TRACING DAN – (3)

By Walter W. Baucum

“If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” – (II CHRONICLES 7:14)

TRACING DAN – PART 1 CHAPTER 3
This is the third instalment of an article titled Tracing Dan published and copyrighted by United
Hebrew Congregations of Picayune, MS. and is reproduced with their kind permission.

PART 1: DAN IN ASIA, EUROPE AND AFRICA continued

So far, we have traced the Tribe of Dan to Greece, North Africa, and other parts of the ancient and modern world. Do Danites have any connection to the Celts, who settled in Europe and the British Isles? Believe it or not, we will begin this section not with people or tribes, but with language, the language of the Celts.

The Irish, Scottish, and Welsh, plus many of the ancient Britons and Gauls, spoke forms of Celtic. Celtic people apparently received the lndo-European aspects of their language and culture from peoples they had conquered on the continent before continuing their westward trek. Linguistic examinations of the speech of the Welsh and Irish reveal a form of Celtic in which there is an underlying speech element similar to that found in North Africa, which languages are classified as “Hamitic.” Both Egyptian and Berber are Hamitic tongues. They have a close affinity with Semitic languages, and local dialects in various parts of the Middle East occasionally exhibit Hamitic features. Aspects of Hamitic speech are found also in Biblical Hebrew, but they are not emphasized. Most of the ancient Canaanite peoples adopted a language similar to Hebrew, although both Indo-European and Hamitic languages also must have been known to them. The Phoenician use of Hebrew has characteristics of a foreign tongue adopted by them. There also exist Arabic dialects which are Hamitic or which reveal a Hamitic substratum. The difference between Hamitic and Semitic is more one of emphasis than of substance. Dialects of Hebrew within the land of Israel could well have absorbed Hamitic elements.

Note that the Hamito-Semitic languages are designated such because they encompassed, besides Semitic, languages such as Egyptian and Cushitic, languages that are mistakenly believed to have originated with Ham. But not so. Ham must be made responsible for the myriad other language families not related to Semitic in Sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere in the world.

Insular British Celtic tongues, especially colloquial Welsh, show certain peculiarities which are reminiscent of Hamitic and Semitic tongues and are unparalleled in Aryan languages.

Irish has as many features in common with non-Indo-European languages, especially with Hamito-Semitic languages, as with other Indo-European languages.

Certain features of Old Irish verb forms can be understood only in the light of Hittite, Vedic, Sanskrit, and Mycenean Greek. (Hittites were a Canaanite nation.)

The pre-Aryan idioms which still live in Welsh and Irish were derived from a language allied to Egyptian tongues.

(Most of the above are quotes by Yair Davidy in Lost Israelite Identity, from Kashani, Markus, Worrell, Wagner, Rolleston, and Mazar (See Bibliography for their works used by Yair Davidy)). The conclusion is that the original tongue of the Insular Celts was Semitic (Hebrew), which marginally was influenced by Mycenean Greek, Hittite, Indo-European (Sanskrit), Syrian, Mitanni, and some few others.(1)

The point that Davidy makes from all this is that the natives of Ireland and Wales undoubtedly used a Hamitic and/or Semitic tongue before they came into contact with Continental Indo-European ones. This is a proof, then, to the objective reader, that the Celtic peoples of Europe originally spoke Hebrew. It must be understood that the Israelites, in their places of exile, were divided and scattered and, to a certain degree, had to accept the cultural and linguistic standards of those around them.

Like early Greek, the earliest forms of Hebrew could be written from left to right or from right to left. Early Greek, remember, was a form of the Phoenician script. The Greeks are believed to have adopted the Phoenician alphabet after 700 B.C.E., i.e., after the Ten Tribes were exiled in 740-720 B.C.E. The Greeks may have received the alphabet from the Ten Tribes.

The Romans (including Julius Caesar) reported that the Gauls wrote in Greek and it is claimed that Greek inscriptions have been found in Gaul. An earlier use of Phoenician may have led to the employment of Greek since Greek lettering was really only a form of Phoenician.

Runic letters (Scandinavian-Viking) are mainly similar to Phoenician ones, but mirror (reversed) images. It too could be written from right to left or left to right. Some claim this script began around 600 B.C.E. on the northern shores of the Black Sea, which would be consistent with the Israelite origins of those who first used it.

The western Celts employed a style of writing called Ogam (sometimes “Ogham”), which is based on straight lines etched in stone in different formations, each of which represents a letter. (More on this later when we get to Barry Fell.)(2)

Barry Fell reminds us that the Arabs were in North Africa almost 1200 years before they re-invaded it under the Islamic hordes. He translated a stele with both Arabic and the North African language on it, calling the North African “Tifinag.” It is identical to an earlier Scandinavian language, but although the written language is the same, the dialects were different.(3) An analogy of this is the Chinese language. There are fifty-two different dialects in China, not one group able to understand the dialect of the other groups. But there is only one written language, which all fifty-two Chinese dialects can read. Even today, American English and British English are becoming so different in the oral speaking that we will probably need translators to understand one another in a couple of decades. But the written English has changed very little.

The language closest to ancient Hebrew today is Welsh, in many cases identical. (See “The Hebrew-Welsh Connection” after this chapter.) Davidy mentions that the Rev. Eliezer Williams (b. 1754) wrote several works on the Celts and made several remarks (quoted by Roberts p. 23) that pertain to this.

“In the Hebrew … which the ancient British language greatly resembles … the roots of most of the ancient British, or real Welsh, words may be regularly traced in the Hebrew. Scarcely a Hebrew root can be discovered that has not its corresponding derivative in the ancient British language … but not only … the words … their variations and inflections afford a much stronger proof of affinity … the plural number of nouns likewise is often formed in a similar manner in the Celtic by adding in (a contraction of IM which is the suffix used in Hebrew to form the masculine plural) … in the formation of sentences, and in the government of words … the same syntax might serve for both…”

“Davies in Mythology of the Ancient Druids (p. 94) asserts that ‘Taleisin, the chief Bard, declares that his lore had been detailed in Hebraic …“‘

“It follows from all the above that though the language of the British Celts may have superficially conformed to an Indo-European type it had enough Semitic and Hebraic features to confirm the notion that Hebrew had been their original tongue.”(4)

We have seen the affiliation of Dan with Wales, Ireland, Britain, Scandinavia, North Africa, and Greece. But Dan was intermingled also with other Israelite tribes and helped settle West Europe, as well as Scandinavia and Great Britain, as we have seen earlier. These people came to be called Celts and are today the West Europeans, what is left of the British Empire, and America. We will start, then, with a people called Cimmerians.

Exiled Israel was called “Khumri” by their Assyrian captors. They also were called Gimir or Gomer. The term “Gimiri” in Babylon meant “tribes.” The similar sounding “gamira” denoted mobility and hints at nomadism, or exile, or both. The Scythians also were called Gimiri, meaning Cimmerian. The Cimmerians first appeared on the fringes of the Assyrian Empire in the Middle East. Yair Davidy goes into lengthy detail about the Israelites serving in the Assyrian armies as mercenaries, with their own Israelite leaders, but time and space do not allow this study to trace them. Solomon himself started what we today term “cavalry” fighting, with Israelites first using it and continuing it into modern times, right up to and including WWI, (the United States and the British Commonwealth being Israel). I Kings 4:26 says that King Solomon had kept “Forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots and twelve thousand horsemen.” I Kings 10:28 tells us, “The source of Solomon’s horses was from Mitsrayim (i.e., Musasir) and from Que, the merchants of the king would take them from Que at a price.” (Note that although the KJV translates “Mitsrayim” as “Egypt,” the “Mutsri” of the north in Assyrian inscriptions is often taken to be Cappadocia (pronounced Cappa dok ia) on the Black Sea shore of the Pontus to the northwest of Assyria and Urartu (in present-day Turkey). The term also was applicable to Musasir to the north of Assyria between Mannae and Urartu.)(5)

These mercenary cavalry men helped expand the Assyrian Empire to what it finally became. In 679 B.C.E., a group of Cimmerians led by Teushpa was defeated by the Assyrians. A document discovered at Nineveh mentioned “Ubru-Harran, chief of a Cimmerian detachment,” serving in the Assyrian forces. The name “Ubru-Harran” is West Semitic and probably Hebrew (Note “Ubru”). The Mesopotamians from Tiglathpileser III on, and later the neo-Babylonian armies, were equipped with “Cimmerian” bows, “Cimmerian” arrows, “Cimmerian” horse harness parts, and even “Cimmerian” footwear.(6)

A side note here concerning Israel’s independence. Assurbanipal reigned in Assyria from 669-663 B.C.E. It was during his reign that the Israelite Scythians eventually took control of the Assyrian Empire. Some, including the present writer, assume that the Israelite captives already might have been given their independence by the Assyrians. The Cimmerians first became known in the land later called “Iberia” (which name also implies “Hebrew”), where legends relate that the Lost Ten Tribes had been taken, and which name followed them into Europe (Note the “Iberic” Peninsula of present-day Spain and Portugal). It was very soon, almost immediately, that these Clmmerians had first appeared after the Israelites were exiled. Their very name might be a form of “Khumri,” which appellation the Assyrians themselves applied to Israel. They were destined to advance into Europe, where they overran the Halstatt civilization.

From the Middle East, then, these Cimmerians moved into Europe by way of the Balkans and the Danube Valley. They became an important factor in the formation of the “Celtic” peoples, as were the Cimmerian-related Scyths. Parts of the Cimmerians, the Scyths, and the Goths (both of whom had been part of the Cimmerians originally) gave rise to the Anglo-Saxon, Frank, Scandinavian, and related people.

This is covered in considerable detail by Capt in his description of the Behistun Rock. But just two direct quotes will be included here:

“Tacitus and Pliny, supported by modern archaeological research, state that all the tribes dwelling along the North Sea Coast from Holland to Denmark were a single ethnic group which they called ‘Ingaevones.’ From this we may conclude that the historical Frisians, Chauci and Cimbri (mentioned by early historians) were of one stock; not only of Cimmerian but originally of Israelitish origin (Italics mine). Archaeology indicates that these people first arrived on the shores of the North Sea about 300-250 B.C.”(7)

“Acts 16:6 is written to a race of the Celts (Cimmerian Israelites), having conquered Phrygia (West Turkey) and giving their name of ‘Galatia’ to North Turkey, called ‘Asia’ in the New Testament.”(8)

Hosea prophesied that the different Cimmerian groups would either unite with each other or at least become allies. Hosea predicted also that the exiled Northern Israelites would lose remembrance of their Hebrew identity. Both of these things have happened. Although they, together with “Gomer,” were destined to bring forth distinct polities, eventually they are prophesied to return to themselves. From about 1200 B.C.E., the Urnfield Culture had dominated central and western Europe. (“Urnfield culture preceded Halstatt, the Urnfield peoples were mixed Orientals and ‘Indo-Europeans,’ and they were to give the Cimmerian dominated iron-using civilisation of Halstatt its European flavour. The early ‘Cimmerians’ themselves we believed to have been largely of Israelite origin. The centres of Halstatt civillsation for a while were in south Germany and from there apparently emerged the Celtic language in its Indo-European dress.”)(9) Out of this, we are told, the Halstatt civilization developed. Although in disagreement as to when this change occurred, most historians today generally accept 700 B.C.E. What caused it? Answer: groups of conquerors from the East identified as Cimmerian. They appeared first in Hungary, then westward to the southern parts of the North Alpine province. Bronze horse bits and bridle mounts, closely related in form to types found on the Pontic steppes in Caucasia all the way to Iran, and which of a certainty are an identification of the Israelite “cavalry,” have been found in this area. These horsemen had far-flung connections over the steppes where these Israelite and Cimmerian exiles had been involved. Powell (p. 41) says, “…their contribution was a stimulus in things martial and in improved horse management, and they may even have been veteran mercenaries from the armies of Assyria and Urartu.” (10)

The initiators of Halstatt brought a superior knowledge of metallurgy, of iron production, and mining. Rapoport (p. 105), as quoted by Yair Davidy, says, “The Assyrians used iron ore on a lavish scale, and weapons, tools, and 150 tons of unworked iron were found in the palace of Sargon II. Sennacherib carried off the smiths of Babylon and Nebuchadnessar those of Jerusalem.” (11)

Jewish smiths are said to have dominated the metal craft in Assyria, Babylon, and Ethiopia. In the case of Assyria, it was actually exiled Israelites from the Ten Tribes (rather than Jewish) metallurgists who were responsible for technological innovations, and every place in western Europe where the Israelites later migrated to they brought their metallurgical expertise with them.(12)

Among other things, these newcomers introduced an increased social hierarchy, more war-like characteristics of the richer graves, greater use of the horse by the upper classes, and burial by inhumation rather than cremation, which the previous Urnfield culture had practiced.

Piggott noted “… how Asia Minor, Syria, and the far-off kingdom of Urartu round Lake Van contributed to the toreutic art (i.e., metal embossing) of prehistoric Europe.” He was referring mainly to the Halstatt period after 600 B.C.E. He noted both the Greek and Phoenician influences on this art.(13) Both of these, remember, were Danites or Danites mixed with Esau.

Cimmerian migrations can be traced from the Assyrian-dominated Middle East across Europe into Britain. They were noted for their equestrian specialties, as the exiled Israelites had been. Piggott says, “The Cimmerians have been invoked as an ultimate agent in the further adoption of cavalry from the seventh century onwards by the contemporary civilizations of antiquity.”(14)

“The Celts were believed to have come from the east and to have advanced via the Danube Valley. Welsh legend stated that their ancestors the Cymry had been led by Hu Gsadarn from Drephane opposite Byzantium (on the Bosporus) across the sea to Britain. Jewish tradition said that part of the Lost Ten Tribes had gone to Daphne of Antiochia which is identifiable with Drephane whence came the Cymry. This account accords with what is known concerning the Cimmerians and their Celtic offspring who arrived in Europe overland from the same direction and bearing essentially the same name and culture.

“In North Europe there appeared a people called CIMBRI and they as much as any other group are to be identified with the Cimmerians and Galatians of old. “The Cimbri were reported by the Romans in ca. 114 B.C.E. at which time they were moving along the Danube but assumedly had already based themselves in Scandinavia which the Romans considered their homeland and wherein place names testify to their presence. The Cimbrians carried a metal bull with them in their migrations. This was admittedly a pagan custom but one which Hebrews had practiced almost from the beginning. Archaeological research shows strong Thracian and Anatolian influences on the Danish Iron Age from this time which connects with the Cimbri and paths of Cimmerian migration.

“When first reported of in 114 B.C.E. the Cimbri together with Teutons and Ambroni from the north and Tigoreni and Toygeni (both branches of the Helvetti) from Switzerland attacked the Romans. Their force numbered 300,000 plus. After inflicting several severe setbacks upon the Romans the Cimbri were finally defeated in 101 B.C.E. and almost annihilated. What survivors there were remained henceforth in the far north and Ptolemy noted their presence in northern Denmark. Other authorities spoke of Cimbri along the North Sea shores. Together with the Teutons they were presumably swept up by the Anglo-Saxon forces and participated in the invasion of Britain.

“Julius Caesar encountered the Suebi in about 50 B.C.E. These were a people who advancing from Germany attacked Gaul at a relatively early stage. They were precursors of the Angles, Saxons, and related groups, and “Sweafs” (i.e. Suebi) were later recorded in the Anglo-Saxon forces. One of the leaders of the Suebi, according to Caesar, was named “Cimbrius” (Julius Caesar “Gallic Wars” 1:37) and some type of link (based on cultural similarities) between the Cimbri and Suebi is believed to have existed. The Cimbri are similarly named to the Cymry of Britain who are recalled in British place names such as Humber and Cambria.

“Strabo (7.2.1) described the Cimbri as a ‘piratical and wandering folk’ and said that the Greeks had called the Cimbri, ‘Cimmerii,’ and had known them from the Crimea. Strabo, in effect, identified the Cimbrians with the Cimmerians of old.

“In Greek… ‘Nimrod’ is rendered ‘Nembrod,’ ‘Omri’ becomes ‘Ambri’, ‘Mesermeria’ becomes ‘Mesembria’. ..the transmutation of the name ‘Cimmerii’ (Cimmerian) into Cimbri was considered obvious and was remarked upon by Plutarch (Marius 11), Diodorus Siculus (5:32), Strabo (7), and Stephen Byzantius….

“Diodorus Siculus (32:4,7) linked the Cimmerians of old, the Galatians, and the Cimbri all together.

“Plutarch (in ‘Marius’) reported the opinion that the Cimmerians, Cimbri, and Scythians were in effect all members of the one nation whom he calls ‘Celto-Scythians.’

“Homer placed the Cimmerians in the British Isles as did a poem allegedly written ca. 500 B.C.E. by the Greek Orpheus.

“The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (891 C.E.) begins by saying that the Britons came from Armenia and the Picts (of Scotland) from the south of Scythia. The idea that the Scots came from Scythia is found in most legendary accounts and also in unedited versions of the Venerable Bede.

“The ideas expressed by ancient sources correspond with what is known today concerning the historical and archaeological background. The Cimmerians became the Cimbri of the north, the Cymry of Britain and the Galatians and other Celtic entities. There were Israelite tribes amongst them which therefore to a degree must have been identical with them. The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel are to be sought for amongst descendants of the Cimmerii and related peoples who settled in Western Europe and from there founded overseas ‘colonial’ settlements.”(15)

I have quoted Yair Davidy almost completely in the above passage. That he has done his homework, with its myriad proofs and direct quotes, cannot be denied by the open-minded individual. To wrap it up, about 650 B.C.E., Cimmerian Celts appeared in Halstatt areas, invaded Italy, and continued to Spain. They settled in Spain and were later re-inforced by La Tene Celtic elements.

In Spain these Cimmerian-Celts amalgamated with the Hiberi (Hebrews), who associated with Tarshish and who influenced their culture. These Hebrews had been transported overseas after the Assyrian conquest of Israel to Spain by Phoenicians in Assyrian employ. In the 500’s B.C.E., the combined Israelite Cimmerians-and-Hiberi (from Spain) were established on the Rhone in southern France. Then North African “lberians” and Carthaginians drove them out of Spain and northwards from the Rhone. These Celts who emerged from Spain are, roughly speaking, those who identified themselves as Hiberi and who were also known as Galatae, Hiberi derived from the word “Hebrew” and Galatae itself being a form of “Gilead,” who was a grandson of Manasseh and founder of an extremely important tribal clan of independent status amongst the Tribes of Israel, according to Yair Davidy.

Mr. Davidy goes more completely into place (and people) names in Europe, but a short summary from a section entitled, “The Hebrews of Britain,” will suffice to continue this particular “proof.” Of all the names associated with Israel in the Celtic world, perhaps “Eber,” meaning “Hebrew,” is the most important. We find it spread throughout Europe, especially in Britain. The early Celtic settlers in Britain referred to themselves as “Hiberi” (or “Iberi”) and are even named such by Ptolemy himself. In the country of the Parissi, the city of York was called “Eboracum” by the British. They called Ireland Hibernia; there were the Hebrides Islands, plus many places in Gaul and other Celtic areas whose names contained the root “eber.” Davidy quotes Bennett (p. 114),” …there were twenty or more places in Wales, the names of which begin with another form of the name Eber, such as Aberystwyth and Aberdare. In Scotland we find Aberdeen, Aberfoyle, Aberdour, Aberargie, Abruthven, and several others.”

Even before the Christian era, when Celts were still “pagans” and not influenced by outside sources, the mythology and toponymy of the Celts were replete with Hebraic names. (Davidy goes into great length naming some of these.) When Spain was invaded by North Afncan peoples, driving out the Iberi there, these people came to be called Iberi by the Greeks and Romans. This later appellation of Spain is a misnomer.

We know too that the Celtic peoples such as the Gaelics of Britain and Ireland called themselves Iberi and their dominant presence in Britain is marked on Ptolemy’s maps of that day. Place names other than Britain containing the root Heber are multitudinous and include, besides those already mentioned, the following:

Ybora: mouth of Halys River in Anatolia (Turkey), place of a Galatian colony.

Hebros River: in Thrace, scene of Celtic presence.

Iberia: in the Caucasus, north of Assyria, legendary area of exiled Israelite tribes re. settlement, cultural connections with the proto-Celts.

Ibernia: name for Spain derived from the original Iberians who accepted Celtic culture and migrated to the west and north.

Hibernia: name for Ireland.

Iberni: in southwest Ireland.

Ibnerni Ocean: east of Ireland.

Hebrides: islands off the northwest coast of Scotland, a Celtic region. Menasseh ben Israel spoke of an early Hebrew inscription discovered on the Hebrides.

Eboracum: Celtic name for the city of York in north England. New York was given this name in the U.S. Today there are more people there of Jewish extraction than in the modern State of Israel.

Eburodunum: in the French Alps, Evorolucum in Auvergne, Gaul, and the list goes on.(16)

The Israelite peoples called themselves Hebrews (Jonah 1:9), “Hebrew” in the Bible being synonymous with Israelite. There were twelve Israelite tribes, and Welsh tradition listed twelve different peoples who invaded Britain, all who can be traced to Hebrew or Israelite names. Yair Davidy goes on in this section to say that representatives of all the tribes settled within the British Isles, but that the dominating elements belonged to the tribes of Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh). Much of Manasseh emigrated to North America. We have mentioned already the Danites in Ireland and Wales.

We need not continue, but the “proofs” as presented by Davidy, et. al., seem insurmountable. That Israel was taken into captivity by the Assyrians, used as mercenaries in the armies of Assyria, and transplanted to Spain and other areas of West Europe by Assyria, are just a matter of staring “truth” in the eye and acknowledging in the mind what the eye is seeing. The point here is that the Tribe of Dan was itself mixed in with these other Israelites and was also mixed in with the Carthaginians from North Africa. What we have is almost proof positive that all of these different groups— Cimmerians, Galatae, Cymry, Cimbri, Helvetti, Belgae, Brit-am, Halstatt, Iberi, Iberians, etc.- are either the same peoples coming in different waves and re-mixing, or at the very least, mixed in with other non-Israelite peoples who accepted the customs of the Israelites. I personally believe the former is closer to the truth. That intermarriage took place was inevitable. That much if not most of this intermarriage was among different Israelite tribes seems almost without doubt. That the Creator would keep the bloodlines more-or- less pure for a future purpose seems obvious. The reader will just have to accept or reject this. But to me, again, the evidence is overwhelming.

There are segments of Dan strewn all over the world, from Assyria and Parthia, Greece and North Africa, Spain and Scandinavia, Ireland and Wales, Britain and West Europe. Recently, I saw a PBS special on television about an area in West China (east of where Assyria was) that has white people with red hair buried there. The Chinese government gave special permission to some Westerners to exhume some of the bodies for study. They admit that these bodies are not Orientals. Some of Dan might even have gone eastward into China before reversing their direction and settling in Europe.

Where else did Dan go? The answer might be surprising.

THE HEBREW-WELSH CONNECTION

Rather than including the following into other sections, or “chapters,” perhaps an entire and separate section should be given the Welsh being Hebrews. These Celts settled all over Europe and North America, but perhaps the closest living representatives of them are those who retreated to the fastness of Wales. Even to this day, they cling to their ancient language and traditions with patient tenacity.

We know that the Celtic lands of Ireland and Wales were never subdued by Roman armies. Today, it is widely taught that no trace of an original Celtic written language exists. There even exists among many a modern idea that the Irish were illiterate and that their history is all myth. This in itself is myth. The real myths regarding Irish history are generally limited to attempts on the part of the Roman Catholic Church to hide the identity of the racial descent of the Irish and other U.K. nations. But Barry Fell and others have found a deciphered Celtic language (Ogham) in the Book of Ballymote, today in the Irish Museum in Dublin. It is believed ancient Irish monks assembled it about eight hundred years ago. A collection of miscellaneous manuscripts, its last manuscript is the most interesting, being known as the “Ogham Tract,” and dealing with about seventy varieties of ancient Celtic script. But is Welsh really Hebrew, and, if so, what has it to do with Dan, about whom this entire paper is about?

Davidy himself believes that the language closest to ancient Hebrew today is Welsh. He mentions that the Rev. Eliezer Williams (b. 1754) wrote several works on the Celts and made several remarks (quoted by Roberts p. 23) that pertain to this.

“In the Hebrew. ..which the ancient British language greatly resembles… the roots of most of the ancient British, or real Welsh, words may be regularly traced in the Hebrew… ‘Scarcely a Hebrew root can be discovered that has not its corresponding derivative in the ancient British language… but not only.. .the words.. .their variations and inflections afford a much stronger proof of affinity…

The plural number of nouns likewise is often formed in a similar manner in the Celtic by adding in (a contraction of IM which is the suffix used in Hebrew to form the masculine plural). ..in the formation of sentences, and in the government of words…the same syntax might serve for both…. “Davies in ‘Mythology of the Ancient Druids’ (p. 94) asserts that ‘Taleisin, the chief Bard, declares that his lore had been detailed in Hebraic…”’

“It follows from all the above that though the language of the British Celts may have superficially conformed to an Indo-European type it had enough Semitic and Hebraic features to confirm the notion that Hebrew had been the original tongue.”(17)

Briefly, and not already mentioned, Danite “Norsemen” in 835 invaded Ireland and built the city of Dublin, from a previously obscure village called Ath Cliath. In 853 Norsemen left Scandinavia under Rollo and invaded the north of France, giving their name (Normandy—a.k.a. “Northman’s land”) to it. These Norsemen (Danites mostly) who settled there became known as “Normans,” they adopted the French tongue and customs, and later they insinuated themselves on to England in 1066 (Battle of Hastings), ending the Saxon rule.

Forty years later, the English regained the Throne of England, invaded Normandy, and struggled for 100 years for possession of it. The French finally won. Continuing this “mini-history,” mostly from Capt,

“The Normans who remained in Britain gradually became absorbed into the peoples of Britain-they became English, Scots, Irish and Welsh. In considering the many conquests of Britain, first by the Anglo-Saxons from Germany, the Danes and Norsemen from Denmark and Scandinavia, and finally the Normans from France, one might imagine that the resulting population of the British Isles, including the original ancient Britains, would have produced a mongrel breed of several different races. Such, however, is not the case. The Normans were a branch of the Scythians who came from Scandinavia. They and the other invading peoples are all of one origin, Israelites of either the Scythian or the Cimmerian branch of the ancient (ga-me-ra-a-a) Gimira, the Assyrian name for Israelites. The Ancient Britons are also descended from the same stock-Hebrews that left Egypt before the Exodus or later from Palestine before the captivities of Israel (Bold is mine. We have seen already my belief that many of Dan left Egypt before the Egyptians enslaved the rest of the tribes.)

“Because of a greater admixture with non-Israel peoples (continuing quote from Capt), it is difficult to distinguish with certainty the ethnic origin of the individual peoples making up these nations. One can only generalize:

“The inhabitants of modern Hungary are descended from several sources. The early people were no doubt Scythians (Germanic). During historical times, this flatland between the Danube and the Tisza (Theiss) had experienced incessant human ebb and flow-Dacians, Goths, Vandals, Gepidae, and Huns. Nearly half of the present inhabitants are descendants of the Magyars, who came in from the Siberian steppes (at the beginning of the tenth century), and pushed into the heart of Germany and Italy. They suffered reverses and finally settled back into present-day Hungary. The Magyars, who were once subject to the Khazar kings, are recorded in modern history books as belonging, in origin and language, to the ‘Finno-Ugrian division of the Alpo-Carpathian stock.’ It is quite possible the Magyars contained a strong element of Scythians who allied themselves with them.”(18)

I included the last paragraph above to show an earlier belief that I had, that although we know for a surety that the West European peoples are Israelites, we cannot know beyond a doubt which particular modern European countries are which particular Israelite tribes because of these massive and continuing integrations. Yair Davidy’s The Tribes helped clear up this misunderstanding on my part, in that, although mixed considerably certain nations contain “more” of one tribe and “less” of others. Plus there exists the point of prophecy and promises given by The Eternal that indicates He (if no one else) knows who they are and will keep them “tribally” intact, at least until He regathers them into one place at a time yet to come. In addition The Eternal stated in Amos 9:9 referring to Israel,

“For surely I will command, And I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, As grain is sifted in a sieve; Yet not the smallest grain shall fall to the ground.”

A further consideration along this line of thought is that The Eternal not only knows the various distinctions, but might even have meant this mixture to be that way. Why? Because maybe He still looks on all of us Israelites as just that—one Tribe called Israel, which name He Himself gave to Jacob. I still have questions concerning this point at times. Even our own America, possessing the “birthright marks” of Joseph, can be identified as modern Manasseh, the thirteenth tribe. However, it is today peopled by a representation of all the other tribes of Israel, those of Germanic extraction even outnumbering those of British extraction.

To retract a little, the connection of Dan with Denmark is quite evident, among other ways, on the Coats-Of-Arms of Denmark. The original Coat of Arms depicts a lion (“Dan is a lion’s whelp, he shall leap from Bashan” (Deut. 33:22)). The Coat of Arms of Denmark represents, in most part, places it once ruled, such as Denmark, Schleswig, Sweden, the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Gothland, and Vandalia. Its motto, “The Lord is a helper unto me,” is reminiscent of the cry of Jacob, “I have waited for thy salvation, 0 Eternal” (Gen. 49:17). This obviously is made in connection with the future fate of the Tribe of Dan. The present-day official shield includes giants with staffs (Dan, Hushim, Samson, probably), lions (Dan), a dragon (Dan), a bear (Reuben?), and a sheep (Joseph). The small National Arms are those of Denmark itself and depict lions, “Dan is a lion’s whelp” (Deut. 33:22). (19)

But what about Wales itself? The flag of Wales depicts a dragon, a symbol of Dan. Green is the national colour of Simeon in Rabbinical tradition, and green is the national colour of Ireland and, along with white, forms the background of the Welsh flag. Some of Simeon are in Wales, probably. Shaul, one of the sons of Simeon, became the Silures of south Wales. These were a fierce darkish people according to descriptions.

More on possible Danite-Welsh links will come in Part II.

FOOTNOTES

(1) Much of the early part of this section is taken from Yair Davidy’s Lost Israelite Identity in a chapter entitled, ‘The Israelite and North African Links of the Insular Celts in the Light of Linguistics. The Question of Alphabetical Lettering ,‘ Ch.17, pp.336-343

(2) Ibid.

(3) Fell, Saga, p. 231 & Ch. 11, ‘Arabs Before Islam’ pp.236-261

(4) Davidy, Lost, p.343

(5) Ibid., p.40

(6) Ibid., p.53

(7) Capt. E. Raymond, Missing Links Discovered in Assyrian Tablets, U..S.A. 1995, p.144

(8) Ibid.

(9) Davidy, Lost, p.77 as quoted from Pounds, Norman J.G. An Historical Geography of Europe, Cambridge, U.K. 1973, p.46

(10) Ibid. p.72, Davidy quoting Powell, The Celts, London 1958, p.41

(11) Ibid., p.73

(12) Ibid.

(13) Ibid., p.75

(14) Ibid., pp.75-76, quoting Piggott, Stuart, Ancient Europe from the Beginnings of Agriculture to Classical Antiquity, Edinburgh, Scotland 1965, p.177

(15) Davidy, Lost, pp.81-83

(16) Ibid., pp.302-305

(17) Ibid., p.343, quoting Roberts, L.G.A., British History Traced from Egypt and Palestine, London 1972, p.23

(18) Capt. Op.cit., Missing, pp.184-185

(19) Davidy, The Tribes, p.209

TO BE CONTINUED