From the book “THE LOST TEN TRIBES OF ISRAEL….FOUND!”
by Steven M. Collins
ISRAELITE AND JEWISH MIGRATIONS FROM PALESTINE
The Israelite empire, which once dominated the nations of the earth, was progressively debilitated by foreign and civil wars, internal strife, and even by calamities in the weather. The Bible reveals that their decline was a result of their refusal to abide by the laws of the Creator God who had made Israel great. This eventually resulted in successive waves of migration exiting the Israelite homeland in Palestine as the land became increasingly untenable.
While many are familiar with the fall of Samaria (Israel's capital) in approximately 721 B.C., most do not realize that by the time of Samaria's fall, the vast majority of Israelites had already migrated out of the land, many of them voluntarily. Additionally, many Jews had been taken from the nation of Judah by 700 B.C. as Assyrian captives. Judah (and its capital city of Jerusalem) survived until approximately 586 B.C., when the Babylonians carried the remainder of the Jews into an Asian captivity.
This chapter will not attempt to provide a comprehensive history of the two Hebrew kingdoms of Israel and Judah, but will examine some of the lesser-known aspects of their history and their migrations from Palestine. A thorough history of the two separate Hebrew kingdoms can be obtained by reading the biblical books of I & II Kings and I & II Chronicles.
After the death of Solomon, the united Hebrew kingdom was divided into two nations: Judah, ruled by Solomon's son Rehoboam, and Israel, ruled by Jeroboam, one of Solomon's former appointees over the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (I Kings 11:28). The events which led to this separation resemble a modern soap opera.
The Israelites had come to greatly resent the labors and taxes which Solomon had forced on them because of his massive building projects, and they wanted relief! In one of the world's worst decisions ever, the son of Solomon (Rehoboam) alienated most of the nation when he said he would be even "tougher" on them than Solomon had been (I Kings 12:1-21). This was profoundly foolish as all of Israel's tribes, led by his rival Jeroboam, had offered their loyalty if only he would lighten the burdens which Solomon had placed upon them. Having had their offer of conditional submission spurned by Rehoboam, all the tribes of Israel except Judah (Rehoboam's own tribe) and Benjamin spurned Rehoboam, and made Jeroboam their king. This event left both factions feeling "rejected" by the other one.
After Rehoboam made his terrible mistake, Jeroboam of Israel also made a very foolish decision. Having been promised the same favor God gave David if only he would be obedient (I Kings 11:29-38), Jeroboam spurned God's offer. He quickly forced calf-worship on Israel, and abolished God's Holy Days in favor of new celebrations he devised for them (I Kings 12:25-33). His adoption of calf worship (an Egyptian religion) likely resulted from his being sheltered in Egypt when Pharaoh gave him political asylum from Solomon's wrath.
This defiance of Solomon by Egypt's pharaoh (i.e. sheltering Solomon's adversary) makes one ask the question: what was becoming of the Israelite-Phoenician-Egyptian alliance which began under Solomon? It was still intact, but showing considerable (and understandable) stress. When Solomon degenerated in his later years, God hand-picked Jeroboam, the governor of Ephraim and Manasseh (the tribe of Joseph) to succeed Solomon over the northern ten tribes of Israel. Solomon learned of this, and sought to execute Jeroboam. Jeroboam was given political asylum by Egypt's pharaoh from Solomon's wrath, indicating that enmities must have been growing between King Solomon and the pharaoh even before Solomon's death. It is possible that there was a personal reason for Pharaoh's distancing himself from Solomon. Solomon's first wife was an Egyptian princess, daughter of pharaoh (I Kings 9:16.) As Solomon began collecting an immense harem, he apparently lost interest in his first wife. Pharaoh, and all Egypt, could easily have felt slighted by Solomon's conduct, giving them a motive to retaliate against Solomon by sheltering Jeroboam. During the time that Pharaoh sheltered Jeroboam, they must have forged a personal friendship and alliance that made them immediate national allies when Jeroboam became king over the largest portion of Solomon's old kingdom. Therefore, while Egypt was drifting away from Solomon, it was growing closer to the one who would succeed Solomon over most of Israel. This prolonged Egyptian sojourn led to Jeroboam's familiarity with Egypt's religion. Therefore, his adoption of Egyptian idols was a move to cement political ties with Egypt.
Jeroboam also disenfranchised God's levitical priesthood (I Kings 12:31), which soon resulted in the whole tribe of Levi migrating to the kingdom of Judah (II Chronicles 11:13-16). Since the worship of God was being "kicked out" of Israel, those who wished to serve God from Israel's northern ten tribes had little choice but to follow the levitical priests into Judah (since only the Levites could perform God's services). This resulted in infusions of contingents from other tribes into Judah's kingdom as well (verse 16). The division of Israel's tribes was fully accomplished: the northern ten tribes followed Jeroboam of Israel, and three tribes (Judah, Benjamin and Levi) followed Rehoboam of Judah. However, the contingents of the other tribes who left Israel for Judah initially resulted in a roughly two-to-one superiority of Israel over Judah (II Chronicles 13:3.)
Rehoboam served God faithfully for three years (II Chronicles 11:17). Then he made another foolish decision by abandoning the laws of God (II Chronicles 12:1-2). He did not have to wait long for God's punishment.
Just five years after Solomon died (and two years after Rehoboam forsook God), Egypt attacked Judah. Since there was no love lost between Israel and Solomon's family, the Egyptians attacked Judah knowing their old friend, King Jeroboam of Israel, would render no aid to Judah (II Chronicles 12:2-12). When Egypt defeated Judah and looted Jerusalem of its gold treasures (verse 9), Pharaoh likely felt he was only "taking what should have been his anyway." Solomon's appetite for building projects and gold had been insatiable, and secular history records that Egypt's fleet was scouring the Pacific for even more gold (see previous chapter) during the time of Solomon's rule. When relations went sour between Solomon and Pharaoh, Pharaoh likely resented the fact that Solomon had accumulated so much gold, leaving little for anyone else in the alliance. So, as soon as it was clear that the breach between Israel and Judah would not be reversed, Egypt acted to take Solomon's cache of gold for itself. Rehoboam's abandonment of God's laws resulted in Judah being stripped of the golden wealth which Solomon had amassed in Jerusalem.
While Israel was likely glad to see Egypt "teach Judah a lesson," Judah surely felt "stabbed in the back" by Israel's refusal to aid it against Egypt's attack. Though they were brother nations, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah became bitter enemies.
The Bible records that there was constant fighting between Israel and Judah during the reigns of Jeroboam and Rehoboam (I Kings 14:30). This internal fighting among the tribes of Israel greatly weakened the Israelite Empire which had developed under Kings David and Solomon.
When Rehoboam died, he was succeeded on the throne of Judah by Abijah. The hatred between Israel and Judah continued as II Chronicles 13:2 states: "And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam." Israel and Judah, mere decades after they were united in ruling over a world empire, were now so full of hatred that they routinely warred against each other. Judah had been stripped of its gold and wealth, and had no empire. Israel was soon to be stripped of much of its remaining power as well.
Israel and the Jews fought a major war against each other that engaged 1.2 million combatants (II Chronicles 13:3). Note the consistency of the Bible's account regarding the armed forces available to the Hebrew people. Under King David, Israel (with all reserves mobilized) could muster 1,510,000 soldiers (I Chronicles 21:2-6). Several decades and internecine wars later, 1,200,000 soldiers were mustered for a war pitting Israel against Judah. Due to the need of both warring nations to maintain garrisons in various cities and conquered lands, their combined total military reserves would have been close to the number of reserves cited under King David.
Although the Israelites outnumbered the Jews approximately two to one; God gave the victory to the Jews. (II Chronicles 13 shows the Jews were again serving God faithfully.) The deaths in this single conflict numbered almost one-half of the 1.2 million combatants! Israel alone suffered 500,000 battle deaths (II Chronicles 13:17), and we are not told the amount of Jewish casualties. The hatred between Israel and Judah must have been immense to cause such unimaginable bloodletting! Considering that such ancient battles were essentially hand-to-hand contests, this means that heads, limbs and chunks of flesh and viscera must have been flying in all directions as hundreds of thousands of swords were being flailed like scythes.
Those who wish that they "lived in Bible days" may change their minds after considering the realities of those days. Visualize what it must have been like to identify and bury the dead after such a battle! This presents a grisly picture, but it is the reality of how ancient wars were fought.
This brutal war (occurring approximately 913 B.C.) between Israel and the Jews had vast international repercussions. II Chronicles 13:20 tersely states concerning the aftermath of this horrendous loss of life: "neither did Jeroboam recover strength again..."
With Israel's military being greatly depleted as a result of this battle, it could no longer control or defend its empire. Israel's area of direct rule had to shrink to a smaller territory which the weakened army could defend. Many nations which had been dominated by Israel now became independent by default.
It was in this time period that secular history records Assyria suddenly began to recover its military strength virtually unhindered by anyone (see chapter one). Assyria's freedom to rearm itself attests to the power vacuum which was created when Israel lost a half-million soldiers in a single battle! Assyrian resurgence, made possible by Israel's crushing defeat at the hands of Judah, would eventually lead to the end of Israel's nationhood almost two centuries later.
Soon after Judah crushed the army of Israel on its northern border, it was attacked from the south. Judah apparently mobilized its full reserves as it mustered 580,000 soldiers to face an Ethiopian army of 1,000,000 men. The king of Judah (Asa) humbly asked for God's help in the battle, and God responded. The Jews crushed the Ethiopian army, and gained a considerable amount of war booty (II Chronicles 14:1-15).
With terrible wars raging between the factions which once had formed a great worldwide alliance, pity the smaller nations which had been vassals of either Israel, Judah or Egypt. They now were torn between large combatants jostling for power. They likely allied themselves with whoever appeared to be the winner, and suffered retribution if they guessed wrong. II Chronicles 15:5-6 says of those times:
"In those times there was no peace...but great vexations were upon all the inhabitants of the countries. And nation was destroyed of nation, and city of city..."
This regional chaos was created when the old established order in the region (the empire led by the united tribes of Israel) suddenly disintegrated. It was a stark commentary on what happens when God's laws are ignored. When God, and his laws, were preeminent in the glory days of King Solomon, there was peace, international harmony, and time for scientific and artistic pursuits. Soon after God's laws were forgotten throughout Israel and Judah, chaos, death and destruction followed on a scale we can scarcely imagine. Following the victory of Judah over Egypt, God sent a prophet to Asa and his people promising God's favor if Asa and Judah would truly obey God (II Chronicles 15:1-7). This time a king heeded the message.
King Asa of Judah restored the worship of God, and removed the idols of foreign gods out of all lands under his jurisdiction. II Chronicles 15:9 records that:
"...he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and those from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon who were sojourning with them, for great numbers had deserted to him from Israel when they saw that the Lord his God was with him." (RSV)
The above account records that many people from the northern ten tribes of Israel joined themselves to the king of Judah in order to follow a king who was willing to serve and obey God. After King Asa's death, his son, Jehoshaphat became king over Judah. He also served God enthusiastically, and had the Levites teach all his subjects the laws of God (II Chronicles 17:1-9). God gave him favor, power and tranquility reminiscent of the glory years of King Solomon. Judah received tribute payments from the Philistines and Arabians, and King Jehoshaphat and his nation became very wealthy (II Chronicles 17:5,11-13). As in the days of King Solomon, King Jehoshaphat launched a construction program, building "fortresses and store-cities" throughout the nation.
He was so feared and respected by the surrounding nations that none of them dared fight him. Indeed, his army numbered 1,120,000 men, divided into five administrative groups. II Chronicles 17:14-18 describes his army as follows:
300,000 soldiers under Adnah 280,000 soldiers under Jehohanan 200,000 soldiers under Amasiah 200,000 soldiers under Eliada 180.000 soldiers under Jehozabad 1,160,000 soldiers in five armies.
The above roster of King Jehoshaphat's military is revealing. While his military forces numbered 1,160,000 men, the combined forces of Judah and Benjamin had never previously exceeded a total of 580,000 men (II Chronicles 14:8). Clearly, Jehoshaphat's army was being swelled by hundreds of thousands of men from the northern ten tribes of Israel who had migrated to Judah from Israel. Why did so many people move from Israel to Judah at that time? To answer that question, we need to understand what was occurring in the northern Hebrew kingdom of Israel.
During much of King Jehoshaphat's reign, the king of Israel was named Ahab, a man described by the Bible's writer as one who "did evil in the sight of the Lord above all that were before him" (I Kings 16:30). Ahab had been preceded by a series of wicked kings who created terrible instability in Israel. I Kings 15:25-16:30 records that this instability included royal assassinations, and internal warfare to determine accession to the throne. With wicked rulers, civil instability and national violence prevailing in Israel, is it any wonder that hundreds of thousands of members of the northern ten tribes migrated toward the peace, stability and prosperity of Judah?
Ahab's wife was a Phoenician princess named Jezebel, daughter of the king of Sidon (I Kings 16:31). King Ahab and his wicked wife completely abandoned the ways of the God of Israel as they led the nation in worshipping the Phoenician god, Baal. Verse 32 states that Ahab built an "altar for Baal in the house of Baal, which he had built in Samaria." He built a "grove" which was apparently a place for church-sponsored prostitution. An alternate translation for the word "grove" is a "pagan shrine for pleasure.1" Harper's Bible Dictionary describes "groves" as "places of worship of the pagan gods Baal and Astarte.2" The Hebrew word translated as "grove" is "asherah,3" indicating the grove was dedicated to Astarte (or Ashteroth), the pagan mother-goddess. The worship of Astarte was brutal and degenerate, with orgiastic sex rites, large phallic symbols, and human sacrifices (mostly of children).4
The "religion" of Baal featured sacrificing little children as part of the "worship" services.5. Another religion, the worship of Moloch, was also present in Israel. Moloch was a Canaanite deity of the inhabitants of Palestine whom the Israelites displaced under Joshua. God warned the Israelites not to practice the human sacrifice rites of Moloch-worship which the Canaanites used as part of their religion (Leviticus 18:21, 20:2-5). Some may think that the God of Israel was being cruel when he ordered the Israelites to kill or drive out all the Canaanites and remove every vestige of their religion when they entered the land under Joshua (Numbers 33:51-53). When one understands that the Canaanites were people who murdered their own children as part of religious services, one can see why God ordered the Israelites to utterly destroy both the adherents and the symbols of this degenerate religion. However, Moloch was again being worshipped in Israel during the latter years of Solomon (I Kings 11:7), and the rites of human sacrifice blended with the contagion of Baal worship in hastening Israel's degeneracy.
In the modern world, there is a myth that "all religions are equal," but reality shows that some religions are terribly destructive to their adherents, others reduce the "faithful" to poverty and starvation, and some do uplift their practitioners to a higher standard of conduct and morals (benefitting the societies that embrace such religions). In ancient times, the worship of the God of Israel was one which greatly benefitted its adherents (witness the peace, wealth and prosperity of Solomon's reign in his faitMil years), while Baalism was one of the most malignant religions ever devised.
God warned the Israelites that if they did not destroy this religion and its practitioners when they came into Canaan, they would be corrupted by its practices, and then God would "do unto you [Israel] what I thought to do unto them [Canaanites]" (Numbers 33:53-56). This came to pass in the reign of Ahab. Just as God was determined to drive the Canaanites out of the land for their gross sins, he began to drive out the Israelites also.
Whereas the army of Judah under Jehoshaphat numbered over a milhon men at this time, king Ahab of Israel could barely muster 7,000 soldiers (I Kings 20:15). It was noted above that many Israelites from the ten tribes of Israel had moved to Judah, and that as many as 600,000 Israelites served in Jehoshaphat's army of Judah instead of continuing in Israel's service. Given the grievous corruption in Israel's top echelons, virtually all the decent people forsook Israel to serve Judah's king instead. Anyone who wanted to avoid raising their children in an environment where they and their playmates could be murdered by the state religion moved! The fact that so many moved to Judah is a testimony that many of the common folk among the ten tribes of Israel were still decent people even though the leadership of Israel had become hopelessly rotten.
A by-product of this mass migration from Israel to Judah is that Judah and Israel temporarily enjoyed cordial relations (II Chronicles 18:1). Ahab was so weak he had no choice, and Jehoshaphat likely felt it was wise to be on good terms with Israel to ensure that the many Israelites in his own army remained loyal to him. Since Israel was still allied to the Phoenician city-states and likely to Egypt as well (the calf-worship of Egypt was still officially sanctioned in Israel), the old tri-partite alliance of Israel (now just the northern kingdom), Egypt and Phoenicia apparently survived in a weakened condition. We will soon examine historical evidence of this fact.
Ahab and his wicked wife Jezebel became worse and worse. One episode particularly indicates that Ahab appears to be a weak-willed leader who was dominated by a strong-willed, ruthless wife. Ahab wanted a particular field which belonged to a private citizen, but the private citizen didn't want to sell. Ahab sulked about the situation, but seemed willing to respect the rights of the citizen not to sell his land to the king. However, when Jezebel heard of it, she simply had the citizen murdered and gave the land to Ahab (I Kings 21).
The situation cried out for God's action, and he sent a prophet named Elijah who became the nemesis of Ahab and Jezebel. Elijah declared that Israel would be punished for its sins by a national drought, and I Kings 18:1 and James 5:17 record that this drought lasted for three and one-half years!
Before examining the effects of this drought, let us consider the evidence that Israel, though weakened, still was the titular head of a considerable empire. We saw in the previous chapter that Israel's empire and influence (built with the cooperation of Egypt, Tyre and Sidon), had explored and colonized parts of Europe, Africa, and North America. Israel's adoption of the pagan gods of Phoenicia (Tyre and Sidon) and Egypt cemented Israel's alliance with them. Israel had inherited the foreign Hebrew dominions (which were colonized mostly with people from the northern ten tribes), while Judah was "shut out" of their old alliance.
Since Israel adopted both the Baal worship of the Phoenicians, and the calf-worship of the Egyptians, the religious bonds would have acted to keep the three nations united. The presence in North America (ancient Iowa) of a trilingual ancient stele depicting a pagan religious ceremony from approximately 800-700 B.C. supports this contention.6. Dr. Barry Fell, in his book America B.C., commented that the languages on this stele are Egyptian, Libyan (the sailors of the Egyptians) and "Iberian-Punic." Iberian-Punic is a Hebrew/ Phoenician language, and its presence in the New World indicates explorers from the Israelite/Tyrian/Sidonian alliance (and/or the Punic colonies of Israel) were still closely allied to the Egyptians during the time of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The Hebrew-Phoenician origin of this Punic language was noted by Dr. Fell, as he states that the stele had "some signs resembling Hebrew and others resembling Phoenician."7" On the same subject, Collier's Encyclopedia states:
"The Iberian language is extant in about one hundred inscriptions in a national alphabet generally believed to be of Phoenician origin. "8
There would have been no need for such tri-lingual inscriptions so far from the mideastern homelands of these nations unless Israel, Egypt, Tyre and Sidon (and their colonies) were still allied together throughout the world! Since their sailors ventured deep into the American Midwest during the period of the divided Hebrew kingdoms, (circa it indicates the worldwide impact of this alliance was still very great. Although Israel had suffered major reverses on land, the allied navies of Israel, Tyre, Sidon and Egypt still ruled the oceans.
Dr. Fell noted that this ancient Iowan stele depicts a pagan religious ceremony honoring the Egyptian deities Osiris and Ra which involved human sacrifices. The fact that one of the stele languages is associated with the Iberian-Punic variant of the Hebrew/ Phoenician tongue shows that the Israelite/Phoenician colonies in Europe and North Africa may have assumed greater autonomy over their own activities in the Atlantic region. This is consistent with the decline and fall of the kingdom of Israel. Interestingly, Dr. Fell wrote that this ancient stele was mistakenly branded a "forgery" by a scientific establishment which at the time of its discovery could neither comprehend nor translate the ancient languages contained on the stele.9
A critical (but unappreciated) fact needs to be reiterated at this point to understand why the ten-tribed kingdom of Israel is generally unrecognized in ancient historical accounts. It cannot be overemphasized that from the time that Israel and Judah became separate, Hebrew kingdoms, they became intensely estranged from one another. Although they experienced interludes of cordial relations, they generally remained enemies. At the very time they separated, the first Israelite king (Jeroboam) sought to sever cultural and religious ties between the Israelite and Jewish kingdoms by replacing God's Holy Days with pagan festivals (which would keep the Israelites of the northern kingdom from travelling to Jerusalem, the Jewish capital). As time went by, Israel became ever more intertwined with the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon, adopting their worship of Baal and Astarte. The Israelite and Phoenician royal houses intermarried, and their economies had long been closely linked with one another. During this time, Judah had several good kings who perpetuated the worship of God, causing Judah to have less and less in common with Israel.
Therefore, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah not only became politically separate from one another, but also drifted apart from each other religiously, economically, and culturally. Since the economic, religious and cultural life of Israel was, for centuries, linked to Tyre and Sidon (not Judah), the ten tribes of Israel in the northern kingdom would have also become progressively more like the Phoenicians linguistically as well! Therefore, the language of the ten tribes of Israel would have become increasingly more like that of the Phoenicians, with whom they had constant, close interaction. Their language would have been increasingly less like that of Judah, with whom they had generally hostile relations.
Indeed, the languages of those tribes of Israel whose homelands directly bordered Phoenician territory would have become linguistically so like the Phoenicians that they would have become virtually indistinguishable from the Phoenicians. By the time the kingdom of Israel fell, Judah's language would still be "Hebrew," but the language of the ten tribes of Israel would be more like (and in the case of some tribes, exactly like) the Phoenician/Punic language! For this reason, after their separation from Judah, the descendants of the ten tribes of Israel would increasingly be found in those places where the language was labelled "Phoenician," "Punic," or "Iberian-Punic." For this reason, the ancient stele found in Iowa which included an inscription in "Iberian-Punic... [with] some signs resembling Hebrew and others resembling Phoenician" is a testimony to the fact that the Israelites had so intermingled with the people of Sidon and Tyre that their language exhibited traits of both tongues.
The tri-lingual stele found in Iowa offers strong evidence in support of the Bible's records that the ten tribes of Israel, after their split with Judah, remained closely linked to Phoenicia and Egypt in a powerful ancient alliance. The "Phoenician Empire" lasted only during the centuries that the little city-states of Tyre, Sidon, etc. were allied to the Israelites (who provided the population base to build an empire). As soon as the ten tribes of Israel left Palestine, "Phoenicia" ceased to be an empire because most of its population base was gone.
Another ancient stele was found in Oklahoma (perhaps as old as 800 B.C.) which included an Iberian-Punic inscription, and mentioned both the Israelite/Phoenician god Baal and the Egyptian god Ra.10 This further indicates that the Egyptians were cooperating with the Semitic alliance of Israel and Phoenicia in the New World during the centuries that followed King Solomon's reign. Also, the Israelite/ Phoenician sex worship associated with the "mother-goddess" was well established on ancient American soil. Phallic symbols, relics and inscriptions of the "mother-goddess" religion (the religion of King Ahab and Queen Jezebel of Israel) have been found, photographed and detailed in the former Phoenician colony in the New England region of ancient America.11. The fact that one of the representations of the ancient American mother-goddess is Tanith, the Carthaginian mother-goddess who was worshipped as the spouse of Baal,12, will become significant in the next chapter. Carthage, like Gades, was a Semitic colony of the Israelite/Phoenician alliance, but it was not founded until the century when King Ahab ruled Israel.
One of the fertility sites in ancient America is described by Dr. Fell as "an open-air fertility precinct." In other words, it was what the Bible called a "grove," an outdoor "pagan shrine for pleasure."13
Fell also observes concerning an ancient phallus-stone found in Vermont:
"The Celtic festival of Beltane, held on May Day, originally in pagan times included revels danced around an erect phallus. In Europe, after Christianity was introduced, the phallus was replaced by a maypole."14
This is remarkably similar to the ceremony which is depicted on the artifact with the ancient trilingual inscription found in Iowa. The photograph of this stele depicts people dancing around a central erect column (a phallic symbol), with a sundisc (a symbol of Baal, the sun-god) overhead, and the prone bodies of human sacrifices on the ground (a principal feature of Baal worship).15 The Celts were Semitic (Celtiberians, Britons, etc.)16 people from Israel/Phoenicia's colonial areas in Europe, and they cooperated with their kinsmen, the Carthaginians (Punic, Iberian-Punic, etc.), in frequenting the pagan temples in the New World as Israel declined into oblivion in the eastern Mediterranean. In the Celtic name, "Beltane," we see the root word of the ancient Phoenician/Israelite sun god: Baal. In other words, we see in these ancient American archeological records that Baal worship, which was deeply rooted in Israel/Phoenicia, had also permeated the ancient European and American colonies founded by Israel/Phoenicia. The above evidence confirms the idolatrous degeneracy of the Israelites as recorded in the Bible. [As an aside, modern readers may be justifiably disquieted by the realization that the "maypole" of May Day festivities preserves the imagery of an erect phallus from ancient sex-worship rites.]
We now resume the narrative of Israel's decline in the middle of the ninth century B.C. during the reign of King Ahab of Israel. Ahab was a particularly bad king in an unbroken progression of evil kings who ruled Israel, and his wife Jezebel (a Phoenician princess) was worse yet!
God intervened by sending Elijah to Israel when the degeneration of Israel reached intolerable levels. It was by Elijah's word that the three and one-half year drought occurred in Israel (I Kings 17:1, James 5:17). During this period of time the water sources dried up, there was scarcely any vegetation left, and severe starvation gripped both Israel and the Phoenician city-states (I Kings 17:7-12, 18:5).
Since Israel was generally a food exporter (Ezekiel 27:17), this drought must have caused unprecedented hardship upon a nation used to an abundance of food. Tyre and Sidon had relatively small populations,17 and therefore had fewer people to feed than the larger kingdom of Israel. Nevertheless, I Kings 17:8-12 shows that even Tyre and Sidon were in desperate straits as starvation was occurring in the suburbs of Sidon. The situation would have been absolutely catastrophic for Israel with its much larger population. Much of Israel's population faced a brutally simple choice: either stay in Israel and die, or migrate elsewhere and live. People's desire for self-preservation being what it is, much of the population simply had to leave to begin life over somewhere else. We have already seen that those who "feared God" and wanted no part of Baal worship had migrated to Judah where King Jehoshaphat ruled according to God's laws. The fact that little Judah could support a population that included military reserves of over one million men provides ample evidence that the drought did not affect Judah! This was a stark contrast between the two Hebrew nations, and daily proof of God's role in the drought. He gave rain to Judah (which obeyed God) while he denied rain to Israel (with its Baal worship), even though Israel and Judah directly bordered each other.
As was demonstrated in previous chapters, international commerce and travel in the ancient world was far more developed than modern man has generally realized. We now know that transoceanic travel between the Old World and the New World was well established by the time of Elijah and Ahab. Indeed, during this time of drought, King Ahab made an intense search to locate the prophet Elijah who had gone into hiding. I Kings 18:10 states that when Elijah came out of hiding, an aide to King Ahab told Elijah that:
"As the Lord your God lives, there is no nation or kingdom whither my lord has not sent to seek you; and when they say, 'he is not here,' he would take an oath of the kingdom or nation, that they had not found you." (RSV)
That King Ahab would send messengers to "all nations" to look for Elijah is reasonable when we realize that the missing prophet could have easily booked passage to distant lands via the commercial maritime routes of that time. Since it would be logical to assume that Elijah had journeyed far from Israel to hide from King Ahab, the above biblical statement includes the possibility that Ahab sent messengers to the Israelite/Phoenician colonies in Europe, Africa and North America to look for Elijah. In fact, the elusive Elijah had hidden in a place that Ahab would least expect to find him: in a suburb of Jezebel's home town of Sidon, the very heart of the pagan religion that was destroying Israel (I Kings 17:9).
Nevertheless, since we have seen evidence of ancient Hebrews, Phoenicians and Egyptians in widespread areas of North America, an assumption by Ahab that Elijah had fled to a completely different continent would have been understandable. Since the navies of Israel, Tyre and Sidon sailed throughout the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean, and since the ancient Egyptians sailed into the Indian and Pacific Oceans, a statement that king Ahab (who was one of the co-rulers of the alliance that commanded these navies) searched "in all nations of the earth" for Elijah can not be dismissed as an exaggeration.
The fact that King Ahab of Israel was able to exact an oath from the nations of the earth indicates that the king of Israel still had some "clout" among the nations. If he had been an impotent little potentate, he would have been ignored. While Israel's homeland could only support a "skeleton crew" during the drought, the remainder of its population (much of it still loyal to Ahab and Baal-worship) could easily have relocated to Israel's colonies. While those Israelites who served God sought refuge in the Jewish kingdom of Judah, those Israelites "who served Baal" likely sought refuge from the drought in Israel's far-flung "Phoenician" colonies where Baal was worshipped.
Undoubtedly, some of Israel's refugees found new homes in Israel's colonies in Spain, Briton, Ireland, and even North America. Since most Israelites had abandoned their distinctly Hebrew religious practices, they would have been indistinguishable from the "Phoenician" colonists in their new lands. With the culture, religion and even the dialect of Tyre and Sidon, migrating Israelites would have quickly lost their Israelite identity, and would be known to us today simply as "Phoenicians", "Iberians," "Celts," Celtiberians," etc. However, these colonies could only accommodate so many new arrivals, and the majority of refugees (the elderly, those with small children, etc.) surely did not wish to travel any further than was necessary. Many would have sought refuge in the numerous (and relatively close) North African colonies of the "Phoenician" Empire, which had been founded during the time of Israelite power "from B.C. 1100 to B.C. 800."18 However, so many Israelites (and Tyrians and Sidonians) needed to emigrate from their parched homelands that a large new colony was needed.
During the same century as the great drought of Elijah, a large exodus of Israelites (accompanied by people from the smaller city-states of Tyre and Sidon) sailed along the North African coast and founded the new Hebrew colony of Kirjath-Hadeschath (the Romans later called it Carthage). Carthage's origin as a colony of Israelite refugees from the catastrophic drought in Israel has not been appreciated. Why did the "Phoenicians" establish a large, new colony in the ninth century B.C. when they already had many established colonies and trading posts in the Mediterranean region? Clearly, they had a compelling reason to remove a large number of people out of their homeland and resettle them elsewhere. The devastating drought of Elijah's time would make such a massive resettlement effort necessary.
While a mythological account of Carthage's founding (the "legend of Dido" which attributes roles to deities of the Pagan pantheon) exists, the fact remains that Carthage was founded with Hebrew names, Hebrew customs and the Hebrew language. These facts (extensively documented in chapter five) confirm the primarily Hebrew nature of Carthage at the time of its founding.
While it is recorded that the original Hebrew name of Carthage was Kirjath-Hadeschath,19 it eventually came to be known to the Greeks as "Karchedon," and to the Romans as "Carthago."20 Since ancient history is taught in the modern, western world from a Greco-Roman viewpoint, we today know Israel's colony by its Roman name instead of its original Hebrew name. Therefore, scarcely anyone realizes that Carthage originally had a Hebrew name.
Since it is known that Carthage was founded by people with a Hebrew culture in the ninth century B.C.,21 and since the Bible states that there were many starving Hebrews in the kingdom of Israel in the ninth century B.C. with a dire need for a new homeland due to the drought of Elijah, the likely connection between the two events becomes clear.
It is important to realize that the Hebrews who founded Carthage were Israelites from the northern kingdom of Israel; they were not Jews from the southern kingdom of Judah. As discussed above, Judah's population (and its Israelite irnmigrants) had no need to migrate as Judah's King Jehoshaphat was loyal to God, and God was not punishing Judah at that time (I Kings 22:41-43). The biblical accounts speak of the drought affecting Israel's and Sidon's territory, but not the territory of Judah.
Finally, the drought ended after Elijah's famous confrontation with the priests of Baal. I Kings 18:20-46 records the episode in which Elijah challenged the priests of Baal to see whether God or Baal was more powerful. In this test, Baal and God were both asked to send fire to consume a sacrifice of oxen. The priests of Baal made frenzied appeals to Baal, and even cut themselves till they were bloody. This practice of cutting themselves was common among the worshippers of Baal and Astarte.22 After they failed to accomplish anything, Elijah called on God to consume the offering with heavenly fire, and he did so. When God did consume the offering with fire, the crowd was shocked into an acknowledgment that the God of Israel was greater than Baal, and their loyalty to Baal was shaken. In an atmosphere where the people were likely afraid that God might also consume them for their Baal-worshipping past, they cooperated with Elijah in executing 450 priests of Baal. This execution of 450 priests was appropriate given the fact that these priests of Baal had probably murdered thousands of innocent children in their rituals of human sacrifice.
It is doubtful that the kingdom of Israel ever truly recovered from the extreme drought in Ehjah's time. The exodus of so many Israelites from their native land greatly reduced the population and military resources of the kingdom of Israel in its homeland. While some Israelites surely returned to Israel when the drought was over, many would have remained in Israel's colonies to pursue their new lives. Israel's new weakness was quite obvious to Israel's enemies. The Bible details a number of wars between Israel and the Syrians. I Kings 20 relates that an outnumbered Israelite army of 7,232 men crushed an alliance of thirty-two Aramaean kings and killed 100,000 enemy soldiers in a single battle during the latter portion of Ahab's reign. Verse 13 shows that God intervened to help the Israelite nation win this battle in spite of Ahab's personal wickedness.
During this time, Judah was periodically allied with Israel in wars against the Syrians (I Kings 22:1-4). Why did righteous King Jehoshaphat of Judah ally himself to wicked King Ahab of Israel? To reiterate, the answer was likely political. There were about 600,000 armed Israelites living in Judah, and Jehoshaphat may have feared a revolt if he asked them to war against their native Israel. Also, although Judah was dominant on the land, Israel (a leading member of the maritime "Phoenician" alliance) and its colonies were dominant on the seas. Judah, therefore, needed goodwill with King Ahab to ensure its access to the world's maritime commercial routes. King Jehoshaphat even allied himself to Ahab's wicked successor, Ahaziah of Israel, in an attempt to reconstruct a major fleet at Ezion-geber. This was probably an effort by Jehoshaphat to rebuild the glory and power that Judah experienced under King Solomon, who also based a large fleet at Ezion-geber. I Kings 22:48-49 and II Chronicles 20:35-37 record that this fleet was destroyed by God himself, who withheld his blessing from the effort because Jehoshaphat was too willing to ally himself to Israel's wicked kings.
The Assyrians also waged war upon Israel and its surrounding nations during the latter portion of Ahab's reign. An alhance of King Ahab's Israelites, various Aramaean kings and Ammonites stopped an Assyrian invasion under Shalmaneser III at the battle of Karkar (or "Qarqar") in about 854 B.C.23 Those who do not understand Israel's previously dominant position in the ancient world may assume that Ahab was at Karkar merely as an ally of the Syrians. Actually, according to the Assyrian accounts of the battle, Ahab contributed 2000 chariots, the largest force of chariots in the anti-Assyrian alliance.24 This shows that Israel, Syria, and the other nations in the region were able temporarily to put aside their rivalries to face Assyria, the greater threat from the East. It is remarkable that this alliance was still able to fight Assyria to a draw, despite Israel's depletions.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica records that the Assyrian annals of the period confirm that many of the personalities mentioned by the Bible (Kings Omri, Ahab and Jehu of Israel, and Kings Ben-hadad and Hazael of Syria) were, indeed, real people.25
The Bible has much good to say about Judah's King Jehoshaphat, one of the nation's best kings. I Kings 22:46 and II Chronicles 19 record that he restored the worship of God, rooted out Baalism, appointed impartial judges, and extradited sodomites from the nation. As a direct consequence of taking such actions, Jehoshaphat and Judah were blessed with wealth, peace and God's protection. However, Jehoshaphat's alliances with Israel's wicked kings began to weaken Judah after Jehoshaphat's death. The royal houses of Israel and Judah intermarried under King Jehoshaphat as Jehoshaphat's son, Jehoram, the next King of Judah, married a daughter of king Ahab of Israel (II Kings 8:16-18). Jehoram departed from God and embraced Baalism. He died eight years later, unmourned and in great agony as his "bowels fell out by reason of his sickness" which God had sent upon him (II Chronicles 21:19-20). The mother of Ahaziah, the next wicked king of Judah, was Athaliah, a princess of the kingdom of Israel (II Kings 8:25-26).
Kong Ahab and Jezebel eventually both died violent deaths, Ahab died in combat, and Jezebel died after being thrown out a window by her servants (II Kings 9:30-37). Jehu, who instigated Jezebel's death, became King of Israel, and led a brief and bloody return to the God of Israel. Besides ordering the death of Jezebelj'he killed both the wicked king of Israel and Ahaziah, the wicked king of Judah. He further arranged the beheading of 70 sons of Ahab and the execution of all of Ahab's relatives. He also ordered the execution of
Israel's priests of Baal, turned the temple of Baal into a public toilet-house, and expunged Baalism from the kingdom of Israel (II Kings 9-10). Jehu's revival was half-hearted, however, as he permitted the calf-worship of Egypt to continue. It was not long before Israel degenerated further.
There is a sober lesson for national rulers here. God does periodically deal personally with national rulers: to bless them for good actions and punish them for evil actions. God killed King Jehoram via a ghastly illness, and prophesied both the destruction of King Ahab's dynasty (II Kings 10:10-11), and Jezebel's assassination (II Kings 9:30-36). God is patient, but his patience eventually does run out on evil rulers and evil nations.
The brief alliance of Israel and Judah, formed in the reigns of Kings Ahab and Jehoshaphat, fell apart as the two Hebrew nations again became enemies. II Kings 14:23-29 records that Israel did enjoy a resurgence of power, including a restoration of Israel's rule over the Aramaean cities of Damascus and Hamath, during the 41-year reign of King Jeroboam II.
The two Hebrew kingdoms fought another gruesome war near the end of Israel's existence as an independent nation in which the Israelites, under King Pekah, killed 120,000 Jews in one day (II Chronicles 28:5-6). This war occurred at a time when Judah was sinking deeply into the depravities of Baal worship during the reign of King Ahaz. The Israelites were in the process of carrying 200,000 Jews captive into Israel when God intervened and, through a prophet, caused the Israelites to release the Jewish captives (II Chronicles 28:9-15). What is remarkable is that the Israelites heeded the prophet, and did what God directed them to do. After this time, Judah had a few good kings and several very degenerate kings. Israel, however, was nearing its end.
After being weakened by a series of Assyrian invasions, the kingdom of Israel ended when the Assyrians captured Samaria (Israel's capital) in approximately 721 B.C. It is a common misconception that "all Israel" was carried into captivity when Samaria fell in 721 B.C.. As we will see, the Bible and Assyrian records agree that only a small number of Israelites went into captivity when Samaria fell. In fact, most of the Israelites that were carried captive were taken away during the reign of King Pekah when an Assyrian invasion made captives of a large portion of Israel's population (dates on this event vary, but it was approximately 735 B.C..)
II Kings 15:29 states that King Tiglath-pileser of Assyria invaded Israel in an unspecified year of King Pekah's reign, and took captive the entire tribe of Naphtali, and those Israelites who lived in Galilee, Gilead, etc. Gilead was the term for Israelite homelands east of the Jordan River, and it was inhabited by the tribes of Reuben, Gad and one-half the tribe of Manasseh (Numbers 32:1-33). I Chronicles 5:26 confirms that Gad, Reuben and half of Manasseh went captive to King Tiglath-pileser.
Besides the above tribes, other Israelites near Galilee were also carried captive at this time. The tribes of Zebulon and Issachar lived in that region, and contingents of these tribes were likely carried into captivity. Perhaps a third or more of Israel's population was carried captive at this time. I Chronicles 5:26 records that this large number of Israelites were resettled in "Halah, Habor, and Hara and to the river Gozan." When Samaria fell in 721 B.C., II Kings 17:6 states that its defenders were also carried captive to the same locations as well as to "the cities of the Medes." Since Samaria was built in the area of the tribe of Ephraim, those IsraeUtes going into captivity when Samaria fell were most likely Ephraimites.
Halah, Habor and Gozan were in the Mesopotamian region of the Assyrian Empire, but "the cities of the Medes" were located southwest of the Caspian Sea (in modern Iran). It is likely that the Assyrians resettled the Israehte captives in several areas of their empire in order to prevent them from consolidating their strength for purposes of a rebelhon. According to Harper's Bible Dictionary, archaeological finds in ancient Gozan confirm the arrival of captive IsraeUtes in that city as "texts [were found which] mention some of the exiles' descendants."26
Many of Israel's and Judah's rulers are specifically named in Assyrian annals as real historical kings. Halley's Bible Handbook notes that:
"In these [Assyrian] annals names of ten Hebrew kings occur: Omri, Ahab, Jehu, Menahem, Pekah, Hoshea, Uzziah, Ahaz, Hezekiah and Manasseh..."27
Of the above kings, the first six were kings of the northern ten-tribed kingdom of Israel, and the last four were kings of the Jewish kingdom of Judah. Assyrian cuneiform records also confirm the statement of II Kings 15:29 that the entire tribe of Naphtali was taken captive in the Assyrian invasion of Tiglath-pileser over a decade prior to Samaria's fall.28 The fact that Assyrian accounts mention by name ten of the kings of Israel and Judah and also record that the whole tribe of NapthaU went into captivity en masse demonstrate that the historical accounts of the Bible are, indeed, accurate.
While perhaps a third or more of Israel's population had been taken captive by Tiglath-pileser in approximately 734 B.C., relatively few people were taken captive when Samaria later fell. II Kings 17:5 states the king of Assyria:
"went throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and besieged it three years." (KJV)
Although the Bible declares the Assyrians "went throughout all the land," the only mention of any resistance to them was at the city of Samaria. This indicates that while the Assyrians went throughout the whole land of Israel, they found Israelites only in the capital city of Samaria. The cuneiform records of the Assyrians claim only 27,290 captives in this final campaign, all of whom came from Samaria.29 The Assyrians claimed no captives other than the residents of Samaria. Since the Assyrian kings were not at all modest in their victory statements, we can be sure that they would not have failed to record additional Israelite captives if there had been any!
We know that a third or more of the Israelites were taken captive by Tiglath-pileser, and that another 29,290 Israelites were taken captive when Samaria fell over a decade later. A total of barely 29,000 captives from the fall of one city is a rather puny amount of captives. The obvious question is: What happened to the rest of the inhabitants of the kingdom of Israel? Where did they go?
Only a few years previously, the Israelites had still been numerous enough to kill 120,000 Jews in a war, and would have brought 200,000 captive Jews to Israel had not God intervened to stop it. The Assyrian "catch" of 27,290 Israelites in Samaria was a paltry sum in light of the above numbers. Obviously, the whole remaining nation of Israel could not fit within the walls of the city of Samaria, so what happened to the rest of Israel's inhabitants?
The Bible's account lists the tribes of Naphtali, Gad, Reuben, half of Manasseh, elements of other tribes, and the residents of the capital city of Samaria as having "gone into captivity." The Assyrians mention the Naphthalites and the Samarians by name as captives in their annals. But neither the Bible nor the Assyrian records make any claims that the remainder of the Israelite nation went into captivity! In fact, II Kings 17:5 shows that the Assyrians "went throughout all the land," but found resistance (and captives) in only the city of Samaria. II Kings 17:25 states that lions had become numerous in the former territory of the kingdom of Israel (indicating that the numbers of wild prey species had to be even more numerous) when Assyria settled people from foreign lands to inhabit Israel's abandoned cities. A large increase in wild animals is typical of a land abandoned by its human population.
What apparently happened was that the remainder of the war-weary Israelites finally abandoned their land and cities just prior to Assyria's last invasion. Let us review the list of tribes unaccounted for in the Bible's accounts of who went into captivity. The missing tribes include Asher, Zebulon, Issachar, Dan, Simeon, Ephraim and half the tribe of Manasseh. Only a tiny fraction of these Israelites could have sought refuge in the walled city of Samaria to oppose the Assyrians. The obvious conclusion is that the remaining tribes of Israel fled the land voluntarily, not as captives.
Put yourself in their place. If you knew another large Assyrian invasion was coming, and you were painfully aware that your homeland of Israel was becoming untenable, what would you choose to do? Would you stay and oppose the Assyrians in a last-ditch effort knowing that you would become either a corpse or a captive? Or would you rather migrate with your families to new homelands where you could remain free and start over again? Obviously, the latter option is what most of them chose. Only a few thousand die-hards stayed to withstand a siege in the capital city. Either they were stubborn Israelites who refused to abandon their land, or they were a heroic rear-guard who engaged the Assyrian army for three years (allowing their countrymen time to flee without pursuit).
Those who chose to leave the doomed kingdom of Israel had many potential destinations as options for new homelands. We have already seen that the "Phoenician" alliance of Israel, Tyre and Sidon had established many colonies in North Africa, Spain, other Mediterranean locations, the British Isles and even as far as North America. Any of these could have served as new homelands. In the ninth century B.C. so many Israelites voluntarily left Israel during the drought of Elijah to settle in these colonies that it was necessary to found a completely new colony (Carthage) to host all the refugees. Many people likely had relatives in these mostly Israelite colonies, and could start afresh with very little "culture-shock" as the language, customs, and religion of those colonies were essentially the same as those of Israel. Carthage (now approximately a century old) probably received the majority of Israelites fleeing to Israel's colonies due to its relative closeness. The fact that Carthage rose to great power in the centuries after the fall of Israel also indicates it received a major infusion of people when Israel fell.
Some might conclude that many Israelites would flee to Judah. After all, Judah had 620,000 Israelites in its army who had fled Israel during King Ahab's wicked rule. However, at that earlier time Judah was ruled by good kings and Israel and Judah were allied nations. At the time of Israel's demise Judah also had wicked kings, and Israel and Judah were again enemies. Flight to Judah was not an option for another reason. Judah was contiguous to the very area that Assyria's troops were going to invade, so it offered no real security. What was needed were places of refuges far away from Assyrian armies.
Historical evidence has long existed concerning the voluntary migrations of the rest of the Israelites at this time, but such evidence has largely been ignored or forgotten. Let us reexajnine some of that historical evidence.
Judges 5:17 records that the tribe of Dan had a strong sea-faring heritage, and their main homeland was on the Mediterranean seacoast. In the previous chapter, we saw evidence that the seafaring tribe of Dan was known to the Greeks as the Danaans of the Eastern Mediterranean. As a maritime tribe, it would be especially easy for many Danites to sail away from Israel in their ships. Much of the tribe of Dan apparently sailed as far as Hibernia (modern Ireland) in their effort to quit the area. Their arrival in considerable force in Hibernia as the Tuatha De Danaans is recorded in the early histories of Ireland.30
The battles of the Danaans to establish a new homeland in Ireland have even been recorded in the annals of ancient Irish history. In her book, Ireland, Emily Lawless cited these ancient historical records that the Danaans fought a three-day battle against the Firbolgs which centered around a hill called Ben-levi, after which they built many stone forts.31 "Ben-levi" is of obvious Hebrew origin as it includes the name of the Israelite tribe of Levi. J.H. Allen's Judah s Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright records that "the greatest influx of the Tuatha de Danaan to Ireland" occurred around 720 B.C., just after the fall of Samaria.32
The Irish islands called the Arans still have remains of old forts bearing the name of the tribe of Dan. Two forts on the Arans are called Dun Aonghasa and Dun Chonchuir. Ancient Hebrew did not write vowels so the vowels "u" in these words was added later. It is the consonants D-N which preserve the name of "Dan." These forts have an antiquity "certainly predating Christ," and "had been crumbling for long centuries before the Arans entered recorded history."33 They have been attributed to the Firbolgs at the time of "the legendary early invasions of Ireland,"34 although the name D-N attached to the castles indicates they may have been constructed (or conquered) by the Danaans, the tribe of Dan. Since the tribe of Dan had a habit of renaming existing geographic features after their tribal name when they came into an area (Judges 19:47), it is possible these forts were, indeed, built by the Firbolgs, and renamed after the Danites conquered them. History has no record that the Danaans ever moved again after their arrival in Ireland.
As an interesting digression, it is clear that the Irish have not forgotten their Danaan roots as a 1980s Irish band in Minneapolis named itself "De Danaan,"35 There was also an intriguing account in U.S. News and World Report Magazine which, noting the presence of then New York Mayor Ed Koch (a prominent American Jew) in the 1987 St. Patrick's Day parade, added that Mayor Koch:
"explained his presence at the head of the grand parade thusly: 'It's part of my roots. The 10 lost tribes of Israel we believe ended up in Ireland. ' "36
Ancient records indicate that only the tribe of Dan arrived in Ireland at the time of the fall of Samaria, however. Also, at that same time, a large portion of the Israelite tribe of Simeon chose a maritime escape from the Assyrians. Coinciding with the arrival of the Tuatha de Danaan in Ireland, the Simonii landed in Wales and Southern England in 720 B.C.37 This date is also just after the fall of Samaria, and it is likely that the simultaneous arrival of the Danaan and the Simonii indicates that the tribes of Dan and Simeon sailed together for the British Isles. Since Briton had long been a Phoenician colony and port-of-call, and had been settled by and named for the "Covenant" (B-R-T) people centuries before the fall of Israel, it is logical that some Israelites would seek refuge there in a time of crisis.
J. H. Allen also notes that:
"...the people of Wales call themselves, in ancient Welsh, 'Bryth y Brithan,' or Briths of Briton,' which means 'The Covenanters' of the 'land of the Covenant.' The first form of this phrase is almost vernacular Hebrew. "38
The fact that these "Brythonic Celts" who migrated to the British Isles bore the Hebrew B-R-T root word for "covenant" confirmed their Israelite origin. These Israelite immigrants furnished much of the racial stock of early Celtic Briton. The Danaan and the Simonii were only part of the waves of Celtic immigrants which arrived in Briton over several centuries. Celtic tribes had settled throughout Europe for centuries, and some of these tribes continued to migrate to Briton.
Concerning the Celts in ancient Iberia (modern Spain and Portugal), the Encyclopedia Americana states:
"The Celtic migrations occurred as early as 1000 B.C. and as late as 600 B.C."39 (Emphasis added.)
This period of Celtic migration begins precisely with the Israelite golden age of Kings David and Solomon (when Israel began many colonies), includes the time of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah and the fall of Samaria, and ends just prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The striking parallels between the timing of Celtic migrations and the rise and fall of the Israelite kingdoms of Israel and Judah argues that these parallels are not coincidental. Many of these Celtic waves of immigration involved Israelites seeking new homelands (initially as colonists of the united kingdom of Israel and later as masses of refugees from Assyrian invasions). Gerhard Herm's book, The Celts, observes:
"...the first Celtic-speaking tribes came to Ireland as far back as the Hallstatt period. After the beginning of the La Tene era these were followed, via Britain, by other wandering hordes, who spoke a Brythonic, that is a P-Celtic, dialect. "40
The Encyclopedia Americana defines the Hallstatt period of Central Europe as being "about 1000 to 500 B.C...[and adds]...The people of the area were early Celts.. ."41 Again, the tirning of the Celtic migrations begins with the golden age of Israel under kings David and Solomon and ends after the fall of Jerusalem. If the waves of Celtic migrations into Europe migrations of Celts were entirely (or predominantly) Israelite, it follows that the Israelites fleeing Assyrian captivity in 720 B.C. would be well aware of the location of Israelite colonies in Europe or Briton to which they could flee.
These Celtic migrations took place over several centuries. Some were slow, overland rnigrations instead of the swift maritime migrations of the Danaan and SimoniL It is not the contention of this book that all ancient Celts were descended from Israel's tribes, but the evidence indicates that many of the migrating Celts were, indeed, Israelites. The Encyclopaedia Britannica records:
"The Celts moved westwards...and two divisions of them
reached the British Isles, namely the Brythons and the Goidels.
The Brythons crossed the channel and established themselves
in England and Wales but the Goidels, probably in the 4th
century B.C., passed directly from the mouth of the Loire...to
It is significant that large masses of Celtic people still bore in their name the Hebrew word for "Covenant" (the B-R-T or B-R-TH root word of Briton and Brythonic) even after the fall of Samaria. It is also significant that Briton (the land to which they were migrating) had borne the same Hebrew name for centuries prior to their arrival. It was likely no coincidence that the Brythonic Celts migrated toward a land that shared their tribal heritage. As refugees, they would logically migrate toward a land bearing their tribal name in the hopes of finding a hospitable homeland.
To sum up, this book concludes that large contingents of the Israelite tribes of Dan and Simeon (the Danaan and the Simonii) sought refuge in Ireland and Briton after abandoning their old homelands to the Assyrians. It further concludes that many of the succeeding waves of Celtic immigrants to Briton (particularly those named with the Hebrew root word for the "covenant" people) were also Israelites in search of a permanent homeland. This infusion of Israelites into early Briton ensured that the Hebrew word for "covenant" (B-R-T) would remain the name by which that Island was known to the rest of the world.
While sizeable contingents of the tribes of Dan and Simeon fled by sea to the British Isles, and other Israelites became Celtic migrants after the fall of Samaria, there is historical evidence that the main body of Israelites fleeing the kingdom of Israel took an overland route to their new homeland. They could not go east because of the Assyrian menace, there were not enough vessels to take everyone to new homelands, via maritime routes to the west, and Egyptian forces were dominant to the south. This left the north as the only realistic land route out of Palestine, and that is exactly where historical evidence says they went.
Colonel J. C. Gawler, a British government official during Queen Victoria's reign in the] nineteenth century (he was Keeper of the Crown Jewels), researched the fate of the northern ten tribes of Israel after the fall of Israel, and he cites both Jewish and Armenian historical sources who recorded that a mass of refugees from the ten tribes of Israelites migrated through Armenia into the region north of the Black Sea (then known by the general term "Tartary")43. Gawler also cited the following observation about Tartary by Abraham Ortellius, the famous sixteenth century geographer:
"In his description of Tartary, notes the kingdom of Arsareth, where the ten tribes retiring...took the name of Gauthei, because, he says, they were very jealous of the glory of God." (Emphasis added )44
Gawler also called attention to a passage in the apocryphal book of II Esdras which asserts that refugees of the ten tribes did, indeed, migrate to a new place called "Arzareth" (note the similarity to the place-name "Arsareth"). This passage (II Esdras 13:40-45) states:
"...these are the ten tribes that in the days of King Hoshea were carried away from their own land into captivity, whom Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, made captives, and carried beyond the river...But they formed this plan among themselves, to leave the heathen population, and go to a more distant region...so that there perhaps they might keep their statutes, which they had not kept in their own country. And they went in by the narrow passages of the Euphrates River. For the Most High then did wonders for them, for he held back the sources of the river until they had passed over. But it was a long journey of a year and a half to that country...called Arzareth." (Emphasis added.)45
This account of the Israelite migration parallels that of II Kings 17:1-6. The account of II Esdras indicates there was a mass of Israelites who escaped an impending Assyrian captivity and fled to "Arzareth" (a Black Sea region). Also noteworthy is the contention of II Esdras that this group of Israelites had repented of their sins, and was determined to obey God in their new homeland. Such a repentant attitude on the part of the ten tribes was foreshadowed in II Chronicles 28:5-15. During the reign of King Pekah of Israel (a few years prior to the fall of Samaria and the flight of all Israelites from Palestine), the ten tribes heeded a warning from a prophet of God to release 200,000 Jewish captives taken in a war with Judah. Verses 12-13 record that the leaders of the tribe of Ephraim (the chief tribe of Israel) directed that the people obey God's directive via the prophet. After centuries of disregarding any direction from God, it is remarkable that the Israelite people were again responding to God's direction just before Samaria fell.
Also noteworthy is the fact that the king of Israel, Pekah, had no role in the decision of the Israelites to obey God's prophet. II Chronicles 28:8-10 records the prophet, Obed, persuaded the Israelites to release their Jewish captives and return a prodigious amount of war booty to the Jews just as this army was arriving at Samaria, the home of king Pekah. King Pekah, an evil king (II Kings 15:27-28), was likely quite furious at the people's surrender of all this war booty (which Pekah thought was "his.")
The willingness of Israel's tribal leaders and the people to act without any apparent input from the king reveals that the people of the kingdom of Israel felt little or no allegiance to their corrupt kings just prior to their exit from Palestine. The fact that many people of the ten tribes exhibited a wholesale disregard for their king's authority just prior to their flight from Palestine offers a possible explanation for the general disappearance of the Israelites during the last Assyrian invasion. Perhaps the king and his reduced band of loyalists stayed in Samaria to resist the Assyrians while most of the war-weary Israelites made a complete break with the king and followed their tribal leaders northward to seek a new homeland.
II Esdras attributes their escape from Assyria to divine help in crossing the Euphrates River, and adds that their journey took a year and a half. Since their escape route was mountainous, and since they had women, children and elderly along, such a journey would be both arduous and time-consuming. The account of II Esdras is consistent with the account of Ortellius that this body of the ten tribes was "very jealous of God," and that of II Chronicles 28 showing the Israelites were then responsive to a prophet of God. Indeed, if God miraculously assisted their escape, it would explain why these migrating Israelites were "very jealous of God" in their new homeland. It would also explain the complete silence in Assyrian annals concerning the unexplained disappearance of most Israelites during their final invasion of Israel. Assyria would have been loathe to record that the God of Israel supernaturally delivered the migrating Israelites, so they limited their bragging to the small band of Israelites captured in Samaria.
The role attributed to God is also consistent with his past actions in blessing Israelite migrations. When the tribes of Israel fled Egyptian captivity to embark on a journey to Palestine, God parted the waters of the Red Sea so they could escape their pursuers (Exodus 14:21-22). When they were about to enter Palestine, God parted the waters of the River Jordan (Joshua 3:11-17). If God parted the Euphrates River to rescue the Israelites from pursuing Assyrians and open the way for their northward migration to a new homeland, it would be consistent with God's past actions in behalf of Israelites who were migrating in obedience to his will. Because II Chronicles 28 records that the last generation of Israelites in Palestine obeyed God's directive through a prophet, it begs the following question. Was this Israelite migration out of Palestine also prompted by a message from a prophet a few years later? If the Israelites were migrating in obedience to a message from God, it would explain God's willingness to perform a miracle to assist them because they were once again submitting to his leadership.
As we shall see in chapter six, this group of Israelites came to be known as "Scythians" by the Greeks and they were not characterized by the degenerate practices of Baal worship. In fact, we shall see that they were known for their wise laws and the avoidance of swine's flesh. The above indicates that this mass of refugees from the ten tribes did repent of their Baal worship, and genuinely returned to God.
Gawler also cited the testimony of a medieval Jewish historian named Eldad, "a Jewish writer who sent to the Spanish Jews his memoirs of the ten tribes."46 Eldad stated that these Israelites who migrated via an overland route did so in considerable force. He wrote:
"that many of the people did not go into captivity, but evaded the calamity, going off with their flocks, and turning nomads, and that the chief or prince whom they appointed could muster 120,000 horse and 100,000 foot." 47
This account further documents the escape of a large body of the ten tribes of Israel when they abandoned Palestine to the Assyrians. Since the Israelites in this migration had 220,000 armed soldiers, one can conservatively estimate the number of Israelites in this body to be around a million people when the number of women, children and elderly are included. Based on the biblical and secular historical records of what happened to the other tribes, this body of Israelites likely included the half-tribe of Manasseh which lived on the west side of the Jordan River, most of the tribes of Ephraim, Asher, Zebulon, and Issachar, and a small portion of the tribe of Dan which lived in the northern part of Palestine.
As this large group of Israelites resettled in the Black Sea region, they assumed new identities, but many key factors made them readily identifiable as Hebrews. The region to the east of the Black Sea (and north of Armenia) came to be known as Iberia,48 confirming the presence of Hebrews from the ten tribes in that region. The Hebrews had given the old Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain the name Iberia (after Eber, the namesake of the Hebrews), and it has long been called the Iberian Peninsula. The name of a modern Spanish river (the Ebro) still preserves the name of Eber, and is a reminder of the Hebrew ("Phoenician") presence in the ancient Iberian Peninsula.
The appearance of the same Hebrew name (Iberia) in the region north of Armenia verifies that this region became an area of Israelite resettlement for those who escaped Assyrian captivity by voluntary flight. While information about the kingdom of Iberia in the Asian Caucasus region rarely appears in modern histories, it is shown on a map on Armenian history in the Encyclopedia Americana.49Tb.at map represents the dimensions of Iberia's size several centuries after the arrival of the Israelites, and at a time when most Israelites had migrated out of that area into South Russia (chapter six will examine those later migrations).
Combining the above historical accounts with the fact that Hebrew place names subsequently became attached to Black Sea areas), we have a positive identification of where the escaped Israelites relocated circa 724-720 B.C. Israel's new homeland was well-chosen as it was in a mountainous region where the terrain greatly favored the defenders. The migration of the Israelites to a defensible region indicates that they purposefully fled to an area where Assyria would be reluctant to pursue them.
As a reminder, the Hebrews who resettled in the Black Sea region were Israelites of the ten tribes of Israel; they were not Jews. The Bible records that there was considerable warfare and hostility between the Israelites and the Jews just prior to this Israelite migration. Indeed, since the Jewish kingdom at that time was allied with Assyria against the Israelites (II Rings 16:7), the Jews at that time had no need to flee. Also, the Bible records that the Jews (Judah) did not leave Palestine at that time, but remained in the land after the rest of the tribes of Israel were gone (II Kings 17:18).
While Judah remained in the land after Israel departed, their presence in the land was far from secure. During the reign of an honorable king named Hezekiah, the Assyrians invaded Judah, intending to do to Judah what they had done to Samaria (II Kings 18). Their initial efforts were successful as II Kings 18:13 records that the Assyrians "came up against all the fenced cities of Judah and took them." Based on Assyrian custom, this likely resulted in much of the tribe of Judah going into captivity at this time. II Kings 18:13-17 and 19:8 mention only three fortified Jewish cities (Jerusalem, Lachish, and Libnah) resisted the Assyrians.
The Assyrians mocked the God of Hezekiah, asserting that he would be as impotent as the "gods of Hamath, Arpad, Sepharvaim, Hena, Ivah, and Samaria (II Kings 18:33-35)." II Kings 18:14 records that Hezekiah gave Assyria's king tribute of "300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold" in an effort to "buy off" the Assyrians. Significantly, the Assyrian records agree with the biblical account of Hezekiah's tribute, mentioning his 30 gold talents.50 Hezekiah, a good king, then appealed to God for divine assistance. An examination of the cuneiform Assyrian records of this invasion shows why Hezekiah and his people were desperate for help.
An Assyrian stone carving depicting the Assyrian seige of Lachish is on display in the British Museum. The relief is described by Werner Keller, in his book The Bible as History, as follows:
"On the turrets and breastwork of the stronghold of Lachish... the Judahite defenders... showered a hail of arrows on the attackers, hurled stones down upon them, threw burning torches...among the enemy… At the foot of the wall the Assyrians are attacking with the utmost violence... Sennacherib had deployed the whole range of approved assault tactics. Every Assyrian is armed to the teeth...Their engineers have built sloping ramps of earth, stones and felled trees. Siege engines, the first tanks in history, push forward up the ramps against the walls. They are equipped with a battering ram which sticks out like the barrel of a cannon...tunnels are being driven into the rock beneath the foundation of the walls...The first captives, men and women, are being led off. Lifeless bodies are hanging on pointed sticks - impaled. "51
One can imagine the horror of the siege faced by Jerusalem's inhabitants as the defenders were terrorized by Assyrian tactics which included impaling their countrymen on stakes! As extreme as his position was, Hezekiah's prayer did not simply ask God "to save their skins." He laid out before God an Assyrian letter which openly mocked the ability of God to help them. Hezekiah asked God to intervene for his name's sake, portraying the battle as one in which the honor of God was at issue. God responded by sending a death angel to kill 185,000 Assyrian soldiers in one night (II Kings 19:14-35)! Those skeptical of this divine intervention need to consider that Assyrian records of this siege of Jerusalem claim only the tribute money they gained from Hezekiah. An Assyrian retreat and an absence of any victorious claims about Jerusalem indicate that it was an unexpected Assyrian defeat.52
The divine intervention on behalf of Jerusalem must have so terrified the remaining Assyrians that they quickly withdrew from Judah. If Jerusalem had been spared by human efforts, it could be expected that Assyria would have simply come back with a big enough army to finish the job. The fact that Assyria suddenly abandoned their invasion, in spite of their overwhelming superiority and desire to conquer Jerusalem, indicates that while they feared no man, they did fear Hezekiah's God.
Those Jews who had been captured in the early stages of the invasion (II Kings 18:13) were likely already on their way to captivity to Assyrian territory, so a large portion of the tribe of Judah was also taken into captivity at that time.
Assyria's King Sennacherib, who had defied God at Jerusalem, was killed by his own sons at a later date. Significantly, after murdering their father, these Assyrian princes "escaped into the land of Armenia" (II Kings 19:37). While the King James Version of the Bible uses the term "Armenia" for their place of refuge, the Revised Standard Version translates it as "the land of Ararat." Iberia, the region to which a large portion of the Israelites had recently migrated, was to the north of Mt. Ararat and Armenia.
After killing the king of Assyria, these fugitives wanted to be absolutely sure that they were fleeing to a nation which would grant them asylum. Their confidence that people living in the area around Ararat would grant them asylum supports the conclusion that a sizeable portion of Israel's ten tribes was in the area (Israel's population, recently displaced by Assyrian onslaughts, could be counted on to welcome anyone who killed the king of Assyria). II Kings 19:37 therefore offers indirect confirmation that Israelites had migrated to the area of Armenia (or Ararat).
After Hezekiah's death, his son Manasseh became the king of the depleted kingdom of Judah. He was a vile king who caused the Jews to worship Baal. Under Manasseh, the Jews practiced astrology, infant sacrifice, contacted demons via those who had familiar spirits (i.e. "channelers," in modern terms), etc. Judah became so degenerate that II Kings 21:1-16 and II Chronicles 33:3-10 record that they became worse than the depraved Canaanites whom the Israelites had displaced in the time of Joshua. Jeremiah 3:6-11 confirms that Judah's sins exceeded those of Israel.
Because of Manasseh's degenerate sins, God allowed him to become an Assyrian captive in Babylon. Surprisingly, Manasseh repented! In a testimony to how merciful God can be when one repents, II Chronicles 33:11-20 shows that God caused him to be reinstated as King of Judah where he subsequently "commanded Judah to serve the God of Israel" (verse 16).
As an example of how far Judah drifted from God, II Chronicles 34 records that later in the reign of Josiah (a good king), the scrolls containing God's Laws were found as part of a project to repair God's Temple. Imagine! Judah had abandoned the worship of God for so long that by the time Josiah was king (circa 639-608 B.C.) no one even knew what the laws of God were! When this copy of God's laws was dusted off and read, it was the first time that King Josiah and his people had ever heard the Law of God. During Josiah's reign, a very important prophecy by Jeremiah was given which offers biblical confirmation that much of the ten tribes of Israel was then located north of Armenia in the land of "Iberia."
Jeremiah 3:6-12 contains a divine warning to Judah through the prophet Jeremiah. After reviewing the sins of Israel which caused them to be removed from Palestine, God warned Judah that its sins were greater than those which caused the ten tribes to be removed from their land. Verses 11-12 then state:
"And the Lord said unto me, The backsliding Israel hath justified herself more than treacherous Judah. Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful... and I will not keep anger for ever."
Note that when God inspired a prophet to direct a message to the ten tribes of Israel, he was told to "proclaim it toward the north." This message was given in Jerusalem about a century after Samaria fell. If all the Israelites had been taken captive into Assyria, God would have said to proclaim the message "to the east." However, the Black Sea is directly north of Jerusalem, and we have examined several sources which traced a large body of the ten tribes of Israel to Iberia, along the Black Sea. The Bible's statement (circa 620 B.C.) that the ten tribes were living toward the north of Jerusalem confirms those historical accounts. Also, God's words "...Israel hath justified herself..." gives credence to the historical accounts of Ortellius and II Esdras that the resettled Israelites were trying to serve the God of Israel.
Approximately 45 years later, the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem and carried the rest of the Jews captive in two separate invasions. In the first invasion (circa 600 B.C.), Nebuchadnezzar took King Jehoiachin, most of his royal family, and much of the leadership of Judah into captivity. This first invasion netted over 10,000 captives (II Kings 24:8-16). Nebuchadnezzar made one member of the royal family (Zedekiah) a puppet king over Judah, but eleven years later, Zedekiah's revolt triggered the final Babylonian invasion which ended the existence of the kingdom of Judah. King Zedekiah's sons were killed (II Kings 25:6-7), but this did not terminate the Davidic dynasty. After spending 37 years in captivity, the former king of Judah, Jehoiachin, was given great favor by a subsequent Babylonian king (II Kings 25:27-30). I Chronicles 3:17-24 shows that Jehoiachin ("Jeconiah the prisoner" or "Jeconiah the captive" in some translations of the Bible) had seven sons, and that these sons produced many descendants who preserved the royal blood of King David. That the royal Davidic line flourished even through the captivity of Judah will become an important aspect of a later chapter.
There is one footnote to the fall of the kingdom of Judah which bears our attention. The book of Jeremiah contains many of the warnings which God directed him to give to Judah. When Judah fell, the Babylonians allowed Jeremiah to go free (Jeremiah 39:11-12). A small Jewish remnant fled westward into Egypt, taking Jeremiah, his scribe Baruch, and the king's daughters from the royal house of David with them (Jeremiah 43:1-7). II Kings 25:7 records that the sons of the puppet-king Zedekiah were slain, but no harm was apparently done to his daughters. The "king's daughters" traveling with Jeremiah would have been the daughters of King Zedekiah.
While the Bible does not say what became of Jeremiah, Baruch, and the royal princesses, secular history does give us an indication of their final place of refuge. J. H. Allen, in his book Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, cites ancient Irish histories in a reconstruction of what happened to Jeremiah and his band of Jewish refugees. He states: "About 585 B.C. a 'notable man'...'a patriarch'...came to Ulster, the northernmost province of Ireland, accompanied by a princess, the daughter of an eastern king, and...Simon Brach (also spelled Barech and Berach)."53 Allen's narrative also states that the princess, Tea-Tephi, married a native Irish king who forsook his old religion and changed the name of his capital to Tara (a Hebrew/Semitic name).
Numbers 33:27-28 states "Tarah" was the name of one of the encampments of the Hebrew people during their wandering in the wilderness after the exodus from Egypt (Numbers 33:27-28), and "Terah" was also the name of Abraham's father (Genesis 11:31). J. H. Allen's narrative contends that the "patriarch, Simon Brach, and the eastern princess" were Jeremiah, his scribe Baruch, and one of the daughters of King Zedekiah of Judah. The Hebrew name "Tara" and the time of their arrival in Ireland, 585 B.C. (near the fall of Jerusalem) support that conclusion.
J. H. Allen further comments that the royal arms of Ireland have long been represented by the "harp of David" (which was said to have accompanied Jeremiah, Baruch and Princess Tea-Tephi to Ireland), supporting the idea that the royal daughter from the east was a descendant of David from Judah's royal family.54
The consonants of Jeremiah's scribe were B-R-CH, as were the consonants of the man who accompanied the ancient eastern patriarch to Ireland. This further supports the contention that the ancient arrivals in Ireland were a band of Jewish refugees escorted by Jeremiah. Jeremiah had been told by God that it would not be safe to stay in Egypt (Jeremiah 42:13-22), so we can be sure he did not remain there. Since Jeremiah likely was aware of where the ten tribes of Israel had fled during the fall of Samaria, he and his small party of Jews apparently set sail for Hibernia (Ireland), one of the old colonies of Israel, and started life anew.
This concludes the narrative about the many ways in which the Hebrews of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah left the land of ancient Palestine. While the subsequent movements of the tribe of Judah (the Jews) are well-known to historians, what happened to the descendants of the much more numerous ten tribes of Israel? They did not disappear from the face of earth. Indeed, Hosea 1:6-10 prophesied that after the ten tribes of Israel were removed from Palestine, they would so multiply their population that their descendants would be too numerous to count. In the following chapters we shall trace the history of the descendants of the ten tribes of Israel after they left Palestine. We shall see that God abundantly fulfilled his promise to multiply their numbers.
The final fact worth noting is that there was a major cultural and religious separation between the Israelites who left Palestine. We have seen evidence that the Israelites who migrated northward to the Black Sea region tried to again serve Yahweh, the God of Israel. They forsook the idolatry and evil customs of Baal worship. Those Israelites who migrated by sea to the Phoenician colonies of Israel, Tyre and Sidon remained in the Baal and mother-goddess worship which permeated Carthage and the other Phoenician colonies.
Those Israelites who migrated to the Black Sea region had plenty of available room for expansion on the steppes of southern Russia. When these descendants of the ten tribes of Israel reappear in history, they burst forth as a conquering horde! However, that story must wait for chapter six. Chapter five will first examine the history of the largest Mediterranean refuge of the ten tribes of Israel... Carthage!
ENDNOTES: CHAPTER FOUR
1. The Open Bible, King James Version, I Kings 16:33, marginal note, p. 350
2. Harper's Bible Dictionary, "Grove," p. 361
3. Young's Analytical Concordance, "Grove," subhead two, p. 439
4, Rawlinson, George, Phoenicia, p. 107-117
5. Ibid, pp. 112-114
6. Fell, America B.C., pp. 261-268
7. Ibid, p. 263
8. Collier's Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, "Iberian," pp. 323-324
9. Fell, America B.C., pp. 262-263
10. Ibid, p. 159
11. Ibid, pp. 219-245
12. Ibid, pp. 236-243
13. Ibid, p. 240
14. Ibid, p. 226
15. Ibid, pp. 261-267
16. Ibid, pp. 236-243
17. Rawlinson, George, Phoenicia, p. 3
18. Ibid, p. 63
19. Church, Carthage, p. 11
20. Ibid, p. 11
21. Ibid, pp. 11-12
22. Rawlinson, George, Phoenicia, p. 116
23. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 20, "Shalmaneser," p. 454
24. Keller, The Bible As History, p. 212
25. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 13, "Jews," subhead "The dynasty of Omri," pp. 45-46
26. Harper's Bible Dictionary, "Gozan," p. 357
27. Halley's Bible Handbook, p. 151
28. Keller, The Bible As History," p. 244
29. Ibid, p. 246
30. Allen, Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, pp. 266-268
31. Lawless, Ireland, pp. 8-9
32. Allen, p. 275
33. O’Faolain, "Skim the High Water: A Song For The Arans," British Heritage, August/September, 1985 Issue, pp. 14-15
34. Ibid, p. 14
35. Coleman, "De Danaan blends new and old for great Irish sound," Minneapolis Star & Tribune, March 3,1986, page 2C
36. U.S. News and World Report, March 30,1987, p. 7
37. Allen, p. 27538.
38. Ibid, p. 275
39. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 6, "Celtiberia," p. 143
40. Herm, The Celts, pp. 251-252
41. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 13, "Hallstatt Culture," p. 726
42. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 5, "Celt," pp. 102-103
43. Gawler, Our Scythian Ancestors Identified With Israel, p. 9
44. Ibid, p. 9, quoting M. Sailman's 1818 book, Researches in the East: an important account of the Ten Tribes
45. Goodspeed, The Apocrypha, (II Esdras), p. 93
46. Gawler, p. 9
47. Ibid, p. 9
48. Rawlinson, The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, map between pages 78 and 79
49. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 2, "Armenia," p. 331
50. Keller, p. 260
51. Ibid, p. 259
52. Ibid, pp. 260-262
53. Allen, p. 228
54. Ibid, pp. 228-229, 249-251