Nehama C. Nahmoud is the author of several works on Oriental, Middle Eastern and Sephardic Jews. She lives in Jerusalem. She wrote an article on the Jewish World Review on January 1, 1998 / 3 Tevet, 5758, titled “When We Were Kings”.
The mentioned article glorifies Yusuf Dhu Nuwas (517-525 CE) calling him “Sheikh Yusuf Dhu Nuwas”.
The second part of article is short but very meaningful and for the record here is what it says:
[The most exciting and glorious period in the story of the Yemenites is set between the destruction of the Second Holy Temple and the coming-of-age of the founder of Islam, Muhammad (about 620 CE).
The Arabs in pre-Islamic days were out-and-out idol worshippers; but those who lived in the cities, of course, were in constant contact with the large Jewish populations there, and even the Bedouin tribes who lived in the desert were familiar with the “People of the Book.”
Moslem legend tells of a desert sheik, Tub’a Abu Kariba As’ad, who reigned as king of Yemen from 390 to 420 CE. He took his tribe north from Yemen to Medina (now part of Saudi Arabia) to fight the Jews of that city. But instead of conquering, he himself was conquered — by the words of Medina’s rabbis. He returned home with two Jewish scholars in tow and became a convert. His tribesmen were at first reluctant to give up their ideas and way of life, but Abu Kariba convinced them of the truth of Judaism and they, too, accepted the yoke of the Creator, thus beginning the Jewish kingdom of Himyar, as Yemen was called during that period.
Accompanying this legend, archeologists have uncovered an interesting inscription from that period, carved in stone, with a sentence in ancient Hebrew appearing in the middle. The inscription tells about a building erected by a man whose first name was Yehudah and continues, “with help and charity of his G-d, the creator of his soul, the G-d of the living and the dead, the G-d of heaven and earth, who created everything; and with the support of His people, Israel; and by the authority of the King of Sheba; and by the authority of his tribal lord.” The content of the inscription is very different from Christian inscriptions of the same period.
Yusuf Dhu Nuwas
Sheikh Yusuf Dhu Nuwas (517-525 CE) was the last Jewish king of Yemen and was himself a convert. He inherited an inevitable situation from his weaker predecessor. When Dhu Nuwas began his reign, the kingdom was in a general state of deterioration, and the Ethiopians, meanwhile, had not lost a minute. They had moved their army into several cities, including the capital — even turning the main synagogue into a church — all without shedding a drop of blood.
Neighboring Ethiopia had become Christian circa 327 C.E., during the reign of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who ruled from the Greek capital of Byzantium, and it was bent on expanding its spiritual, if not temporal, territory. The Ethiopians had infiltrated into Yemen gradually over the years since their embracing of Christianity. Backed by Christian Byzantium, they had made repeated efforts at missionizing among the Yemenites.
Among Dhu Nuwas’ first acts as king was to unite all the princely factions in his territory into an effective army and to go into action. Sarhil Yakbal, one of his prince-commanders, wrote a description of Nuwas’ Ethiopian wars, the highlights of which were the battles of Ta’afar and Najran.
The battle of Najran appears to have been an event which shook the entire region: some believe to have found an echo of this battle even in the Koran itself, as well as in Christian literature of the era. In fact, three related inscriptions were discovered near Najran in the 1950s, one of which gives us an intimate peek into life in Najran.
It describes the city as a hotbed of Christian agitation against the king, ending in a revolt in which some Jews were killed. Christian sources acknowledge that the king requested Najran’s residents to surrender and live in peace, attacking the city only upon their refusal to do so.
Reports of the fall of Najran stirred up the desire for revenge in the Christian world, and Yusuf Dhu Nuwas was killed during a subsequent Ethiopian invasion in 525 CE.
An Arab legend has Yusuf ridding his horse into the waves of the sea and drowning; but two German researchers found a princely tomb in 1931, believed by some to be Yusuf’s.
Some of the recent archeological discoveries linked to the old Jewish legends can be as imagination-stirring as the legends themselves. During the years of 1936 and 1937, excavations were carried out in the Amoraic-period cemetary of Beis Sh’orim, near Haifa. Archeologists came across four chambers containing sarcophagi and inscriptions in Greek. One read: “The people of Himyar”; another: “Menachem, Elder of the Community.” Pottery shards found in one of the burial chambers were dated at the second-half of the Third Century, CE. The Jewishness of the Tombs’ occupants is confirmed by both a shofar and menorah. It is surmised that the Yemenites brought their leaders to be buried in the Holy Land.
The latest inscription pertaining to this legend is “Rechov Yusuf Dhu Nuwas” enameled on a modern street sign in the heart of downtown Jerusalem.] end of quote.
Who Really is Yusuf Dhu Nuwas? He was a Jewish warlord who massacred and burnt Christians alive, set churches on fire and razed them to the ground in 520 AD in many cities in Yemen. Yusuf Dhu Nuwas committed real documented holocaust against Christians. He is celebrated and glorified by Jews, and by some Yemenis.
Without the intervention of King Kaleb (ruled circa 514-543), King of Axum (situated in modern-day Eritrea and North Ethiopia) a lot more lives could had been slaughtered. After much fighting, Kaleb and his soldiers totally eliminated Yusuf and his forces and appoint Sumuafa’ Ashawa'(Smeaf’ Ashwa’ ( سميفع أشوع)), a native Christian leader of Dhi Yazan (named Esimphaios by Procopius), as his viceroy of Himyar.
Kaleb eventually abdicated his throne, gave his crown to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and retired to a monastery. The Eastern Orthodox Church commemorates Kaleb as “Saint Elesbaan, King of Ethiopia” on 24 October (O.S.) / 6 November (N.S.).
What are the Origins of Israelite and Jews?
The first part of this article “The Yemenite Golus” (“exile” from Yiddish, a term for Diaspora with a more negative connotation) starts with a very good question [The first question that comes to mind is: How — and why — did Jews get to such a backwater as Yemen?].
The article suggested four theories for this answer:
1. Ethiopian origin or influence;
2. Jews were always merchants and traders and Yemen is a trading post;
3. The classes of Kohanim, Levi’im, and ordinary Yisraelim and Levites who escaped during the rumblings of impending trouble with Babalonia; and
4. Many Jews immigrated to Yemen from Persian-dominated Babylonia.
None of these theories are valid. The answer for the origin of Israelite and Jews is simple and clear. The Israelite are from Southern Arabia they fled draught and lack of pasture to Ethiopia and remained there refugees for 430 years. Then they were expelled from Ethiopia, and the Exodus brought them back to Yemen.
It is very important to draw clear distinctions between three different groups.
First: the ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” those who remained faithful to the Scriptures after the Exodus, few of them were left in Ethiopia and lesser are in Southern Arabia, and Yemen.
Second: the unfaithful ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” who invaded, colonized, and mixed with the Canaanite, after they rejected the original Promised Land in Asir.
And the third group is the Turkic Persians who became the “Jews” and followers of “Judaism” who were invented by Persia after a fraudulent return from the Babylonian Captivity, who invaded the invaders and colonized the colonizers of unfaithful Israelite in Canaan.
The Israelite rejected both the Scriptures and the Promised Land and faked the Exile, and the Exodus and forged the Scriptures to legitimize their illegitimate colonization of Canaan. Then came the Turkic Persians and dislodged the unfaithful Israelite by inventing the Jews and Judaism.
Both the Egyptian and Babylonian Exiles were fake. The first Exile/economic refuge of Egypt (1876-1446 BC) was fake because it was in Ethiopia not Egypt. The second Exile/Captivity of Babylonia (585-535 BC) was also fake because it was only imprisonment of few hundreds from the House of David and their officials but it didn’t include the Israelite people.
The Return from the second Exile/Captivity was made of hundreds of thousands of Turkic Persian colonizers claiming to be decedents of the few Davidic captives who never returned. The Turkic Persian colonizers are the first Jews and they took over the Semitic Hebrew Israelite, both in their original land in Southern Arabia and in the illegitimately colonized Canaan (not Palestine).
King Kaleb of Ethiopia (St. Elasbaan) Victorious Over Jewish Warlord Yusuf Dhu Nuwas (Dounias) of Yemen
Great Ethiopians (Habashah, Abyssinians): 1- Kaleb of Axum
King Kaleb (ruled circa 514-543) is perhaps the best-documented and best-known, King of Axum (situated in modern-day Eritrea and North Ethiopia).
Procopius of Caesarea calls him “Hellestheaeus”, a variant of his throne name Ella Atsbeha or Ella Asbeha (Histories, 1.20). Variants of his name are Hellesthaeus, Ellestheaeus, Eleshaah, Ella Atsbeha, Ellesboas, and Elesboam, all from the Greek Ελεσβόάς, for “The one who brought about the morning” or “The one who collected tribute.”
Procopius, John of Ephesus, and other contemporary historians recount Kaleb’s invasion of Yemen around 520, against the Jewish Himyarite king Yusuf Asar Yathar (also known as Dhu Nuwas), who massacred Christians in Yemen. After much fighting, Kaleb and his soldiers totally eliminated Yusuf and his forces and appoint Sumuafa’ Ashawa'(Smeaf’ Ashwa’ ( سميفع أشوع)), a native Christian leader of Dhi Yazan (named Esimphaios by Procopius), as his viceroy of Himyar.
As a result of his protection of the Christians, he is known as St. Elesbaan after the sixteenth-century Cardinal Cesare Baronio added him to his edition of the Roman Martyrology despite his being a miaphysite. However, the question of whether Miaphysitism—the actual christology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches (including the Coptic Orthodox Church)—was a heresy is a question which remains to this day, and other Oriental saints such as Isaac of Nineveh continue to be venerated by the Chalcedonian churches.
Axumite control of South Arabia continued until c.525 when Sumuafa’ Ashawa’ was deposed by Abraha (Abraha al-Ashram, أبرهة الأشرم, أبرهة الحبشي), who made himself king. While Abraha he was not Ethiopian Turko-Arabs still deliberately call him “(Abraha al- Habashi) the Ethiopian” just to accuse the Ethiopians of his criminal attempt to destroy The Holy Kaaba of Islam in Mecca. He ruled Yemen from 531 AD to 565 AD.
This accusation is clearly false since King Kaleb appointed a local Christian Yemeni to rule Yemen and was deposed by Abraha. The second reason is that all the Arabs in Arabia knew very well that Ethiopia was ruled by just kings whole tolerate no aggression, and that is why the first believers in Islam were advised to flee and take refuge in Ethiopia under the protection of their kings.
King Kaleb made several unsuccessful attempts to remove Abraha and restore order in Yemen; however, his successor gave up and negotiated a peace with Abraha. By these expeditions Axum overextended itself, and after this final intervention across the Red Sea Aksum gave up its position as a great power in the region.
Ethiopian tradition states that Kaleb eventually abdicated his throne, gave his crown to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and retired to a monastery. The Eastern Orthodox Church commemorates Kaleb as “Saint Elesbaan, King of Ethiopia” on 24 October (O.S.) / 6 November (N.S.).
Later historians who recount the events of King Kaleb’s reign include Ibn Hisham, Ibn Ishaq, and Tabari. Taddesse Tamrat records a tradition he heard from an aged priest in Lalibela that “Kaleb was a man of Lasta and his palace was at Bugna where it is known that Gebre Mesqel Lalibela had later established his centre. The relevance of this tradition for us is the mere association of the name of Kaleb with the evangelization of this interior province of Aksum.”
Besides several inscriptions bearing his name, Axum also contains a pair of ruined structures, one said to be his tomb and its partner said to be the tomb of his son Gabra Masqal (servant of the Cross). (Tradition gives him a second son, Israel, whom it has been suggested is identical with the Axumite king Israel).
This structure was first examined as an archaeological subject by Henry Salt in the early 19th century; almost a century later, it was partially cleared and mapped out by the Deutsche Aksum-Expedition in 1906. The most recent excavation of this tomb was in 1973 by the British Institute in East Africa.
Dhu Nuwas the Jewish of Yemen
Dhū Nuwās, (Arabic: ذو نواس) or Yūsuf Ibn Sharhabeel (Arabic: يوسف بن شرحبيل) Syriac Masruq; Greek: Dounias, was a Jewish warlord in Yemen between 517 and 525-27 CE, who came to renown on account of his military exploits against people of other religions living in Yemen.
Ibn Hisham’s Sirat Rasul Allah (better known in English as the Life of Muhammad), explains that Yūsuf was a Jew who grew out his sidelocks (nuwas meaning, “forelock” or “sidelock”), and who became known as “lord of the sidelocks.” The historicity of Dhū Nuwās is affirmed by Philostorgius and by Procopius (in the latter’s Persian War).
Procopius writes that in 525, the armies of the Christian Kingdom of Axum in Ethiopia invaded Yemen at the request of the Byzantine Emperor, Justin I, to take control of the Jewish kingdom in Ḥimyar, then under the leadership of Yūsuf Dhū Nuwās, who rose to power in 522. Jews were smitten, and their supremacy in all of Yemen, came to an abrupt end.
One Syriac source appears to suggest that the mother of Dhū Nuwās may have been herself a Jew hailing from the Mesopotamian city of Nisibis. If so, this would place her origins within the Sassanid imperial sphere, and would illuminate possible political reasons for his later horrendous crimes against the Christians of Arabia.
Many modern historians, though Christopher Haas is an exception, have argued that her son’s conversion was a matter of tactical opportunism, since Judaism would have provided him with an ideological counterweight to the religion of his adversary, the Kingdom of Aksum, and also allowed him to curry favour with the Sassanid shahanshah. This is another evidence of the Persian origin of Judaism.
Based on other contemporary sources, after seizing the throne of the Ḥimyarites in ca. 518 or 523 Dhū Nuwās burned Christian at Najrān and other places, and burning their churches. After accepting the city’s capitulation, he massacred those inhabitants who would not renounce Christianity.
According to the Arab historians, Dhū Nuwās then proceeded to write a letter to the Lakhmid king Al-Mundhir III ibn al-Nu’man of al-Ḥīrah and King Kavadh I of Persia, informing them of his crimes and encouraging them to do likewise to the Christians under their dominion. Al-Mundhir received this letter in January 519, as he was receiving an embassy from Constantinople seeking to forge a peace between the Roman Empire and al-Ḥīrha. He revealed the contents of the letter to the Roman ambassadors who were horrified by its contents.
The Ethiopian church in Ẓafâr, which had been built by previous king of Yemen some years earlier, and another church built by him in Aden had been seen by Constantius II during the embassage to the land of the Ḥimyarites (i.e. Yemen) in circa 340 CE. These churches were set on fire and razed to the ground, and Christians killed. Later, foreigners (presumably Christians) living in Haḏramawt were also put to death before they advanced to Najran in the far north.
Yusuf Asar Yathar led groups from Hamedan, Madh’hij, Kindah, and Murad to massacre Christians in Ẓafâr, Mokhā and Najran claiming that they were Abyssinians.
The Najran inscription of 518 AD gives brief details on the massacres of Christians in Yemen as follow:
God who owns the heavens and the earth bless king Yusuf Asar Yathar, king of all nations and bless the Aqials (Dhi Yazan leaders)
Who they stand with their master, King Yusuf Asar Yathar, when he burned the church and killed the Habashah (Abyssinians) in Dhofar and war on (Habashah) in Ash’aran and Rakban (regions) and Farasan
The king has succeeded in these battles in the killing of 12,500 and capturing 11,090
Booty of two hundred thousand camels, cows, sheep, and this Misnad (inscription) was written by Shrahal Dhi Yazan when camped in Najran
With the nation of Hamedan and the Arabs and the Yazaniin fighters and the A’rab (Nomads) of Kinda and Murad and Madh’hij and his brothers the Aqials who camped with the king
On the sea from the side of Habashah (Abyssinia) And they set up a series of fortifications in the Bab al-Mandab and all who mentioned in this Musnad they fought and took booty and camped in this mission
And they returned in the history of thirteen and Rahman (god) bless Sharhabal Ekml and Wh’an and Asar Bni Lhi’t
The crowned man relief found in Zafar in Yemen ca. 530 AD
An article titled “Buried Christian Empire Casts New Light on Early Islam” By Matthias Schulz, translated from the German by Christopher Sultan, posted on December 21, 2012. It is full deceptive statements. While discussing the same period and place, it is deliberately silent about the Jewish horrible massacres of Christians and it tries to depict King Kaleb and the Ethiopians as conquerors and puppets, instead of a good faithful savior.
The main purpose of that despicable article to avert the blame on Jews and ask was there once a church in Mecca? It says: [These Sacred Heart imperialists confronted the Persian realm of the Sassanids, with its archers and armies of bearded soldiers clad in heavy metal armor. The Jews, who lived by the tens of thousands in the oases, were to some extent aligned with this power. It was a confrontation between east and west, and everyone was forced to choose a side.]
Please read the article to find out how history is a very serious security issue for the Jews. This certainly indicates that wars, mass displacement, and massacres are indeed usable tools to hide and forge Jewish history.
Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Mosque says King of Axum saved Islam
The Grand Imam spoke to the German Parliament, the Bundestag on Mar 17, 2016, reiterated if it wasn’t for Emperor Armaha of Axum Islam as a religion would have been destroyed. “Christianity was the first to provide sanctuary for Islam; without Abyssinia and its Christian king who protected the first Muslims, Islam would have been destroyed in its cradle,” he told the German Parliament.
The Grand Imam is referring to migration of 108 Muslims including the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter and uncle to Axum. The first Muslims crossed the Red Sea to seek refuge in the Christian Kingdom of Aksum. The Chiefs of Quraysh tried everything including sending gifts of gold and other precious things to Emperor Armaha to win him to side with them. They pleaded with him to send the Arab refugees back home explaining the new religion is against the teachings of Christ but, the wise king questioned both sides and he denied Quraysh’s request, rejected their gifts and granted the early Muslims asylum.
(Note: Ironically Islam did die only fifty years after birth in a great bloody civil war instigated by Turkic groups in Persia, Mesopotamia, Canaan, Yemen, and Mecca).
The history of what became the modern State of Israel could be viewed in two two-thousand years parts. The first period before the Ministry of Jesus Christ (Yeshua) and the second is from that year until today.
The first part of Israeli history is marked by four distinct periods. These periods are:
1. The Hebrew Israelite Yemeni Period (2006 to 1876 BC),
2. The Hebrew Israelite Ethiopian Period (1876 to 1446 BC),
3. The Hebrew Israelite Canaanite Period (1446 to 605 BC), and
4. The Jewish Turkic Persian Period (605 BC to 66 AD).
The second part of Israeli history is marked by four overlapping periods. These periods are:
1. The Turkic Jewish Roman Period (66 AD to today),
2. The Turkic Pagan-Jewish-Muslim Khazar Period (350 AD to 1783 AD),
3. The Turkic Jewish Germano-Sorbian-Pannonian Period (450 AD to today),
4. The Turkic Muslim Ottoman Empire and Turkish State (1299 AD to today)
5. The Hebrew Israelite Iberian Period (711 AD to today),
6. The Turkic Jewish American Period (1492 AD to today).
I started writing this article and it is getting lengthy. Therefore, I post this is as the first part.
The Israeli Government carried out Operation Moses to evacuate Ethiopian Jews (known as the “Beta Israel” community or “Falashas”) via Sudan in 1984. Originally called Gur Aryeh Yehuda (“Cub of the Lion of Judah”) by Israelis, the United Jewish Appeal changed the name to “Operation Moses”.
So what does the name refer to? It indicates an Exodus like the one Moses did. But wait do the Israelis admit that “Beta Israel” community or “Falashas” are ethnic Israelite? Do they mean that the biblical Exodus started from Ethiopia and not Egypt?
The most important questions are why this evacuation now? And what are the real intentions of the Israelis towards “Beta Israel” community? Do they want to protect and help them? If yes why not in Ethiopia? And why “Beta Israel” community are not happy?
It could be very serious if the real intention is to make them and their faith and history extinct to cover up unwanted history.
These questions raise serious concerns about the safety of nations and histories of countries related to the long track of Hebrew Israelite and Turkic Jewish nomadic wandering. This includes Yemen, Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many more in West Asia and North Africa.
Map of Aksum and South Arabia ca. 230 AD
The Hebrew Israelite Ethiopian Period (1876 to 1446 BC)
The Hebrew Israelite were nomadic herders who lived in Yemen. Suffered from shortage of pasture land and draughts they decided to cross The Bab-el-Mandeb (Arabic: باب المندب, lit. “Gate of Tears”) or Mandeb Strait to Ethiopia in 1876 BC.
Patriarch Joseph was sold four times, the first was in Yemen and he ended up to be raised in a rich Ethiopian house. Later he was imprisoned then became the king’s chief assistant in a small Ethiopian kingdom. Few decades later the Israelite fled drought and lack of pastures in Yemen to Ethiopia and they were treated with generosity and given land in Ethiopia.
The Israelite also moved beyond Ethiopia and Eritrea to reach to Somalia and Sudan. In Sudan they settled in east Sudan (Beja land); North Sudan (Upper Nubia); central Sudan (Al-Gezera (between Blue and White Niles)); and they reached west to Kordofan.
In each of their settlements the nomadic Israelite caused profound changes in these regions. In Al-Gezera the Shilluk (Shilluk: Chollo), a major Luo Nilotic group, were pushed south to Rabak town.
In Kordofan, the Israelite engaged in large scale enslavement that caused massive displacement of the Kordofanians to Nubia and Darfur, but mainly to the south to the Nuba Mountains.
The Israelite took the city of Soba, or Meroë, which was built at the confluence of Blue and White Niles. Having successfully laid siege to the city, the city was eventually subdued by betrayal of the prince’s daughter, who had agreed to deliver the city to Israelite. Hebrew oral tradition avers that Moses, in his younger years, had led an Egyptian military expedition into Sudan (Kush), as far as the city of Meroë, which was then called Saba.
The Israelite also caused Upper Nubia to struggle with Lower Nubia. Lower Nubia requested assistance from the Ancient Egyptians. King Psamtik II (595 BC – 589 BC) led a joint foray into Upper Nubia in 592 BC. The Twenty-sixth Dynasty of Egypt (notated Dynasty XXVI) was the last native dynasty to rule Egypt before the Persian conquest in 525 BC. The dynasty’s reign (664–525 BC) is also called the Saite Period after the city of Sais, where its pharaohs had their capital, and marks the beginning of the Late Period of ancient Egypt.
After the successful defeat of Israelite king Aspelta (600 – 580 BC), the Nubian ruler of the Kingdom of Kush, moved the capital from Napata considerably farther south to Meroë in 591 BC.
Later on the major changes resulted in the disintegration of the Kingdom of Kush (1070 BC–AD 350) into three separate kingdoms (Nobatia, Makuria, and Alodia). Further troubles in Nubia forced the King Ezana of Axum (320s – c. 360 AD) to wage a campaign into Nubia. He was first monarch of Axum to embrace Christianity. Along with his brother, Se’azana, Ezana is regarded as a saint by the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, with a feast day of October 1. He himself employed official title “king of Saba and Salhen, Himyar and Dhu-Raydan”.
The last period of Nubia is marked by the victory stele of an unnamed ruler of Aksum (almost certainly Ezana) erected at the site of Meroë; from his description, in Greek, that he was “King of the Aksumites and the Omerites”. King Ezana invaded Nubia to support the Nubians as they had previous bad experience with the Israelite during their refuge in Ethiopia (1876 to 1446 BC).
He commemorated his victories on stone tablets in praise of God. These liturgical epigraphs were written in various ancient languages, including the Ethiopian Semitic Ge’ez, the South Arabian Sabaean, and Greek. His carvings in stone provided a trilingual monument in different languages, similar to the Rosetta stone.
A pair of inscriptions in Ge’ez have been found at Meroe, which is understood as evidence of a campaign in the fourth century, either during ‘Ezana’s reign, or by a predecessor like Ousanas.
A surviving letter from the Arian Roman Emperor Constantius II is addressed to ‘Ezana and his brother Se’azana, and requests that Frumentius be sent to Alexandria to be examined for doctrinal errors; it is believed that King Ezana either refused or ignored this request.
The Meroitic language was spoken in Meroë and the Sudan during the Meroitic period (attested from 300 BC) and became extinct about 400 AD as a result of disorder that was brewed by Israelite for 2000 years.
Nubian Sudan entered a dark age called the X group. This age must be the product of Israelite damages in Nubia. The end of the Meroitic period was not spontaneous, it was rather gradual and is most evident in the shift of building materials from more durable to more perishable ones.
The post-Meroitic period, which starts approximately after 350 AD, is distinguished by the emergence of a new culture in Sudan labeled as the X-Group; the culture is associated with nomadic tribes who migrated from the deserts neighboring the Nile Valley. This is most evident in burial traditions where X-Group rulers were buried in tumuli structures, just like the rulers of Kerma in the past.
In Ballana and Qustol, in Lower Nubia, and at el-Hobagi, Jebel Adda, Jebel Quisi, and Meroe, in Sudan, X-Group tumuli were located in large numbers; however, most of those in Sudan have not yet been excavated. The sizes of the tumuli varies to a great degree.
Ezana’s inscriptions are very important and significant but all the stone records are poorly translated and kept. It is impossible to assume that his campaign could ignore the presence of Israelite in Nubia particularly with their hostile experience, the deep Christian faith of King Ezana, and most importantly the massacres of Christians in Najran by the Jewish king Yusuf As’ar Dhu Nuwas in 524 AD.
Dhū Nuwās, (Arabic: ذو نواس) or Yūsuf Ibn Sharhabeel (Arabic: يوسف بن شرحبيل) Syriac Masruq; Greek Dounaas (Δουναας), was a Judaic warlord in Yemen between 517 and 525-27 CE. He was a Jew who grew out his sidelocks (nuwas meaning, “forelock” or “sidelock”), and who became known as “lord of the sidelocks”. After coming to the throne through a coup d’état, Dhu Nuwas launched a campaign which where a church was put to the torch, and then invaded the Tihāma coastal lowlands where a partially Christianized population dwelt, and where he took over key centers as far as the Bab el-Mandeb.
He sent one of his generals, a Jewish prince, north to Najran in order to impose an economic blockade on the oasis by cutting off the trade route to Qaryat al-Faw in eastern Arabia and the Christians of Najran were massacred
St. Arethas or Aretas (Arabic: آل الحارث “al-Haarith”) was the leader of the Christian community of Najran in the early 6th century. He was executed during the persecution of Christians.
He is known from the Acta S. Arethae (also called Martyrium sancti Arethae or Martyrium Arethae) which exists in two recensions: the earlier and more authentic, which was found by Michel Le Quien and was subsequently dated as no later than the 7th century; the latter, revised by Simeon Metaphrastes, dates from the 10th century. The Ge’ez and Arabic versions of the text were published in 2006 and the Greek version in 2007. Feastday: 27 July (Roman Catholic Church) In Eastern Orthodox Church his feastday is 24 October (6 November O.C.).
In 525, the armies of the Christian Kingdom of Axum in Ethiopia invaded Yemen to take control of the Jewish kingdom in Ḥimyar to save Christians. With this invasion the Jewish religion in all of Yemen, came to an abrupt end.
The Original Promised Land Rejected by the Israelite
It is very important to draw clear distinctions between three different groups. First: the ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” those who remained faithful to the Scriptures, few of them are left in southern Arabia, Yemen, and Ethiopia. Second: the unfaithful ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” who invaded, colonized, and mixed with the Canaanite. And the third group is the Turkic “Jews” and followers of “Judaism” who were invented by Persia after a fraudulent return from the Babylonian Captivity, present day Jews, who invaded the invaders and colonized the colonizers of unfaithful Israelite in Canaan.
The Israelite rejected both the Scriptures and the Promised Land and faked the Exile, and the Exodus and forged the Scriptures to legitimize their illegitimate colonization of Canaan. Then came the Turkic Persians and dislodged the unfaithful Israelite by inventing the Jews and Judaism.
Both Exiles were fake. The first Exile of Egypt (1876-1446 BC) was fake because it was in Ethiopia not Egypt. The second Exile/Captivity of Babylonia (585-535 BC) was also fake because it was only imprisonment of few hundreds from the House of David and their officials but it didn’t include the Israelite people. The Return from the second Exile/Captivity was made of hundreds of thousands of Turkic Persian colonizers claiming to be decedents of the few Davidic captives who never returned. The Turkic Persian colonizers are the first Jews and they took over the Semitic Hebrew Israelite.
The Hebrew language must have went through four radical periods during its development due to Hebrew movements and settlements. These periods are: the Yemeni Era, the Ethiopian refuge era, the post-flee to Ethiopia era, and the post Neo-Babylonian captivity era. This definitely also indicates cultural and genetic changes of what is known today as Jews and remaining Israelite. The world will take ages to admit that the old stories of Old Testament and the foundations of many religions, politics, and institutions are totally fictitious.
Today the six Turkic main groups (without mentioning those in Russia, Africa, and Central Asia) are:
1- Turkic Muslim in Anatolia, Caucasus, and Balkan, (fake Caucasians since Eastern Tourkia (Khazaria) in 650 AD),
2- Turkic Shia Persians (fake Iranians since the Achaemenids in 550 BC),
3- Turkic Talmudic Zionist Jews (fake Israelite since the tricky Babylonian “Return” in 520 BC),
4- Turkic rulers of Arabia (fake Arabs, following the death of Islam in 655 AD),
5- Turkic “Hindu” Indians and Gypsy (fake Aryans since the Persian conquest in 530 BC), and
6- Turkic Europeans (fake liberal Christians since the “Holy” “Roman” “Empire” in 962 AD)
Plus these groups are the Turkified Scythians who invaded, enslaved, and created the Slavs and Thracians in Caucasus and Balkans since 600 BC.
“Islamic” organizations and all the Palestinian issue are Turkic Mongolian drama. Jews and Judaism were created once by the Turkic Persians, then later Zionism was created by the Turkic Ottomans. Ukraine is a Turkic old enslaved region taken from Ruthenia.
Three Turkic groups are working together to form three empires. Turkish from Balkan to China, and Gulf Empire from Oman to Mauritania, and Greater Israel inside Russia.
The major migrations that formed Eastern European Jewry according to the Khazarian and Rhineland Hypotheses are shown in yellow and browns, respectively
Here are two researches which examine the Slavic-Turkic origins of the Ashkenazim Jews:
1- The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity, by Paul Wexler,Publisher: Slavica Pub; First edition. (December 1, 1993), ISBN-10: 0893572411
2- Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses by Eran Israeli-Elhaik, Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Published: 14 December 2012
The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity, by Paul Wexler
This book, a linguist’s reassessment of early European Jewish history, will be of interest to anyone who has ever wondered how the Jewish people, lacking their own territorial base and living as a minority among often hostile non-Jewish peoples over the four corners of the globe, succeeded in preserving a separate identity for close to two thousand years.
The book makes a number of innovative and controversial claims about the relationship of the contemporary Jews to the Old Palestinian Jews. Recognizing the limitations of historical documentation, this book shows how facts about Yiddish and Modern Israeli Hebrew (presented in four recent books) can assist historians and archeologists in evaluating known data and artifacts as well as generate a new hypothesis about the origins of the Ashkenazic Jews, the north European Jews who have consituted the majority of the Jews in the world for the last several centuries.
In Wexler’s view, the Ashkenazic Jews most likely descend from a minority ethnic Palestinian Jewish emigre population that intermarried with a much larger heterogeneous population of converts to Judaism from Asia Minor, the Balkans and the Germano-Sorb lands (the Sorbs are a West Slavic population that still numbers about 70,000 in the former German Democratic Republic). Widespread conversions to Judaism that began in Asia Minor in the Christian era and ended with the institutionalization of Christianity among the Western Slavs in the beginning of the second millennium saved the tiny ethnic Palestinian Jewish population in the diaspora from total extinction.
The major non-Jewish contributors to the ethnogenesis of the Ashkenazic Jews were Slavs, though there was probably also a minor Turkic strain — both in the Caspian-Black Sea area (the descendants of the Khazars, a mainly Turkic group that converted to Judaism in the eighth century) and in the Balkans and Hungary. In all of these areas, the Turkic population early became submerged with the coterritorial Slavs. In addition to Yiddish terms of Slavic, Greek, Romance and German origin which express aspects of the Jewish religion and folk culture, the book shows that many elements of Ashkenazic folklore and religion themselves were of Slavic origin — either West (Sorbian and Polabian) or Balkan Slavic.
There is a lengthy discussion of the evidence for widespread conversion to Judaism in Asia Minor, southern Europe and the Germano-Sorbian lands up to the twelfth century and the reasons why pagan and Christian Slavs converted to Judaism. While historians have been disputing the extent of conversion to Judaism, Wexler thinks the linguistic and ethnographic evidence make the conversion evidence highly plausible. In addition, Jewish linguistic evidence refutes the traditional claims that Yiddish is a variant of High German and that Modern Hebrew is a “revived” form of Old Hebrew; new hypotheses are proposed: that Yiddish began as a Slavic language (specifically a Judaized form of Sorbian) that was re-lexified to High German at an early date, and that Modern Hebrew is, in turn, Yiddish that became re-lexified to Hebrew, and thus is also a form of Sorbian.
These facts support the author’s hypothesis of the Slavic origins of the Ashkenazic Jews, and the bulk of their religion and folk culture. The book proceeds to show how, under the conditions of relative separation from the non-Jewish population that developed after the twelfth century, the north European Jews developed elaborate processes of “Judaizing” their pagan and Christian Slavic religion and folk culture — by inserting unusually large amounts of Hebrew elements into colloquial Judeo-Sorbian/Yiddish and by reinterpreting and recalibrating religious and ethnographic practices according to biblical and talmudic precedents; customs known to be obsolete among the Christians were retained by the Jews as “Jewish” practices.
For example, the Slavo-Germanic glass-breaking ceremony intended to scare the devil away from the merrymakers at a wedding, was reinterpreted as remembrance of the destructions of the two Temples in Jerusalem. The ethnographic and religious evidence is taken mainly from discussions in the Germano-Slavic Hebrew religious literature of the thirteenth through sixteenth centuries which reveal that many rabbis were quite aware of the non-Jewish origins of Ashkenazic folklore and religious practices. Where the rabbis could not convince the masses to abandon pagan-Christian customs, they were obliged to retain them, but in a “Judaized” form. The book offers a correction to the unsubstantiated views of the late Arthur Koestler in his The Thirteenth Tribe (London 1976), that the Ashkenazic Jews are largely descended from Turkic Khazars who converted to Judaism in the Caucasus in the eighth century.
Wexler believes Koestler was right about a Slavo-Turkic basis for the north European Jews — but that he erred in assuming the preponderence of Turks over other ethnic groups, and in placing the “homeland” of the Ashkenazic Jews in the Caucasus. Where Koestler’s evidence, mainly non-linguistic, was scanty and totally unreliable, Yiddish and Ashkenazic folk culture and religion provide a wealth of varied evidence that support a primarily Slavic ethnic origin for the Ashkenazic Jews.
In opposition to the popular view that the Slavic imprint in Ashkenazic Jewish culture is a “late borrowing”, Wexler sees the Slavic elements as an “inheritance” from the pagan Slavic cultures which were to become for the most part submerged and reformed under the impact of Christianity.
Hence, Ashkenazic Judaism is essentially a Judaized form of Slavic pagan and Christian culture and religion (rather than an uninterrupted evolution of Palestinian Judaism) — and the best repository of pagan Slavic folk culture that survives to our days. Wexler also proposes that the other Jewish diasporas — e.g. the Sephardic, the Arab, Iranian, Chinese, Indian, Ethiopian and Yemenite — are also largely of non-Jewish origin.
The book compares the notion of Jewish peoplehood with attempts at rewriting the past found in many other societies. There is a bibliography of some seven hundred items and an index of examples.
Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses, by Eran Israeli-Elhaik
The question of Jewish ancestry has been the subject of controversy for over two centuries and has yet to be resolved. The “Rhineland hypothesis” depicts Eastern European Jews as a “population isolate” that emerged from a small group of German Jews who migrated eastward and expanded rapidly. Alternatively, the “Khazarian hypothesis” suggests that Eastern European Jews descended from the Khazars, anamalgam of Turkic clans that settled the Caucasus in the early centuries CE and converted to Judaism in the 8th century. Mesopotamian and Greco–Roman Jews continuously reinforced the Judaized Empire until the 13th century.
Following the collapse of their Empire, the Judeo–Khazars ﬂed to Eastern Europe. The rise of European Jewry is therefore explained by the contribution of the Judeo–Khazars. Thus far, however, the Khazars’ contribution has been estimated only empirically, as the absence of genome-wide data from Caucasus populations precluded testing the Khazarian hypothesis. Recent sequencing of modern Caucasus populations prompted us to revisit the Khazarian hypothesis and compare it with the Rhineland hypothesis.
We applied a wide range of population genetic analyses to compare these two hypotheses. Our ﬁndings support the Khazarian hypothesis and portray the European Jewish genome as a mosaic of Near Eastern-Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries, thereby consolidating previous contradictory reports of Jewish ancestry. We further describe a major difference among Caucasus populations explained by the early presence of Judeans in the Southern and Central Caucasus. Our results have important implications for the demographic forces that shaped the genetic diversity in the Caucasus and for medical studies.
Contemporary Eastern European Jews comprise the largest ethno-religious aggregate of modern Jewish communities, accounting for approximately 90% of over 13 million Jews worldwide (Ostrer 2001). Speculated to have emerged from a small Central European founder group and thought to have maintained high endogamy, Eastern European Jews are considered a “population isolate” and invaluable subjects in disease studies (Carmeli 2004), although their ancestry remains debatable between geneticists, historians, and linguists (Wexler 1993; Brook 2006; Sand 2009; Behar et al. 2010).
Recently, several large-scale studies have attempted to chart the genetic diversity of Jewish populations by genotyping Eurasian Jewish and non-Jewish populations (Conrad et al. 2006; Kopelman et al. 2009; Behar et al. 2010). Interestingly, some of these studies linked Caucasus populations with Eastern European Jews, at odds with the narrative of a Central European founder group. Because correcting for population structure and using suitable controls are critical in medical studies, it is vital to examine the hypotheses purporting to explain the ancestry of Eastern and Central European Jews.
One of the major challenges for any hypothesis is to explain the massive presence of Jews in Eastern Europe, estimated at eight million people at the beginning of the 20th century. We investigate the genetic structure of European Jews, by applying a wide range of analyses— including three population test, principal component, biogeographical origin, admixture, identity by descent (IBD), allele sharing distance, and uniparental analyses—and test their veracity in light of the two dominant hypotheses depicting either a sole Middle Eastern ancestry or a mixed Middle Eastern–Caucasus–European ancestry to explain the ancestry of Eastern European Jews.
The “Rhineland hypothesis” envisions modern European Jews to be the descendents of the Judeans—an assortment of Israelite–Canaanite tribes of Semitic origin (ﬁgs. 1 and 2) (supplementary note S1, Supplementary Material online). It proposes two mass migratory waves: the ﬁrst occurred over the 200 years following the Muslim conquest of Palestine (638 CE) and consisted of devoted Judeans who left Muslim Palestine for Europe (Dinur 1961).
Whether these migrants joined the existing Judaized Greco–Roman communities is unclear, as is the extent of their contribution to the Southern European gene pool. The second wave occurred at the beginning of the 15th century by a group of 50,000 German Jews who migrated eastward and ushered an apparent hyper baby-boom era for half a millennium (Atzmon et al. 2010). The Rhineland hypothesis predicts a Middle Eastern ancestry to European Jews and high genetic similarity among European Jews (Ostrer 2001; Atzmon et al. 2010; Behar et al. 2010).
The competing “Khazarian hypothesis” considers Eastern European Jews to be the descendants of Khazars (supplementary note S1, Supplementary Material online). The Khazars were a confederation of Slavic, Scythian, Hunnic–Bulgar, Iranian, Alans, and Turkish tribes who formed in the central–northern Caucasus one of most powerful empires during the late Iron Age and converted to Judaism in the 8th century CE (ﬁgs. 1 and 2) (Polak 1951; Brook 2006; Sand 2009).
The Khazarian, Armenian, and Georgian populations forged from this amalgamation of tribes (Polak 1951) were followed by relative isolation, differentiation, and genetic drift in situ (Balanovsky et al. 2011). Biblical and archeological records allude to active trade relationships between Proto-Judeans and Armenians in the late centuries BCE (Polak 1951; Finkelstein and Silberman 2002), that likely resulted in a small scale admixture between these populations and a Judean presence in the Caucasus.
After their conversion to Judaism, the population structure of the Judeo–Khazars was further reshaped by multiple migrations of Jews from the Byzantine Empire and Caliphate to the Khazarian Empire (ﬁg. 1). Following the collapse of their empire and the Black Death (1347–1348) the Judeo–Khazars ﬂed westward (Baron 1993), settling in the rising Polish Kingdom and Hungary (Polak 1951) and eventually spreading to Central and Western Europe.
The Khazarian hypothesis posits that European Jews are comprised of Caucasus, European, and Middle Eastern ancestries. Moreover, European Jewish communities are expected to be different from one another both in ancestry and genetic heterogeneity. The Khazarian hypothesis also offers two explanations for the genetic diversity in Caucasus groups ﬁrst by the multiple migration waves to Khazaria during the 6th–10th centuries and second by the Judeo–Khazars who remained in the Caucasus.
Sure people all over the world don’t understand why Yemen, Syria, and Iraq are ruined? and Why terrorists destroy archeological sites instead of looting them?
The answer is simply “unwanted History”.
The Promised Land to Abraham was shown to Moses while he was on the top of mountain in Yemen after he received the Torah, and the Exodus was from Ethiopia to Yemen via Bab El-Mandeb in 1438 BC.
The Promised Land was Asir region, in Saudi Arabia. They never went to Egypt. The Israelite rejected the gift of God and forged the Scriptures. They invaded and colonized Canaan without any reason.
Joseph was sold four times, the first was in Yemen and he ended up to be raised in a rich Ethiopian house. Later he was imprisoned then became the king’s chief assistant in a small Ethiopian kingdom. Few decades later the Israelite fled drought and lack of pastures in Yemen to Ethiopia and they were treated with generosity and given land in Ethiopia.
They stayed in Ethiopia for more than 400 years and they married Ethiopians. The Israelites became aggressive and caused troubles and another junior king ordered their evacuation and expulsion. They were not allowed to take with them Ethiopian gold, silver, and cattle. The Israelites refused and took them in their Exodus.
After few centuries in 605 BC Turkic Persians defeated the kingdoms of Judea and Samaria and in 585 BC took 300 from the ruling house of David captives to Neo Babylonia and after 60 years Turkic Persians sent hundreds of thousands of Turkic settlers claiming that they were the decedents of the ruling house of David. Those new settlers were called Jews.
The Turkic Persians replaced the Torah with the Talmud and controlled the Israelites with the Jews. The Israelite were forced to divorce and marry the Turkic Jews and made it among their new unholy laws. The Israelite were unfaithful and the Jews were criminal. The Jews are not a nation, ethnicity or religion. Jewishness is a political association and culture, the older form of Zionism.
When Jesus came the Jews were furious and hostile fearing Jesus will free the Israelite and reveals the corruption and foreign origin of the Jews. That is why the Jews crucified Jesus.
On this basis, it is very important to draw clear distinctions between three different groups. First: the ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” and who remained faithful to the scriptures, few of them are in southern Arabia, Yemen, and Ethiopia. Second: the unfaithful ancient Hebrews “sons of Israel” who invaded, colonized, and mixed with the Canaanite. And third group: the “Jews” and “Judaism” who were invented by Persia after a fraudulent return from the Babylonian Captivity, present day Jews.
There three groups differs from each other substantially in ethnicity, culture, faith, language, and legality. The only genuine true teachings of Moses and Jesus can only be found in Ethiopia together with Ark of Covenant.
Modern day Israel and Israel at the time of Jesus both are illegitimate creatures. The modern was made by Turkic Persian invaders and colonizers, and the older was made by unfaithful Israelite invaders and colonizers.
The Promised Land that the unfaithful Israelite rejected is surely in Saudi Arabia, between Mecca and Yemen. Ethiopia was only a refuge for them for more than 400 years. And Ethiopians were very generous to them.
The Israelite didn’t set foot on Egyptian soil. There are no remains, no writings, no mention in all records, and no possibility to accommodate cattle herders in a country like Egypt. There was never a walled city with gates in Egypt. The geography and names are irrelevant to Egypt, but much related to Yemen and Ethiopia.
More than 400 years without a trace is just unbelievable. This is another grand forgery and not just misinterpretation. Jewishness is a Political Organization for Turkic Mongolians
Researchers say the DNA of Yiddish speakers may have originated from four ancient villages in north-eastern Turkey. They also proved that Yiddish is not “bad German”, but it is a Turkic language mixed with Hebrew, German, Persian, and East European.
It can be stated with confidence that the Jews of northern and eastern Europe – normally known as Ashkenazim Jews – are the descendants of earlier Turkic raiders mixed with enslaved natives from the regions all around the Black Sea from Volga-Don rivers to Anatolia, Balkan, and Thracia in 650 BC.
At that time they were pagan Tengeri. Judaism (Talmudic Pharisees) was not yet invented as it began to form since 530 BC and continued till 220 AD. But, Moses’ faith (the written Hebrew Scriptures) existed before that time by about 550 years, since 1200 BC.
The Turkic raiders and colonizers of Eastern Europe were not called Jews by that time. Ashkenazi Jews became organized Jews in a political group only after 650 AD when they received members form other Turkic groups who came from Arabia, Levant, Mesopotamia, and Persia with the start of wars with Arabs in those regions.
All of the new comers to the Turkified Eastern Europe were politically Jews, as they were established in Judea and Samaria by the Turkic Persians. They were ethnically Turkic Mongolians, and religiously followed Judaism (Talmudic Pharisees) to rule over the Hebrew Sadducees and Israelite.
The combined Turkic groups worked together both from within and from the outside Arabia and Levant to stop and influence Islam and finally to control it.
Genetics and linguistic research proved that Turkish villages –Iskenaz, Eskenaz, Ashanaz, and Ashkuz were part of the original Ashkenazic homeland. It is believed that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza – the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppeland people, the Scythians.
Unfortunately, geographical name changes in Turkey have been undertaken, periodically, in bulk from 1913 to the present by successive Turkish governments. Thousands of names within the Turkish Republic or the Ottoman Empire have lost or departed from their popular or historic alternatives.
The governments have argued that such names are foreign and/or divisive against Turkish unity. The policy commenced during the final years of the Ottoman Empire and continued into the Turkish Republic. Approximately 28,000 topographic names were changed, which included 12,211 village and town names and 4,000 mountain, river, and other topographic names. The name İşkenaz was changed to Skena and many other name changes were enforced.
A map of the Arabian Peninsula showing the Hebrew-Arab Kingdom of Himyar, together with other notable Hebrew villages
Historians and researchers must find the relationships between the Torah with Yemen and the Exodus with Ethiopia. They must notice that the Hebrew language could had passed through 4 fundamental changes due to Hebrew movements and Turkic colonization. (Yemeni era; Ethiopian Era; Post-Exodus era; and the Post-Babylonian era)
While it is clear that the Israelite presence and Exodus from Egypt never happened there are explanations for geographic name similarities (copying) between Asir and Palestine, as Prof. Salibi proved. It is most probably that the unfaithful Israelite who rejected Asir renamed many places in Canaan to match those in the original Promised Land in Asir to make their case stronger.
The late historian Kamal Salibi claimed in his book “The Bible Came from Arabia” (1985) that Asir near Yemen was the original Promised Land
Research and analysis of the Old Testament place names, corroborated by contemporary Pharaonic and Mesopotamian sources, Kamal Salibi locates the ancient land of Israel, not in Palestine, but in the Najran province of what is now Saudi Arabia. The unfaithful Israelite rejected the original Promised Land then after sometime invaded Canaan and claimed it is the Promised Land. And to convince the Israelites renamed many places with names from the original Promised Land in Asir.
Thus, as the ancient Hebrews became extinct through their assimilation into other peoples, the religion founded by Moses disappeared. The Hebrew Judges and prophets continued to spread among other peoples who had no connection with the original Hebrews of the Old Testament. In the Israelite leaders created alternative Promised Land and unholy scriptures. Then few centuries later the Turkic Persian took over that land for the Turkic Jews and invented Judaism.
It is also important to notice that The Implication, of course, is that the Jews of today are not descendants from the Old Testament tribes and, consequently, that they have no claim to the “Promised Land”, whether it is located in Palestine or elsewhere.
After looking through a gazetteer of Arabia given to him as a gift, Kamal Salibi was struck by the number of biblical place names found in the province of Asir. To satisfy his curiosity he correlated the names of places to the distances travelled according various Old Testament books of the Bible, and found that there was a close correspondence in the distances between all places in Asir and those in the Old Testament, not the discrepancies found between such places in Palestine.
His research led to the publishing of his first book on Asir, The Bible Came from Arabia and to some scholarly resistance but mostly to his ideas being completely ignored by the academic world.
Moreover, when one remembers that Jerusalem in Palestinian Israel is often referred to as “the daughter of Jerusalem”, one feels there may indeed be an original Jerusalem here in Asir. Unfortunately, to date there has been little archeological research in Asir, though the state is replete with ruins. How fascinating it would be if the Promised Land did turn out to be Asir.
Salibi’s book “The Bible Came from Arabia” is out of print, but his second book, “Secrets of the Bible People”, is still available. They make interesting reading — although, personally, I would be more interested in some credible scholastic criticism of his theories; there has been little to date.”
Through a minute analysis of Old Testament place names, corroborated by contemporary Pharaonic and Mesopotamian sources, the author locates the ancient land of Israel, not in Palestine, but in the Najran province of what is now Saudi Arabia.
Professor Kamal Suleiman Salibi (Arabic: كمال سليمان الصليبي ) (2 May 1929 – 1 September 2011) was a Lebanese historian, professor of history at the American University of Beirut (AUB).
He wrote these books:
“A History of Arabia”, Beirut, Caravan Books, 1980
“The Bible Came from Arabia”, London, Jonathan Cape, 1985
“Secrets of the Bible People”, London, Saqi Books, 1988
“Who Was Jesus? Conspiracy in Jerusalem”, London, I.B. Tauris, 1988
“The Historicity of Biblical Israel”, London, NABU Publications, 1998
“The Historicity of Biblical Israel” (second edition), Beirut, Dar Nelson, 2009 Other sources include:
“Abraham’s Pharaoh was not King of Egypt” Posted on January 3, 2016 by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat, https://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2016/01/03/pharaoh-of-abraham-was-not-king-of-egypt/
“Ancient Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor any Israelites” by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat, Kindle Edition, 153 pages, Published March 3rd 2015
“Palestine is not the Jews’ Promised Land” (2015 book) by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat, available on US Amazon for only ($4.99) and at a lower price on Kindle Unlimited. Books in Arabic include:
“Moses and Pharaoh in the Arabian Peninsula”, 2007, 136 pages, by Ahmed Aldbash
“Geography of the Torah Egypt and the Children of Israel in Asir” by Ziad Mona
“The Arabic Bible and Jerusalem” by Faraj Allah Saleh Dib. Beirut. : Dar Nawfal
“Yemen and the prophets of the Torah”, 1, 211 pages, Published October 11th 2012
A great source about the Ethiopian history with Israelite is Bernard Leeman:
“The Queen Of Sheba & Biblical Scholarship” – July 21, 2015, by Bernard Leeman, 276 pages, Publisher: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; First Edition edition (July 21, 2015), ISBN-10: 1515169618, ISBN-13: 978-1515169611 (https://www.amazon.com/Queen-Sheba-Biblical-Scholarship/dp/1515169618) also (https://www.free-minds.org/sites/default/files/Sheba.pdf) 268 pages (Printed in Thailand)
“The Queen of Sheba and Africa: A Reassessment of the Sheba-Menelik Cycle of the Kebra Nagast in the Light of the Salibi Hypothesis”, Bernard Leeman
“NUBIAN MOSES, ETHIOPIAN EXODUS, ARABIAN SOLOMON”
“RECONSTRUCTING THE OLD TESTAMENT NARRATIVE”
“THE ARK OF THE COVENANT” (16 August 2016 update), Bernard Leeman
“Second Sabaean Inscription at Adi Kaweh ca 800 BC mentioning Hebrew”, Bernard Leeman
Here are four published articles describe the findings of a research and contradicts earlier theories that Yiddish is an old German dialect or of any European origin. The study, titled “Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz” was conducted by researchers from three universities in the U.K., U.S., and Israel. It was published in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution. Important Notice: The four articles, for unclear reasons, try to justify the Turkic presence in the region with trade along the Silk Road, while ignoring the raiding, colonization, and enslavement of Western Asia, Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, the Balkan, and Anatolia.
The creation of the Slavic group, the mass migration and invasions of the Sea people, and the simultaneous collapse of several great civilizations that occurred in 1177 BC all might be linked to earlier Turkic raids.
By Patric Kerouac – March 16, 2017, (to check the original article posted go to Molon Labe Media!)
Introduction: Many academics and politicians try to deny and claim the following explanation which even support the existence of Irish slavery.
[Irish indentured servants were Irish people who became indentured servants in territories under the control of the British Empire, such as the Caribbean (particularly Barbados, Jamaica and the Leeward Islands), British North America and later Australia.
Some came willingly, agreeing to provide up to seven years of labor in return for passage to the New World and food, housing, and shelter during their indenture. At the end of this period, their masters were legally required to grant them “freedom dues,” in the form of either land or capital.
Many were transported unwillingly: as political prisoners, vagrants, or people who had been defined as “undesirable” by the British state. Penal transportation of Irish people was at its height during the 17th century, during the Cromwellian conquest and settlement of Ireland. During this period, thousands of Irish people were sent to the Caribbean, or “Barbadosed”, against their will. Similar practices continued as late as the Victorian period where Irish political prisoners were sent to imperial British penal colonies in Tasmania.]
(Comment: It is really amazing that enslavement of Europeans are attributed to Arabs and Muslims, while slavery in Europe began with Turkic Mongolian raids and plunder around 700 BC. Why even revisionists are deceiving Europeans (Whites). Arabs never left Arabia and they were under the yoke of Turkic bands since the Turkic created Persia in 600 BC, with the Turkic invention of Jews and Judaism by the Turkic Persians.
Just replace all references to Arabs and Muslims with Turkic and Jews and the following article and book will be more accurate.
The article ignored all old and recent Turkic Khanates and their deep large scale influence in White slavery in Caucasus, Russia, Poland, Germany, Ukraine, Crimea, all East Europe, Balkan, Greece, Iberia, Mediterranean coast, and Anatolia. Also, Indian, Afghani, Iranian, Levant, African slavery were Turkic enterprises, including the so-called Arab/Islamic/Oriental Slavery and then the Transatlantic Slavery)
Here is the article:
You probably have seen the white Irish slave meme below on social media. It has caused quite a stir especially amongst the progressive liberals and the black slave reparations movement. Why? Because it brings to light a very very uncomfortable subject that has long since been dropped from school curriculums as it does not serve the progressive white liberal guilt agenda and the race pimp industry talking points. White slavery and Irish slavery is being denied and covered up. After all, where would the main source of progressive division be without the black slavery grievance? It is not like a man of African descent just occupied the highest office in the land for eight years. It is not like a black woman just held the highest office in law enforcement. Oh, wait…Nevermind.
White Slavery and Irish Slaves Are Very Real And There Are Plenty Of Facts To Prove It
Let’s discuss the very real history of white slavery and Irish slavery in America.Today, not a tear is shed for the sufferings of millions of our own enslaved forefathers. 200 years of White slavery in America have been almost completely obliterated from the collective memory of the American people.Who wants to be reminded that half or perhaps as many as two-thirds of the original American colonists came here, not of their own free will, but kidnapped, shanghaied, impressed, duped, beguiled, and yes, in chains? We will lay out the facts about white slavery and we will cite references from numerous sources all verifiable. After reading this article there will be no room left to debate the validity of white and Irish slavery.
The fraud of the grievance industry successfully established the definition of the word slave as label for blacks, while labeling descriptions of the historic experience of whites in slavery a fallacy. Yet the very word slave, which the establishments consensus school of history pretends cannot legitimately be applied to Whites, is derived from the word Slav. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word slave is another name for the White people of eastern Europe, the Slavs. (Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, p. 2,858).
In other words, slave has always been a term for and a definition of a servile condition of white people. Yet we are told by the liberal academics and those in the race pimp industrythat it is not correct to refer to whites as slaves but only as servants, even though the very root of the word is derived from the historical fact of white slavery.
A correct understanding of the authentic history of the enslavement of whites in America could have profound consequences for the future of the races: We cannot be sure that the position of the earliest Africans differed markedly from that of the white indentured servants. The debate has considerable significance for the interpretation of race relations in American history (Eugene D. Genovese, Roll, Jordan Roll: The World the Slaves Made, p. 31)
Most of the books on white labor in early America are titled with words like white indentured servitude, white bondservants, white servants etc. It is interesting that white people who were bound to a condition of what became in many cases permanent chattel slavery untildeath, are not referred to as slaves by academics.
With the massive amount of educational and media resources on the black experience of slavery, the unspoken assumption has been that only blacks have been enslaved to any degree or magnitude worthy of memorial. The historical record reveals that this is not the case. White people have been sold as slaves for centuries.
White Slavery in Ancient & Medieval Europe
Among the ancient Greeks, despite their tradition of democracy, the enslavement of fellow whites even fellow Greeks was the order of the day. Aristotle considered white slaves as things. The Romans also had no compunctions against enslaving whites who they too termed a thing (res). In his agricultural writings, the first century B.C. Roman philosopher Varro labeled white slaves as nothing more than tools that happened to have voices (instrumenti vocale). Cato the Elder, discoursing on plantation management, proposed that white slaves when old or ill should be discarded along with worn-out farm implements.
Julius Caesar enslaved as many as one million whites from Gaul, some of whom were sold to the slave dealers who followed his victorious legions (William D. Phillips, Jr., Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade, p.18).
In A.D. 319 the Christian emperor of Rome, Constantine, ruled that if an owner whipped his white slave to death he should not stand in any criminal accusation if the slave dies; and all statutes of limitations and legal interpretations are hereby set aside.
The Romans enslaved thousands of the early white inhabitants of Great Britain who were known as Angles, from which we derive the term Anglo-Saxon as a description of the English race. In the sixth century Pope Gregory the First witnessed blond-haired, blue-eyed English boys awaiting sale in a slave market in Rome. Inquiring of their origin, the Pope was told they were Angles. Gregory replied, Non Angli, sed Angeli (Not Angles, but Angels). When the Franks conquered the Visigoths in southern Gaul huge numbers of whites entered the slave markets. After Charlemagnes conquest of Saxony, during which many pagan Saxons were enslaved, he set up a network of parish churches. To provide for the maintenance of the priest and the church, those living in the parish were to donate a house and land as well as a male and female (Saxon) slave to the church for every 120 people in the parish (William Phillips,Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade. p. 52).
Arabs and the Traffic in White Slaves
The trade in White slaves was one of the few sources of foreign exchange for western European powers in a period when the East produced the goods that Europeans could not procure elsewhere. The sale of White slaves to Asia and Africa was one of the few sources of gold for European treasuries.
From the eighth to the eleventh century France was a major transfer point for White slaves to the Muslim world, with Rouen being the center for the selling of Irish and Flemish slaves.
At the same time that France was a transfer point for slaves to the Muslim world, Italy was occupying much the same position… Venetians (were)… selling slaves and timber across the Mediterranean. The slaves were usually Slays brought across the Alps… The Venetians were the earliest successful Italian sea traders and because profits on (slave) trade with the Muslims were lucrative, they resisted efforts to stop them. In return for their exports of timber, iron and (White) slaves, they brought in oriental luxury products, mainly fine cloths… (William Phillips, Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade.pp. 62-63).
The stereotype from Establishment consensus history is of the Muslim slaver herding chained Blacks through the desert. In fact, for seven hundred years, until the fall of Muslim Spain, those being herded were first and foremost overwhelmingly White:
Before the tenth century, the Muslims generally bought Christian Europeans as slaves… By the tenth century, Slavs became the most numerous imported group… during the late Middle Ages, until the fall of Granada in the late fifteenth century, most slaves of the… Muslims were Christians from the northern kingdoms… (William Phillips, Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade.p. 69).
In the vast lands of the eastern European steppes from the eighth to the twelfth century, there was a well-developed slaving network… Slavs and Finns, called saqaliba (slaves) indiscriminately by the Muslims, entered the Muslim world by these Caspian and Black sea routes. (William Phillips, Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade.pp. 63-64).
The fate of the hundreds of thousands of White slaves sold to the Arabs was described in one Spanish text as atrocissima et ferocissima (most atrocious and harsh). The men were worked to death as galley slaves. The women, girls and boys were used as prostitutes.
White males had their genitals mutilated by castration attempts.Based on the high prices white eunuchs commanded throughout the Middle Eastern slave markets most of these castration victims did not survive the savage procedure.
Escape from North Africa and the Middle East was almost impossible and those White slaves who were caught trying to flee were punished by having their noses and ears cut off, or worse.
Early Muslim texts provide insights into the extent to which the Arabs identified Europeans with slavery, classified White slaves as animals and even produced learned racist disquisitions on the supposed merits of emasculated East European slaves. In his ninth century treatise on beasts, The Book of Animals, the Muslim scholar Jahiz writes:
Another change which overcomes the eunuch: of two slaves of Slavic race, who are… twins, one castrated and the other not, the eunuch becomes more disposed toward service, wiser, more able, and apt for various problems of manual labor… All these qualities you find only in the castrated one. On the other hand, his brother continues to have the same native torpor, the same lack of natural talent, the same imbecility common to slaves, and incapacity for learning a foreign language. (Charles Verlinden, The Slave in Medieval Europe, vol. 1, p. 213).
In the ninth century, the Vikings sold tens of thousands of Whites to the Arabs of Spain. According to Michael Woods book In Search of the Dark Ages:
An Arab traveler of the time who came to Spain remarked on the great numbers of European slaves in harems and in the militia. The palace of the Emir of Cordoba in particular had many White girls. Of these unfortunate people the Vikings were undoubtedly a major source of supply.The Arabs in Spain saw the long-term potential of this trade, and as early as the 840s sent a diplomatic mission to Scandinavia to put it on an organized basis.
The most westerly component of the early medieval slave trade in Europe was the British Isles. In the eleventh century the Vikings were active slave traders in Ireland… From Ireland the Vikings took the slaves to be sold in Muslim Spain and Scandinavia, and even to be transported into Russia; some may have been taken as far as Constantinople and the Muslim Middle East… (William Phillips, Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade.p. 63).
The Norwegian slave trader was an important enough figure to appear in the 12th century tale of Tristan… Icelandic literature also provides numerous references to raiding in Ireland as a source for slaves.
Norwegian Vikings made slave raids not only against the Irish and Scots (who are often called Irish in Norse sources) but also against Norse settlers in Ireland or the Scottish Isles or even in Norway itself. Slave trading was a major commercial activity of the Viking Age… (Ruth Mazo Karras, Slavery and Society in Medieval Scandinavia, p. 49). The children of White slaves in Iceland were routinely murdered en masse (Karras, p. 52).
White Slavery in Early America
As late as the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, continuing shipments of white slaves, some of them Christians, flowed from the booming slave markets on the northern Black Sea coast into Italy, Spain, Egypt and the Mediterranean islands… From Barbados to Virginia, colonists.., showed few scruples about reducing their less fortunate countrymen to a status little different from that of chattel slaves… The prevalence and suffering of white slaves, serfs and indentured servants in the early modern period suggests that there was nothing inevitable about limiting plantation slavery to people of African origin. (David Brion Davis writing in the New York Review of Books, Oct. 11, 1990, p. 37)
From 1609 until the early 1800’s, between one-half and two thirds of all the White colonists who came to the New World came as slaves. Of the passengers on the Mayflower, twelve were White slaves (John Van der Zee, Bound Over, p. 93). White slaves cleared the forests, drained the swamps, built the roads. They worked and died in greater numbers than anyone else.
Both psychologically and materially whites in modern times are called upon to bear burdens of guilt and monetary reparation for black slavery. This position is based entirely on enforced ignorance and the deliberate suppression of the record of white slavery in North America. Hundreds of thousands of Whites had been enslaved during the colonial era in America while millions of others were too poor to afford even a mule, much less a Black slave.
Slave reparations and guilty feelings are due if one subscribes to such a thing as retroactive collective guilt from the descendants of the minority of wealthy whites who owned black slaves and who, in the South at least, were themselves generally reduced to penury in the aftermath of the Civil War. Reparations would also have to be paid by the descendants of the Cherokee and other American Indian tribes who owned Black slaves and by the heirs of Black tribal leaders in Africa who sold them into slavery.
Reparations must also be paid, if the logic of the situation is to be consistent, to the modern-day white descendants of the white slaves of early America.
The whole discussion of black slavery, Southern racism and the Civil War as currently framed by the liberal progressive establishment and race pimp agenda, necessarily must exclude any examination of the fact of white slavery, especially in the 17th and 18th centuries, and the condition of free white poor in the 19th century forced to compete against black slave labor in the South.
In the founding era of colonial America, both White and Black slaves were referred to as servants. Once the term slavery came into universal usage (a word derived from the enslavement of Slavic peoples), objective observers of the time who were without mercenary ties to the traffic in white servants called them slaves: Contemporary observers described it as white slavery and referred to indentured servants as White slaves. (Hilary Beckles, White Servitude, p. 71).
Breaking the Chains of Liberal Progressive Lies
In colonial America, white servants could be bartered for a profit, sold to the highest bidder for the unpaid debts of their masters, and otherwise transferred like movable goods or chattels. In every civic, social and legal attribute, these victims of the displacements of the 16th and 17th centuries were set apart. Despised by every other order, these men and their children, and their children’s children seemed mired in a hard, degraded life. The condition of the first blacks in the continental English colonies must be viewed within the perspective of these conceptions and realities of (White) servitude… (Origins of the Southern Labor System, William and Mary Quarterly, April, 1950, p. 202).
The history of enslavement in America, as portrayed, in the false narrative of the liberal progressive corporate media has focused exclusively on the enslavement of blacks. The impression is given that only whites bear responsibility for enslaving blacks and only blacks were slaves. Blacks in Africa as well as American Indian tribes, such as the Cherokee engaged in extensive enslavement of blacks. The Cherokee Indians owned large plantations on which they worked their black slaves in gangs (R. Halliburton, Jr., Red over Black: Black Slavery among the Cherokee Indians, p. 20).
White slaves were actually owned by blacks and Indians in the South to such an extent that the Virginia Assembly passed the following law in 1670: It is enacted that no black or Indian though baptized and enjoyned their own freedom shall be capable of any such purchase of Christians… (Statutes of the Virginia Assembly, Vol. 2, pp. 280-81).
Blacks also owned other blacks in America (Charleston County Probate Court Records, 1754-1758, p. 406).
While whites languished in chains, blacks were free men in Virginia throughout the 17th century (Willie Lee Rose, A Documentary History of Slavery in North America, p. 15; John Henderson Russell, Free Black in Virginia, 1619-1865, p.23; Bruce Levine, et al., Who Built America?, vol. I, p. 52).
In 1717, it was proposed that a qualification for election to the South Carolina Assembly was to be the ownership of one white man. (Journals of the Commons House of Assembly of the Province of South Carolina: 1692-1775, volume 5, pp. 294-295).
Blacks voted in the Carolina counties of Berkeley and Craven in 1706 and their votes were taken. (Levine, p. 63).
Blacks were carryingguns or other weapons and going about armed in the service of wealthy landowners at the same time that tens of thousands of enslaved white men were forbidden arms. In 1678 one thousand blacks were armed by the planters and formed into a fighting militia for protection against the French (Carl and Roberta Bridenbaugh, No Peace Beyond the Line: The English in the Caribbean, 1624-1690; pp. 359-360).
In Carolina in 1704, 1707, 1712, 1738 and 1741 bills were passed authorizing armed black militias in the service of the planters. In 1742 certificates were presented to the black militiamen for services rendered. (Warren B. Smith, White Servitude in Colonial South Carolina, p. 98).
During the American Revolution, Lord Dunmore, the Royal Governor of Virginia appointed by the King, sought to win Virginia back for the British Crown with black troops recruited in America, to be called the Ethiopian Regiment. Parties of Blacks in the South were armed by the British with guns, clubs and swords with the order to use them against rebellious American patriots. (Ronald Hoffman, The Disaffected in the Revolutionary South, The American Revolution: Explorations in the History of American Radicalism, pp. 281-282).
By the first of December (1775) nearly three hundred blacks in uniform, with the words Liberty to Slaves inscribed across their breasts, were members of Lord Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment. On the ninth of December at the Battle of Great Bridge the Lexington of the Souththe British force of six hundred, nearly half black, was thrown back by Woodfords (all-White, American) Second Virginia Regiment. In April, 1782, General Nathanael Greene informed Washington that the British had armed and put into uniform at least seven hundred blacks. The Ethiopian Regiment was not the only black unit. That same spring two members of a black British cavalry troop, about a hundred strong, were killed in a skirmish (with patriots) at Dorchester, Virginia. Evacuating Boston, the royal army sailed to Halifax with a Company of Blacks. It is possible that tens of thousands of (black) slaves in South Carolina and Georgia went over to the British. (Sidney Kaplan, The Black Presence in the Era of the American Revolution, 1770-1800, pp. 32, 61 and 67).
During the War of 1812, the British ranks included approximately three hundred armed American blacks, who were used in combat against American forces. Some of these blacks helped the British burn the White House in 1814 (Roediger, p. 44).
The British aristocracy’s penchant for arming blacks and Indians for combat against White Americans has largely been forgotten today, even though it was one of the factors which led the colonists to go to war against King George, and was cited as such in the Declaration of Independence. The patriots outrage at Indian atrocities and anger at Dunmore’s manumission of blacks, was summarized by Jefferson in one of the least quoted passages of the Declaration: He (King George) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us (Dunmore’s proclamation freeing Blacks in American jurisdiction), and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Cromwell’s conquest of Ireland in the middle of the seventeenth century made slaves as well as subjects of the Irish people. Over a hundred thousand men, women and children were seized by the English troops and shipped to the West Indies, where they were sold into slavery… (George Novack, Slavery in Colonial America, Americas Revolutionary Heritage, p. 142
On Sept. 11, 1655 came the following decree from the Puritan Protectorate by Henry Cromwell in London:
Concerning the young (Irish) women, although we must use force in taking them up, yet it being so much for their own good, and likely to be of some great advantage to the public, it is not in the least doubted, that you may have such number of them as you think fit to make use upon this account. The account was enslavement and transportation to the colonies.
A week later Henry Cromwell ordered that 1,500 Irish boys aged 12 to 14 also be shipped into slavery with the Irish girls in the steaming tropics of Jamaica and Barbados in circumstances which killed off white adult slaves by the thousands due to the rigors of field work in that climate and the savage brutality of their overseers. In October the Council of approved the plan.
Altogether more than one hundred thousand Irish were shipped to the West Indies where they died in slavery in horrible conditions. Children werent the only victims. Even eighty year old Irish women were deported to the West Indies and enslaved (D.M.R. Esson, The Curse of Cromwell: A History of the Ironside Conquest of Ireland, 1649-53, p. 176).
Irish religious leaders were herded into internment camps throughout Ireland, and were then moved progressively to the ports for shipment overseas like cattle. (D.M.R. Esson, p. 159). By the time Cromwells men had finished with the Irish people, only one-sixth of the Irish population remained on their lands. (Esson, p. 168).
Irish Slave Facts:
The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat (70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves at this time). From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and over 300,000 were sold as slaves.
Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were forcibly taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. Another 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia while 30,000 Irish men were sold to the highest bidder.
In 1656, Oliver Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers. African slaves were very expensive (50 Sterling), they had to be transported long distances and paid for not only in Africa but in the New World. Irish slaves were cheap (no more than 5 Sterling) and most often were either kidnapped from Ireland, prisoners or forcibly removed. They could be worked to death, whipped or branded without it being a crime. Many, many times they were beaten to death and while the death of an Irish slave was a monetary setback, it was far cheaper than the death of an expensive African. Therefore, African slaves were treated much better in Colonial America.
The importation of Irish slaves continued well into the eighteenth century, long after the importation of African slaves became the norm. Records state that after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. Irish slavery didnt end until Britain decided to end slavery in 1839 and stopped transporting slaves.
The enactment of 1652 in the British Isles: it may be lawful for two or more justices of the peace within any county, city or town, corporate belonging to the commonwealth to from tyme to tyme by warrant cause to be apprehended, seized on and detained all and every person or persons that shall be found begging and vagrant.. in any town, parish or place to be conveyed into the Port of London, or unto any other port from where such person or persons may be shipped into a foreign colony or plantation.
The judges of Edinburgh Scotland during the years 1662-1665 ordered the enslavement and shipment to the colonies a large number of rogues and others who made life unpleasant for the British upper class. [B](Register for the Privy Council of Scotland, third series, vol. 1, p 181, vol. 2, p 101).
This ship from London with people to sell will give credit to buy the servants from the Virginia Gazette, March 28, 1771
They came into a society in which a large part of the white population was to some degree unfree. The blacks lack of freedom was not unusual. These Black newcomers, like so many others, were accepted, bought and held, as kinds of servants. He goes on to say that the desire for cheap labor caused the elite merchants and landowners to enslave not only the blacks but their own white kindred as well blacks were much more expensive than whites.Therefore, whites were mistreated more often than blacks.
During the Colonial period, whites did the harder work, such as digging ditches, clearing land, and felling trees. The frontier demands for this kind of heavy manual labor was satisfied primarily by white slaves As late as 1669 those who had large scale plantations were manning them with white slaves, not blacks.
In 1670 the Governor of Virginia said that he had 2000 Blackand 6000 White slaves. Hundreds of thousands of whites in colonial America were owned outright by their masters and died in slavery. Even the blacks knew this. If they were made to work too hard they accused their masters of treating them like the Irish
Cromwell did not only enslave Catholics. Poor white Protestants on the English mainland fared no better. In February, 1656 he ordered his soldiers to find 1,200 poor English women for enslavement and deportation to the colonies. In March he repeated the order but increased the quota to 2,000 young women of England. In the same year, Cromwells Council of State ordered all the homeless poor of Scotland, male and female, transported to Jamaica for enslavement (Eric Williams, p. 101).
Of course, Cromwell and the Puritan ruling class were not the only ones involved in the enslavement of Whites. During the Restoration reign of King Charles II, the monarch with Catholic sympathizers who had been Cromwells arch-enemy, the king enslaved large groups of poor Presbyterians and Scottish Covenanters and deported them to the plantations in turn.
Legislation sponsored by King Charles II in 1686, intended to ensure the enslavement of Protestant rebels in the Caribbean colonies, was so harsh that one observer noted, The condition of these Rebels was by this Act made as bad, if not worse than the Blacks. (Richard Hall, Acts Passed in the Island of Barbados, p. 484).
By far the largest number and certainly the most important group of white indentured servants were the poor Protestants from Europe. (Warren B. Smith, p. 44).
Slaves or Indentured Servants
There has been a lot of whitewashing of the Irish slave trade, partly by not mentioning it, and partly by labeling slaves as indentured servants. There were indeed indentureds, including English, French, Spanish and even a few Irish. But there is a great difference between the two. Indentures bind two or more parties in mutual obligations. Servant indentures were agreements between an individual and a shipper in which the individual agreed to sell his services for a period of time in exchange for passage, and during his service, he would receive proper housing, food, clothing, and usually a piece of land at the end of the term of service.
It is believed that some of the Irish that went to the Amazon settlement after the Battle of Kinsale and up to 1612 were exiled military who went voluntarily, probably as indentureds to Spanish or Portuguese shippers. However, from 1625 onward the Irish were sold, pure and simple as slaves.
There were no indenture agreements, no protection, no choice. They were captured and originally turned over to shippers to be sold for their profit. Because the profits were so great, generally 900 pounds of cotton for a slave, the Irish slave trade became an industry in which everyone involved (except the Irish) had a share of the profits.
Treatment Of White Irish Slaves
Although the Africans and Irish were housed together and were the property of the planter owners, the Africans received much better treatment, food and housing. In the British West Indies the planters routinely tortured white slaves for any infraction. Owners would hang Irish slaves by their hands and set their hands or feet afire as a means of punishment. To end this barbarity, Colonel William Brayne wrote to English authorities in 1656 urging the importation of Negro slaves on the grounds that, as the planters would have to pay much more for them, they would have an interest in preserving their lives, which was wanting in the case of (Irish). many of whom, he charged, were killed by overwork and cruel treatment. African blacks cost generally about 20 to 50 pounds Sterling, compared to 900 pounds of cotton (about 5 pounds Sterling) for an Irish.
They were also more durable in the hot climate, and caused fewer problems. The biggest bonus with the Africans though, was they were NOT Catholic, and any heathen pagan was better than an Irish Papist. Irish prisoners were commonly sentenced to a term of service, so theoretically they would eventually be free. In practice, many of the slavers sold the Irish on the same terms as prisoners for servitude of 7 to 10 years.
There was no racial consideration or discrimination, you were either a freeman or a slave, but there was aggressive religious discrimination, with the Pope considered by all English Protestants to be the enemy of God and civilization, and all Catholics heathens and hated.
Irish Catholics were not considered to be Christians. Any infraction was dealt with the same severity, whether African or Irish, field worker or domestic servant. Floggings were common, and if a planter beat an Irish slave to death, it was not a crime, only a financial loss, and a lesser loss than killing a more expensive African. Parliament passed the Act to Regulate Slaves on British Plantations in 1667, designating authorized punishments to include whippings and brandings for slave offenses against a Christian.
Irish Catholics were not considered Christians, even if they were freemen. The planters quickly began breeding the comely Irish women, not just because they were attractive, but because it was profitable as well as pleasurable. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, and although an Irish woman may become free, her children were not. Naturally, most Irish mothers remained with their children after earning their freedom.
Planters then began to breed Irish women with African men to produce more slaves who had lighter skin and brought a higher price. The practice became so widespread that in 1681, legislation was passed forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale. This legislation was not the result of any moral or racial consideration, but rather because the practice was interfering with the profits of the Royal African Company. It is interesting to note that from 1680 to 1688, the Royal African Company sent 249 shiploads of slaves to the Indies and American Colonies, with a cargo of 60,000 Irish and Africans.
White Losses in the Middle Passage Higher than that of Blacks
White slaves transported to the colonies suffered a staggering loss of life in the 17th and 18th century. During the voyage to America it was customary to keep the white slaves below deck for the entire nine to twelve-week journey. A white slave would be confined to a hole not more than sixteen feet long, chained with 50 other men to a board, with padlocked collars around their necks. The weeks of confinement below deck in the ships stifling hold often resulted in outbreaks of contagious disease which would sweep through the cargo of white freight chained in the bowels of the ship.
Ships carrying white slaves to America often lost half their slaves to death. According to historian Sharon V. Salinger, Scattered data reveal that the mortality for [White] servants at certain times equaled that for [Black] slaves in the middle passage, and during other periods actually exceeded the death rate for [Black] slaves. (Salinger, p.91.) Salinger reports a death rate of ten to twenty percent over the entire 18th century for Black slaves on board ships enroute to America compared with a death rate of 25% for White slaves enroute to America (Salinger, p. 92).
Foster R. Dulles writing in Labor in America: A History, p. 6, states that whether convicts, children spirited from the countryside or political prisoners, white slaves experienced discomforts and sufferings on their voyage across the Atlantic that paralleled the cruel hardships undergone by black slaves on the notorious Middle Passage.
Dulles says the whites were indiscriminately herded aboard the white guineamen, often as many as 300 passengers on little vessels of not more than 200 tons burden overcrowded, unsanitary. The mortality rate was sometimes as high as 50% and young children seldom survived the horrors of a voyage which might last anywhere from seven to twelve weeks.
Independent investigator A.B. Ellis in the Argosy writes concerning the transport of white slaves, The human cargo, many of whom were still tormented by unhealed wounds, could not all lie down at once without lying on each other. They were never suffered to go on deck. The hatchway was constantly watched by sentinels armed with hangers and blunderbusses. In the dungeons below all was darkness, stench, lamentation, disease and death.
Marcus Jernegan describes the greed of the shipmasters which led to horrendous loss of life for White slaves transported to America:
The voyage over often repeated the horrors of the famous middle passage of slavery fame. An average cargo was three hundred, but the shipmaster, for greater profit, would sometimes crowd as many as six hundred into a small vessel. The mortality under such circumstances was tremendous, sometimes more than half. Mittelberger (an eyewitness) says he saw thirty-two children thrown into the ocean during one voyage. (Jernegan, pp. 50-51).
The mercantile firms, as importers of (White) servants, were not too careful about their treatment, as the more important purpose of the transaction was to get ships over to South Carolina which could carry local produce back to Europe. Consequently the Irish as well as others suffered greatly. It was almost as if the British merchants had redirected their vessels from the African coast to the Irish coast, with the white servants coming over in much the same fashion as the African slaves. (Warren B. Smith, p. 42).
A study of the middle passage of White slaves was included in Parliamentary Petition of 1659. It reported that White slaves were locked below deck for two weeks while the slave ship was still in port. Once under way, they were all the way locked up under decks… amongst horses. They were chained from their legs to their necks.
…transports… travel in double irons… were whipped and beaten… captains such as Edward Brock-ett of the Rappahannock Merchant, were totally unfit. (Ekirch, p. 101). Of the White slaves bound for Maryland from London aboard the slave ship Justitia, at the mercy of the savage Capt. Barnet Bond, nearly one-third of the Whites died: The very worst excesses were revealed during the voyage of the Justitia in 1743. Under the command of Barnet Bond… Bond set stringent water rations. Despite ample reserves of water on board, he allotted each transport only one pint a day. Some started to drink their own urine… (Ekirch, p. 102).
The former partner of Andrew Reid of the White slave trading firm of Reid & Armour wrote that Reid was a person against whom every species of complaint was made. Profits continued to flow in spite of the deaths of what the White slave-trade firm of Stevenson, Randolph & Cheston referred to as the goods. The traffic in these goods… properly managed will in a few years make us very genteel for-tunes. The sales of the convicts run up amazingly in a little time. (William Stevenson to James Cheston, Sept. 12, 1768 and Dec. 30, 1769, Cheston-Galloway Papers, Maryland Historical Society).
Once the slave ships left British shores, profit rather than penal policy shaped the character of transportation and what happened to enslaved Whites overseas mattered little. As soon as they were safely consigned to merchants, authorities assumed no responsibility for their welfare. (Ekirch, p. 3). White slaves aboard ship were treated worse than dogs or swine and are kept much more un-cleanly than those animals are… (Shaw, p. 35).
A witness who saw a White slave aboard a ship owned by the slaver John Stewart, reported: All the states of horror I ever had an idea of are much short of what I saw this man in; chained to a board in a hole not above sixteen feet long, more than fifty with him; a collar and padlock about his neck, and chained to five of the most dreadful creatures I ever looked on. Another observer watching the auction of a hundred White slaves in Williamsburg, Virginia remarked, I never seen such passels of poor wretches in my life. Some almost naked… (Ekirch, pp. 100 and 122).
One White woman slave bound for Australia, Elizabeth Dudgeon, had dared to talk back to a guard. She was trussed up to a ships grating and mercilessly whipped. One of the ships officers relished watching her lashed: The corporal did not play with her, but laid it home, which I was very glad to see… she has long been fishing for it, which she has at last got to her hearts content. (Journal of Ralph Clark, entry of July 3, 1787).
In order to realize the maximum profit from the trade in White slaves, the captains of the White Guineamen crammed their ships with as many poor Whites as possible, certain that even with the most callous disregard for the lives of the Whites the financial gain would still make the trip worth the effort. A loss of 20% of their White cargo was regarded as acceptable. But sometimes losses were much higher.
“Out of 350 White slaves on a ship bound for the colonies in 1638 only 80 arrived alive. We have thrown overboard two and three in a day for many days together wrote Thomas Rous, a survivor of the trip. A ship carrying White slaves in 1685, the Betty of London, left England with 100 White slaves and arrived in the colonies with 49 left.
A number of factors contributed to the higher death rates for white slaves than Blacks. Although the goal of maximum profits motivated both trades, it cost more to obtain Blacks from Africa than it did to capture Whites in Europe. White slaves were not cared for as well as Blacks because the Whites were cheaply obtained and were viewed as expendable. The African slave trade was not fully established in the early 17th century… The price of African slaves was prohibitively high and the English were neither familiar with nor committed to black slavery as a basic institution (Beckles, White Servitude, p. 3).
Ship Captains involved in the white slave trade obtained white slaves with penal status either free of charge or were subsidized to take them, and for all other categories of White slaves, they paid at most a small sum to an agent to procure them, forfeiting only the cost of their keep on board ship if they died.6
Moreover, traders in black slaves operated ships designed solely for the purpose of carrying human cargo with the intent of creating conditions whereby as many black slaves as possible would reach America alive. White slave ships were cargo ships with no special provisions for passengers.
In addition, transportation rules decreed that, in cases where White slaves were sold in advance to individual planters in America, if the White slave survived the voyage beyond the halfway point in the journey, the planter in America not the captain of the slave ship would be responsible for the costs of the White slaves provisions whether or not the slave survived the trip. Captains of the slave-ships became infamous for providing sufficient food for only the first half of the trip and then virtually starving their White captives until they arrived in America.
Jammed into filthy holds, manacled, starved and abused, they suffered and died during the crossings in gross numbers. Thousands were children under 12, snatched off the streets… (Kendall, p. 1).
…the transportation …became a profitable enterprise. Traders delivered thousands of bound laborers to Pennsylvania and exhibited a callous disregard for their… cargoes (Salinger, p. 88). As a result, White slaves on board these ships suffered a high rate of disease. …transportation (of White slaves) remained a branch of commerce wedded to carrying human cargoes at minimal expense… sizable numbers never reached American shores… from disease, mistreatment… (Ekirch, p. 108).
The number of diseased White slaves arriving was high enough for Pennsylvania officials to recommend a quarantine law for them. Thus a new torment was to be endured for White slaves who were often stopped just short of the New World, with land in sight, and forced to remain quarantined on board ships in which they had just spent a horrifying ten to twelve weeks (Salinger, p. 89).
In 1738 Dr. Thomas Graeme reported to the colonial Council of Pennsylvania that if two ships crammed with White slaves were allowed to land, it might prove Dangerous to the health of the In-habitants of this Province. (Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania, Colonial Records, 4:306).
Ships filled with diseased White slaves landed anyway. In 1750 an island was established for their quarantine, Fisher Island, at the mouth of Schuylkill River. But the establishment of the quarantine area did nothing to protect the health of the White slaves and the island was more typical of Devils Island than a place of recuperation. In 1764 a clergyman, Pastor Helmuth, visited Fisher island and described it as a land of the living dead, a vault full of living corpses.
More than 14,000 died during passage. Following the Battle of the Boyne and the defeat of King James in 1691, the Irish slave trade had an overloaded inventory, and the slavers were making great profits. The Spanish slavers were a competition nuisance, so in 1713, the Treaty of Assiento was signed in which Spain granted England exclusive rights to the slave trade, and England agreed to supply Spanish colonies 4800 slaves a year for 30 years. England shipped tens of thousands of Irish prisoners after the 1798 Irish Rebellion to be sold as slaves in the Colonies and Australia. Curiously, of all the Irish shipped out as slaves, not one is known to have returned to Ireland to tell their tales.
Many, if not most, died on the ships transporting them or from overwork and abusive treatment on the plantations. The Irish that did obtain their freedom, frequently emigrated on to the American mainland, while others moved to adjoining islands. On Montserrat, seven of every 10 whites were Irish. Comparable 1678 census figures for the other Leeward Islands were: 26 per cent Irish on Antigua; 22 per cent on Nevis; and 10 per cent on St Christopher. Although 21,700 Irish slaves were purchased by Barbados planters from 1641 to 1649, there never seemed to have been more than about 8 to 10 thousand surviving at any one time. What happened to them? Well, the pages of the telephone directories on the West Indies islands are filled with Irish names, but virtually none of these black Irish know anything about their ancestors or their history. On the other hand, many West Indies natives spoke Gaelic right up until recent years.
They know they are strong survivors who descended from black white slaves, but only in the last few years have any of them taken an interest in their heritage. There were horrendous abuses by the slavers, both to Africans and Irish. The records show that the British ship Zong was delayed by storms, and as their food was running low, they decided to dump 132 slaves overboard to drown so the crew would have plenty to eat.
If the slaves died due to accident, the loss was covered by insurance, but not if they starved to death. Another British ship, the Hercules averaged a 37% death rate on passages. The Atlas II landed with 65 of the 181 slaves found dead in their chains. But that is another story. The economics of slavery permeated all levels of English life. When the Bishop of Exeter learned that there was a movement afoot to ban the slave trade, he reluctantly agreed to sell his 655 slaves, provided he was properly compensated for the loss. Finally, in 1839, a bill was passed in England forbidding the slave trade, bringing an end to Irish misery. British commerce shifted to opium in China. An end to Irish misery? Well, perhaps just a pause.
During the following decade thousands of tons of butter, grain and beef were shipped from Ireland as over 2 million Irish starved to death in the great famine, and a great many others went to America and Australia. The population of Ireland fell from over 9 million to bottom out at less than 3 million. No movie blockbusters, book signing bonuses for authors writing of these horrors or collective guilt instilled in the masses for these abominable crimes. Throughout this article there are numerous cited references don’t take my word as gospel. Check my sources and references and educate yourself. Please feel free to do more research on this subject. Knowledge is power, the marxist progressives use the grievance industry to divide Americans. The knowledge that a great deal of Americans ancestors were exploited for monetary gain regardless of the color of their skin. As I have shown here slavery is not something that white America invented rather it is something that white Americans ended through enormous sacrifice, loss of life and bloodshed.
“The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.”
― Gloria Steinem
"The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived and dishonest--but the myth--persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
- John F. Kennedy (Commencement address, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, June 11, 1962)
The last of the very few decent Presidents America ever had