Book Blurb: "The Unknown History of the Jews; Discovered From The Ancient Records And Monuments of E

[Helphand]

The theme of this book is that the Jews originated not from Semitic peoples but from the "white race" (the Assyrians, Hittites etc ) who invaded Palestine from Asia Minor and the tablelands beyond the Caucasian Mountains in pre-Biblical times; the term "Israelites" was adopted by Ezra and the prophets and applied to the followers of their new monotheistic religion. However,
"Among the prophets there was at least one man who knew the truth about the origin of his race. It was Ezekiel who said: 'Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of the Canaanites; the Amorite was thy father, and thy mother was a Hittite.'
The confusion of these Caucasian races with the Israelites is due to the traditions of two entirely separate peoples having been merged into one history by the scribes."

Jessel, if not an exclusively Jewish surname, is certainly one used by persons known to be Jews.

He does not appear conscious of the later (c800AD) contribution of the Khazarian Turco-Finn Mongoloid/Armenoid races to the "Jewish" population (themselves from the Caucuses but originally from the steppes of eastern Russia and China), the knowledge of which contribution was subsequently made popular by Arthur Koestler in "The Thirteenth Tribe" (1976).

The author's stance certainly reflects the norms of the time of writing which speak of the superiority of the "white race". Having witnessed the actions of extremist Jews in Israel and on the streets of New York, his sentiments and probable origin attest to the likelihood that the author, like the rest of modern day Jewry - and perhaps from the beginning - is of a population typified by its tribalism, elitism and cruel hostility. See: "My Irrelevant Defence: Jewish Ritual Murder; Chapter II: The Racial Urge."
http://www.holywar.org/txt/RitualMurder/jrm-02.html

It would be interesting to know if Jessel had any formal involvement in the British-Israelism movement.

Much of the evolution of the book's argument is heavily documented. Without inordinate time spent on its study, it is no easy work of précis. The following excerpts are therefore indicative only.


[Chapter I:]

We can now summarise the pre-exilic period as follows:
In the whole period of about seven hundred years, during
which the small Canaanite State had enjoyed an independent
existence, the religion we call Judaism was unknown.
The inhabitants, tribes and clans of various races and subraces,
worshipped idols, and practised the same pagan rites
as the surrounding peoples. The kings, down to Hezekiah,
were idolaters and polytheists. There was no fixed form
of worship, and no settled ritual. Each city and tribe
worshipped its own gods, to whom sacrifices and offerings
were made. Fashion favoured now one, now another
deity; but a section of the people whose ancestors came
originally from Arabia worshipped a tribal god of their own
whose name was spelt, in Hebrew, " Y H V H , " now called
Yahveh or Jehovah. The Yahveh worshippers inhabited
the lowlands, especially about the Sinai peninsula; but in
course of time they spread over other parts of the country,
until they came into contact with the white races of the
mountain districts, who adopted from them the worship of
Yahveh, and added this god to their own pantheon.
In the reign of Hezekiah political events brought about
a great movement of races, in the course of which a body
of refugees of the same origin as the white race of Jerusalem
came to join them, and defended the fortress against the
Assyrians, who had then conquered all the rest of Palestine.
The actual facts are obscured by unhistorical interpolations
of the scribes, but it appears that Jerusalem alone was
successfully defended or ransomed. The white race then
endeavoured to suppress idolatry, and substitute for it a
form of monotheism; but the attempt did not succeed with
the native races, and even among their own people was
only partially successful. The next attempt was made in
the reign of Josiah, and ended in the fiasco of the battle of
Megiddo.

...In fact, the whole object of the religion was to place
unlimited power in the hands of the priesthood, and so to
vest in them a complete control over the morals and beliefs
of the people. There was nothing very original in all this.
Other nations had been ruled by priests in the same
fashion, and the idea occurred to the scribes and priests of
Jerusalem at a period much later than is commonly
supposed.


[Chapter II:]

WITH the period of the Babylonian captivity begins the real
history of the Jews, and also the secret preparation of those
works which have passed for the early history of the Jewish
race. The people who had hitherto called themselves the
Yahuds, or Yahudehs (for such was the real name), had
failed in their several attempts to make their city,
Jerusalem, the religious metropolis of all Canaan. Their
temple, long the shrine of idolatrous worship, had twice
been dedicated to the worship of their God, Yah or Yahveh,
alone; but neither Hezekiah nor Josiah had succeeded in
suppressing the worship of other gods. The final blow was
the disaster of Megiddo and the death of the king. Then
came the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and
in 586 B.C. the principal families of the Yahuds were
transported en masse to Babylon, leaving behind the poorer
classes and the native peasants, who continued their
vocations without molestation.

...The Babylonian Yahuds prided themselves
on their genealogical purity, and each family claimed a
long descent from ancestors more or less problematical--a
weakness which produced later on stringent laws against
intermarriage with other races. In these civilised
surroundings the Yahuds soon established a social and
commercial fraternity of their own, just as they have done
in later times at Alexandria and other centres of activity.

...It is probable that some of the wealthy Yahudeh bankers
and merchants of Babylon actively co-operated with the
Persians, so that when Cyrus and his army appeared before
the city it surrendered without a blow being struck. The
plain facts seem to be that Nabonidus and the greater part
of the Babylonian forces were got out of the way as part of
the plot. The king, however, left his son Belshazzar in
charge.
The Yahuds and the Babylonian conspirators having
agreed to surrender the city, an opportunity was found on
the 15th of the month of Tammuz, the great festival of
the marriage of Ishtar and Tammuz Adonis, in the year
538 B.C., and during the feast Belshazzar was murdered
and the Persians admitted.

...It was not until sixty years after these events that the
real Moses of Judaism appeared on the scene in the person
of Ezra, the scribe, known among the exiles as the "ready
scribe of the law of Moses" (Ezra vii. 6, 11, 12, 21).

...Anyone has read the Jewish prayers for the day of
Atonement will easily recognise in the above the model
from which they are taken.
The Medes and the Persians brought to Babylon the
religion of Zoroaster, which was the means of giving the
final touches to the form of monotheism that the Scribes were
preparing. When all was ready the religious enthusiasts
were anxious to return to Jerusalem for the purpose of
promulgating the new laws...

...The solemn promulgation of the Law, with its latest
additions, was made in Jerusalem in 444 B.C.; and about
this time the last of the prophets, Malachi, was adding his
contribution to the Biblical collection of prophetic writings.
As a supporter of Ezra and Nehemiah, and especially of
the prohibition from marrying "the daughters of strange
gods," he puts words into God's mouth which have the
true ring of that secularism which was henceforward to
distinguish the Jewish faith.

...The best influences of Persian theology subsequently
modified these crude beginnings. We see also in the book
of Genesis distinct evidence of Persian mythology in
the idea of Satan and the story of the Garden of Eden, of
which even the situation was adopted from the Persians.
The attributes of God--love, grace, piety, wisdom, etc.--
the resurrection of the dead, heaven and hell, the hosts of
angels, all came into Judaism from Persian sources; in
fact, we may say that the final form in which the Jewish
religion has come down to us is Persian, built upon Babylonian
ritual and observances, and embodying remains of a
still more ancient cult which spread over all Syria from a
mysterious source in Asia Minor.

...The famous Jewish philosopher Spinoza was the first
modern Jew to question the antiquity of Judaism and the
truth of a Mosaic revelation. A disciple of the great
French scientist Descartes, Spinoza found himself unable
to reconcile the evidence of science with the alleged inspiration
of the Bible.... He concluded that the Pentateuch was not
written by Moses, and that all the books were written long
after the dates assigned to them.


[Chapter IV:]

We have already mentioned elsewhere that the Ten
Commandments were framed during the exile in Babylon,
and it is from that time we hear of the veneration in which
the Sabbath was held. ...

We must not, however, fail to notice a very remarkable
passage in Isaiah i . 13, 14. The English revised version
has it thus:--
"Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination
unto me; the new moons and Sabbaths, the calling of
assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the
solemn meeting.
"Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul
hateth; they are a trouble to me: I am weary to bear them."
But when the modern Jewish ecclesiastical authorities
revised i . 13 they took objection to the plural rendering of
Sabbath as Sabbaths, and in their edition of the English
Bible it reads in the singular. This must be because the
plural suggests that the Sabbaths referred to by the prophet
were not seventh-day observances, but certain holidays
known as Sabbaths. On the other hand, by altering it to
the singular it makes the prophet object to the holiest
day of the Jews--a strange dilemma! followed by a contradiction
in lviii. 13.
This is only one more instance of the difficulties in which
the monotheists find themselves when they try to make the
Jewish observances commence before the time of Ezra.


[Chapter V:]

...we are frequently confronted with what
appears to be evidence of a great flood in almost every
country, and it is therefore claimed that the land has once
been submerged.

... It has been brought to light in the
Assyrian tablets discovered in the Kouyunjik mound at
Nineveh, and turns out to be part of an epic poem somewhat
on the plan of the Odyssey, consisting of twelve
chapters corresponding to the twelve signs of the zodiac.
Ea is an inferior god, who warns the Noah of the story
and guides the ship. In other respects the adventures of
the principal characters are the same as in the Biblical
story. It is called the Gilgamesh Epic, and dates from a
period earlier than 2300 B.C....

...Apart from the purpose served by the Deluge story in
the foundation of Judaism, it has a much more interesting
bearing in its ethnographic application. The sources of
the great rivers Tigris and Euphrates lead into the
mountainous region of the Caucasus, in which Mount
Ararat is situated.

...There are strong reasons for believing that the story of
Noah had travelled along the line of this mountain range
from a country in the heart of Asia. The Indian Noah is
called Satyavrata, and the tradition is that he lived on the
banks of the Indus. The mountain where the ark rested
is, according to this version, Chaisaghar, north-west of
Lahore, and the natives believe certain reddish streaks to
be the impression made by the feet of the dove Noah sent
out. Another Indian version has it that a high peak called
Nau-bandha was the place where Satyavrata made fast the
ark, the name signifying "nau," a ship, and " bandha," to
make fast. We must notice the resemblance of the words
"Nau" and "Noah." This mountain is in Cashmir, and
it is curious to learn that doves are very numerous on it.
Pilgrims resort there from all parts of India, and they
think the doves are the offspring of the original dove
let loose by Noah.

...In the names Aryawart and Ararat we have the root
words for Aryan; and we think the story of Noah is, in fact,
the mythology of the Aryans, the Indo-European race of
mankind. How it was transmitted to the Jews we shall
see when we come to speak more particularly of their
origin.

...The name of the Patriarch Abraham has so
far not been discovered on any monument or tablet,
although it exists in the traditions of Bible lands. "Ab"
is a general Semitic term for "father," and "ram" means
"elevated." As Abramu, Abuha, Ab-raham, Ibrahim, and
other variations, the name is common in Eastern legend,
and we find the root "Ab" in European languages as part
of such words as Abbe, Abbot, and Abbess. Abram is
described as an ancestor of the Hebrews who migrated
from Ur in Chaldea to Palestine, and thence to Egypt;
then back again to Canaan; but it is clear that the migration
in question was not that of an individual, nor even of
a family, but of a tribe, and there are good reasons for
thinking it was a part of a much larger movement of races
then proceeding westward. ... This tribe
is also supposed to have spoken an Arabian dialect which
afterwards developed into Hebrew.

We know from inscribed bricks
and tiles now in the British Museum that Nannar, the
moon-god, was one of the deities of Ur. Nannar is a
corruption of Namraru, "the Illuminator," and he was
addressed as Abu-Nannar--Father Nannar. Moon worship
is especially connected with nomadic peoples, and it seems
probable that the name Abram is derived from some
word which meant moon-worshippers. The Abramu or
Ibramu (the Arabic name for Abram and Abraham is
Ibraim) settled on the borders of Egypt, and were known
to the Canaanites as Ebrei or Ibrei-- properly pronounced
E-ber-iah.1 ... The migration of the Abramu, or Hebrews,
as we shall now call them, was accounted for in the
Talmudic tradition as due to their objection to the idolatry
of the Chaldeans; but when we know that there was
idolatry everywhere, in Babylon, in Palestine, and in
Egypt, this explanation fails. The Biblical narrative
suggests that it was because Abram had a revelation from
God, and this bears the stamp of the scribes, attaching to
the traditions of the Hebrews of 2200 B.C. monotheistic
forms of belief which only commenced 1,600 years later.
... we may consider the
story of Abram's migration to be typical of the introduction
of Chaldean customs among the nomads of
the Egyptian borderlands, the adopted country of the
Hebrews. The discovery of a wall painting in an
Egyptian tomb with the unexpected description, "the
Hebrews making bricks," shows the tribe doing forced
labour for the Egyptians, and was at first hailed with
delight by orthodox believers, until it was pointed out that
the brickmakers are brown-skinned men, with typical Arab
features. The picture was then deemed merely an interesting
example of the kind of task imposed upon the Israelites.

.... the revelations
Moses is said to have had direct from God were acquired
through his relations with the Midianite family of his
father-in-law. It seems more probable that the scribes of
the exile had before them some independent traditions of
Arabian origin, which were incorporated into the story of
Moses and given the credit of Divine inspiration, in the
same fashion as the other revelations attributed to the
prophet.


[Chapter VI:]

IT is to Ezra, the ready scribe of Moses, as he was dubbed
by his contemporaries, that we are indebted for the
miraculous story of the exodus, the foundation-stone of
Jewish belief. ...Historians of Egypt can find nothing to confirm the
narrative told in Exodus; and it has long been the custom
to adopt the so-called sacred writings without question, and
to try to make history agree with them.

...Although it is not the object of the author to discuss such
a difficult problem as the date and name of the Pharaoh of
the Exodus narrative, the question does properly belong to
an account of the history and origin of Judaism, because,
if there never was an exodus, all the revelations of Moses
and the laws he gave the Jews are characterised as fictions
from beginning to end.

...Our modern historians, with a few exceptions, have
forced the events of Egyptian history to agree with the
Bible story, and, under the guidance of religious societies,
have even gone so far as to import into a history of Egypt
references to Jacob and other Biblical characters concerning
whom Egyptian history knows absolutely nothing.

...In any case, however we may calculate the period of
the Hyksos occupation and the Hebrew occupation of the
Delta (the Goshen of the Bible), they must coincide over
a number of centuries....
Here we see Josephus agreeing with Manetho that the
term Hyksos applied equally as a description of the
Shepherd Kings and the Hebrews.
To bring all the conditions into line we have only to
admit that the Bible chronology is erroneous, and to put the
exodus back to 1550 B.C.--not a great concession when we
remember that Biblical dates begin with creation, and that
people lived for hundreds of years.

...The historians of Egypt have noticed the numerous
Semitic names in the Delta, the supposed land of Goshen,
which they attribute to the Hebrew occupation.
We can only see in this an additional proof that the
Hyksos and the Hebrews were both Arab peoples, for the
Delta and lower Egypt were admittedly the Hyksos
kingdom, and as the ruling race for 500 years they would
leave behind them plentiful evidence in the shape of names.
All over Arabia we find those personal names it has been
customary to call Jewish or Israelite; Yakub, Ibraim, Suleiman,
Ismail, and Yussef were possibly common Arab names
long before Hebrew modified them into Yankow, Avrohom,
Schlaumo, Yismoel, and Yitzchok.

...There is a complete code of laws known as the Hammurabi
Code engraved on a pillar in the Semitic Babylonian
language, in the archaic cuneiform writing, dating
from 2150 B.C., to be seen at the Louvre in Paris.2
Other ancient inscriptions are those of Ur-Engur in early
Babylonian or Sumerian, dating from 2500 B.C. From
Egypt there are the records of the fourth dynasty, 3700 B.C.
All these are authentic, original works of men who lived in
those times. But it is in vain that the modern archaeologist
searches for some authentic record of the Hebrews.
This fact has made modern criticism possible, and the
upholders of the authenticity of the Pentateuch can only
reply in general terms, that the scriptures have been handed
down to us in their original form by reliable copyists.

...One of our greatest authorities, Professor Cheyne, whose
works are monuments of learning and patient labour,
arrives at the conclusion that the meaning of the unpointed
Hebrew words may be rendered quite differently from what
we read in our European translations. The land of Mizraim
is perhaps not Egypt at all, but Misrim, North Arabia; and
Par'oh is not Pharaoh, but possibly Pir'u, the name of an
ancient Misrite king; Abram means Arabia of Aram;
Yahveh is the North Arabian deity Yerahmé el; Israel is
a corruption of Asshur in North Arabia; Joseph is an old
name for Ephraim, and for his coat of many colours should
be read a tunic of fine linen. ... "The
conclusion is obvious. There is no reason why (the Hebrew
text) in the passage before us should be supposed to point
to Egypt as the scene of the story of Joseph. On the
contrary, it points distinctly to Arabia."

...In Chapter I. we have already remarked on the curious
absence from the prophetic writings of all mention of
Sinai, while Zion is frequently called the holy mountain.
From Mr. Boscawen's observations we are led to conclude
that the scribes of the exile were aware of the reputation of
Mount Sinai, and deliberately chose it as the scene of the
great revelation, making Moses the recipient of the very
laws they were themselves preparing.
While on the subject of Sinai it should be mentioned
that the district now considered to be identical with the
Bible narrative is inhabited by tribes of Bedawin, of whom
the most important, the Sawâlihah, claim to have been
there since the earliest times.


[Chapter VII:]

THE numerous historians of Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia
have traced for us with some accuracy the principal events
which have occurred in those countries almost from their
infancy down to the present day. These works have been
compiled from various sources. There are the ancient
Egyptian and Chaldean inscriptions, parts of the works of
ancient Egyptian and Persian writers on tablets of clay or
papyrus, the monuments of the kings, and finally the works
of the scribes who wrote the story of earlier traditions still
current in their own times. Yet among all this wealth of
ancient record it is a remarkable fact that, except in the
Bible, not one hint or suggestion has anywhere been discovered
of an Israelite invasion of Canaan, and our
authorities, one and all, are obliged to fall back upon the
Biblical narrative and reproduce it in the guise of true
history.

...But the scribes had to show that a race of monotheists
were the rightful owners of the country, and were
authorised by God to stamp out idolatry, so they made
Joshua and his followers the owners of the land by right of
conquest. "So Joshua took the whole land according to
all the Lord spake unto Moses, and Joshua gave it for an
inheritance unto Israel according to their divisions by their
tribes" (Joshua xi. 23). From this the Babylonian Rabbis
were able to teach that Palestine is the true land of the
Jews, to which they must always pray to return, and where
Yahveh alone was to be worshipped with sacrifices. ...

...Sargon I., King of Agade, and first king of the Babylonian
Empire, describes Palestine on one of his monuments
as the land of the Amorites (Sayce, Patriarchal
Palestine), and at a later period we find portraits of Amorite
prisoners on the wall sculptures of Egypt. The Egyptians
depict them as a fair people, with blond or reddish hair
and blue eyes. When we know how to unravel the tangled
mass of Biblical record and separate the wheat from the
chaff, some valuable information results which we shall
show agrees with the independent records of the Egyptians,
and secrets which have been hidden from all except a few
of the initiated are disclosed. We see in the Bible that the
Amorites are often mentioned in the early history of the
Jews, as are also the Hittites, and then both disappear in
an unaccountable manner.....
A study of ethnology leads to the conclusion that
these people were the blond or red-haired white race,
the Amurra or Amurru we hear of occasionally in the
Egyptian campaigns in the direction of the Amanus
mountains.1 That the Amorites were Caucasians in
appearance and physique leaves no room for doubt, and
some of their habits and forms of worship point to their
being a Keltic sub-race.

...In Scotland, Sweden, Brittany, and Spain superstitions
still survive which can be traced to Amorite forms of belief,
and even the type of the Amorite can be distinguished in
the population. These resemblances in Europe to certain
forms of Jewish belief have led to the vague notions about
the "lost tribes" which we sometimes hear. In fact,
fire worship has left strong traces in Judaism. The
appearance of God on a mountain in a bush of fire, the
actual fire worship (Isaiah xxvii. 9, Deuteronomy xvii. 3),
and the prohibition to touch fire on the Sabbath, the
burnt-offering, and the fire (lamp) always kept burning in
the Temple, all point to an ancestral fire worship.

...The first stage of Amorite extension southward was their
settlement in the Lebanon.

...The name Lebanon is of supreme importance in the
origins we shall now trace. In Hebrew " white" is Lobo,
and a white spot is Lebono, a name given by the Amorites
to these mountains because of their snowy heights.1 Hence
the Egyptians called these people the Lebu. Long
residence in the mountains, combined with the reputation
the Amorites had obtained for their fighting qualities,
caused them to be known as "old lions," and a separate
word having this meaning appears in the Hebrew language
as "Lobeah"--the old lion. Therefore the lion is the crest,
the totem of Judah (in Hebrew Yahudeh), celebrated in
song and tradition as "the lion of Judah." The Hebrew
language has another word for lion, meaning the ordinary
lion, the lion of the Caucasus, and this word conveys a no
less remarkable meaning. It is "Ayria". It is
strange to find that both these words survive at the present
day as the names of Jewish families, Lowe and Aria. ...
Other Caucasians, the Persians, claim the lion as
their emblem, and we see it again in the origin of the
Sphinx. Students of orismology may trace these names in
every European nation, and they will find numerous families
whose armorial bearings have the lion of Judah, their tribal
totem. Leo, Leon, and the old German Lewo are all words
derived from Lobeah, the lion of the Lebanon.

......we think all the indications point to the spread of the Lebu
along the Mediterranean coast from their original home,
the Amanus mountains.2 We think a study of the types of
prisoners taken by the Egyptians in their wars against the
Libyans shows unmistakably the features and colouring of
the Amorites, and, as we have seen the direction of their
emigration was from the Amanus to the Lebanon, so we
should expect to find them in other mountain ranges
along the coast. In this manner they can be traced in
history as the founders of Carthage and other commercial
cities which led them to the countries of Western Europe.
Here, then, may be the origin of those settlements on the
shores of even the British Isles which introduced Amorite
forms of worship; and we see in the cromlechs of the Druids
the very same arrangement of stones which is characteristic
of the Amorites of Palestine.
We are told that when the Hebrews were driven out of
Egypt they attempted to settle in Canaan, where they
encountered the Amorites, the people of the hills.

...By a treaty of peace (now in the British Museum)
the Egyptians and the Hittites each agreed to respect the
territory, the rights, and the gods of the other; and the
whole of Palestine was apportioned between the two Powers
... Thus all Palestine
came under either the Egyptian or the Hittite. ...
From the above short summary of events in Palestine
between 1461 B.C. and 1300 B.C. it will be seen there was
no room for any other great conqueror of Palestine to
appear on the scene. The fighting is always between the
Egyptians and the Hittites...

...How, then, can we account for the very circumstantial
history of the invasion of Palestine by Joshua? By the
simple alteration of one word. For "Israelites" we should
read "Egyptians." The bloodthirsty Seti I. has his counterpart
in Joshua. God's commands to exterminate the
people of the land were Seti's commands.

...If we identify Joshua and his host with the
Egyptians, whose history the scribes appropriated, where
are we to look for the ancestors of the Jews, and what part
did they play in the struggle for the possession of Palestine?
We have before us the certain knowledge that the Yahuds
established their rule at Jerusalem soon after the war of
Ramses III.; and, as they were the people from the Lebanon,
it is clear they were also in the alliance formed by the
Hittites against the Egyptians. At the head of that
alliance or confederation we find, in Joshua xi. 1-5, a
certain Jabin, and in Judges iv. 3 it appears that this
same Jabin, who reigned at Hazor,1 had nine hundred
chariots of iron. It was he who brought the allies to the
waters of Merom to fight Israel, alias the Egyptians; and
there can be no other explanation than that Jabin was the
Hittite king. ...At first sight there is nothing familiar to us
about the name Jabin. It does not occur in the Egyptian
records, nor elsewhere in the Bible. It is an unusual name,
and, considering the importance of this king, it is strange
that nothing whatever should be known about him.

...Perhaps it will help us when we remember that in the
Coptic the letters "b" and "m" are interchangeable, and
that, instead of Jabin, we may read "Jamin."
In Hebrew and Arabic, tribes and races were commonly
named after some chief or ancestor, as is still the case with
the modern Arabs. "Son" in Hebrew and Arabic is
"ben," and therefore the Arabs have tribes called the Beni-
Adam, the Beni-Hemad, the Beni-Sukhr; and they call
the Israelites the Beni-Yisroel. For the same reason the
sons of Jamin would be the Ben-Jamin. ...
We find in the Bible many references to the fighting
power of the Benjamin, and we find them also always in
alliance with the Yahuds. Together these white races held
in subjection the coloured people, the natives of Canaan.
Together they opposed the Egyptians and fought for
possession of the country, sometimes with the help of
native allies and sometimes with the natives against them.

...That the Hittite
type of 3,500 years ago has become somewhat modified in
their present descendants is of course to be expected; but
we claim that there is a distinct tendency observable in the
present-day Jews living under more favourable conditions
to revert to one or the other of the ancestral types of the
warlike Kheta or Amurri. Among the prophets there was
at least one man who knew the truth about the origin of
his race. It was Ezekiel who said: Thy birth and thy
nativity is of the land of the Canaanites; the Amorite was thy
father, and thy mother was a Hittite.
The confusion of these Caucasian races with the Israelites
is due to the traditions of two entirely separate peoples
having been merged into one history by the scribes.

... In Kings and Chronicles it is the Amorite and the
Hittite who have adopted the name of Israel, or more
probably Ezra and his colleagues could find no other way
of making a consecutive history out of the traditions they
had before them. The Hittites, like the Amorites, came
originally from the tablelands of Asia Minor, whence they
descended into Syria, Media, and Mesopotamia, and in
2000 B.C. swept down on Babylon. They were the darkhaired
people of sturdy medium stature and rather short legs
that we see in many types of Jews. Their remote ancestors
were perhaps troglodytes, and in the Taurus mountains
there are still caves to be seen which were inhabited by a
prehistoric people. Another branch of the race emigrated
westward, and can be recognised in Greece, Italy, and
Spain. Ousted from Babylon by later invaders, they established
their Empire in Northern Syria, where we have
found them at war with the Egyptians. With their neighbours
and allies, the Amorites, they seem always to have
been on the best of terms, and no doubt they had language
and religion in common long before both races colonised
Palestine.

... The Jews have been classed with
the Semites because their language, Hebrew, belongs to
the Aramean group, which includes the Punic and Arabic
tongues; but as a race they are ethnologically distinct, and
have always kept themselves uncontaminated with Arab or
Ethiopian blood. The error began by the acceptance of
Bible genealogy, which makes Shem, a son of Noah, the
ancestor of the Hebrews, the Arabs, and the Assyrians;
while another of his sons, Ham or Cham, is the ancestor
of the black races of Africa and the coloured people of
Egypt. This purely fantastic genealogy is responsible for
a modern classification which is as unhistorical as it is
unscientific.1

... The Taurus range stretches along towards the Caucasus
chain, which is, in fact, an arm of the Himalayas; and in
ancient times there lived in these mountains a warrior race
called Chettris, whence we derive many modern names--
the C'hasas, C'hasyas, and Cossias. ... By following the latitude
37 N it will be seen that the mountain chain extends eastward
continuously from the Taurus to the Hindu Kush,
and along the whole length its original inhabitants were
the Indo-European peoples by whom Europe was afterwards
populated. They were known as the Cassi, who inhabited
the Coh-Cas; hence Europeans are Caucasians. These
same Cassi were also identical with the invaders of Babylonia,
the C'hatti, the Egyptian K'heta, now called Hittites
(the K was no doubt a guttural prefix). As soon as we know
this many things of obscure derivation suddenly become
clear.

... It has been remarked that
language alone is not a very safe guide to the origin of a
people; but in this case, where there are so many other
corroborations, it is interesting to notice the few words of
the Hittite language which have been preserved for us by
the Egyptians. ... Other resemblances to
Hittite are found in the Hebrew word for throne, "Casa,"
which is evidently Cas, a mountain, or the sacred seat of
the god of the mountain; and the wild bull " Taur" is
exactly the same word in Hebrew and in Hittite.
As toreau and toro we find this word in the European
languages of the Mediterranean. Linguists and ethnologists
have been greatly exercised to account for evidences
of "Semitic" origin in these people, who were evidently
not Semites in the sense the word is applied to the Arabs.

... We are indebted to Mr. E.J. Davis for a wonderful
discovery, reported in the transactions of the Society of
Biblical Archeology for 1876, which strongly suggests the
Hittites to have been the veritable ancestors of the Jews;
yet this important evidence seems to have been overlooked,
and is only mentioned by writers on ethnology and archeology
as an interesting picture of ancient Hittite dress and
racial characteristics.
Mr. Davis was travelling in the Taurus mountains, and,
at the point where the chain reaches its greatest height, he
came upon two little Turkish cities named Karaman and
Eregli. ... At Ibreez he saw
a river issuing from the mountain rock; skirting a branch
of this river there was a cliff of deep red limestone forty
feet high. On this wall was sculptured a most exquisitely
designed bas-relief, representing what are thought to be a
deity, and a priest in the attitude of worship. ...
Both the
dress and features of the smaller figure recall those of the
Jewish priest, and in the squares with which the dress is
ornamented we see the original design of the breast-plate.
The fringes especially are interesting, and seem to prove
that it is from their ancient Hittite ancestors that the Jews
have inherited the fringed talith worn at prayers. The
locality where this beautiful sculpture exists ought to
convince the most sceptical that the ancestors of Jews came
from the Taurus mountains, and were, in fact, a branch of
the Hittites. Recent research has proved that under the
name of Hittites we are dealing with a confederacy of races
from Asia Minor, whose monuments are found over a wide
area, including ancient Phrygia and Lydia; but, for the
purpose of our present inquiry, it is enough to say that they
came from the tablelands beyond the Taurus. ...
Few would suspect that the story of the struggle between
the white and the coloured races of Palestine, the Yahuds
and the Israelites, is plainly discernible from the very
beginning of Bible history. Let us take as an example
chapter x. of 2 Chronicles. The white race (the Yahuds1)
ruled in Jerusalem, in Hebron, in Lachish, and some other
cities. They held in subjection the Israelites and other
coloured peoples of the lowlands and made them do forced
labour.

... A few centuries later the whites received an unexpected
reinforcement. In 717 B.C. the Hittite Empire was broken
up by the Assyrians. Southern Palestine was also attacked,
and the Kingdom of Israel conquered. ...
The Kingdom of the Yahuds was then overrun and
all the fenced cities taken. Bible history is interrupted
here by one of those miracles which the scribes introduced
whenever it was possible to contrive an example
of divine interference. The Assyrians did not take Jerusalem
because God protected the Yahuds. The Angel of
Death destroyed the Assyrian host. The writers of this
account little thought that the original baked clay cylinder of
Sennacherib, inscribed with a detailed report of the whole
campaign, would be available to the student of 2,400 years
after their time! Yet there it is in the Babylonian and
Assyrian Room, British Museum, Table Case H, duly
docketed and marked in the most practical and businesslike
manner; and this is what it tells us:-

"...I brought their King Padi forth from Jerusalem, and
I established him upon the throne of dominion over them,
and I laid tribute upon him....  Hezekiah
himself like a caged bird I shut up within Jerusalem, his
royal city; I threw up mounds against him, and I took
vengeance upon any man who came forth from his city. ...
The fear of the majesty of my
sovereignty overwhelmed Hezekiah, and the Urbi and his
trusty warriors whom he had brought into his royal city of
Jerusalem to protect it, deserted."

... The date of this cylinder is about 691 B.C. It is after
this disaster that the first suggestion of the introduction of
monotheism begins.

... If we have succeeded in solving this riddle, it must follow
that there were no twelve brothers and no twelve tribes of
Israel, and no parent of the twelve races named Jacob.
Ezra and his colleagues adopted the traditions of the native
Israelites of Palestine, who were Arabs by race, and as
distinct from the Yahuds as the Englishman is from the
Chinaman. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were their traditional
ancestors. The Arabs were never Jews. They
were not even monotheists until they were converted to
Islam. There were probably some few converts to Judaism,
as there are now black- and brown-skinned Jews in Yemen,
in North Africa, and even in China; but the Jewish people
as a nation are whites.

... Ezekiel has disclosed the truth. The whole story about
the tribes, the patriarchs, the wandering Arameans, may be,
in a measure, founded on fact; but those people were an
Arab race whose traditions the scribes of the exile appropriated--
it may be innocently--believing them to be the
ancestors of the Jews, but more probably for the sake of
the revelation of monotheism. Had they understood something
about ethnology, they would have known, as Ezekiel
did, that a white race could not be identified with a
coloured race. Now we can see why the prophets knew
nothing about Moses nor the doings in the desert. There
were vague legends in circulation about a sojourn in
Egypt, but no one supposed them to be of tremendous
importance to the Jews of the exile until Ezra and his
colleagues wrote the story. There were real traditions
before them, but they were not the traditions of the
Jewish race.1
The Talmud has a story of two Rabbis
who were discussing Ezekiel's remark. Said one: "When
the Holy One, blessed be He, commissioned Ezekiel to
say to Israel, "Thy father was an Amorite and thy mother
a Hittite," a pleading spirit (Gabriel says Rashi--i.e.,
the God-man) objected, and said: 'If Abraham and Sarah
were to stand here in thy presence, wouldest thou thus
humiliate them to their face? Debate thy cause with
thy neighbour (reprove the people of Israel), but DISCOVER
NOT THE SECRET to another'" (Pr. xxv. 9).


[APPENDIX, Note H:]

The laws of the Arabs, whose records Ezra incorporated
into the five books of Moses and the books of Joshua and
Judges, were probably founded upon the Code Hammurabi,
with Egyptian modifications. Mr. Chilperic Edwards finds
many resemblances between them, and in one case he
shows that the Hebrew law is the law of the Bedawin.
This is the penalty of the ox which has gored a person:
the animal is accursed and must be stoned to death, and
its flesh may not be eaten. Again, the usages referred to
in the legends of the Hebrew patriarchs are found to be in
accordance with the Hammurabi Code, and this we think
rather points to a genuine tradition from Chaldean sources
having been the basis of Ezra's story. The giving of
Hagar to Abram by Sarai, and a similar act by Rachel,
Jacob's wife, as also Leah's case, are all true to Arabian
customs. The marriage customs of the Arabs are reproduced
in various Bible anecdotes; but it may be that the
Amorites had adopted them from the Arabs, for David was
of Moabite descent (Ruth iv. 18-22). The present inhabitants
of the Moabite district are a mixed race of whites
and Arabs, often Caucasian in appearance, but Arab in
habit. The Jews were not allowed to intermarry with the
Moabites in Ezra's time.

o0o

[/tab]

.

The unknown history of the Jews : discovered from the ancient records and monuments of Egypt and Babylon / by E.E. Jessel





Description
London : Watts, 1909.
xi, 158 p., [26] leaves of plates : ill., maps ; 22 cm.


Subjects
Bible. - O.T. - Criticism, interpretation, etc.  |  Jews - History - To 70 A.D.  |  Judaism.

Book Summary: Unknown History of the Jews
Discovered from the ancient records and monuments of Egypt and Babylon. This work reviews the Higher Criticism of the Old Testament and adds the evidence of the monuments of the ancient near east. Contents: Introduction; Gods of the Canaanites; New Religion; Great Festivals; Sabbath; Bible myths; Exodus; Secret of the Rabbis. With 29 illustrations.

Details of Book: Unknown History of the Jews
Book: Unknown History of the Jews
Author: E. E. Jessel
ISBN: 0766129144
ISBN-13: 9780766129146, 978-0766129146
Binding: Paperback
Publishing Date: Feb 2003
Publisher: Kessinger Publishing
Number of Pages: 228
Language: English


http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1661875

http://www.flipkart.com/book/unknown-history-jews-e-jessel/0766129144


Google  E.E. Jessel

http://www.google.se/#hl=sv&source=hp&q=E.E.+Jessel&meta=&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=c53359b29a58aca2

.
.