Keith Hunt - Israel - Forgotten World Empire   Restitution of All Things
  Home Previous Page   First Page

Israel - World Power

Under David and Solomon!

            FROM THE BOOK "THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL ... FOUND"

                                    by 

                             Steven M. collins

Continued from previous page:
 

"Israelite" and "Jew" are not synonymous is clear from his
notation on a chart that the "Israelites [were] carried into
captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, 587 B.C. 35" It was actually the
"Jews" (of the kingdom of Judah) who were taken into captivity by
Nebuchadnezzar in 587 B.C. The "Israelites" (of the kingdom of
Israel) had not resided in Palestine since the fall of Samaria in
721 B.C. Due to this mistake, Waddell failed to recognize the
Israelite character of the "Phoenician" Empire. While Waddell
documents the prominence of the word "B-R-T" in the Phoenician
sphere of influence, he failed to realize that the prominent
presence of the Hebrew word for covenant ("B-R-T") on the
Phoenician Empire argues powerfully for Israelite dominance in
the "Phoenician" empire. While Tyre and Sidon had nothing in
their heritage to place the word "covenant" on themselves, the
ten tribes of Israel (especially the tribes of Ephraim and
Manasseh) were the covenant people, and their use of the word
"B-R-T" proclaimed their identity to the world! Besides calling
themselves "Israel," "Judah," or their individual tribal names,
the Israelites called themselves "the covenant people."
     The early British chroniclers record that a King Brutus came
from the Eastern Mediterranean with hundreds of ships to colonize
the large island on the northwest of the European land mass, and
gave it the name "Briton" or "Brittania." The approximate date
for this event is 1103 B.C., a time just prior to the beginning
of the first millennium B.C. Although Brutus is attributed a
Trojan ancestry in the ancient accounts, he bore the Hebrew word
B-R-T in his name (Brutus), and applied the same Hebrew word
(B-R-T) to their new homeland (Briton). 36  In other words, King
Brutus' name identified him as a member of the "Covenant People,"
and in naming his new land "Briton," he claiming it as a
territory for the "Covenant People." That a Trojan leader bore an
important Hebrew root word in his name argues that Israelites
were present among the inhabitants of ancient Troy.
     While it cannot be demonstrated that Brutus' colonists
arriving in Briton were all Israelites, the fact that the Hebrew
word "B-R-T" was placed on the leader of the expedition and their
new homeland does argue for a dominant Israelite role in this
early colonization of Briton. Even though the formal alliance of
Israel and Tyre was not created until the reigns of Kings David
and Hiram (approximately a century later), Brutus' voyage
indicates that Israelites were involved in colonial expeditions
and maritime journeys even before the reign of King David.
Indeed, the Bible supports such a conclusion. Judges 5:17
attributes a nautical presence in the Mediterranean Sea to the
Israelite tribe of Dan (circa 1200 B.C.), indicating a seafaring
tradition among the Israelites a century before Brutus' time.
Israel, the covenant nation, had been present in the Eastern
Mediterranean for centuries before King David ruled, so the
arrival of King Brutus and a fleet of "Covenant People" (i.e.
Israelites) from the Eastern Mediterranean in Briton in 1103 B.C.
was historically possible. Indeed, who else but the Israelites
(who had entered into a "covenant" relationship with God at Mt.
Sinai) would so prominently affix the Hebrew word for "covenant"
to themselves and their territories? Also, unless Brutus' fleet
of colonists were predominately Israelite, why would they allow
him to name their new homeland with a word so closely linked with
the tribes of Israel?
     A need by Israel to export its growing population via
colonizing expeditions is consistent with the biblical promise of
God to Abraham to so increase the population of the Israelites
that they would be like "as the stars of heaven, and as the sand
which is upon the seashore (Gen.22:15-17)". Any people so blessed
would regularly need to locate additional territories for an
expanding population. The colonizing expedition of Brutus and the
Hebrew word "B-R-T" being placed on ancient Briton indicates that
is precisely what was happening.
     The above does not deny that the city-states of Tyre and
Sidon also had major concurrent seafaring capacities. Since the
Israelites, the Tyrians and Sidonians had long shared a common
race, language and trading relationships, it is possible that
when Kings Hiram and David sealed a formal alliance between their
peoples, navies, etc.; they simply formalized the "status quo"
rather than established something radically new. This creates the
possibility (indeed, the likelihood) that Israel, Tyre and Sidon
had been cooperating for some time in their overseas endeavors.
The fact that the Greeks did not limit the term "Phoenicia" to
the small city-states like Tyre and Sidon, but included the land
of Israel in the region they called "Phoenicia" supports this
conclusion. 37
     At any rate, the arrival of Israelite settlers in Briton
paved the way for its inclusion among the lands of the
Israelite/Phoenician maritime empire which followed shortly
thereafter. Unique among the lands inhabited by the
Israelite/Phoenicians, the island of Briton has retained a name
based on the Hebrew word for "covenant" continuously into the
modern era.
     The B-R-T root word was also found on Phoenician coins,
further indicating that they identified themselves as "the
covenant people. " 38  The Phoenician colony of Carthage also
printed the word B-R-T on its coins. 39  A later chapter will
present considerable evidence that the Israelites were the prime
founders of the Phoenician colony of Carthage. Therefore, it is
not surprising that this significant Hebrew root word (B-R-T)
also appears on Carthaginian coins (proclaiming to the world that
they were part of "the Covenant People"). The Israelites were
proud of being "the Covenant People;" as demonstrated by that
word being used as a legend on their coins. Whether the vowel
sounds of their day resulted in a word like "Barat," "Brrith," or
"Brit" is not important; what is critical is the understanding
that Phoenician people chose to refer to themselves as the
Covenant (B-R-T) People. When we find the root word containing
the consonants B-R-T (or its variations) attached to a group of
people in the ancient "Phoenician" world, we can generally assume
we have located some of the "covenant" tribes of Israel unless
there is overriding evidence to the contrary.
     The word "Hebrew" comes from one of the ancestors of the
Israelites whose name was "Eber" (Genesis 11:14-26 traces the
ancestry of Abraham to Eber). Several variations of the word
"Hebrew" also appear within the ancient "Phoenician" Empire.
We have already seen that the ancient name of Spain (which was
the site of the major Phoenician/Israelite colony of
Gades/Gadeira), was Iberia. Also, an ancient name of Ireland was
Ibheriu or Iberiu, and ancient Gaelic histories record that the
ancestors of the Gaelic settlers of Ireland came from Iberia
("Phoenician" Spain) 40  Ancient Ireland was also called
Hibernia, a name which also preserved the Hebrew root word
"eber." Note how closely the words Ibheriu and Iberiu coincide
phonetically with the pronunciation of the word Hebrew.
Waddell also notes some of the above, and includes the Hebrides
as a related word, representative "of the 'Iberia'...stock, which
first peopled the British Isles." 41  The placement of the name
of a Hebrew patriarch on Ireland, Spain and early Briton further
confirms that their early settlers were Israelites, colonizing
these areas during the centuries of the "Phoenician Golden Age."
     One other possibility exists for these early names in the
British Isles. It was noted earlier that early histories of
Briton record that the tribe of Asher operated the ancient mines
in Cornwall. One of the clans of Asher was named the Heberites
(Numbers 26:44-45), and this Hebrew name also serves as a precise
root word for such names as Hibernia and the Hebrides. Either
way, the Israelite dominance in the old Phoenician Empire is
further shown. Would the pagans of the ancient city-states of
Tyre and Sidon have called their colonies, coins and kings by
Israelite names based on the Hebrew word "covenant," and the
names of either Abraham's ancestor or a clan of the tribe of
Asher? Of course not! These Israelite names clearly indicate that
the old Phoenician Empire at the beginning of the first
millennium B.C. was the international Israelite empire spoken of
in the Bible. The common usage of the Hebrew word B-R-T indicates
they referred to themselves as the "covenant" kingdom.

     Let us examine still more evidence that the Phoenician
Empire was actually the empire of Israel. Remember that the
consonants of ancient languages were written while the vowels
were frequently omitted. The consonants of the word "Phoenicia"
are P(h)-N-C. These consonants were preserved by the Romans when
they called the Carthaginians the "Punic" empire (According to
secular accounts, Carthage was founded by the Phoenicians in the
ninth century B.C.) In doing so, the Romans simply preserving the
Greek designation for the Phoenicians (the founders of Carthage).
The Romans were not the only ancient nation that retained the
P-N-C" name for the ancient Israelite empire. The ancient records
of Vedic India also record the existence of an international
empire with those consonants in their title. The ancient writings
of Vedic Indian include the following statement: "The able Panch
setting out to invade the Earth, brought the whole World under
their sway." 42
     Also, a Rig Veda Hymn includes this statement: "The Panch
leaders of the Earth." 43
     The consonants for these "Panch" world leaders in the Vedic
records are P-N-C(h). This could conceivably be written off by
skeptics as a coincidence except for the fact that this "Panch"
empire is also linked with the B-R-T Hebrew root word for
"Covenant." The first quote about the "Panch" is from the
"Maha-Barata Indian Epic of the Great Barats, and the second
quote is from a Rig Veda hymn stating:

"The Brihat singers belaud Indra...Indra hath raised the Sun on
high in heaven ...Indra leads us with single sway - The Panch
leaders of the Earth." 44

     The references to Indra and sunworship are hardly
surprising. The Bible records that Israel became devotees of
Baal, the Sun-god of Tyre and Sidon, during their golden age.
This idolatry had permeated Israel even before the death of
Solomon as he himself worshipped "Ashtoreth (or "Astarte)," a
Phoenician name for the "mother-goddess" who was worshipped in
many other cultures by other names. Israel's devotion to foreign
gods lasted from Solomon until the fall of Israel in about 721
B.C., so the fact that the B-R-T (Covenant) People of "Panch"
(Phoenician) fame were associated with the mother-goddess worship
is consistent with biblical accounts.

     It is clear, nonetheless, that ancient Indian histories
referred to the Israelite empire by the same root words by which
they were known to the Mediterranean world. The Greeks knew the
Israelites by the term Phoenicia, and the Israelites named
themselves the "B-R-T" ("Covenant") People. Ancient India
preserved both root words in the terms Panch, and the Barats (or
Brihats). Further linking these root words together is a phrase
in an ancient Indian epic (the Vishnu Purana) which states: "The
principal nations of the Barats are the Kurus and the able
Panch." 45
     That the Israelite/Phoenician Empire made a lasting
impression in Asia as well as the Mediterranean world indicates
that Israel's empire and influence was truly international in
scope. The record in ancient Indian annals that the Barat/Panch
(B-R-T/Phoenicians) "brought the whole World under their sway"
gives added weight to the statement of the Bible that "all the
kings of the earth sought the presence of Solomon ... and they
brought every man his present ... year by year" (2 Chronicles
9:23-24).
     It is evident that the great empire known to the
Mediterranean/ Atlantic world as the Phoenicians (and by the
Hebrew word B-R-T), and the great empire known to the Asians as
the Panch (and by the Hebrew word B-R-T) were one and the same.
This empire was the Israelite empire under Kings David and
Solomon: the "covenant" or "B-R-T" kingdom.
     The Bible quotes God giving King David the following message
through the prophet Nathan:

"I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all
your enemies from before you; and I will make for you a great
name, like unto the name of the great ones of the earth" (2 Sam.
7:9).

     This passage is important for two reasons: It not only
claims that the fame of King David (the founder of the Israelite
empire) would equal the fame of any other world leaders known to
him at that time, but it also claims a divine role in David's and
Israel's ascendancy. God was reminding David that his kingship
and Israel's success resulted from divine intervention in the
affairs of nations. This message was to keep David humble by
reminding him that he also had a king (the God of Israel) to
obey.
     One additional piece of evidence of the substantial role of
the Israelite tribes in the ancient world will be examined.
Ezekiel 27 lists many ancient nations which traded in Tyre's
marketplace, and verses 17-19 (KJV) list the tribe of Dan as
having an identity separate and distinct from Israel and Judah.
This fact was hinted at earlier in the reference to Judges 5:17
that "Dan remain[ed] in ships." This passage indicates that the
tribe of Dan (whose territory included a strip of land on the
Mediterranean shore) had a nautical identity. If a portion of the
Danites had an identity separate from Israel and Judah, secular
records should bear witness to that fact ... and they do!
     The Encyclopaedia Britannica records that the Greeks listed
the "Danaans," or "Danuana" as a distinct, seafaring people who
were present in the eastern Mediterranean Sea as early as
1230-1190 B.C. 46  This is the same time frame that Judges 5:17
ascribes a nautical identity to the Danites. Bibles which affix
dates to chapter headings typically show a date around 1200 B.C.
for Judges 5:17. Therefore, the biblical and secular accounts
agree on the dating of the tribe of Dan's separate, maritime
identity.
     These "Danaans" were part of a seafaring alliance of peoples
known as the Sea Peoples who raided and settled Mediterranean
coastlands at that time. The connection between the tribe of Dan
and the Sea Peoples has also been noted in Biblical Archaeology
Review, in an article which cites the work of Israeli
archaeologist, Yigael Yadin, in the following comment:

"...The Danites were originally not members of the Israelite
confederation ... They seem, rather, to have been connected with
a group of the Sea Peoples called Danuna or Denyen in Egyptian
sources, and known to the Greeks as the Danaoi." 47

     Dan's apparent independence from the other tribes occurred
at a time when the Israelite tribes were loosely ruled by a
series of Judges who predated the Israelite monarchical period.
During that time, the Israelite tribes had no strong central
government, and the tribes were free to pursue more independent
paths. The fact that the "Danaans" were located in the eastern
Mediterranean region also supports their being the tribe of Dan
as that is precisely where one would expect the tribe of Dan to
be present. It is also recorded that the "Danaans" furnished some
of the earliest settlers of ancient Ireland. 48  This account not
only further supports a strong nautical tradition for the ancient
tribe of Dan, but their presence in ancient Ireland also
indicates that several of the Israelite tribes had roles in the
early colonization of the British Isles.
     If Dan, one of the lesser tribes of Israel, was itself
sufficiently numerous that the Greeks preserved its prominent,
independent identity approximately two centuries prior to the
reigns of Kings David and Solomon, it is easier to understand how
great the entire Israelite nation could become when all twelve
tribes were finally united under a strong ruler.

     In conclusion, we can now see that the Israelite empire
under Kings David and Solomon at the beginning of the first
millennium B.C. was truly an international empire that spanned
several continents. Besides its Mideast homeland, it extended its
influence to the European and African shores of the
Mediterranean, the British Isles, and North America. For a time,
it exercised dominance over the nations which had either been
conquered by King David or had voluntarily offered tribute
payments to Israel under King Solomon. Also, their sphere of
influence extended far beyond their actual areas of settlement.
When King David routed the Assyrian army and its allies, the fame
of Israel spread far and wide. Solomon's wealth, wisdom and power
would have further expanded the world's awareness of Israel's
greatness. King Solomon's alliance with Sidon, Tyre and Egypt
would have made this grouping the most powerful land and maritime
force on earth at that time. The biblical assertions that the
Israelite empire under King Solomon had worldwide influence is
neither fantastic nor exaggerated.
     That even the Vedic histories of India state that the Panch
(same consonants as Phoenicia), who were known as the Barats
(same consonants as the Hebrew word for "covenant"), brought "the
whole World under their sway" confirms their international
dominance. Archeological evidence shows that the Phoenician
(Israelite) Empire was worldwide in its influence, including a
substantial presence in ancient North America. History also shows
that the "Phoenician" Empire was characterized by Israelite names
such as "Iberia" (named for the Hebrew ancestor "Eber"), tribal
names from the Israelite tribes of Asher, Gad and Dan, and the
Hebrew word for covenant (B-R-T) which would designate the tribes
of Ephraim and Manasseh, the primary inheritors of Abraham's
"Covenant" blessings.
     It has been clearly shown that the "Phoenician empire" was,
in fact, the Israelite empire. For a very long time, secular
historians have been unaware of the real scope of Israel's
ancient empire. One reason for this omission is the great
antiquity of Israel's empire. We must realize that the Israelite
Empire's Golden Age was already "ancient history" at the time of
Alexander the Great, and occurred almost a millennium prior to
the time of the Caesars of Rome. Because its existence was well
before the empires commonly discussed in history texts, and
because its Golden Age of world power was mostly limited to the
reigns of just two kings (David and Solomon), the story of the
Israelite Empire has not been included in our knowledge of world
history. However, some world histories have recorded the
existence of the Phoenician Empire, but even those accounts which
discuss the Phoenician Empire have not noticed its Israelite
character. However, even though modern man has been ignorant of
the real state of affairs of the ancient Israelites, the Bible
recorded both the existence of Israel's empire and the fact that
international trade and commerce thrived in the ancient world.
Even though these biblical records have been ignored and
discounted for some time, recent archeological evidence shows
that the Bible's historical accounts were (and always have been)
accurate!

     Another reason why historians may have overlooked the
greatness of the Israelite empire is the lack of ancient
monuments, steles, etc. in the Mideast. We have already discussed
one reason for the lack of monuments to Israel's glory: God
himself punished King David and the Israelites for even so much
as conducting a census of their military reserves. God was
attempting to keep Israel's monarchs humble (for the good of the
nation), and self-glorifying monuments and steles, etc. would
have countered God's policy far more than a military census. So,
Kings David and Solomon, who were faithful to God at the time of
Israel's greatest glory, would have been disinclined to leave
memorials and monuments to "their" conquests and accomplishments.
Since they did not build self-praising monuments, modern
archeologists have nothing to find.

     But what about later monarchs, when they ceased fearing God,
some might ask? It is likely that later Israelite monarchs did,
indeed, make records of their accomplishments on stone and
papyrus in later years, but there are several reasons why these
artifacts would not have been preserved. The territory of Israel
was the location for many savage and brutal wars after the reigns
of Kings David and Solomon. As Israel's enemies conquered
Palestine, destroying whole cities in the process, vast numbers
of monuments and records were destroyed as well. Indeed, as
Assyria and Babylon conquered the Israelite homelands, Solomon's
Temple, the royal palaces of David and Solomon, etc. were all
razed. It is likely that Assyria and Babylon destroyed every
vestige of Israelite civilization that they could find when they
burnt Israel's and Judah's cities, and carried the remaining
Israelites captive out of Palestine. Also, since other
populations were subsequently placed in the land of Palestine,
these other groups had no use for anything "Israelite," and
likely scavenged whatever physical materials were left for use as
building materials for themselves. Palestine is a key nexus where
the routes to three continents (Africa, Asia and Europe)
converge. For this reason, the small territory of Palestine has
been fought over and successively destroyed many times.

     Each of the many wars in Palestine further destroyed any
physical evidence of the very ancient israelite Empire.

     There is another reason why little or nothing would have
remained of the Israelite empire based in Palestine: the
weathering forces of the elements. Martland Edey writes
concerning the weathering forces of the damp, ocean climate of
the eastern Mediterranean:

"Anything written on papyrus quickly disappears; wood rots; clay
tablets, unless safely buried in the ground, crumble. Even stone
monuments or inscriptions, if exposed long enough to the
weathering of wind, rain and frost, become blurred and eventually
indecipherable." 46

     While the ancient tablets and monuments of Assyria, Babylon
and Persia were preserved in dry desert conditions or buried
under the sands of time (and subsequently undisturbed for
centuries) in desert areas which were comparatively undisturbed,
Israel's monuments and records would have deteriorated in the
eastern Mediterranean area. Also, since many conquerors and
civilizations came and went in Palestine after the Israelites
flourished there, virtually nothing was left undisturbed.
However, enough artifacts and records about the Israelite empire
(called "Phoenicia" by the Greeks) have survived to document
their true worldwide influence.
     The Israelite empire was at its zenith during the reigns of
kings David and Solomon, but after their deaths, it was rent by a
great civil war which permanently divided the tribes of Israel
into the separate, and often hostile, kingdoms of Israel and
Judah. Their former glory and power was never recaptured. The
story of Israel's decline and their subsequent migrations out of
Palestine will be examined in the next chapter.

                           .....................


ENDNOTES: CHAPTER THREE

1. Edey, The Sea Traders, p.9
2. Hitti, Short History of the Near East, p.28; Collier's
Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, "Babylonia and Assyria," p.637, and Halley,
Halley's Bible Handbook, p.134
3. Harper's Bible Dictionary, see "Tarshish," p.1018  
4. Fell, America B.C., p.93
5. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 18, "Magellan,Ferdinand," pp.
80-81 
6. Fell, America B.C., pp.93-101
7. Edey, p.14
8. Rawlinson, Phoenicia, p.63 
9. Ibid, p.68
10. Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible, Old Testament
Hebrew Lexicon, see
"Gadar," p.16
11 Waddell, Phoenician Origin of the Britons, Scots and
Anglo-Saxons, p.74 
12. Hitti, p.259
13. Encyclopedia Britannica , Vol. 513, "Cadiz," p.513 
14. Rawlinson, Phoenicia, p.68
15. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 18, "Malaga," p.152 
16. Rawlinson, Phoenicia, pp.69-70
17. Capt, The Traditions of Glastonbury, p.28 (citing William
Camden's Britannia) 
18. Ibid, p.28 (citing Sir Edward Creasy's History of England)
19. Fell, Saga America, p.167; Bloom and Polansky, "Translation
of the 'Decalogue Tablet' from Ohio," Epigraphic Society
Occasional Publications, Vol. 8, Part One, 1980, pp.15-20; and a
series of articles on the "Los Lunas Inscriptions," Epigraphic
Society Occasional Publications, Vol. 13, 1985, pp.32-50
20. Lenhart, "The Adena Tablets," Epigraphic Society Occasional
Publications, Vol. 13, 1985, p.206
21. Ibid, p.206
22. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 19, "Mound Builders," p.565 
23. Ibid, Vol. 19, "Mound," p.565
24. Fell, Saga America, p.248
25. The Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications, Vol. 7, Part
2, 1979, "An Interview with Barry Fell," pp.160-166 
26. Fell, America B.C., p.21
27. Ibid, p.21 
28. Ibid, p.158 
29. Lenhart, p.208
30. Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible, see first
Heading entitled "Shiloh," p.879 
31. Ibid, see Heading "Gathering," subhead one, p.385
32. Rawlinson, Phoenicia, pp.69-70
33. Ibid, Hebrew Lexicon Section, see word "berith," p.8 
34. Ibid, Hebrew Lexicon Section, see word "borith," p.9 
35. Waddell, The Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots and
Anglo-Saxons, Appendix 1, p.387
36. Ibid, p. vii of Preface and pp.142-167 
37. Rawlinson, Phoenicia, p.1
38. Waddell, pp.54-56 
39. Ibid, p.9
40. Fell, America BC, p.43 
41. Waddell, p.137
42. Ibid, p.1
43. Ibid, p.1 
44. Ibid, p.1
45. Ibid, p.188/21
46. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 22, "Troy," p.504
47. Raban and Stieglitz, "The Sea Peoples," Biblical Archaeology
Review (BAR), November-December 1991, p.41 (citing Yadin,
"Danaans and Danites," BAR, June 1976)
48. Lawless, Ireland, pp.6-9
49. Edey, p.17
......


I believe ALL books by Steven Collins are still obtainable from
AMAZON.COM

Keith Hunt

  Home Previous Page First Page Top of Page


Other Articles of Interest:
  ... ... ...

 
Navigation List:
 

 
Word Search:

PicoSearch
  Help