A selection from “Israel’s Tribes Today” by Steven M.
A selection from “Israel’s Tribes Today” by Steven M. Collins,
chapter one, pages 31 to 49:
The Asian “Sacae” Become the European Saxons
Not all of the migrating Parthians and Scythians came to be known as Goths or Germans. One of the famous branches of the Germanic tribes entering Europe from the east was the Saxons. Sharon Turner comments on their Scythian origins:
“The Saxons were a German or Teutonic, that is, 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…The Sakai…were an important branch of the Scythian nation. Ptolemy mentions a Scythian people, sprung from the Sakai, by the name of the Saxones…There was a people called Saxoi, on the Euxine [the Black Sea], according to Stephanus.”46 (Emphasis added)
The Scythian/Parthian people had been known as the Sacae or Saka for over a millennium. This name was retained by the Germanic tribe that the Romans called the “Saxons.” Phonetically, “Saxons” is the same as “Sac’s sons,” or “Sons of Isaac.” While the English word “Saxon” has a Latin “x,” the German word for “Saxon” is “Sachsisch” or “Sachse.”47 The modern German words for “Saxon” still preserve the name of the Scythian “Sac-ae” who migrated into Europe from Asia. The Sacae were Scythians and Parthians in Asia, so the Saxons, or Sachse, were Scythian/Parthian refugees entering Europe. The Bible prophesied in Genesis 48:14-16 that the name of Isaac would specifically be placed on the Israelite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. Since the Saxons still bore the name of Isaac as they migrated into Europe, it confirms that the Saxons were primarily the Israelite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
The Scythian/Sacae origin of the Germans and Saxons has been known for centuries. A famous British historian, William Camden, wrote the following in 1610:
“…that the Germans are called Scythians, we gather not only out of…Strabo…but also out of Pliny. The name of the Scythians (quoth he) extendeth…even to the Germans…the Saxons descended from the Sacae, a most noble nation, and of much worth in Asia…they came in companies…together with the Getae, Suevi, Daci and others into Europe.”48 (Emphasis added)
Consider also Sharon Turner’s comment in the 1836 book, The History of the Anglo-Saxons:
“The next great sources of its [Europe’s] population were the Scythian or Gothic tribes, who entered it out of Asia, and who gradually spread themselves from its eastern to its western extremity…The Saxons were a German, that is, 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…”49 (Emphasis added)
These accounts confirm that, in 1610 and 1836, it was known that the Germans, Saxons, Getae, Sacae and Daci had migrated into Europe from Asia, and that the Germanic and Saxon tribes of Europe descended from the Scythian and Sacae tribes of Asia.
The Romans had a custom of naming leaders after the enemies they fought. Thus one Roman leader was named “Germanicus” because he fought the Germans. Another took the name “Parthicus” because he fought the Parthians. One Roman leader who fought without success against the Parthians called himself “Decidius Saxa.” Since the Sacae (or Saka) were part of the Parthian Empire, this Roman general had apparently taken the name Sac-ae (or Sak-a), and represented it in a Latin form as “Sax-a.” Since this was done long before Parthia fell, the Romans apparently referred to the Parthian “Sacae” as the “Saxae” even before they migrated to Europe. The Latin plural is “Sac-ae,” and “Sax-a” is a singular form. It is not surprising then that the descendants of the Sacae would be called the Saxons when they later migrated to Europe. Col. Gawler also noted in the 19th century that the classical writer Ptolemy:
“…mention[ed] a Scythian people sprung from the Sakai named Saxones.”51 (Emphasis added)
The link between the Scythian/Parthians and the Saxons is well established. R.H. Hodgkin, in History of the Anglo-Saxons, elaborates further on Ptolemy’s comment on the Saxones. He states:
“After Ptolemy’s statement that the Saxons were to be found ‘on the neck of the Cimbric Peninsula,’ we have to wait for more than a hundred years before we hear of them again. Then about 286 A.D. they are mentioned along with the Franks, first as pirates who infest the coasts of Gaul and later as allies of Carausius, the Roman admiral who revolted and established himself in Britain.”52
He says that the Saxons were first recorded as being “on the neck of the Cimbric Peninsula [modern Denmark]” over a century prior to 286 A.D. This was likely an advance group of Scythian explorers or traders. The Saxons were never present in large numbers in Northern Europe until after the fall of the Parthian Empire. However, by 286 A.D., large numbers of Saxons and Franks are found as pirates in Northern Europe, just six decades after Parthia’s fall.
The conclusion is inescapable that masses of refugee Scythian or Parthian Sacae migrated into northern Europe, and were called Saxons by the Romans. Refugee Sacae would also be anti-Roman. They preyed on Roman shipping and allied themselves with a Roman admiral who was willing to oppose Rome.
Alfred Church wrote in Early Britain that the pirate tribes who allied themselves to Carausius were:
“the first-comers of the swarms of invaders who, under the names of Franks, Saxons, Danes and Normans, were to work such a change on the face of Northern and Western Europe” [and adds] Carausius was a native of the country now known as Holland.”53
This indicates that the Franks, Saxons, Danes and Normans were allied tribes who jointly migrated into Europe from a similar location. We now know that point of origin was in Asia. The Romans referred to many of these tribes as “Germanic.” While the Saxons bore the name of Isaac, the “Danes” bore the name of the Israelite tribe of Dan, which tribe had attached its name to the major rivers entering the Black Sea during Scythian times. William Camden also wrote in 1610 the following about the Danes’ origin:
“Andrew Vellius a Dane and a very great scholar, fetcheth their original from the Dahae, a people of “Scythia.”54
R.H. Hodgkin wrote: “the motive force of the [Saxon] migrations was a land-hunger like that which has carried men of Anglo-Saxon stock as migrants around the globe.”55 He also recorded that the Saxons:
“began to molest the Island (Briton) some time in the latter half of the third century…After 250 A.D. the Imperial authorities began to construct defenses along the coast…the Saxon raiders are not mentioned…till the last quarter of the third century.”56 (Emphasis added)
These dates are extremely significant. The Parthian Empire fell in 226 A.D., precipitating a massive migration of Sacae to the northwest across Europe. From 250-300 A.D., the Saxons and related tribes migrated into Europe in great numbers. Some became pirates, attacking the coast of Britain after 250 A.D. Could anything be clearer? The Saxons were the Sacae who had been dislodged from their homelands by the fall of Parthia just decades previous to their appearance in Europe. While the Goths struck directly at Rome, the Saxons and their allied tribes migrated into Europe around the northern edge of Rome’s European territory in search of a new homeland.
D.V. Fisher’s Anglo-Saxon Age states that:
“Saxons from the eastern shores of the North Sea ravaged the coasts of Britain and occasionally penetrated deep into the lowland zone. Until the end of the fourth century the [Roman] Empire was strong enough to repair the damage done by the incursions.”57
However, Rome’s hold on Britain grew steadily weaker, and Rome eventually had to abandon Britain altogether. The native British Celts at first invited Saxons from the European mainland to assist them as mercenaries, but the Saxons eventually occupied much of England, pushing the native Celts into Wales and Scotland.
Several Germanic/Scythian tribes formed a confederation in the lower Rhine and Weser River areas by 240 A.D.58 These tribes had migrated out of Asia into Central Europe just 14 years after the fall of Parthia! The common denominator in all the Scythian-Germanic-Gothic migrations out of Asia is that their tribes arrived in Europe in huge numbers only after the fall of the Parthian Empire. Clearly, the fall of the immense Parthian Empire is what triggered these great migrations.
The armaments of the Saxons included spears, pikes, bows and arrows, and defensive armor of mail-coats and helmets.59 The fact that they wore metal armor indicates that the Saxons were a people skilled in metallurgy, not ignorant nomads. Their use of the bow and arrow and pikes for offensive weapons and use of mail armor for defense attest to their Parthian origin. The previous book noted that the Parthians primarily fought with a light cavalry with bows and arrows, and a heavy cavalry that charged with long pikes (spears). Their heavy cavalry and horses were clad with mail armor and metal helmets. The Saxons, while exhibiting traditional Parthian weaponry, had to fight on foot instead of on horseback. The horses were needed for hauling their families and possessions in wagons, and may even have been eaten during the privations of migration.
There are additional cultural factors that identify the Saxons with the Parthian/Scythian peoples, but these factors are also common to the Angles, Goths, Germans, Vandals and others who migrated out of Asia into Europe. These factors will be discussed after we examine the migratory history of some of the other tribes who also fled the fallen Parthian Empire.
The tribes most likely migrated just far enough to come to a vacant area and then settled there. New migrants then leap-frogged past them to the next vacant area. Or, when the population increased, they sent out more settlers in covered wagons, like in the American West.
While small Gothic outposts had long existed in Northern Europe,60 the Goths were mainly located in the Black Sea region when they began to invade the Roman Empire. Some accounts about the Goths speculate that the original Gothic homeland was in Scandinavia and that they migrated south toward the Black Sea, but that is incorrect. The vast numbers of Goths who massed by the Black Sea circa 250 A.D. before pouring into Europe were Parthian and Scythian refugees who had been driven out of Iran and Asia, as the evidence clearly shows.
The Gothic-Scythian connection is also noted by the Encyclopedia Britannica, which asserts that the Goths “migrated into Scythia.”61 (Emphasis added) Both the Britannica and Henry Bradley discuss the assumption that the Goths migrated into Scythia from the north, out of Scandinavia. However, the Britannica properly expresses doubts about a Scandinavian origin for so many Goths in these words:
“The credibility of the story of the migration from Sweden has been much discussed by modern authors… [however] so many populous nations can hardly have sprung from the Scandinavian Peninsula.”62
How true! While there were some Goths in Europe prior to the fall of Parthia, they were not known for great numbers or strength until their ranks were swelled by the masses of Parthians, Scythians and other Semitic people who fled from the fallen Parthian Empire. Some Goths had settled as far north Scandinavia, but Scandinavia was not the original homeland for the masses of Goths who invaded the Roman Empire. There is no historical record of massive populations of Goths in Scandinavia before their appearance in Europe in great numbers. The original “Gothic homeland” was Parthia and Scythia!
At the beginning of the third century A.D., the Goths were divided into the Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths) and the Visigoths (Western Goths). These two Gothic groups lived on each side of the Dniester River on the shores of the Black Sea.63
The Goths, Germans, and Saxons are sometimes collectively called the Teutonic people. Henry Bradley’s 1887 book, The Goths, states:
“The Gothic language…is very much like the oldest English, though it is still more like the language that was spoken by the ancestors of the Swedes and Norwegians. There is little doubt that in the first century all the Teutonic peoples could understand one another’s speech, though even then there must have some differences of dialect, which grew wider as time went on…the old Teutonic speech…developed into the different languages which we call English, German, Dutch, Swedish and Danish.”64
These tribes separated as they spread over Europe, and the dialects of their old Teutonic Gothic”) speech developed into modern European languages. The original Teutonic or Gothic speech gradually fell into disuse and was last recognizable in its original form in the Crimea in the 16th century, the original Black Sea region from which they poured into Europe.65
There is evidence that the word “Goth” comes from the Gothic word “Guth,” which meant “God.”66 Henry Bradley discounted this idea, although he wrote that “Jacob Grimm, one of the greatest scholars who ever lived” supported that concept.67 Bradley discounted it too quickly. He acknowledges that the Gothic word for God is Guth.” The consonants of both Goth and Guth are “G-TH.” Both words have identical consonants, supporting the concept that we are dealing with the same root word. Also, the languages descended from the Gothic language, such as English and German, use words descended from the word Goth” or Guth” to describe the Deity: “God,” and “Gott.” Since the descendant words still directly refer to the Deity, there is every reason to believe the antecedent Gothic word did as well.
In chapter six it was noted that Col. J.C. Gawler, an official of the British Government in the 19th century, quoted a book by M. Sailman written in 1818 entitled Researches in the East; an Important Account of the Ten Tribes. Gawler says:
“It states on page 25, that ‘on the authority of several Armenian historians, the ten tribes passed into Tartary.’ It also quotes Ortellius, who, it says, ‘in his description of Tartary, notes the kingdom of Arsareth, where the ten tribes retiring…took the name of Gauthei’ because, he says, they were very jealous of the glory of God.”68 (Emphasis added)
This record that the Israelites, when first fleeing into the Black Sea region from the Assyrians, took the name “Gauthei” out of a zeal for God, argues that the Gauthei or Goths did, indeed, name themselves after God. Since the Goths lived in the same region in which the term “Gauthei” originated, it follows that the term “Goth” was simply a more recent form of the word “Gauthei.” Bradley also cites Gothic literature in which is found the word:
‘Gut-thiuda, [meaning] ‘people of the Goths.’ The word thiuda is the same as the Old English theod, meaning ‘people’…” 69 (Emphasis added)
There is good reason to conclude that the Goths considered themselves to be the “people of God.” Once it is understood that they were the descendants of the ten tribes of Israel, it is logical that their Israelite ancestors believed themselves to be the “people of God.”
Since modern history almost completely ignores the history of ancient Parthia’s massive empire, it avoids addressing the pressing historical question of where its hordes of Semitic people went when Parthia fell. If history texts gave the Parthian Empire the prominent attention its position in the ancient world merits, it would be impossible to miss the Parthian origin of the masses of refugee Caucasians pouring into Europe. We know the Goths were part of the Caucasian race (Semites) which migrated in huge numbers out of Asia into Europe. We know the Parthians had a Semitic culture when they exited Parthia, because their Semitic culture is what drove the Persians to expel them. Parthian coins and Scythian artwork confirm their people had white, Caucasian features. Only the fallen empire of Parthia could have provided the many nations and tribes of refugees which poured into Europe promptly after the fall of the Parthian Empire. Yet history texts seem unwilling to make the obvious, easy connection between their dispersion and the arrival of many tribes of “Caucasian” refugees arriving in Europe right after Parthia’s collapse. Curious, isn’t it?
The fact that the Goths, Germans, Saxons, and related tribes risked the lives of their families by bringing them along as they sought new homelands in Europe (in spite of military opposition) proves that they had no other choice! If their former homelands had been available to them, they would not have risked their entire civilian population in this mass migration. Parthia was the only nation at the time which could have provided such a mass of refugees.
Historical accounts needlessly obscure the history of the ten tribes of Israel by creating artificial gaps in their migratory paths. The first artificial gap occurs with the fall of the ten-tribed kingdom of Israel — commonly called the “Phoenician Empire” — in about 745 to 721 B.C. Historical accounts imply that these Israelites “suddenly disappeared” into Asia, or became “lost.” It is not that historians have been unable to follow their migrations, but rather, that most have refrained from trying. We have the Scythians, Parthians, Gauthei, and related peoples “suddenly appearing” in Asia with Hebrew names and customs just after the Israelites migrated to Asia. We have the additional testimony of Josephus that the ten tribes had become very numerous in Asia, and he even named their western border, the Euphrates River, which was the western border of the Parthian Empire. During the 1st century A.D., an educated Jewish historian such as Josephus did not regard the ten tribes of Israel as “lost” or even difficult to find. Overwhelming evidence confirms that the Scythian Sacae and Parthians were the ten tribes of Israel.
The next artificial gap in Israelite history occurs in the third century A.D. when history texts, if they mention Parthia at all, ignore the historical fact that the Parthians fled to the northwest in the direction of South Russia and the Black Sea. Just a few years after the Parthian collapse, we find the Saxons, Goths and related Germanic tribes “suddenly appearing” in vast numbers as they migrate in search of new homelands, entering Europe from the regions of South Russia and the Black Sea. It is not difficult at all to make the historical connection between these events.
Classical writers of Greece and Rome had much to say about Parthia, and in the 19th century historians wrote extensive histories of Parthia, yet 20th-century history texts widely ignore Parthian history. Is it only coincidental that the study of Parthian history has declined at the same time that evolutionary theories permeated our textbooks? To foist the theory of evolution on people it was necessary for the apostles of evolution to discredit the Bible. It served their interests to delete from history texts any factual accounts which supported the Bible or which identified the hand of a Living God guiding the affairs of nations. Since a knowledge of the history of Parthia and Scythia could easily reveal where the ten tribes of Israel went and would confirm God’s guidance of world events, the story of these mighty empires was deleted or grossly downplayed in the textbooks. It was deceitful, but it served the purposes of those who wanted to foist evolutionary ideas on the populace of the Western World. This series of books is an effort to restore to modern audiences the truth about the forgotten Israelite empires and God’s active role throughout human history.
We will now examine striking commonalities between the tribes that formed ancient Scythia and Parthia and those who settled in Europe after the Parthian Empire fell. As noted above, the Scythian “Sacae,” many of whom migrated into Parthia’s eastern provinces during the pre-Christian period, were also called the “Saxones.” As they migrated into Europe, their name was placed on portions of the European mainland, such as several regions of Germany named “Saxony” and the modern French province of “Al-sace.” Also, it was noted earlier that the German word for the Saxons preserves the “Sac” root word that was brought to Europe by the Sacae. These names still preserve the name of the Hebrew Patriarch, Isaac, as God had promised in Genesis 21:12.
Many Saxon tribes migrated into the British Isles, along with the Angles and Jutes. Angle, or Engle, is likely based on the Hebrew word “egel” for “bull” or “calf,” an identifying sign historically attached to the tribe of Ephraim. “Jutes” may simply be a variation of the name, Judah or Jats.
God gave Jacob the new name, “Israel.” (Genesis 32:28) This was the birthright name, and by this God gave to Jacob-Israel the blessings that had been promised to Abraham and Isaac. Many years later, Jacob-Israel passed the birthright name, Israel, to his grandsons, the sons of his favorite son, Joseph. These sons were Ephraim and Manasseh. When he did this, Jacob-Israel said, “….let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.” (Genesis 48:16, KJV)
Because of this blessing, the names of “Israel” and “Isaac” — the “Sacae” or “Saxons” — were placed primarily on the Israelite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in perpetuity. When you see the name “Israel” in the Bible, it usually designates these two tribes of the ten tribes of Israel. The term “Isaac” has been very well preserved in secular records throughout history, making it relatively easy to trace the two birthright tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
Asia’s “Germanii” Become Europe’s “Germans”
Other names from the Parthian Empire were brought to Europe as well. One Parthian province was named Carmania, the home of the Kermans or Germanii. The Sassanian Persians attacked these people along with the Parthians, so the Kermans also had to flee Persian persecution. Indeed, since the Kermans were one of the first nations attacked by the anti-Semitic Persians, it is logical that the Kermans were Semites. Where did these people get their name? Historian Herbert Hannay answered that question in his 1915 book, European and Other Race Origins. Hannay wrote:
“It was the Romans, then, about B.C. 58, who, by applying the name of a particular Persian tribe in a loose way to other tribes inhabiting the same country, originated, or rather appropriated and established the name Germanii, “Germans,” as a generic appellation for the collection of tribes who eventually became so called…”70 (Emphasis added)
It was the Romans who gave this name to a variety of tribes living in Persia in 58 B.C! Of course, at that time, all of Persia was in the Parthian Empire! So at the time the name “Germans” was placed on a group of tribes in Asia, they were all living in the Parthian Empire! By the time Parthian fell, large tribes of Germanii, or Germans, had been living in the Parthian Empire for almost three centuries! (58 B.C. – 226 A.D.) In 58 B.C., the Parthians were called “Persians” by many writers because they lived in and ruled the entire territory of the former Persian Empire.
Herbert Hannay also wrote the following about the Germans when they left Asia:
“…the original ancient Persians – amongst whom the German were included – took advantage of the occasion to abandon Asia and to migrate bodily into Europe.”71 (Emphasis not added)
The many German tribes came to Europe from the Parthian Empire. Yet the Germans, or “Kermans,” came from but one province in Parthia. If the very numerous Germans coming into Europe came from but one of Parthia’s provinces, it gives us an insight into just how huge and heavily-populated the entire empire of Parthia was!
As the “Kermans” or “Germanii” migrated into Europe with the rest of Parthia’s refugees, they were still called “Germans.” The name “Carmania” was transplanted into Europe as “Germania,” a general name used by the Romans to describe many different, but similar, tribes. However, we have evidence that the name “German” was applied to tribes in the Persian region long before the Roman Empire existed!
Herodotus recorded that the “Germanii” were a subject people in the old Persian Empire of the Achaemenids, before either the Roman or Parthian Empires existed.72 The Encyclopedia Britannica, in commenting on this passage of Herodotus, indicates that the “Germanii” and the “Carmanians” were two names for the same people.73 Obviously, these people kept that same name for centuries and were still called the “Germanii” in the Parthian Empire. Clearly, the term “German” originated in the Iranian-Mesopotamian region, and later spread to Europe. We have already seen that the Sacae Scythians of Asia had colonial outposts in Europe long before the main body of Sacae and Parthians migrated to Europe to seek refuge. Perhaps the Germans did as well. As the reader can see, the ancient Asian tribal name, “Germanii,” was virtually unchanged over the centuries as it became “Germany” in Europe.
It is this book’s opinion that the original people called “Germanii” by Herodotus were not the only people later called “Germans” by the Romans. As noted above, the Romans came to “loosely” attach that same name to other tribes who happened to live in the same region as the Germanii during Parthian times. This fact indicates that the name “German” was eventually applied to many other Semitic people by the time these commonly-named tribes were attacked by the Sassanian Persians and driven from Asia. As the Germans migrated from their old Parthian homelands into Europe, they kept the name “German” which had been applied by the Romans to a much larger grouping of tribes.
Readers can confirm for themselves the region of ancient Persia in which the ancient Kermans (or “Germanii”) formerly lived. The region of ancient Persia is now called “Iran,” and a modern city in Southern Iran is still named “Kerman,” after the ancient Semitic tribes which formerly inhabited that region before they migrated to Europe.
The ancient writer, Strabo, records that the Carmanians (Germanii or Kermans) were a warlike people.74 Also interesting is the fact that Strabo records that an area of Asia Minor was named “Prusa.”75 When Hannibal, Carthage’s greatest general, fled in the second century, B.C., after being defeated by the Romans, he fled to Armenia and was given refuge in Asia Minor by a King “Prusias.”76 Were the residents of Prusa called “Prusians?” The resemblance between the ancient names “Prusa” and “Prusias” with the modern term “Prussia” is obvious, and both the ancient “Prusa” and the modern “Prussians” were known for their warlike traits. The region of Armenia/Asia Minor where the Prusa (and King Prusias) lived was often within Parthia’s empire but always within Parthia’s sphere of influence. Given the very large migration of people from the region of Parthia into Europe after Parthia fell, it is possible that the ancient Prusa were the namesake or ancestors of the modern Prussians.
The term “German” also came to include many of the Scythian tribes who migrated into Europe. In the first century, A.D., the Roman historian and writer Pliny wrote concerning the Scythians in Europe:
“the name of the Scythians has altogether been transferred to the Sarmatae and the Germans.”77
This is a very important historical observation. It confirms that many Scythians, as they migrated out of Asia into Europe, also became known as “Germans.” The Encyclopedia Britannica notes that the Greek writers Herodotus and Hippocrates regarded the Sarmatae, or Sarmatians, as a Scythian tribe.78 The above sources confirm that the Scythians were not “lost” in history, but simply became known as “Germans” when they migrated into Europe. We also have seen that many Sacae Scythians came to be known as “Saxons” when they entered Europe, and the Saxons are viewed as a branch of the Germanic tribes. Since many Israelite tribes were known as “Scythians” in Asia, this confirms that many of them were called “Germans” or “Saxons” as they entered Europe.
Asia’s “Jats” and “Alani” Become Europe’s “Jutes” and “Alans”
As the Saxons migrated into Europe and the British Isles, they were closely allied to the “Jutes.” History records that after their entry into the British Isles, they settled in Kent, the Isle of Wight and parts of Hampshire.79 The Jutes left their name (Jute-land) on the Danish peninsula of “Jutland.” Where did they come from? Is there evidence of their name in Asia? There certainly is, and even then we find them closely identified with the Sacae, who became the Saxons.
When describing the Sacae Scythian tribes who migrated from the Caspian Sea region in the second century, B.C., to settle within the Parthian Empire, historian George Rawlinson notes that the greatest tribe, the Massagetae, was also named the “great Jits, or Jats.”80 These migrating Sacae or Saka gave their name to the Parthian province of Sacastan and to the Saka kingdoms of Northwest India. The term “Jat” has survived as a caste-name in northwest India into modern times, attesting to the ancient dominance of the Jats in that region. The Encyclopedia Britannica states the following about the ancient “Jats:”
“The early Mohammedans wrote of the Jats country as lying between Kirman and Mansura…Speculation has identified them with the Getae of Herodotus …[or] Scythians or Indo-Scythians.”81 (Emphasis added)
The Asian Jats lived near the land of Kirman (i.e. the Kerman or German region of Parthia). If they were Asian “Getae,” their later European name was the “Getes” or “Goths.” If they were Scythians (Sacae), they became known as Germans or Saxons as they entered Europe. Collier’s Encyclopedia states of the Jats:
“They are believed to be descended from the Saka or Scythians, who moved into India in a series of migrations between the second century B.C. and the fifth century A.D.”82 (Emphasis added)
Since the Jats were a branch of the “Sacae,” called “Saxones” by Ptolemy, it is not surprising that they were still allied to the “Saxons” and called “Jutes” by the time they reached Europe and the British Isles. Note that the consonants of the words “Jats” and “Jutes” are identical.
Many Sacae moved into Parthia in the second century B.C., but some did stay in Asia centuries after the fall of Parthia as we will document in the next chapter. In Asia, the Sacae and Jats lived next to the Kermans (Germanii); in Europe they were called the Saxons and Jutes, and were part of the migrating Germans. Their names changed very little as they moved from Parthian Asia into Europe as part of the great Caucasian migrations. The names “Kerman” and “Jats” also remained in the regions of Asia where they once lived. Some Jats stayed in India and intermarried with other tribes in the region. Today, the Indian Jats “in general have a fair complexion,”83 supporting the conclusion that they had Saka ancestors. As discussed in books two and three of this series, the Massagetae, a leading tribe of the Sacae were most likely the descendants of the Israelite tribe of Manasseh, and the suffix “-getae” indicates a common origin with the “Getae” (“Goths”) of the Black Sea region.
Historian Herbert Hannay wrote about this connection:
“The Goths, too, it will be remembered, when in Asia as the Massagetae, had been worshippers of the Sun…”84(Emphasis added)
The second book in this series discussed the Massagetae in detail, acknowledging that they were sun-worshippers. After crushing the army of the Persian King, Cyrus the Great, in the sixth century B.C., they migrated into Parthia in the second century B.C. They lived in the Parthian province of Sakastan, named for their Sacae origins. It must be acknowledged that while Christianity had significant numbers of converts in the Parthian Empire, many Parthians and Scythians remained Zoroastrians or sun-worshippers. Hannay’s quote identifies the Massagetae with the “Goths” who migrated into Europe. However, this author thinks most of the Massagetae (a “Sacae” tribe) merged into the Saxon tribes who migrated into northern Europe after Parthia fell.
Another Asian tribe that moved from Asia into Europe was the Alans (or Alani). Historian George Rawlinson notes that bands of Alani lived from the Black Sea region to the east of the Caspian Sea.85 They have been called “half-caste Scyths,” and many Alani followed the Vandals into Europe.86 Collier’s Encyclopedia asserts the Alans were a tribe of “Iranian-speaking nomads” who moved from Asia into Europe in the 5th century A.D., and established a kingdom of their own in Portugal.87 Even as the numerous third century Goths by the Black Sea exhibited “Iranian” (i.e., Parthian) traits, the Alans had an “Iranian” language. This confirms they had a common origin with the Parthians and Scythians, whose “Iranian” language and culture is well-documented.
The Indo-Europeans who migrated from Asia into Europe in the aftermath of Parthia’s fall included many different nations and tribes. As tribes intermingled, became allied or split up as they poured into Europe, there came to be considerable overlap in terms such as “Germans,” “Goths,” and “Saxons.” The term “Caucasian” became an overall term to describe all these tribes migrating into Europe through the Caucasus Mountain/Black Sea region.
Footnotes:
46. Turner, Sharon, The History of the Anglo-Saxons, pp. 100-101
47. Langenscheidt’s German-English/English-German Dictionary, see word “Saxon” in English-German section, p. 510
48. Camden, William, Britannia, p. 129
49. Turner, Sharon, The History of the Anglo-Saxons, Vol. 1, pp. 31 and 34
50. Rawlinson, The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, pp. 187-189
51. Gawler, Colonel J.C., p. 6 (citing Sharon Turner’s History Of The Anglo-Saxons, Vol. 1, p. 100)
52. R. H. Hodgkin, History of the Anglo-Saxons, p. 17
53. Church, Early Britain, pp. 80-82
54. Camden, Britannia, p. 141
55. Hodgkin, p. 36
56. Ibid, p.42
57. Fisher, DV., The Anglo-Saxon Age, p. 1
58. Turner, Vol. 1, p. 50
59. Hodgkin, pp. 24-27
60. Bradley, pp. 1, 7-8
61. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 10, Heading entitled: “Early History,” p. 549
62. Ibid. p. 549
63. Ibid, p. 5
64. Ibid, p. 4
65. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 10, Heading entitled “Goths,” Subhead: Gothic Language,” pp. 551-552
66. Bradley, p. 5
67. Ibid, p. 5
68. Gawler, p. 9
69. Bradley, pp. 4-5
70. Hannay, Herbert, European and other Race Origins, p. 232
71. Ibid, p. 232
72. Herodotus, The History, 1, 125
73. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 17, Heading entitled “Persis,” p. 611
74. Strabo, The Geography of Strabo, Vol. 7, 15. 2. 14
75. Ibid., Vol. 5, 12. 4. 3
76. Church, Alfred, Carthage, p. 269
77. Dilke, O.A.W., Greek and Roman Maps, p. 46 (citing Pliny, iv. 81)
78. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 19, Heading entitled “Sarmatae,” p. 1001
79. Ibid., Vol. 13, Heading entitled, “Jutes,” p. 217
80. Rawlinson, The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, p. 118
81. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 12, Heading entitled “Jat,” p. 970
82. Collier’s Encyclopedia, Vol. 11, Heading entitled “Jats,” p. 356
83. Ibid., p. 357
84. Hannay, Herbert, European and other Race Origins, p. 233
85. Rawlinson, The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, p.291 (see also footnote 2)
86. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 1, Heading entitled “Alani,” p. 496
87. Collier’s Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, Heading entitled “Alani,” p. 310
Chapter two discussed several waves of migrations into
The
The Greek story of Xenophon mentions the “ Sacians” of
This ancient stele contains joint inscriptions in three ancient languages: Iberian-Punic (a language related to and descended from Phoenician-Hebrew), Egyptian, and ancient Libyan.
When Israel died, he passed on the birthright blessings to the descendants of his favorite son, Joseph, who was the eldest son of Israel’s favorite wife, Rachel. However, since Joseph already had two sons at the time Israel bequeathed his blessings, Israel gave these blessings jointly to the two sons of Joseph, who were named Ephraim and Manasseh. Israel gave prophetic blessings or statements about not only Ephraim and Manasseh, but about all of his 12 sons which were to be fulfilled in a time called “the latter days.” This blessing ceremony for the sons of Israel has two phases and is recorded in Genesis 48-49.
The long Diaspora of the Jewish people came to an end when the modern Jewish State was founded in 1948. This fulfilled a prophecy in Zephaniah 2 that “Judah” would again have a nation in the old Promised Land just prior to “the Day of the Lord’s anger” (another term for the end of our age). However, something occurred in 1948 which has caused deep and lasting confusion among modern Christians regarding the terms “Israel” and “Judah.” When the modern Jewish nation was named in 1948, they named it not after their own tribal name of Judah, but rather after the ancient land of Israel (which was shared by the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah). However, in biblical prophecies, the term “Israel” refers to prophecies about the latter-day descendants of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, not the Jews! This confusion of terms has led modern Christians to mistakenly assume that the terms “Israel” and “Judah” are synonyms in biblical prophecies when they are actually describing very different nations in the latter days. Notice that the term “Israel” is not used in Zephaniah 2’s prophecy about the return of the Jews to the old Promised Land. It uses only the biblically-accurate term, “Judah,” for the Jews. In biblical prophecies for the latter days, the term “Judah” refers to the Jews/Israelis. However, biblical prophecies about “Israel” in the latter days refer to the modern tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and the rest of the “ten tribes of Israel.”
Ezekiel 38 also contains another clue re: the identity of the chief nation of “Israel” which will be the primary target of the Russian-led “Gog-Magog” alliance of Ezekiel 38. In Ezekiel 38:8, the