"Brit-Am Now"-147

November 13, 2002
Contents:
1. British = Brit-Ish?
2. France
3. Question on Anti-Semitism
4. Alans
5. Letter from "Jessica"
6. Question on Lombardy and Italy:

1. British = Brit-Ish?
       Clarifications:
The Terms "Brit-Am" and "Brit-Ish":

  The Cimbri descended from the Cimmerians who in part were the Lost Ten
Tribes. They were eventually to be found throughout Scandinavia especially
in Denmark-Jutland which Procopius ("Gothic Wars 2.1.7) referred to as
"Brittania" whereas the isle of Britain (home of the British Cymry) he
called "Brittia". Part of the Cimbri reached Holland in their wanderings
and there too  the presence of a tribe of "Bretons" was reported (Pliny
N.H.4;17). Similarly Britain according to Welsh sources was settled by the
Cimmeri who are also referred to as Gomeri.

Isaiah (ch.49) placed the Lost Israelites in "Isles of the Sea" and said
they would establish a "Brit-Am" i.e. A People's Covenant or Commonwealth.

[Isaiah 42:6] I THE LORD HAVE CALLED THEE IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND WILL HOLD
THINE HAND, AND WILL KEEP THEE, AND GIVE THEE FOR A COVENANT OF THE PEOPLE,
FOR A LIGHT OF THE GENTILES;
   "A COVENANT OF THE PEOPLE" in Hebrew "Brit-Am". Israel will be a
"Brit-Am". In the Middle Ages Britain sometimes referred to herself as
"Britammia". The Welsh called themselves, "Bryth y Brithan" , or Briths of
Brithan. In  Biblical Hebrew "brith" means "covenant.
The Rabbinical Commentator Malbim says that the term "Brit-Am" in the Book
of  Isaiah  means Israel. This also accords with the simple meaning of the
context in which the name is found and Talmudic traditions concerning the
relevant passages.
This is why we chose "Brit-Am for the name of our organization.  "Brit-Am"
represents the Lost Ten Tribes returning. Other reasons were that "Brit-Am"
hints at Britain from whom many of those to whom we direct our message
originate. Our friend Cecil Davis pointed out that "Brit-Am" can also be
understand as a shortened way of saying "Britain and America".

[Isaiah 49:8] THUS SAITH THE LORD, IN AN ACCEPTABLE TIME HAVE I HEARD THEE,
AND IN A DAY OF SALVATION HAVE I HELPED THEE: AND I WILL PRESERVE THEE, AND
GIVE THEE FOR A COVENANT OF THE  PEOPLE, TO ESTABLISH THE EARTH, TO CAUSE
TO INHERIT THE DESOLATE HERITAGES;

a covenant of the people [Hebrew: "BRIT-AM" i.e. Britain], to establish the
earth [or in the Hebrew: "to found a country", e.g. the U.S.A., the State
of Israel], to cause to inherit the desolate heritages".

         "Desolate heritages" relatively speaking were the regions of North
America, Australia and New Zealand, and South Africa before the nations
here spoken of colonized them. Also, on a long-term geopolitical and
economical level the ZionistJewish resettlement of part of the Land of
Israel was made possible (like and/or believe it or not), in some measure,
due to the policies of Britain (sic!) and America!!

The Ancient British referred to themselves and were referred to as Britons,
Cimmeri, and as Iberi.
The Ancient British are usually called "Celts" by which is meant the
inhabitants of the British Isles before the Anglo-Saxon and Viking
conquests. This term is a modern one and may be misleading since it
suggests too close an identification with the "Celts" on the Continent.
"Britannii" or something similar appears to have been a name used by the
people of Britain for themselves. It appears in both Greek and Phoenician
sources
The Welsh called themselves "Cymru" or Gomeru or similar names. Welsh
tradition says that this was once the name of all the British Celts and it
may be so.
We do know that the major name by which the British Celts referred to
themselves and by which they were known to others was "Iberi" or "Hiberi".
This is the name applied to them by Ptolemy, the name found in Irish
mythology and repeated in numerous place and ethnic names throughout the
British Isles.
"Iberi" (or "Hiberi") is a westernized form for "Hebrew":
The Ancient Britons called themselves Hebrews.

The term may "British" may be understood to mean "Brit-ish": "Brit" in
Hebrew means covenant; "ish" mean "man" or "belonging to", or
"part-of-the-same". The suffix "-ish" in the English language also means
"being part of" or "belonging to".
The English suffix, like a significant part of the English language,
derives from the Hebrew original.
We in Brit-Am however do not push the word-similarity of "Brit-ish" to the
Hebrew as a proof but it is worthy considering after all the other Biblical
and general evidence has been taken into account.
We do, however, on occasion refer to the name "Brit-Am" which means
"Covenant-of-the-People". "Brit-Am" is applied to the Lost Ten Tribes in
Isaiah 42 and 49. In Hebrew dialects "Brit-Am" could be pronounced as
"Brit-An". On the other hand the name Britain in old documents was
sometimes written "Britammia".
The Hebrew "Brit-Am" could be the source of the name "Britain" OR the Bible
may have chosen the term "Brit-Am" to represent the Lost Ten Tribes since
the British Isles were destined to be the home of the leading tribes and
representative portions of the other tribes and to be the main agency
through which the Lost Ten Tribes as a whole would be enabled to express
their destined goal. In this respect the daughter nations of Britain and
the USA are included.

2. France: Clarification
Adapted from "Ephraim"
Chapter Seven
Zarephath

FRANCE, BRITAIN, ISRAEL, GERMANY, AND ROME ACCORDING TO TALMUDIC AND
RABBINICAL COMMENTATORS

In early Medieval and Modern Hebrew the country of France is called
"Zarephath". Zarephath was originally a Phoenician town, "Zarephath which
belongeth to Zidon" (1Kings 17;9) in which Israelites also dwelt. The name
"Zarephath " is derived from a Hebrew root meaning "MetalForger"1.
Throughout ancient Gaul and especially on the northwest coast there are
signs of Phoenician or Israelite settlement2. It may be that France
received the name Zarephath for ethnic reasons due to some connection with
the mixed IsraelitePhoenician center of Zarephath. Compare in this
connection the Orthodox Jewish Rabbinical Commentary known as "Daat Sofrim"
on Obadiah 1;20: "EVEN UNTO ZAREPHATH:
<There is a place named Zarephath besides Sidon (I-Kings 17;9). It would be
easy to explain the meaning to be that city [in Lebanon] that was a
Sidonian [i.e. Phoenician] settlement. From the style of expression,
however, it appears that a distant place is spoken of whereas the city
[Zarephath in Lebanon] was very close. From this it appears that here it is
speaking of a far-away land whose name in Hebrew is [also] "Zarephath"
[i.e. France] until this very day and at that time contained Sidonian
colonies amongst which Israelites also settled. [58] [58] Perhaps the name
Zarephath in the Land of Israel [i.e. Zarephath in Lebanon besides Sidon
which was all within the promised boundaries of Israel] was so called after
the land [of Zarephath = France in Hebrew] due to certain connections that
existed with its inhabitants? The prophecy says there is a future for the
dwellers there, and so it was, and for a certain period the place became a
Torah-center.> DS.

At all events Zarephath is mentioned in the Biblical Book of Obadiah in
connection with the future location of the Lost Ten Tribes. Commentators
understood the intention to mean the country of Gaul-France that according
to Abarbanel (on Obadiah) included in Biblical terms the Isle of Britain.
This understanding of Scripture is shown below to possess an internal logic
of its own: It should be considered in the light of all the other proofs
adduced in this present work.

OBADIAH CONCLUDES:

         "AND THE CAPTIVITY OF THIS HOST OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL
POSSES THAT OF THE CANAANITES, EVEN UNTO ZAREPHATH; AND THE CAPTIVITY OF
JERUSALEM, WHICH IS IN SEPHARAD, SHALL POSSESS THE CITIES OF THE SOUTH.

         "AND SAVIORS SHALL COME UP ON MOUNT ZION TO JUDGE THE MOUNT OF
ESAU; AND THE KINGDOM SHALL BE THE LORD'S" (Obadiah 1;2021).
         The above translation is from the King James (KJ) version. The
Hebrew original is capable of additional nuances of meaning.
         Sepharad means Spain and refers to the Jews or descendants of
Jews. Our interest at the moment is concentrated on the Lost Ten Tribes who
are in Zarephath.  As explained above, Zarephath was the name of a township
on the coast of Lebanon, "Zarephath which belongeth to Sidon" (1Kings
17;9). "Zarephath" was also the name given in later Hebrew to France and
its neighbors and encompassed Britain. "Zarephath" is mentioned in the Book
of Obadiah (1;20) in connection with the exile of the children of Israel:

         "THE CAPTIVITY OF THIS HOST OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL
POSSESS THAT OF THE CANAANITES UNTO ZAREPATH.."

According to a composite explanation based on Rabbinical Commentators the
above verse may actually be understood to say:

         "This first exile [of the Lost Ten Tribes] who reach from the Land
of Canaanites [i.e. Germany] to Zeraphath [France and Britain].."

         The Hebrew word ("Chail") translated in the KJ as "host" can also
mean "first" and most Jewish Commentators seem to have understood the verse
to refer to the First Exile which was that of the Lost Ten Tribes. They
also tended to understand the placename "Zarephath" (in this case) as
referring to France and its area or to France and England together and thus
either expressly. This identification, by implication, links the Lost Ten
Tribes with these western regions.
         Classical Jewish Traditional Commentators interpreted the Hebrew
passage of the first part of the above excerpt as saying:

         "And this first exile of the children of Israel who are
(positioned) from the Canaanites to Zarephath..."*o

         The words of the traditional Jewish Rabbinical Commentators on
this verse will now be quoted with a bare minimum of explanation. Suffice
it to say that their opinions are based on substance and confirmed from
other sources:

Rashi (Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac, 10401105, Champagne, France):

         <The first exile of the children of Israel who were exiled from
the Ten Tribes to the land of Canaanites unto Zarephath...The exegetes say
that Zarephath means the Kingdom called "France" in common language..>

i.e. Rashi says that the Lost Ten Tribes are in France!

  Abraham iben Ezra, (10921167, Spain):

         < "FROM THE CANAANITES": We have heard from great men that the
land of Allemagne [i.e. Germany] are the Canaanites who fled from before
the children of Israel when they came into the land. So too, Zeraphath
means France...",

Ramban (Nachmanides, Rabbi Mosheh ben Nachman, 1194-1270, Spain; from "The
Book of Redemption", chapter 1.):

         "The vision of Obadiah...the house of Joseph refers to the Ten
Tribes ...who were exiled and still are in their place of exile, the exile
of Zarephath and Canaan which are in the farthest north..."

         A definite message is derivable from the above Commentatories
taken as a complementary whole. The import may be understood to be that the
Lost Ten Tribes are still in exile in the Land of France from (including or
bordering upon) Germany that includes amongst its composite ethnic elements
those who descend from the ancient Canaanites. A Canaanite (or other)
descent for part of the Germans does not contradict their belonging to Edom
and other groups. The identification with Edom relates to the leading
classes, elite dominating groups, and national imposed character whereas
other identifications are concerned more with straightforward general
physical descent.
         Don Isaac ben Yehudah Abarbanel, (14371508, Spain) has a somewhat
different explanation than the others. On some points his commentary is
worthy of consideration in the light of the above:

         "Zeraphath is France and so too the exile of Sepharad is
Spain..and let you not err just because Zeraphath [i.e. France] is spoken
of and Angleterre [i.e. England] is not recalled, for there too did the
exiles go, for lo and behold, that island is considered a part of
Zarephath  and in the beginning belonged to it. In their ancient books they
call it [i.e. Britain] the Isle of Zarephath [i.e. of France] even though
it later separated itself from Zarephath [France] and became a kingdom in
its own right.
         "....And maybe the intention is too to those Children of Israel
who completely left Religion due to the weight of troubles and persecutions
and they remain in France and in Spain in their thousands and tens of
thousands, huge communities. They shall return and request the LORD their
God.." (Abarbanel on Obadiah).

         Concerning the inclusion of England with France in the language of
early Commentators Abrabanel has a point since after the Norman Conquest
England and France could be considered one continuum. Norman French was the
official language of England. The Norman Kings attached as much importance
to their possessions in Normandy and France as they did to England. They
alternately laid claim to the French Throne or acknowledged French
suzerainty. Movement between the two countries was free and was not
accompanied by cultural changes.

Consider also
The 1599 Geneva Bible on Obadiah 1:20.
1:20 And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel [shall
possess] that of the {p} Canaanites, [even] unto Zarephath; and the
captivity of Jerusalem, which [is] in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of
the south.
(p) By the Canaanites, the Jews mean the Dutchmen, and by Zarephath,
France, and by Sepharad, Spain.

The Radak (Kimchi) in "The Book of Hebrew Roots" ("Safer haShorashim")
entry "Zarephath" (Tsarephath"):
<They say that Zarephath means the land called France>.
The Jewish Commentators in the verse of Obadiah  (1:20) said that:
"And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel" meant the Lost
Ten Tribes and that
"Canaanites, [even] unto Zarephath" meant Germany, Holland, France, and
England.

3. Question on anti-semitism
From: Yehshua Somerville
Subject: anti-semitism

Yair, I had e-mailed you a question on Hungarians/Magyars and there
origins. You Stated that "One of the signs of Israelite origin is a
relatively low level of anti-semitism and the Hungarians have not possessed
this quality or other of the necessary traits."
Would this statement would go for the descendants German, English, polish,
Irish, french, Spanish along with many other European people. At one time
or another many nations including the USA had strict laws or judgments
against Jews how is it that by this factor we can claim ancestry to Israel?
In the bible we can find many chapters and verses that put Israel and Judah
against each other after the separation of the tribes. Wouldn't anti-Jewish
actions from European Israelites along with anti-European actions from Jews
be part of our inherited subconscious character over the past thousands of
years testify against us, just as much as non-Israelite decent could impose?
We also know that many of our own tribes absorbed non-Hebrew peoples before
the capture of the promise land; such as Simeon and Judah. Wouldn't by
using the factors stated about non-Israelite people(s) dislike for
Israelites or Semites create an internal conflict just as much as
non-Israelite influences would?
Thank you,
J.Somerville

Answer: Relative lack of anti-semitism or even philo-semitism was one of
seven main criteria we applied for the purposes of identification. It was
not the only point we used but one that had to exist together with the others.
The point holds but exceptions do occur, for instance:
Bulgaria in the Second World War was an ally of the Germans but the
Bulgarian populace demonstrated on behalf of the Jews
and on the whole protected them. Similarly the Serbians were not
anti-semitic on the whole.
We do not identify either Bulgarians or Serbians with the Lost ten tribes.
We do say that people of Lost Israelite origin are significant in Sweden
and Switzerland even though in many ways
these countries have not been pro-Jewish.
Anti-semites exist everywhere. Sometimes people can change. Colonel
Meintzerhagen was a British officer who was initially anti-semitic but had
a change of heart and became an important advocate of the Zionist cause.
Mark Twain also initially had anti-Jewish sentiments but later changed his
mind and wrote well about the Jews.  On the other hand people who once
appeared to be pro-Jewish (such as Ernest Bevan) later became anti-semitic.
On the whole relatively speaking nations we have identified as belonging
largely to Israel have been less anti-semitic than others.
We judge relative rates of sympathy for the Jews according to the
historical times and circumstances.
The King of Denmark in the Second World War said to a Nazi official that
since the Danes, unlike the Germans, never had an inferiority complex when
dealing with the Jews they did not hate them.
Countries like Hungary and Poland had a large number of Jews in proportion
to their population. This caused fiction. The common people were made to
feel inferior by their own upper classes, had a low self-image,  and
therefore resented the Jews who in some respects were better off. They were
also more primitive and subject to superstition and manipulation by
medieval elements.
Despite all these extenuating circumstances a relative lack of
anti-semitism and an attitude of fair dealings towards the Jewish people
over long periods of time has proven to be a valid measurement of Israelite
ancestry especially when taken into consideration along with the other
criteria we employ for the same purpose.
This is what I believe.
This is what Brit-Am holds. It corresponds with conclusions reached from
the Bible and from history and related sources.
There is a good chance that people who instinctively identify with Israel
really are of Israelite descent no matter what country they come from. Our
criteria concern the whole population, the aggregate, rather than the
individual.

4. Alans

At 18:41 11/09/2002 +0200, branko wrote:
Re: Fw: Tribal Identifications: Asher-1
>Hi, by the name "as" there was  also described sarmatian tribe of alans
>(halani, alanoi).
>
>Branko

Comment:

Some of the Alans moved westward and some remained in the Caucasus area.

We have identified the Alans as descendants of Elon from Zebulon. Those who
moved west we traced  to France, Switzerland,  and Holland.
In historical reports they are sometimes confused with the Allemans.
The portion who remained in the Caucasus mostly joined the Khazars.
Sometimes the Ossetes are confused with the Allans but the Ossetes appear
to have been another people
who at one stage were subjects of the Alans.

5. Letter from "Jessica"
From: Jessica
Subject: subscription please
Please put me on your subscription mailout. Eddie Chumney has sent me
several of your writings. They have been a HUGE blessing to me. I have
poured over them numerous times.
Thank you,
Jessica

6. Question on Lombardy and Italy:

At 04:56 11/11/2002 -0800, Cynthia wrote:
>Dear Yair-Davidy,
>
>Athol suggested I write to you w/my question. I
>am working on a paper investigating the Hebrew
>Contributions & Connections to The Northern
>Italian City States during the Late Medieval &
>Early Renaissance Period. I can't seem to find
>your specific work on that area. Would you direct
>me to where on your site I should be looking or
>what text I should purchase? If there are other
>sites I can access etc.? I am working w/a small
>International Research Group of which I am the
>smallest of small components.
>
>All Good Things,
>Cynthia Tedesco

Answer:

Below is what I have written concerning Italy and Lombardy. I doubt if it
will help you very much
but you may find it of interest, Yair:

Extracts from "The Tribes":
         In Europe the Semnones (cf. Simeon) were a section of Suebi to
whom the Angli were federated. Semnones12 bordered Laccobardi (Lombards),
Angles, and Viruni (Warings). The Lombards in Scandinavian Literature have
been identified as the HEADOBARDS13 of old, whose name is reminiscent to
that of "OHAD" (Genesis 26;10), Son of Simeon.
         The Headobards-Lombards descend from Ohad son of Simeon.  They
were destined from the area of Scandinavia to migrate southward and
ultimately conquer and settle the region of Northern Italy now called
LOMBARDY which is famous for its capital of Milano.. LOMBARDY in ancient
times had been known as "Gallia Transpadana" and its one-time inhabitants
according to Pliny (N.H. 3; 17) had been called "Laevi" or "Levi"  (sic.).
Thus, the Simeon-Levi association may have been repeated when the
Headobards (Ohad from Simeon) settled in the "Levi" neighborhood creating a
Lombard-Laevi conjunction. As stated, the Lombards (Headobards) had emerged
from Scandinavia and were closely associated with the Angles who later
conquered England. Ptolemy reported a people named "Levonii" in
Scandinavia.  These too may also have had Levite connections and may have
been part of the Lombards, since Ptolemy's report dates to the time when
the Lombards were probably still within the Scandinavian area, at  least in
part. Levi, however, like Simeon, seems to have achieved his natural
expression more easily through partnership to Judah to whose kingdom
(2-Chronicles 13; 9-11) many Levites fled. Most Levites appear today to be
found scattered amongst all sections of the Jewish people and seem to be
especially noticeable amongst certain sections of the North African Jewish
communities.

ITALY
  What applies to Continental Europe and Germany also applies to Italy. It
was noted that in Lombardy of North Italy settlers from Scandinavia (such
as the Headobards sons of Ohad of Simeon) had settled and that a group from
Levi had preceded them there. In Lombardy there existed a recurring
tendency to "Judaise", meaning to adopt "Old Testament" lores and to
imitate forms of worship which were Jewish or at least considered as such .
At Milano, capital of Lombardy, for nearly 200 years (1100's-1200's c.e.)
there existed a theocratical government using names and ceremonies drawn
from the Old Testament. At the same time the sect of Passagii attempted to
adopt all of the Mosaic Law as it was understood by them and later from
time to time similar tendencies made themselves evident in that country2.
In addition to Israelite, settlement in Lombardy, other Lost Israelites
such as the Goths, Vandals, Normans, and so on settled throughout Italy and
also bands of Jewish slaves and free Jews had reached Italy in Roman times
and many of these assimilated. Even though very many Italians are of
Israelite or Jewish origin most are not. They are of mixed origins with a
stock related to the Greeks in ascendancy and including a constituent from
Edom. Esau the twin-brother of Israel (Jacob) was the forefather of the
Edomites and became the arch- enemy of Israel. Descendants of Edom are in
addition numerous amongst the Germans and in the European ruling classes.
Even in those nations herein proven to be basically Israelite in many
respects, there exist Edomite and Canaanite elements.



NOW INDEX

HOME