lunes, 30 de mayo de 2016

Anglo-Israelism, Ephraimitism, Two-House Movement... & British Israelism explained 6

Austrian tradition related that Austria was once ruled by a line of Jewish kings. If they were of the Davidic line, that could imply that their subjects, the Austrians, are from the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. 

According to Steve M. Collins the modern tribes of Israel are the USA, Canada, Scandinavia and many mainland European nations, Australia, New Zealand, the Jewish State of Israel and portions of many other nations. Pockets of Israelites are also located all along the migration routes out of Asia into modern Europe.

Stonehenge is believed to have been a place dedicated for animal sacrifice just as the Mosaic law prescribes.

Jerusalem Hymn
And did those feet in ancient time. Walk upon England's mountain green? And was the holy Lamb of God. On England's pleasant pastures seen? And did the countenance divine. Shine forth upon our clouded hills? And was Jerusalem builded here. Among those dark satanic mills? Bring me my bow of burning gold! Bring me my arrows of desire! Bring me my spear! O clouds unfold! Bring me my chariot of fire! I will not cease from mental flight. Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand. Till we have built Jerusalem. In England's green and pleasant land.

Israel's and Dan's main trek route, made by combining the testimonies of the Old Testament, Snorre Sturlasson, and Thor Heyerdahl. Other trek routes are not shown on this map. Dan is like if it was a separate people on its own, perhaps this is why in ancient China, Europe... you see plenty of Danite toponyms & hardly, if at all, from the other tribes. Danites or their place names were so popular that sometimes the name Dan or derived names have been considered to just mean people. 

A man with Irish last name said: A great number of the Irish Celts have an Oral tradition that says they are one or part of one of the Lost Tribes. Having my YDNS tested shows 90% + Celt, but one part of the 10 to 8 % shows and the oldest Jewish! I have found other persons who are Irish that also have old Jewish DNA.

Ever wondered why there are so many people called Jones in Wales? Tom, Catherine Zeta and Tommy Lee Jones all inherited their surname from men called John. Adding an 's' to a father's first name and giving it to the newborn child at baptism was a favored practice in Wales during the late Middle Ages. Hence, 'John's son' became Jones. Extras actress Ashley Jensen's name means exactly the same thing, only in Danish, the language of her forebears - Jens is Danish for John.

The tribe of Dan are the Danes who live in Jutland (Danish: Jewland) and are Jutes (Danish: Jews). They have the same education, high tech industry and development as the Jews of Israel. They are a modern western civilization as all Jewish civilizations. They name their children with Hebrew names like Sarah, Michael and educate them. They develop their country and don't need help from outside. All Danish men and women have their genetic roots and haplogroup origins in the Near East Levant.

Does the Austrian Chronichle Prove An Abrahamic Origin of the Austrians, Hinting An Israelite Identity for the Alpine Country?


An amazing document reveals the interesting events of Abraham's (Father of Israel) life before his call. It is the fascinating old World record, the Austrian Chronicle.

This ancient record, just one volume out of a great and monumental German work of over one hundred volumes, preserves the history of the Danubian Valley - the area of Austria, Hungary, Bohemia, Bavaria, and neighboring regions.

Written in German, it has never been translated into English. A number of copies of the Chronicle are scattered throughout Europe.

One copy found its way to the research library of the University of California at Los Angeles. It was completed in the early 1400's A.D. The last entry is dated 1404.

The Austrian Chronicle begins its consecutive history with a man of princely birth - none other than the PATRIARCH ABRAHAM.

It is most unique that an ancient Austrian historical record should begin its list of rulers with a Hebrew name!

Yet, apparently, the compilers of this record, who did their work in the 15th century, did not even realize this was the great Biblical patriarch.

At least this record nowhere states that this was the Abraham of the Bible. And yet this could be no one else because, when the chronology of the Chronicle is matched with the story of Abraham in the Bible, all the dates fit exactly.

There are no conflicts; the story is harmonious in every detail.

The Chronicle states that Abraham was born in an area of Mesopotamia called Aligemorum which was under the jurisdiction of the Assyrian Count Sattan, 'Aligemorum' is the Latin name of a district which is now impossible to locate by any contemporary records.

Several other geographical names in the Chronicle are unknown at present.

Nevertheless, this district of Assyria encompassed the area of Ur of the Chaldees where Abraham was born.

The Chronicle states that, quite a few years later, Abraham "took to wife Susanna from the land of Samamorum ....Who was this Susanna?

First of all it should again be noted that 'Susanna,' like Abraham is another Hebrew name in an Austrian historical record.

The Bible nowhere names Susanna directly.

Yet it does mention her indirectly in Gen. 25:6 where it is recorded that Abraham sent his concubines - plural, more than one - away along with their sons, an event which occurred in 1914 when Isaac was weaned at the age of two.

The point to consider at this juncture is the fact that the Bible speaks of only one concubine and one son, Hagar and Ishmael.

Yet this verse reveals that there had been more than the one expressly named in the Bible. The Austrian Chronicle names the other one - Susanna!

The Austrian Chronicle calls Susanna a wife - the Bible uses the expression concubine. Sarah was Abraham's legitimate wife.

The individual through whom God wanted the chosen seed to come. Susanna was a secondary wife or concubine.

Though there is no record of when these unions took place, there is no reason why Abraham could not have married Sarah first and then taken Susanna several years later after the discovery that Sarah was barren (Gen. 11:30).

Sarah died at the age of 127 (Gen. 23:1-2). Gen. 17:17 states that she was about ten years younger than Abraham.

The reason the Austrian Chronicle mentions only Abraham and Susanna, and nothing about Sarah, Hagar, Isaac, and Ishmael is that it is concerned only with the princely line of Austria which they originated!

Abraham's life apart from the history of Austria is completely left out of the account.

Diodorus of Sicily gives a helpful insight into who Susanna actually was. He records that Horus had a half-sister named 'Sosannes.'

Sosannes is simply the Greek form of Susanna! She was of Assyrian royalty. Susanna and Horus had the same father but not the same mother.

Semiramis was the mother of Horus. The mother of Susanna is unknown, but, the father was Ninus II.

A son of Asshur and a king in early Assyrian history. He ruled 2100-2048.

Susanna, then, was from the royal line of Assyria.

Why should Abraham choose someone with this type of background? He too was heir to royalty and rulership.

Genesis 23:6 describes him as a "mighty prince." And it will be made plain shortly that he has legal heir to a vast realm which he had to be willing to forsake.

Thus it is only logical that royalty choose royalty. Just prior to 1944 Abraham had a son by Susanna whose name was Achaim. From him, after 1895, the royal line of Austria continued!


WHEN David spoke to Nathan about building a temple and received Nathan’s approval, the Lord intervened in a strange way. The incident occupies the entire seventh chapter of 2 Samuel.

First the Lord makes a speech to Nathan, then He commands Nathan to make a speech to David, then David makes a speech to the Lord; all three speeches are in some detail, and do not seem to be to the point about not building a temple. The words of the Lord seem to be of a slight rebuking tone, and Nathan reports the words of the Lord to David, in part with this now renowned promise: “I will appoint a place for my people Israel”.

But there is more: “Also the Lord telleth thee”, said Nathan, “that He will make you a house ... and thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee” (vv 10, 11,16). David, perhaps perplexed, replied to the Lord. “Then went King David in, and sat down before the Lord.

 , and he said, Who am I, 0 Lord God; but thou hast spoken also of thy servant’s house for a great while to come; thou wouldst foretell the destiny of thy servant’s line in days far hence, Lord God, can mortal man claim such rights, 0 Lord God? And what can David say more unto thee?” The last bold italicized passage is from Knox’s translation, to which he has this footnote: “It seems necessary to take these words (literally, this is the law of Adam)...”, and so he brings this all the way back to Adam. (All italics and upper case emphases are this author’s throughout.)

We think of the ‘House of David’ in David’s expression “thy servant’s house” as referring to his descendants; but what if David also means “the House of Israel”? The ‘whole house’ was ‘his’ to reign over, and will be again. (But this House would be remoulded.) David later confirms that the reason he was not to build the Lord a house was because of the blood shed in his many wars. So it seems to me that a reason for this seemingly obscure dialogue does go back much further, yes to Adam and beyond. (The “appointed place” passage certainly referred to the House of Israel, then some centuries old.)

In the allegory of the Israel vine in ISAIAH 5, we are told of a “very fruitful hill; and he fenced it”; afterward, he would “break down the wall [fence] thereof” by way of condemnation. So we had an effective boundary around our House of Jacob. Going back still further, Moses tells us that “he set the bounds of the people” according as he portioned out the nations’ inheritances.

An inheritance implies possessions, planning, foreknowledge, and an earlier time; He did this “when he separated the sons of Adam” - (DEUTERONOMY. 32:8).

We are told clearly that “we were formed” by the Lord “for himself; we shall shew forth his praise”. Understand that there are two notions here, first that God formed; and second, that it is pointedly us whom he formed.

The margin reading for ISAIAH 37:26, The Oxford Bible, reads “hast thou not heard I have made it long ago, formed it of ancient times?” (quoting from II KINGS 19:25). “I have formed thee, 0 Israel; fear not; thou art my servant” (ISAIAH 43:1; 44: 21). And there is this third notion, too: we were formed long ago to be His servant. There is a connection in all this.

See that these really “are ancient things” (ISAIAH 46:10), “God is my king of old” (PSALM 74:12). He must be older still then than His throne, for he Himself established it: “the world also is stablished that it cannot be moved - thy throne is established of old”, from then [margin] (PSALM 93:1,2). Moreover, in MICAH 6:2, we are called the “strong foundations of the earth”.

From this nexus we see that the throne over Israel was established not later than when the world was fixed; the “from then” [margin] refers directly to the time when the world was fixed of old. So in DANIEL, we read of “the Ancient of Days” [now Father], “even he that abideth of old” (PSALM 55:19); that is, ‘he abideth from of old’.

So the Father is of old; our Lord, Redeemer, Kinsman and King is of old, and we, ourselves the sheep of His pasture, are of old, and likewise our bounds and our purchase from Egypt are from “of old” (PSALM 74:2 and DEUTERONOMY 9:27-29).

When the Israel Truth was first given to me years ago, it was explained how the House of Omri, Beth Omri, became the bit k’Umri of the Assyrians’ language, bit standing for the Hebrew Beth, or ‘house’ and the k or k’ standing for the preposition “of”; and how later they or part of them became known as Kimmerians or Kimmeroi or K’immeroi; and so forth. But it was never explained what the term Celt meant. I had been studying Hebrew at that time, so I knew intuitively where the answer lay hid and it didn’t take much searching to find it.

When I acquired Gladys Taylor’s excellent little set, Our Neglected Heritage, it was interesting to read in vol.4 on page 6, what she wrote about these “Celts”:

“The name Celt is a mystery to historians”; “none have solved the puzzle of its meaning and derivation, or the language from which it comes”;

and again: “It was widely used by the Greeks, but they had taken it from some earlier source... Keltoi is meaningless as a descriptive word.”

Let me show you today that it really is descriptive, and show you its derivation, too. The Greeks being first Hebrews, and the Greek language being drawn heavily from the Hebrew, we should be alert to search the Hebrew/Semitic tongues.

Gladys Taylor goes on to say, “The name itself is very old!”, pointing out that they (the Keltoi) are mentioned sometimes, particularly by the Roman writers, in connection with the Kimmerians [...Khamri][ing] a relationship between these two considerable race groups.” (The letter c developed from the letter k, and both are the same; the pronunciation “selt” is incorrect - as it is often pronounced in the U.S.)

The quickest philological explanation is that the Greeks called them Kelts because they, the Greeks, being - many of them - Hebrews themselves, knew they were God’s elect, as Isaiah clearly tells. In passing from the Hebrews to the Greeks, and again to the Romans, ears hear differently, and the Romans might pronounce the Greek “eklectos” (elect) as “ek-kelt-os “. this kind of transposition happened often in ancient times—and still does!

Still, the Celts called themselves Celts, and I think that this is not the true solution. I think they were less aware of Isaiah’s writings than they were of the law and the Psalms, and we shall see presently that there is another solution. And besides, it would require a knowledge on the part of the Greeks that we do not know from Scripture that they had.

The riddle is easily solved when we assign the same style to this name as was applied to the term bit k ‘humri.

Kelt, or K'elt is formed from the root “elt” just as Kimry is formed from the root Umri or Omri. “Elt” means “old”. I found this proof under the entry elt in a German dictionary where I had searched first because in German alt means “old”. So it is apparent that Waddell comes closest, in his Phoenician Origins where he refers to them as “Khalt”.

To elaborate, the 1995 Thorndike Barnhart World Book Dictionary (Chicago, London, Sidney, Toronto), states under the entry “old” that “old” comes from the Old English ald, eald and that the archaic English noun eld comes from “eldo” or “ald”. This dictionary then quotes for usage: “of old has thou laid the FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH” - (PSALM 102:25) (italics theirs, upper case mine). And how good it is to see that our best and newest dictionaries STILL hark back to the Holy Scriptures! It also gives “ealderman” as the obsolete form of “alderman”; “ealder + mann” (see entry “alderman”).

“Ald” is the same as the German alt, the substitution of the d for the t is merely one of tongue and ear.

In the same dictionary under the entry “eld”, the derivation is given thusly: “[Old English eldo <ald old] “, meaning that eldo “developed into”, or became, “ald”, old. “Elder”, in Old English ealdra, is but the comparative of “ald” according to Thomdike under the entry “elder”.

The first thing this dictionary says under the entry “eld” is: “n. archaic. 1 ancient times” and gives this quote for usage: “lands that contain the monuments of eld (Byron)”.

Thus “Kelt” means ancient or “of old”, and we, those ones of old, are his people, his people of old, and so we are then His ancient ones.

Is there proof for this in the Scriptures themselves? The Hebrew words “old” and “eld” in Strong’s at 2056 and 3205 refer to lineage, offspring, and begettal. Remembering what we learned in the preceding paragraphs, we should remember also that “we are the offspring of God” that Ancient of Days [“God the Ancient” in the Sacred Name Bible] who sits on the ancient throne (ACTS 17:29 and PSALM 93:2).

Isaiah tells, “I have appointed the ancient people” (44:7) , clearly referring to us, and “the Lord of hosts shall reign in Zion, and in Jerusalem, and there shall be glory before his ancients” (24:23). Here, His people are expressly called “his ancients”. What more proof do we need?

It is said that only some Celtic tribes called themselves “Celt”. This doesn’t mean that all Israel isn’t God’s ancient ones. Only some tribes were known as Cimmerians, too, but we know that that term refers to all of the House of Israel taken away in captivity. And there are many similar examples which could be set out.

Now, Gladys Taylor takes this still further in her same first chapter. She relates how, in The Book of Jubilees there is a reference to “the mountain of the Celt toward the north”.

In ISAIAH 41 we are addressed to “keep silence before me, 0 isles, and let the people renew their strength”. In ISAIAH 14:13 the mount of the congregation is indicated as “the sides of the north”, and in PSALM 48:2 Mount Zion is referred to as “the sides of the north”; in JEREMIAH 1:15 those of Britain and the lands round about it are “the families of the kingdoms of the north”. The use of the term “mountain” with reference to Israel occurs numerous times; and again, its connection with the Stone (in DANIEL 2), cut out of the mountain is understood by us all.

In the phrase “sides of the north”, “sides” is given by Strong’s at 3411 as follows: “feminine of 3409 ... coasts, ...“ [in other words, ‘coasts of the north’]. at 3409 we read:

“by euphemism, the generative parts; ... x body, loins ...“

So we can also understand, then, that Zion, the congregation, the mountain of Israel, and the sides of the north, all refer to our being His “offspring” ... and “brought forth” out of Egypt; “from the wilderness [of Egypt] ... there thy mother brought thee forth.” - (SONG OF SOLOMON 8:5)

Knox rendered this as “where sore distress overtook thine own mother, where she that bore thee had her hour of shame”, meaning in the wilderness, when Israel was brought forth, across the Red Sea.
Without going into deeper things, we can see “that he [our Saviour] might be the firstborn among many brethren” - (ROMANS 8:29). We are His brethren, He is our Kinsman.

In I PETER 1:3, Peter says that our Father hath begotten us, “again” — that is, a second time.

Going back into the Old Testament, we run across our grandparents and cousins bitterly complaining about something, and Moses takes the matter to the Lord, and in a kind of complaint of his own, he asks Him, “Have I conceived all this people? Have I begotten them?” (NUMBERS 11:12). In DEUTERONOMY 32:18 Moses tells them that they were begotten of the Rock, and formed by God. And in PSALM 2:7 we have the Father saying “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee”.

I began this article by titling it The Celtic Foundations of the Earth. Bonnie Gaunt points out that the number 12 is the number of the foundations of the earth; 12, as in the 12 tribes. She notes that 99% of the bedrock of the earth’s crust is composed of twelve elements (and that their atomic numbers total 186, the number of displacement. Israel was displaced through sin.) She also points out that 12 of the significant Stonehenge alignments point to an extreme position of the sun (a symbol of the Son) and that 12 alignments point to an extreme position of the moon (a symbol of Rachel and of Israel).

The number 12 is also the active agent in creation. Photosynthesis is possible only because of the 12-fold symmetry of the chlorophyll molecule, which transforms light into substance.

Bonnie Gaunt has written a series of seminal, original books showing the parallels of Stonehenge and the Great Pyramid, and threading through them sacred, Biblical gematria. Her discoveries are astounding.

The USA is an Israelite land in the middle of all the lands of other Israelites

The first areas where the Restored gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was preached first in the USA (black & white Americans & Amerindians) then to the east in the British Islands & other western European countries, to the west in the Hawaii, Samoa, the south in Mexico, to the north to Canada.

Interestingly all of these peoples are regarded as Israelites, depending on the belief current: Black Hebrews, British Israelites & Mormons.

The USA is indeed an Israelite land in the middle of all the lands of the mentioned Israelites.

The USA is indeed an Israelite nation in the middle of all of these Israelite lands & Israelite flows that went there.

Fulfilled Prophecy Identifies True Israel Peoples

Israel to be great and mighty nation. Gen. 12:2; 18:18; Deut. 4:7,8.

Israel to have multitudinous seed. Gen. 13:16; 15:5; 22:17; 24:60; 26:4, 24; 28:3, 14; 32:12; 49:22; Isa. 10:22; Hos. 1:10; Zech. 10:7,8.

Israel to spread abroad to the West, East, North and South. Gen. 28:14; Isa. 42:5, 6.

Israel to have a new home. 2nd Sam. 7:10; 1st Chron. 17:9.

Israel's home to be north-west of Palestine. Isa. 49:12; Jer. 3:18.

Israel to live in islands and coasts of the earth. Isa. 41:1; 49:1-3; 51:5; Jer. 31:7-10.

Israel to become a company of nations. Gen. 17:4-6, 15,16; 35:11; 48:19; Eph. 2:12.

Israel to have a Davidic King (a perpetual monarchy within Israel). 2nd Sam. 7:13,19; 1st Chron. 22:10; 2nd Chron. 13:5; Psa. 89:20, 37; Eze. 37:24; Jer. 33:17, 21, 26.

Israel to colonize and spread abroad. Gen. 28:14; 49:22; Deut. 32:8; 33:17; Psa. 2:8; Isa. 26:15; 27:6; 54:2; Zech. 10:8,9.

Israel to colonize the desolate place of the earth. Isa. 35:1; 43:19, 20; 49:8; 54:3; 58:11, 12.

Israel to lose a colony, then expand, demanding more room. Isa. 49:19, 20.

Israel to have all the land needed. Deut. 32:8.

Israel to be the first among the nations. Gen. 27:29; 28:13; Jer. 31:7.

Israel to continue as a nation forever. 2nd Sam. 7:16, 24, 29; 1st Chron. 17:22-27; Jer. 31:35-37.

Israel's home to be invincible to outside forces. 2nd Sam. 7:10; Isa. 41:11-14.

Israel to be undefeatable - defended by God. Num. 24:8, 9; Isa. 15-17; Micah 5:8, 9.

Israel to be God's instrument in destroying evil. Jer. 51:20; 51:19-24; Dan. 2:34, 35.

Israel to have a land of great mineral wealth. Gen. 49:25, 26; Deut. 8:9; 33:15-19.

Israel to have a land of great agricultural wealth. Gen. 27:28; Deut. 8:7, 9; 28:11; 33:13, 14, 28.

Israel to be rich by trading. Isa. 60:5-11; 61:6.

Israel to be envied and feared by all nations. Deut. 2:25; 4:8; 28:10; Isa. 43:4; 60:10, 12; Micah 7:16, 17; Jer. 33:9.

Israel to lend to other nations, borrowing of none. Deut. 15:6; 28.12.

Israel to have a new name. Isa. 62:2; 65:15; Hos. 2:17.

Israel to have a new language. Isa. 28:11 (The Bible, by means of which God speaks now to Israel, is English not Hebrew).

Israel to possess the gates of his enemies. Gen. 22:17.

Israel to find the aborigines diminishing before them. Deut. 33:17; Isa. 60:12.

Israel to have control of the seas. Deut. 33:19; Num. 24:7; Psa. 89:25; Isa. 60:5 (F. Fenton translates this last, "when rolls up to you all the wealth of the sea". That could not be unless Israel controlled it).

Israel to have a new religion (New Covenant.) Heb. 8:10-13; 9:17; Matt. 10:5-7; Luke 1:77; 2:32; 22:20; John 11:49-52; Gal. 3:13.

Israel to lose all trace of her lineage. Isa. 42:16-19; Hos. 1:9, 10; 2:6; Rom. 11:25.

Israel to keep Sabbath forever (one day in seven set aside). Ex. 31:13, 16, 17; Isa. 58:13, 14.

Israel to be called the sons of God (i.e., accept Christianity). Hos. 1:10-11.

Israel to be a people saved by the Lord. Deut. 33:27-29; Isa. 41:8-14; 43:1-8;44:1-3;49:25, 26; 52:1-12; 55:3-10, 13; Jer. 46:27, 28; Eze. 34:10-16; Hos. 2:23; 13:9-14; 14:4, 6.

Israel to be the custodians of the Oracles (Scriptures) of God. Psa. 147:19, 21; Isa. 59-21.

Israel to carry the Gospel to all the world. Gen. 28:14; Isa. 43:10-12 (witnesses), 21; Micah 5:7.

Israel to be kind to the poor and set slaves free. Deut. 15:7, 11; Psa. 72:4; Isa. 42:7; 49:9; 58:6.

Israel to be the heir of the world. Rom. 4:13.

Israel to be God's Glory. Isa. 46:13; 49:3; 60:1, 2.

Israel to possess God's Holy Spirit as well as His Word. Isa. 44:3; 59:21; Hagg. 2:5.

Israel to be God's Heritage, formed by God, forever. Deut. 4:20; 7:6; 14:2; 2nd Sam. 7:23; 1st Kings 8:51, 53; Isa. 43:21; 54:5-10; Hos. 2:19, 23; Joel 2:27; Micah 7:14 -18.

Israel is the nation appointed to bring glory to God. Isa. 41:8-16; 43:10, 21; 44:23; 49:3.



TERRY MARVIN BLODGETT in 1981(c) published a Ph.D. thesis (“Phonological Similarities in Germanic and Hebrew”, The University of Utah, 1981) in which he proved that the original tongue of the northern “Barbarians” who overran Europe was Hebrew. These peoples are commonly referred to as “Germanic” since some of them had sojourned at one stage in Germany and their language had been adopted by the German “natives”. The peoples in question however had little real connection to the present day inhabitants of the area of Germany. Blodgett, now Professor of Languages, Southern Utah University, Cedar City, Utah, USA, showed how it is academically accepted that approximately one-third of all “Germanic” vocabulary is of an unknown (non -Indo-European) origin. There were also other linguistic features that need explanation such as certain peculiarities in the rules of pronunciation:

“The Germanic sound shifts and gemination [i.e. double-sounding of consonants as found in Hebrew] are not to be explained on the basis of lndo-European linguistics”.

These foreign non-Indo-European elements are attributable (said Blodgett) to Hebrew incursions recognizable in the areas of phonology, morphology, and lexicology.

“English, Frisian, Dutch, Flemish, High and Low German, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, and lcelandic, as well as the extinct languages of Gothic, Old Norse, Old Saxon, and others comprise one of the Indo-European groups of language commonly called Germanic. On a broader scale, the Germanic branch of languages shares many features in common with the Italic, Greek, Celtic, Slavonic, Indo-lranian and other Indo-European groups”.

Even so the Germanic branch of these languages has a non “lndo-European” component comprising approximately one-third of the total: It is this element that Blodgett identified as HEBREW!!! Blodgett proved his case using terminology and a great many examples of a technical nature. [That there was a non-lndo-European basis for the Germanic languages is generally accepted in academic circles. The nature of this basis has not been decided upon.] A crude but reliable enough notion of the overall tendency of Blodgett’s work is as follows:

At some early stage, there occurred a series of sound shifts in the Germanic language or languages, the lndo-European “bhrator” became : “brother”, “peter” became “father”, etc. “p” became “f”’, “t” became “th”, “w” became “ch”, b, d, and g also changed.

Opinions concerning the date of this Germanic Sound Shift give dates varying from 2000 BCE to 9 CE. On the one side, John T. Waterman (“A History of the German Language”, 1966) says “the general consensus of scholars is that the Germanic Sound Shift began probably not much before the fifth century B.C., and that it was essentially completed by the last pre-Christian century”, i.e. from ca. 400 BCE to 100 BCE. Waterman bases his case on the fact that words in Germanic borrowed from Greek in the 400s BCE also underwent the shift whereas words taken from Latin in the first century BCE did not.

“On the other hand, Heinz F. Wendt (“Sprachen”, 1977) believed that the shift had been essentially completed by 500 B.C.” Overall it is assumed (Blodgett quotes sources) that the sound shift occurred around 500 BCE give or take a century or two. All Germanic dialects took part in the shift so it is assumed that the change took place whilst the parent groups were still in the north, in Scandinavia and Northern Germany. The period of 500 BCE (for the said “Sound Change”) is the one most authoritative opinion seems to converge on. Whether it occurred before 500 BCE or in the following era the most important point for us is recognition of the fact that it did occur.

A lot of reasons have been proposed to explain this shift but the bottom line is that the cause is generally ascribed to ethnic factors implying racial mixture.

S. Feist thinks: “that the northern peoples were originally non-Indo-European, who learnt their Indo-European from the broad-headed Alpine race....”

Waterman said: “It is reasonable to assume that a non-Germanic substratum had some influence upon the language of those lndo-Europeans who migrated to the area in northern Europe which later became the Germanic homeland ...“

Waterman appears to assume that “Indo-Europeans” moved to northern Germany where there already existed a non-Indo-European speaking element and that these influenced the “lndo-Europeans”. Our (Brit-Am) own studies show the opposite. We have evidence that peoples from the East, of Hebrew descent, via Scythia invaded Germany and influenced the “Indo-European” natives.

The newcomers from Scythia according to archaeology in east Scythia used Aramaic as their major language. There is some evidence that they also used Hebrew and that the Lost Ten Tribes prior to their exile had used both Hebrew and Aramaic. This knowledge is based on archaeological finds.

Some of the Israelites (e.g. those who were east of the Jordan according to inscriptions) before their exile spoke an Aramaic dialect similar to Hebrew. The Scythians in east Scythia must have used Hebrew as well as Aramaic. New work by Scandinavian scholars such as Dr. Dr. Kjell Artuns “Runer” (Oslo, Norway, 1994) and Orjan Svensson (of Blekinge in Sweden) have proven that the first Runic inscriptions in Scandinavia wore written in both Hebrew and Aramaic dialects. Orjan Svensson has shown that the language of some of these inscriptions is almost certainly Hebraic! In other cases it is Aramaic or in a Hebrew-type related tongue. Early Nordic dialects as well as early English ones still retained a large number of Hebrew words and Hebrew characteristics. Remnants of these are still to be found in the English language.

The Germanic Sound Shift can best be explained by the mass presence of former Hebrew-speakers. The same changes that occurred in “Germanic” languages occur in Hebrew according to fixed grammatical and phonetic rules. Blodgett points out that people who from birth made the said changes would naturally have tended to speak as if the changes also held in a foreign language that they may have been forced to use at short notice.

Even technical sophisticated details concerning rules of the Sound Shift in Hebrew were continued into Germanic. The Sound Shift is not the only factor demonstrating this same principle which seems to hold throughout all possible examples.: e.g. Hebrew rijchah ‘sense of smell’ and verb form rijach [pronounced “ray- ach”] ‘to smell’ compare with German riechen ‘to smell’.

“..The {sh} of Hebrew was usually represented, sometimes by {s}, and occasionally by {st} in Germanic. This is not only true of Biblical names such as Shaul - Saul, but also of ancient words such as Hebrew shaphah ‘to scrape, form, shape, create’. Two words appear in Germanic similar in form and meaning to the Hebrew “shaphah”: the first is Old Norse skrap and English scrape; the second is Old Norse skap and Old Saxon scapan, which eventually developed into High German shoepfen and English shape”. In Ancient Hebrew there were also changes, “shiboleth” became “siboleth” between one Tribe and another (Judges 12;6). Blodgett gives tens of examples to back each of his claims up and he goes through and explains each one of them. The total number of examples reach into the hundreds, and each example is a good one!!

“Gemination, or the doubling of consonants [e.g. apple pronounced as “ap-ple”, “middle” is pronounced as “mid-dle” ]... while seen sporadically throughout all Germanic dialects in general, is far more developed in the West Germanic areas. This phenomenon of gemination has an amazingly close parallel in Hebrew... ” In West Germanic dialects (e.g. Frisian, Anglo-Saxon) there are a sizeable number of words showing gemination which are similar in form and meaning to words in Hebrew.

In Hebrew you have “kabal” meaning “to complain, cry out, oppose, get ahead of someone”. “Kabal” in Hebrew is pronounced as “Kab=bal” with a gemination or doubling of the “b” consonant. KABAL gave rise to the English “squabble” = to quarrel noisily, and “quibble” meaning “to argue in an attempt to receive the largest portion”. In this as in very many others you have a word that sounds the same, follows the same grammatical rules and means the same in both languages! Geminations are found in Gothic, Old Norse, and Old English. There are other parallels between Hebrew and the Old Germanic tongues that are of a technical nature. The parallels include much vocabulary. Professor Blodgett presents a list containing hundreds of detailed examples.

There are several sources that provide additional examples of similarities between “Germanic” tongues and Hebrew in vocabulary. The one that most impressed me was “The Origin of Modern Culture Languages and their Derivation from the Hebraica,” by Professor Karl Rodosi, 1891. This work also adequately proves that the so-called Germanic tongues must have been formed by peoples who originally spoke Hebrew. The implications of these studies regarding ancestry are applicable to West Europeans but do not encompass most of the modern Germans. The case is similar to that of the present inhabitants of the USA who now nearly all speak English though only a portion of their ancestors came from Britain.

A few examples culled at random from Rodosi include:

English “BEAR”: bore or bare-borne: from Hebrew “OBER” pass over. The “v” and “b” are interchangeable in Hebrew. English “BEAT” from Hebrew “BAT” trample, kick. English “BECOME” from Hebrew “KOM” come into appearance, arise. English “BLOW” from Hebrew “BLOW” swallow. English “BURN” from Hebrew “BAER”. English “BURST” from Hebrew “PRATS”. English “BUY” from Hebrew “BUY” request. English “CHOSE” from Hebrew “CHIZEH” search out, chose (Exodus 18:21). English “CLOTHE” from Hebrew “CHELATZ”. English “DARE” from Hebrew “ADIR” might. English “DIG” From Hebrew “DACHA” ditch. English “DO” from Hebrew “ADAH” cause. English “DRIVE” from Hebrew “DARBEN” urge forward, drive on. English “EAT” from Hebrew “CHIUT” give life to. English “FEEL” from Hebrew “FElL” effect. English “HEAR” from Hebrew “HEIR” arouse, awaken. English “LIGHT” from Hebrew “LAHAT” flame, illuminate. English “MAKE” from Hebrew “MAKIN” prepare. English ‘WEAN” from Hebrew “MANAH” answer. English “RIDE” from Hebrew “RIDEH” rule, subjugate. English “SET” from Hebrew “SIT” to place. English “SHALL” from Hebrew “SHAL” request, require. English “TEACH” from Hebrew “TOKEACH” admonish. English “WILL” from Hebrew “WEYAL” will.

In Pursuit of the Lost Ten Tribes and the Science of Ancestral Identity.

The Ancient Patriarchs are ABRAHAM, ISAAC, JACOB……

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were warned by God that if they did not abide by a Biblical Way of Life, that They would be Scattered to the “ends of the earth.”

They were warned clearly many times that at some point in the future regardless of how far they had strayed from that Biblical Way, They would still inherit exponentially monumental physical blessings and be gathered back to their ancient Homelands; to their ancient hub, which was the Middle East. And when They regained their memory that all the Families of the Earth would be Blessed through and only through them.

Heber is the genetic father (G.F.) of Abraham and all Abraham’s Children. Isaac is a genetic son of Abraham and Heber. Isaac’s brother Ishmael is the Genetic Father of the Arabs. The Arabs are the children of Abraham but Not the Children of Isaac. The Spiritual & Material Birthright Blessings were passed on to Isaac’s Children,some of them became known as Saxons from Isaac’s sons.

Genesis 21:12 “And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman [HAGAR]; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.”

Isaac’s sons became the Saxons, Celts, Cimmerians, Goths over time and settled in North-Western Europe and in the British Isles and Ireland.

Because of Joseph’s promotion to Prime Minister of Egypt beside Pharaoh, the Children of Joseph settled together as a Union of the brothers in Egypt and over time migrated to The Isles aka The British Isles as well as to France, and other North-Western nations of Europe. “Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from afar; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.” The material side of the Promises of God were conferred on primarily Britain and America aka Ephraim and Manasseh.

All three major religions today namely Muslim, Christianity and Judaism all claim they are the Children of Abraham. The misconception arises on account of the fact that all Judahites are Sons of Heber aka Hebrews But Not ALL Hebrews are of the genetic family of JUDAH, one of the twelve sons of JACOB.

So since France and England and America are really all sons of Heber, why then do they not understand their real identity? Why do they not identify as Hebrews?

Are they three of the Lost Ten Tribes?

Small nations by today’s standards such as Egypt, Libya, Ethiopia, Lebanon are found named in the Holy Bible. One would naturally expect to find the Empire-sized nations such as Britain and America. Where then are the biggest nations mentioned and if not then why? It is natural that Britain and America should be mentioned. Where are they mentioned? The answer is they are mentioned but only by their ancient homeland names.

Let us start you on your journey to Understanding the History of Tribal Royal families which descended from our ancient patriarchal Chieftains. The journey begins with understanding the true Meaning of Terms.

God’s Birthright Material Promise to Abraham. Did the Tribe of Judah get it?

Let’s compare the Blessing one by one and ask whether it had been fulfilled on the Tribe of Judah or was it conferred on some other Tribe? Could it be Tribe of Joseph and his Sons?

Did the Tribe of Judah ever fulfill to be a great and mighty nation? (Genesis 18:17-18)
to be numerous as the stars of heaven? (Genesis 22:16-18)
to spread abroad over the whole earth and bless all of humanity? (Genesis 28:14-15)
to be a nation and company of nations? (Genesis 35:10-12)
to number ultimately thousands of millions (literally “thousands of ten thousands”) and possess the gates of their enemies? (Genesis 24:60)
to be the riches nations on earth? (Genesis 49:22-26) In the last days! (Deuteronomy 33:13-17)
to be chief of the nations? (Deuteronomy 7:6) “above all people who are upon the face of the earth.“
to be a great naval power? (Numbers 24:7; Psalm 89:25)
to have a lion, unicorn (Numbers 24:8-9; Deuteronomy 33:17) and a Bald Eagle (Micah 1:16) as national symbols?
to be planted in another land outside Palestine? II (Samuel 7:10)
to have another name? (Isaiah 65:15) – called after Isaac? (Genesis 21:12; Romans 9:7; Amos 7:16)
to live in the isles and coasts? (Isaiah 41:1-10; 49:1-9)
to rule a vast Gentile Empire of many nations? (Deuteronomy 15:16)
to be God’s battle-axe? Have the greatest military power? (Jeremiah 51:19-21)


Have these and many other prophecies been fulfilled by the Tribe of Judah?

Obviously No! – the birthright went to Joseph not Judah (1 Chronicles 5: 1-2). Jacob’s name Israel was passed to the House of Joseph namely his children, the tribes of Ephraim (Britain) and Manasseh (United States of America).

America & the Russian Federation in 2016

The U.S. has been a part of the global economic system since its independence—it has been a Great Power since the latter half of the 19th century, a superpower since the 1940s, and the global hegemon since the early 1990s. For the past 60 years, the U.S. has had the power and influence to not only dominate the global environment, but to make the rules, too. The U.S. domestic environment, however, has undergone significant changes over the past 30 years marked by the slowing of population and economic growth. The relative power advantage the U.S. has maintained over the rest of the world has been primarily through its development and use of technology.

For Putin, the path to solving both the demographic and economic decline is to expand its population or to recapture some of the ethnic Russian populations lost in the breakup of the Soviet Union. This approach also fits nicely within Russia’s stated strategic objective of protecting the rights of compatriots abroad. Recent incursions into Georgia, Crimea, and Ukraine serve this strategic objective.

Holland Identified With Zebulun Who Was Zebulun?

In the first book of the Bible, Genesis 30:20,an account of his birth is given. Zebulun is the youngest son of Jacob and Leah being the sixth son. "God has endued me with a good dowry, now will my husband dwell with me, because I have born him six sons, and she called him ZEBULUN." What is in a name? Let us learn about the hidden information of Zebulon in connection with a mill.

                                       The Dwelling:- which hooks up water - with the movement


Indeed the Dutch have been famous for their interiors throughout the ages, claiming to have invented decoration. Famous Dutch paintings of the 16th and 17th centuries show "Holland's Binnenhuis" and its unique atmosphere, of which the highly emancipated Dutch woman was the vital centre, as many a foreigner in those days has described. Rembrandt, Pieter de Hoogh and Vermeer painted rich Dutch family scenes and interiors with light streaming through stained glass windows colouring the white and black tiles, the decorated walls, carved oak, beautiful china, copper utensils and magnificent arrangements of flowers, step gabled houses with winding staircases (a Dutch invention) along clean Dutch canals. Dutch family dwellings were later imitated by other countries Denmark, South Africa and the early settlers in America.

And not only in the past! The Dutch are even now renowned for their home making. They like large windows, open curtains at night, which surprises the tourist, showing lots of lamps and lights (advertising Philips light bulbs!) Going through Holland by train at night gives the traveller an impression of homeliness and life in the Dutch dwellings different from Belgium, France and other European countries.

The Dutch have to build "elevated houses." Their houses are all built on sand, clay and mud, as there is no rock sub-strata underneath Holland's soil. So they have to be built on piles. The entire city of Amsterdam has been built on piles: an elevated city with a Dutch ancient dwelling-culture, and in contrast, still below sea level. By lack of space, dwellings are made in house boats on the canals of Amsterdam which are very numerous, numbering 2500 in all. One of our royal princes lives on one of them.


What is more Dutch than the sight of a working windmill in a flat green Dutch landscape? Although those who have studied the history of the windmills have traced them back to Medo Persia - you remember Zebulun as one of the ten tribes which was deported to that area - the Dutch have refined the buildings and engineering of windmills from at least as far back as 1200 A.D. The invention of the water-windmill for drainage purposes, with the screw action lifting or "hooking" the water from a lower to a higher level is exclusively Dutch.

Apart from this, the variety of windmills in the Netherlands is greater than anywhere else in the world. On the power of the wind their age old wooden engines worked as flour, spice and oil grinders, as sawmills, as papermakers, as printing presses and as gin-distillers. In the golden 17th century the Netherlands had thousands of turning windmills with the always blowing west wind sucking and sighing harder through its sails, making the wheels to turn harder and more efficiently, than many a modem machine even after the invention of electricity.

"God created the world, the Dutch created Holland"; is an old Dutch saying. Anyhow Dutch engineers have been asked to give advice on drainage projects throughout the ages.

Prof. Ch. Wilson devoted a chapter (page 80 91) in his book "The Dutch Republic" to the areas reclaimed by the Dutch in Western Europe and England from the 13th to the 17th centuries. For instance the Royal Park at Windsor, the Lincoln and Cambridge Fens, parts of Kent, Somerset, East AngIia, but also parts of France, Italy and Germany.

The Dutch know how to grow crops on reclaimed land and how to remove excess salt.

"At the same time" according to Wilson, "the famous breed of Friesian cattle was making its appearance in Britain. Mortimer, writing in 1707, remarked that the long legged short horned cow of the Dutch breed found in Lincolnshire and Kent was the best breed for milking."

Zebulun would live at the seashore. Since prehistoric times the Lowlanders have been inventive and skilled in building. Unlike other regions the Dutch don't possess a single local stone! All their houses had to be built from clay, which they, like the Israelites of old in Egypt, baked (they must have had their own factories as innumerable 'Roman' tiles have been found in the Scheldt area), or, as ancient farms still show, they built from wattle and daub, a skill which eventually they must have brought under the names of "Belgium" tribes into Somerset in Britain! The Lowlanders could never dwell in caves, because these did not exist.

There is not a single rock formation in the Netherlands, and there is hardly any danger due to the almost stagnant waters and the small differences in tides. Moreover the Dutch Flanders's coast is the longest range of natural dunes without rocks in the world, consisting of some 170 miles, of which the Netherlands form two thirds, while the remainder are man made dykes. Nowhere can one find a more natural parallel with Jacob's blessing to Zebulun!


To be a piler ("heier") is a very ancient skilled job in Holland, and now it is a well known Dutch surname "den Heier." All the foundations of most Dutch houses are piles piled deep into the ground. From prehistoric times the Lowlanders have been very advanced in building houses on piles along quays and roads built on wattle and piles. Dutch engineers were often asked for advice and actually built castles and estates in watery areas, as on Fuenen in Denmark (Egeskov) or in England near the Thames, Yarmouth and the Cambridge Fens to name but a few.

The reason for mentioning this is to show that Dutch always have been renowned for building dwellings (Zebulun) in watery areas and alongside havens, ditches, quays and seashore. (blessing given to Zebulun is to dwell at the seashore and natural harbours)


"Zebulun shall be a haven of ships". The Hebrew word for ship is aniah. It means ship, but also fleet, conveyance, galley, navy.

What about the "Flying Dutchman" and our first AIRSHIP?

Unconsciously the Dutch tourist offices are advertising exactly what Zebulun had prophesied he would be doing! Exporting reclaiming land, putting fingers in dykes, living in windmills sucking water, and all the Dutch being shown as blond cheese heads milking their Friesian cows or making cheese and butter in some fancy national costume, everybody with smiling faces, rejoicing, with Dutch tulips in their hands -goods for export. Yes indeed, modern export propaganda and exploitation of past Dutch folk lore still shows in a mirror a strange parallel with Zebulun!


Speaking about haven in the modern sense, is it so strange that small Holland has the largest port in the world within its borders, namely "Rotterdam Europoort"? It has surpassed London, New York and Hamburg. Willynilly it is becoming the premier port of the European Community.The name itself, "Europoort" is the Dutch abbreviated word for "gate of Europe." It is too far fetched to remind you that Israel, living in the Isles of the West, will possess the (sea) gates of their enemies, as prophesied in Genesis 22:17; 24:60. Incidentally, as far as our comparison with Zebulun is concerned it is a nice little touch that Rotterdam Europoort has as its modern symbol a large watch lower called Euro mast, like the mast of a ship.

At Rotterdam the international rivers Rhine and Meuse become confluent. According to ancient legend it was Ratherius in 90 A.D.who founded Rotterdam, being a descendant of the Royal Trojans, who again claimed to belong to the tribe of Judah. (see Rev.W.M.H. Milner's The Royal House of Britain an enduring dynasty, 13th edition 1964, Covenant Books, London).

The identification of one of Israel's tribes with a country and a particular nation is not new. At Hoorn, north of Amsterdam, there are three 17th century step-gabled houses with a decorated frieze showing the battle of the Dutch at Hoorn against the Spanish Admiral Bossu. The houses are now called Bossu Huizen with inscriptions saying that the Hollander identify themselves with Israel and the Spanish with Amalek, who is always Israel's antagonist in the Bible.

One inscription reads:

"Oh glorious deed, oh golden times, who ever thinks of them, he is rejoicing still, the land that shakes and trembles, the enemy is nearing fast, he will with Amalek aIl Israel defeat, he comes with greatest might, But God has given us Aarons, even Hurs, whose names are written."

In that "golden" 17th century when the Dutch had won the battle for religious (Protestant) freedom, they were conscious of being literally Israel. They were enlightened Bible readers.

The 17th century "Chronicle of Zealand" by Smallegange, shows how historians in those days were convinced that the early inhabitants of the Netherlands, the Batavians, the Frisians, the Menapians and others were descended from the Hebrews and father Noah.

"Chronicle of Leeland" - by A.V.Scriecle showing the curios of the Greeks and Latins about the beginning of common origin.

That the Low-landers, the Gaels and the Germans were called Celts, descended from Hebirous in the North on the Celtic side of the world, who are much older in age and language that the Greeks or the Romans.

From the beginning, till the time of Charles the Great - over 4000 years.


This time a woman, being a judge in Israel, is singing her prophecy regarding the children of Zebulun, now being free and at home in their Promised Land. The Zebulunites had received a portion of the land by lot and they had taken an active part in the fight to sweep the country and to throw off the tyranny of Jabin the Canaanite, for which battle Deborah, the woman judge, had summoned 10,000 Zebulunites of whom she now says:

"Zebulun's men risked their lives to death." - (Judges 5:18) and
"Come to me with Zebulun wielding the writer's pen" - (Judges 5:14).

This means handling the pen of the writer, or skilled in writing. It sometimes has been translated as "the recruiter's staff" which means a military call. On this different level it has the same function by writing or by recruiting one is calling others to mental or physical action and jointly to enlist or to enrol into something. Recruiting a small Gideon's band of people who will stand for real Israel.

However these Hebrew words still have another meaning. The "pen" is here literally "branched stick or scion for punishing," (Strong Concordance) for writing, for fighting, for ruling.

It was especially used in this sense to inscribe, to recount, to number. The word used here is "sepher," which is known in the Bible as the word for a book or a roll.

It is therefore not out of place to associate it with the means for producing books and printing letters.


The arms of the Seven provinces are on the side of the ship which has the Bible on its prow. The words (by William the Taciturn) in the circle are: "Quiet in the midst of the roaring waves" Poem -
''At The Bottom":- "In all pressure and mourning. Offer each other the hand. Be faithful in everything God's Church and the Fatherland."


Prior to the Middle Ages, the Lowlands were already renowned for their beautifully calligraphic breviaries on parchment. What became the means ofr producing books since the 14th century? Small "branched off" sticks of lead and moulds of letters! Movable letters of tin and lead, still used by printers nowadays. Do you realise what a far reaching and revolutionary invention it has been to obtain the means for duplicating books?

Who would be the first to get this brilliant idea which was going to revolutionise the intellectual mind? It would lead up to the freedom of the printed word and availability of the Bible to the common citizen. The first English bible was printed in Amsterdam. Zebulun was to be blessed with the skill of numbering "branched off" sticks or letters. Here is the strange parallel:

The Dutch claim to have invented this!
For ages this has been a controversial historical question, and it is still generally accepted in the Anglo Saxon world that it was a German, Gutenberg, who invented the printing press. The Dutch have always disputed this on good grounds, and recent discoveries in Germany give even more credit to the Dutch claim!


Here is the Dutch story behind it, which by the way, millions of Dutch have been taught at school to be the truth!

In the city of Haarlem there is a statue in the market place of a man with a letter block in his hand. On the stone is inscribed:

1440 A.D. "Typographiae letteris mobilibus a metallo fusis inventor," or the inventor of the art of printing with movable letters, made of cast metal.

Coster having invented this primitive way of printing with lead types was robbed of his invention on Christmas night of 1440 his servant Jan, who fled with it to Mainz in Germany, where it eventually came into the hands of Gutenberg, who seems to have refined the method and produced the famous Gutenberg Bible in 1448.


Where refugees in the 16th 17th century could freely print their religious ideas? Don't we have a remarkable combination here of Jacob's blessing to Zebulun, of being a haven, and Moses' words of "being blessed in thy going out with joy" (think of all the Dutch books having gone the world over!) and Deborah's prophecy that Zebulun's talent for the "sepher," the book, will be blessed? The Dutch have been and still are greatly blessed in finding new methods of printing. From the 15th and 18th centuries they were the leading nation. From the Encyclopaedia Britannica I quote, (vol 18,1960 Edition) "Even England was completely dependant for type on the Dutch". 
Recently Dutch colour printing and the latest methods of photo-type have been developed in the Netherlands. Orders for the highest quality of art -printing from all over the world are being placed by the United States and Great Britain as well. This again is drawing a far sighted parallel with the "light" prophecy for Zebulun.


On yet another level of interpretation the light of the Gospel has been brought to these islands by means of the sea as early as A.D. 50 and again in the 5th and 6th centuries by Irish and English monks, long before Rome claims to have converted these barbarous and heathen "Germanic" tribes. 

This is a subject in itself. The earliest missionaries to the Lowlands came in boats and established centres along the coast of the Netherlands, "where the glory shone."


But in the midst of judgement there is the promise and the certainty of the Lord's deliverance there shall be no gloom for her who was in anguish. In the former time the Lord brought into contempt the land of Zebulun ... but in latter time He will make it glorious, by the way of the sea ... The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the land of intense darkness and the shadow of death, upon them light shines ... (different translations)
(Isaiah 9:1) This reminds us of the fact that the land of Zebulun in latter days became part of Galilee. Is it so strange that the prophet is having two visions simultaneously? He sees the depopulated wasteland of Zebulun west of the river Jordan, where one day the Messiah will walk. He also sees the Zebulunites, afflicted by the sea in a land of dimness and darkness, seeing light.


Is there any land in the western world that has had so many disastrous floods since times immemorial as the Netherlands? No regularly rising rivers here as in India, but sudden afflictions by a roaring and thundering sea attacking the land and its civilization. Legends tell us about dramatic disasters, one of them being called the "Kimbrian flood" of all names! More recently, in 1953 the land was afflicted more grievously. Was this applicable to Zebulun's land, which never bordered on the sea in Biblical times?* Orthodox Dutch fishermen and farmers at the latest disastrous breach of dykes cited this very verse of Isaiah when whole families in Zealand were drowned in the sea, fifteen hundred in one night, 1st of February, 1953. A people that fled in darkness on the top of their houses and saw the house high waves running towards them. "In the land of shadow and death, upon them light has shined." To those among the Dutch who remember those days they themselves are the people of whom Isaiah spoke.


Holland, country of light, has to be cleansed first from its sickness, in order to become Zebulun, the dwelling of the elevated. If it is true the destruction will come by fire to many parts of the earth, the atmosphere will be so dim and dark that the sun will be blackened. When this comes, says the Bible "go into your dwellings and wait." There will be light inside. There will be light in each inner home that has been cleansed. As it was in Moses' time when Egypt sat in darkness, while the Israelites were surrounded by the Shekinah light, so it will be in times to come Zebulun will see the light first.Those in the Netherlands, who are aware that this strange parallel is a true one, will behave as children of Zebulun. Being cleansed, they will dwell safely,and they will receive the grace of seeing the return of the Light.


"What then of these people, these north western Europeans living in the flat lands of Holland? Are they descended through the ages from the People of Zebulun? If they be of Zebulun, then they are of Israel. Down the long corridors of time, beyond the 21st century, the prophets foresaw a wondrous future, for Zebulun, as Isaiah foretold, would see the LIGHT FIRST."

The Light of the world did His first miracle in CANA GALILEE (country of Zebulun). He the Living water, changed the 6 water jars (meant for cleansing) into blood of the VINE. Jesus being the True VINE and Israel the branches who have to produce much fruit. I'll show you now some deeper symbolic and numeric explanations. He the GREAT SON. SON has the number value 52. So has the word wine. The fruit of the VINE being UNFERMENTED grape Juice as the BLOOD of JESUS was UNDEFILED, became the symbol of cleansing ISRAEL and it provides for the NEW COVENANT with ISRAEL. Cana Galilee has the numeric value of 145. In Psalm 145 it says: "Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom" The task of Zebulun is spreading the LIGHT. The numeric value of Zebulun is 95. So do we read in Psalm 95: "0 come, let us worship and bow down, let us kneel before the Lord our God; ...".and we are the sheep of His pasture.

Vinefruit has the numeric value of 423 that is 3 times 141. In Psalm 141 it says: "Our bones are scattered at the grave's mouth... But mine eyes are unto Thee 0 God the Lord: in Thee is my trust".

                                                                        Last Supper

Jesus BLOOD came down, during His crucifixion, from His left side, into the split in the rock (due to the earthquake at His death) and dropped down on the MERCY SEAT in the cave below. Only the golden MERCY SEAT on top of the GOLDEN ARK WITH THE OLD COVENANT WRITTEN ON STONE IN IT, could do service for the PRECIOUS BLOOD of CHRIST on behalf of HIS OWN PEOPLE ISRAEL; Forgiving their sins, breaking the bill of DIVORCE once given to her and bringing ISRAEL into His NEW COVENANT, "writing His LAW in the Hearts and minds of all Israelites".

Will that LIGHT first appear in the nation of Zebulun, at the border of the sea? Then it will enable them to CALL THE NATIONS (of Israel) to the mount. That word MOUNTAIN has also a deeper meaning of PROMOTION (Do you get it)? Promotion of' "a company of nations".

Netherland means LOWLAND - the numeric value of that word is 415 or 5 times 83. In Psalm 83 it says:

"That men may know that thou, whose name alone is YAHWEH, art the MOST HIGH over all the earth."

That LIGHT will surely NATIONALY go forth from my LOW LAND.

Dutch National Emblem "I will maintain God and my Right"

We are heirs of the Father, we are joint heirs with the Son. We are children of the Kingdom. We are a family, we are ONE.

The Irish Hero Dagda and Samson

Contents: Introduction: Irish Mythology and the Bible Dagda and Samson. Summary of Samson adapted from Wikipedia article: "Samson" Parallels Between Dagda and Samson. Sexual Prowess and Exchange of Favors More Examples. The Name Dagda from Dagon! Parallels Samson -Dagda. Some Sources.

Introduction: Irish Mythology and the Bible Irish Mythology frequently contains details that have since been proven true by archaeological findings. For instance, an old Irish myth, "the Marriage of Etain" says that King Eochaidh Airemh made the clans of Tethba build a causeway across the bog of Lemrach. In 1985 in Longford, Ireland, were uncovered 1000 yards of remains from a roadway dating back to ca. 150 BCE. It was found in the place where the legend said it would be. [Source: "The Celtic Empire. The First Millenium of Celtic History 1000 BC - AD 51" by Peter Berresford Ellis, UK, 1990, p.15]. Irish Legends on occasion recall Biblical precedents and the impression is that the similarities were not always due to later Christian influence. Concerning parallels to Scripture in general we must also take into account the Hebrew original sources. We believe in the literal truth of the Bible.

To see our three articles on this subject: The Literal Meaning of Prophecy.

The Bible is inspired and was written down by Prophets and Sages guided by the Almighty. Together with this we must recognize that the Bible was written in the language of the people at the time of writing. Scripture incorporates local traditions. These traditions are undoubtedly the correct ones but that does not mean that other somewhat deviant accounts were also not in circulation. These were rejected from being included in the Canon of Scripture but would have continued in popular tradition. Much of the populace over large sections of Ancient Israel appear at times to have been effectually illiterate. They relied on oral traditions.

We also know that they were heavily influenced by the peoples around them and in turn had influence over them. We are implying that parallels between Irish (and other) traditions) with the Bible may reflect the remembrance of alternate accounts. We also know that there is much that happened to Israel in ancient times that the Bible only hints at or ignores altogether. Our recent study of the First Book of Kings brought up the case of King Ahab fighting alongside the King of Aram in a coalition of eleven local monarchs against the King of Assyrian and probably defeating him. The Bible does not mention this but we know of it through what may be deduced from an Assyrian inscription from the time of Shalmaneser-iii. [For more details, See the Brit-Am commentary following 1-Kings 22:30].

Irish Mythology in places on occasion derives from Biblical antecedents as found in Scripture itself and in oral traditions some of which were transmitted to us via Talmudic and Rabbinical Literature. This parallelism extents not only to details in the tales themselves but also to the psychology behind them.

The article below (unlike some of our other writings) unashamedly indulges in a great deal of speculation. Nevertheless we think there is something to what we are saying and that these ideas are worth considering. If perchance we are mistaken in this case then it should not reflect on our other writings. The article in itself is of interest and worth reading. Regardless as to whether or not the reader will agree with us we feel certain that he will have benefited from the information and be pleased with its presentation.

Dagda and Samson One of the figures whom we consider to show Biblical parallels is Dagda, the giant good god, son of the goddess Dana. The brothers of Dagda were Ogma and Lugh though in some accounts they are ascribed different parents.

Several features of Dagda bring to mind the figure of Samson though parallels with other Biblical heroes also exist.

In Irish accounts the Tribe of Dana came from Lebanon and then from Greece and had fought there against the Philistines. See: Dan in Ireland and Wales.
The Tribe of Dana, Bile, and Dagda in Ireland
The son of Dana was Dagda. Dagda along with his brothers parallels aspects of Scripture especially those concerning the Hebrew judge Samson. The story of Samson is found in the Book of Judges chapters 13 to 16

Summary of Samson adapted from Wikipedia article: "Samson" The Israelites had been delivered "into the hand of the Philistines". An angel appears to Manoah, an Israelite from the tribe of Dan, in the city of Zorah, and to his wife, who had been unable to conceive. This angel proclaims that the couple will soon have a son who will begin to deliver the Israelites from the Philistines.[Manoah's wife (as well as the child himself) were to abstain from all alcoholic beverages, and her promised child was not to shave or cut his hair. He was to be a "Nazirite" from birth. After the angel returned, Manoah soon prepared a sacrifice, but the Messenger would only allow it to be for God, touching his staff to it, miraculously engulfing it in flames. The angel then ascended to heaven in the fire. When he becomes a young adult, Samson leaves the hills of his people to see the cities of the Philistines. While there, Samson falls in love with a Philistine woman from Timnah that, overcoming the objections of his parents who do not know that "it is of the Lord", he decides to marry her.On the way to ask for the woman's hand in marriage, Samson is attacked by an Asiatic Lion and simply grabs it and rips it apart, as the spirit of God moves upon him, divinely empowering him. He continues on to the Philistine's house, winning her hand in marriage.

On his way to the wedding, Samson notices that bees have nested in the carcass of the lion and have made honey.He eats a handful of the honey and gives some to his parents.At the wedding-feast, Samson proposes that he tell a riddle to his thirty groomsmen (all Philistines); if they can solve it, he will give them thirty pieces of fine linen and garments.The riddle ("Out of the eater, something to eat; out of the strong, something sweet") is a veiled account of his second encounter with the lion (at which only he was present). The Philistines are infuriated by the riddle.The thirty groomsmen tell Samson's new wife that they will burn her and her father's household if she does not discover the answer to the riddle and tell it to them. At the urgent and tearful imploring of his bride, Samson tells her the solution, and she tells it to the thirty groomsmen. He flies into a rage and kills thirty Philistines of Ashkelon for their garments, which he gives his thirty groomsmen. Still in a rage, he returns to his father's house, and his bride is given to the best man as his wife.

Her father refuses to allow him to see her, and wishes to give Samson the younger sister.[Samson attaches torches to the tails of three hundred foxes, leaving the panicked beasts to run through the fields of the Philistines, burning all in their wake.The Philistines find out why Samson burned their crops, and they burn Samson's wife and father-in-law to death. In revenge, Samson slaughters many more Philistines, smiting them "hip and thigh". Samson then takes refuge in a cave in the rock of Etam. An army of Philistines went up and demanded from 3000 men of Judah to deliver them Samson. With Samson's consent, they tie him with two new ropes and are about to hand him over to the Philistines when he breaks free. Using the jawbone of an ass, he slays one thousand Philistines. At the conclusion of Judges 15 it is said that "Samson led Israel for twenty years in the days of the Philistines". Later, Samson goes to Gaza, where he stays at a harlot's house. His enemies wait at the gate of the city to ambush him, but he rips the gate up and carries it to "the hill that is in front of Hebron".

He then falls in love with a woman, Delilah, at the Brook of Sorek.The Philistines approach Delilah and induce her (with 1100 silver coins each) to try to find the secret of Samson's strength.Samson, not wanting to reveal the secret, teases her, telling her that he will lose his strength should he be bound with fresh bowstrings.She does so while he sleeps, but when he wakes up he snaps the strings.She persists...Eventually Samson tells Delilah that he will lose his strength with the loss of his hair. Delilah calls for a servant to shave Samson's seven locks....Samson is captured by the Philistines, who stab out his eyes with their swords. After being blinded, Samson is brought to Gaza, imprisoned, and put to work grinding grain. One day the Philistine leaders assemble in a temple for a religious sacrifice to Dagon, one of their most important deities, for having delivered Samson into their hands.

They summon Samson so women and men gather on the roof to watch. Once inside the temple, Samson, his hair having grown long again, asks the servant who is leading him to the temple's central pillars if he may lean against them (referring to the pillars). "Then Samson prayed to God, "remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes" (Judges 16:28)"."Samson said, "Let me die with the Philistines!" (Judges 16:30). He pulled the two pillars together, and down came the temple on the rulers and all the people in it. Thus he killed many more as he died than while he lived." (Judges 16:30). After his death, Samson's family recovers his body from the rubble and buries him near the tomb of his father Manoah.

Parallels Between Dagda and Samson To my mind there are parallels between the Irish god Dagda and Samson. Dagda was a giant club-wielding deity of immense strength. He used a club and not of man -made weaponry while Samson wielded used the jaw of a donkey as a club and killed 1000 Philistines with it. Dagda was enormously strong like Samson. Dagda protected his people mainly through individual feats of strength like Samson versus other heroes who inspired the people to action and lead armies. Dagda however also led armies and participated in mass battles in one of which he was killed.

#Tales depict the Dagda as a figure of immense power, armed with a magic club and associated with a cauldron. The club was supposed to be able to kill nine men with one blow; but with the handle he could return the slain to life. The cauldron was known as the Undry and was said to be bottomless, from which no man left unsatisfied. He also possessed Daurdabla, also known as "the Four Angled Music", a richly ornamented magic harp made of oak which, when the Dagda played it, put the seasons in their correct order; other accounts tell of it being used to command the order of battle. He possessed two pigs, one of which was always growing whilst the other was always roasting, and ever-laden fruit trees. #

Here we have Dagda attributed characteristics associated with other Biblical figures. The cauldron reminds us of Elijah: Elijah promised the widow who had given him her last morsel to eat: [1-Kings 17:14] FOR THUS SAYS THE LORD GOD OF ISRAEL: "THE BIN OF FLOUR SHALL NOT BE USED UP, NOR SHALL THE JAR OF OIL RUN DRY, UNTIL THE DAY THE LORD SENDS RAIN ON THE EARTH."

Dagda being able to revive the dead also recalls Elijah who revived from death the son of the same widow whom he had blessed with self-replenishing containers of flour and oil (1-Kings 17:22). Elishah the former pupil of Elijah performed a similar miracle to Elijah when he saved a woman from having to sell her two son into servitude. She had only one jar of oil left. Elishah told her to borrow utensils from her neighbors and pour the oil into them. All the vessels were filled and she was able to sell the oil and be freed from debt.

2-Kings 4:5 So she went from him and shut the door behind her and her sons, who brought the vessels to her; and she poured it out. 6 Now it came to pass, when the vessels were full, that she said to her son, 'Bring me another vessel.' And he said to her, 'There is not another vessel.' So the oil ceased. 7 Then she came and told the man of God. And he said, 'Go, sell the oil and pay your debt; and you and your sons live on the rest.'

Dagda revived the dead with the handle of his staff. Elishah is associated with a similar phenomenon. Elishah blessed a woman who with her husband had provided him with lodging. The woman bore a son. The boy died in childhood and immediately the woman sent to Elishah to do something about it. Elishah gave his staff to his disciple Gehazi and told him to go to where the dead boy was lying and place the end of the staff on the boy's mouth. Gehazi did so but nothing happened. Meanwhile the woman had importuned Elishah to come himself. Elishah went in to where the boy was and managed to revive him.2-Kings 4:32 When Elisha came into the house, there was the child, lying dead on his bed. 33 He went in therefore, shut the door behind the two of them, and prayed to the LORD. 34 And he went up and lay on the child, and put his mouth on his mouth, his eyes on his eyes, and his hands on his hands; and he stretched himself out on the child, and the flesh of the child became warm. 35 He returned and walked back and forth in the house, and again went up and stretched himself out on him; then the child sneezed seven times, and the child opened his eyes. 36 And he called Gehazi and said, 'Call this Shunammite woman.' So he called her. And when she came in to him, he said, 'Pick up your son.' 37 So she went in, fell at his feet, and bowed to the ground; then she picked up her son and went out.

The harp of Dagda reminds us of King David. David was chosen to attend King Saul at his court due to his skill with the harp and the soothing effect his music induced: [I-Samuel 16:16] "Let our master now command your servants, who are before you, to seek out a man who is a skillful player on the harp. And it shall be that he will play it with his hand when the distressing spirit from God is upon you, and you shall be well." [I-Samuel 16:17] So Saul said to his servants, "Provide me now a man who can play well, and bring him to me." [I-Samuel 16:18] Then one of the servants answered and said, "Look, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skillful in playing, a mighty man of valor, a man of war, prudent in speech, and a handsome person; and the LORD is with him."?

Not only Dagda but the Irish in general became associated with the harp which became the semi-official symbol of Ireland. Vincenzio Galilei (father of the famous astronomer Galileo) in "Dialogo della Musica Antica" (1581 CE) commented on the Irish harp: "This most ancient instrument was brought to us from Ireland where such are most excellently worked... and they paint and engrave it on their public and private buildings and on their hill: stating as their reason for so doing that they have descended from the Royal Prophet David."

Star of David: the celebrated Jewish symbol named after King David

As for the two pigs Dagda possessed, this was a later development. Irish tradition is full of pigs and swine. The curing of ham and the rearing of pigs was an important aspect of Celtic culture on the Continent. Even so according to LOUIS HYMAN ("The Jews of Ireland", Jerusalem, Israel, 1972, p.1):

"It is stated in very old copies of The Book of Invasions and other ancient documents that it was the Mosaic law that the Milesians brought into Errin [i.e. Ireland] at their coming; that it had been learned and received from Moses in Egypt by Cae Cain Beathach , who was himself an Israelite..." see Various Traditions no.12.

It may be that some of the exiled Israelite Tribes did continue for a time to keep the Hebraic Laws concerning forbidden foods. We know that in Scotland up unto a few centuries back widespread food taboos existed dating from pre-Christian times that overlapped Mosaic injunctions and swine was forbidden in many communities. See: "The Food Taboos of Old Scotland. The Law of Moses and of Caledonia"

Sexual Prowess and Exchange of Favors Samson and Dagda may have shared a feature that nice people prefer not to speak about.

Samson was also known for his powers in this region. The Bible describes three sexual liaisons Samson conducted with Philistine women. After he was captured and blinded he was put to work grinding. [Judges 16: 21] Then the Philistines took him and put out his eyes, and brought him down to Gaza. They bound him with bronze fetters, and he became a grinder in the prison. In Hebrew the word used for "grind" can also have sexual connotations,

[Job 31:10] Then let my wife grind for another, And let others bow down over her.

Do not misunderstand or misinterpret what we are saying. The Bible says that Samson was set to grinding and that means he was set to pushing a grinding stone in the processing of grain. The word used for grinding however has a double meaning and there were Sages who suggested that this additional meaning was also intended. There existed a tradition concerning Samson quoted by the Radak, # Each one of the Philistine would bring his wife to Samson so that she might get pregnant from him #

Dagda used his sexual powers to extract information. # His lover was Boann and his daughter was Breg. Prior to the battle with the Fomorians, he coupled with the goddess of war, the Morrogan, on Samhain in exchange for a plan of battle.# Samson did not receive but gave secrets to his women folk after coitus. Nevertheless the plot is similar. His first wife extracted the secret of honey in the carcase of a dead lion from him. Later Delilah got from him the secret of his power coming from his hair.
Concerning his first wife we are told, Judges 14:17 Now she had wept on him the seven days while their feast lasted. And it happened on the seventh day that he told her, because she pressed him so much. Then she explained the riddle to the sons of her people. # she pressed him so much. She would pressure him and refuse herself to him, and so on. # (Metsudat David).

Concerning Delilah we hear: [Judges 16:16] And it came to pass, when she pestered him daily with her words and pressed him, so that his soul was vexed to death, # his soul was vexed to death. The Sages (Sotah 9b) said that Scripture expressed itself in euphemisms. She would slip out from underneath when they were having intercourse.# (Radak).

The Bible described things as they happened. The figure of Dagda may have been derived in part from that of Samson but since he was deified it would not be seemly to have him looking like a fool ruled by that particular portion of his anatomy. They therefore kept the story but switched the roles. Instead of Dagda being confounded by his need for sex he became the one who gained advantage by bestowing it.

More Examples # The Dagda is a father-figure (he is also known as Eochaid Ollathair, or "All-father") and a protector of the tribe. In some texts his father is Elatha, in others his mother is Ethlinn.
In Hebrew "Elatha" would connote "the goddess".

Ogma the brother of Dagda was also known for feats of strength and has aspects of Samson. # His father is Elatha and his mother is usually given as Ethliu, sometimes as Etain.# Samson took refuge in a cave in the rock of Etam. Etham and Etain could interchange since a final "m" became an "n" and the place of refuge became the mother's womb or "rechem" in Hebrew meaning both "womb" and "source of mercy".

# The Dagda had an affair with Boann, wife of Nechtan. In order to hide their affair, Dagda made the sun stand still for nine months; therefore their son, Aengus, was conceived, gestated and born in one day. #

The sun standing still is associated with Joshua who made the sun stand for a full day. We shall see below that the name Dagda probably originally derived from the Hebrew word "dag" meaning "fish". Joshua son of Nun in Hebrew Mythology was also linked with a fish. Nun, the father of Joshua, has a name which in Aramaic also means "fish". Different legends said that Joshua was once swallowed by a fish (as happened to Jonah) etc.

Dagda and a Play on Words # Whilst Aengus was away the Dagda shared out his land among his children, but Aengus returned to discover that nothing had been saved for him. Under the guidance of Lugh Aengus later tricked his father out of his home at the Bru na Boinne (Newgrange). Aengus was instructed to ask his father if he could live in the Bru for a day and a night, and the Dagda agreed. But Irish has no indefinite article, so "a day and a night" is the same as "day and night", which covers all time, and so Aengus took possession of the Bru permanently. In "The Wooing of Etain", on the other hand, Aengus uses the same ploy to trick Elcmar out of Bruna Boinne, with the Dagda's connivance. 

Here we see Daga tricked by his son through a play on words. This may be compared to the Riddles of Samson.

Ogma the brother of Dagda invented the Ogham script.

The Sun-Face of Ogma and the Name of Samson # By virtue of his battle prowess and invention of Ogham, he is compared with Ogmios, a Gaulish deity associated with eloquence and equated with Herakles. J. A. MacCulloch compares Ogma's epithet grianainech (sun-face) with Lucian's description of the "smiling face" of Ogmios.

The figure of Herakles (Hercules) was derived from Samson. Ogma was parallel to Hercules. The name Samson in Hebrew may connote "strength of the sun" (Samas-on) and at all events is based on the root SheMeSh meaning sun. We see that Ogma was also referred to as "face of the sun".
Ogma in Gaul was known as Ogmios. Wikipedia:

Ogmios was a Gallic deity, who Lucian records was depicted as a bald old man with a bow and club leading an apparently happy band of men with chains attached to their ears from his tongue. This is thought by some scholars to be a metaphor for eloquence, possibly related to bardic practices. Lucian records that the Gauls associated him with Hercules. ## The baldness of Ogmios is contradistinct to the long hair of Samson but Samson had his hair shorn and then was put in chains.

The Name Dagda from Dagon! The name Dagda is said to be derived from Old Irish: dag dia; [Irish: dea-Dia] meaning "good god". The Philistine god Dagon is described as depicted as a kind of male mermaid with the lower half of his body shaped like a fish. In Hebrew "dag" means "fish" and thus we have "dagon" implying fish-like. Othniel Margalit ("The Sea Peoples in the Bible" Hebrew, 1988) suggests that Dagon was later equated with either Zeus (i.e. Baal) the chief god or with Apollo (a sun god) or with them both.

The Tribe of Dan neighbored the Philistines, intermarried with them, fought against them, and perhaps also with them. Samson the hero-judge came from the Tribe of Dan. Samson died by destroying the Temple of Dagon. It could however be that due to Danites coming to worship Dagon they re-named Samson in his honor. Later the name Dagon (or however the Philistines and Danites actually pronounced it) was slightly altered (as was the custom in the use of foreign names) to have pertinent meaning in local Irish, Dag or Dagon was modified to Dagda.

Parallels Samson -Dagda Samson was the hero from the Tribe of Dan:

Dagda was the son of Dana mother of the Tribe of Dana. Both had immense strength. Samson used the jaw of a donkey as a club; Dagda used a club. Both acted more or less independently as individuals protecting their people. Both were known for their unusual sexual potency. Samson sold his secrets for sexual favors; Dagda obtained information by bestowing sexual favor. Both were known for their use of riddles and plays on words. Samson was linked with the power of the sun; Ogmios (Ogma) brother of Dagda was nicknamed "Face of the Sun". Samson may have been later identified with Dagon (Apollo) and the name Dagda may be derived from Dagon.

The parallelism between Dagda and Samson needs to be considered in the light of additional evidence indicating that the Ancient Irish (and relatedpeoples) to a significant degree were the physical descendants of Israelite Tribes who had lost their identity yet still retained vague traditions carried over from when they had been in the Land of Israel before their exile.

Israelites in southern Africa: Zebulun with Issachar, Judah, Levi, Reuben and Ephraim

The white people of southern Africa are descendants of several different tribes of Israel. Amazing end-time prophecies in the Bible tell us that a God-fearing remnant of Israelites will remain in southern Africa.

Whites in southern Africa

There are two large groups of whites in southern Africa: app. 3.5 mio. Afrikaans speaking whites and app. 2 mio. English speaking whites.

The Afrikaners

The first Dutch settled in the Cape Colony on 6 April, 1652 under Jan van Riebeeck who is considered the father of the Afrikaner people. Today there are some 3,500,000 Afrikaners. Afrikaner is today used to describe all white Afrikaans speaking people of Cape Dutch origin and Boer origin. The Afrikaners are primarily descended from Dutch Calvinists and secondarily from Frisians, Germans, and French Huguenots. Smaller groups of other Europeans have also immigrated to South Africa and become Afrikaners, such as Scandinavians, Scots, Irish, Greeks, Portuguese, Spaniards, and Italians. Most of the app. 150,000 whites in Namibia also speak Afrikaans.

Strange Parallel: Zebulun - The Netherlands a Tribe of Israel by Helene Koppejan (1984)
Dutch and Frisian Afrikaners of Zebulun and Issachar

The Dutch are mainly of the tribe of Zebulun (see Holland Identified With Zebulun - Who Was Zebulun?) Since the Afrikaners primarily are descended from the Dutch we would expect them to have characteristics of the tribe of Zebulun.

Many Afrikaners are descended from Frisians. Some people who study the tribes of Israel believe that the Frisians are of the tribe of Issachar, which was closely connected to Zebulun, because Issachar and Zebulun were Leah's two last born sons. (See Bert Otten: Frisians - Sons of Issachar!)
Moses blessed Zebulun and Issachar thus: And of Zebulun he said, Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out; and, Issachar, in thy tents. They shall call the people unto the mountain; there they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness; for they shall suck of the abundance of the seas, and of the treasures hid in the sand. (Deuteronomy 33:18-19)

This prophecy is fulfilled in the fact that South Africa has one of the world's largest mining industries. South Africa is one of the countries which produce most diamonds. South Africa also has the second largest production of gold in the world, or 15% of the world's production. In 1993 it was 30%! South Africa is the largest producer in the world of chrome, manganese, platinum, vanadium, and vermiculite.

South Africa also has the second largest production of ilmenite, palladium, rutile, and zirconium.

The South African mining industry was established after the Dutch and Frisians left the Netherlands by ship: Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out. And this prophecy is confirmed in the fact that most of the South African mining industry is found in inland South Africa, far from the sea: for they shall suck of the abundance of the seas, and of the treasures his in the sand.

Jacob blessed Zebulun thus:

Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he shall be for an haven of ships; and his border shall be unto Zidon. (Genesis 49:13) 

This prophecy is for the Afrikaners' part fulfilled in the fact that the Afrikaner people started with the founding of the Cape Colony, which originally was built as a re-supply point and way station for ships of the Dutch East India Company sailing between the Netherlands and the Dutch East Indies.

The Coat of Arms and the flag, the Vierkleur, of the South African Republic (Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek), a Boer national state which covered the later Transvaal province and was independent 1856-1877 and 1881-1902. The Coat of Arms displays symbols of the four Israelite camps (Num. 2): The Man (Reuben, Gen. 49:3), the Lion (Judah, Gen. 49:9), the Bull (Ephraim, Deut. 33:17), and the Eagle (Dan, Rev. 4:7).

German Afrikaners of Judah and Levi

Many Germans have become a part of the Afrikaners, which generally are a pro-German people.
Germany is made up of several Israelite tribes, including Reuben (Franks), Simeon and Levi (Bavarians, Alemannians, and Swabians), Judah (Saxons), and Gad (East Germany). The German elements in South Africa must, however, primarily be of Judah and Levi, because South Africa fulfills prophecies about the Kingdom of Judah, which ended in 587 BC when the Babylonians deported many Judahites, Benjamites, and Levites to Babylon.

When the Israelites continually sinned and broke the Law of Moses, God would eventually punish them 2520 years (seven times or 7 x 360 years), and then God's time of punishment would be lifted. The Kingdom of Judah started its 2520 years of punishment in 587 BC, and it ended in 1934 AD. Shortly after, on 26 May, 1948, the Afrikaner-dominated National Party won the elections and established the Apartheid system. Dr. D.F. Malan, who became Prime Minister in 1948, basically declared the Afrikanersv independence from the British when he said, speaking of the Afrikaners:
Today South Africa belongs to us once more. South Africa is our own for the first time since Union, and may God grant that it will always remain our own. When Malan said that South Africa belonged to the Afrikaners he did not have the White-Black struggle in mind, but the rivalry between the Afrikaner and the English.

In 1961 the Union of South Africa left the British Commonwealth and became the entirely independent Republic of South Africa.

The Afrikaners have many things in common with the Jews. The Jewish state was founded when David Ben-Gurion declared its independence from the British Mandate of Palestine on 14 May, 1948. The Afrikaners and the Jews thus got their national states at the same time, and they both seceded from British administration. This is of course not a co-incidence!

The Jews represent a part of Judah, even though the Edomites, many of the Khazars, and many other people have become Jews. Both the Afrikaners and the Jews must therefore represent the descendants of the Kingdom of Judah of the Old Testament. The Jews obviously represent those Judahites which remained in Judea and for the most part rejected Jesus Christ. The Judah-element among the Afrikaners must, however, represent: those Judahites which were deported to Babylon in 587 BC but did not return to Judea, and those Judahites which were in Judea in the 1st century AD and received Jesus Christ and became the first Christians.

French Afrikaners of Reuben

Many French Huguenots have also immigrated to South Africa and have become a part of the Afrikaners. Many of the most common Afrikaner surnames are thus Huguenot names, such as Cronje, Joubert, de Klerk, Malan, Nel, du Plessis, Terreblanche, Theron, du Toit, Viljoen, etc. The French are of the tribe of Reuben. (See Origin of France and its Peoples.) The Afrikaner French Huguenot elements are therefore of Reuben.

                                         Flag of the Republic of South Africa 1961-1994

The English-speaking white South Africans of Ephraim

The British are primarily of the tribe of Ephraim. The app. 2 mio. English-speaking white people of southern Africa of British descent, or Anglo-Africans, are therefore primarily of the tribe of Ephraim.
A part of Jacob's blessing to Joseph, Ephraim's father, was: Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall (Genesis 49:22) This promise is fulfilled in the fact that the British have spread out all over the world, to southern Africa, North America, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere like "a fruitful bough whose branches run over the wall".

The land beyond the rivers of Kush

The Bible speaks prophetically about Israelites in a land beyond the rivers of Kush (in Zephaniah 3 and Isaiah 18). The original word used in the Hebrew text is Kush/Cush, but in some Bibles it is translated Ethiopia and Nubia.

Zephaniah, whose name means" Hidden by YaH", writes: From beyond the rivers of Cush my worshippers, my scattered people, will bring me offerings. On that day you will not be put to shame for all the wrongs you have done to me, because I will remove from this city those who rejoice in their pride. Never again will you be haughty on my holy hill. But I will leave within you the meek and humble, who trust in the name of the LORD. (Zephaniah 3:10-12 NIV)

The Kingdom of Kush was an ancient kingdom south of Egypt centered on the confluences of the Blue Nile, the White Nile, and the Atbara River. The Kingdom of Kush was established c. 1070 BC and disestablished c. 300 AD.

                                         The Kingdom of Kush (5 th century BC)

Zephaniah and Isaiah prophesied from the Kingdom of Judah. When they stood in the Kingdom of Judah and looked in the direction of the rivers of Kush, then beyond the rivers of Kush were the Congo and southern Africa, including what today is Zimbabwe and South Africa. The people which will be beyond the rivers of Kush and trust in the name of the LORD are therefore a part of the white people of southern Africa.

Zephaniah's prophecy also fits the present situation in South Africa which has become very bad for whites since 1994. The crime rates per inhabitant for violent crimes such as murder and rape in South Africa are among the highest in the world. More than 3,600 white farmers and their family members have been murdered in farm attacks since 1987. The ANC government has made racial employment laws, Black Economic Empowerment, which bar whites from large parts of the job market. Many white South Africans had become so poor that in 2008 more than 600,000 Afrikaners lived in squatter camps. [iv] One million white South Africans have emigrated since 1994. [v] Many fear that South Africa will follow Zimbabwe's example and completely drive out the whites. Many even call it a genocide.

Despite the grave situation the white peoples of southern Africa are in, God will protect the remnant which put their trust in Him!

Hail, Denmark! A Mother Nation of Modern Israel

The Northern European Kingdom of Denmark comprises the peninsula of Jutland; an archipelago which includes Zealand and various islands; the outlying islands of Bornholm and the Faroes and the dependency of Greenland. Denmark was separated from Sweden in 1523 and from Norway in 1815.

Danmark, as it is known to its own people, appears to have been the first settled by a branch of the tribe of Dan who reached the islands of Denmark by sea, apparently from Greece. Eldad, the Jewish historian, tells us that during the reign of Jeroboam, or about 970 B.C., Dan refused to shed his brother's blood, and rather than go to war with Judah, he left the country and went in a body to Javan (Greece) and to Danmark. These people named their new home Danmares, meaning Dan's country. 

The modern Danes, however, are unlikely to have descended purely from Danite stock, for there is considerable traditional evidence to suggest that Denmark was a popular base for other Israel peoples. The Normans, for example, who are believed to have been largely of Benjamite stock, were domiciled for some time in Denmark before taking possession of Normandy. The Norman invasion of Britain is, even today, described in Danish history books as a civil war between two branches of the Danish people. A man was, again, the heraldic sign of Reuben and, as will be seen from the illustration below, two men form the supporters of the present Danish arms. It should also be remembered that a large part of England, traditionally Ephraim in origin, has been settled by people who at least came from Denmark.

The very close ties which have, for centuries, connected Denmark with the rest of the Celto-Saxon world are too obvious to call for emphasis here. In Denmark, a guide book written for English tourists, Clive Holland has very aptly pointed out that Probably no other country in Europe will impress the English visitor more markedly than does Denmark with the things we have in common rather than the things in which we differ. In a modern political sense, Denmark is a crowned democracy, and it may be worth pointing out that Iceland, a one-time Danish dependency, was given in 1918 a free and sovereign status identical with that of a British Dominion or an American Commonwealth.

Indeed, it is reasonably safe to assume that the five million Danes can be identified with the Protestant remnant of the woman (Israel's) seed referred to in the twelfth chapter of Revelation. Like their kinsfolk in Holland and Britain, the Danes are at present enmeshed in the Babylonian web of Europe, but we may be reasonably sure that Denmark will, at no far distant date, be able to throw off this incubus and to join in full communion with its companions, the whole House of Israel.

QUEEN VICTORIA (Heir To King David's Royal Throne)

OF all the spiritual revivals that have taken place on the American Continent, none has been so influential, far reaching and enduring as the Pentecostal Spirit-outpouring of the early 20th century. There were earlier revivals such as the mid eighteenth century First Great Awakening of New England and the Second Great Awakening of the Midwest at the turn of the nineteenth century. They helped to preserve the moral and spiritual standards of Biblical Christianity in the American people in preparation of greater things to come. One of the most phenomenal and sovereign spiritual awakenings ever to occur in American history is the spiritual revival which took place among the Southern Army during the war years of 1861-1865. The fruits of this revival eventually spawned the establishment, growth and expansion of more churches, Bible schools, camp meetings and evangelistic efforts than any previous revival. As a natural result, this created the perfect climate for the Holiness revival which was soon to follow in the 1880's and 1890's.These revivals of the past were not the only thing that God had in store for the Body of Christ that would revolutionize the lives of millions, both at home and abroad.

Soon after the tum of the twentieth century, an event would take place in the very heartland of America that would be both miraculous and most influential upon the institution of the modern church. That event would be the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in fulfillmentof the words of the prophet Joel (2:28-29) and the affirmation of the Apostle Peter as recorded in Acts 2:14-18.

Whenever the history of the latter-day spiritual outpouring is studied, the Rev. Charles F. Parham is most likely always considered as being the father of the modern Pentecostal movement. At the age of nine years old, Parham felt a divine call to the ministry and soon had a strong attraction to Christian evangelism. He was converted to Christ in a Congregational Church and in 1890 entered Southwest Kansas College for three years. He pastored a Methodist church for two years from 1893-1895 before joining the Holiness movement and opening the Bethel Healing Home in Topeka, Kansas in 1898. Here he began publishing his bi-monthly Holiness journal, entitled "The Apostolic Faith."

After some time of further research into the Holiness movement and earnestly seeking for a greater personal manifestation of spiritual power, Parham returned to Topeka in September 1900. Here he opened a Bible school in an old mansion, where he encouraged the students to seek for a greater spiritual experience as recorded in the Book of Acts. One of the students, Agnes Ozman received the expected blessing and spoke in 'tongues' as a sign of its reception. This greatly encouraged Parham and the rest of the student body and within a few days he and about half of the students testified as to receiving the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit."

A similar revival experience occurred in Galena, Kansas in 1903. From there, Parham. went to Houston, Texas and held a ten-week training session which fanned the flames of the Pentecostal message throughout Texas. Soon afterward, the outpouring in Los Angeles, California occurred and quickly spread throughout the country. Among all the early leaders of the modern Pentecostal movement, Charles F. Parham is credited with formulating classical Pentecostal theology and is recognized as being its principle pioneer and founder.

As early as 1899 or before, Parham had recognized and was teaching the truth of the Christian Anglo-Israel message of the Bible. He earnestly contended for this truth until his death in 1929. As late as two years before his death, he published an article in "The Apostolic Faith" magazine of July 1927affirming his belief in this truth and encouraging his readers to accept it as being a part of the Full-Gospelmessage. The following are the opening and closing paragraphs of that article entitled, "The Ten Lost Tribes."

"I want to write a short sketch to introduce to our readers one of the most important topics of the day, commonly known as Anglo-Israel, or The Ten Lost Tribes. I do not think that any Full Gospel preacher ought to longer delay in acquainting himself with this subject as I believe it belongs with the Full Gospel Message and that the message of the last days must include this subject or we are not preaching the Full Gospel."

"Now, if the reader will carefully read Jacob's blessings upon his children for the last days, and all the prophecies concerning Israel in the Old Testament, knowing they refer to the above named nations (ie:Anglo-Saxondom) and belong to us as a people, (ie: Protestants) the Old Testament will become a new book to you full of vital importance and interest."

The following article entitled, "Queen Victoria's Descent From Adam," was published in "The Apostolic Faith" magazine of March 22, 1899.


The following genealogy was first studied by Revd F. R. A. Clover, M.A., of London, in 1861, but no depths of facts were reached, when others took it up, until Mr. J. C. Stevens, of Liverpool, compiled this evidence which resulted in bringing to light the wonderful fact that God has proved His oath to David that he would never want for an heir to sit on the throne, and infidelity is nonplussed.

This, then, was discovered to be no new fact; that the Saxon kings had done the same was found in MS, in Herald College, London, and in Volume 1 of Sharon Miner's History of Anglo-Saxons.
                                                              Davidic throne in Britain

At the capture of Jerusalem Zedekiah was taken to Babylon and died there, but Jeremiah, his father-in-law, fled with the heir to the throne, Tea Tephi, to Egypt, and when Egypt fell fled on board a ship carrying tin from Britain, and thus reached Ireland, and there died.

"In the following genealogy those who reigned have K fixed to their names. The dates after private names refer to their birth and death; those after sovereign's names to their accession and death. Wherever known, the wives have been mentioned. Besides those mentioned in Genesis, some have been obtained from Polano ("The Talmud." London, 1877) b, and d. stand for born and died."


1 Adam, b c 4000, 3070, Eve. 2 Seth, b c 3870, 2978. 3 Enos, b c 3765, 2860. 4 Cainan, b c 3675, 2765. 5 Mahalaleel, b c 3605, 2710. 6 Jared, b c 3540, 2578. 7 Enoch, b c 3378, 3013. 8 Methusaleh, b c 3313, 2344. 9 Lamech, b c 3126, 2344. 10 Noah, b c 2944, 2006, Naamah. 11 Shem, b c 2442, 2158. 12 Arphaxad, b c 2342, 1904. 13 Salah, b c 2307, 2126. 14 Heber, b c 2277, 2187. 15 Peleg, b c 2243, 2004. 16 Reu, b c 2213, 2026. 17 Scrug, b c 2181, 2049. 18 Nahor, b c 2052, 2003. 19 Terah, b c 2122, 2083, Amtheta. 20 Abraham, b c 1992, 1817, Sarah. 21 Isaac, b c 1896, 1716, Rebekah. 22 Jacob, b c 1837, 1690, Leah. 23 Judah, b c 1753, Tamar. 24 Hezron. 25 Armn. 26 Aminadab. 27 Naashon. 28 Salmon. 29 Boaz b c 1312 Ruth. 30 Obed. 31 Jesse. 


32 K David, b c 1085, 1015, Bathsheba. 33 K Solomon, b c 1003, 975 Naamah. 34 K Rehoboam, b c 1016, d 958, Maacah. 35 K Abijam, b c 958, 955. 36 K Asa, b c 95 5, 914, Azubah. 37 K Jehosaphat, b c 914, 889. 38 K Jehoram, b c 889, 885, Athaliah. 39 K Ahaziah, b c 906, 884; Zibiah. 40 K Joash, b c 885, 839, Jehoaddan. 41 K Amaziah, b c 864, d 810, Jecholiah. 42 K Uzziah, b c 826, d 758, Jerushah. 43 K Jotham, b c 783, d 742. 44 K Ahaz, b c 787, d 726, Abi. 45 K Hezekiah, b c 75 I, d 698, Hephzibah. 46 K Manasseh, b c 7 10, d 643, Meshullemeth. 47 K Amos, b c 621, d 641, Jedidah. 48 K Josiah, b c 649, d 610, Hamutal. 49 K Zedekiah, b c 578, 599


50 K Heremon, b b c 580, Tea Tephi. 51 K Irail, Foidh reigned 10 years. 52 K Ethraill, reigned 20 years. 53 Follain. 54 K Tighennas, reigned 50 years. 55 Eanbotha 56 Smiorguil. 57 K Fiachadh Labhraine, reigned 24 years. 58 K Aongus Ollmuchaidh, reigned 21 years. 59 Maoin. 60 K Rogheachta, reigned 25 years. 61 Dein. 62 K Siorna Saoghalach, reigned 21 years. 63 Oholla Olchaoin. 64 K Giallchadh, reigned 9 years. 65 K Aodhain Glas, reigned 22 years. 66 K Simeon Breac, reigned 6 years. 67 K Muireadach Bolgrach, reigned 4 years. 68 K Fiachadh Tolgrach, reigned 7 years. 69 K Duach Laidrach, reigned 10 years 70 Eochaidh Buaigollorg. 71 K Ugaine More the Great, reigned 30 years. 72 K Cobhthach Coalbreag, reigned 30 years 73 Meilage. 74 K Jaran Gleofathach, reigned 7 years. 75 K Coula Cruaidh Cealgach, reigned 4 years. 76 K Oiliolla Caisfhiachach, reigned 25 years. 77 K Eochaidh Foltleathan, reigned 11 years. 78 K Aongus Tuirmheach Teamharch, reigned 30 years. 79 K Eana Aighneach, reigned 28 years. 80 Labhra Suire. 81 Blathucta. 82 Eassamhuin Eamhua. 83 Roighnein Ruadh. 84 Finlogha. 85 Fian. 86 K Eodchaidh Feidhlioch, reigned 12 years 87. Fineamhuas 88. Lughaidh Raidhdearg. 89 K Criomthan Niadhnar, reigned 16 years 90. Fearaidhach Fion-Feachtnuigh. 91 K Fiachadh Fionoluidh, reigned 20 years. 92 K Tuathal Teachtmar, reigned 30 years. 93 K Coun Ceadchathach, reigned 20 years. 94 K Arb Aonflier, reigned 30 years. 95 K Cormae Usada, reigned 40 years. 96 K Caibre Liffeachair, reigned 27 years. 97 K Fiachadh Sreabthuine, reigned 30 years. 98 K Muireadhach Tireach, reigned 30 years. 99 K Eoachaidh Moigmeodhin, reigned 7 years. 100 K Niall of the Nine Hostages. 101 Eogan. 102 K Muireadhach. 103 Earca.


104 K Feargus More, a d 437. 105 K Dongard, d 457. 106 K Conran, d 535. 107 K Aidan, d 604. 108 K Eugene IV, d 622. 109 K Donald IV, d 650. 110 Dongard. 111 K Eugene V., d 692. 112 Findan. 113 K Eugene VII, d a d 721, Spondau. 114 K Etfinus, d a d 761, Fergina. 115 K Achaius, d a d 819, Fergusia


116 K Alpin, d 834. 117 K Kenneth II, d 854. 118 K Constantin II, d 874. 119 K Donald VI, d 903. 120 K Malcolm I, d 958. 121 K Kenneth III, d 994. 122 K Malcolm II, d 1033. 123 Beatrix m. Thane Albanach. 124 K Duncan I, d 1040. 125 K Malcolm III Canmore, d 1055,1093, Margaret of England. 126 K David I, d 1153, Maud of Northumberland. 127 Prince Henry, d 1153, Adama of Surry. 128 Earl David, d 1219, Maud of Chester. 129 Isabel m Robert Bruce III. 130 Robert Bruce IV m Isabel of Gloucester. 131 Robert Bruce V m Martha of Carriok. 132 K Robert I. Bruce, d 1306, 1329, Mary of Burke. 133 Margary Bruce m Walter Stewart III. 134 K Robert II, d 1390, Euphonia of Ross, d 1376. 135 K Robert II, d 1460, Arabella Drummond, d 1401. 136 K James I, d 1424, 1437, Joan Beaufort. 137 K James I, d 1406, Margaret of Gueldres, d 1463. 138 K James III,d 1488, Margaret of Denmark, d 1484. 139 K James IV, d 1543, Margaret of England, d 1539. 140 K James V,d 1542, Mary of Lorraine, d 1560. 141 Q Mary, d 1587, Lord Henry Darnley


142 K James VI and I, d 1603, 1625, Anne of Denmark. 143 Princess Elizabeth, 1596, 1613, K Frederick of Bohemia. 144 Princess Sophia m Duke Ernest of Brunswick. 145 K George I, 1698, 1727, Sophia Dorothea Zelle, 1667, 1726. 146 K George II., 1727, 1760, Princess Caroline of Anspach, 1683, 1737. 147 Prince Frederick of Wales, 1707, 1751, Princess Augusta of Saxe-Gotha, 1744, 1818. 148 K George III, 1760, 1820, Princess Sophia of Mecklenberg Strelitz. 149 Duke Edward of Kent, 1767, 1820, Princess Victoria of Leinengen. 150 Queen Victoria, b 1819, cr 1838, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg

"From this royal princess, we obtain a direct and unbroken line of ancestry to King Fergus, who went from Ireland to reign as king of Scotland; and from King Fergus I of Scotland we get the same unbroken line to the time of King James of Scotland, who himself became king of England; and from KingJames we get the same unbroken line to our beloved Queen, she being then, the seed royal to King David's house, and therefore the royal seed of King David; she is and must be, the ruling monarch over the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.

The Revd Joseph Wild, D.D.,says the old Irish histories say when Jeremiah landed in Ireland with Princess Tea Tephi, he took with him a stone which stone was known to have been in the temple at Jerusalem. On this very stone all the monarchs in Ireland were crowned until Fergus I, kingof Scotland.who caused the same stone to be taken from Ireland to Scotland, and so were all the monarchs in Scotland crowned upon it, from Fergus to King James, after which it was brought to England;and so all the monarchs in England, from King James to our beloved Queen, have been crowned upon it, she being the last crowned upon this wonderful stone: so that for 2,450 years monarchs have been crowned upon this wonderful stone, which stone may be seen this very day under the coronation chair in Westminster Abbey, London. It received the names, Wonderful, the Precious Stone, Jacob's Stone and is now called Jacob's Stone. The Lord said Jacob's stone should be a pillar of witness that He would fulfil His promises to Israel. The stone was kept in the temple at Jerusalem as a witness, and from there was removed to Ireland, and then to Scotland, and now we have it as a witness in England. Joshua (24:27) said unto all the people,

"behold, 'this stone' shall be a witness unto us, for it hath heard all the words of the Lord, which he spake unto us; it shall be, therefore a witness unto you, lest ye deny your God."

I ask, why does this enlightened nation keep such a stone so many generations if there is no meaning in it? Why, because it must continue with the royal seed to be a witness that our Queen is the seed royal to King David's house, and her subjects are the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.

Queen Victoria's peaceful, prosperous, successful reign for well nigh three-score years, has been almost phenomenal. Who next? Possibly the Prince of Wales for a turbulent time during the final war with Esau, and then possibly "A child shall lead them," since the next heir is a baby now. And then Jesus, who was born to this end.

"Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and ONE KING shall be king to them all, and they shall be no more TWO NATIONS, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all."

".. this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel, And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spint upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit and they shall prophesy... "

Acts of the Apostles 2:16

Danes and Jutes: Dan and Judah-Dan

The modern Danish people (Danskere) is made up of the proper Danes (Daner) on the numerous islands, and the Jutes (Jyder) on the Jutland peninsula, if recent immigrants, etc., are ignored. The original Danes were a Nordic tribe, while the original Jutes were a Germanic tribe. The Danes are of Dan, and the Jutes are of Judah and Dan.

The deportation of Israel to areas south of the Caucasus

The three northern tribes of Israel Dan, Asher, and Naphtal, were among the first of the Israelite tribes to be deported out of the land of Canaan, because the invaders who attacked and deported the Israelite tribes, the Assyrians and Babylonians, invaded the land of Canaan from the north. From 734 to 732 BC Tiglath-Pileser III King of Assyria invaded and conquered the northern, eastern, and western parts of the 10 tribed northern kingdom of Israel, as the Holy Scriptures record:

In the days of Pekah king of Israel came Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel-beth-maachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria. (2 Kings 15:29)

In 724 BC Salmaneser V King of Assyria attacked Samaria, the capital of the northern 10 tribed kingdom of Israel, and in 721 BC his successor, Sargon II, took Samaria, and the rest of the 10 tribes of Israel were deported to areas south of the Caucasus mountains and south of the Caspian Sea, as the Holy Scriptures record:

In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes. (2 Kings 17:6)

These areas are almost identical to the areas where the oldest Norse chronicles state that the ancestors of the Nordic and Germanic tribes came from, before they trekked over Eastern Europe to Northern Europe.

The Aser and Vaner homeland south and north of the Caucasus

The Icelandic chief and historian Snorre Sturlasson (1179-1241) wrote Heimskringla (app. 1230), of which the first part is called the Ynglinge Saga, wherein Sturlasson describes the homeland of the Nordic and Germanic tribes as the areas south and north of the Caucasus mountains. They were divided into two groups, Aser and Vaner, which obviously are the names of Asher and Dan, two of the Israelite tribes in the camp of Dan.

Snorre Sturlasson describes the homeland of the Vaner, which was the lost Israelite tribe of Dan:
On the south side of the mountains which lie outside of all inhabited lands runs a river through Swithiod, which is properly called by the name of Tanais, but was formerly called Tanaquisl, or Vanaquisl, and which falls into the Black Sea. The country of the people on the Vanaquisl was called Vanaland, or Vanaheim; and the river separates the three parts of the world, of which the eastermost part is called Asia, and the westermost Europe.

The river Tanakvisl/Vanakvisl/Tanais must be the river Don, because its ancient Greek name was Tanais. In the Old Testament, the Danites named places after their ancestor Dan (Judges 18:12, 29), and Don also carries the name Dan.

The Vaner lived adjacent to the Aser, whose chief was Odin: The country east of the Tanaquisl in Asia was called Asaland, or Asaheim, and the chief city in that land was called Asgaard. In that city was a chief called Odin, and it was a great place for sacrifice. It was the custom there that twelve temple priests should both direct the sacrifices, and also judge the people. They were called Diar, or Drotner, and all the people served and obeyed them. Odin was a great and very far-travelled warrior, who conquered many kingdoms, and so successful was he that in every battle the victory was on his side. (Snorre Sturlasson: Ynglinge Saga pt. 2)

The lost tribes of Israel's trek from the Middle East to Northern Europe

After a war between the Aser and Vaner, which ended without anyone of them prevailing, Odin led the tribes to Northern Europe: There goes a great mountain barrier from north-east to south-west, which divides the Greater Swithiod from other kingdoms. South of this mountain ridge it is not far to Turkland, where Odin had great possessions. In those times the Roman chiefs went wide around in the world, subduing to themselves all people; and on this account many chiefs fled from their domains. But Odin having foreknowledge, and magic-sight, knew that his posterity would come to settle and dwell in the northern half of the world. He therefore set his brothers Ve and Vilje over Asgaard; and he himself, with all the gods and a great many other people, wandered out, first westward to Gardarike [Russia], and then south to Saxland [Saxony]. He had many sons; and after having subdued an extensive kingdom in Saxland, he set his sons to rule the country. He himself went northwards to the [Baltic] sea, and took up his abode in an island which is called Odin's Island [Odense] on Funen. (Snorre Sturlasson: Ynglinge Saga pt. 5, my brackets)

The account of this trek is confirmed by important historians such as Peter Friderich Suhm (Denmark, 1728-1798) and Olof Rudbeck the Elder (Sweden, 1630-1702). Suhm and Rudbeck did not trace our origins all the way back to the Israelites, but Suhm did write - speaking of the Nordic peoples - that the ancestors of us, the Germans, and the Celts lived together in Asia Minor (P.F. Suhm: Om Odin og den Hedniske Gudel re og Gudstieneste udi Norden (1771), p. 140-141)

The Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl also confirmed Snorre Sturlasson's account in 2002, when he published Jakten på Odin (The Search for Odin), wherein Heyerdahl specifically wrote that the ancestors of the Norsemen came from Azerbaijan.

The many Odins

There were several Odins. Suhm writes of at least three different Odins. Odin was most likely not a name, but a title, which meant something like lord, chief, no. one or prime minister.
In Russian, Odin means one. I have asked a Russian lady about this, and she confirmed it.

The lost tribes of Israel are divided in two groups

When the lost tribes, led by Odin, came to the Baltic Sea, they divided themselves into two groups. One group went north across the Baltic Sea and became the ancestors of the Nordic tribes, such as the Danes (Daner), Swedes (Svear), Geats (Gotar), and Norwegians. The other group went west across what today is Poland and became the ancestors of the Germanic tribes.

Suhm thus writes that it is reasonable that our fathers have come here via Russia and the eastern part of Poland. When they came to the Baltic Sea and present-day Livonia, they divided themselves into two great multitudes. The one went north, and our fathers descend from them, and the other went west, and became the ancestors of many German peoples (P.F. Suhm: Historie af Danmark, Vol. 1 (1782), p. 4-5)

Denmark called Vanaheim

After the tribes had arrived in Northern Europe, Vanaheim - the homeland of the Vaner - was still a geographical place. Suhm mentions a Swedish King Svedger in the 1 st century AD who went to Vanaheim and married a Vaner woman, and then continued to Germany, the Greater Svithjod and Gothheim, to search for the old Odin, who had been missing for five years. (P.F. Suhm: Om Odin og den Hedniske Gudel re og Gudstieneste udi Norden (1771), p. 99)

From the context, it seems that by Vanaheim is meant Denmark.

The original Danes and Jutes

The Gothic historian Jordanes writes in De origine actibusque getarum (The origin and deeds of the Goths, 551 AD) that the Danes came out of the Swedes. (The original Swedes and the Geats later formed Sweden.) The Danes were of the tribe of Dan, who came to the Scandinavian peninsula along with the other tribes of Bilhah and Zilpah, Naphtali, Asher, and Gad.

The original Jutes, on the other hand, were of the tribe of Judah, who along with other tribes of Leah made up the Germanic tribes that settled on the European continent and the Jutland peninsula.

Denmark in the Middle Ages. The two eastern provinces Blekinge and Bornholm are inserted in the upper right corner. (From A. Fabricius: Illustreret Danmarkshistorie for Folket Vol. 1 (1914), p. 539)

Origin of the nation of Denmark

Suhm writes that around 235 AD Dan Mikillati, king of the Danes in Scania and Halland, was also crowned as king of the islands Zealand, Funen, Møn, Falster, and Lolland. When the Jutes and the Angles were invaded by the Saxons, Dan Mikillati succesfully helped them, and for this the Jutes and the Angles also crowned him as king in Viborg in Jutland (P.F. Suhm: Historie af Danmark (1782), p. 103-112).

Denmark, as we know it today, was thus united, even though the three parts, Scania Land, the isles, and Jutland, kept their separate laws. (The four provinces Scania, Halland, Blekinge, and Bornholm were collectively called Scania Land (Terra Scania).)

The name Danmark (Denmark)

Danmark, the Danish name for Denmark -means" the Danes borderland", because mark meant borderland. Danmark was originally the name for Dan Mikillati's kingdom in Scania and Halland, but eventually became the name of the entire kingdom.

The Danish historiographer Iver Nielsen Hertzholm (1635-1693) wrote that the Danes' and Denmark's name comes from the Hebrew word Dan: meaning to judge, investigate, and believes that we are called so because of our wisdom (according to P.F. Suhm: Critisk Historie af Danmark (1774), p. 144).

In the days of the Old Testament, the tribe of Dan had a habit of naming places after their father Dan, the son of Israel. Dan originally lived in a territory next to Ephraim, Benjamin, Judah and the Philistines. In the early 12 th century 600 Danites sought a new territory in the north of Canaan, where there lived Phoenicians, next to Naphtali and the half tribe of Manasseh in Bashan. On their way, they camped in a place in Judah, which the Danites called Mahaneh-dan, meaning Camp of Dan: And there went from thence of the family of the Danites, out of Zorah and out of Eshtaol, six hundred men appointed with weapons of war. And they went up and pitched in Kirjath-jearim, in Judah: wherefore they called that place Mahaneh-dan unto this day: behold, it is behind Kirjath-jearim. (Judges 18:11-12)

After they had smitten the peaceful Phoenicians of Laish with the sword and burned the city, they called the new city Dan: And they built a city, and dwelt therein. And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born unto Israel: howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first. (Judges 18:28-29)

When the tribe of Dan, called Vaner and Taner, trekked across Eastern Europe, they likewise seem to have named several major rivers after themselves. The river Don, by the ancient Norsemen called Tanakvisl and Vanakvisl, and by the ancient Greeks called Tanais, has already been mentioned. Other major East European rivers with the prefix D-n are: Donets, a tributary to Don. Dnieper, which by late Greek and Roman authors was called Danapris and Danaper respectively. Dniestr, which by the Romans and Jordanes (6 th century AD) was called Danastris and Danastus. The Danube, which in German, Danish, and other languages is called Donau.

In 1219 King Valdemar II of Denmark led a succesfull crusade in Estonia to convert the Estonians to the Christian faith. Besides King Valdemar and the Danish army, the Crusaders also included Archbishop Sunesen of Denmark, Bishop Theodorik of Estonia, a German army, and a Slavonic Sorb army. The Crusaders encamped at Lyndanisse and began to build a castle which they called Dane Castle (Castrum Danorum), which became the city Tallinn, which in Estonian means Dane City, and today is the capital of Estonia. (It was at the battle of Lyndanisse that a flag, which probably had belonged to some of the Crusaders and had gotten hurled up in the air - fell down from the sky, and became Dannebrog, the Danish flag.)

Today Danes likewise have a habit of using the name Dan in their firms. If you type in Dan in the Danish online yellow pages, there comes out a long list of firms, such as:

Cable tubes made by Dantex. Dantex: they make cable tubes and other tubes. Dan-Ejendomme: they rent out apartments. Dan-Glas there are several firms by this name, they are into car windows
Rota-Dan: they make different kinds of wheels. Dan-Color: they produce different kinds of paints. Dan Dryer: they produce dryers for bathrooms. Dan-markering: they make road signs and other forms of road markings. DanTrailers - they make trailers for cars. A trailer from DanTrailers. Dan Delektron: they produce lightning conductors. Nor-Dan Bus: a Norwegian-Danish bus company, Dan Cargo: a leading Nordic firm within international transport and third-party logistics. Dan-cool: they make vehicles with refrigerators and freezers (for butchers, for example)...

The Jutes

The Jutes were originally a Germanic tribe which later became Nordic. (See P.F. Suhm: Historie af Danmark, Vol. 1 (1782), p. 26 and 109, and P.F. Suhm: Critisk Historie af Danmark, Vol. 1 (1774), p. 172-173, and here.) The Jutes came to Jutland from Germany, while the Danes came to the isles from the Scandinavian peninsula. The Angles and the Saxons, two other Germanic tribes, settled in the southern parts of the Jutland peninsula.

Today the descendants of the ancient Germanic tribes are dispersed throughout both Germanic speaking and non-Germanic speaking peoples, though. The following European nations are in the following percentages genetically descended from the ancient Germanic tribes:

Germany: 25% Germanic, 45% Celtic, 20% Slavonic, 10% Jewish. Austria: 35% Germanic, 30% Slavonic, 10% Finno-Ugric, 10% Phoenician, 10% Jewish, 5% Celtic. Switzerland: 30% Germanic, 55% Celtic, 10% Jewish, 5% Slavonic. Netherlands: 40% Germanic, 50% Celtic, 10% Viking. Belgium: 20% Germanic, 80% Celtic. UK: 13% Germanic, 75% Celtic, 12% Viking. France: 20% Germanic, 70% Celtic, 10% Phoenician. Czech Republic: 50% Germanic, 42% Slavonic, 8% Jewish. Spain: 15% Germanic, 40% Celtic, 30% Iberian, 7% Phoenician, 7% special case (?), 1% Arab. Sweden and Norway: 12% Germanic, 88% Viking. Denmark: 40% Germanic, 60% Viking
When Denmark today genetically is 60% similar to the ancient Vikings and 40% similar to the ancient Germanic tribes, the Israelite tribe of Dan must make up the 60% Viking part and the Judah-Jutes must make up the 40% Germanic part.

Jutes invade England

Even though the Jutes had become a part of Denmark under King Dan Mikillati app. 235 AD, Jutland remained the apple of discord between Danes and Saxons, and to such an extent that the Jutes often were reckoned as belonging to the latter rather than the former. (P.F. Suhm: Historie af Danmark, Vol. 1 (1782), p. 109)

In the 5 th century AD, when the earth in Jutland was exhausted and could not support the population, the Jutes invaded England along with the Angles and the Saxons. In these invasion are not mentioned any Danes. The Danes and the Norwegians only invaded the British Isles in the later Viking Era (8 th to 11 th century).

The tribe of Dan in the book of Revelation

The tribe of Dan's future is shrouded in mystery. The tribe of Dan is, as the only tribe of Israel, not among the sealed 144,000 male Israelites (Rev. 7:4-8) that are going to reign with the Lamb and God. Revelation does simply not state why the tribe of Dan is not among the 144,000.

The 144,000 are the co-rulers and are compared with the fruitsfruits (Rev. 14:4). The firstfruits was a small ceremonial offering at Pentecost (Ex. 34:22, Lev. 23:15-17). All the inhabitants of the coming Kingdom of God are, on the other hand, compared with the normal harvest (Luke 10:2). The normal harvest takes place in the autumn, and is immensely larger than the firstfruits in size.

That the tribe of Dan is not among the 144,000 does therefore not mean that the tribe of Dan is going to perish.

The Bible Distinction Between "The House of Israel" and "The House of Judah"

Radio Address by F. F. Bosworth

I can say with deep and humble gratitude that I heard him speak!

It was at a William Branham healing campaign in Eugene, Oregon. Evangelist Bosworth believed that Branham was "a man sent from God." In fact, he became a member of the Branham team.
His was a commanding presence. He was brilliant in the pulpit. His messages were clear and full of revelation knowledge. He was a Teacher-Preacher, a true scholar and his message was understandable.

He became a great Christian Statesman.

Evangelist F. F. Bosworth learned to preach under the late Alexander Dowie of Zion, Illinois. There is where his famous book, "CHRIST THE HEALER" was hammered out on the anvil of experience and Bible instruction. It is said that each chapter of the book was a sermon of his.

An elderly couple which attended my services for several years, knew him as a youth. They said he was the Band Leader of Zion Tabernacle and worked in an ice cream store!

In the 1920's and 30's great crowds attended his Healing Crusades. He was also a pioneer preacher in radio ministry. Evangelist Bosworth had one of the most powerful ministries the 20th century has ever known.

Evangelist Bosworth's sermon contained in this booklet is a Bible teaching message that is a real gem. It is a corrective teaching message that cannot be refuted. The work of a 'rightly dividing' of Scripture. How easily the Holy Spirit uses this dedicated vessel to unravel a most difficult topic in the Bible and make it easily understandable.

George W. Southwick, D.D. Pastor, Bible Teacher Conference Speaker

The Bible Distinction Between "The House of Israel" and "The House of Judah"

Today there is much teaching on the subject of prophecy, and it is important that there should be. It is very important for every student of prophecy, in fact, it is absolutely necessary for their understanding, to see the distinction the Bible makes between the Jews and the other Tribes of Israel. Until this distinction between the two Houses, Israel and Judah, as that distinction is taught in the Scriptures, is clearly understood, a great portion of the Bible will remain a closed book. This clear distinction between the two Houses is never lost sight of in the Bible, and until it is understood, it is impossible to follow the truth of Scripture on this subject, or to understand the Bible story of Israel. If we had time we could show you that ignorance of this distinction is responsible for much of the infidelity today. Because the pre-millennial promises God made to the "House of Israel" have not been fulfilled to the "House of Judah," they have accused God of unfaithfulness.

Many people today suppose that where Israel is mentioned in the Bible, it means the Jews. We read articles and hear sermons today in which the writers and speakers refer to "Abraham, the Jew." Isaac and Jacob are often called Jews, the most absurd and impossible thing as we shall see from the Scriptures. It is a common thing today to hear ministers and writers use such phrases as the following: "The Jews in Egypt" "The Exodus of the Jews" "The Jews at Mt. Sinai" "When the Jews entered Canaan" "12 Tribes of the Jews" "Abraham, the Jew"

Thousands of Christians use the terms "Israel," and "Jew," "The House of Israel," "The House of Judah," employing these and similar words and phrases as if they always referred to the same people. They do not know that according to Biblical history, there were no "Jews" known as such until about 15 centuries after Abraham was born, and until 600 years after the death of Moses.

Most Hebrews Are Not Jews

Beginning with Adam, we have the start, not only of chronology, but of the genealogical tables of the Bible. There are ten generations from Adam to Noah, and ten generations from Shem (Noah's son) to Abraham. Eber or Heber was the fourth in generation from Shem. All of the descendants of Heber were Hebrews. Abraham was six generations later. He, therefore, was a Hebrew. The Hebrews were not Jews, because Judah, from whom the Jews descended, was not yet born. When the time came that there were Jews on the earth, of course, they also were Hebrews - a very small portion of them - but the great mass of Hebrews were not Jews, and are not today. Let us closely follow the facts.

"Abraham had eight sons. One son was Ishmael whose mother was Hagar. One son was Isaac, whose mother was Sarah. After Sarah's death, Abraham married Keturah, and she bore unto him six sons. Abraham, being a Hebrew, or descendant of Heber, his descendants would of course be Hebrews, and their descendants would also be Hebrews, but their descendants are not Jews. If they are, then Ishmael, that would make the Arabs Jews. The descendants of Keturah's six sons became the Brahmins of India. It would be foolish to declare that they are Jews, although as the descendants of Abraham, they are of the stock of Heber, and therefore Hebrews. The same reasoning applies to Isaac, Isaac was a Hebrew, the son of Abraham. Now Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob. If Isaac was a Jew, then both Esau and Jacob would be Jews. This would make the descendants of Esau also Jews, but the descendants of Esau became the Edomites, later the Turks; also the Pharoahs of the oppression were of the Esau line, but none of these people are Jews."

                                   The Jews are the descendants of the Israelite tribe of Judah

To call Abraham a Jew would make him a descendant of Isaac's yet unborn grandson Judah. The Tribe of Judah had no existence on earth during the time of Abraham and Isaac. If Isaac was a Jew, then surely his twin sons, Jacob and Esau would be Jews. We all know that Esau, Jacob's twin brother, became the progenitor of the Turks, as they are known today. If Jacob was a Jew, how could it be that his twin brother would not be, since they were both born of the same father and mother?

Descendants Do Not Name Their Ancestors

Jacob, one of these twin brothers had 12 sons, which came from four different mothers. None of these 12 sons were Jews. One of his 12 sons was Judah, but in the sense in which we use the word "Jew" today, the term cannot be applied to Judah, for "he was not a Jew," because of the fact that they whom we call Jews today have certain characteristics and are racially a type that came into existence hundreds of years after Israel left Egypt. This racial type or remnant we know as the Jews is only a small portion of the descendants of Judah, who was only one of the 12 sons of Jacob. There are no Jews among any of the descendants of Jacob's other 11 sons. Now Judah had three sons. "The descendants of one son, Zarah, peopled the shores of the Mediterranean, leaving Egypt before the exodus of the children of Israel." Pharez, the twin brother of Zarah, became the progenitor of the tribe of Judah. The tribe of Judah descending from Pharez was divided by the Lord into two Houses - the "House of David" and the "House of Judah."

Abraham was the father of Isaac; Isaac was the father of Jacob; Jacob, who was later named "Israel," became the father of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphthali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benjamin. The 12 sons each became the head of a Tribe called after his own personal name. From Judah, the fourth son of Jacob, are descended the Jews; the word "Jew" being simply an abbreviation of the name "Judah." A glance at the geneology will show that it is impossible for Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob, to have been Jews. Only the descendants of Judah - those coming after him, could be called by his name - not his ancestors. No one had ever been named "Judah" until more than 200 years after Abraham was named. Suppose your parents gave you the name of Charles. That does not name your ancestors, who lived two hundred years before you, Charles. And naming Jacob's fourth son Judah would not make Abraham, his great grandfather, a Jew.

Israel and Judah Separate Nations

The 12 Tribes of Israel became two nations, with widely different destinies, until the time when they will be united in the coming age. (Ezek. 37:22) The distinction or separation between Judah and Israel was foreshadowed at an early date. We read in Psalm 114:1, 2 "When Israel went out of Egypt...Judah was His sanctuary and Israel His dominion." In Samuel's day, the two Houses, Judahand Israel, were numbered separately. In I Samuel 11:8 we read "And when he numbered them in Bezek, the children of Israel were three hundred thousands and the men of Judah thirty thousand." Notice that even at this early date, Israel numbered ten times more than Judah. The Numerical contrast today is very much greater. The Bible tells us that the Jews would be "few in number," but it tells us that Israel would be as the sands of the sea for multitudes (Hosea 1:10). The Scriptures tell us that David reigned seven years over Judah before he was made King over Israel. If Judah and Israel are the same, how could David be king for seven years over Judah before he was made King over Israel? Until the year 975 B.C. the descendants of Jacob formed one nation. But they are spoken of as "the two families which the Lord hath chosen" (Jer. 33:24).

In the year 975 B.C. at the death of King Solomon, the nation was divided into two nations. In I Samuel 18:16 the expression "All Israel" is used, when Judah is excluded. I will quote you this passage: "But all Israel and Judah loved David, because he went out and came in before them." In II Chronicles 10:12-14 we are told that when Solomon died, and his son Rehoboam came to the throne, the ten tribes rebelled, and under Jereboam, formed the NORTHERN NATION; while Judah, along with Benjamin and certain Levites, formed the SOUTHERN NATION.

The NORTHERN NATION, which consisted of the Ten Tribes, was known under the following national titles: Israel, Ephraim, Isaac, Samaria, The House of Israel, The House of Judah and The Ten Tribes.


The SOUTHERN NATION, which consisted of the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, was known as "Judah," "The House of Judah" or "The Jews." The capital of the SOUTHERN NATION was Jerusalem. If I had more time, I would quote you the Scriptures which show that this division of the Tribes of Israel into two nations was Divinely Predetermined, Divinely Predicted, Divinely Emphasized, Divinely Maintained, Divinely Accomplished, Divinely Explained, Divinely Approved. The Scriptures show that this division into Two Kingdoms had behind it and controlling it, the fore-ordaining eternal councils of God; and it took place for great, beneficent, well-defined and Divine reasons.

In Jeremiah the 3rd chapter, Israel is five times called "Backsliding Israel," a term never once applied to Judah, and Judah is four times called "Treacherous Judah," a term not once applied to Israel. I will read you this passage: "And I saw, when for all the causes whereby BACKSLIDING Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also." (Jer. 3:8) Ask those who declare that Israel and Judah are the same people to read that passage, analyzing it in the light of their belief. And there are many such passages showing the clear distinction between Israel and Judah. There are more than 2000 references to Israel in the Bible that have no reference whatever to the Jews. On the other hand, there are more than five hundred references to Judah that have no reference to Israel, and yet there are those continually trying to tell us there is no distinction between Israel and Judah, and continually refer to Israel as Jews, and even change the name of Judah to Israel. It is absurd as to use the words America and England interchangeably.

Here is another quotation for them to explain: "Backsliding Israel hath justified herself more than treacherous Judah." Make Israel and Judah one and the same people referred to, and the statement becomes ridiculous. Many today are evidently unacquainted with the fact that, according to Biblical history, there was not a single "Jew" known as such upon the face of the earth earlier than 600 years after the death of Moses, or about 1500 years after Abraham was born. There were, of course, Hebrews and Israelites long before that time; Abraham and Isaac were Hebrews; but they were neither Israelites nor Jews. The 12 sons of Jacob were Hebrews and Israelites, but they were not Jews. The same may be said of Moses and Aaron, of the people of the Northern Kingdom, of Elijah and Elisha. To avoid confusion over the expression "Israel" it is necessary to determine in which sense it is used in any particular passage, whether it means: (1) "The whole of the Twelve Tribes; (2) Or the House of Judah alone as being a part of the Twelve Tribes; (3) Or the Ten-Tribed Kingdom."

Ten Tribed Israel Never Called Jews

Nothing can be more unscriptural than to call all Israelites "Jews;" it is as absurd as calling all Americans Californians. Most of Israelites are not Jews because they are the descendants of the other tribes of Israel. There is just as much reason for calling all Israelites "Danites" or "Gadites" or"Ephramites" as there is for calling them Judahites or "Jews." It is just as reasonable to call all "Jews" "Danites" as it is to call all "Danites" "Jews." The term Jew is never used until more than a thousand years after Abraham. It appears for the first time in II Kings 16:6, where we are told that the King of Israel, together with the King of Assyria, made war against the King of Judah. Now since in this passage Israel, one Kingdom, made ware against the Jews, another Kingdom, how can they both be the Jews? The Scriptures never once refer to the Ten-Tribed House of Israel as "The Jews;" neither past, present, nor future. The term "The Jews" is never, in God's Word, applied to the 12 Tribes, collectively, or to the Ten-Tribed House of Israel.

Bishop J. A. Allen of California, speaking of this modern confusion which we are discussing writes: "For ecclesiastical writers to ignore the national and racial representative Israelitish names of Joseph, Ephraim, and Samaria (The name of Israel's former capital city, as used in history and prophecy, and to substitute "The Jews" either as a name or as a people, calling them the sole representatives of Israel's race, is not only the height of ignorance, but THE GREAT ECCLESIASTICAL CRIME OF THE AGES. Truly an enemy hath done this."

In Jeremiah 13:11, nearly 400 years after the tribes were divided by God into the two kingdoms, "The Whole House of Israel" and "The Whole House of Judah" are both spoken of in the same verse, proving that neither House without the other constitutes all of the Lord's chosen people. "The Whole House of Judah" are not all of the Lord's people, and "The Whole House of Israel" are not all of the Lord's people. It takes "The Whole House of Israel" together with "The Whole House of Judah" to make all of God's chosen people; and comparatively few of these are Jews. This text proves conclusively that there is a people called the "Whole House of Israel" of which the "Whole House of Judah" is regarded as neither part nor parcel. The Holy Spirit has never either in Biblical history or prophecy, called the 10 Tribed House of Israel "Jews". They have never been called "Jews" except by uninformed and unscriptural teachers.

Birthright People Are Not Jews

The fact that Jacob's two wives, Leah and Rachel, are spoken of as "building the House of Israel," of necessity divides the immediate household of Jacob into "two families." In Jeremiah 33:24 they are spoken of as "the two families which the Lord hath chosen." The Covenant promise of the BIRTHRIGHT was given to one of these families, and that of the SCEPTRE to the other family. Rachel was to be the mother of "thousands of millions" while Leah was to be the mother of royalty. Genesis 49:10 shows us that Judah represents the SCEPTRE family; and I Chronicles 5:2 tells us "THE BIRTHRIGHT is Joseph's." Never try to apply a BIRTHRIGHT blessing to the Jews. Judah and the Jews were excluded from the BIRTHRIGHT promises, Joseph from the SCEPTRE. The BIRTHRIGHT people are not, and are never in the Scriptures called Jews.

Two Sticks Prophecy

In Ezekiel the 37th chapter we are told that "the two sticks" which are still separate, but which are yet to be reunited, represent Judah on the one hand, and Joseph and the "House of Israel" on the other. One of these sticks represents the SCEPTRE people and the other the BIRTHRIGHT people. Judah, the inheritor of the SCEPTRE, is only a half bother to Joseph, the inheritor of the BIRTHRIGHT. The SCEPTRE and the BIRTHRIGHT inheritors are "two-families" with different mothers. How could the distinction between the SCEPTRE and the BIRTHRIGHT families Judah and Israel be more emphatic?

Israel Distinct From Judah

Unless we see the distinction between the "House of Israel" and the "House of Judah" from the time of the division till the final and glorious reunion of the Two Houses, which will take place at the end of the "latter days," the prophecies concerning Israel cannot be understood. From the time of the division into two kingdoms until now, Judah and Israel have remained absolutely distinct. They were carried into captivity separately, at different times and by different nations, because Israel was taken into captivity by the Assyrians, 721 B.C. (II Kings 17:6); while Judah was carried into captivity 133 years later by the Babylonians 588 B.C. (II Kings 25:21). A portion of Judah returned after 70 years, as had been predicted (Ezra 2:1), but Israel never returned, nor was there any prediction that she would return until the final, glorious, restoration in the near future. All the prophecies were written after the division of the tribes into two nations; and these prophecies give the whole future of Israel as entirely distinct from Judah.

The great Jewish historian Josephus, writing from Rome in the year 70 A.D. which was nearly 800 years after Israel was taken into captivity by the Assyrians says: "The entire body of the 10 Tribes are still beyond the Euphrates, an immense multitude not to be estimated by number." It is estimated that there were 50 million in Israel at the time of the division, and this was 800 years later.

Rev. Canon Faucett M.A. says in his "Critical and Expository Bible Encyclopedia" The idea that the House of Israel has been amalgamated and incorporated with the "Jews," is one of the most amazing errors in Biblical History.

The prophets write of Israel and Judah still being separate people in "the latter days," or the days of the Gospel dispensation. In the 37th chapter of Ezekiel is a prophecy yet to be fulfilled. God promising to unite the stick of Joseph, representing the House of Israel with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick in His hand. This and many other Scriptures require that Israel and Judah be kept separate until this union which has not yet taken place.

According to the prophet Hosea, the House of Israel in the last days was to become as the sands of the sea for number, before their reunion with the House of Judah, and their return, representatively, to Palestine (Hosea 1:10, 11). Also Jeremiah writes: "When ye be multiplied and increased in the land in those days...the House of Judah shall walk with the House of Israel and they shall come together out of the land of the north, to the land that I gave for an inheritance unto your Fathers" (Jer. 3:16-18).
In Jeremiah 30:3, 4 we have a prophecy yet to be fulfilled concerning the uniting of the two Houses. 

Here we read: "For the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the captivity of MY PEOPLE Israel and Judah; and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers and they shall possess it. And these are the words that the Lord spake concerning Israel and concerning Judah." Here God calls Israel and Judah "My People Israel and Judah." So if Judah, the Jews, are the people of the Lord, then the Lord has a people besides the Jews whom He calls Israel and who are not counted among the Jews.

Long before the division took place, Moses, while prophesying unto the seed of Jacob, cried out: "Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah and bring him unto his people: (Deut. 33:7). This plainly shows that Judah was to be separated from his people and finally brought back to them. And the Scriptures tell us that shall not be until at the end of "the last days."

No Evidence For Amalgamation Theory

Orthodox Jews, even to this day, know that they do not represent the Ten-Tribed House of Israel. On the day of the Feast of Trumpets and on the Day of Atonement, they include in their prayer Jeremiah 31:20, and pray that Ephraim Israel (the Ten-Tribes) may be united with them. If we had time, we could quote from the testimony of Jewish scholars, and from their literature, showing that they know they are not representatives of the Ten-Tribed House of Israel. We have quotations from the "Jewish Encyclopedia," "The Jewish Religion," "The Jewish Chronicle," Rabbi Gershom, Prof. Neubauer, "The History and Literature of the Israelites," "The Jewish Quarterly Review," etc. The Rabbi Dr. Hertz, of London, says: "People known at present as Jews are descendants of the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin...we look forward to the gathering of all the Tribes at some future date."

The learned Isaac Leiser says that "The Israelitish nation was left in banishment after the return of the Jews from Babylon." Professor Neubauer wrote: "The hope of the return of the ten tribes has never ceased among the jews in exile." Josephus, a Jew, and loyal to Jewish history and tradition, wrote about 70 A.D. or about 800 years after the captivity of Ten-Tribed Israel as follows: "The 10 Tribes did not return to Palestine; only two Tribes served the Romans after Palestine became a Roman province."

Jeremiah prophesied that only they who were taken by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon were to return. Then the historical fulfillment of that prophecy must see only a return of those taken to Babylon. Both Ezra and Nehemiah testify to the fact that historically only those taken by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon did return (Ezra Chapter 2: Nehemiah Chapter 7).

The return to Palestine of the 10 Tribes at any time in the past is contrary to Kings and Chronicles, contrary to Ezra, Nehemiah, Zechariah, Jerome and Josephus, and to history. In the prophecy that the "Two Sticks," Judah, and the House of Israel will become "one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one King (the Lord Jesus Christ) shall be King to them all" we have Divine proof that the two Houses are still separate, because Christ is not reigning over them as King at the present time.
In connection with the return of the Jews from Babylon, Nehemiah says: "I saw Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, and of Ammon, and of Moab," (Nehemiah 13:23). Ezra declares the same fact, naming the Hittites as among those with whom marriages were consummated. In Ezra 9:1 - Ezra says "They have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed has mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hands of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass." You can see how the facial expressions of all the descendants of these intermarriages would differ from that of the pure descendants of Judah, and still more from the BIRTHRIGHT TRIBES who were only half brothers of Judah to begin with.

And then, I ask, did the returned captives abide in the land "forever"? The prophet tells us that when Israel and Judah are reunited, their descendants were to be in perpetual occupation of the land. We know that this has never taken place because the Jews were suddenly driven out in A.D. 70, and have been wanderers for 18 centuries. This shows again that the Ten Tribes did not go back with the Jews when they returned from Babylon.

Jerome was one of the most eminent of the early fathers of the Church. He wrote, in the 4th century, wWhen Jesus told the Jews in his day that he would go where they could not find Him, though they should seek for Him, the Jews, knowing of Israel still in dispersion, inquired: "Will He go to the dispersed among the Gentiles? (John 7:35). This passage shows that the Jews knew that the Ten Tribes were still in dispersion among the Gentiles.

God divided the Abrahamic promises among Jacob's twelve sons, and when He said through Jacob that Ephraim's "Seed shall become a multitude of nations." He was not referring to the Jews who never have or ever will be "a multitude of nations," God was speaking to the BIRTHRIGHT heirs. The "Nation and a Company of Nations" promised in Gen. 35:11 was a BIRTHRIGHT BLESSING TO BE FULFILLED" in the last days before Christ's Return (Gen. 49:1) to Joseph and his descendants (I Chron. 5:1), none of which are Jews. In Jer. 31:9, God said, "Ephraim is My firstborn," and in Gen. 48:19, Jacob said of Ephraim, "His seed shall become a multitude of nations" - just the opposite of what was said of Judah -"He shall become a remnant." That this promise to Israel was not to Judah is proven by the fact that Judah has never been a multitude of nations, and never will be. And so, more than 2,000 times God refers to Israel when what He says has no more to do with the Jews than with the Germans, or the Italians or the Chinese, or the Russians. On the other hand, the word "Jew" is mentioned 265 times, and in no instance does it refer to the Northern Kingdom of Israel or to any of their descendants.

The Amalgamation Theory Receives No Support From Holy Scripture

The book of Micah plainly teaches that the Jews who "halted" were to become "A remnant," while Israel "that was cast far off," was to become "a strong nation" (Micah 4:7). The bringing together of these "two families" is to be associated with the Kingdom-Age. Till then, they would be separate. Some errors are slow in dying but this amalgamation-assumption which falsifies hundreds of Scriptures is now only lingering upon its death bed.

It is important to notice that neither the Major nor the Minor Prophets appear in the Old Testament until about 200 years after the division of the Twelve Tribes into two nations. What then did they find was the condition of God's chosen race? Was there any sign of amalgamation among them? Not a scintilla. The prophets found them still divided into two nations; as separate as France and Italy, or Britain and America. They had separate Kings, separate administrations, separate national alliances, and of course, separate national titles. The National title of the Ten Tribes was "Israel," or "Ephraim," because the Tribe of Ephraim had become the Tribe of the Birthright owing to the sin of Reuben. We have seen that the national title of the other two tribes was "Judah," a remnant of which were later called "The Jews."

It was during this state of affairs that the prophets commenced their ministry - some residing in the territory of Israel, and others in that of Judah. The Prophets addressed these two nations by the names that God gave them - "Israel" being the title which the Northern Nation had decided to retain; and "Judah" being the title which the Southern Nation had decided to assume . Hence we find that all through their writings, whether of warning, of rebuking, or directing, or consoling; and whether their words were historical or prophetical, the prophets recognized the separate condition of the Two Nations, and accordingly addressed them by their chosen and well-known national titles.

Ten Tribed Israel a Non-Jewish People

The separation into the Two Nations took place many years before any of the major or minor prophets wrote; therefore, the "Israel" known to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the minor prophets, our Lord, the evangelists, and the apostles, had no Tribe of Judah in it. Israel, as known to all of these writers, was a non-Jewish people. Israel has remained a non-Jewish people to this day. The amalgamation theory is hopelessly discredited in the presence of the Bible. The closing books of Bible history leave Israel and Judah in separation from each other, while Bible prophecy keeps them separated until reconciled and united in the Kingdom-Age, and are dwelling representatively in the Holy Land under the personal reign of the Lord Jesus Christ, their welcomed and Crowned Messiah.
Hosea's statement that Israel shall be "as the sand of the sea which cannot be measured nor numbered" is not made concerning Judah (Hosea 1:10).

In the first chapter we read "Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel." Did the two nations of captives "gather together" and amalgamate while in the land of their captivities? Did they "together appoint themselves one head" when the small remnant of Judah returned from Babylon? Both Ezra and Nehemiah, who were the historians of the Babylonian return, inform us that this was not the case.

That this uniting of Judah and Israel did not take place when the remnant of Judah returned after the Babylonian captivity, is clearly proved by Jeremiah's prophecy in the third chapter where we are told that "The House of Judah shall walk with the House of Israel and they shall "come together out of the land of the North to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers" (Jer. 3:18).

Nothing like this has yet taken place. The 17th verse of this chapter shows us that when Israel and Judah unite, Jerusalem will be so fully under Divine truth and influence that she will be called "The Throne of Jehovah." This shows us that this uniting of the Two Houses has not yet taken place, and when it does it will not be a Jewish Nation. It will be the Israel Nation.

Of this reunion of Israel and Judah, Jeremiah in the 50th chapter and 4th verse says, "In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together: They shall go on their way weeping, and shall seek the Lord their God." It was not in "the former days" but at the end of "the latter days" [after the "seven times" or 2520 years punishment of both Houses has run out] that this is prophesied to take place; and if Israel is already amalgamated with Judah - this and other prophecies can never be fulfilled. Jeremiah goes on to say in the 20th verse, "In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none; and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found; for I will pardon them whom I leave as a remnant." We all know that such a return and union of Israel and Judah has never yet taken place.

Return "Together Out of the Land of the North"

According to the amalgamation theory, which has no support of the Scripture, Israel would have gone south to join Judah instead of Judah going north to join Israel for Jeremiah says "In those days, "The House of Judah shall walk with the House of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers." We know that this has never yet happened. This is not true even of Judah's return from Babylon. They returned from the south. When Israel and Judah become "one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, they are to have one King and be no more two nations" says Ezekiel (37:22).

That this uniting of Israel and Judah was not in the past is again proven by the fact that the Jews have never had a King since they went into Babylonian captivity. As a matter of undeniable fact, there never has been, to this very day, a Davidic King reigning in the Holy Land from the year B.C. 586, when the temple was destroyed, and the House of Judah was carried away captive to Babylon. Anyhow it was not of any human monarch that Ezekiel wrote when his prophetic vision spanned the gulf of ages, and he beheld the glories of the Crowned Redeemer and of His ransomed, restored, and united Israel.

Ezekiel had reference to Him of whose Second Coming we read; "And He hath on His vesture and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS" (Rev. 19:16).hich was more than a thousand years after Ten Tribed Israel went into captivity as follows: "Unto this day, the ten Tribes are subject to the Kings of Persia" - - "The Ten Tribes inhabit at this day the cities and mountains of the Medes." He knew that Israel had not returned to Judah, that the ten tribes were still separated from the Jews.

Ezra, in the 2nd chapter and the 1st verse, shows us that those who returned to Jerusalem were all from one "province." This word is in the singular. This is proof that the House of Israel who were captive not in this "province," but in another country, did not return.

In the book of Ezra, which mentions the two tribes that returned, none of the Ten Tribes were listed. And in the book of Nehemiah, which says that only Judah and Benjamin returned, none of the ten tribes are mentioned.

In Zechariah the 10th chapter, which was written 18 years after the Jews had returned from Babylon, the prophet shows that when he wrote, the Two Houses of Israel and Judah were still separate. And then all His prophecies concerning Israel require that they shall be kept separate from Judah as a people until their future uniting. On page 500 of the Scofield Bible, Dr. Scofield says, "The two Kingdoms are to be reunited in the future Kingdom" and then cites a number of Scriptures to prove the assertion.

The amalgamation-theory is hopeless. It is a mere assumption. All who hold that theory will have to abandon it if they follow the testimony of Holy Scripture. If they adhere to their theory they will be in conflict with the Word of God, and with all the historical facts. Their theory breaks down at every point. None of those who hold that Israel was amalgamated with the Jews can tell you when the amalgamation took place. Just so the Scriptures, which require that Israel shall be a great military power in the last days, cannot be applied to the Jews; and they are not applicable to Israel during the Millennium when there will be no wars. These promises are pre-millennial, and not consistent with millennial times.

The many Scriptures also which require that Israel in these last days shall be a maritime people "whose seed shall be in many waters" cannot be applied to the Jews; but they apply perfectly to the BIRTHRIGHT section of Isaac's descendants to whom the promises were made.

We have seen in other broadcasts that Jerusalem was trodden down of the Gentiles exactly "seven times" or 2520 years to the very day. Obadiah in the 17th verse speaks of the soldiers under General Allenby, who delivered Jerusalem from the Turks on the exact day and in the exact manner in which God says Jerusalem would be delivered, as belonging to the House of Jacob (verse 17). The next verse shows us what part of "The House of Jacob" they were - "The House of Joseph." And the next verse shows what part of the House of Joseph they were - "Ephraim;" and in the same verse He speaks of them as "the children of Israel." Also in Ezekiel 25:14 God shows us that it would be Israel who would drive out the Turks and end the "treading down of the Gentiles" in Palestine. To insist that these Scriptures addressed to Israel are to be applied to the Jews is to call the soldiers of General Allenby Jews.

Thus, you see that if we were to discuss each of the hundreds of Bible references to Israel as distinct from the Jews, it would furnish matter for a large volume.

In the authorized daily prayer book of the United Hebrew Congregation of the British Empire, there are three prayers which they pray for Israel as distinct from themselves. They pray both for "Judah" and "Israel." In one of these prayers they speak of Ephraim-Israel as "our brethren." Dr. V. Herman Adler, who in the past was chief rabbi of the Jewish Church in England, wrote: "The Ten Tribes did not return to the Holy Land."

In this discussion over the air, we have given you but a small part of the Biblical and historical proof of the distinction between Israel and Judah. We have scarcely touched upon the many wonderful prophecies concerning "Israel" which have no reference to the Jews, nor upon those relating to "Judah" which have no reference to Israel. To discuss these even briefly would furnish material for a good sized book.

For instance, to apply to the Jews the many Scriptures which require that the descendants of Ephraim shall be "a multitude (or Commonwealth) of Nations" (Gen. 48:19) in these "last days," before the union of the Two Houses, Judah and Israel, would be equivalent to saying that the only "Commonwealth of Nations" on earth today are Jews. The Anglo - Saxons  Nation are Isaac sons or Saxons, but they are not Jews. Only one of the twelve Tribes are descendants of Judah. The Promise of "A Multitude of Nations" was made to Ephraim, not to Judah.

Again, Gen. 48:19 shows us that two great rival nations were to spring from Joseph "in the last days." To insist on applying this Scripture to the Jews, is equivalent to calling these great rival nations Jews.

F.F. Bosworth Biography

Fred Francis (F. F.) Bosworth was a pioneer evangelist in the ministry of divine healing during most of the first half of the 20th century. He also had a profound understanding of the Holy Scriptures and was a believer in the Anglo-Israel message as stated in his sermon contained in this booklet. The following is a comment by Evangelist Bosworth written in 1952 concerning his ministry of proclaiming Jesus Christ as both Savior and Healer.

"For more than thirty years during great evangelistic campaigns, I have overworked, praying for the sick and afflicted. During fourteen years of this time, we conducted the National Radio Revival during which time we received about a quarter of a million letters, most of them containing prayer requests from sick and suffering people who could not have recovered without the direct action of the Holy Spirit in response to the "prayer of faith". We have received multiple thousands of unsolicited testimonies from those who have been miraculously healed of every bodily affliction I know anything about, including leprosy. To God be all the glory because these results are impossible to anyone but Him. As a result of these miracles, many thousands have been joyfully converted, whom we would have missed had we not preached the healing part of the gospel once a week in all our evangelistic campaigns."

The following are typical testimonials that were written by pastors concerning the ministry of Evangelist Bosworth.

"Neither shall we forget the precious teaching of that Apostle of Faith, Rev. Bosworth, which played an important part in each campaign, in creating and stimulating trust in the Great Physician. Again and again, under his ministry, we saw deaf spirits cast out and eardrums recreated. No case of sickness daunted the enthusiastic faith of this veteran warrior. He labored unceasingly and we certainly learned to love him."

Pastor A. H. Cooper
"The constructive teaching on Divine healing given by Brother F. F. Bosworth whom we regard as a 20th century pioneer of the ministry of the miraculous, inspired and established the faith of many. His undaunted faith in prayer for deaf mutes and the results which followed became an incentive to thousands to trust God for their healing."


Jeremiah xlvi. 28. I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee, but I will not make a full end of thee.

When Jehovah spoke these words by the prophet, many of the people to whom they were addressed had been living for more than a century on the north of Persia, or in some place bordering on the Caspian, and were, to use Jehovah's own words, removed out of His sight. Their removal, too, took place at a time which by an unaccountable coincidence marks the dawn of authentic history; but from that time to this there has come down through the generations who have preceded us a belief which we have inherited, and of which it would be impossible to divest ourselves, that these people, although removed out of sight, are nevertheless in existence as a distinct people somewhere. Their sentence was a strange one they were not to go unpunished. The nations among whom they were driven were not however to absorb them or to amalgamate with them, - as has been the common lot of the conquerors and the subjugated among all other peoples - but on the contrary, their conquerors were to perish utterly; and the same doom awaited all the nations among whom they were driven. We know that the threatened doom fell on the nations of Assyria and Chaldea; the ruins of their cities remain, but their inhabitants are extinct.

The supplement to the belief in these invisible people is that they are to be discovered; and many are the attempts that are made to identify them: some have scrutinized the faces of the Karens of Burmah, others have searched for them among the lawless tribes inhabiting the gorges of the Himalayas; but the general opinion is, that none of these people answer the conditions of the case, because another clause in their sentence was that they were to be sent to five different nations, the names of which are Tarshish, Pul, Lud, Tubal, and Javan, and to the isles afar off, that had not heard of the fame of Jehovah, neither had seen His glory. The first of these nations, Tarshish, is called in one instance by the LXX. χαρχηδονιοι Carthaginians; of the other nothing certain is known. But of the isles afar off, Jehovah adds, and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles, from which language it obviously follows that these people are making known the glory of God among the Gentiles, and it as necessarily implies the knowledge of that glory themselves while diffusing it to others as the possession of influence morally and politically, which is nowhere found among semi-civilised tribes.

And in the endeavour to identify these people it will be necessary, from what these quotations referred to point out, to look for them among the powerful and civilized nations of the world. Neither can there be any partiality on the one hand or injustice on the other in singling out any nation or people in particular, in the endeavour to discover them, as it is by no means certain that the nation singled out would consider the comparison complimentary, or the remainder regret their exclusion.
Several passages however in the Scriptures that treat of the restoration of the Israelites seem to show that they were destined to be a great and powerful nation, possessing immense resources, both in shipping and rapidity of locomotion, such as is used in the present day, before they returned to their own land.

Quoting the LXX. Isaiah lxvi. 19, 20. of which this is a literal rendering: And I will leave behind among them proof, I will send forth after them, I will keep them safe among the nations, among Tharsis, and Phoud, and Loud, and Mosach, and among Thobel, and among the Ellada, and among the islands the far where my name is not heard, neither shewn my glory; and proclaim they shall my glory among the nations. And they shall bring your brethren out of all the nations a gift to the Lord, on horses and carriages, covered chariots, mules with canopies, unto the holy city Jerusalem, saith the Lord: they shall bring back the children of Israel: they shall offer them to me with singing into the house of the Lord.

Again in the authorized version: *Micah iv. 7. Micah v. 8. # Zephaniah iii. 10 Isaiah xviii. 7. And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation; The remnant of Jacob shall be among the Gentiles in the midst of many people as a lion among the beasts of the forest, as a young lion among the flocks of sheep: who, if he go through, both treadeth down, and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver.

From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering. The next is a rendering from the French version; In that time they shall bring a present to the Eternal of hosts, habitation, to the mountain of Zion, of a people of great implements and splendor, of a people terrible since their commencement, and in their sequel of a nation who measures to the line, and a multitude of people, and of whom the rivers inundate the country. The first verse of this chapter appears in greater force in the LXX., and is thus rendered into English: Woe land of ships swift winged beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, who hostages in sea floating vessels accompany letters of Paphyrus upon the waters travelling toward a nation in the midst of the sea, and a strange people and terrible who themselves dwell apart;  The passage "beyond the rivers of Ethiopia," is in the French version, "an del" des fleuves de Cus."

And Rawlinson says that "the most ancient Chaldean was decidedly Cushite or Ethiopian." Now it appears that as Cush was the father of Nimrod, whose kingdom was in the land of Shinar, that the rivers of Cush would be the Euphrates or the Tigris, or more likely the Indus, as the country north of India is called Hindoo Koosh, and at the mouth of the Indus Cutch; and also the sculptures in the rock temples of Elephanta, near Bombay, have been taken from Ethiopian models; all the statues have thick lips and apparently curly hair, which evidently shew that these temples were hewn out of the solid rock by an Ethiopian or Cushite race. And a land of swift ships beyond any of these rivers would refer to India at a period very late in its history or during the last hundred and fifty years, when the destination of almost all ships leaving its shores was to a nation in the midst of the sea. The mythology of the Hindoos appears to be a distorted history of the family of Cush and Raamah given in Genesis,(Genesis x History of England) and as in the case of Assyria where Nimrod was deified, and to this day a vast ruin on the site of ancient Babylon bears his name; so also in India the name of Ramah is very common among the Hindoos, and in most of their troubles and perplexities their ejaculatory prayers are addressed to the god Ramah.

The present condition of India, with reference to England is fully shewn in the Scripture passages already quoted, especially by combining the translations of the French and the LXX., where the land beyond the rivers of Cush is described as sending hostages and letters in swift ships to a people in the midst of the sea, a nation of great implements and splendor, a people terrible since their commencement, and in their sequel a nation without hope and despised (when the prophet wrote) in the land of the rivers. How far the description of a people terrible since their commencement will suit England, can best be seen by referring to the history of the country as given by Macaulay: The struggle between the two fierce Teutonic breeds, lasted six generations, each was alternately paramount, provinces wasted, convents plundered, and cities razed to the ground, make up the greater part of the history of those evil days. There is also in the history of the last two hundred and fifty years, that is from the landing of the pilgrim fathers in America down to the present time, an unaccountable resemblance to the consequences involved in the sentence of theIsraelites on the nations among whom they were driven. I will make a full end of all the nations among whom I have driven thee. When the Anglo-Saxon, or more correctly the Anglo-Cimbrian tribes were forced to seeks refuge in America, that country was inhabited by numerous and powerful tribes, but on whom the presence of these exiles and their descendants acted like an epidemic; originating that expression of irony, as the white man advances the red man disappears.

The tribes for whom Elliot's Indian Bible was intended are all gone, their language is dead, and not a drop of their blood flows in the vein in any human being, and the only history of the former inhabitants of that immense continent is just this" they have perished. The exact counterpart of this is taking place in Australia, and New Zealand: a recent writer observes.* In half a century (it may be less time) the Maories will have passed away, and have given place to a more energetic race: the Maori race pur sang are fast dying out; they are subject to the same law of mortality that is sweeping away the natives of all the South Sea islands. A quarter of a century ago the population was estimated at 150,000, at the present moment it certainly does not exceed 40,000, and the mortality is rapidly on the increase.

The colonists apart from emigration are increasing more rapidly than the Anglo-Saxon race in any other part of the world; it seems as if a supernatural effort were made to fill up the void of human life. There is no physical reason why the Maories should not increase at the same rate, as the climate is equally adapted to both races; for four centuries they continued to multiply and replenish the earth, till the fatal hour when the Pakeha landed on their shores. The aboriginals of Tasmania are all extinct, and the Kaffers of the Cape of Good Hope are fast disappearing, and the same terrible doom is sweeping away the natives of Bengal. Sickness and mortality are so great from fever and cholera, that the people are scarcely able to dispose of the dead. Houses are falling down, every member of the household having been cut off. It is high time that some measures were passed and steps taken to arrest, if possible, the fearful destruction of life which threatens to leave the land without inhabitants a wilderness within a few miles of the capital of India.

In the peopling of North America by the Anglo-Saxons there has been no amalgamation with the aboriginals; but wherever the Spaniards have colonized, the opposite of this has taken place. The inhabitants of Peru and Southern America are more or less half-castes: it is said their gentlemen boast of the Indian blood in their veins. In Mexico there is the same mixture of Spanish and Indian blood, and out of a population of 6,000,000, there are 5,000,000 of Indians; this contrasted with the United States and Canada is one of the most inexplicable problems of the age. In the presence of the one race the Indian perishes and dies out: in the presence of the other he holds his own, and is, as in Mexico, the most numerous section of the population. Some have tried to account for the mortality of these different races as caused by their coming in contact with a higher civilization, or by imbibing the vices of civilised men; but can it be proved that the Anglo-Saxon emigrant is more civilised than the Spanish emigrant, or that he has more civilised vices, whatever that can mean, than the other? In the absence of such proof, however, it may be stated that the Spanish emigrant is quite his equal in the former, and may be his superior in the latter qualification.

We read that the Anglo-Saxon is a mixture of several races. How can that appear possible with these facts, taken from the history of the last three centuries confronting us, and proving, as clearly as analogy can prove, that amalgamation in the mass with any other race has been a physical impossibility; and that whatever number of separate races may have existed in remote times in the British Isles, all must have been subjected to the same unaccountable law of mortality that causes the aboriginals of every land the Anglo-Saxon colonises to die out.

The ruins of a pre-historic period, leads us to this conclusion, and afford sufficient evidence that the former inhabitants of the British Isles have become extinct. On Dartmoor there are the remains of roads and bridges, so firmly though rudely constructed, that have withstood the impetuosity of the winter torrents of that wild region, which also contains villages that have for centuries stood in their wild solitude, within few miles of peopled towns, yet unknown to man. In the Scilly Islands there are the remains of fortifications and burial places, and there is a vague legend among the inhabitants that a large city has been submerged, but all records of the former inhabitants have been lost. The same mystery envelops the origin of the round towers in Ireland; no one can tell who built them, or what possible use they could serve.

No tradition has lingered among the peasantry of any locality in which these buildings stand; and this is the more remarkable for the Irish peasantry are particularly tenacious of the traditions of the past, for a sort of unwritten history handed down from one generation to another is found among them to this day, but the commencement is always with the wars and invasions of the Danes. In Scotland there are not so many monuments of an unknown past remaining; but in examining the traditions of the north-western parts and of the islands especially, we discover nothing but the exploits of rovers and pirates. The same can be said of Kent, where we hear of the men of Kent and the Kentish men, but nothing that goes further into the past than the arrival of the Danes; and were it not that the Roman occupation of the country is recorded by their own historians, it would have remained unknown, for there is no evidence to shew or leading us in any way to suppose that the ancestors of the present inhabitants were in the British Isles when the Romans arrived.* Macaulay observes, Concerning the other provinces of the Western Empire we have continuous information. It is only in Britain that an age of fable completely separates two ages of truth. This may appear very humiliating to our national vanity in one sense, but such appears to be the truth nevertheless.

For there is a blank in our national history between the departure of the Romans and the historian Bede of about three hundred years, and the materials with which he has filled the gap are entirely at variance with tradition, and also disagree with the previous history of Tacitus, which if not the earliest is the most authentic history of the island; for although Julius Cesar was the first historian whose works has descended to us, yet he had no means of knowing very much, as he only made himself master of the sea-shore; and Tacitus adds Antecedent writers adorned conjecture with all the graces of language; what I have to offer will have nothing but the plain truth to recommend it. The received accounts therefore of the Welch or Cumri being the descendants of the ancient inhabitants of Britain, and of their ancestors living in the island for more than a thousand years before the arrival of Julius Cesar, are manifest fables, and the wonder is how they have passed current.

That the Cumbri or Cimbri have an older history than any people in Europe is certain; but it is not British history, for Tacitus makes no mention of the Cimbri whatever in the time of Agricola: and knowing his accuracy as an historian, could he be expected as a Roman to omit recording the prowess of his countrymen in having subdued their old hereditary enemies the Cimbri, if such a people were in Britain at the time; failing to recognise them was impossible; upwards of two hundred years of incessant warfare had fully established their mutual acquaintance. Nor is there any mention of German tribes among the inhabitants of South Britain; on the contrary, the latter were said to resemble the people of Gaul and Spain, some of them having an olive complexion and crisp hair. The Caledonians however were said to be of German extraction, known by their ruddy hair and lusty limbs, for all the Germans had a familiar likeness the same form and feature, stern blue eyes, ruddy hair, their bodies large and robust.

Here is clear historical proof that the Cimbri were not in South Britain in the time of Agricola; and we may infer from the description of his last campaign, that the Caledonians who were not exterminated by the Romans destroyed themselves. Tacitus relates that after the last battle, some laid violent hands on their wives and children, determined with savage compassion to end their misery. The following day displayed a deep and melancholy silence all around; the hills deserted; houses at a distance involved in smoke and fire, and not a mortal discovered by the scouts: the whole a vast and dreary solitude. But in a few years more the balance of life was more than restored: the Romans were attacked by barbarians from the north; it was the well known gigantic form, the same ruddy hair and stern blue eyes which they had so often encountered beyond the Rhine; and they were forced to abandon their northern line of fortifications between the Forth and Clyde, and fall back upon their southern line of defence between the Tyne and Carlisle. As years rolled on this second wall was taken and retaken, broken down and repaired, and finally abandoned by the Romans; and the Barbarians (called also in scorn, from words in the barbarian tongue, Pict and Scot) occupied the whole northern end of the island to the Humber, and the western seabord to the land's end, the southern extreme of the island; and their descendants, the Cimbri, hold the same territory to this day.

Eventually the Romans left the island, and all written history ceased for more than three hundred years; but tradition has handed down a continuous account of the arrival of the northern tribes from Cimbrica, the modern Denmark, who in turn were all called Danes, who settled on the east and south-east coasts, and in Ireland, and built in the latter island large and well-fortified cities.

Again a written history commences; and the historian peoples the interval between the departure of the Romans and his own time with the Saxons, who, having been invited by the ancient Britons to defend them from the Picts and Scots, seized the country themselves, and drove the ancient inhabitants into the mountains of Wales and Cornwall. But this is a most improbable story, to make people settle in the most valuable parts of the whole country, in the only localities that contained the mineral wealth of the island, such as tin, silver, lead, copper, and, according to Tacitus, gold; for it happens that the Cimbri are settled on the whole of the coalfields and mines, from the Firth of Forth to the land's end. Undoubtedly the historian would have been perplexed by the dialect of the Welch, or Cimbri, and, consequently, confounded the people with the former inhabitants who, according to tradition, made their escape into Gaul, and was unacquainted with the fact that the ancient writers called the language of the northern tribes* indifferently Cambrian, Scandinavian, Gothic. But tradition makes no mention of the Saxons whatever. There is no word of their speech, whatever it was, mingled with the language. Trench says that in every hundred words of English sixty are from the Scandinavian, thirty from the Latin, five from the Greek, and five from other sources; and the hypothesis which Sharon Turner advances for the origin of the Saxons, as a people distinct from the Cimbri, and descended from the Scythians, or Sakae, mentioned by Herodotus, is wholly untenable, because Tacitus mentions no such people among the Germans. He makes mention of the Angles; but a great part of the Angles are incorporated with the Cimbri, and still speak their language; and having given their name to the whole island, it is by their name that the entire people are known to the rest of Europe.

Tacitus informs us that in his time German was a new name; but whenever he mentions the people who invaded Italy, and conquered, or rather annihilated five Roman armies in the best days of the Republic, they are always spoken of under the generic name of the Cymbri or Teutons. The Romans became acquainted with them about the year B.C. 111; and Saxo Grammaticus informs us that there were invasions of Ireland in the year of the Incarnation by the Northmen, and they were then powerful in ships; but who the Saxons were, or when they arrived, or where they settled, is a subject on which tradition is entirely silent, for of a written history there is none.

There is another mythical people called the Celts, said to inhabit the British isles in common with the Saxon, with which the Cymbri are always confounded, and said to be of the same race as the Gauls; but the confounding of the Cymbri with the Gauls is making a very great mistake, for the two peoples were quite distinct. This is shewn in the speech of Cerealis, the Roman General, to the Gauls.* You had called the Germans to your aid, and those barbarians proved the worst of tyrants: they enslaved without distinction those who invited them and those who resisted. The battles which Rome has fought with the Teutons and Cimbrians need not be mentioned. And again, the address of Civilis, the Batavian chief, to the Germans. The Romans, he said, would shrink with terror from the approach of those gallant warriors (the nations beyond the Rhine). The Gauls were of no account a race of dastards, and the ready prey of the conqueror. The testimony, therefore, of Tacitus is that the Cimbri were not Gauls but Germans; and as the tradition of Brittany are to the effect that their ancestors migrated from England to escape the Northmen, it remains an open question whether the two giants in Guildhall are not all that represent the mythical Saxon and Celt.

Plutarch, when describing the Cimbri, says: They are called Cimbri, not from their manners it is the name of their race. Twenty-four centuries have now elapsed since they were first mentioned in history by that name. Herodotus relates that nomade Scythian tribes from Massagetes crossed the river Araxis in the territory of the Cimmerians, attacked and expelled them from the country, and adds in confirmation of it, that the territory possessed (in his time) by the Scythians was formerly called Cimmeriom; and it is among the most bewildering and apparently unimportant of merely accidental things that brings up their name again.

The writing on a slab dug out of the ruins of long-buried Nineveh is deciphered, and the inscription reads:* Sargon came up against the city of Samarina and the tribes of Beth Khumri, and carried captive into Assyria 27,280 families. The Cumri or Cimbri are thus shewn to be the ten tribes of Israel, and from the circumstance that the Teutons are always mentioned along with them by Tacitus, the conclusion is forced upon us that they are of Judah; for we know from Bible history that the greater part of them never returned. The total number of them given by Ezra and Nehemiah is forty-two thousand. It was also said by Jehovah, I will remove Judah out of my sight as I have removed Israel. And, in fact, the main land of Denmark bears their name, Juteland, to this day.

The conduct of the Caledonians in destroying their wives and children after their final defeat by the Romans, is exactly like what occurred at the taking of Massada in Judea. The Jews killed their wives and children with their own hands, and then destroyed themselves. Florus relates the same of the Cimbri in Italy, when defeated by Marius. When the Cimbri women saw that all was lost, they strangled their children, and either destroyed themselves in one scene of mutual slaughter, or with the sashes that bound up their hair hung suspended by the neck on the boughs of the trees or on the tops of their wagons. And this is what Jehovah declared by the Prophet should characterise the Israelites: And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the Lord of Hosts.

It is difficult, at this distance of time, to know the reason of the Israelites being called Khumri by the Assyrians, although analogy would lead to the conclusion that it was from the name of their idolatrous worship, and this is to some extent borne out by the Bible.* In the margin of the Hebrew name of the idolatrous priest is Chemarim, and the word in the LXX. Is spelled Χωμαριμ, Chomarim. The only one of the missing tribes that can be traced with any degree of certainty is Dan. The Danes and Jutes are Jews of the tribe of Dan; and it is stated in Revelation # that all the other tribes were sealed and the apparent meaning of the word sealed is to close, or conceal. That it has a deeper and more hidden meaning is admitted; but it is unaccountable that while the name Dan has descended to us with its pronunciation unchanged, that the other tribes should be hidden away; and as it was characteristic of that tribe, when in their own land, to call their chief town and other places by the name of their tribe, we can obviously trace their rout from the Caspian to the Baltic, by the names of the rivers Don, Dinaper, Dniester, Danube, a town in Prussia, Dantzic, and Denmark, which the Danes pronounce Dan-merk. In the British isles we have Dunmow, Dundee, Dundalk, which are evidently the broad Norwegian pronunciation, Denmark being by them pronounced Dawn-merk.
Many of the rivers in the British isles have nearly the same names as those lying between the Baltic and the Caspian, such as Dane, Don, Doon, and in addition to this some of the harbours appear to have Hebrew names, such as Sheerness, Inverness. The word ness as in Jehovah-nissi, is translated by the LXX. Καταφνυη (refuge); so that these harbours are literally Sheer-refuge, Inver-refuge; and those towns with names ending in ester, which etymologists tell us are derived from Castra, (a Roman camp) but the pronunciation in no single instance bears out such a conclusion. For instance, Doncaster: it is pronounced Donc-ester; Chichester, Leicester. Also in Ireland: Munster, Ulster. The latter is obviously El-ester, literally the goddess Ester that was worshipped by the Scandinavian tribes, and whose festival was held in the month of April, about the same time as the Pascal or Passover, and in commemoration of which the name Easter has been retained. The origin of this name appears to be the edict of Queen Esther, and the Jewish feast of Purim.

The names of villages beginning with Bally, Balla, etc., are evidently derived from Baal, the idol worshipped by the Israelites; and it is human nature to name a village or place of worship after their god or patron saint. And as to the improbability of such rovers finding their way across from Norway to Scotland, there is nothing improbable in the case, for Tacitus relates that one of the German cohorts of Agricola's army seized one of the ships, put to sea, passed round the north end of the island, and reached some part of Germany. This, of itself, goes far to prove that these tribes had some knowledge of the route. As to the distance, it is only 357 miles from the Naze of Norway to Inverness; and a boat running five miles per hour would cross in three days. The two places lying directly east and west, we can quite understand that a boat steered right before an easterly wind, and in the direction of the setting sun, from the entrance of the Baltic, would make the land about Inverness and the Orkney Islands, coasting along them would reach Ireland in the same way. The distance appears nothing at sea, for in clear weather they would be no more than one day out of sight of land, the coast being high on both sides may be seen probably a distance of fifty miles. Therefore, agreeable with tradition, Ireland, Scotland, and the north-east of England would be peopled from the north by the Scandinavians. And after the Romans left they poured in on the east coast. In reality their attack upon the Romans from the north appears to have more of strategy than accident. They continued to keep up a constant succession of migrations from the Christian era to the final invasion of the Normans, who were also the same people. Their history since they settled in the British isles, and more especially during the last three centuries, is in too close agreement with the Bible to be accidental. There is no other nation in the world that answers to the Bible conditions, no other people are obliged to colonise in order to make room for the ever-increasing population. The land of thy destruction shall even be too narrow by reason of the inhabitants; and they that swallowed thee up shall be far away. The children which thou shalt bear after thou hast lost the other shall say again in thine ears, The place is too strait for me, give place to me that I may dwell.

This passage has long since become history. The yearly rate of increase at home, according to the returns of the Register-General, is estimated at half a million, and probably a tenth of this number yearly leave the country.

There is another remarkable fact: that Protestantism is almost exclusively confined to them, and geographically to the north-west corner of Europe. It is true that they have carried it with them wherever they have settled; in America, Australia, and in Europe especially. The exact boundary could almost be drawn by the finger on the map: a line from (Luther's) Wittemberg north to the Baltic, and another from the same city continued west to the land's end (England), incloses, with a few exceptions, the whole of Protestant Europe; and when the Bible (at the Reformation) was translated into the vernacular of these people they seized hold of it with an earnestness that has never been explained as though it had been a long-lost certificate of their birthright; but the inhabitants of Europe south and east of the boundary referred to, with few noble exceptions, have shown the greatest indifference to the Bible from the first, and continue to do so, and have at times made some strenuous and nearly successful efforts to destroy it, and Protestantism along with it. Macaulay has observed that no large society whose language is not Teutonic has ever become Protestant. There is something inexplicable in the fact that the majority of the Latin races are so opposed to it.

Mr. Bickersteth's comments on Romans, chap. Ii. St. Paul leads us to the idea: that through the fall of the Jews salvation came to the Gentiles; that the Gentiles, by unbelief, highmindedness, and not continuing in His goodness, may be cut off; and that the natural branches shall be grafted into their own olive-tree. It is also stated (Isaiah lx. 2) For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and His glory shall be seen upon thee. In the heading of the chapter from which this is taken it is called the glory of the Church. But why should this be claimed for the Church to the exclusion of the children of Israel? Is not the Bible the history of Israel; recording God's dealings with them in the past, and recording also what He intends to do with them in the future? That the Gentiles were to participate in their privileges is certain. But it is not said that they were to supersede them.

The language of the last quotation, therefore, forces upon us one of the two conclusions from which there is no logical escape:- Either that there is a time of darkness and ignorance yet to come on the world, in which all traces of Gospel light and knowledge are to be obliterated; or else that the world was in that predicted state of mental darkness and ignorance when Luther commenced the Reformation. The latter conclusion is fully supported by history. There was then through the greater part of Europe very little learning, and that little was confined to the clergy. Not one man in five hundred could have spelled his way through a psalm. Books were few and costly; the art of printing was unknown. Also Church history from the closing part of the fifteenth century to the commencement of the sixteenth. We read that unlettered and rude men wholly destitute of merit rise to the priesthood: no attention is paid to purity of life, a liberal education, or a good conscience: the bishops, occupied with temporal affairs, devolve the trouble of examining candidates upon persons of no experience; the study of Scripture and learning are totally neglected by the priests, why prefer occupying themselves with training of dogs and birds; they sit with tipplers in the taverns, are addicted to gaming and debauchery, and destitute of the slightest fear of God; they can neither speak nor write Latin, and scarcely know enough of German to explain the Gospel.

It is the opinion of many Protestants that a severe time is in store for them, - a fiery ordeal, short and terrible, but out of which they are to emerge victorious. None seem to expect such a time as the prophet describes, when darkness shall cover the face of the earth, and gross darkness the people: when the Vandals shall again become paramount, and destroy all knowledge, science, literature and religion, and inaugurate another dark age similar to the one in which Europe was enveloped for centuries: but they expect and believe that the Jews will be converted; for they are to be the great missionary people, who are destined to carry the Gospel successfully to the heathen, as both these articles of their belief are stated clearly and repeatedly in the Bible; although it does not state, nor do they expect, that all the heathen will be converted, because our Lord told Hs disciples shortly before His crucifixion that the Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness to all nations; and then shall the end come.

But in addition to this Protestants also believe that all this is to happen in the future. The time has yet to come was the argument the Jews made use of to excuse themselves when commanded to build the Temple after their return from Babylon; and Protestants have either inherited or acquired very much from the Jewish unbelief in reference to similar matters. The Jews maintain that the Messiah has not come, and the Protestants are equally certain that the conversion of the Jew has not taken place. But their inference is about as logical on this point as the Jew's on the other; because the Bible states distinctly that the conversion of the Jews should be preceded by a night or time of mental darkness; and Paul writing to the Romans, in a passage already quoted, intimates that if the Gentiles fall away the Gospel will return to Israel; and we know from the history of the period that the world was in a state of mental ignorance answering to the prophetic description when the Reformation commenced, and the people who received the light in the first place were those inhabiting the north-west of Europe, whose descendants are still Protestants. To the Jew were committed the oracles of God, and they were destined to make known the glory of God to the nations: and when we find the people of one nationality carrying out the mission that was decreed for Israel, and on a scale unprecedented in Apostolic times, which, from the want of the facilities of travelling, could not then be carried out, and without the most remote idea that they are the people destined for such a work, but from some unknown irresistible impetus that has gathered force in the face of difficulties and obstructions, often on the part of their national Government, have come to the belief in their inner hearts that they are under the obligation of making known the Gospel to the world. It is true that the Jewish denomination, so-called, are not doing this, as they are conservatives still, and from the language made use of by St. Paul they are destined to remain so until the remainder of their nation are brought in: For I wish you were not to mistake this mystery, brethren, lest you become proud of yourselves; that induration for part of Israel is decreed until the complement of His nations come in. The translation in the authorised version is the fulness of the Gentiles.

It must also be admitted that the propagators of Roman Catholicism have fearlessly and successfully spread their doctrines among the heathen in Europe and elsewhere throughout their entire history. But their principal aim has always been to establish the authority of the Church; and whether they connected these two things in their mind, that the glory of God and the glory of the Church had the same meaning, is best known to themselves; but they have fully succeeded in spreading the glory of the latter superstructure instead of the glory of God. And in contrast to this, the great aim of Protestantism has been to give the heathen of all lands, in their own tongues, the Word of God without curtail or comment. An anonymous writer who published a work on prophecy in 1860 accuses England of going with the sword in one hand and the Bible in the other, and demands in words to this effect, What right have they [the English] to spread the Bible everywhere, unless they are the Israelites? But the idea is too preposterous to be entertained. The general public have probably no idea that the world is girt with missionary stations, all of them proclaiming the glory of God and appearing as so many outposts of Zion, each more advanced towards the sun-rising. Among the African tribes and the tribes inhabiting the islands of the Southern tropics great changes have taken place for the better. None of them had a written language until the missionaries went there; and generally the first book printed in each has been the Bible. The missions of India and its dependencies are on a large scale, and there are numerous villages of native Christians with their unpretending little church and schools on the outlets of the Ganges and Irrawaddy, and in the Straits settlements, to show that something has been achieved. And the same is true of China: the people who are carrying on this work, it may be said, are exclusively inhabitants of the British Isles, the United States, and Germany; that is, those who are proclaiming Bible Christianity. There are Roman Catholic missionaries, it is true; but they do not give the Bible; and no disparagement is here thrown upon their sincerity, but it should be obvious to themselves, as it is to others, that in reality they only succeed in changing the name of one idol for another.

It is stated in several places in the Bible that there would be a sign or a standard set among the Israelites by which they should be recognised; and in another passage Jesus is called that sign, and that He is set for the falling and rising again of many in Israel. And what is the standard of Protestantism? Is it not Jesus? He is the sole and only representative at the Court of Heaven.
Of the future we know nothing; but, apparently, politically France has a footing in Egypt, and any misunderstanding with her rulers will at any moment stop the Overland route. And if India is to be held, then England must gain possession of Palestine, make Acre a port, fortify it, and run a railway from there to the Persian Gulf, and so colonise those vast lands between the Mediterranean and the Euphrates. The general belief is that the territory through which the Suez Canal is cut has been ceded to France by the Egyptian government, so that any rapture between this country and France would stop the Overland route, and compel us to return to the old route round the Cape, of three months instead of the present one of three weeks. As long as we are at peace with France it is all very well, but one thing is very certain, that she (France) has got the entire control of the canal, and let the property belong to whomsoever it may, possession is nine points of the law, and France must have changed very materially if she does not keep possession and find a plausible pretext for so doing. It is well known that the rest of Europe, with the single exception of England, are perfectly indifferent in the matter; regrets are now of little use, a remedy should be found, for disguise the matter as we may France is in possession of that narrow neck of land that connects the two seas; and there is at this present time an opportunity of making an amicable arrangement by giving Turkey a province, somewhere between India and Persia, in exchange for Syria and the Euphrates Valley, in order to run a railway from the Persian Gulf to the Meditarranean.

It has often been admitted that if India is to be held this must be done; but why not do it now, and send the emigrants there who are now being sent to Australia, and who become bankrupt in consequence? they are misled by promises of land from government, and when they get there they find it a worthless desert which they cannot cultivate for want of water, having to go in many places five and six miles to procure a can of brackish water; whereas there is a magnificent country, well watered, of great extent, and through which could be made the high road between India and the Mediterranean, - at the present time an untenanted waste. France could then keep Egypt, and with her consent, or without it, give Turkey an equivalent for Syria and Mesopotamia; for it is obvious to every one that the object of Russia in making the present demonstration on the Indian frontier is to compel England to keep a large army in India, so as to prevent her from interfering in Europe. Then why not meet the views of Russia? if not by a compromise, at least by establishing a neighbouring Anglo-Saxon State as a nucleus to support that army. It may be said that such a step would be the means of embroiling this country with the rest of Europe, but the probabilities are that it would not. Prussia has incorporated a part of Denmark, France, and the German States; so a slight concession to Russia, that as a simple hint she will not be interfered with within reasonable limits, and the same to France in Egypt; and it is wonderful how smooth the adjustment could be arranged. Besides, there is this at stake, viz., self-preservation, as no doubt the matter could be settled with Turkey alone, who would be but too glad to close with the offer, and by that means obtain a powerful friendly State on her frontier, who could and would make security to the native moneyed classes in India, who have been taught by the sad experience of generations that whoever wins they must lose, and who know as well as anyone that if the States are so placed, physically or geographically, that they must be under the protection of a more powerful State: it is better to remain under their present protectors, the extent of whose exactions they know to a cowery, than go through the ordeal of a change of protectors, the limits of whose cupidity they do not know; consequently the present attitude of their would-be protectors causes them a great deal of uneasiness. They ask, Will the English fight the Russians if they invade India? Are they able to do so? Now the latter query has no doubt been caused by the injudicious tone of the Indian press, forgetting the difference between an Indian and an English public; the latter perfectly understand the irony of pretended national weakness when made the theme of the newspapers for party purposes, and the former do not. It is unfair to tell the Indian public, as many of the Indian papers do, that if Russia made a descent on the country we have no means of withstanding them, we are without an army, the country is little better than bankrupt, without money or credit. There is a vast difference between telling them this, and telling the same story to the British public.

Independent of all other considerations there is a great amount of English capital invested in India, in works public and private, such as canals, roads, coal-mines, railways, factories, and telegraphs, which, considering the extent of country, are second to none in the world, and which is bringing about a social revolution among the natives that would put the social progress of some districts at home to the blush; but one thing is wanting, England must be brought nearer, - in other words, it is absolutely necessary to establish an Anglo-Saxon colony on the continent of Asia, and within sixty hours run of India, not in India itself, which is too hot and deteriorates the race.

It is unnecessary to recapitulate the causes that led to the conquest of India; no one pretends to say that they were in themselves strictly right, and as a nation we can no more justify the conduct of our Scandinavian forefathers for taking possession of England and exterminating the former inhabitants; but here we are, and the natives with whom we have coquetted in times of prosperity, have no wish to be abandoned in the days of adversity: there are mutual interests at stake, ours and theirs, and the great desire of both is, that British statesmen should take early and effectual to provide for the security of the country. It is too late to think of the Red Sea route now, we must have another; it is also too late to tell us we should have remained at home, and thereby have escaped this tremendous responsibility: how can we remain at home, when that home is throwing off year by year its half million of new life for which room must be provided elsewhere! No other people are under the necessity of making these incessant migrations but ourselves.

Australia has already as many inhabitants as it can sustain; and the cry is, We want more room! and we want it in such a geographical position as to be able to defend what we have already; let us have that neck of land lying between the head of the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean: all know that France has got the other one: we shall dispossess no one; the climate is more suitable for us than having to go and endure the extremes of heat and cold in North America. We must hold India, and in order to hold it we must have Syria and the Euphrates valley, and in order to hold them we must colonise them. Who knows? God's ways are inscrutable: He may make Israel's return a political necessity.

England, the Remnant of Judah, and the Israel of Ephraim

"Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The Two Families which The Lord hath chosen, He hath even cast them off?

Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; Then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." Jer. 33:24-26.

"We see not our signs" Psa. 74:9 The intent of these pages is to prove, First, that as, England is, in God's providence, in possession of a Certain Stone, called JACOB'S PILLOW, which is the seat of the Coronation Throne of the Empire, cherished and protected by her, in a very special manner, as her Chiefest National Muniment; so also, if it be the case that the Stone be Jacob's Pillow,
Secondly, there must have beenTHE SEED ROYAL OF JUDAH to set upon it, as certainly, if not as
Thirdly, manifestly, she has THE STANDARD OF JUDAH to wave above it: and, herein, that she is entitled to be considered "The Remnant of Judah."

And again, to show that the THREE are, at the appointed time, - when Judah and Israel are to return to "their own land," - also to return together to that place from which they, together, came, now some 2400 years, since, under the care, and leading of the Prophet JEREMIAH, who established them in Ireland; his mission being a FOURTH point to be proved: inasmuch as the mission of that illustrious Prophet was, at that time, to do the will of the Lord in "planting and building" in another land (Jer. 15:11), that, which he had been equally commissioned to "pluck up," "root out," and "destroy," in his own: viz. the Throne, the Seed, and the Polity of Judah (Jer. 1:10; 34:17, 22; 37:8-10).

Considering the extraordinary elevation to which the nation has raised this Relic of Antiquity - this so-called Jacob's Pillow upon which so grand an Edifice is thus apparently to be raised, - and the singular manner in which we guard it and provide for its safety; and that it is hardly creditable to us as Men, or as a Nation, not to be able to give some rational and credible account of it; it is held to be no less pious than reasonable to search out what there is, that is connected with this religious monument of so remote antiquity, that may throw light on its history, and such its very curious position.

The proposition and allegations based upon it, and connected with it, are, it may be, at first sight, somewhat startling:-

1. A Stone from Judea, consecrated to God 3600 years since by the patriarch Jacob;-

2. The Race of Judah to use it as a Throne; over which, a Prophet of Judah having inaugurated the one, and re-established the other, planted above them,

3. The Standard of the tribe of Judah;-and, these three, all to be with us in honour, and flourishing in positive reality and fullest prosperity, in England at THE PRESENT TIME! ... and all in full exercise of their respective functions, without our knowing aught of the last things, and being in entire disbelief, altogether, of the pretensions of the first: and yet, upon the truth and reality of which pretensions to be what it professes to be, the proof of the reality of the other two things may be thought to depend:- all this is indeed strange!

Strange, however, as it is, it may be, notwithstanding, not more strange than true: for, it is to be particularly remembered, in the outset, that there is no physical hindrance, to the FULL POSSIBILITY of all that is here supposed to Constitute the facts of the case. Accordingly we hope to prove, that the conspicuous importance we consent to give to this Ancient Stone ought to be satisfactory to the common sense of all who are reasonable men as well as earnest Christians.

At present, we seem, as Keepers of this Stone, to be merely gratifying our pride as the holders of an old curiosity; not to give our conduct in this respect a worse name. A state of custody not creditable to us personally as men of sense: nor, nationally, as a practical people; satisfied to hold what may be the most important sign of the dealings of God with Israel, past and future, as a "curious fact" (see quotation later). For such appears to be about the best account our antiquarians and historians can, at present, give of this Stone to ourselves and to foreigners! So little, truly, do the people who fail to "look to the rock whence they were hewed, and to the hole of the pit whence they were digged," "see their signs" (Isa. 51:1, Ps. 74:9)

A fact, however, it is, - this 'curious fact" and its belongings, - little as most men know of it, and still less that those, who do know of it, regard it, - which lies at the bottom of the greatest and most important National Act, executed from time to time, in our greatest and most important National Assembly. Not in the great WITENAGEMOT of King, Clergy, and Lords; neither in that other important assembly, the MYKEL GEMOTE, the Commons of England, by Representatives assembled: but, in that, which combines the fact of the ancient Wittena Gemote with the principle and fact of the Mykel Gemote; both convened in common assembly, in Common-Hall, so to speak, - the Wittena Gemote and the Mykel Gemote together, - at the Coronation of the Monarch of the Empire:

... that great event, which, those who understand the matter best, have declared, and well declared, to be, the Safeguard of our Liberties. Why is this? Because, then, THE NATION assembles in its great Temple, - namely, the Temple of GOD, Westminster Abbey, at the beginning of each Reign, - Clergy, Lords, and Representatives of the Commons, - to exact from the Monarch, whom, seated upon that Stone, they are about to elect for coronation, the Oath, that he will preserve and maintain, whole and inviolate, the rights and privileges and liberties of all orders and degrees of men and classes of the community of our great and imperishable nation.

Imperishable! Why Imperishable?

This Stone, into whose history, past and prospective, we propose to inquire, will show us why.
For much as all this is, much more remains behind. It is only half of the subject. It concerns JUDAH; and, in one sense, Judah only. But "The Stone" is "The Stone of Israel" (Gen. 49:24) and, that which concerns Judah alone is no more the whole subject, than the executive of an empire is the administrative; though the executive be, the manifestation of the other, in itself. "The Everlasting Covenant" (Jer. 32) is with "the Two Families" in one band (Isa. 11:12), under one Head (Hos. 1:10). 

"The remnant of Judah," (Jer. 44:14; 55:11, Zeph. 3:10) that important element in the world's future, is indeed there; the Ordinance Head, it may be, and is, of that Illustrious Power. The Throne is there; the Seed Royal is there; and the Ensign of the Perpetual Sceptre withal!

But the Strength of Israel, where is that? - that has not yet appeared on the stage! Nevertheless, it is there; all there. For as it is in Joseph, and by Joseph, that "the Shepherd," "the Stone of Israel," is to appear (Gen. 49:24), in the clearing up of what has been termed, not unaptly, "the great Asian mystery;" so does the investigation of this Stone's history, and what the Stone imports, bring upon the stage, England, as the full development of that important element of Israel's greatness, viz. "the multitude of nations of Ephraim;" as the Descendants and Representatives of him upon whom the Patriarch Jacob named his name, 'his own imparted name (Gen. 48:5, 16), ... the name of ISRAEL, The PRINCE of GOD. And so, England, i.e., Israel, in the sense of "the multitude of nations" of Ephraim (Gen. 48:19), now, is the representative of him who had power with God and Man, and prevailed. (Gen. 32:28)

And England, as ruled over by a descendant of the house of Judah, is herself, in that Head, the Representative and Executive of The Two Families whose captivity is to return when the promises of God to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob are to be fulfilled in the land which "their seed are to have for an everlasting possession:" (Gen. 48:4) .. even at the time when "men are to buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin and in the cities of Judah, (Jer. 32:44) and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valleys and of the south;" and when the title-deeds of Jeremiah to his possessions in Anathoth, sunk (Jer. 32:14), as the evidence of his faith in a faithful Creator, shall be placed, side by side, with the Stone of Israel returned from Britain to Jerusalem, in pursuance of the promise of these words:

"And now therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, concerning, this city, whereof ye say, It shall be delivered into the band of the king of Babylon by the sword, and by the famine, and by the pestilence; Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: and I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: and I will make an EVERLASTING COVENANT with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.

"Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul. For thus saith the Lord;

"Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised them. And fields shall be bought in this land, whereof ye say, 'It is desolate without man or beast; it is given into the hand of the Chaldeans:' for I will cause their captivity to return, saith the Lord." (Jer. 32:36-44)

In order to the better understanding of the subject, the importance of which few will be disposed to underrate, it will be best to subdivide it into two parts, viz.: the SIGNS Of JUDAH, and the SIGNS of EPHRAIM.

"Judah is a lion's whelp. Thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise. The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come." - Gen. 49:9-10

"Bring him unto his people: let his hands be sufficient for him: and be thou an help from his enemies." -Deut. 33:7

F.R.A. Glover: In the system of Polity of England there are three prominent and very important matters:

1. A Material Fact. 2. An Hereditary Descent. 3. An Heraldic Blazon.

If these things exist, - there is no denying them. They do exist. There is a cause for their existence. These things are all Eastern:-The first is, Jacob's Stone. The second, The Descent of the Monarch enthroned on it. The third, The Standard of the Lion Rampant. If these things came from the East, they must have been brought. Who brought them? They are all Hebraish. The first manifestly, as its name implies. The second, proveably so. The third, is, The Standard of the Tribe of Judah.

The bringer of them must, therefore, have been a Hebrew; and, undoubtedly, one of note and power.
Viewed collectively, these things have great significance; and may have, or exercise, an important influence on present and future events: the which, indeed, must be the case, if the character, the power, and the mission, of the bringer of these things from Judea, be taken into account. For it will be seen, by a variety of circumstantial evidence, that this bringer was no less a person, and no other, than the illustrious prophet Jeremiah: the man destined by God, in his early days, to foretell, and to aid in, the out-rooting of the polity and kingdom of Judah; as he was equally, in his latter days, to help " to plant and to build " the same (jer 1:10) elsewhere. (Jer 15:11; 25:11)

And this can be proved. Not because certain traditions affirm that the Prophet was in Ireland, as the Instructor of one of its greatest kings; but because, the three premisses admitted, nobody but Jeremiah could have conveyed them thither; or, bringing them, have established the Stone so as to accord with the terms of the tradition concerning it. The Legend of the Stone and that Tradition is, that, - 

Wherever that Stone might be, a Sceptre should be with it, until it returned to the East, whence it came. A tradition confirmed, as to the eastern origin of the Stone, by the discovery now, that its name, which was thought to be Irish, is Irish, only inasmuch as it is adopted from the Hebrew; and, as to its prophetic aspect, as not contradicted, hitherto, by subsequent events connected with it, although traversing a strange and chequered course, for upwards of 2400 years. For, The Stone has still a Sceptre belonging to it; even that of the mightiest nation on the earth [JML: 1861]; a "Nation of Nations;" - truly, even so, a Nation of Nations. And the Ruler who is enthroned thereon, can claim to descend from the Kings of the Race, then and there set upon it.

At the Council Table at Whitehall, on the 21st April, 1613, King James I said, - "There is a double cause why I should be careful of the welfare of that people [the Irish] : first, as King of England, by reason of the long possession the Crown of England hath had of that land : and, also, as King of Scotland; for the ancient kings of Scotland are descended of the kings of Ireland." - See Cox's Hibernia Anglicana.

And who shall say that it is not to go back to that East whence it came, in honour and power, even as it emerged from it, out of disaster and woe? .. "that those that sowed in tears" (Jer. 15:11; Zeph. 3:10) shall not have a joyful harvest?

This TRADITION, however, it is to be especially noted, though a Prophecy, and a Promise requiring the presence of some certain one to make it of possible performance, is without any allusion to the most important facts of the case; viz. the identity of the individuals, in whom the transaction of the setting-up of this Stone in Ireland originated, with two celebrated persons, intimately and officially connected with Hebrew history and the Hebrew polity; viz. one, a Prophet and Priest; the other a Woman, a Princess: a state of things which is only now, at this moment, being first exhibited to Man; and which, - the proof being based upon material and historical facts, (now, first, drawn from the obscurity of a language which concealed them, and, placed in juxta-position,) - he is called upon to consider, with relation to their practical bearing on present and future events: since they establish, as an historical fact, that, England is the Remnant of Judah.

For, if this case can be proved, then, this strange fact stands out upon the canvas of modern history; namely, that England is the possessor of the Throne of David, and its Representative; and, the continuator of that Sceptre of Judah, of which the patriarch Jacob foretold the continuance until the coming Of SHILOH: and that, coupled with all this, the Standard of Judah is, not only the Ensign which this Power will have sooner or later to unfurl, as the Ensign to the Nations, and to which "the dispersed of Judah" will have to rally; but that her own Scottish Blazon, is, as that Standard of Judah, the mark, outward and visible, by which the connexion is established between the dislodged Royalty of Jerusalem and the rehabilitated Judah of the West: and that she, England, is, therefore, under this triple manifestation of Hebraical Identity, the true and proveable and legal representative and essence of "the remnant of Judah:" that remnant, including "king's daughters," (Jer. 41:10, 43:5-7) which was warned to escape from Egypt, in company with the Prophet Jeremiah, and promised protection if it did. (Jer. 44:14, 28; 15:11)

That Remnant, making Judea its way to sanctuary, ("The little sanctuary" here alluded to, is that of the Tribes. And if Joseph had one, was not one as needful for Judah? - Ezek. 11:16), became, under the conduct of the prophet,-whose duty it was to provide for such a restoration of the royal house, wherever he might, in the providence of God, be directed to go, (and that he went to Ireland we are able to prove)-the Legal Representative of the House of David, of the Polity of Judah, and, of the interim state of Entire Israel. ("Thou art a God that hidest Thyself," - Isa 45:15; Ezek. 11:16)

This, however, will seem to many a relation so strange, as that no man should be called upon to give it credence without proof. The first point to establish, will be the Office of the Prophet Jeremiah in the matter: he being the substratum of foundation upon which the whole edifice is made to rest.

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee. I ordained thee a Prophet unto the Nations. Thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee. Whatsoever I command thee, thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee."

"See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant." - Jer. 1:5-7, 8-10.

To Build and to Plant!

F.R.A. Glover: Where such an important part is attributed to the prophet Jeremiah as the re-habilitation of an embryo-kingdom of Judah in Ireland, - an event involving immense consequences, - it would be natural to expect that some footmarks would be left by the way, by which the steps of this great man might be tracked. Such unmistakable footmarks, if to be found, might be more reliable as evidence of his presence, than any chronology of the times might afford, even if such existed; seeing that they would be beyond suspicion of fabrication. Accordingly there are, both personal and official, as well as legal, marks of the Prophet's presence in Ireland at the proper time; independent of the priestly one of blessing the Stone in inauguration of the new Dynasty destined to perpetuate and redeem the forfeited promise to the line of David, and to secure the continuance of the Sceptre of Judah. Such marks are discoverable in the various points, as regards Jeremiah, below enumerated.

1. OLLAM FOLA, the reputed king, sage, and legislator, and the College of Ollams which he founded at Tara;-2. INNIS-PHAIL, the Isle of Destiny;-3. JODHAN MORAN, the Righteous Judge (Isa. 11);-4. LIA FAIL, [Gaelic (Irish) for] the Stone of Destiny,5. The MATERIAL FACT;-6. TARA, the name of the Royal Settlement of Ireland;-7. The LAW OF SLAVERY, the seven years' law of the Hebrews;-(As regards the Hereditary Descent of the Royal Race of Britain,)8. The IRISH MYSTERY not to be uttered;-9. The Scottish-Irish LAW OF DESCENTS10. The GENEALOGY;-11. The Lion Rampant of Scotland; the HERALDIC BLAZON;- 12. The HEBRAICAL Etymological COINCIDENCES at Tara.


"Ollav Fola is celebrated in ancient history as a sage and legislator, eminent for learning, wisdom, and excellent institutions ; and his historic fame has been recognized by placing his medallion, in basso relievo, with those of Moses, and other great legislators, on the interior of the dome of the Four Courts in Dublin." - Annals of the Four Masters, p. 227, notes.

"The ancient Records and Chronicles of the kingdom were ordered to be written and carefully preserved at Tara by Ollav Fola, and these formed the basis of the ancient History of Ireland, called the Psalter of Tara." - Ibid. p. 297, note.

F.R.A. Glover: Ollam Fodhla - pronounced Ollav Fola - is a man well-known of, though not accurately known in, Irish tradition, as a great Monarch, Sage, and Lawgiver. He is mentioned thus in the Annals of the Four Masters, p. 412:-

"Amongst the most celebrated kings of Ulster, who also reigned as monarchs of Ireland, was Ollamh Fodhla, or Ollav Fola, the famous legislator, whose reign is placed by Tigernach, O'Flaherty, and others about seven centuries before the Christian era. He founded, the Conventions of Tara."

This is that Eocaid-Ollambh-Fodhla-Heremon-Ardrigh (Each'd=Historian, Ollam=Prophet, Fola=Destiny or Learned, Heremon=King, Ardrigh=Head-King [Pentarch]) of Tara, of whom the Chronicles of Eri make such ample and honorable mention (Chronicles of Eri, vol ii pp.70, 85,91,116).

"Their kings had many names and titles; these titles have been branched out into persons, and inserted in the lists of real monarchs; ... by which means the chronology of Egypt has been greatly embarrassed." So, as Bryant said of Egyptian history and chronology, may be said of Irish, as Mr. Moore well suggests. This case, however, affords an example of the converse evil: a compound, in which mere titles have been converted into a man, and two persons thrown into one. - Moore's Ireland, i. 161.

"Ollav Fola" is no king at all:- is not the name of a king, nor of any one. It is, if we are to judge of his true position by the circumstantial evidence that the case affords, the title of an Official. We have to prove that his Office was made and filled by the prophet Jeremiah.

The Ollav Fola, of Irish history, was the chief and first, and founder of the Order of Ollams, in Ireland. This was an order, not of kings, but of priests or sages; Druids so called: more properly Draoi, as General Vallancey insists. They were not Pagans. They were simple Deists.

                                                                  Druids meeting

This Ollav Fola founded, also, a college of Ollams, at Tara; "At Tara, was also the building called Mur-Ollam-ham, or the House of the Learned: in which resided the bards, brehons, and other learned men." - Annals of the Four Masters, p. 293.. Or, as the Hebrews would say, 'a school of the prophets;' but not a college of kings.

Who ever beard of an order of kings? or, a college of kings? Therefore, this Ollam Fola is not, in his presumed name, a king, by reason of this word Ollam. The word Ollam has a meaning. It is a Hebrew word, (Strong's No. 5769); and has to do with any period of time short of eternity, or eternity: a natural word to apply to the office of a man whose business it was to teach men to look to Him "who keeps the times and seasons in His own hand," and Who, incarnate, should, according to the Hebrew Scriptures, at some certain time, appear in the East.

As Kingship, therefore, is evidently not in the word Ollam, we must seek for it in the other portion of this official's name; that is, in the word Fola.

Now, this word, this illustrious official had in common with a certain Eastern Princess, married to the King of the Country, one of the many Queens after whom Ireland has been said to be named, Inis-Fodhla, Inis-Fola. The letters "dh" introduced into the word, were a subsequent invention. When the language came to be written, and men had to find out reasons for what they did not know, they changed the Fola of conversation into some other word, the meaning of which they did know, by the arbitrary incorporation of unsounding consonants: a process by which the word Fola, which was unintelligible as Irish, became invested with a meaning, which they thought would fit the circumstances of the case.

But if the Island was named Fodhla at all, or, Fola, in pronunciation, why not after the alleged king, who was a wonderfully learned man, and a great man, instead of after a woman? For the greatness of this Ollam Fola, which it is impossible to treat as a fiction, has come down to us, notwithstanding a halo of the impossible which surrounds the demi-god, as an undeniable reality. So much is this the case, that notwithstanding his alleged apocryphal existence, he is en-dome-d at this day in the grand Hall of the Four Courts, in Dublin, with Moses and other magnates of ancient celebrity. The apocrypha in the case is, his imaginary kingship; which, intruding unnaturally into the legends concerning the man, has, by turning truth into fiction, thrown a cloud of doubt over the whole. The Ollam Fola is a reality, and a grand reality, but not that of a king. He was a Prophet and a Hebrew, as the word and its significant meaning declare to us.

And what Hebrew prophet of note was living at the time assigned as the era of this Ollam Fola, - cir. B.C. 600, according to the corrected chronology of Mr. O'Connor of Balanagare, in his Dissertations, - but Jeremiah? .. the man who was appointed prophet to the Gentiles, and the restorer of the eradicated kingdom of Judah (jer. 1:5, 10; 15:11). He was; and was adrift at the time. And, the place of his death and burial being unknown, (for his tomb is shown at three places, Taphnis, Jerusalem, and Babylon, and the legends of his death being in terms that carry their own confutation,) be may as well have lived and died in Ireland as in any other country. (See Jer. 1:8 and 19. So far from any thing being known as to the certainty of his death, a fanciful idea obtained that he never died at all; record of which is to be seen in the questions of the disciples of John, the Forerunner, to their Lord; a notion that very well accords with the fact of the prophet's disappearance towards the Fortunate Islands, and his long looked-for return from those imaginary Elysian Fields, the Suvarna-Dwip of Sanskrit theology. [Suvarna-Dwip is the name by which Ireland was known by those to whom Father Abraham was known; and was the place to which their descendants, later, swarmed, when driven out of Pali-stan by him whom they have handed down to posterity as "Joshua the son of Nun, the Robber."])

                                         Joshua, man of God & second Moses

He, Jeremiah, had, as we shall see, a great business to do somewhere: and he was, doubtless, under the guidance, as before he had been under the protection of Almighty God, to do it.

With respect to the reason as to why Ollam Fola might have been concluded to be a king when he was none other than a prophet, it is easy to suppose that the Conductor and Guardian of the King's Daughters, would, as guardian of these high-destinied women, be held by the vulgar, and by the Bards also in course of time, as himself a king. The character, also, which he had, the position he filled, and the relation in which he stood towards them and God, in Whose Name he spoke and Whom he represented (2 Cor. 5:20), would necessarily inspire that admiration and profound respect for the man, which, the kings who knew him readily according him, would, by the same vulgar, be interpreted into kingship over them. Hence all the exaggerated statements concerning the wonderful phantom, Ollam-Fola-Heremon: of whom and whose imaginary character the poet Moore feels constrained, albeit with great respect for the illustrious dead, to speak in the following philosophic terms:-"

"Among the numerous kings, that, in this dim period of Irish history, pass like shadows before our eyes, the Royal Sage, Ollamh Fodhla, is almost the only one, who, from the strong light of tradition thrown round him, stands out as a being of historical substance and truth. It would serve to illustrate the nature and extent of the evidence with which the world is sometimes satisfied, to collect together the various celebrated names which are received as authentic, on the strength of tradition alone; and few, perhaps, could claim a more virtual title to this privilege than the great legislator of the Irish, Ollamh Fodhla. In considering the credit, however, that may safely be attached to the accounts of this celebrated personage, we must dismiss wholly from our minds, the extravagant antiquity assigned to him by the Seneachies; and as it has been shown that the date of the dynasty itself, of which he was so distinguished an ornament, cannot, at the utmost, be removed further back than the second century before our era, whatever his fame may thus lose in antiquity, it will be found to gain in probability; since, as we shall see, when I come to treat of the Irish annals, the epoch of this monarch, if not within the line to which authentic history extends, is, at least, not very far beyond it." Moore's Ireland, vol. i. 113, 114.

"In fixing the period of this Monarch's reign, chronologers have been widely at variance. While some place it at no less than 1316 years before the Christian Era" (the time of Gideon), "Plowden makes it 960 years" (the time of Jeroboam), "O'Flaherty, between 700 and 800" (the time of the Israelitish Dispersion), "and the author of the Dissertations, Mr. C. O'Connor, of Balanagare, about 600." [The time. of the besieging of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, being, according to Hales, 602 B.C.]
This extravagant difference in the fixing the era of the most distinguished man that ever lived in Ireland, to say nothing of Mr. Moore's own further reduction of 400 years in the antiquity of the illustrious individual, shows that there is still a great want of information as to the realities of the case.

Possibly, when historians shall have agreed to the propriety of un-king-ing the man who was no king, and dislodging him from the imaginary dynasty, to all the exigencies of the theories concerning which this official's life and acts have been made to conform, his true place and time in history may be more easily determined than is now the case; while the truth established in this so-important an instance, may become the stand-point for the rectification of a great deal of other matter: matter very valuable in itself, but quite unusable from the heterogeneous inter-comminglings of Persons and Things, which Irish Tradition now so often presents to the anxious inquirer after truth and facts.

Mr. Moore's observations on this point are,-"It is a task ungracious and painful, more especially to one accustomed from his early days to regard, through a poetic medium, the ancient fortunes of his country, to be obliged, at the stern call of historical truth, not only to surrender his own illusions on the subject, but to undertake also the invidious task of dispelling the dreams of others who have not the same imperative motives of duty or responsibility for disenchanting themselves of so agreeable an error. That the popular belief in this national tale should so long have been cherished and persevered in, can hardly be a subject of much wonder. .. . Even in our own times, all the most intelligent of those writers who have treated of ancient Ireland, have each, in turn, adopted the tale of the Milesian Colonization, and lent all the aid of their learning and talent to elevate it into history.

But, even in their hands the attempt has proved an utter failure: nor could any effort, indeed, of ingenuity succeed in reconciling the improbabilities of a story, which in no other point of view differs from the fictitious origins invented for their respective countries by Humbold, Suffridius, Geoffroy Monmouth, and others, than in having been somewhat more ingeniously put together, and far more fondly persevered in by the imaginative people, whose love of high ancestry it flatters, and whose wounded pride it consoles. Suffridius was a fabricator of fictitious origins for the Frisons, as Humbold was an inventor in the same line for the Franks; the latter founding his fictions professedly on Druidical remains. There is scarcely a nation, indeed, in Europe, which has not been provided thus with some false scheme of antiquity; and it is a fact, mournfully significant, that the Irish are now the only people among whom such visionary pretensions are still clung to with any trust."

" Had the Bards, in their account of the early settlements, so far followed the natural course of events as to place that colony they wished to have considered as the original of the Irish people at the commencement instead of at the end of the series, we should have been spared, at least, those difficulties of chronology, which, at present, beset the whole scheme .. . The ideal colony - the Milesian Settlement - which ought to have been placed beyond the bounds of authentic record, where its inventors would have had free scope for their flights, has, on the contrary, been introduced among known personages and events, and compelled to adjust itself to the unpliant neighbourbood of facts: while on the other hand accredited beings of history, have, by the interposition of this shadowy intruder, been separated, as it were, from the real world, and removed into distant regions of time, where sober chronology would in vain attempt to reach them." (According to the calculation of the Bards, the arrival of the Belgae, for example, must have been, at least, 1500 years before the Christian era.)

"It is true, the more moderate of the Milesian believers, on being made aware of these chronological difficulties, have surrendered the remote date at first assigned to the event; and, in general, content themselves with fixing it near 1000 years later. But this remove, beside that it exposes the shifting foundation on which the whole history rests, serves but to render its gross anachronisms and improbabilities still more glaring .. . When brought near the daylight of modern history, and at the distance of nearly a thousand years from their pretended progenitors, it is plain that these Milesian heroes, at once, shrink into mere shadows of fable." - Moore, pp. 91.123.

Seen from our point of view, the dignity of the great Ollam Fola of Irish Tradition has hardly been magnified beyond due proportions, as men, in those times, would see and feel what they understood, (i.e., were able to understand,) of his position, and of the great powers with which he, if our conjecture be the truth of the case, was endowed: particularly if the Papal view of such endowments can invest even the pretender to such, with a grandeur, in presence of which, that of kings and emperors must pale; and out of the assumption of which, upon no authority but his own assurance, a Christian bishop has been found to magnify himself into, and has found others to make of him, a King of kings, and Lord of lords, and further dared to act, the Mighty Ruler of Princes.

The words thus applied by Jehovah to the office of the Prophet Jeremiah having been those upon which the Bishops of Rome established their travesty of Almighty Power on Earth, over kings, emperors, and states: as is clear from the Preamble to the Bull of Pope Pius V., by which that Bishop of Rome thought to deprive the Queen of England of her throne and power:-

"Pius, Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God. He, Who reigneth in the highest .. hath committed to me, .. Church .. to one alone upon Earth, .. the Bishop of Rome, to be governed in fulness of power. .. Him alone, He made Prince over all people, with power to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant, and build."

The word, of the Lord to Jeremiah were, - "See, I have set thee over the nations, and over the kingdoms, to root out, to pull down, to destroy and to throw down, to build and to plant."
I have, however, no desire to encumber my hypothesis, with any argument, as to whether the Ollam Fodhla of Irish Tradition is, or is not a mistake for Jeremiah the Prophet. I feel that the case of the presence of the illustrious Seer in Ireland is made out on other grounds; that, indeed, he must have been the transporter of the Stone, the conductor of "the King's Daughters" and the planter of the Standard of Judah, in Ireland. I was satisfied of this, long before I heard a word of the Legend, of his having been Instructor to the great warrior Finn McCoyle, or even of the existence of this Ollam Fola. 

But as the existing history of Ollam Fola is inconsistent with itself, .. as his kingship is evidently a fiction, while the facts of his reality and his wisdom cannot be denied; .. and as, moreover, the chronology of the real individual is brought down to accord with the times of the Prophet; and as his acts are exactly those that the Prophet's acts would have been had he had the power to do as he would have felt it to be his duty to do, viz. the establishing an order of learned men to carry on the knowledge of that Law, the Tara, which he certainly would have brought with him and left them, with that office of Jodhan Moran, of which he was evidently the introducer, - I submit,

1. That the Eochaid-Ollam-Fola-Heremon-Ardri of fiction, is, when reduced to its proper elements, the description of two officials instead of one person:-

2. That the Eochaid Ollam Fola, when divested of the royalty which belongs to the first of the last two words of this pretentious name, and of the Pentarchate expressed by the last, is the Jeremiah of reality:-

3. That the two last words belong to the King contemporary with him, the King Pentarch at the time of the Prophet's arrival in Ireland, and who married the Princess from the East:-

4. That the word Eochaid as prefixed to the words Olla-Fola, is an adjective characteristic of respect, such as we are accustomed to use towards the ancient chronicler, the Venerable Bede:

The word Each'd, evidently the same as Eocaid, means "History," "Annals." "The ancient Records and Chronicles of the kingdom were ordered to be written and carefully preserved at Tara, by Ollav Fola," -more Hebraico? - "and these formed the basis of the ancient history of Ireland called the Psalter of Tara." - Annals of the Four Masters, note, p. 297. Well, therefore, did Ollam Fola deserve the immortalization of the epithet, "The Chronicler." Vide also Moore, i. 114.

5, and lastly. That, in the capacity and character thus assigned to him, as the Prophet-Restorer of the Monarchy of Judah, the Ollam Fola of Tara, Chronicler, Sage, and Lawgiver, divested of both Pentarchy and Royalty, is more worthy of the exaltation given him in the Dome of the Four Courts in the Irish Capital, than any other would be, though entitled to the dignity of all the adjuncts through which Ollam Fola has been presented to the world, since the true knowledge of the real man became lost to the generations which succeeded him.


"FAIL, simply, appears to have been a favourite epithet." - p. 328.

"Verily it shall be well with thy remnant. Verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of affliction." - Jer. 15:11.

F.R.A. Glover: Ireland has had many names. She is now Hibernia, and Erin, and "the Emerald Isle;" but she has been Inis Ealga, the Noble; and Fioah-Inis, the Woody; and Crioch Fuiniah, the Final, - similar to Finis-Terre, and the Land's End. And we read that "Inis-Fail, it was also called, after the Lia-Fail; and 'Fail,' simply, appears to have been a favourite epithet. The Danans also gave Ireland the names of Eire, Fodhla, and Barba, from three of their queens, being beautiful and euphonious in sound." And people, it seems, credit this nonsense! "Erin also; and Ierne, the Sacred Isle; Plutarch calls it Ogygia, or 'The ancient land.' Roman writers call it Iuverna, Iuvernia, Ouvernia, Ibernia, Ierna, and Vernia, and Caesar called it first Hibernia." - Annals of the Four Masters, (Notes), 388. 90-1.

But a principal name for the famous Island has been Scotia Vetus; and Scotia Major, to distinguish it from Hibernian Scotland; then called, Scotia Minor: though now known, mostly, as Scotland. - 391.
But if Ireland has had many names, she has had as many reasons assigned for some of her names; for Scotia, for example, there are not less than nine given: as Sir Wm. Betham has shown in his Gael and Cymbri, p. xi-xiv. Hence, one may collect that not much is known about the reality of the case. A lady is honoured as being the cause of this effect: Scota, the daughter or wife of Gathelus. But as she and her illustrious companion are assigned to very early times, and the word Scotia was never beard of as a name for Ireland earlier than the third century after Christ, that celebrated lady may be set aside with all the other ladies, whose names were always at hand, with Bards and Annalists, to give a name to Ireland whenever a reason had to be assigned for what chroniclers had heard of, as an adjective descriptive of their Island, and they were unable otherwise to account for.

As this name is not on record earlier than the times that the Greeks were masters of the Seas and of the trade of the World, .. and as the men of that day would talk of "going into the Darkness" as now an American would speak of "going down West" .. and as considerable emigration had taken place at different times from Phoenicia, and those who had emigrated would be considered as having "gone West," or "into the Darkness," .. and hence, as living in the West, the Finis-Terre, they would be designated generally the Skoti, (Gk.) it is clear that the Greek word, Skotia, Darkness, is the etymology of a word which came to be used to convey the idea of the local habitation of those who had gone West. This was the word by which Ireland was universally known, after the time when men understood Greek nautical terms. Porphyry, in the third century, is the first writer who called the Irish Scoti. By the same name they are known ever after by St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, and the poet Claudian, and so downwards to the eleventh century. "Pinkerton says, 'From the consent of all antiquity, the name of Scoti, belonged to the Irish alone.'" Annals of the Four Masters p.390-1, notes.

Whether or not the above suggestion gives the true origin of the name, Scotia, for Ireland, we know, that as the Sun-Rising, Anatolee, where the light first shows in the morning stood for the East, with the Greeks; so, skotia, darkness, is in the West, where the light vanishes in the evening; that there, Ireland, was certainly, by the Greeks, known to be; and that Scotia, its name, is a Greek word, signifying Darkness.

The, object in thus depriving the celebrated princess, Scota, of her name and honours is to show, that the assertion with respect to the Lady with the "euphonious'" name, Fodhla, may be as void of foundation as the existence of her, who has been supposed to have given a name to Ireland for a thousand years, and to Scotland to the present time. The Princess Fola, as much gave a name to Ireland as did the Lady Scota, who never existed. The name Fola, is, evidently, a corruption of a known word that did exist, and did give a name to Ireland; a name which is, proveably, not Irish at all, because it is Hebrew. That a queen had to do with it, is possible, is probable; but it was not in her name as a woman: it was altogether on other and higher grounds. The woman had a destiny; a great destiny: and it was the word that identified her with that, which she and the Island had in common. The meaning of the Irish-Hebrew compound Innis-phail, is, the Isle of Destiny; from Inis, an Island; and Fail, Mystery or Destiny.

If Ireland were indeed ever named Inis-Fola, Fola is not so far, in sound, from Fail, as are a good many alleged kindred etymologies from their assumed cognates: and if, as a matter of fact, as the island of Fola, it became Inis-Fola by the same rule of construction that the island of Fate or Fail became Inis-Fail, .. and that Ireland were called, anywhere, in this connexion, Inis-Fola, would any doubt exist in the mind of the philologist, that the two words Inis-Fail and Inis-Fola had been confounded? .. the one taken for the other? .. that they meant, in fact, the same thing, and were the same word, somewhat differently pronounced?

Those -who are accustomed to accept of such transmutations as St. Coemgere into St. Kevin, and again Koemin or Caymin into the same Kevin, will hardly make a difficulty in finding in Inis-Fola and Inis-Fail two words expressive of the same thing, and therefore of the same meaning. - See Ledwich's History and Antiquities of Ireland. -Art. Glendalough, p. 174.

But, as in this case, the word in question was common to the Man, and the Princess; and as the Man, the Woman, and the Stone all came on the stage at the same time, doubtless, the word belongs to them all; and is the same word, modified by time; or, changed by bardic imaginations to fit fanciful ideas. The stone was the Stone of Destiny:- the woman in whose destiny and joint agency the perpetual sceptre of Judah was again set up and identified, was a Woman of Destiny:- the High Ollam, the founder of the order of Ollams, he who proclaimed the destiny, remembrance of which, the Order that he founded, was ever to keep fresh in men's minds, and who sanctified the whole with a grand inauguration, and re-consecration of the Stone - the Stone of Witness to the great destiny of the people to whom it belonged -was, properly, the Ollam of Destiny. So that the meaning of the word would seem to be, not that of the subsequently written word, Fodhla, "learning," which would be a mere reduplication of its conjunct, Ollam, - but a meaning which would cover and be common to the whole transaction.

The priest who proclaimed the destiny, viz. that the Stone, the Race, and the Standard should abide until the time of their restoration to the East, was an Ollam of Destiny, i.e. a prophet. He proclaimed the same, as connected with the Woman of Destiny, enthroned, doubtless, with her husband on the Stone of Destiny; that Lia-Fail, after which the Island was certainly named: .. even that same Pillar of Witness which Jacob set up at Bethel the morning after his vision, and consecrated, then and there, unto the Lord, in proof of his confidence that the DESTINY promised to Abraham and confirmed to himself, would be fulfilled in the fortunes of his Children. See Gen. 28:13, 15.

And who are, and where now are, these Children? Has the destiny foretold failed? Were not rather, a Remnant, entirely contrary to what might have been ordinarily looked for, well-treated of the Baalitish enemy, when, in the day of Judah's affliction, and of the Remnant's wandering, they honoured them by giving to their own Island a new name in the Jew's language, and, in honour of their faith and hope?


"What nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, in all that they call upon him for?" -Deut. 4:7

WE learn from unexceptionable authority, that "the Rabbi in the Talmud say, that the Messias shall be called Joden Muren, for He shall be the Judge, as in Isaiah 11. Thus it is very plain that the Irish name is derived from the Chaldee, Choshen Hemeshpot, or Joden Muran." J. Heidegger, Prof Ling. Oriental. apud Keating.

F.R.A. Glover: The mention of the existence of this Official, so named, is constantly on record in Irish history.

The words themselves, according to the application made of them by the above authorities, are the highest prophecy of The High Being whose advent was to be.

How is it possible to account for these words of prophecy and its concomitant events being understood, or being at all, in Ireland, at that time? .. the promise also of the perpetual sceptre, and the promised return to the East, - all alike indicative of the expectation of the Shiloh in the East, - but in the presence, there, of the mind, of what we know would, under the circumstances, have been the mind of Jeremiah? This can point only to Jeremiah.

Again, why was this Hebrew phrase incorporated into the nomenclature of a foreign people? Does not this fact exhibit strikingly the influence which the Hebrew introducer of this Office and Title must have had with those whom he persuaded, in recognizing the office, as well, to adopt a Hebrew name for it?

Whence this influence of this strange man with this Baalitish people, in the things of God, but that it was felt, or believed, he was a messenger of God? If they believed this, it must have been because he declared he was. And who could have so declared, at that time, in Ireland, but Jeremiah? He not only was, - he was so by special appointment, - "prophet to the nations," but the prophet as well who had the duty to perform "to plant and to build" the kingdom of the Lord wherever he came: namely, that of resuscitated Judah, the perpetuity of which he had been so expressly commanded to declare I? (Jer. 33:17, 21, 26)

Jeremiah, also, had been instructed, commanded in a very especial manner, on two several occasions, (Jer. 23, 32) to declare the advent of The Righteous Judge of Isaiah and the SHILOH Of Jacob (Gen. 48:10), at whose appearance Judah should be saved, and Israel dwell safely and, "out of the north Country," restored "to its own land."

Now, the Jodhan Moran of Irish history was, when first that name was assumed, the Prophetic Impersonation of this SHILOH; that gatherer-up of all the promises "spoken by all the holy prophets since the world began." (Acts 3:21) And the fact of an Official assuming, in the Name of God, this highest of all earthly titles, showed, that he who assumed it, and in assuming proclaimed it, and proclaimed the doctrine involved in it, knew what he was about; and that he know also what, his duty it was, to state. He who set up this office, in these words, could only have been Jeremiah.

Keating says, "The famous Moran was one of the chief judges of this kingdom (Ireland). When he sat upon the bench to administer justice, he put his miraculous JODHAN MORAN about his neck " [by a chain], "which had that wonderful power, that if the judge pronounced an unjust decree, the breastplate would instantly contract itself, and encompass the neck so close that it would be impossible to breathe; but, if he delivered a just sentence, it would open itself and hang loose upon his shoulders."

The Jodhan Moran is a character who appears not only in the pages of Keating, but over and over again on the stage of Irish History; but the gold insignia of the Office having been exhumed more than once from the bogs of Ireland, into which they may have been cast, or buried, in times of trouble, no more doubt can exist as to the reality of tho Office, than of Tara itself, or of any other fact well authenticated by circumstantial evidence. A golden collar or breastplate, supposed by Vallancey to be the Jodhan Moran, was found, some years since, in the county of Limerick, twelve feet deep in a bog. "It is made of thin plated gold, and chased in a very neat and workmanlike manner; the breastplate is single, but the hemispherical ornaments at the top are lined throughout with another thin plate of pure gold." Collectan. Hibern. No. 13. The traditional memory of this chain or collar (says O'Flanigan) is so well preserved to this day, that it is a common expression for a person asseverating absolute truth to say, " I would swear by Moran's chain for it." - Trans. of Gaelic Soc. vol. i. apud Moore.

It seems then, thus, that there was once an officer in Ireland, a chief justiciary, whose office not only gave him great influence, but that it was, at one time, believed to be endowed - as was that of the Hebrew High Priest - with miraculous powers.

Dismissing all consideration of the marvelous from this case, the doctrine set forth, by this teacher, was good. It inculcated the direct interference of Almighty God to overrule the acts of His servants, for His people's good; for he who dispensed justice in the name of The Righteous Judge was necessarily God's servant (Deut. 4:7); while the promise which the title itself implied, was the highest then, or since known by Revelation; namely, the coming of a GREAT ONE, - in Whose Name this Witness for God presented himself to the People, - to bring in Universal Righteousness and renovate the Earth (Acts 3:21): a doctrine which was, as we shall see, proclaimed in the title itself of this grand officer of state.

The full import of this Phrase, can only be arrived at, by quoting the chapter referred to by the Talmudist, and those chapters in the Book of Jeremiah which declare the same truth of the same great person, alleged, by the Talmudist, to be the Messiah.

The Judge in Isaiah 11, then, is, "a Root out of the Stem of Jesse; and, a Branch is to grow out of his Roots; and which, in that day, is to stand for an Ensign to the people: to it shall the Gentiles seek, and his Rest shall be glorious." It is He who is to be, THE RIGHTEOUS JUDGE. He is, to "set up the Ensign for the nations," .. to assemble "the outcasts of Israel," and gather together "the dispersed of Judah" from the "four corners of the earth."

When? In the day in which THE STONE is to return to the East, whence it came?

The same is He who is spoken of in Jeremiah 23, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a Righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute JUDGMENT and JUSTICE (="The Righteous Judge") on the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is the name by which he" [the Righteous Judge] "shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS."

When? In the day that the Stone is to return to the East, whence it came?

And, again, when Jeremiah was in prison (Jer.33:1) for foretelling the destruction of Judah, he was informed, and instructed especially to set the testimony before the people, "Behold, the days come, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the House of Israel "- (then already 180 years scattered and lost to sight, - almost to memory, and never, even yet, restored or recovered) - "and to the House of Judah:" then about to be cut off with a severity amounting, to an entire excision of the males of the Royal Line of Judah, which also came to pass; for there was no King of the House of Judah to resume the throne on the return from the captivity. And yet, notwithstanding, the Prophet was instructed to say, "In those days, and, at that time, will I cause the Branch of Righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute Judgment and Righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely. And this is the name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. For thus saith the Lord, David shall never want a man to sit upon the Throne of the House of Israel."

In those days! When? In the day that the Stone which came from the East is to return to the East, whence it came?

                                                                Jesus walks on water

It is impossible not to see that these three portions of Holy Writ are identical: and that, therefore, what appertains to one of them, is inseparable from the other two; referring all of them, as they do, to the same person, The Righteous Judge, The Branch of Judah; therefore, to the same time, and to the same great event; and, therefore, to all its concomitants. That event, which we call the second Advent of the Lord Jesus, the Jews before Christ considered, even as the present "dispersed of Judah" consider it, the Coming of Messiah; .. that Shiloh of Jacob, until the time of Whose appearance, the sceptre of Judah was never to disappear from the earth as a Reality and a Power (Gen. 49:10). So, if Jeremiah had been made to pronounce its excision (Jer. 22: 28,30; 36:30), and was in prison because he did so in obedience to the word of the Lord, he was called upon, at the same time, in accordance with his own belief, to record and reiterate that it could be no more than a partial eclipse of the promised perpetuity of enduring continuance of the Royal Line; inasmuch as he was made to conclude the message with the remarkable promises in the succeeding parts of the chapter. (Jer. 33:17, 20-26)

Here, then, is the authority for Jeremiah to pronounce, as he would set up the Stone of Jacob any where, and anoint it with oil again, as it had been anointed aforetime (Gen. 28:48), at Bethel, that, God would not leave it until He had done by it, and those to whom it should belong and should belong of right, all of which He had spoken to our Father, Jacob (Gen. 28:15): viz. that the sceptre should abide with it, until the time of its return to the place whence it came; .. the time that Shiloh, The Righteous Judge, should come to manifest Himself to the nations, to restore Jerusalem to Judah, and "their own Land, to Israel." Now all this knowledge was evidently in the mind of him, who, in the Name and in the Character of the Branch of Jesse, set up, in The Righteous Judge, the witness for GOD in Ireland: the witness to Him Who was to come, in fulfillment of the words of Isaiah and of the prophet Jeremiah, before spoken in Judea.

Who then, we ask, could have done that, at that time, and have dared to conceive of the Stone, and to pronounce of it, and connect with it, the words and promise of the Legend, but this very Prophet, Jeremiah, himself? - he, who alone knew, and was able to see through, the mystery Of the CUT-OFF, and to-be-resuscitated House of Judah? .. "cut off," for the breaking of Sabbaths, themselves; .. for promising to the Lord and keeping it not, in breaking the law of the Sabbatical year to their slaves (Jer. 34); .. for despising the Prophets; .. for cutting up the word of the Lord and burning it in the fire (Jer 36:23); .. for these and like things "cut off," but to be resuscitated. "King (Jer. 33:17-18) and priest", "not by bow, nor sword, nor battle, nor horses, nor horsemen" (Hos 1:7) - by what then? - by influence (Jer. 15:11) - "by the Lord their God;" (Hos 1:7) because God would not fail Jacob, whom He had promised, nor Abraham whom He had loved; (Deut 7:8) nor David, to whom Nathan had been commanded to say, "Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever." (2 Sam. 7:16)

Here, then, are two very extraordinary things; with respect to the Man, and with respect to the Stone. What we have chiefly to consider, as concerning the man, in connexion with the Legend of the Stone is, that the phrase, "The Righteous Judge," is itself, a Prophecy of His future appearance to restore Israel to "his own," and "his own" to Israel. He who knew of The Righteous Judge, must have known the concomitants of the Prophecy: for, by the parallel passages quoted, that is all contained in the proper knowledge of this one phrase: and none knew this so well as Jeremiah; Isaiah having been dead, and the Prophet having twice given forth the same grand prophecy of Isaiah, with amplifications.

The Righteous Judge, of the Root of Jesse, would be in the East; and the Stone was to go back to the East; until when, a Sceptre was to continue with it: that is, until Shiloh, The Branch, The Righteous Judge, would be manifested. What is, then, the Legend of the Stone, supposing it to have been pronounced by a proper authority, but a paraphrase of the prophecy, "The Sceptre shall not depart from Judah until Shiloh come?"

There are, thus, unmistakable indications of a Prophet having been in Ireland at that remote time: and what Prophet of the Lord but Jeremiah, - consecrated the "Prophet to the Gentiles" in his mother's womb, - could have had any business there? He had; and he was able to go there.

And while he had also, as we have already seen, good reasons for going somewhere, Jeremiah's peculiar doctrine is found in Ireland, where he is, also, said to have gone: a doctrine, which, in so far as we can see, could hardly have been taken there by any but himself. Thus, he, and the business which he had to do somewhere, appear on the Scene, in Ireland, at Tara, at the very time that he was free to go where he listed: which business, as done at Tara, nobody else beside himself could have had, at that time, either knowledge, or authority, or power to do, as we now discover, and consequently, know, it to have been done.

Hence, it is concluded, with entire conviction of the truth of the conclusion, that, if the accounts of the presence of the Jodhan Moran in Ireland be true, Jeremiah the Prophet, and Jeremiah alone, was, could be, the only then living being, who was able to know, do, and say, and be justified in saying at that time, that, which the account declares to have been known, done, and said, with respect to the Stone of Destiny, then, at Tara, in Ireland: and that he accordingly was there, and did it.

It will, consequently, be clear, from the foregoing, that the fact of the Prophet Jeremiah having been in Ireland, requires no other evidence to establish it, than that of this one fact, even if it stood alone; viz. the certainty of the existence of this Official with this significant Title, to illustrate and give sense to the Legend of the Stone.


"And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the Lord God of Abraham thy Father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of. And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it." - Gen. 28:13-15, 18.

F.R.A. Glover: Next, with respect to the Stone of Destiny, it is in the Legend itself, attached to it, that we have the highest evidence of a priestly presence in the inaugurator of the Stone; and, herein, of the official and providential inauguration of the Seed of David on the Throne of Israel, to wield the Sceptre under the Standard of Judah, according to the intimation in the last words of the tenth verse of the first chapter of the book of Jeremiah; - for he had "to build and to plant," a kingdom.

The Stone came from the East;-Wherever it be, a Sceptre is to be with it;-And it is to return to the East, whence it came.But what is this Stone, to which this important Legend is attached?

It is that Eastern, Hebraish, MATERiAL FACT, already spoken of, and which is the first, there enumerated, of the Signs of Judah in England.

Where is it?

This Stone is in the Coronation Throne - Seat of the Kings of England. [JML: Now returned to Scotland]. It is called by some, THE STONE or, DESTINY; in Irish, LIA-FAIL; and by the English, 


Why is it where it is?

In his Essay on Certain Monuments of Antiquity, Mr. Weaver says, p. 118, - "It appears that the Irish kings, from very ancient times until A.D. 513, were crowned upon a particular sacred stone, called 'Liath Fail,' 'the Stone of Destiny;' that so, also, were the Scottish kings until the year 1296; when Edward I. of England brought it here: and it is a curious fact, that this stone has not only remained in England until now, and is existing still under the Coronation-Chair of our British Sovereigns in Westminster Abbey, but that all our Kings, from James I., have been crowned in that Chair. This being a fact so curious, we shall quote its particulars in a note, as taken from Toland, in his 'History of the Druids' (pp. 137-9), and from Mr. Edward O'Reilly, author of the 'Irish Dictionary,' in his letter to Sir William Betham, and inserted in his Irish Antiquarian Researches.'

                          Druids were mediators between men & God like the Hebrew Levites

"Toland's statement is this: 'The Fatal Stone (Liag fail), so called, was the stone on which the supreme kings of Ireland used to be inaugurated, in times of heathenism, on the hill of Tarah; it was superstitiously sent to confirm the Irish colony in the North of Great Britain, where it continued as the Coronation-Seat of the Scottish Kings ever since Christianity; till, in the year 1300, Edward 1. of England brought it from Scone, placing it under the Coronation-Chair at Westminster, and there it still continues. I had almost forgot to tell you, that it is now called by the vulgar, Jacob's Stone, as if this had been Jacob's Pillow at Bethel.'

So far Toland. Now we extract O'Reilly's account. Speaking of 'Leath Fail' he says:

'All our Irish historical writers, ancient and modern, tell us that it was a large stone of extraordinary virtue brought into Ireland; that the monarchs of Ireland, from A.M. 2764 [see later for correction of this date] to A.D. 513, were all inaugurated on the Lia Fail, which, until that period, was kept at Tara in Meath, the chief seat of the Irish monarchs. At this last-mentioned period, Muisceortagh (Murkertagh) reigned; Fergus, his brother, having established for himself a kingdom in Alba, or, as it has been since called, Scotland, procured from his brother the Lia Fail, that on it he might, with the greater solemnity, be inaugurated king over his new possession. The Stone was never returned to Ireland, but remained in Scotland; and each succeeding king of Scotland was crowned thereon until Edward I. of England invaded that country, A.D. 1296, and carried off into his own country the Scottish regalia, among which was the Lia Fail. From that period to the present day it has remained in England; and ever since the reign of James I. has continued to serve the purpose for which it was so long used in Ireland and Scotland; the kings of England from his time down to the present sovereign having been crowned on it.'"

With respect to the Stone, we have seen that the date assigned for the presence of Lia Fail in Ireland, viz. advent of the Ollam Fola is B.C. 600. Jerusalem was destroyed and the great fact of the Captivity took place, B.C. 602.

If then the Stone which we have, be Jacob's Pillow, it must have been conveyed to Ireland, certainly not before the time of Jeremiah; but most probably by him, and for some purpose. We set about now ,
First, to prove; that he might have taken it;

Next, we ask what his object would have been in taking it out of the East at all?

Thirdly, we have to show, that, whoever took it, it was set up under such attendant circumstances at Tara, as fit none but a man whose pretensions and authority were such as were those pertaining to Jeremiah;

Fourthly, accompanied, as he might have been, by some member of the Family of David. A series of evidence which seems only to want the confirmation, the direct assertion furnished by tradition, that he was, personally, in Ireland, to establish firmly the fact that, Jeremiah having been himself in Ireland, he did, therefore, take with him the Stone, and set it up as a Pillar of Witness, as had been done by it aforetime, and pronounce a blessing upon it. The substance of this has been handed down to posterity, in the very terms of the legend.

If Jeremiah took the Stone, all the marvels about Tara, its Eastern Princess, its Judge, and Mysterious Priest, and the Law, are not only solved, but are necessary events. If it be Jacob's Pillow, and set up by Jeremiah, there is sense in the legend; otherwise, it is an absurdity, and something worse.

1. The Prophet might have taken the Stone.

In the year 602 B.C. Jerusalem was taken by king Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon; and, so considerable a portion of the people was carried away, that, after the raid, made upon the remnant left behind, by Ishmael the son of Nethaniah (Jer.41), and the subsequent migration of the remains of the remnant, the place was (Jer. 43:7) almost entirely deserted. (Jer. 41:10, 43:4-7)

On the departure of the main body for Babylon, the prophet Jeremiah was allowed the option, by the monarch, to go to Babylon (Jer. 40:4), or to remain behind (Jer. 39:12, 40:4). For reasons best known to himself (Jer. 40:6), he decided to remain at Jerusalem, i.e., at Mizpah; and he made use of this licence to secure those invaluable endowments of the first temple, which, if lost, could never be replaced. Accordingly, we read in 2 Maccabees, 2:4-7, "It was also contained in the same writing, that the prophet, being warned of God, commanded the Tabernacle and the Ark to go with him, as he went forth into the mountain, where Moses climbed up, and saw the heritage of God. And when Jeremiah came thither, he found an hollow cave, wherein he laid the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of incense, and so stopped the door. And some of those that followed him came to mark the way, but they could not find it. Which, when Jeremiah perceived, he blamed them, saying, As for that place, it shall be unknown until the time that God gather His people again together, and receive them unto mercy."

At this time Jacob's Pillow was an object of hardly less veneration, in Jerusalem, than the miraculous furniture in the Temple: and, as we find that in the subsequent capture of Jerusalem by the Caliph Omar, in his veneration for the stone shown to him by the patriarch as Jacob's Pillow, he immediately ordered a mosque to be built over it, in honour of it (and which we know to have been a fictitious "pillow," - for we have the true one) we have herein pointed out to us, with sufficient certainty, the place where the ante-captivity Jews had set up this National Stone; the sacred memento of the promises of national greatness, made to their father Jacob, when he dreamed his dream at Bethel.
We learn from Hosea that the temple of Bethel had come to be changed, in the language of prophetical denunciation, from Beth-el to the contemptuous name of Beth-aven, "The house of nought;" which would hardly have been the case, had "the Pillar of Witness" been the foundation of its altar.

Was, then, Jeremiah the man, - it having been shown that he did care for one set of Holy Things, - to disregard the existence, or be careless, of this other Holy Thing? For it was a consecrated thing; and it lay deep, so to speak, in the fundamental traditions of the Empire.

The Stone, then, being a conspicuous object among the holy things belonging to the holy city, we may be sure that the prophet no more neglected to take care of and for it, than he did for the things which be set in the cave. In some such cave, therefore, or in some other safe place, he doubtless secreted it; possibly in the same in which Baruch had secreted by burying in an earthen vessel, "The Evidences" of his purchase (Jer. 32:14). In such case, therefore, he would be able to lay his hands upon it readily, when he returned to the Land of Judah, with the small number that escaped the sword in Egypt (Jer. 44:28).

And when subsequently, on his arrival, he considered the duty that lay upon him, according to the injunctions of his first commission over the nations, "to plant and to build," (Jer. 1:10) coupled with the impossibility of his doing so within the land of Judea, which was to be in bondage for seventy years, (Jer. 25:12) - and he himself was now fifty-six years old, [by computation] - and therefore felt the necessity of going thence, and that he had authority to do so; the absence of all the Jews of influence, and the fact of the authority he had with the Babylonish Lieutenant (Jer. 39:12), would make the removal of the cherished Stone to him a matter of no difficulty: whereas the Jews with him, and also the Babylonish officer, would have absolutely forbid its being removed by any other person but Jeremiah.

2. But what reason could the prophet Jeremiah have for desiring to remove this stone?

In proportion as was the veneration of the nation for this Stone, as a National Emblem, - one representing the destiny of the nation, - so might a man who had the intention, and felt the duty weighing upon him, to re-establish the Sceptre of Judah, towards the reunion of "the Two Families " of Israel, very well feel the necessity of being accompanied by such a National Muniment; and, as his determination was to make flight by sea, - for the hypothesis is that he came to an island, - to some distant land, there would be no hindrance to his carrying with him that, which would be an almost unbearable burden by land. The present form of the Stone indicates its having been reduced from its original shape (The stone is 26 inches long, 16.75 broad, and 10.5 thick; and a little broader at one end than at the other); possibly to make it manageable for its journey from Jerusalem to the sea-shore, under circumstances of difficulty.

3. The Stone being found at Tara, in Ireland, and at the time that it was bound, as it were, to disappear from Judea, and the Legend attaching to it being what we know it to be, none but Jeremiah could have been the declarer of such a Legend.

Not alone because of the foregoing; but because no other person could have pronounced the legend concerning perpetuity and promise of return. For who could have been authorized to say such things, of any Stone? If any body but he had said any thing like this, at that time, it would have been nonsense if he did not believe what he said, or, blasphemy if he did: i.e., to prophesy without authority. But if Jeremiah said such words, they were not only the evidence of his perfect faith in his mission and pregnant with meaning, but strictly what he was well authorized to do. For his commission was, "to plant and to build." What? Trees and Houses? No, but an Empire, on a foundation which should last, "until Shiloh, to whom the gathering of the people should be, should appear." To the Jews the prophet had been sent as the minister of God's judgment "to root out, to pluck up, and to destroy" their Polity for their multiplied iniquities; but he was, in the same decree, named as the messenger "to the nations" to proclaim the Power of God, and to make it manifest among, them by the re-establisbing of the Sceptre of Judah (Jer. 1:10), and to confirm it with a blessing and a promise.

Furthermore, it must be asserted, that if the prophet Jeremiah pronounced the Legend, feeling authority to do so, we may be sure that the terms of it will be fulfilled. And hitherto are they not? "Frustration is for the Tokens of Liars," but the Lord "confirmeth the word of His servants, and performeth the counsel of His messengers." (Isa. 44:25-6)

If then the Legend be sound, which may be assumed, as having been spoken by one who had authority, which could be no other but Jeremiah; and the facts of the case, hitherto, are not inconsistent with its being so;- and if the fulfillment of the Legend be intended - and who will venture to say that it be not? -then the Stone must be the throne of the blood royal of Judah. That is to say:-

4. The Prophet must have been accompanied by some member of the Family of David, in order to have made the prediction of possible realization.

For to a sceptre of what Stock could a Hebrew prophet promise continuance, until a return to the East, but to the sceptre of Judah? .. to a sceptre, of which Stock, to appear in the East in the promised SHILOH, as the Hebrew would very well know, uninterrupted dominion was promised. And how could a throne of David be re-established, but in the presence of those by whom a perpetuation of the race would be possible? Therefore, a man of the seed royal, or woman, must have been present, to make the promise, possible and reasonable.

But the kings and princes of the royal house had been all cut off; consequently none of them were there. "The king's daughters" had not been cut off. They were manifestly in the Prophet's company on his two forced journeys from Jerusalem; first (Jer. 41:10), with Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, towards Ammon; and last (Jer. 43:6), with Johanan the son of Kareah, to Taphnis in Egypt. When there against his will, the Prophet was commanded to escape from it, and promised safety in flight (Jer. 44:12-14), to return to Judea; and safety, consequently, to those with him, who should, in so escaping, obey the voice of the Lord (Jer. 44:28; 1:19, 15:20; 20:13).

"The king's daughters," therefore, would, for their own sakes, take care to be with him on his return to Judea. When there (Jer. 5:14), he had the opportunity of transporting thence, whithersoever he would, the Stone of Israel, the grand national relic, .. the ancient Pillar of Witness (Gen. 28:13-15, 18, 22), .. even to whatever place he would be moved to proceed "to plant and to build" (Jer. 1:10) that kingdom, -i.e., to reestablish that kingdom of Israel (Jer. 33:24),--whose restoration he had been commanded to foretell.

In Judea, it was not possible for Jeremiah to set up this resuscitated kingdom. It was to lie waste for seventy years; and the prophet was now, as we have seen, fifty-six years old. In Babylon it could not be. Neither in, nor under the protection of, Egypt could it be. Whither then was he to set about "to plant and to build" that which he had been ordained to help "to pluck up and destroy?" and set up again that Pillar of Witness, by which the Patriarch of old had handed down to the generations to come, the assurance of his Faith in the promises of God? Did "the Isles of the Sea" suggest themselves as a likely place for sanctuary to that "righteous man in the East?" or were they suggested to him?

However that may be, the fact is very remarkable, that this Stone, this Pillar of Witness to the Truth of God's Promise, and for the safety of which, it was the duty of the earnest prophet to provide, is found, later, in great repute and preservation, "in the utmost ends of the earth," away in "the Islands of the Sea," - the name by which our Islands are, to this day, known by "the dispersed of Judah;" - and is, even yet, after 2400 years, still used for the same purpose for which it was then first set up in Ireland, just about the time that it disappeared in the East: and it is, to this day, guarded as the Nation's greatest Treasure, by the nation which has charge of it, by the Constable of the National Fortress in the Heart of the Empire. And the Legend pertaining to it is as fresh as it was the day on which it was declared; namely, that it came from the East; that the blessing of God is with it, even to the guaranteeing to its possessor, a Sceptre, and to his Dynasty an abiding continuance, until the time shall arrive when it is to go back to the East from whence it came. And the Token of the Utterer has not been yet frustrated!

Is then this Stone a Talisman? or are men to be taught to consider it such?

There is no doubt, but that, as well in Scotland as in Ireland, and even later, in England, this Stone has been held, superstitiously, to be the Palladium of the Empire. But when Jacob took the Stone on which he slept, did the Patriarch consider there was any particular virtue in the Stone which he set up as a Pillar of Witness? So neither do we believe that there is any particular virtue in the Coronation Stone. The Stone may or may not be Jacob's Stone. I believe it is. It is more likely to be than not. But there is no necessity that it should be the identical Stone. What God wants is not a Stone, but faith. Faith in the Homage of the Seed Royal to the Shiloh in the East, is more than the Identity of a Stone; and he who entertains that faith will bear all the brazen blasts of the infidel deniers of Providence, unscathed. Judah will be restored to Jerusalem; and to that fact future, the Legend of the English Stone is a perpetual witness. That belief is the palladium, not only of our Empire of this world, but the guarantee of every Christian's, in that which is to come!


"I work a work in your days, which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you." - Acts 13:41.

F.R.A. Glover: Here, then, to enable us to satisfy ourselves that the Material Fact of which mention has been made, is indeed Jacob's Stone, known as his Pillar by the Jews, - to sum up the Premises, concerning both the Man and the Stone, - we have shown that, -

1. Here is a Man, a Prophet of the Lord, who had a great duty to perform:-

2. Here is a Stone, in Jerusalem, which it is the duty of that man to take care of, and to care for :-

3. At the time when a Stone, (which has come to be called Jacob's Stone,) appears in another country, the above-mentioned Prophet is free to do what, and go where, he will: so that there was no political or physical hindrance to his having taken it from Judea:-

4. That Stone, with a Hebrew name and signification, was set up in a foreign country, under the cognizance of or by a great official, the chief Justiciary of the Land, who is himself signalized by a Hebrew name, and that, a name of the highest spiritual import in Hebrew Theology:-

5. In the country in which a Stone is later found, with a Hebrew name, much accounted of, and which is, later, declared to be the above-named Stone - the certainty of which is established by its having an (unsuspected) Hebrew etymology - such a prophecy and legend is attached to its history, as none but Jeremiah could have pronounced; a blessing which it would have been his duty, under the circumstances, to have pronounced, as connected with such a stone as this Stone is declared to be:-

6. The title of the Official in whom the Stone was set up, is the equivalent of the Future Title of the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS at the time that the Stone is to resume its place in the East; and, of which time and its concomitant facts, the Church of England, in the most pointed and express manner, renews our special recognition at the most solemn season of expectation every year [See the Book of Common Prayer, "Epistle" for Pre-Advent Sunday], so identifying with it her own existence:-

7. And lastly, it is the common assertion of the People who have possession of the Stone, that it is, Jacob's Pillow.

Hence we conclude, from the foregoing Premises, interchangeably,-

1. That, if Jeremiah brought any Stone from the East, Jacob's Pillow is what he would have brought:-

2. That (while other traditions exist, altogether independently of any connexion with this subject, affirming that Jeremiah was in Ireland), as we have seen that he must have been there, and was in a position to bring the Stone, he did bring it:-

3. That, the concurrence of the time of the disappearing of the Stone known as Jacob's Pillow, from Judea, with the appearance of the Stone supposed to be Jacob's Pillow in Ireland, affords, in connexion with the foregoing considerations, a strong circumstantial proof that the two thus-named Stones, are one and the same:-

4. That, as the consciousness on the part of the Prophet of what the Stone was, coupled with that of the duty he had to perform, would have justified him in asserting of the Stone in the terms of the Legend, he certainly did so:- and finally,

5. That the necessity of otherwise accounting for the Legend and the Stone, and the Hebrew Justiciary in Ireland - not to involve here other considerations which will appear hereafter - in any reasonable way, amounts to a moral proof, - no physical hindrance opposing the possibility of the things surmised, - that these conjectures so nearly touch the realities of the case, that the main conclusion arrived at, may be considered to be the proper one, and the actual truth; which is, that the common report concerning the Stone is true. That is to say, That the Stone, which is the Throne-Seat of the Monarchs of England, is Jacob's Pillow, (or a portion of) that Stone, on which The PRINCE Of ISRAEL slept when he dreamed that dream (Gen. 28:11-12), that was the VISION and PROPHECY, and renewed assurance to the Grandson, of the future greatness on Earth of the House of his grand-Father Abraham.

If all this be so, then, indeed, of that House, its future greatness and perpetuity, the Throne and State of England is, by the interposition and providential existence of this Material Fact, the present proof and earnest: and, the Queen thereof, who is enthroned on the one, to rule over the other, as the Vicar of Jesus Christ [17 Chap. Code of Edward the Confessor - "Rex, quasi Vicarius Summi Regis, ad hoc constituitur; ut Regnum, Terram, et Populum Domini, et super omnia, Sanctam Ecclesiam Ejus, veneretur et regat, et ab injuriosis defendat."] according to God's Law, [It is much to be remembered, that while S. Sylvester, Bishop of Rome, received and accepted the title of Vicar and the Pall, the badge of Temporal Subjection, from the Emperor Constantine, - the Bishop thereby acknowledging him, the Emperor, as God's Vicar, - S. Eleutherius, Bishop of Rome, some 150 years earlier (171 to 185), had already informed Lucius the Great, King of Britain, on his conversion to Christianity, that he, Lucius, as King, was God's Vicar in his kingdom: on which expression of Eleutherius, and the doctrine it conveyed, the here-quoted law of Edward the Confessor was avowedly framed.]
["Eleutherius, then Bishop of Rome, sent the king, Lucius, as a gift, both the Old and Now Testaments, and this letter: 'You have received, in the kingdom of Britain, by God's mercy, both the law and faith of Christ; you have both the Old and New Testament. Out of the same, through God's grace, by the advice of your realm, make a Law; and by the same, through God's sufferance, rule your kingdom in Britain; for in that kingdom you are God's Vicar.'" - Apud Holinshed, vol. i. pp. 511, 512.] must be the Representative and Ordinance Head, 1. to her own people, .. 2. to "the dispersed of Judah," .. and 3. "to the nations" at large, .. of the Remnant of the House of Judah. Hence, consequently, this great Material Fact, i.e., The Existence of Jacob's Pillow as the Throne-Seat of England, stands indisputably a proof, that the Providence of God is manifestly at work, to identify the Fortunes of Britain with the Destiny promised to the House of Judah:.. of Judah, Ordinance Head, by Divine appointment, of the House, of the many-tribed House, of Israel. (Gen. 49, I Chron. 5:2 "Of him came the Chief Ruler.")

N.B. - Some people have thought to be facetious in comparing the transport of a Stone from Judea to Ireland, with that of the House of the Annunciation from Nazareth to Loretto. There is as much resemblance between the two as there is between 'the possible' and 'the impossible.' A Stone, somewhat of the shape of a not very large writing desk, is not a very untransportable thing in a ship, or by land. The theory concerning the House of Loretto is, that it was its own ship; and which, according to Dr. Stanley's obliging comparison of the foundation on which it stood with its present form, must have taken advantage of freedom from contact with the earth, to have given itself more seemly proportions than the long narrow original edifice presented ('Sinai and Palestine,' by A. P. Stanley, D.D., Reg. Prof. Eccles. Hist. Oxon, and Canon of Christ Church. See Comparative Ground Plans, p. 432, and pp. 438-446.) This resemblance, indeed, between them, there is: "Pillars of Witness," they both are :- the one, of the truth of God; the other of - (Consult 2 Thess. 2:9)


"Tara had various names in ancient times." - Annals of the Four Masters, p. 293 (note).

"The Hill of Tara is large, verdant, level at the top, and extremely beautiful; and, though not very high, commands extensive and most magnificent prospects over the great and fertile plains of Meath" (p. 296). "It was for many ages the seat of the Irish monarchy, the chief royal residence being, at Teamhair, or Tara, hence called Teamhairna-Riogh, or Tara of the Kings, being the chief seat of the Ard-Righ: that is, the high king or monarch who presided over the five provincial kings and kingdoms of Meath, Ulster, Connaught, Leinster, and Munster, forming the Irish Pentarchy " (p. 292, note).

"Tara became deserted as a Royal residence in the sixth century, owing to a quarrel between the King Dermot and St. Ruadham, Abbot of Lothra. The latter having cursed the former and the residence for his sake, from the death of Dermot, A.D. 565, no other king resided at Tara. The Stone of Destiny had already been removed to Scotland. What were the convulsions which led to the ruin of Tara, are little known; but somewhat of their character may be guessed at from the fact, that "in one of the earthen ramparts there were discovered, in the year 1810, two of the ornaments called Torques; a sort of golden collar of spiral or twisted workmanship, and of a circular form, open at one side, worn on the necks of ancient kings and chiefs; and similar to those which were worn by the ancient kings and chiefs of Gaul, and were called torc in the Celtic language. One of the torques discovered at Tara is five feet seven inches in length, and something more than twenty-seven ounces in weight, and all formed of the purest gold; the other torque is beyond twelve ounces in weight, and they form some of the most interesting remains of ancient Irish art " (p. 293, note).

F.R.A. Glover: As it is somewhat the custom to imagine that the supposed extensiveness of the settlement at Tara, and almost its very existence, is a fable, - even Moore's mention of it is of the most meager character, - the above fact is here recorded to satisfy the reader of the contrary. Phantoms and fictions are not usually dressed up in robes of solid metal. Tara was a very large settlement, as sufficient remains even now attest. And though ridiculous stories are told of its vastness and riches and goblets of gold, that all is not fable is proveable by what remains above ground, as well as what has been found under it; and, not less, by the various names under which it has established its reality in history. It is with the last of these, and with the fact of this change of its name, that we have to do.
We learn then that it was called successively Hazel-Wood (Annals of the Four Masters, p.294); Liath Druim, or the Hill of Liath; Drum Cain; and, subsequently, Cathair Crofinn, or the Fortress of Crofinn, from one of the Danan queens; and on the coming of a certain princess from over the sea, it acquired the name of Teamair; a word which people will insist upon being the same as Tara. As thus, - "Tamhar, a tower, the great tower of Tamhra, now Tara, is much celebrated in Irish history" (Vallancey's Prospectus of a Dictionary, p.78). In a book called the 'Chronicles of Eri', the change of name is made to be the result of setting up the Lia Fail; for, Eocaid-Ollam-Fola-Heremon-Ardri, the king, is made to say to the heralds, "From this day forth, what if this mount be called 'the Hill of Tobrad?' [later corrupted to Tara, Vol ii p.92, 95] and all said 'Yea.'

But, that which is the chief point to be considered in all this, is, that The Nine Laws were established at this time, against murder, theft, false witness, perjury, and neglect of parents; and that every one should do to others as they would wish others to do to them, &c., by the authority of the great Ollam, together with a house and endowment for the order of Ollams." (Chronicles of Eri, vol. ii. pp. 2. 100. 102. 108 (note). 112. 114-5. 140.)

But granting all this, Why should the name of Crofinn have been changed to Tura, at the time that the Ollam Fola set Heremon on the Lia Fail as a throne? The answer is apparent. Clearly because at that time also, he set up the Laws of God, in conformity, - even as that enemy of Hebrew Revelation, Mr. O'Connor (Chronicles of Eri, passim: especially pp. 499. 501, vol. ii), admits, - with the requirements of the Social Law of the Two Tables, in charge of the Ollams, and, in opposition to the priesthood of Baal. For the word, which seems to have bad numerous supposed derivations, all equally unsatisfactory, - as Tamra, Tahmair, Tobrad, "Tea-mur, hence was derived the name of Tara." (Annals of the Four Masters, p. 294.) - is itself the best explanation of itself, and, as to what it means. The name of Tara, adopted at that time, is, in itself, an evidence that the Law of the Two Tables, called by the Hebrews Torah, (pronounced taw-rab,) was there set up at that time. (The Hebrews call, The Teaching of God, Torah).

Jeremiah, it is to be remembered, had received a commission as "ordained prophet to the nations" (Jer. 1:5) as well as to his own people. The setting up the Law of the Two Tables, with distinction, there, where he had had those other duties to go through of which mention has been made, is clearly what he ought to have done (Deut. 4:10). If he set up any system of teaching, - and that, he would, certainly, do, -what could Jeremiah set up but the 'teaching of God?' .. that is, the Torah. If, then, Words and Names can teach any thing, this name Tara seems clearly to point to this great needful fact; and also, as clearly, as to why an order of Ollams should have been founded at the same time; viz. to perpetuate The Torah, and to expound its requirements, as the basis of that law, upon which each subsequent Jodhan Moran was to rule his decisions. And the Hill and Settlement, where " the Teaching of God" was a known and well-proclaimed fact, would from that time, naturally be, preeminently, the Hill of Torah.

Tara, they say, is the Hill of Conventions. It is, it was, the Hill where was set up, there, at that time, by the man who had the power, the means, and the authority to do it, the Great Convention made between God and His people at the giving of the law (Exod. 19:8, 24:3, 7). The same, which another great Sage and Lawgiver, but who was a King, Alfred of Britain, also set up, in his time, as the convention between God and Man. The First Chapter of Alfred's Code of Laws, is, The Two Tables of GOD'S Commandments.

It is very evident, from considerations which will later be set before the reader (chap. xiv.), that this occasion was, indeed, a grand National Convention; at which, in all probability, the triennial meetings and other needful institutions may have been determined upon.

P.S. - It is interesting to note, as connecting the ancient grandeur of Tara with present existing and recognized dignities, that the Bishops of Meath take precedence of all other Irish Bishops, and have the ducal Coronet to their Mitres; are styled Most Reverend, and assume other archi-episcopal style, because the ancient Regal Settlement of Tara is within the Diocese of Meath.

The high king or monarch presided over the five provincial kings and kingdoms of Meath, Ulster, Connaught, Leinster, and Munster, forming the Irish Pentarchy " (p. 292, note).

"Tara became deserted as a Royal residence in the sixth century, owing to a quarrel between the King Dermot and St. Ruadham, Abbot of Lothra. The latter having cursed the former and the residence for his sake, from the death of Dermot, A.D. 565, no other king resided at Tara. The Stone of Destiny had already been removed to Scotland. What were the convulsions which led to the ruin of Tara, are little known; but somewhat of their character may be guessed at from the fact, that "in one of the earthen ramparts there were discovered, in the year 1810, two of the ornaments called Torques; a sort of golden collar of spiral or twisted workmanship, and of a circular form, open at one side, worn on the necks of ancient kings and chiefs; and similar to those which were worn by the ancient kings and chiefs of Gaul, and were called torc in the Celtic language. One of the torques discovered at Tara is five feet seven inches in length, and something more than twenty-seven ounces in weight, and all formed of the purest gold; the other torque is beyond twelve ounces in weight, and they form some of the most interesting remains of ancient Irish art " (p. 293, note).

F.R.A. Glover: As it is somewhat the custom to imagine that the supposed extensiveness of the settlement at Tara, and almost its very existence, is a fable, - even Moore's mention of it is of the most meager character, - the above fact is here recorded to satisfy the reader of the contrary. Phantoms and fictions are not usually dressed up in robes of solid metal. Tara was a very large settlement, as sufficient remains even now attest. And though ridiculous stories are told of its vastness and riches and goblets of gold, that all is not fable is proveable by what remains above ground, as well as what has been found under it; and, not less, by the various names under which it has established its reality in history. It is with the last of these, and with the fact of this change of its name, that we have to do.
We learn then that it was called successively Hazel-Wood (Annals of the Four Masters, p.294); Liath Druim, or the Hill of Liath; Drum Cain; and, subsequently, Cathair Crofinn, or the Fortress of Crofinn, from one of the Danan queens; and on the coming of a certain princess from over the sea, it acquired the name of Teamair; a word which people will insist upon being the same as Tara. As thus, - "Tamhar, a tower, the great tower of Tamhra, now Tara, is much celebrated in Irish history" (Vallancey's Prospectus of a Dictionary, p.78). In a book called the 'Chronicles of Eri', the change of name is made to be the result of setting up the Lia Fail; for, Eocaid-Ollam-Fola-Heremon-Ardri, the king, is made to say to the heralds, "From this day forth, what if this mount be called 'the Hill of Tobrad?' [later corrupted to Tara, Vol ii p.92, 95] and all said 'Yea.'

But, that which is the chief point to be considered in all this, is, that The Nine Laws were established at this time, against murder, theft, false witness, perjury, and neglect of parents; and that every one should do to others as they would wish others to do to them, &c., by the authority of the great Ollam, together with a house and endowment for the order of Ollams." (Chronicles of Eri, vol. ii. pp. 2. 100. 102. 108 (note). 112. 114-5. 140.)

But granting all this, Why should the name of Crofinn have been changed to Tura, at the time that the Ollam Fola set Heremon on the Lia Fail as a throne? The answer is apparent. Clearly because at that time also, he set up the Laws of God, in conformity, - even as that enemy of Hebrew Revelation, Mr. O'Connor (Chronicles of Eri, passim: especially pp. 499. 501, vol. ii), admits, - with the requirements of the Social Law of the Two Tables, in charge of the Ollams, and, in opposition to the priesthood of Baal. For the word, which seems to have bad numerous supposed derivations, all equally unsatisfactory, - as Tamra, Tahmair, Tobrad, "Tea-mur, hence was derived the name of Tara." (Annals of the Four Masters, p. 294.) - is itself the best explanation of itself, and, as to what it means. The name of Tara, adopted at that time, is, in itself, an evidence that the Law of the Two Tables, called by the Hebrews Torah, (pronounced taw-rab,) was there set up at that time. (The Hebrews call, The Teaching of God, Torah).

Jeremiah, it is to be remembered, had received a commission as "ordained prophet to the nations" (Jer. 1:5) as well as to his own people. The setting up the Law of the Two Tables, with distinction, there, where he had had those other duties to go through of which mention has been made, is clearly what he ought to have done (Deut. 4:10). If he set up any system of teaching, - and that, he would, certainly, do, -what could Jeremiah set up but the 'teaching of God?' .. that is, the Torah. If, then, Words and Names can teach any thing, this name Tara seems clearly to point to this great needful fact; and also, as clearly, as to why an order of Ollams should have been founded at the same time; viz. to perpetuate The Torah, and to expound its requirements, as the basis of that law, upon which each subsequent Jodhan Moran was to rule his decisions. And the Hill and Settlement, where " the Teaching of God" was a known and well-proclaimed fact, would from that time, naturally be, preeminently, the Hill of Torah.

Tara, they say, is the Hill of Conventions. It is, it was, the Hill where was set up, there, at that time, by the man who had the power, the means, and the authority to do it, the Great Convention made between God and His people at the giving of the law (Exod. 19:8, 24:3, 7). The same, which another great Sage and Lawgiver, but who was a King, Alfred of Britain, also set up, in his time, as the convention between God and Man. The First Chapter of Alfred's Code of Laws, is, The Two Tables of GOD'S Commandments.

It is very evident, from considerations which will later be set before the reader (chap. xiv.), that this occasion was, indeed, a grand National Convention; at which, in all probability, the triennial meetings and other needful institutions may have been determined upon.

P.S. - It is interesting to note, as connecting the ancient grandeur of Tara with present existing and recognized dignities, that the Bishops of Meath take precedence of all other Irish Bishops, and have the ducal Coronet to their Mitres; are styled Most Reverend, and assume other archi-episcopal style, because the ancient Regal Settlement of Tara is within the Diocese of Meath.


"Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel; I made a covenant with your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondmen, saying, At the end of seven years let ye go every man his brother an Hebrew, which hath been sold unto thee; and when he hath served thee six years, thou shalt let him go free." - Jer. 34:13, 14,

F.R.A. Glover: Another footfall by which the path of the prophet Jeremiah is to be tracked in his sojourn in Ireland, is to be seen in the Law of Release of the Slave after seven years of bondage: a law in common acknowledgment in Ireland even down to the days of St. Patrick. That illustrious personage having claimed freedom, from his bondage after seven years of service, according to it, from the master, to whom he had been sold by the pirates who bad seized him from his paternal home, on a raid into Brittany; this master refusing like the Jews in the time of Jeremiah, to fulfil the will of God in this wise, the saint was compelled to have recourse to gold to obtain that which the tyrant refused to accord to right and law. But so the fact comes out: viz., that the law, more Hebraico, s the Annalist intimates, en passant, set up by the "Prophet to the Nations," if by him, had abided in full repute, for 800 years, the Law of the Land; a law which, we may well believe, the Prophet would have bad it much in his mind to insist upon to his new people, in the recollection of the woe which its neglect and denial had wrought upon that elect nation, of whose small remnant he had been, partly on this very account (Jer. 34), the leader from an earthly paradise to the wild wastes of Crioch Fuiniab, "the ends of the earth," - Emerald Isle though they be!

It is said in some of the Lives of St. Patrick, that there was a law in Ireland, according to which slaves should become free in the seventh year; and that it was under this law he gained his liberty. The same writers add, that this was conformable to the practice of the Hebrews, more Hebraeorum, (Lev. 25:40). See on this point Dr. Lani, chap iv. From Moore's Ireland, vol. i. p. 219, note.


"She gave a name to her fair cahir, The woman with the prosperous royal smile.* * *It is a mystery not to be uttered." Mr. Petrie's Paper, p. 134.

F.R.A. Glover: Whether or not the direct succession of the Irish Royal House from the Royal House of Judah, was that to which the legend alludes as a thing which it was necessary, in the counsels of God, should be kept out of sight of man until the time come that it is to be known ("Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself." Isa. 45:15), I dare not say. But if the Prophet Jeremiah were in Ireland, and set up the Stone of Jacob, with a promise that the Sceptre - the Sceptre of Judah (subaudi, i.e., sensed but not expressed) - was to abide with it for ever it could not, as has been seen, have been the Stone alone, that he set up with such a promise. He must, along with the Stone, have had one of the Seed of the House of Judah there present, by whom and by whose progeny alone, the promised Sceptre could be wielded (Jer. 22:26-30); and, as this points to the presence of "the King's Daughters " with the Prophet, it is of importance to establish that point; that being the point, on which the whole subject, in so far as the connexion or identity of the Sceptre of England with that of Judah, turns.

It will be, doubtless, readily admitted, that, if the prophet Jeremiah, on leaving Judea, had been accompanied by "the King's Daughters;" .. and that, on his arrival in Ireland, his representations concerning the Seed Royal of Judah were such as to induce the monarch of Ireland to seek alliance with the Illustrious Stock; .. and that the King had, consequently, allied with one of them, either by himself or a kinsman, in the hands of whose sons and sons' sons or daughters, from that time to this, a Sceptre had continued, .. there would then be no doubt, but that the present wielder of such Sceptre would be a Ruler of the Stock of Judah.

It will also be admitted that though there be no proofs whatever existing, nor any shadow of proof, that such is the case, yet, that absence of proof, is no proof that such is not the case.

Nevertheless, it is reasonable, perhaps, to suppose, that some vestiges of such event, - one so fraught with important issues, - might have left their marks visible in a country so full of ancient reminiscences as Ireland is: albeit, perhaps in no country have the marks of an early civilization been so ruthlessly handled, .. of mental culture with so reckless a vandalism destroyed; sad to relate, in the name and in honour of Christianity.

The first step towards proving that the Seed Royal of Judah was in Ireland, must certainly be to quote Jeremiah, chapters 41:10, and 43:5, 6; from which passages of Scripture - from their mention of the King's Daughters - we see that a possibility existed of the Prophet having been accompanied by such members of the Seed Royal; all that were left of the Royal House : for all the King's sons were cut off, and no male was to sit on the throne of David, in Jerusalem, (that is in Judah, Jer 32:30) from that time forth. Yet, as Jeremiah was to re-habilitate the Royal House (Jer. 1:10, 15:11), and, as that could not be done by him in his lifetime, there, in Jerusalem, even if it had been lawful to do so, - inasmuch as Jerusalem was to be waste according to the terms of his own prophecy, seventy years (Jer. 25:11), - it was necessary that he should do that needful work elsewhere.

Why Ireland should have been chosen, it is not for any man to be expected to declare. That may appear hereafter, which may account for it: but no man dare say why this or that has been done, when there is no revelation of the mind of God on the subject. The way to Ireland was the gang-way of traffic in those days; and if it was remote, remoteness may have been an object with the Prophet, for reasons best known to him. The Irish are, and call themselves, Canaanites, and had a reputation in matters spiritual in Heathendom, - at a period when people were more zealous in the worship of their idols than a good many Christians, so-called, are now for the honour and praise of the great and good God, who has allowed His children to call Him, Father, - that, we can hardly realize in these times of rationalistic semi-Christianity. The people, who had constantly led Israel astray with idolatrous practices, were there in great force. Those who had escaped or fled from "Joshua the Robber," had transferred to Ireland, all that, for which they were driven out of the land of Canaan.

The new country of the Refugees was, naturally, well known to those who had succeeded them in the old; from which, also, their descendants had never been entirely ejected. A communication would, therefore, ever be kept up between those of Tyre and Sidon and the newly planted colonies in Ireland. Hence, traffic existing in the time of Jeremiah, and intercourse of which he might be disposed to take advantage, - and, as he had means at command to redeem his inheritance (Jer. 32:10), we may very well suppose him to have been able to carry out all such arrangements as would be needful for effecting, a voyage in those days, - there is, then, every reason to conclude, that, while this ground was open to him to choose, and as there were no impediments existing to his choosing it, he, (in accordance with the traditions of the people of Ireland who declare, to this day, that Jeremiah was the teacher of one of the Irish Kings,) actually did sail for and reach Ireland.

Having arrived in Ireland, the Prophet would naturally be an object of note and respect to the kings of the country. An alliance with a Royal Race, to which such promises and blessings were declared, by such a Prophet, to attach, would be a most natural thing for a king to desire. Such an arrangement the Prophet would, also, certainly promote. Is there then any proof existing of any such alliance having been made between a Princess arriving in Ireland over sea from the East, and an Irish Chief Monarch about this time?

There is something that looks very much like it, which drops out in the Legends of the Historiographers of the Irish Monarchy.

In the year of our Lord, 513, the Irish Kings and Grandees, oppressed by a consciousness that something mysterious existed in the foundation of the ancient muniments of Tara, assembled, with great circumstance, to inquire into all that Bards and Seneachies could declare concerning the ancient foundation and the ancient times. They devoted themselves to the pious labour, with fasting and prayer, for three days continuously. Alas! such had been the destruction of records in the confusion of the times, and the struggle of the Baalitish Priests to recover the ascendancy which they bad lost during the time of the Hebraizing of their chief stronghold, - this very Tara, - that nothing could be ascertained farther on the matter in hand, than that it was a subject shrouded in deep mystery, and connected in some way with the existence of a woman from over the great plain - the Sea - "with a Royal Prosperous Smile:" and who - such had been the intensity of respect of their ancestors for this illustrious scion of royalty, concerning whom, also, there was some mystery, too deep to be uttered, - was buried in a tomb sixty feet long and wide.

A Poem or Record was composed on this occasion by one Amergin, (Quaere, Does the word Amergin mean Chief Bard in Irish? If not, either Amergin had a very long life, or the name was common among Bards), Chief Bard to King Dermod, monarch of Ireland in the Sixth Century, from information communicated to him by an old sage, called Fintan. The following verses are from a literal translation of this Poem, as presented to us in the Notes of the "Annals of the Four Masters," p. 294.

"Temor of Bregia, whence so called? Relate to me, O learned Sages.* * *When was the place called Te-mor (When was Teamair Teamair? - Mr. Petrie's Paper.) Was it in the time of Partholan of battles?
Or at the first arrival of Caesaire? Tell me, in which of these invasions Did the place obtain the name of Tea-mor? O Tuan! O generous Finnchahb! O Bran! O active Cu-alladh! O Dubhan! ye venerable Five, Whence was acquired the name of Te-mor?" It appears that it bad been once called "Hazelwood," and three other names in succession.

"Until the coming of the agreeable Tea, The wife of Heremon of noble aspect." Then was the name changed. "A Rampart was raised around her house, For Tea, the daughter of Lughaidh. She was buried outside in her mound, And from her it was named Tea-mur." We accept the fact without the parentage as signed in this distich. "The Seat of the Kings it was called, The princes, descendants of the Milesians: Five names it had ere that time, That is from Fordruim to Temor. I am Fintan the Bard, The Historian of many tribes: In latter times I have passed my days At the earthen fort above Temor." Such was the substance of the record declared one thousand years after the facts, concerning which the inquiry was made, had occurred.The following, is from a Poem on Tara, 500 years later, by a celebrated bard, Cu-au O'Cochlain, A.D. 1024: a considerable man, and, for a time, once, Regent of Ireland.

"It gave great happiness to the women When Temor was erected. * * * * Where, after her death, was Tea's monument; Which event perpetuated her fame. * * * * The grave of the great Mergech, A sepulchre which was not violated. The daughter of Pharaoh of many champions, Tephi, the most beautiful that traversed the plain, Here, formed a fortress, circular and strong, (otherwise, Formed a cahir, strong the circle) Which she described with her breast-pin and wand. She gave a name to her fair fortress, This Royal Lady of agreeable aspect, (otherwise, the woman with the prosperous royal smile) The fortress of Tephi, where met the assembly, Where every proceeding was conducted with propriety. It may be related without reserve That a mound was raised over Te-phi as recorded, And she lies beneath this unequalled Tomb, Which mighty Queens had formed there. * * * * It is a mystery not to be uttered, (Mr. Petrie's Paper)* * * *

The length and breadth of the Tomb of Tephi. Accurately measured by the sages, Was sixty feet of exact measure, As Prophets and Druids have related. Tephi was her name; she excelled all virgins,
And unhappy for him who had to entomb her, Sixty feet of correct admeasurement (apportionment)
Were marked as a sepulchre to enshrine her. The mournful death of Tephi, who had come to the North, Was not for a moment concealed.* * * * **** a meeting should be held to select a sepulchre
In the South, as a Tomb for the beloved Tephi. Temor, the impregnable, of lasting resources, (a reference possibly to the Stone, the Race, the Standard, and the College of Ollams) Which conferred, on the women, high renown."

Now all this, it is to be observed, was at Tara, called also Teamar; where the Stone, which came from over the sea, was set up, with the promise of blessing and perpetuation, at the time that the Jacob's Pillow disappeared from Judea. And this Woman, mysterious and royal, is declared to have caused the importance and consequence of Teamar; and to have given it a new name, as the Stone was said to have done also to Tara. That her name also should be Teamar, or Teamair, is not without significance, considering that Tamar, as a woman's name, occurs twice in the nomenclature of her ancestry; i.e., if she be allowed to have come of Judah. And our Eastern Princess may naturally have been thought to be the daughter of a Pharaoh of Egypt, since she who came almost direct from Taphnis, the royal Egyptian city, may, in the confusion of persons, places, and things, at that distance of time - in the records of oral tradition - well have been held to be a daughter of the only great Eastern potentate of whom the Bard, 1500 years later, had ever heard.

Whether or not, in that wonderful tomb, was deposited any sacred relic of the Law, in Two Tables, called by the Hebrews Torah, and from which the Mount of the Covenant might have gotten its name, is more than one can say. The Buddhists have changed Torah - the same Word, with the same meaning - into Ura: the sounds are almost alike. Possibly, also, the Canaanitish emigrants may have done the same.

At all events, the assembled sages knew nothing of the name of the place, nor of the woman, nor where she came from, but this; viz., that a remarkable woman came to the north and from the East, certainly as a Pharaoh's daughter (General Vallancey says that this is a false translation); that of those who came, she was the most beautiful, and that she became the wife of one King, Heremon, "of noble aspect," the king contemporary with Ollam Fola, and who has been confounded with him, - that imaginary king with five names, Eochaid-Ollam-Fola-Heremon-Ardri; - that the foundations of the fortress Teamor, were, as it were, laid in her, to do her honour; and that at her decease - which seems to have been thought very odd - possibly they had conceived that she was to have lived to take the Stone back again herself to the East - she was honoured with a Temple or Mausoleum, sixty feet square; and that, at the time of the inquiry, all knowledge failed "the venerable five" to determine any thing positive about her farther than has been declared.

Withal, all the reasons assigned, as explanatory of the naming Temair after the lady in question, were so unsatisfactory to the more recent chronicler of the events, that he ventures a derivation of his own. He would have Temoria, into which word he changes Temair, or Tara, to suit his theory, to be derived from Theooreoo (Gk.), to perceive; because Temor is conspicuously placed. All this wild conjecture, and the fusion of two names into one, not less than the shifting name of the chief person, proves that the real cause of the change of name was unknown to them all alike; that they had lost the record of the real name after which Tamor was called, which was, in all probability, the name of the lady herself, viz. Tamar. For, She gave a name to her fair cahir, The woman with the prosperous royal smile." Mr. Petrie's Paper.

How many of these particulars, including the name of the fortress after the lady's own name, fit the case of the "king's daughter," who might have accompanied the Prophet, the reader is able to judge for himself. A handsome daughter of an Eastern monarch is found, no cause assigned, - there was "a mystery not to be uttered" connected with her, - having strayed into Ireland. What would a daughter of Pharaoh have to do, straying away from home? The daughter of Judah had no home in the East. She, even as those had, who wailed beside the waters of Babylon, had lost hers "in Jerusalem." In her presence in Ireland, therefore, there was, at the time that she could have allied with King Heremon, just as much sense and probability, as in the case of a daughter of a Pharaoh of Egypt being there, there would be neither one nor the other.

Considering that the supposition set up, viz., that one of the king's daughters, who accompanied Jeremiah, had, on landing, attracted the attention and admiration of the monarch of the country, and had married him, required some corroboration from the traditions of the country, the most critical will admit that in the substance of the above-quoted lines, and the causes that led to the creation of the earlier poem, there is something that looks very much like it.

It may be, also, that this inquiry has thrown more light on the subject of that conference, so painfully carried out, than the whole position of things has ever yet received, since the time that the words Tara and Teamor were confounded. That the true import of the foundation of Teamor should have been lost sight of in the lapse of ages, is a thing perfectly to be understood, when, records having been destroyed, - beside that the name of the illustrious lady was never uttered but with bated breath, - traditions were handed down viva voce, but only by the privileged and hereditary bards; of whom some were as fit for their office probably, as those hereditary heralds to whom Moore pleasantly introduces us, who had every requisite for office but the voice for which they were wanted (From Herodotus, vol. i. p. 115.).

So, even as King Josiah had occasion to lament the lapses of his people to gross misconduct, from having lost all knowledge of the Law, - (and all the copies of the Law were lost, save the one copy that Hilkiah the priest discovered in the Temple, 2 Chron. 34:15, though religion was maintained by an endowed body of priests,) - we need hardly be surprised that, in however perfect a state a Prophet of God may have left things at his death, amongst a Canaanitisb people, they had become in such a condition, one thousand years later, that little or nothing should be known, or could be declared with certainty on so grave and important a subject; especially when it is remembered that there was a displaced body of priests of Baal, who, superseded by the Ollams of Ollam Fola, as Teachers, and by the Jodhan Morans, as Judges, gnashed their teeth at the first, at the institution of the Ollams, when established by an influence that they were as little able to resist (see Chapter xiv), as were the priests of Baal that of Elijah in the days of Ahab (I Kings 18).

But, the Prophet being dead, in the confusion arising from conflicting interests, and the successful efforts of the priests of Baal to outroot the newly imported doctrines from Judea, every thing perishable went the way of all perishable things. The imperishable, the Stone of Jacob, and the Seed of Judah, remained; and, the Standard of Judah. And these, in process of time, King Fergus transferred to another country (Chapter xiii); from whence they have reached in safety their present sanctuary, ready to be revealed in due time.


"There is a double cause why I should be careful of the welfare of that people [the Irish]: first, as the king of England, by reason of the long possession the crown of England hath had of that land; and also as king of Scotland, for the ancient kings of Scotland are descended of the kings of Ireland." - Speech of King James I. at Whitehall, Apr. 21, 1613.

F.R.A. Glover: There is a passage in Scottish History, connected with Irish Legend, which appears so extravagant in itself, that it has been pronounced to be utterly beyond the possibility of reality; it has, indeed, been stigmatized as much as if it had been invented, merely to show how far absurdity could be carried or credulity taxed. If it stood alone, one's wonder might almost be excited that any man of so much mental culture as to have attained the position of a chronicler, should have troubled himself to refer to such a poor story; or, much more, have thought it worth the time occupied in transcribing it. Therefore Mr. Moore's observations concerning it are not altogether surprising.

It may, however, be neither untrue nor stupid; and it is, in any case, doubtless, founded on fact.

When the Picts "first desired that some of the Milesian Women should accompany them to Scotland," so runs the Legend, "they pledged themselves solemnly that, should they become masters of the country they were about to invade, the Sovereignty should ever after be vested in the descendants of the female line" (Moore, i, 111). In so far there is nothing very extravagant; this was evidently to secure that the Blood Royal of Scotland should be one with the Blood Royal of Scotia Major, i.e., Ireland. What follows is, however, treated in the comment of Mr. Moore, as being too strong for his digestion. He says, "

This matrimonial compact is, thus, in a spirit far worse than absurd, misrepresented by O'Halloran. 'They, at the same time, requested wives from Heremon; engaging, in the most solemn manner, that not only then, but for ever after, if they, or their successors, should have issue by a British and again by an Irish woman; that the issue of this last only, should be capable of succeeding to the inheritance! and which law continued in force to the days of Venerable Bode; i.e., about 2000 years! A mark of such striking distinction, that it cannot be paralleled in the History of any nation under the sun!" Vol. ii. ch. 4, O'Halloran' (Moore i, 111, note).

Yet this story, absurd as it seems, and against which, as the representation of a supposed state of things, the Historian found it in his conscience to reclaim as above, must have had some foundation of fact, on which to have been based; and, indeed, the chronology corrected, - i.e. for 2000 Years read 1000, -might, under certain imaginable circumstances, be not only reasonable but true; and even by us, at this time, be reasonably held, according to the view of the case taken by the imponents, to be a necessary imposition.

And, seeing that these certain circumstances trench very closely on the hypothesis of this work, and that the Irish King would, if such circumstances had existed, have had, on the one hand, high authority to adduce for the laying down of the stipulation; and the Scottish, on the other, would have had good reason for accepting it; it almost becomes a duty in us, for the credit's-sake of our ancestors, to inquire, whether such circumstances did exist as, existing, would convert the absurd and unreasonable into what would have been a perfectly intelligible and justifiable requirement; and therefore reasonably likely on the part of the Scottish, to be acquiesced in.

Can any good reason, then, be assigned for the stipulation, on the part of the Irish Monarch, that could have produced such a willing acquiescence on the part of the Scottish, as Bede declares to have been the case in this matter, and to have had such a long endurance?

It is not necessary, however, it must be remarked, that the supposed facts, in such imaginable circumstances, should have ever really existed. It is sufficient to make the story probable, that the general belief was, that the case was as it was imagined to be. And it may be remarked, generally, that it is hardly becoming in us to travel out of the record, for the purpose, as it were, of impugning the intelligence of our ancestors, by proving to our own satisfaction that they were mere dupes; when, if we keep strictly within it - as we ought, at least, not to neglect to do, - investigation of the marks along the highway which they trode, may show us, that those whom we think to have been unwise, because they did not act just as we think we should have done, are, on the contrary, the wise: .. those, whose acts bear witness for them, and who do not, like some others, bear witness for themselves, and "warm themselves in their own sparks" (Isa. 1:11).

Credulity is a poor thing, it may be; and our poor half-civilized ancestors may have been credulous. Nevertheless, it is astonishing how much credulity some people have, who are credulous of their own wisdom, as they compare themselves with "ancient men and their good fathers who begat them" (Ecclesiasticus 44). A wretched example of this self-adulation has recently been most painfully presented to the world!

What good reason, then, - what sufficient reason can be assigned, for the stipulation, on the part of the Irish King; and the covenant entered into by the Scottish Petitioners? such as may account for that willing acquiescence on the part of the latter, which Bede declares to have been of so enduring a character among their descendants?

We know that from the time when it was declared that "the Seed of the woman was to bruise the Serpent's Head," (Gen. 3:15) that "the man from the Lord" (Gen. 4:1) appointed in the Divine Counsels to do it, was "the desire of women:" (Dan. 11:37) and that, amongst the Jews, this promised seed was so earnestly longed for by every woman individually, that barrenness of the womb was held to be a curse from the Lord amongst those of whom Messiah could possibly come. And though, ultimately, the Shiloh, "the desire of all nations," (Hag. 2:7) was announced as to come of Judah, still, the feeling had been so strongly implanted in the minds of all, that "the desire of women" continued a well-known form of expression: however, in reality, universally recognized, that the field of the possible occurrence of the Event was narrowed, even among, the descendants of Judah, to the Root of Jesse: i.e., to the Descendants of David. (Mic. v. 2.)

Consequently, in the event of any woman of the Seed Royal of David, being granted, in alliance, beyond the pale of her own people, - (the possibility of the birth of the Messiah through her womb, being a part of her endowment, and may it not have been to this, that "the mystery not to be uttered," alluded?) - it would be natural, that those who were conscious of this possibility of Descent, should stipulate, before they granted the favour solicited, - viz. to spare a portion of the Elect Seed, - for such terms as they felt would be necessary to secure, that Descents from her, should take precedence of all other Descents. For the expected Seed was to be, it is to be remembered, born, a pre-eminent monarch. And if, on the one hand, those solicited, explained to those who solicited, why they demanded this; and on the other hand, those who solicited the favour and the honour, believed that the others spoke the truth; then it was, would be, would have been, entirely reasonable, that they who acknowledged the reality of the declared endowment, should give in to such demand, and, that all concerned in it, should acquiesce therein.

Now, if we suppose that the Royal Family, or the Chief Race in Ireland, had reason to believe that they were of the Race from which Messiah, the true Jodhan Moran, who was to be, according to their notions, the bearer of the Stone back to the East, in triumph, was to spring; .. and of which Race, they showed the Standard, the Standard of Judah, as their own; being also, at the same time, as they thought, able to affirm, that they had the mark of the assurance of God's favour in the possession of that Stone, of which it was declared, with great confidence, that it was to be with their Race, until some one of those connected with them, should return with it, to the East, as a Sceptred Monarch, as the promised Messiah, as the Righteous Judge, the expected Shiloh; - then, would they not only have been perfectly right in making the alleged stipulation, but it would have been most culpable in them to have neglected any thing which they should have thought to be their duty, towards God and Man, with respect to a due provision for such a possible Event.

But that is the very hypothesis; and which is assumed to be the actual fact in the case: not, indeed, that the Messiah was to come of that Stock, but that, they thought, He might come of it.

The Hebrews, down to the time of the coming of the Messiah, were universally of opinion that He was to be the restorer of the Monarchy of Judah, which would be a monarchy in "the East," as the people in the West would see it, - and a universal King. The belief, therefore, to the same effect, of these simple ones of the West, was no more discreditable to them, than was the persistence in that opinion to the learned hierarchy and fully-civilized intelligence of Judea at the time of the Advent of Christ. For entertaining that opinion, it is to be remembered, that the Jews were never blamed. It was for their persistence in the opinion, after proof sufficient had been exhibited to them that they misunderstood the time rather than misread the predictions, that they were blameworthy: and for which, and their conduct influenced by such misunderstanding of the time, the Jews of the Crucifixion and their descendants suffered.

The allegation, therefore, of the ancient Chronicler, becomes, not a self-evident fiction, credulously accepted by "fanciful Old Bede," but the credible declaration of a reasonable fact by the Venerable Historiographer: and, the conversion, by such a supposition, of what would be utterly extravagant, not to say nonsensical and inconceivable among rational men, into reasonableness and propriety, affords strong ground for presuming that this was the very idea that possessed those who made the stipulation; and that it was accepted as stated, as the Rule of Succession, willingly, by those upon whom it was imposed. And the rumour or declaration that such an extraordinary Rule of Succession prevailed, and was acted upon, affords strong ground equally for the belief that the stipulation was made, and by some of the descendants of some branches of the original stock, maintained, and to a comparatively late period, acted upon: and an argument, in so far, that all the parties, respectively, believed that they had amongst them the favoured Seed of the Perpetual Race to whom had been assigned, the Throne of David, the Sceptre of Judah, and the invaluable endowments of Jacob, as inherited from Abraham.

This is an argument that will have little weight with such as treat the Revelation of God as an elaborate fiction. But the fiction of Revelation is not now, nor here, the question. It is not, "Were these people right, to believe so and so?" - but, "Are there fair reasons for assuming that they did so believe?" If there are, they acted as has been declared by Venerable Bede. And, so acting, as they did not do so, without some assignable grounds for their belief, those grounds are the marks along the highway which show us by which road our ancestors travelled, and at the same time indicate the reasons why they took that particular way. And we may be erring against truth not less than against decency to pronounce the record nonsense, or the reasonable conduct of the ancients, incredible folly, because some dare to think Revelation, in which our ancestors believed, a fiction, and themselves warranted in denying premisses, on which they formed their conclusions.

Had Mr. Moore had any idea of the real value of this fact, which it fell in his way to relate and comment on, or of the character and name of the several persons and things connected with Irish and Scottish ancient History, and of Tara in particular, of which he has spoken with less consideration than they deserve, we may be sure that he would have given the subject all the advantage that it could have derived from being handled by one of his extensive local knowledge.


"Confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work will perform it, until the day of Jesus Christ." Phil. 1:6

F.R.A. Glover: Having now brought into prominence those footfalls of the presence of the Blood Royal of the Privileged Race of Judah, which, occurring in the records of Ireland and Scotland, tend to prove the fact that the indestructible Race was really imported into the Islands of the Sea, - the name by which the Hebrews know and still designate these countries, - it remains to show that the present occupant of the English throne is the lineal descendant of her, who is concluded to have accompanied the Prophet Jeremiah, when seeking a land where to plant the Stem and to build the House of dislodged Judah, although we may have no genealogical table of names to attest and illustrate the fact.

As the possession of the Pillar of Witness, and of the outward and visible sign of the House of Judah, would be no substitute for the Seed of David; .. and as no guarantee that could have been offered would have been sufficient as a physical substitute, in the absence of such material fact, had the Seed of David not been visibly present when the Stone was set up at Tara, to assure those present of the possibility of the allegations made, in the promise recorded in the Legend of the Stone; .. so, the presence of a Royal Stem, at the time of the inauguration of the Stone, would be no proof to us, that the present occupant of the throne of these realms is the lineal descendant of the Princess of Judah then present, - and whose name is conjectured to have been Tamar, - unless a reliable pedigree of descents from that time to the present were producible; or, what would be still more reliable, such circumstantial evidence of the fact, as tends to establish the certainty of it, more assuredly than any list of names in a genealogy could. A genealogical list of names might be interesting; but such list would afford no proof.

It is one of the great elements in the controversy of the Jew with the Christian, that the genealogy presented to our belief in the Gospels, is not to be relied on : inasmuch as, they allege, that, after the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, the Jewish people bad become, and still became, so mixed with the foreigner, and the confusion in the descents arising from other causes was so great, that certainty in their pedigrees was utterly an impossibility: and that, consequently, the genealogies offered by the Evangelical Records of the descents of Joseph and of the Blessed Virgin, from David the King, carry no conviction along with them to those conversant with the realities of the case.

In ordinary cases, to prove the claim to a lapsed peerage, as amongst ourselves, or right of succession to an estate, a complete genealogical tree of descents may be a legal necessity. But, He who commended Himself to the acceptance of Man in Judea, needed no genealogical tree to prove to those among whom He walked, that the Carpenter's Wife's Son Who stood before them, low though He was in earthly station, was King of Israel, Lord of the Temple, and thence, the looked-for Prince of Judah, the Son of David (John 7:42).

The genealogical tree of our Lord's descent from the Stem of Jesse, is, to us, no moral necessity. The proof of its correctness lies, not in the succession of names so much as in this: viz. that we know, that, under the circumstances, that alleged fact, that Jesus of Nazareth was of the Lineage of David, must be so. As a cavilling point for the Jew, who is compelled to catch at any thing to justify an untenable position, his allegation is much for him to lay hold of and insist upon. But what Christian now troubles himself, if any ever did, to think about the written genealogies as a proof of that which is proved to him in fifty ways without them? Nevertheless, there was a line of descents; and, doubtless, the genealogies presented to us are correct: but the case, as it now exists, does not require, even if it ever did, genealogies, as an element towards making up faith in the truth of the mission of Jesus Christ.

The genealogies are unnecessary for the substantiation of the faith of any body. Belief in the truth of them is just as much a matter of faith, as is the great fact to which the Jew would make the truth of each an essential accessory. Who is to know how true they are, either as physical or moral proofs in what they allege, but as one takes them as presented? The fact is proved, not by the genealogy, or its assumed correctness, but by the circumstances of the case having proved that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of David. So in this case a genealogical tree, though one might construct such an interesting detail of names, would afford no such proof of reality of the fact of the right successor always filling up rightly, the line of descents, if it were ever so authentic, as the circumstances of the case themselves: they make it absolutely certain that the thing required, existed. It did so, because it must have done so.

The Law of Succession, in those rude monarchies of Scotia Major and Minor, was, that, on the death of the monarch, the fittest man of the Sept was elected. ("The tribe or clan, however numerous, comprised each but one family, of which the chief was elective, though always chosen from a particular stock." - O'Driscoll's Ireland, p. 389.) But he was always a Sept's-man; a system which produced, perhaps, much blood-shedding, and sometimes fratricide; but such was the case. ("The inheritance descendeth not to the son [when a minor, subaudi], but to the brother, nephew, or cousin-germaine, eldest or most valiant; for the childe being oftentimes left in nonage, and otherwise young and unskilfull, were never able to defend his patrimonie; being his no longer than he could hold it by force of arms. But by that time he grew to a competent age, and have buried an uncle or two, he also taketh his turne and leaveth it in like order to his posterity." - Spenser's Ireland.)

The contention was, however, always confined to the Royal Stock. In the event of a king leaving minors, the next eldest brother of the deceased king, if he was fit, was elected and crowned king; and he was a king, bona fide: a king, not until the minor came of age, but for life; as they held that a king, once a king could not be un-king-ed. On his death, however, the succession reverted, as a matter of course, to the eldest son or heir-proper of the former king; and so on: so that, in that manner, were the royal stock always preserved for, and presented to, the people.

This was the Scottish rule, which came in with Fergus; and he brought with him from Ireland, we may be sure, all the family traditions and use: the man who would not attempt any landing in Scotland to establish his rule, without the family Stone and the family Standard, was not likely to intermit the usages of his race, or neglect any family tradition.

Not however to compare small things with great, as the facts in the one case substantiate the descent, so must the facts in this case be the proof, that the genealogy is unbroken, though it be not forthcoming. If the Jews' allegation be worthy of disproof, "the day" will make all clear. So will "the day" likewise declare if this be the truth. The Providence that brought the Seed Royal to Ireland is equal to the completing of whatever work It pleases to take in hand. If the Stone, which is the symbol of that Providence towards the Throne of Jacob, and the Standard of Judah, have been manifestly preserved to this Royal Family of England, we need not doubt but that the other essential to the identification of its state with that of Judah, as the full and efficient representative of the Royal House, has been equally preserved.

The Prophet Jeremiah was "to plant and to build" a kingdom. When did he do it? and where?

To the throne of David was promised an everlasting duration. Where do we see it?

The sceptre of Judah was to continue with Judah till Shiloh should come. Where is the sceptre of Judah to be seen?

But Shiloh is come! If He be come, where was the Sceptre of Judah visible after the Babylonish Captivity in the Restoration? There was no king in Judah: the Maccabees were Levites: Herod was an Edomite : and Jerusalem was in bondage one hundred and eighty-seven years to the Malum Regnum [JML: evil rule] before Christ appeared. Has the prophecy then failed?

But, if Shiloh has come, He has not been manifested. In the sense promised, He has not come. He to whom "the gathering of the People" is to be, is not in presence: in the sense therefore to satisfy "the people," Jesus Christ, as the Shiloh, is to them, unintelligible. To the Christian Mind, which can see through the enigma, certainly, Jesus is the veritable Shiloh, .. the Light that shineth in the dark place, to the illuminated mind of man. But to the Human Body, He is not: nor, in that sense, will He be, until "the gathering of the People" shall be the accomplished fact of the Future. Has then the prophecy failed? Impossible! Where then is the indefeasible Sceptre of Judah?

In Ireland, the Witness for Truth was set up in the words of Isaiah, and in the spirit of Jeremiah, and in the Type of the Shiloh, by one who was accompanied by a Mysterious Woman from the East, with a Royal Prosperous Smile, in, and for, and by whom were done things which are unaccountable altogether under any other supposition save the one, viz., that she was such a woman as the exigency of this hypothesis requires. If she, after whom the place Tamar was named, were a Hebrew Princess, the case is clear. The Seed of Judah, in the Providence of God, came hither, and, by the same Providence, has been preserved. If there was a purpose in its having been brought, the purpose is fulfilling; and the Legend of the Stone points to it: and, in this fulfillment, two illustrious prophecies are manifestly meeting their's: the prophecy of the Perpetuance of the Sceptre of Judah, and the promise of the Unfailing Throne of David.

Under any other hypothesis, we are still to seek for their manifestation and fulfillment. With respect to the prophecy of the Sceptre of Judah (Gen. 49:10), all that has been said and written about that in the attempt to prove that it has been fulfilled, is mere accommodation, if not mystification; altogether unworthy the reputation of those who have attempted it: ingenuity having been made largely to supply the deficiency of fact. The attempt arose doubtless in a sort of nervous anxiety of man to prove that God is as good as His Word. It has, however, pleased the Lord, for His own all-gracious purpose, "to hide Himself." May He not do this if He will? (Isa. 45:15) We need not fear. "Hath the Lord spoken, and shall He not bring it to pass? Hath He said, and shall He not do it?" (Num. 23:19) We must bide the Lord's time.

It is a great mistake, and something more perhaps, to attempt to hasten an interpretation. A false interpretation by a great name, is not only bad because it is false; but, because it is mischievous in proportion as men are satisfied with it. Like the great Newton's avowed fiction, which he offered as a substitute for the True Theory of the Tides, and which, unduly elevated by unreasoning admirers of his great name, acts not only as a screen to keep men from seeking further after that as yet undiscovered fact, but causes those who do to be scorched by accusations of conceit and presumption for daring to think in the line in which he thought without effect; so, the great names of those who have discovered that the Sceptre of Judah is no sceptre at all but a Tribe; and of others, that Levi and Edom, and the malum regnum of the Latins for one hundred and eighty-seven years, was the domination of the Tribe of Judah; and of all, that Shiloh has come to and restored Judah and Israel; while, manifestly, the coming of the Lord in humiliation [JML: as opposed to a Messiah in conquering glory] being the cause of the dispersion of the one, and Israel not being yet allowed to be in presence at all, is a proof that the prophecy is misread: .. all this constitutes such a confusion of names, and things, and fancies, inconsistent with, and so contradictory of, one another, as shows, that nothing but the Exigency of System could have induced the production of so many antagonistic facts as, or by way of, proof of the fulfillment of the promise. And, so long as men are content to take up with such unintelligible fulfilments of a very plain assertion, so long will the Vision of Truth, as it is acted out upon the common-place stage of the earth's theatre, though visible to those whose minds are not preoccupied by the conviction that the prophecy of the Peace of the Shiloh, has been accomplished by War, and Woe, and False Manifestations of God's Truth for 2300, or for 1800, or 1260 years, - be utterly invisible to those whose judgment is led astray by false interpretations of great men.

But if, indeed, the Sceptre of Judah and its prophesied continuance can be thus sublimated away, where are we to find the Indestructible Throne of David? Is it in 'Change Alley? [JML: the London stock exchange] - or in the Jew's Quarter in Frankfort? [JML: with the Rothschilds] Is money, or money-dealing the foundation or manifestation of the Throne which was never to be without an occupant of the Stem of Jesse? Where then is it?

I say, under any other hypothesis than that which the case of England exhibits to men's astonished eyes, as in the details here presented to them, we are still to seek for the manifestation of their fulfillment, as a now present reality, on the earth. Where is the Perpetual Sceptre of Judah? Where is the Indestructible Throne of David?

All things are possible with God: and such a manifestation of fulfilled prophecy and promise may be possible, apart from the present circumstances of the British Empire. But it is difficult to the human mind to conceive how, on the one hand, on the face of the earth, such a fulfillment could be presented to man, other than the State of Britain presents; and, on the other, how at the same time, the things which have led to these conclusions could have come together, and thus clustered themselves, and thus strangely, by chance that the Elements of the Remnant of Judah should be collected into one place, and belong, to one power; .. and, as would be, in the future-expected state of things, fitting, that power, the greatest on the earth; .. whose Monarch is seated on a Throne, which her, people insist on calling Jacob's Pillow; and over whose head waves, in sight of all the world, in every Sea, on every Continent, and in all the Corners of the Earth, the Lion of the Irish and Scottish Kings, which is, the Standard of the Tribe of Judah!


"Judah is a lion's whelp." - Gen. 49:9
"Every man of the children of Israel shall pitch by his own standard, with the ensign of his father's house." - Num. 2:2
"In the first place went the standard of the camp of the children of Judah." - Num. 10:14.
F.R.A. Glover: It will not have escaped the attention of the least observant, that, in the National Flag, called the Royal Standard, which is the Blazon of the National Arms, in the upper and outer quartering of that Ensign, there is a Lion Rampant, red, on a Golden Ground.
That Lion is the Lion of Scotland, incorporated, according to the Rules of Heraldry, into the Arms and Standard of England from the time that James VI. of Scotland, inheriting by his English Descent the Realm of England, united the Two Crowns.
How that Eastern Tropical Beast, a Lion, came to be the Blazon of a Country lying so far West as Scotland, and in the Icy North, the following extract from Campion's Historie of Ireland, p. 32, in Spenser's Publication, will declare,-
First therefore came from Ireland Fergusius, the Son of Ferchardus; a man very famous for his skill in blazoning of armes. Himselfe bore the Red Lyon, rampant in a Golden Field (John Major, lib. 2, cap.1 ). There was in Ireland a monument of marble, fashioned like a throne; and .. because he deemed the finding thereof to be ominous to some kingdome, he brought it along with him and layde it up in the country for a Jewell. This marble Fergusius obtained towards the prospering of his voyage, and in Scotland he left it, which they used many years after, in Coronation of their kings at Scone."
Thus, it will be seen, that the Lion of Scotland was, in reality, the Lion of Ireland: and, as the Lion is no more an Irish than a Scottish wild beast, it is evidently an importation to that Country from the East: further, as having been associated, as is seen above, by Fergus with the National and Family Stone, it is clear that he must have considered it equally as the Family and National Standard.
The Harp became the National Standard of Ireland, only from the time of Henry VIII (Ledwich, 232), in order to commemorate his election as king of Ireland by the common assent of the Irish Princes. They were no less glad than the English, to be rid of the unseemly intrusions of the Bishop of Rome; and they thus expressed their gratitude to the doughty king. However deservedly reprobated for his tyranny in other matters, the king was a great favourite with the Chief Princes in Ireland; who willingly recognized his authority and kingship, and did homage to him, accordingly, as King of Ireland.
Up to this time it would seem that the Irish had no common or National Standard; for, "in an ancient Roll of Arms preserved by Leland (Collectanea 616), of the age of Hen. III., giving the bearings of most European Princes, we find the Arms of Wales, of Scotland, and the little Isle of Man, but not a word of Ireland." (Ledwich's Antiquities, p.232).
The cause of this might have been, that the English considered their Arms as the Arms of the English Pale; and would have felt it to be untrue as well as impolitic, to give any blazon of any of the then existing Irish kings, as the Arms of Ireland.
But, as Fergus had taken the Lion Rampant with him to Scotland as a proper accompaniment to the National Stone, which he, possibly, held to have had some talismanic virtue, it is evident that he thought that that Standard was the Standard of his Race; and we may, therefore, very well believe that he felt it to be the Standard of his nationality also.
That this Irish Lion was the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, introduced into Ireland by the Prophet Jeremiah at the same time that the Stone from the East and the Seed Royal were introduced, there is no need toaffirm. Of the probability of such a deed on the part of the Prophet, others are as well capable of judging as he who writes. It is very evident, that an Eastern Beast, never indigenous to these countries, was once the Standard of Ireland, or of the Reigning Family of Ireland; and that that goes to establish the fact of a connexion of that Family with the East: and further, that this Figure of a Lion Rampant, is the Ensign of the Hebrew Tribe of Judah; which concurrence tends much to show the likelihood of aHebrew connexion between Ireland and the East. Certainly, whatever be the ancient facts of the case, this Irish connexion has been the means of introducing and maintaining, in constant display, on the National Keep of Royalty, over the anointed Head of this United Empire, the Blazon identical with the Standard of the Tribe of Judah. This may indicate what has been suggested, or it may mean nothing. It may be accident, and not Providence. It certainly ties Ireland to the East, .. to those of the East who bad a Lion Rampant for their Standard. And the son of Jesse had a Lion Rampant for his Standard. And if there be any reason to imagine that Jeremiah, in the exercise of his office and mission "to plant and to build" the kingdom of Judah, for the perpetuation of the Sceptre thereof, and the continuation of the Throne of David, set up any mark of Jewish Nationality and Descent, what badge would he have brought and left as the mark and sign of that Monarchy, but the old well-known and prophetically inspired Standard of the Race he represented?


"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; but of kings to search it out." - Prov. 25:2.
F.R.A. Glover: The argument here set forth is materially strengthened, by the proof afforded in the fact that of all the different Notabilia connected with Tara, in relation to this point, every one is originally Hebrew, and has a Hebrew name; and not an Irish name, except by adoption or corruption. From the Stone of Destiny downwards, to the establishment of the College of Ollams, there are eight several points, as will be seen by the following sentence, in which the words or things having Hebrew equivalents are marked with small capitals. It exhibits the nine assumed historical Hebraical facts of the case.
The Stone of DESTINY, (Called Lia-Fail. Phail from Heb. Phelia, Buxtorf.) of Ireland (called, Hebraically, after it, the Isle of DESTINY, INIS-FAILIA, Inis-Phail) is the "Jacob's Pillow " of England; on which was once crowned, on the hill of TARA (Heb. Torah, the Law) in Ireland, TAMAR (Teamair), "the KING'S DAUGHTER" OF JUDAH, under THE STANDARD OF JUDAH, by the OLLAMI FOLA (Fola, or Aramaic, Phola = Magnates, Vallancey), of Ireland; who was Jeremiah the prophet. He, as Jehovah's " Prophet to the Nations," there set up the TORAH, the Law of God; instituted the office of the JODHAN MORAN (The Righteous Judge, Isa. 11; Jer. 23; 33), the REACTAIRE (Ra-ta, Governor, Judge; Moore's Ireland i 135) (or, Judge) of Tara; and founded the Mur-OLLAM-ham, or school of Ollams, to teach The Law at the place which was called from that time, TARA.
The evidence that is furnished by each of these matters in relation to the others, so acts and re-acts upon the whole of them, that the assurance of the prophet's having brought the Stone, the Blood Royal, and the Standard from Judea, and their being what they are believed to be, - coupled with the great National Fact that the Sceptre in connexion with them still flourishes, and is, of those in all the world, the most illustrious, - may be held to be established to the point of moral certainty.
Concerning, these things, it is to be observed that they "drop out," so to speak. They tell nothing of a Prophet; nothing of Jeremiah; the chief of them absolutely seems to make it impossible for him to be the person meant: .. they are hardly discernible, by the ordinary reader, to have any relation to any System, or to the facts of such a case as we suppose the realities of this one to constitute. With respect to the Prophet himself, the chief actor of the whole scene and the pivot on which it all turns, to get at him at all, the disguise of a false office is first of all to be stripped off an imagined man before it is possible to get a glimpse of the real official; and then, the truth of the attribute-adjunct, Fail, is to be recovered from the perversion the real word has undergone, and a sense given to it, consistent with the meaning of its conjoined word, applicable to the character of the man and his office: i.e., Irish metamorphosis has to be reduced to Hebrew sound and Hebrew sense to bring it into congruity with the office of the man. These things done, the Ollam, the Teacher, i.e., the Ollam-Fola, Teacher of Destiny, reveals the Prophet. And, when he is seen as the Prophet who set up the witness of The Jodhan Moran, - a phrase itself taking in the whole system of Theology that the Holy Scriptures reveal, or had revealed up to that time, and indeed, if standing alone would contain the whole argument in itself, - nothing from such premisses can be concluded, but that these people had the advantage of a Hebrew Prophet to proclaim glad tidings to them, and that, that Prophet, was Jeremiah. Culled, however, thus, out of the histories of the times, cast together, and each made to throw a gleam of light on the presence or existence of its neighbour, they constitute a cluster of coincidences too remarkable to be passed over with neglect by the Christian or the Philosopher, whether truly or falsely so called.
But, while treating of the probability of these matters being in accordance with the hypothesis of this work, the very remarkable fact must not be overlooked, that there appears thus, as above, to have been a complete Hebrew revolution at Tara effected, at the time that the Stone, the Seed Royal, and the Standard of Judah were set up. (With respect to the chronology here assumed, the text does not accord with the date quoted in chapter vi. But it is to be recollected, that as Mr. O'Connor has brought down the date of the Chief Actor in this whole drama from the fabulous times of the nearly antediluvian era to the reasonable date of circa 600 A.C., while it is not possible to imagine that the Stone itself could have been adrift from Jerusalem until its polity and temple were brought to nought; while the name of Fola, common to the Ollam and the Princess, makes these two characters synchronous, it is not possible to arrive at any other conclusion, to make these facts consistent, but the assumption of the text.)
For it is not alone in the Name of the Stone, in the changed Name of the place, (the rectification and establishment of one date involves the correction of the assumed date of all contemporaneous events), in the Title of the Fortress, and the Standard itself, that we have Hebrew words and indications; but, the Jodhan Moran, the Ollam-Fola and the School of the Ollams, and the Reactaire, (the Judge), were not only Hebrew names or things; but they were, as all existing, on the same spot, indicative of the introduction of an ENTIRE HEBREW SYSTEM, and of the unhesitating confidence and obedience with which all these Things, Persons, and Offices with Strange Names, were accepted, and allowed tosupplant the national institutions and nomenclature: having been suffered, evidently, by the people, to supersede by one general sweep, all that had previously been the order of the day.
Under the supposition that the people believed that they had been favoured with a direct visitation from ALMIGHTY GOD, to which it behoved them without question to yield, the solution of this strange fact is easy. Under any other supposition, it is altogether unimaginable how such a state of things could have so recommended itself as to have brought about this overwhelming change.
If any man, at that time, could have wrought such a change from Irish Heathenism to Hebrew Deism, have introduced the Torah, have set before the People the full Revelation of Hebrew Theology, in the Office of The Righteous Judge, and have established an Order of Teachers to magnify the one and to expound the other, - who could he have been but a Hebrew?
Had an Ogygian Sage gone to Judea, and there been taught the law of The Two Tables, and desired, on his return to Ireland, to introduce the necessary Officers for carrying it out, and had been able to do so, he would hardly have encumbered big argument and increased the difficulty of his undertaking, by using outlandish words to convey his meaning to his people.
The fact, therefore, of all these Words and Things being Hebrew, and of their being exhibited and perpetuated among the people under Hebrew names, tells its own tale. The Hebrew influence must have been overwhelmingly in the ascendant, when these institutions were introduced. The work was done with intelligence and forecast. Therefore, a Hebrew must have been there, to do this work which has, evidently, been done. And those who accepted and acknowledged the authority of the innovator, must have believed that they were obeying a Divine impulse - as no doubt they were - in receiving the founder of the things in question, and accepting all that he said and did, with reverence (Jer. 15:11).
These Hebrew words, things, and institutions, therefore, clustered at Tara, constitute full evidence that the whole institution as remodelled by the Hebrew Innovator, was, in a sort, a transplanted Jerusalem; and that the people who submitted to and acknowledged the authority of him who brought them from the East, must have believed that he was, to them, a messenger from God. And so no doubt he was: for it was Jeremiah the Hebrew, the priest of Anathoth, consecrated prophet to the Gentiles when in his mother's womb. And the favour with which he was received, as evidenced by this multifold fact, is a proof that the promises of God made to the Prophet when in quiet in Jerusalem long before, had not been forgotten, by His gracious Lord, when in faith in His providence, be committed himself and the Remnant the Lord had given him to His guidance (Ps. 37:5).
"A Stone, a Woman, and a Flag." - Introduction.
'Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of affliction." Jer. 15:11.
"Thine eyes shall behold the land that is very far off." Isa. 33:17.
F.R.A. Glover: Behold we then the prophet to the Gentiles - so consecrated while an unborn infant - accompanied by the relics, the Stone of Witness, the Standard of Judah, the Law, and the Stem of the Old Kingdom as the Seed-Plant of the New Empire, on the great waters, taking sail, to set up a kingdom and the knowledge of God among Gentiles, under the providence of the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, for "the ultimate bounds" of the West: for those countries where trade had already established a well-tracked line of communication: and where, beyond the reach of Egyptian influence, the Stone of Israel might be set up for a little moment, until the tyranny, under which the necessity for the transportation of this Remnant of Judah had originated, were overpast.
Little idea had the faithful prophet, possibly, of the long interval that was to pass before this Stone of Israel, now set up in Ireland, as the Throne-Seat of the Resuscitated Dynasty, should be restored to the Mount of the Lord, whence he had, in full faith in its return, brought it; .. of the period to elapse between The Righteous Judge's appearance and withdrawal for a season (John 16:18), and His return to the land of his love and his longing, what time Ephraim should have learnt not to envy Judah, and Judah to have ceased to wish to vex Ephraim. The time when the Ensign of which Isaiah prophesied, should be lifted up by the Root of Jesse, for the Nations, .. for the assembling of the outcasts of Israel, and the gathering together the dispersed of Judah, not now from Babylon, but from the four corners of the earth, the East, the West, the North, and the South.
Of one thing he was entirely satisfied: viz., that, as sure as he set up the Pillar of Witness in the Name of his God; and, in the same Holy Name blessed the Race incorporated with its destiny with the promise of a continuance to abide until the appearance of The Righteous Judge, with Whose name, office, and dignity, he, a prophet to the Gentiles, made those Gentiles then acquainted; so surely would that blessing be fulfilled (Isa. 33:17-22): and that, until, in God's own time, He would bring it to pass (Psa. 37:5):
"David should never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel." (Jer. 33:17).
For he had himself been instructed to say, "If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season, then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured; so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me. Moreover the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The Two Families which the Lord bath chosen, he bath even cast them off? thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them." (Jer. 33:20-26).
Lo! then, the significancy of the fact, that, Jeremiah the Prophet having had to do all these things which have been here ascribed to him, all these things themselves point to him as their conductor into the West, and establisher when there.
Lo! the reason of the preservation of a simple Stone; that on which the monarchs of England are crowned. A Stone of no intrinsic or inherent value; but of such, nevertheless, as Jacob's Pillar of Witness, that all the armaments of the world shall not wrest it from the grip of the Anglo-Saxon, so long as they are true to their God and themselves.
Lo! again, also, the cause of the dignity and preeminence of the Race enthroned on it; and of the fact of that Lion Blazon of the British Empire being its highest merit (see Chapter XIII), and pre-eminent election; for it is GOD'S MARK upon us, and constitutes the nation that has it, by right, The Standard-Bearer of the God of Israel: that standard being England's, not by assumption, but by inheritance and right; for it is the Standard of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah; and the Blood of Judah, through the Stem of Jesse, sits on the throne of England: so that the Monarch of England is herein, now, the Living Representative of the REMNANT OF JUDAH of the Prophet Jeremiah: even that Remnant of Judah to whom the Lord promised sanctuary and recovery; for "The Lord said, Verily it shall be well with thyremnant; verily,I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction" (Jer. 15:11). And "the remnant" that escaped of the House of Judah, did take root downward, and has borne fruit upward (II Kings 19:30-31), and will: for, already, "of one, has become a thousand, - of a little one a great nation," (Isa. 40:22) the earnest of a greater; and it is still "the Remnant of Judah;" .. the marks whereof, these, "The Islands of the Sea," have, and can show them: even a Stone, a Woman, and a Flag, as heretofore, with such evidence of the Presence of a Prophet amongst us to notify the will and do the work of the Lord (see Introduction), as the foregoing pages, in part, may suffice to declare.
Lo! then, the Remnant of Judah, and these, the marks thereof:-
The mysterious Throne:-
The mysterious Race seated on it:-
and, The Ensign of The Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5).
And are all these things, these Three Things, here in England? They are; and are England's, not only by Right of Possession, but the Monarch of THE ISLANDS OF THE SEA has inherited them.
Are they here for nothing? or is all this seeming Providence purposeless?
Are they SIGNs ? or are they not SIGNS?


"Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the Lord." - Jer. 31:20. Spoken B.C. 587
"I am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-born," Jer 31:9.
F.R.A. Glover: If, then, these things be such, and, as is affirmed of them, they are, as constituting "The Remnant of Judah," in power and permanence here; then is the position of the Monarchs of England of this Race, that of Perpetuators of the Sceptre of Judah until SHILOH come, - even of Judah, who is to be Lord over his Brethren and Victor over all his Enemies (Gen 49:8-9). And, wonderfully indeed hasthe Lord blessed the arms of England with victory in the several conflicts in which she has contended, for Right and Principle, with the various nations of the world!
But that same section of Scripture which foretells the perpetuity of the Sceptre of Judah, his dominance over all his brethren, and that his "hand is to be in the neck of his enemies," also promises universal dominion to Joseph. His power is to run "to the utmost bounds of the everlasting hills," to encompass the earth, and he is to become, in the Ephraim of Israel, "a multitude of nations." (Gen. 49:26; 48:19).
How can these things be? .. that is How can they co-exist? If Joseph be dominant, Judah must decline. If Judah is to rule the nations and is to receive "the praise of his brethren," how can the power of Joseph be universal? .. how can Joseph be a Lord-Paramount on Earth?
That England, is, in her royal family, enthroned on the Stone of Israel, under the mark and the power of the Ensign of Judah, the Remnant of Judah, and authorized, through those marks and what they import, to receive the homage of "the dispersed of Judah" as the Head of their House, wherever they are in dispersion, is manifest enough. But where is Israel? And how can Judah, how is he, to receive the homage of the Tribes ? How, of Joseph in particular, .. the first-born (1 Chron. 5:2), the beloved Ephraim? Where is Israel? where the Israel of Ephraim? of Ephraim and Manasseh? entitled above all, to the Name which Israel won (Gen. 48:16)? And when found, will that Israel bow down to Judah?
And if "Ephraim, remembered of the Lord," (Jer. 31:20) though long lost, were now to appear, what room is there for him on the face of the earth, and in power, unless he should possess himself of the domains of Judah? If Joseph run down and bring Judah to vassalage, where is the fulfillment of the promise of sceptral power to Judah over all his brethren, and his immunity from the power of his enemies (Gen. 48:8)?
Besides, where are we to seek for this grand Joseph? him, whose greatness is to be equal to that of Judah? Is it in the Russian Empire? Is it in that of France? either of which have already handled in conjunction, and in disjunction, Turkey and Syria, the nucleus of the Land of Promise! Is it in rising Italy? Is it in waning Austria? Is it in Prussia, looming to a Germanic Empire, a possible incorporation of all the Tribes save four (to wit:- Reuben, Simeon, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, excluding Judah and Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh. Levi is a distributable tribe)? Or, is it in The United States? Which of these are likely to volunteer absorption into the arms of, and to make identity with, England, and become, with her, one in faith and love, as well as one in Arms and Power? Have they not all, in turn, shown that jealousy of her, that forbids the likelihood of any coalition, much less identification by incorporation? Have not the very favours she has done them all in turn, been made food for the heaviest revilings, the bitterest of cursings ? And even among our brethren of the United States, own cousins though we are, our earnest love towards our own Race, and anxiety that they might spare themselves the pang of fratricid, are returned to us with bitterness, and cursings, and threats of war!
Let us, however, not be weary in well-doing. Wishing well and doing well to all mankind, we must be content to heap the coals of fire of good deeds on their heads, even without the comfort of thinking that we merit the thanks of God for so doing. We act as we ought to act; and are, withal, but unprofitable servants to our Master.
But where, in the mean time, are we to find this mighty Joseph, whose greatness is not to be dimmed by the presence of Judah? This Israel, blessed, and to be blessed with blessings, spiritual and temporal, beyond all that man can desire and hardly dare to conceive? Blessings of the Heaven, the Earth, and the Sea; of the Breast, and of the Womb! To the utmost bounds of the everlasting hills they are to extend and run over, and become withal "a multitude of nations."
If, indeed, Judah and Joseph, - Judah being what he is, and Joseph equally great somewhere in visible existence, - were to combine and agree to be one, and it were lawful in the sight of God that this should be, then indeed would all these difficulties disappear, and the greatness of each tribe would be the augmentation of that of the other in this confirmation of the blessing to both.
Now, strange as it may sound to hear this, or difficult as it may be, to bring one's self to think it, yet, what is tantamount to this combining, this agreeing of the two to combine, has already occurred, and can now be hindered by the jealousy of no power on earth, nor by all of them in combination. Its lawfulness also in the sight of God must be indisputable: for His Providence has already brought it to pass. Man's acts have unconsciously wrought out, in this behalf, the will of God. England is this Joseph! England is this Ephraim! For, Joseph, long lost, has appeared, and been, a long time, one with Judah, the substantial representative of its dignity, the manifestation of its power. Judah and Joseph are one, in the dignity and power of the State of England. And they are already full to overflowing with the amplitude of terrestrial possessions; for, such is England's greatness and power, that any aggrandizement in the way of territorial or political augmentation has long been felt by this strange power to be a nuisance and a hindrance, and it would now hardly be voluntarily increased, save under the motion of a divine impulse.
Yes, truly, strange as all this is, yet is it not more strange than true. Strange indeed, not that the ways of God, Who has planted
"His footsteps in the sea,
His wonders to perform," (vide Chapter XV.)
are greater than man's ways, but that this thing should have been manifestly set forth before us for now upwards of 250 years, and that we should not have seen it! And that, while we have been looking for The Lost Tribes in every corner of the earth, and have fancied that we have detected them in the presence of every degraded portion of the human race, we, in the very midst of them, part of them, - the most important part of them, - should have been blind to their existence as such; .. should have failed to see them where certainly Joseph ought to be looked for if not found; viz. amongst the noblest and grandest of the species that tread the face of the earth, - in England! In England?
How is England of the Lost Tribes of Israel ? How is England, Joseph ? How is England, Ephraim? How is England, Manasseh? How is Joseph, here, Lord-Paramount? How is Joseph Lord-Paramount of the Earth? And then, if that be, How is Judah Lord over his Brethren? i.e., How is the envy of Ephraim to depart, and Judah to cease to vex Ephraim ? and, How are the Two Families to agree to choose one Head?


"The Saxons were a Gothic or Scythian Tribe; and of the various Scythian nations which have been recorded, the Sakai, or Sacae, are the people from whom the descent of the Saxons may be inferred, with the least violation of probability." Sharon Turner's History of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. i. p. 100.
"The fact that we have six or seven hundred words in our language of Persian origin, agrees with our own origin amongst the Persians, but not [as] of them. Hebrew Roots, too, are amongst our homeliest words." - Dr. Moore's Lost Tribes, p.91.
F.R.A. Glover: How is England of the Ten Tribes?
About some 120 years before the events occurred, which were the basis of the Argument of the first fifteen Chapters of this Book, - viz., the breaking up of the Polity and Rule of the House of Judah, by its removal from Jerusalem to Babylon, - Phul, Tiglath-Pileser (II Kings 15:29), Shalmaneser (I Chron. 5:26), &c., led away the Israelites captive. They were deported to the depopulated cities of the Medes, off the Caspian Sea, in the territory lying between the rivers Araxes and Gozan, B.C. 720. This done, by the will of the Lord, they, worthy of punishment, were punished. But, though erring children, they were Sons of Jacob and Children of Abraham, and neither of the Patriarchs would God fail because of the unworthiness or sin of their descendants (Gen. 28:15). So, after punishment, came reconciliation, and thenceforward prosperity and multiplication; enlargement of their border and manifestation of power. They stretched up northwards, by land and by sea; and, as a powerful nation, by the name of Sakae (tzaa-chi), or the Tribes of Isaac (Isaac, "House of Isaac," Amos 7:9, 16. Heb. tzakhak, laughter; hence 'Isaac.' Gen. 18:12, 21:6), overlaying the northern sea-board of the Caspian, were the first people who could say to the conquering Alexander, "Turn about and return by the way that you came, for here you shall not pass." And he did turn back.
As to their adoption or acquisition of the name of Sakae, by which they and their descendants subsequently were known, it appears that, after the separation of the Ten Tribes, when they, in their pride and arrogance, refused to be ruled over by a Son of Judah, and renounced thus the hopes and promises connected with the House of David, they arrogated to themselves the title of "the Sons ofIsaac:" for it was not until after that event they were known by the name of "the House of Isaac," as synonymous with the Israel of Jeroboam (amos 7:9, 16).
"This is," as Dr. Moore observes (It is to be noted that this learned layman, who seems here to touch the position of the Deistical writers in the "Essays and Reviews," can hardly have had them in his mind, as his book was written apparently before theirs was published), "memorable. They did not think, by this rejection of God's anointed, to reject the hopes of Israel, but rather, in their wilfulness, appeared to fall back upon the anterior promise, and to look for blessing and power in the name of Isaac, the true seed of Abraham;" [when as yet there was no blessing by Israel to a pre-eminent Prince of Judah; but, in whom, certainly, all the nations of the earth should be blessed.] "They arrogated the right of dominion, in this name, when occupying the hills of Samaria; and it is, therefore, highly probable, that when the conquering Assyrian king drove all their families from their fatherland, they still boasted of their descent from Isaac. They preferred to mingle idol-worship on high-places with their traditional ritual; and thought, perhaps, with the opinionated and Cain-like spirit of refiners of God's ordinances, to honour Jehovah more, by calling Him Baal, or Lord of All, than by worshipping Him as the God of their fathers, and the chosen people only. The origin of the name of Sacae, or Sakai, for the inhabitants of that part of Armenia, which the Sacae occupied after the expulsion of the Scythians, is thus naturally accounted for. That they should be confounded with the Scythians is equally natural, especially as there is reason to suppose that they afterwards colonized amongst that wide-spread race of marauders, and gave their name to the country they occupied beside the Massa-Getae. They attained so conspicuous a position amongst the Scythian nations, from superior arts, power, and industry, as at length to give their royal name to the dominant part of that race. It is at least remarkable that the name Sacae is not applied by the Classic historians and geographers to any tribe of the Scythians until some time subsequent to the exile of the House of Isaac." - pp. 97-99.
Ultimately, as Sakae, these people spread out westward and eastward. And, after many changes of place and power, of those who came westward, some became the Angles of England. They were followed later by other off-slips of the same determined race, named Sons of Sakae (Sakasones, Suni = Söhne, Ger. sons). Lo! the origin of the Anglo-Saxons, - that ever-advancing Race, who have since occupied all England, and absorbing the Scottish and Irish, have at length spread themselves out into a "nation of nations" (Gen. 48:19).
There are three very striking - what may be called popular - marks, by which this descent of England from Israel may be seen:
(1) the Wittena Gemote, the evidence of the Medo-Persian residence of the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons, - such institution, in name and thing, being, identical with the same custom, so named also, and so used by the Persians; (There are numerous words in the Persian language which are, in sound and signification, precisely the same in the old English ; we will only instance one: Witten-a-gemote, which, in both tongues, literally means a national assembly. Huet says, the German language bears a great affinity to the Persian. The cause of this may be imputed to their common origin from the Scythians." - Pennie's Historical Drama, 530.)
(2) the Seven-Day weekly division of time, still known among us under the names of the gods whom they, during their heathendom, held sacred; and
(3) their use of the Three Yearly Feasts of the Hebrews (Deut. 16:16), the Passover, of which the Saxon heathen name still remains in use amongst us, as Easter, the Feast of Weeks, as Whit-Sunday, - and the Feast of Tabernacles, by the Anglo-Saxons, when they were still lost in the slough of Wodenism. See Wilson, p. 128.
For further proof on this interesting subject, the Reader is referred to a Book of "Lectures on Ancient Israel," setting forth "Our Israelitish Origin," by Mr. Wilson (Nesbit). This learned layman commenced to lecture upon it at the instance, it seems, of a valuable and eminent servant of the Church (Rev. Peter roe, Kilkenny); who was desirous that what he had himself heard might be delivered in every city and town in Ireland. This was at once set about; and as well also, many chief places in Scotland and England benefited by this valuable witness's 'labour of love.' The substance of the fourteen Lectures has been in print for now twenty-one years, and the Book has gone through many editions.
Mr. Wilson has collected all that is sufficient, in proof of this case, in his Lectures, to which the Reader is referred: to cite passages in proof is out of the question: it would be to reprint the whole book.
In the mean time, Mr. Wilson's authorities for his facts and deductions are chiefly Mr. Sharon Turner, Rapin de Thoyras, and the Abbé Milot, from his work, entitled, "Elements of the History of England:" all of whom, without being at all aware that they are speaking to the case, and viewing things, in general, from quite different points, most curiously illustrate the theory of Mr. Wilson; which is, .. That the purpose of God has been overruling the actings of His people, (the sons of Joseph,) in such a manner, that their greatness and power is rather the result of a destiny than any ordinary issue of effect from cause: that they have been made great, in spite of themselves; their mistakes having been so overruled, as to work out the advantage of the nation. Thus, he says,
"All changes He hath overruled for their good. The wonderful manner in which they withstood, as it were, the world at the commencement of this century; and in which they have been enriching it with their wise and useful inventions, more and more ever since, is most worthy of note; and all this they are to ascribe, not to chance, but to the goodness of the God of their Fathers, who had promised so to defend them, and so to cause them to be for blessings unto all the nations of the earth. In their case are manifested, not the supposed freaks of blind fortune, but the good providence of the God of Israel."
"That this people have been wondrously dealt with is acknowledged," continues Mr. Wilson, "by those who have had the best opportunity of judging: by those who have studied their history in comparison with other nations." - p. 120.
" How impenetrable are the decrees of Heaven!" exclaims the Abbé in astonishment,as he contemplates the events in succession. He concludes his summary of the events of our History in these words: "To this very imperfect summary of the principal epochas, let us add, the detail of those laws successively established, to form a rampart to liberty, and lay the foundation of public order; the progress of letters and of sciences, so closely connected with the happiness and glory of States: the singularities of the English genius, profound, contemplative, yet capable of every extreme; the interesting picture of parliamentary debates, fruitful in scenes, the variety and spirit of which equally strike us. The reader will easily conceive that this history is unparalleled in its kind." [What wonder! is it not the history of Joseph?] "In other countries, princes, nobles, fill the entire theatre; here, men, citizens, act a part which is infinitely more interesting to man." - p. 121. [Wilson.]
In page five of his Preface to his third Edition, in 1844, Mr. Wilson laments that the dissemination of his views has not been undertaken by the Clergy, and others, and public teachers, "whose position in society was advantageous for their dissemination to the extent that is desirable." Of this "desirable extent," it is possible that an estimate of that is formed elsewhere. When the time comes for action, men's minds will doubtless be moved. The fact may be, that men may see a War Rocket in that which Mr. Wilson deems to be only a Signal; and that the Political Corollary to Mr. Wilson's Religious Proposition is a Fire-Work not to be ignited, heedless of the political issues of a national adoption of his hypothesis. In the mean time, notwithstanding all the apparent apathy on the subject, multitudes of earnest and deeply-religious men have imbibed the great truth that Mr. Wilson was privileged to proclaim. That the seed was not spread broad-cast in vain, if his own experience have not already assured him abundantly, not only may these pages satisfy him, but those of another learned layman, from whose recent publication I think it right to make the accompanying extract.
"A work was published some time since, (by Mr. Wilson of Brighton) entitled 'Our Israelitish Origin' This was too much opposed to the views of popular expositors to be received with the candour it deserved; but it must be acknowledged that Mr. Wilson, in that work, has done much more to meet the requirements of prophecy, than any that preceded him: and, although we dare not follow him into all the results to which he would lead us, still he has shown a large amount of probability, and indeed very much of the letter of Scripture, in favour of the opinion he has advocated, viz., that the Saxons are the descendants of the Israelites as distinguished from the Jews. Mr. Wilson has not advanced any directevidence of Saxon connexion with Israel by descent; but he has indicated a great deal in the Anglo-Saxon character and customs which accords better with the notion of our Israelitish origin, than with any other explanation of our peculiarities."
"Could we but find the broken link in the chain, by which the Sakai or Sacae are supposed to have been connected with the Israelites, we should be at no loss to discover some of the modes in which the wondrous prophecies, so apparently contradictory and paradoxical, concerning the outcast tribes, have been fulfilled in their descendants: for here we are, the Anglo-Saxons, with mind and heart imbued with the history and hopes of Israel, elevated and enlarged by the sublime doctrines and predictions of their sacred seers, sages kings and prophets, singing the songs of Zion in our temples, living in the noble expectation of universal blessedness under the glorious reign of the King of Salem, and desiring and endeavouring to promote the coming of His kingdom in all lands. The [Anglo]-Saxons embrace the world; and the devout amongst them realize, in faith and spirit, the visions of all true prophets and seers that have been since the world began ; and now anticipate the period when a King, shall reign in righteousness and princes rule in judgment. (Isa. 32.) What could converted Israelites do more?" - Dr. Moore's Lost Tribes, pp. 94, 95.
But granting what Sharon Turner, and Rapin, and others have declared as suggestive of this descent of the Anglo-Saxon races from the lost tribes deported into the Heathendom of Medo-Persia, and the many marks existing, among us, political, social, and domestic, by which the identity of this people with the Tribes of Israel is established, upon what ground can any one assume that England is entitled to be considered as the representative of Joseph?


"Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall: {23} The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him: {24} But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob; (from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel:) {25} Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb: {26} The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren. Genesis 49:22-26
"And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the LORD be his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath, {14} And for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon, {15} And for the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting hills, {16} And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren. {17} His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh." Deuteronomy 33:13-17
"But the birthright was Joseph's." - 1 Chron. 5:2.
F.R.A. Glover: How is England Joseph?
The prophecy concerning Joseph himself, by Jacob, is so peculiar in its promises and terms, and it seems so exactly to fit the condition of England, that one is driven to see England's existence and power, as foretold in the endowments promised to Joseph; which endowments cannot, by any stretch of fancy or accommodation of language, be extended to suit the condition of any other of the Teutonic or Continental nations, sprung equally from the tribes with ourselves, or any other, sprung from any other source.
So much colour is there for this assertion, that
"Mr. Wilson," says Dr. Moore, "who has not advanced any direct evidence of Saxon connexion with Israel by descent, while he has indicated a great deal in the Anglo-Saxon Character and Customs which accords better with the notion of our Israelitish origin than with any other explanation of our peculiarities, lays most stress upon the circumstances that the prophecies concerning the family of Joseph are not fulfilled, unless in the Anglo Saxons. This, however, will scarcely serve to prove," continues the Doctor, "that the Gothic and Saxon races are the direct descendants of Joseph, to whom were promised all the blessings of increase and abundance. The facts and arguments, accumulated by several writers, may well suffice, however, to convince us that an Israelitish influence has been infused into the people from whence we sprung, and that the Spirit of Israel's training, in war, legislature, religion, and all outward endeavour, has been operating amongst us to qualify our population to colonize all countries; and while preparing the ground for the highest culture, penetrating the everlasting hills for gold and treasure, traversing seas, building docks in every harbour, intersecting the mountains and the valleys with roads of wrought iron, riding on fiery chariots with the speed of tempests, sending forth their thoughts and words on lightning wings from land to land, and declaring every where this earthly earnestness, notwithstanding that this world is not our rest. These, however, are not the positive marks by which the offspring of the escaped remnant" - he means the remnant of Israel - "is to be known at last." - Moore's Lost Tribes, p. 94,
Having thus eloquently, but truthfully withal, delivered himself concerning this wonderfully endowed and gifted people, in illustration of the prophecy concerning those who were promised the fulness of the riches of Heaven and Earth and Sea - things spiritual, physical, and temporal - it seems bard to conceive what further proof be or others can desire to satisfy them, that those of whom he so wrote must be Very-Joseph.
But should any doubt linger in the mind of any as to the identity of England with Joseph, through lack of proof, as in absence of some more definite mark of identification between England and Joseph, that will pass away in the answer to the question, How is England Ephraim?


"I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations." - Gen. 48:18-19.
"Again will I build thee, and thou shalt be built, O Virgin of Israel .. Thou shalt yet plant vines upon the mountains of Samaria. For thus saith the Lord; Sing with gladness for Jacob, and shout for the Head of the Nations." - Jer. 31:4, 5. 7.
"The name Sacae was applied to them first, as simply the Tribes; perhaps adopted from themselves: but ultimately it came to signify Bow-men, because they, like the Ephraimites (Ps. 78:9), and the English, were so famous for the use of the bow." - Moore, p. 89.
F.R.A. Glover: How is England, Ephraim?
If, notwithstanding all that has already been said and quoted, this admits of a doubt in the minds of candid inquirers, who desire not to arrogate to our glorious land more than justly belongs to her, - a thing, certainly, most.earnestly to be guarded against, - the fact that England is Joseph, - will be brought home to the mind of every man of our empire, who considers England's position as manifested in her Colonies, which constitute a constellation of nations. These "nations," though they are as one with us, and so, we constitute one people, are, in so far as concerns the administration of power, equal, at any moment, to start, each, as an independent nation; having, all, a form of government, and being equal to the labour of self-existence: each, in fact, being a Nation in embryo, as having the germ of a nation in itself.
God forbid that they should ever desire to commit suicide by separating from the parent stem, either through false ideas of the glory of independence, or through the gratification of some vague notion of "the fitness of things" by any insensate doctrinaire, in temporary power, amongst ourselves. There, however, they are, to separate if they list. Nobody wants to keep them for our own sake. It is hard to see what they would gain by separating, beyond the chance and likelihood of being swallowed up by any power that chose to march in upon them with 400,000 men, and occupy their sea-board, if they had any, with iron-plated frigates, with a Constitution for them, ready cut and framed, according to the most exact regulation-order of some imperial wisdom. He who is one with England, be he no bigger than the smallest atom of herself [the island of Sark, for instance, with one man upon it], has, in union, all the strength and power of England to defend him; and those who are bigger than Europe have found that they have not done themselves much service by starting on their own independence. It is a great thing to be Joseph; which is, the proper title, dignity, and eminence of all that belongs, or has ever belonged to, England. But it is to Joseph with Judah that the blessing is. It, is Judah that has THE ABIDING SCEPTRE!
Who can look on the present state of the United States without anguish of soul and body? There is Joseph who was one with Judah, but is not. They would not be. They chose to separate: and now they are, all, in all the energy of infuriated discord, ready to plunge a knife each into the bowels of his brother. If the price of their ill-conceived desire of independence is a war of extermination among themselves, - not possible so long as they were in the band of Judah, - which of them, as they give out their last gasp and leave their unhappy widows and helpless infants to the miserable issues that must befall, but will have cause to deplore the acts which led their fathers to separate from "the mother that bare them," and to wish that the grand energies that God gave them had not been turned to some other and better account, than to create the opportunity to show to the enemies of freedom the most miserable spectacle that mankind will ever have had to deplore? .. unless, in God's Providence, He be mercifully pleased even yet to cry, "Hold! enough. Repent, and do your first works of humiliation and repentance!" .. and they do them.
Let therefore all Large Colonies take warning and Small Ones count the cost, how they separate from that grand Mother which is the HEART through which the life-blood of all who belong to her may circulate. Judah is to Ephraim what the heart is to the body. Nevertheless, as the example of the United States has shown, that, that which was with us may become a Nation, it does not require those who are still with us to follow that example to prove, that each separate Colony is one of "the nation of nations of Ephraim," and to go adrift from us to give material evidence of the great fact, which is sufficiently evident without it.
This Multitude of Nations, then, the Colonies and Dependencies of Great Britain, making it palpable that England is Ephraim, .. and, as omne majus continet omne minus, Ephraim in multitude must be Joseph in nucleus, England must be, therefore, Joseph: and so, whatever is promised to Joseph as well as to Ephraim, will be fulfilled in the destinies of the land in which the multitude of Ephraim is felt, as well as the strength and power of Joseph, is seen, to be.
End of excepted text
From: "England, the Remnant of Judah, and the Israel of Ephraim", written by F.R.A. Glover, M.A., Chaplain to the Consulate at Cologne. Published by Rivingtons, London, 1861. Based on research commenced in 1844.

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario