 gives us the prophetic period of 2,520 years. If we calculate the commencement of Israel’s punishment from the first deportation in 741 BC, we get the terminal date 1779 AD. As “the kingdom of the House of Israel” was not brought to a complete end until 721 BC, i.e. twenty years later, the “seven times” punishment should begin to taper off during the eighteenth century and end in 1799 AD.
Was not this the very period that marks the spectacular rise of the British Empire to a position of world dominance in sea power, in colonies, in wealth, in politics and in missionary activities?
Brief as is this racial history survey of the people whom we call Anglo-Saxons it must now be quite clear, not only that they are the lineal descendants of the House of Israel, but that the early Britons were not “painted savages” as taught in some of our schools to this day. Indeed, the “unknown script” of the “Newton” stone in Aberdeenshire, which was deciphered by Dr. Waddell in recent times, places its date about 400 BC, and goes far to prove the inaccuracy of this teaching. In his work The Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots and Anglo-Saxons, Dr Waddell states:
“And so far from these ancestral Britons having been mere ‘painted savages roaming wild in the woods,’ as we are imaginatively told in most of our history books, they are now on the contrary disclosed by the newly found historical facts to have been from the very first grounding of their keels upon Old Albion’s shores, over a millennium and a half of years before the Christian era, a highly civilised and literate race, pioneers of civilisation, and a branch of the famous Phoenicians. “
Did but space permit, hundreds of additional facts could be submitted. Among these would be abundant evidence that the Royal Line of David has continued unbroken through the years (2 Sam. 7:16), and may now be found in the Royal House of Britain. We could show the USA to represent Manasseh (Gen. 48:19), the joint-birthright holder, who was to break away. We could also demonstrate Anglo-Saxon identity through their great missionary enterprises (Isa. 27:6), as well as through their Sabbath observance, (Ex. 31:17). All these facts establish Anglo-Saxon identity beyond doubt, and indicate that full restoration depends not only on the acceptance of Christ, His Son, as a personal and national Redeemer, but on the acceptance of His perfect laws also. It follows, therefore, that we must examine these laws with care in order that we may intelligently apply them in the reconstruction of our social, political and economic affairs.
