Sunday, March 26, 2017

Clash of the Leahite Tribes of Israel in Western Europe


The Israelite Tribe of Simeon (R1b DF 27 ydna) was settled in the south of Israel and after the Israelite Exile around 600 BC (721 BC in the Accepted Chronology of modern Academia) they settled in Spain and southern France. The former lands of Simeon in the south of the Holy Land (Negev) then became part of the Kingdom of Judah from the time of King Hezekiah of Judah.

Location of the Tribe of Simeon in Europe in the 19th century

The Tribe of Simeon and the Celtic Tribe of Reuben (R1b U152) started to clash after 400 BC when the Reubenite Celts moved from their base in Central Europe into the southern areas. The Beaker Folk of R1b L21 of the Davidic House of Nathan (Milesians) who around 300 BC invaded northwestern Spain. 

Location of the Tribe of Reuben in the 19th century in Europe

The Reubenite Celts were descended from two groups that rejoined in Central Europe. The Trojan Reubenites (R1b U152 ZZ45) moved to Central Europe and the west from Finland after 690 BC and the Israelite Reubenites (R1b U152 L2) entered Europe from the East after 600 BC. U152 Z56 is most likely the Rhadanite branch of the Tribe of Reuben. The Trojan Reubenites may be descended from the clan of Hanoch, the Israelite Reubenites from the clan of Pallu. The Rhadanite Reubenites most likely are from the clan of Carmi. These Reubenites clans reunited in Europe and were the core population of the Celts and the later Franks. 

The Location of the Tribe of Zebulon in 19th century Europe

These Reubenites clashed with and inter-reacted with the Tribe of Zebulon (U106) in the north western part of Europe. The Danaan or Hellenes (from the Elonite clan) of the Iliad were of the Tribe of Zebulon as were the later Frisians and Germans. Another Zebulonite clan (U106 L238) entered Europe from Israel with the Pallu Reubenites. All these clashing clans were descendants of Jacob and Leah of Israel. They were later joined by the Saxons (Sacae) from the Tribe of Issachar (R1b DF19). It is also possible that R1b ZZ337 ydna is a clan of Levi that remained among the northern Israelites.

It would seem that the inheritance of the Leahite Tribes of Israel was in western Europe and the Ephraimite Tribe of Joseph in Eastern Europe (R1a Z283). Is God finished with sifting out the Tribes or will we see further movements of peoples that will lead to the regathering of all Israel? 

These Tribes also encountered the Assir (later called Vikings) of I1 ydna in the northern parts of Europe. These Assir were part of a Ishamelite kingdom of Assir that stretched form the Russian Steppes to northern Germany and France. Some of the Assir known as the Royal Assyrians conquered parts of the Midde East that became the Assyrian Empire. After the defeat of Assyria the Royal Assyrians returned as the Sarmatians (I2 ydna) to Europe. The Massa clan of Ishmael established their Assir kingdom sometime after 950 BC.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Bronze Age King and R1b L11 or Lost Israelite Tribes


Last year in many journals an article was published headed "Half of Western European men are descended from one Bronze Age king". In past  blog articles I have explained that dna mutations can be across a group as well as in individuals. Many of today's evolutionary geneticists believe that half of Western Europe's population descend from R1b L11 who they speculate must have been a Bronze Age King who left a dynasty of noble sons that spread R1b L11 across Europe.

This is a rather simplex and incorrect understanding. R1b L11 is in my opinion the y-dna marker of the Lost Tribes of Israel descended from Jacob and Leah who had moved into Europe in the so-called Bronze Age. It would seem this mutation occurred, due to some cataclysmic event that affected all the R1b L51 descendants of the Northern Leahite Tribes of Israel, sometime before 750 BC rather than the 4,000 years ago of the evolutionary dating of this marker. It is possible this cataclysmic event occurred in the time of the Israelite Judges when Samson pulled down the Temple of Dagon and Atlantis sunk around 968 BC or earlier before the Zebulonites moved to Europe but after they left Egypt and entered the Holy Land around 1300 BC. Many of the southern Judaites were not affected in the same way but the ancestors of David were affected by it. The ancestors of David may have been in the North at the time of the cataclysmic events before they moved south to Bethlehem.

However this event also affected the Western European Israelites (Northern Atlanteans) descended from Zebulon (becoming R1b U106) who had been living in Europe from before the time of the Assyrian Exile differently to those Israelites of the Leah tribes who had left Northern Israel at the time of the Assyrian Exile (becoming R1b  P312). When it is more widely understood that dna changes are not always constant across haplogroups or history and are caused by a number of different factors across groups as well as in individuals then the dating and movements of peoples will be better comprehended and studied.

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Ruskulova and Salnava Manors in Latvia

This is the Ruskulova Manor (in need of repair and in ruins) which is not far from the Vulfiuss/Wulfiuss Salnava Manor (they are both in the Salnava parish) and was the home of Count Tolstoy, in 1883 it was bought by Baron Levenstein, and then bought around 1897 by Nicholas II's mother the Empress Dowager Maria and used as the home of the Empress's Lady in -waiting whose daughter was a half sister to the Czar Alexander III and the mother of my step-grandmother Madame Nadine Wulffius (nee Krivkov/ Krivko) who lived here with her grandmother, parents and siblings until the Russian Revolution. Nadine was also known as Madame Mirceva. The Ruskulova Estate was originally about 40,000 acres. In 1909 the Ruskulova Manor was burnt and the family moved to an estate near Riga until the rebuilding of the Manor. The family left Latvia in 1917 and Nadine (Mirceva) returned to Latvia after escaping Russia in 1922 by then the estate had been broken up under the Agrarian land laws of 1920 and she spoke of the Latvian manager having taken possession of the Manor and the land surrounding it. It would seem on reflection that Madame Nadine's family held this estate as a grace and favour residence from the Royal Family and thus she could not make any legal claim on it or the residence near Riga.

Nadine's paternal Jewish grandmother Nadezhda Krivkov (Nechama Staradab) lived in a Jewish village near Karsava (or in Karsava itself). Nadine once described hiding under a bridge while going to visit her paternal grandmother as a pogrom was in process. Nechama had married Anton Krivkov who had been a serf that was freed in 1861. They lived in the Moscow region. It would seem that Nechama took the name Nadezhda when she eloped and married Anton but returned after his death to her Jewish identity. After her son Fyodor moved to Latgale she moved to Karsava to be closer to him and his family where they could secretly visit her. Her great grandson Dimitri Krivkov (b.1913) died in Auschwitz on 9 January 1942. These Jewish connections were a closely guarded secret as firstly from the anti-Jewish Russian Orthodox high society of the Russian Empire who they mixed with and of course later with the rise of the anti-Semitic Nazis and fascists.


The home of the Barons Wulffius/Vulfiuss in Latvia from the 1860's until 1944 was Salnava Manor. The estate was once over 5,000 acres which was subdivided into 80 little farms in the Agrarian reforms of 1920. After this the Barons Wulffius only held about 133 acres with the Manor until World War 2.

"Salnava manor was built in second part of the 18th century in the classicical style. In Salnava Manor Park you can see a plantation of rare trees and alleys. There is a Love stone in the centre of the park – it is a huge stone with a flat surface. Also there is pictorial pond with two little islands;.." from http://balticlakes.com/en/routes/latgale/zlatgale?print=1




The Catholic Chapel at Salnava dating back to 1770 and the time of the Frankist (Jewish Catholic) times of influence among the Jews and Catholics of Latgale.

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Babylonian Jewish Diaspora and R1b ht-35



Some times Western European R1b y-dna is called R1b-Ht15 and  is distinguished from a more Eastern variety of R1b called R1b Ht-35 (also known as R1b-Z2103). There is some speculation about what people this group of Ht-35 originates from. Some speculate they are Greeks others Armenians. Some have noticed a larger amount in Turkey/Armenia areas and the Iraq/Iran area.

In fact this group of R1b Ht-35 represents the Babylonian Jewish diaspora that occurred after the destruction of the Temple around 460 BC (not 586 BC the date of the Accepted Chronology of Modern Academia).  According to Velikovsky the so-called Hittites were in fact Babylonians or Chaldeans and Turkey was their homeland from which they conquered the area in Iraq known as Babylonia. Thus it makes sense that the Babylonians took many of the Jews to their homelands in Asia Minor (Turkey/Armenia) and to Babylonia (Iraq/Iran). Only about 10% of these Jews who were the more devout Jews returned to Israel under Cyrus' decree and were part of the Roman diaspora of Jews, the rest spread out into other lands and many of them assimilated to the surrounding cultures and later with them became Christians.

This Jewish origin fits the wide dispersal of R1b Ht-35 better than a Greek or Armenian diaspora though many Greeks and Armenians are descendants on their direct male lineages from these Jewish descendants of the Tribes of Judah and Levi (and the priestly House of Aaron). The Roman diaspora included many of the Samaritans of J1, J2 and E ydna hapologroups who had assimilated with the Jews who were paternally descended from Judah, Benjamin and Levi. Due to modern academias reliance on the theories and frameworks of Darwinist scientists they are unable to read the dna evidence in its correct historical light which is distorting the origins of different ethnic groups which are often contrary to the past written and oral sources of these cultural groups.

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Genetics, Out of Africa and Antarctic City


The most common evolutionary based theory called "Out Of Africa" claims that all the haplogroups from C -T y-dna have three mutations P9.1, M168 and M294 but haplogroups A and B y-dna don't. However it could also be just as likely that A and B whose ancestors who were in Africa at the time of the Ice Age and cut off from the rest of mankind (who were in Sundaland and Australia) missed out on these mutations because they were isolated in Africa. Thus the "Out of Africa" and the "Out of Australia" are as equally likely from a genetic perspective. 

When one questions the evolutionary assumptions and finds they are often just a "House of Cards" or a convenient mythology modern scientists like to use as a framework for their interpretation of the actual physical evidence. Once one chooses to look at the evidence using other frameworks a very different interpretation of both history and the sciences is possible if not very probable. 

I just read an article about scientists finding a lost city in Antarctica that is 2.3 kilometres under the Ice. Either one believes that cities could have been built millions of years ago by aliens or a pre-human being or the theory about how old the Ice is may be wrong. Even most evolutionary scientists believe that cities such as this have only been around within the last 8 thousand years so that in that time frame Antarctica must have been free of Ice as seen in some old maps. 

This city probably was built after the Flood of Noah and the cataclysms at the time of the Tower of Babel so that limits it to within the last 4 thousand years. Was this an ancient ruin or a vibrant city that probably went under Ice around 1530 AD at the time of the so-called "Little Ice Age" as discussed in my other blog posts. The maps from the early 1500's often have an ice free Antarctica. Some claim they are drawing from ancient maps but what if in the early 1500's Antarctica was Ice free?

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Ancient Origins: Hunters, Farmers and Metal-Age Invaders of Europe???


Recently family tree dna has put a new feature on their family finder section that apparently tells you what percentage one's dna comes from Hunter's and Gatherers, Farmers and Metal-Age Invaders and non-European ancient origins. I think this feature is pretty ridiculous and worthless for understanding one's family origins.
 
Apparently I have only 12 percent Metal Worker origins and my double first cousin has only 10 percent. The R1b y-dna of Western Europe belongs to Metal-Age Invaders. Both my grandfathers belong to R1b and I find it hard to believe that we have such a low percentage of Metal-Age Invader ancestry. The so-called Farmers seem to be associated with G ydna of which I have 42 % and my double cousin 41% according to familytree dna. The Hunters and Gathers seem to be associated with I ydna which I apparently have 46% and my double cousin 49%. Of course I as one who follows a non-evolutionary interpretation question the datings and the identification of these ancient Europeans but even if one accepts an evolutionary interpretation (as does Eupedia) something seems to be wrong.

I was pleased to note that the author of Eupedia is also questioning these percentages he is seeing. He states on his forum: "Interesting initiative, but when I see the results (mine and those posted here), their percentages for the Metal-age invaders seems completely off for everyone. ...I have been explaining that their Metal-age admixture, despite expressly claiming to represent Yamna Steppe people, does not represent Yamna admixture at all, but rather South Asian + West Asian admixture. We end up with Middle Easterners having three times more presumably Yamna admixture than Northwest Europeans, which is utterly ridiculous." 

I hold that those of I y-dna in Europe are the ancient Royal Assyrians who became the Sarmatians and Vikings descended from one of the clans of the ancient Atlanteans descended from Ishmael's son Massa. The G y-dna are Nahorites or ancient Syrian farmers who may have come into Europe before the R y-dna of the ancient Israelites of the steppes. The Syrian farmers may have entered Europe before 500 BC and the Metal working Israelites of the steppes after 500 BC. However both the Atlantean I and R1b (U106) were in Western Europe before 500 BC. The R1b L21 Gaels didn't come to Western Europe until around 300 BC. The rather simplex divisions of Europeans into three groups of Hunters and Gatherers, Farmers and Metal Age Invaders is entirely inaccurate and misleading.

These so-called Metal Age Invaders are linked to the Samara, Khvalynsk, Maykop, Leyla Tepe and Yamna of R1b and R1a and are totally incorrectly dated to the 6th to 5th Milleniums BC rather than in the period between 600-100 BC and are the cultures of the exiled paganised northern Israelites. The R1a Josephites were exiled to the Samara area of the Volga River while the R1b Leahites were in Azerbaijan (Teyla Tepe). Bodies from Khvalynsk II (around 400-200 BC) have been tested with a Leahite R1b man who is maternally H2, a Josephite R1a man who is maternally U5 and a Benjaminite Q1a man who is materally U4. This also demonstrates that females of H2, U5 and U4 were most likely part of the original Israelite people. It would seem that the R1b man whose paternal family probably came from Azerbaijan had a Milesian noble mother or grandmother descended from Nimlot or Nilius the Milesian Prince of Thebes and his wife Asenath (Scota) a Princess of Judah and daughter of King Zedekiah. 

Bell Beaker and Corded Ware Cultures: Who are they really?

 

Y-dna and mt-dna Trees from the Family of Noah

 

Monday, October 3, 2016

There is a Mammoth in the Room: Dna, Genetic Distances and Dating Methodologies


There is a mammoth in the room of genetic results. While using dna along with genealogical research and historical and archeological evidence can be fruitful and helpful, it is however not as clear cut as many believe. While the actual testing of dna may be mostly accurate and scientific, the interpretation may not be. There are still many question marks in this field of research. 

Much in this field is based on speculation and probability whereas mutations are actually random and there is no scientifically proven constant rate of mutations. Different companies and researchers use different formula and give different results. This means that I could, for example, have  two fourth cousins coming from the same paternal 3x great grandparents but have a totally different number of mutations separating me from them. One I could have a genetic distance of 7, the other a genetic distance of 5 out of 111. Or I could have an 8th cousin whom I only have a genetic distance of 5 out of 111. I would assume just based on the genetic evidence that the two with a genetic distance of 5 were closer related to me than the one with 7 but this may not be the case. 

Another example would be two brothers- one who stays in their home location and the other who goes to a far land where he experiences traumatic or cataclysmic or environmental effects that cause him to have sons with a number of new mutations and for the rate of mutations to occur more rapidly. If we then tested the y-dna of the two brother's grandsons due to the more numerous mutations we will wrongly assume they are much more distantly related than they actually are. Or if the mutations rates are much less then we will assume people are closer to us than they actually are. In working back even using a germ line approach we can be greatly deceived as there is no evidence that there is a constant rate of mutation throughout human history and there may have been periods when it was higher or lower or virtually zero across humanity or among separate groups. We also don't know how much our  autosomal dna can influence y-dna or mt-dna. These are just a few of the questions and question marks. That mammoth gets bigger all the time.

Linking the age of haplogroups to evolutionary theories based on a so-called molecular clock is also highly speculative and problematic. They assume a certain age for when chimpanzees separated from humans that is totally based on arbitrariness and then they try to stretch the dna evidence to fit this timescale and the timescale of the theory of man's origin and coming out of Africa. In fact some genetic studies show that humans share more dna in common with pigs than with chimpanzees. These same evolution-based theories are then used and applied to archeological discoveries which then totally distort history and the movements of peoples. Instead of realising that the Beaker culture is the culture of the Gaels arriving in Europe from 300 BC and the Utenice culture is that of the Turkic-Bulgars arriving in central Europe from the 5th century AD until their Christianisation in the 9th century with the Iron-culture of the Romans in between, they back date them to a much too ancient time-frame.

Using the terms of Stone, Bronze and Iron age as a chronological measure is problematic as it is sometimes a level of technology but in others it is a question of age or environment. Iron rusts away more quickly than bronze or stone and it also rusts quicker in certain environments to others. Thus a civilization we call Bronze or Stone may have had iron or bronze but all traces of it has disappeared. Or we have those who live in a higher level of technology alongside those living in a more simple or primitive levels as we often see today.  

This also affects evidence based on the dna of ancient bodies. For example if one dates the Utenice culture to the 2nd millenium BC instead of 500-800 AD and finds a certain haplogroup such as I1a1 mt-dna among its dead, one then gets the false impression of the age of this subclade. Alot of these datings of cultures are based on the end of the Ice Age in Europe. The end of the Ice Age is believed by many evolutionists to have occurred 15,000 years ago rather than the 4500 years ago proposed by Velikovsky (my own dating is around 1350 BC). We don't even know if the Ice Age in Western Europe was the same one that wiped out the mammoths in Siberia or that it was some later ones we called the Little and Mini Ice Ages closer to our own times. We should always remember, that in many regards, in the areas of history and science we are in a realm of hypothesises, theories, speculations and story telling. In the end we must hold to that which most convinces us as the truth while remaining open to being wrong and that with further research we may all have to revise our understandings.

A recent study has demonstrated that the lactose tolerant gene was not found among the Leahite Yamna (R1b) cattle rearers but entered Europe through the Gaelic Beaker (R1b-L21) cattle milkers. While the study based on evolutionary datings of Yamna and Beaker cultures states that the gene was found in an individual who lived about 4,300 years ago -it was more like around 300 BC. These scientists also seem to be saying that white man only appeared 8,000 years ago. This is the time when great civilisations and technology arose after dark-skinned man supposedly had wandered around for 200,000 years doing nothing much but living as simple hunter and gatherers. This view would seem to feed racism and white supremacists ideas and reflect the ideas of the occultic theosophists.

Man would seem to have been created with the ability through natural selection to adapt to a wide range of environments (which may have been aided in the past by ancient genetic scientists). This is what some call micro-evolution for which there is a lot of evidence. Macro-evolution of one kind becoming another, as proposed by Darwinists, has very little to support it other than fanciful story-telling. It is equally ludicrous and ridiculous to think that man descends from an ape or chimpanzee type creature as it is from a pig or a pig-chimp creature as proposed by some evolutionist scientists.

For a few years the field of genetic research seemed to be challenging the stranglehold of the "Out of Africa" evolutionary views of the scientific atheist elites who control much of academia but once again we see a new control being used to interpret the evidence within the frame-work of this tired and manipulated system. Citizen-scientists were making rapid progress which the elites couldn't totally control but now they are trying to put back the shackles. We need the mammoth to burst open the room and lead us to a new academic, historical and scientific grassland of freedom.