Shi Ji 史記 Annals of Yin 殷本紀 by Sima Qian 100 BC

Records of the Grand Historian 史記 《殷本紀》 Annals of Yin

殷契，母曰簡狄，有娀氏之女，為帝嚳次妃。三人行浴，見玄鳥墮其卵，簡狄取吞之，因孕生契。契長而佐禹治水有功。帝舜乃命契曰：「百姓不親，五品不訓，汝為司徒而敬敷五教，五教在寬。」封于商，賜姓子氏。契興於唐、虞、大禹之際，功業著於百姓，百姓以平。
Qi of Yin’s mother was Jian Di, who was one of the daughters of Yousong and the secondary wife of Emperor Ku. She was going with her two sisters to bathe, when she saw a dark bird drop its egg. Jian Di picked it up, and swallowed it, and thus being with child gave birth to Qi. When Qi grew up, he was successful in assisting Yu to control the flood, and the Emperor Shun, directing Qi, said: The people are wanting in affection for one another, and do not observe the five orders of relationship. You, as Minister of Instruction, should reverently inculcate the lessons of duty belonging to those five orders, but do so with gentleness. He held in fief the principality of Shang, and was given the surname of Zi (son). Qi flourished in the reigns of Yao, Shun, and the great Yu. His services were manifest to the people, who were accordingly at peace.

契卒，子昭明立。昭明卒，子相土立。相土卒，子昌若立。昌若卒，子曹圉立。曹圉卒，子冥立。冥卒，子振立。振卒，子微立。微卒，子報丁立。報丁卒，子報乙立。報乙卒，子報丙立。報丙卒，子主壬立。主壬卒，子主癸立。主癸卒，子天乙立，是為成湯。
Qi (documents) died, and his son Zhaoming (luminous) succeeded him. Zhaoming died, and his son Xiangtu (view land) succeeded him. Xiangtu died, and his son Chang Ruo (bright-like) succeeded him. Chang Ruo died, and his son Cao Yu (cattle-pens) succeeded him. Zao Yu died, and his son Ming (obscure) succeeded him. Ming died, and his son Zhen (shake) succeeded him. Zhen died, and his son Wei (diminutive) succeeded him. Wei died, and his son Baoding (report D) succeeded him. Baoding died, and his son Baoyi (report B) succeeded him. Baoyi died, and his son Baobing (report C) succeeded him. Baobing died, and his son Zhuren (lord I) succeeded him. Zhuren died, and his son Zhu gui (lord J) succeeded him. Zhu Gui died, and his son Tian Yi (Heaven B) or Tang the Completer succeeded him.

Zoser’s Saqqara Step Pyramid Grain Bins of Imhotep Joseph True Historians Proving Genesis

I am not necessarily a close fan of H. Gruver, but he also proves the truthfulness of Ron Wyatt‘s archaeology. The discovery of the deep grain bins near the Saqqara Step Pyramid of Imhotep, who therefore is proven to be identical to the Biblical Joseph, son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, who became second in command under the Pharao (Zoser or Djozer) .  It once again proves the historicity of the Book of Genesis in the Tanakh, one of the Five Books written by Moses or also called the Pentateuch!

Extrapolating from that truth, why not accept and believe its entire truth which Jesus Christ also accepted, that Creation was very recent and not billions or even millions of years ago, but at the most less than 10.000 years ago. These following are some great videos.

PROBLEM: MANY Christians even STILL do NOT believe in Genesis as REAL TRUE history because they’re STILL brain-washed by Darwin’s untenable Evolutionist nonsense & “billions of years” (How about you?) (VIEW the long videos at 1.25 or even 1.5 HIGH SPEED)

THIS is historian Jonathan Gray’s video, confirming Ron Wyatt’s discovery of Joseph’s grain-bins & more.

For Ron Wyatt’s death-bed confession that he found the ARK OF THE COVENANT and SAW ANGELS & DISCOVERED & ANALYSED THE BLOOD OF JESUS, SEE OUR ARTICLE ON HIS DEATHBED CONFESSION HERE: https://ancientpatriarchs.wordpress.com/2016/02/21/ron-wyatts-deathbed-confession-of-finding-ark-of-the-covenant-its-guardian-angels/

IF we don’t care to consider these proofs of Bible accuracy.. we are without excuse if we continue to believe Darwin & his soul-damning LIE of humans descending from animals or other species, which genetically is impossible. For your notebook or desktop computer to get more faculties/capabilities, it needs more CODE or INFORMATION in the form of software, and often acquire more hardware even to make it capable.  Information does not just ‘fall from the sky’ in some undefined, empirically never proven, unknown non directed process that these 19th century Darwinian spinsters & rich atheist bankers just thought up and labeled this mirage or ‘Fatah Morgana’, this spurious figment of their imagination: “Evolution“.  Extra coded informtion has to be programmed by Intelligence and added to the genome. It doesn’t “just happen” any more than millions of monkeys typing for millions of years coming up with an Encyclopedia, or even average American teenage destroyers (a tautology), coming up with Marxist ideas on their own without Saul Alinsky or Dewy, let alone with Platonic or Socratean philosophy! It ain’t gonna happen. They have to be taught it! Added to their brains! (?)

Deep Corn Bins Built by Joseph also called Imhotep.

All the ancient patriarchs and ancient civilisations and tribes and nations ALL accepted CREATION & talked about the GLOBAL FLOOD disaster, whereas modern Marxist, atheist, post-modernist historians are all beholden to Darwinism, for that is where the filthy lucre and Book sales for these compromisers come from.

One more recent CLEAR video of Saqqara step pyramid

HOW MUCH historical truths are suppressed by the Antichrists! It is devastating for our Christian civilisation and cultures.

How ‘Ignorant’ Pagans Deified A Real-Life Wodan Into Their Ancestral Anglo-Saxon Warrior God ‘Odin’

Ancient Patriarchs editor’s introduction to article below:
Wodan or Woden is the early patriarch of many Germanic tribes like the Anglos & Saxons as well as others. The weekday name Wednesday originated in Wodan‘s Day. Thursday came from ‘Thor‘s day’. Friday came from ‘Freya‘s day’, while Saturday came from Saturn’s  Day.
It is our A.P. theory that Tuesday originated in Tuisch’ or ‘Tuitsch‘ day, the eponymous patriarch of the ‘Deutsch‘ (=German) tribes or people. Academia – for their lack of sticking to Euhemerist analysis – only say that Tuesday comes from the Old English tīwesdæg, meaning “Tiu’s day.” All they can come up with is that Tiu was some “Germanic god of the sky and war” with its equivalent in Norse mythology as Tyr, but they are unaware (or rather unwilling because of their Darwinian bias) to accept the importance of the German UR-patriarch Tuitsch!
The German and Dutch word ‘UR’ and ‘OER’ mean “radically ancient” (‘ur-alt’ means very very old, which word ‘very‘ probably has the same origin as well when spelled as ‘uery’ in old English!) Ur probably stems from the ancient Sumerian city state of ‘UR‘, where also Abraham happened to live and be born. There is a theory that the German ur-patriarch Tuitsch and his tribe originally came from Assyria, so that Germans would have descended from the Assyrians; the people of Asshur, son of Shem, son of Noah.
Sun and Moon caused Sunday & Monday of course. The German & Dutch names for ‘Tuesday’ are respectively ‘Dinstag’ and ‘Dinsdag’, which most likely originated from ‘Odin‘s day’, which strongly indicates that Wodan and Odin were indeed two different personalities, which is not supported in the article below. Its writer believes that Woden and Odin are one and the same. But if they were they would not have been assigned to two different days of the week by the original Germans.
The British Saxons (and Angles) were descendants from the original German ‘Deutsch‘ Saxons (& Angeln) whose historical knowledge was of course older & superior to that of their Saxon offspring in ‘Britain‘! Britain was named after Brutus, the eponymous patriarch of the ‘Britons‘ who came from Troy and landed in Britain with his tribe, now called the ‘Welsh‘ people, who actually used to possess and control the entire Island, except for parts in the North controlled by the Picts and Scots. The Brits or Brutus’ people invited the Saxons to help them fight the Scots, and they did, but in so doing they lost their hold on Britain as those Saxons never left and took over most of the island and pushed the Britts into what is now called ‘Wales’. Apart from that, the article below (NB: written by British Israelites! ) establishes the pagan “god” Woden or Wodan in correct Euhemerist methodology as a deified patriarch of some or many of the Germanic tribes. It mentions the names also of two of his great-great-grandsons called ‘Hengest’ and ‘Horsa’. These are interesting names and may indicate that horses were named after one, while in German and Dutch a ‘stallion’ is called a ‘Hengst’! Interesting!
As far as modern pagans in Northern Europe returning to their former ‘gods’ – who were actually people – it is sad that these nationalists revert to what amounts to man-worship, reverting to the same deification as in the rest of the pagan world, of ‘their‘ physical patriarchs who were perhaps strong leaders and great warriors but definitely not gods! This is a sad result of the sissyfication of worldly ‘Christianity’ that doesn’t cut the mustard enough to fight evil by spreading real truth as Jesus did it, plus a result of the venomous Antichrist propaganda campaigns from media, academia, and the evil oligarchy who hate Jesus, that turned these Northern Europeans away from the REAL God and true role model who came to die for their sins to pay the ransom for their souls.

---

January 20, 2021 By CFT

Many people still to this day worship Odin as the traditional god of the Anglo-Saxon race — and these same people also believe that Christianity — supposedly an alien, Middle Eastern religion that worships a Semitic desert god — was forcibly imposed upon their pagan ancestors in Europe, subplanting their “real” noble warrior god — named Woden or Odin — and thereafter cut off the Saxon race from their true and “natural” spiritual leader.

There is only one small problem with this fanciful narrative — Woden was a real man — a historically-documented ancestral chieftain — that pagans long ago turned into a god — and began to worship as a god out of sheer ignorance, according to Medieval historian Richard Fahey:

No detailed account of Woden and his mythic adventures survives from early medieval England; nevertheless, this ancestral figure remains present in the cultural imagination of the English people even centuries later.  The famous ecclesiastical historian Bede is the first known Anglo-Saxon author to describe this mythic genealogy in Book I, Capitula 15 of his Historia claiming: ‘Duces fuisse perhibentur eorum primi duo fratres Hengist et Horsa….Erant autem filii Uictgilsi, cuius pater Uitta, cuius pater Uecta, cuius pater Uoden, de cuius stirpe multarum prouinciarum regium genus originem duxit,’ [or translated into English]:

“From the first their leaders (the Anglo-Saxons) were held to be two brothers, Hengest and Horsa….They were sons of Wictgils, whose father was Witta, whose father was Wecta, whose father was Woden.”

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, surviving in nine extant manuscripts and probably completed under King Ælfred the Great in the 9th century, reiterates Bede’s Wodinic genealogy.  Almost a century later, in a Latin adaptation known as Chronicon Æthelweardi, the 10th century historian Æthelweard (descended from the 9th-century King Æthelred I, the elder brother of the King Ælfred the Great) laments Woden’s divine status within the Norse Pantheon.  In his chronicle, Æthelweard complains that ignorant Scandinavian pagans have mistakenly deified Woden, whom Æthelweard identifies as king of the barbarians.  He bemoans how these pagans honor Woden as a god rather than the ancestral chieftain that Æthelweard, like so many Anglo-Saxon authors, understood him to be.

Well after the Norman Conquest of 1066, Woden was still making his way into English manuscripts, especially in depictions of Anglo-Saxon royal lineages.  At roughly the same time as Snorri was composing his Edda, and Geoffrey of Monmouth his Historia, Wodinic genealogy remains present in the English written record, remembering the Anglo-Saxon kings of old who trace their ancestry back to this deified chieftain.

The Libellus de primo Saxonum uel Normannorum adventu—located in a 12th-century manuscript (London, British Library Cotton Caligula A. viii) and often attributed to Symeon of Durham—contains an illustration of Woden, crowned as ancestral king of the Anglo-Saxons.  The text surrounding the illustration describes the royal lineages of the kingdoms of Kent, Mercia, Deira, Bernicia and Wessex respectively, each claiming descent and the right to rule from this legendary figure.

A strikingly similar image of Woden as a crowned English ancestral figure surrounded by his royal descendants accompanies the 12th-century Historia Anglorum by Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon (located in Cambridge Corpus Christi College MS 66).  This text connects Woden with Henry II, the contemporary king of England.

Likewise, Ernulf, Bishop of Rochester describes the kings of East Anglia as descendants of the legendary Woden in his 12th century Textus de Ecclesia Roffensi (found in Rochester Cathedral Library, MS A.3.5).

In medieval English historiography, Woden appears to have been used to establish dynastic legitimacy for kings in early medieval England.  Long after Woden may have been worshiped as a god, well past the Anglo-Saxon conversion and even through the Norman Conquest, the importance of this legendary figure continues to loom large in the cultural imagination of those living and ruling in medieval England.  Although today nowhere near as popular or well known as Arthur, the so-called king of the Britons, the earliest kings ruling in England turned to Woden, not Arthur, in order to affirm and legitimize their royal lineages.

European paganism is very popular among many White Nationalists who believe in this false notion that Christianity is an “alien” religion — but this view requires willful ignorance of a significant part of early European history.

Tour Armenia Speaks About Noya or Noah

Tour Armenia discusses the Armenian history of Noah and interesting descent from their patriarchs Haik & Togarmah or Torcom, in spite of way too ancient dating! Enjoy some truth!

---

TOUR ARMENIA ARTICLE:
The story of Noya (Noah) forms the basis of Armenia’s Christian religious identity, but in fact there is no recorded account of the Flood in ancestral Armenian mythology until the kingdom of Urartu and later, Christianity. Of all ancestral peoples who left records of their living in the region, there is not one single account of the Flood, which is widespread among other cultures in the region.

The reason for this is simple, if one believes the account of the biblical flood and subsequent regeneration of the human race:

According to the biblical timeline, the Armenians are direct descendants of Japheth, one the grandsons of Noah, whose ark landed on the top of Mount Ararat after the Great Flood. During the deluge Noah’s ark came to rest on the Mountains of Ararat, and his sons and grandsons, whose progeny increased there, had to emigrate to other lands. While some of Japheth’s sons stayed in the vicinity of Ararat, the others went towards Mesopotamia. Haik, who was believed to one of Japheth’s grandsons and the heroic patriarch of the Armenian people, was among those who went to Babylon. Another offspring, Aram, is credited with founding the Syrian kingdom.

“Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah; Shem, Ham and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.

“The son of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

“And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah”.

Armenians consider themselves as coming from the House of Togarmah or Torcom. There is a cuneiform inscription that refers to the walled town of Tilgarimnu near Malatia in ancient Armenia. Others think that Togarmah is made up from two words: “take” (meaning tribe or race in Sanskrit) and “Armah” (Armenia).

Of course some of you may want to suspend some archeological facts for a little mythical belief. However, considering the discovery of Troy was pointed to by a story of the “mythical” Trojan War (which is now known to have actually occurred), and the Old Testament has been more and more shown to indicate actual history, perhaps this timeline does not need to be treated so much as legend but as a symbolic representation of actual events.

For example, there was a flood that covered much of the world around 13,600 BC as the world warmed through a tilting of its rotational axis, causing glaciers to melt. The Bible speaks of the mountain Noah lands on as Ararat or Alarod. In the Aramaic version of Genesis, the bible doesn’t speak of Noah landing on ‘the mountain of Ararat’, but on ‘the mountains (plural) of Ararat’. Later cultures called the region Urartu or Arata. These different words describe the same place.

The consequent raising of seawater inundated all of the lowlands in the Near East. Some speculation is made that rather than being seen as an actual boat, Noah’s ark can be considered as a symbolic embodiment of life (the ark of the covenant, for example, existed both as a thing and as an idea–the compact between God and man).

‘The Babyloniaca’ of Berossus – by Stanley Mayer

The Babyloniaca of Berossus by Stanley Mayer Burstein sources and monographs sources from the ancient near east  volume 1, fascicle 5 undena publication malibu  1978 ANET FGrH Grayson JCS RLA RE
ABBREVIATIONS
Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (1948)
Die Fragmente der Grieschischen Historiker (1923-1958)
Texts from Cuneiform Sources, vol. 5, Assyrian and Babylonian
Chronicles (1975)
Journal ofCuneiform Studies
Reallexicon der Assyriologie (1928-1938; 1957-)
Real-Encycloplidie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abbreviations …………………………………………………………. 1
Table of Contents . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ……………3
A. Introduction………………………………………………………..4
1. The Hellenistic Period and Ancient Near Eastern Civilization………………………… .4
2. The Life of Berossus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. The Babyloniaca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …6
4. Evaluation ………………………………………………………8
5. The Present Edition………………………………………………… IO
B. Book One: Genesis ………………………………………………….. 13
1. Prologue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. The Revelation of Oannes…………………………………………….. 14
3. The Great Year……… : ………………………………………….. 15
4. The Moon ……………………………………………………… 16
5. The Walling of Babylon ……………………………………………… 17
6. Unplaced Fragments of Book One ……………………………………….. 17
C. Book Two: The Book of Kings……………………………………………. 18
1. Kings Before the Flood ……….·…………………………………….. 18
2. The Flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3. Sages After the Flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .·. . . ……………………………….. 21
4. Dynasties After the Flood…………………………………………….. 21
5. Nabu-Nasir……………………………………………………… 22
D. Book Three ………………………………………………………. 23
1. Tiglath-pileser/Pulu ………………………………………………… 23
2. Sennacherib . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …….. 23
3. Nabukadnezzar II …………………………………………………. 26
4. The Successors of Nebukadnezzar II ………………………………………. 28
5. The Persians . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6. Possible Fragments from Book Two ………………………………………. 29
7. Doubtful Fragment ………………………………………………… 30
E. Appendices ………..·…………………………………………….. 31
1. The Authenticity of the Astronomical and Astrological Fragments……………………31
2. Berossus’ Chronology of the Dynasties after the Flood in Book Two……………………. 33
3. Berossus’ Chronology of the Reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon……………………. 36
4. The Ptolemaic Canon……………………………………………….. 38
5. Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

INTRODUCTION

1. The Hellenistic Period and Ancient Near Eastern Civilization
Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Persian Empire marks a major turning point in the cultural history of the Ancient Near East. Unlike their Persian predecessors, the Macedonians and Greeks were not part of the Mesopotamian culture area, but true aliens, largely ignorant of and unsympathetic to the values and ideals of
the civilizations of their new subjects. True, Greeks had visited the Near East for centuries as travelers, mercenaries and merchants. They had admired and continued to admire the great antiquity and splendid monuments of. its civilizations and had borrowed various artistic motives and techniques and even so important a tool as writing from the area, but they had been and continued largely to be unable to read and understand the cuneiform and hieroglyphic scripts in which the intellectual traditions of these cultures were recorded. 1
Consequently, they were outsiders, dependent for their knowledge on the observations of travelers such as Herodotus for Egypt or romancers such as Ctesias for Mesopotamia and on such information as they could glean from the guides and other members of the Near Eastern cultures who would associate with them. Not surprisingly, the new masters’ view of their subjects was seriously distorted, being based as it was on a curious melange of shrewd if often biased observations and only partially understood oral tradition.
Among those Near Eastern intellectuals who chose to deal with their new rulers we can isolate two essentially  different responses to the challenge posed by them. One group created a literature, both oral and written, of  protest, composing apocalyptic prophecies of the ultimate defeat of their oppressors on the one hand and elaborating still further the folk histories of the great heroes of their cultures’ past on the other. Thus, new conquests were ascribed to Sesostris and Semiramis and alongside them chauvinistic new legends were formed around such figures as Ramses II and Nectanebo II in Egypt, Taharqa in Nubia, Moses and Abraham in Judea 11 -, and Nebukadnezzar II in Babylonia. The other group, however, more willing to cooperate with their new masters, attempted to educate them hy the publication in Greek of authoritative accounts of their respective countries’ history and culture, accounts in which the factual errors of the popular Greek authorities would be corrected; at the same time they provided an introduction to the authentic traditions of their civilizations. The
compilation of such works was a genuine innovation, involving as it did the determination of what constituted the intellectual core of a civilization and then the presentation of that core in a foreign language in such a way that it would be understood by readers almost totally ignorant of it. The greatest and only completely surviving example of such a work is the Jewish antiquities of Flavius Josephus, but the first of them was the Babylonian history of Berossus, composed about 281 B.C. and dedicated to Antiochus I.

————————-
1For examples of late Hellenistic school texts in Greek and cuneiform suggesting that some Greeks attempted to learn cuneiform, see Edmond Solberger, ‘Graeco-Babyloniaca,’ Iraq, 24 (1962) 63-72. laFor Nebukadnezzar II and Taharqa see Megasthenes, FGrH, 3C2, 715 Ff I and 11. For Ramses II see Hecataeus of Abdera, FGrH, 3A, 264, F 25.47-49; Tacitus, Annales 2.60; and for Nectanebo II see Ps. Callisthenes, Historia Alexandri Magni, 1.1-14.
For Moses and Abraham see in particular Eupolemus, FGrH, 3C2, 723 F 1; Pseudo Eupolemus, FGrH, 3C2, 724 Ff, 1-2; and Artapanus, FGrH, 3C2, 726 Ff, 2-3. For this literature see Martin Braun, History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature (Oxford, 1938); and Samuel K. Eddy, The King Is Dead: Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism 334-31 B.C. (Lincoln, 1961).
2Berossus, FGrH, 3Cl, 680 Tt 1-3. For his priorlty to Manetho see Manetho, FGrH, 3Cl, 609 T 11; and Oswyn Murray, ‘Herodotus and Hellenistic Culture,’ Qassical Quarterly, 66 (1972) 209. Paul Schnabel, Berossus und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur (Leipzig, 1923) 8-10, dated the work to between 293 and 280. The more precise date of ca. 281 is based on the chronological discussion in Appendix 2. I have followed Schnabel (16) in assuming that the title of the book was Babyloniaca and that the correct spelling of his name was Berossus (3-5). In regard to the latter, however, G. Komor6czy, ‘Berosos and the Mesopotamian Literature,’ Acta Antiqua, 21 (1973) 125, has recently proposed that the form Berosos is correct and that it should be interpreted as meaning ‘Bel is his shepherd.’ Unless otherwise noted all subsequent dates in this study are B.C. 

2. The life of Berossus
By the early centuries of our era Berossus had become a legendary figure. He was credited with the invention of a common type of sundial and honored in Athens for his prophecies with a statue in one of the city’s gymnasia. A family was even invented for him including a wife, Erymanthe, and a daughter, appropriately
one of antiquity’s famous sibyls, Sabbe, the Babylonian sibyl.3 Unfortunately, however, the known facts about Berossus’ life are, in contrast to the legendary, few and undramatic.
In the preface to his Babyloniaca Berossus stated that he was a contemporary of Alexander the Great, and this taken together with the fact that he wrote his book about 281 and lived for a time after that year allows us to set the date of his birth no earlier than about 350. In addition, he identified himself as a priest of Bel of Chaldaean origin. This implies, and the fragments of his book confirm, that he received a normal scribal education in the traditional Sumerian and Accadian classics. 4 Further, his ability to write in Greek, his familiarity with popular Greek conceptions of the Babylonian past, and the very fact of his writing a book such as the Babyloniaca for the instruction of Antiochus I points to his being a member of the Seleucid court, (perhaps one of the Chaldaean astrologers consulted by Seleucus I and his predecessors.5 Finally, some time after 281 Berossus abandoned Babylon and settled on the Ptolemaic island of Cos where, we are told, he became the first to give formal instruction to the Greeks in Chaldaean astrology.6 .
Scant though they are, these few facts about Berossus’ life in contrast to the later “Berossus legend” are helpful in the understanding of his book. They identify Berossus as an individual suspended between two cultures, Babylonian and Greek. Steeped in the traditions of Babylon and of its priesthood and proud of them, Berossus still accepted the new Greco-Macedonian regime as legitimate and had adjusted himself to it. For such a person the ignorance of the Greeks and Macedonians he associated with must by itself have been annoying, but Seleucus I’s deliberate policy of degrading Babylon and its shrines by transferring most of its population to his new capital city of Seleucia on the Tigris and the consequent friction between him and the priesthood can only have been deeply disturbing.7 It is tempting to think that Berossus saw in the accession of Antiochus I, long resident in Babylon as governor of the upper satrapies, the possibility of reversing this policy and wrote his book in the hope that a true account of the Babylonian past and its significance and of the proper relationship between the Chaldaean priesthood and a king might aid in inducing Antiochus to
repudiate his father’s policies. If so, then Berossus’ abandonment of Babylon in old age for Cos,

Germania by Tacitus; 2000 Yr. Old History of Tuisto-/Tuisco-land, Twiskland, & Deutschland

In 1498, a monk named Annio da Viterbo published fragments, (put down as “Pseudo-Berossus”) stating that Babylonian records had shown that Tuiscon or Tuisto, the fourth son of Noah, had been the first ruler of Scythia and Germany following the dispersion of peoples, with him being succeeded by his son Mannus as the second king. Later historians (e.g. Johannes Aventinus) furnished numerous further details, including the theory by James Anderson that Tuiscon was in fact none other than the biblical Ashkenaz, son of Gomer.

There is another history that Tuitsch was a leader and/or descendant from a tribe of Assyrians that moved up into Europe long before this Roman History below was written by Tacitus. Tacitus relates that “ancient songs” (Latin carminibus antiquis) of the Germanic peoples celebrated Tuisto as “a god, born of the earth” (deum terra editum). These songs further attributed to him a son, Mannus, who in turn had three sons, the offspring of whom were referred to as Ingaevones, Herminones and Istaevones, living near the Ocean (proximi Oceano), in the interior (medii), and the remaining parts (ceteri) of the geographical region of Germania, respectively.

GERMANIA by TACITUS

Chapter I

TACITUS, Roman historian

Geography of Germany. “The various peoples of Germany are separated from the Gauls by the Rhine, from the Raetians and Pannonians by the Danube, and from the Sarmatians and Dacians by mountains – or, where there are no mountains, by mutual fear. The northern parts of the country are girdles by the sea, flowing round broad peninsulas and vast islands where a campaign of the present century has revealed to us the existence of some nations and kings hitherto unknown.

The Rhine rises in a remote and precipitous height of the Raetian alps and afterwards turns slightly westward to flow into the North Sea. The Danube issues from a gentle slope of moderate height in the Black Forest, and after passing more peoples than the Rhine in its course discharges itself into the Black Sea through six channels – a seventh mouth being lost in the marshlands.

Chapter II

The Inhabitants. Origins of the Name “Germany”. The Germans themselves I should regard as aboriginal, and not mixed at all with other races through immigration or intercourse. For, in former times it was not by land but on shipboard that those who sought to emigrate would arrive; and the boundless and, so to speak, hostile ocean beyond us, is seldom entered by a sail from our world. And, beside the perils of rough and unknown seas, who would leave Asia, or Africa for Italy for Germany, with its wild country, its inclement skies, its sullen manners and aspect, unless indeed it were his home?

In their ancient songs, their only way of remembering or recording the past they celebrate an earth-born god Tuisco, and his son Mannus, as the origin of their race, as their founders. To Mannus they assign three sons, from whose names, they say, the coast tribes are called Ingaevones; those of the interior, Herminones; all the rest, Istaevones. Some, with the freedom of conjecture permitted by antiquity, assert that the god had several descendants, and the nation several appellations, as Marsi, Gambrivii, Suevi, Vandilii, and that these are nine old names.

The name Germany, on the other hand, they say is modern and newly introduced, from the fact that the tribes which first crossed the Rhine and drove out the Gauls, and are now called Tungrians, were then called Germans. Thus what was the name of a tribe, and not of a race, gradually prevailed, till all called themselves by this self-invented name of Germans, which the conquerors had first employed to inspire terror.

The True Timing of Moses in Egypt, the Exodus, & the Bronze Age Collapse

Before we can analyse the relationship between the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites and the Bronze Age Collapse, we have to be able to first drop the major academic lie that the Exodus is a “Pious Fiction“.

Well, guess what, that restoration of true Bible history was already deftly accomplished by David Rohl, who is the sharp knife who deciphered & proved without doubt the proper Egyptian timeline of the Exodus around 1450 BC at the end of the Middle Bronze Age & the end of the Middle Kingdom brought about  by the Hyksos who took over defenseless Egypt after Israel had left, because the true Exodus Pharaoh DudiMose‘s army.. lay drowned on the bottom of the Red Sea!

Without me pre-digesting this very detailed video, I challenge you to watch this 2 hour amazing presentation by … agnostic… David Rohl – which you can speed up to 1.5 in settings – made by Evangelical ‘Rood Awakening’ whose movie producer – by God’s grace – hardly interrupted Rohl’s magnificent academic presentation.

Rohl proves that Academia – as usual as we have proven in article after article here at Ancient Patriarchs – got it all wrong again; The timings of Joseph, the Famine, Sojourn, Moses, the Exodus, the destruction of Jericho by Joshua, and they also still to this day neglect to recognise the Stone of the Covenant Joshua set up in Migdol Shechem.

The Biblical Exodus… Fairytale or Historical Fact? by David Rohl

And, so, if the Exodus took place around 1450 BC, the destruction of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, etc. would then have happened around 1400 BC, that would be too early for the approximate dating of the Bronze Age Collapse around 1200 BC.

The reason we say this, is because some are now trying to paint the Israelite invasion & destruction of Canaan as one major cause for the Bronze Age Collapse, in a futile effort to blame ALL the world’s misfortune on God & His ‘Chosen People’ of yore, because presumably would be the same people as are causing it today? But the present day so-called “Jews” are not the same Judaeans or let alone the Israelites of yesteryear, no matter how hard some of them are insisting that they are. It has long been proven that their Palestinian victims have more Judaean DNA in their genome than the Khazarian Turks from Southern Russia!

They insinuate that it is all God’s fault for permitting the old Israelites to charge interest – usury – on their neighbours, whereas God never by the wildest stretch of His imagination intended for them, let alone these unrelated Turks, to make it a worldwide policy of extortion today. Neither did God intend the extermination of Israel’s enemies then to become a blueprint for extermination today! God rather intended Israel then to be a  light to the nations and mainly to produce the Messiah, Yeshua! When they had the Romans kill him, they lost it all, their temple, country, status, everything.

To blame the Bronze Age Collapse (BAC) on the Israelites of yore, sounds like Anti-Goddism to me, for ultimately He would be responsible for it. It is a bit far sought IMHO, seeing that the Exodus and the 1200 BC BAC are separated by two centuries! Does it then look like he has a dog in this fight, blaming God for everything? Well it does seem to be the fashion these days. Let me put it this way, GOD is not responsible for what evil people do to others, especially since He came down in the human form & face of God called Jesus who taught us to “Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you!”

Now the detractors may say, “Well, so why did He do it to the Canaanites? Did He want them to exterminate Him?” ANSWER: The old wicked Canaanites that lived there had already tried to exterminate Him and His Love ever-since they settled down there in a land that was not theirs in the first place, for they persecuted righteous Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and kids, unreasonably stealing their very own dug wells with impunity, and even raping their daughter, etc. Not nice. But most of all some of them, especially the Amorites and the several Canaanite giant races were the wicked degenerate offspring of the Nephilim who are taking over the world now! God KNEW! But His very own nation let them into their midst and into their seed, before Nehemiah put a halt to that.. sad to say too late!

But mostly they exterminated God’s Love by their promotion of the  most wicked religion of that day – as well as today – the extermination of their own children in the fires for the glory of their wicked god Molech or Moloch, for whom the Italian government now has set up a statue in the Colosseum in Rome! Wicked! (Will they reap the same fate?)

Now, you could perhaps find fault with God, blaming all the world’s present evils on Him, allowing Adam & Eve to be tempted by the fruit of the ‘Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil’, but isn’t that a little bit far sought? Besides, if He had not allowed one temptation in that perfect Garden of Love, we would’ve been automatons without any Free Choice! And Anthony would not have written his article.

Sure the destruction of many of the Canaanites – not all because even Jesus had Simon the Canaanite as a disciple & even cured a Canaanite woman’s possessed daughter- sure left a vacuum in the land that Israel then filled up with their presence, but whether it caused the BAC? Hmm…

If you have read the other articles here on Ancient Patriarchs, you might have come across the most likely REAL reason for the BAC, namely some REAL Climate Change before the BAC, to be specific the lessening of the rains over North Africa and the Middle East, that caused droughts and famines, and inevitable relocations of the much smaller nations of those days, some 1800 years after the 3000 BC Flood.

The Flood had caused the REAL Ice Age to start by the heating up of the global oceans when the Fountains of the Earth sprang fault lines all over the globe, causing volcanic disasters ever-since. The rise in sea temperatures caused more evaporation of water causing abundant rains which turned into ice caps on land in the Northern hemisphere in Europe, Siberia, North America, etc., while making the Sahara green grazing lands for cows! By 1400 BC they had dried out though.

When the seas had cooled to present levels by 1500-1400 BC the ice caps melted and caused a 125 M. (300 ft.) global sea level rise, sinking Atlantis, Sunda land, Kumari Kandam, Dogger Land, and the Land of Mu here around Taiwan and the Pacific. See the red sunken areas below. And therefore the island people like the Atlanteans, Sundans, Mu-ans, Doggerlanders, etc. had to find new places to live. That’s why the Egyptians  named their attackers the “Sea Peoples”, a fact heavily suppressed by the Materialist Darwinian gatekeepers who prefer to deny Atlantis because ‘humans’ (homo sapiens sapiens!) were till to stupid to cross the oceans, so therefore there could not have been an Atlantis, and Poseidon’s (Sidon) and Neptune’s (Naptuhim Gen. 10) ..10 islands in the Atlantic (wonder why they named it the Atlantic? Hmm..) are of course called ‘myths’ by them. But why then are there identical megaliths across the oceans all over the world.. if they couldn’t cross them in first place?

Look in Our 200 Most Popular Articles!

But the Darwinian historians – if that’s what you can call them? – insist of course that their Ice Ages took place long before the Creation of the Universe some 10.-20. or even 80.000 years BP. (Before Present)

Why? Because they – as Materialists, Naturalists, Marxists, Atheists, etc. – despise and suppress true knowledge of the Flood, because it proves God’s existence via Noah’s foreknowledge of the coming of the Flood, by building an Ark, collecting animals and people to cause them to survive this Flood. How else did he know? And so they dismiss the over 700 global Flood legends and the similar names of Noah, Nu-ah, Nuewa (China), Nun, Nur, Nuh, Noe, Nu-Uh, Nut, Ouranuh or -Noh, etc.

Well, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2020 everybody. I am not too sure though about a happy 2020! It might all crash this year, finally, and that won’t be a very happy time, but rather cause some bad extermination, but don’t blame it on the God of Love. He did His best, by coming down here and humbly dying on the cross for all of our wicked sins, child abuse, child murder, mayhem, wars, genocides, exterminations,  etc., that if we just accept His sacrificing Himself by asking Him to come live in our very own hearts, He will enter our lives and give us the free gift of Eternal Life with Him as His children in a much better Eternal Dimension called the Kingdom of Heaven! I hope I’ll see you there!

HISTORY OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE – HISTORIES BY HERODOTUS

Translated by George Rawlinson

Book 1 – CLIO

[1.0] THESE are the researches of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, which he publishes, in the hope of thereby preserving from decay the remembrance of what men have done, and of preventing the great and wonderful actions of the Greeks and the Barbarians from losing their due meed of glory; and withal to put on record what were their grounds of feuds.

[1.1] According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began to quarrel. This people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea, having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria. They landed at many places on the coast, and among the rest at Argos, which was then preeminent above all the states included now under the common name of Hellas. Here they exposed their merchandise, and traded with the natives for five or six days; at the end of which time, when almost everything was sold, there came down to the beach a number of women, and among them the daughter of the king, who was, they say, agreeing in this with the Greeks, Io, the child of Inachus. The women were standing by the stern of the ship intent upon their purchases, when the Phoenicians, with a general shout, rushed upon them. The greater part made their escape, but some were seized and carried off. Io herself was among the captives. The Phoenicians put the women on board their vessel, and set sail for Egypt. Thus did Io pass into Egypt, according to the Persian story, which differs widely from the Phoenician: and thus commenced, according to their authors, the series of outrages.

[1.2] At a later period, certain Greeks, with whose name they are unacquainted, but who would probably be Cretans, made a landing at Tyre, on the Phoenician coast, and bore off the king’s daughter, Europe. In this they only retaliated; but afterwards the Greeks, they say, were guilty of a second violence. They manned a ship of war, and sailed to Aea, a city of Colchis, on the river Phasis; from whence, after despatching the rest of the business on which they had come, they carried off Medea, the daughter of the king of the land. The monarch sent a herald into Greece to demand reparation of the wrong, and the restitution of his child; but the Greeks made answer that, having received no reparation of the wrong done them in the seizure of Io the Argive, they should give none in this instance.

[1.3] In the next generation afterwards, according to the same authorities, Alexander the son of Priam, bearing these events in mind, resolved to procure himself a wife out of Greece by violence, fully persuaded, that as the Greeks had not given satisfaction for their outrages, so neither would he be forced to make any for his. Accordingly he made prize of Helen; upon which the Greeks decided that, before resorting to other measures, they would send envoys to reclaim the princess and require reparation of the wrong. Their demands were met by a reference to the violence which had been offered to Medea, and they were asked with what face they could now require satisfaction, when they had formerly rejected all demands for either reparation or restitution addressed to them.

[1.4] Hitherto the injuries on either side had been mere acts of common violence; but in what followed the Persians consider that the Greeks were greatly to blame, since before any attack had been made on Europe, they led an army into Asia. Now as for the carrying off of women, it is the deed, they say, of a rogue: but to make a stir about such as are carried off, argues a man a fool. Men of sense care nothing for such women, since it is plain that without their own consent they would never be forced away. The Asiatics, when the Greeks ran off with their women, never troubled themselves about the matter; but the Greeks, for the sake of a single Lacedaemonian girl, collected a vast armament, invaded Asia, and destroyed the kingdom of Priam. Henceforth they ever looked upon the Greeks as their open enemies. For Asia, with all the various tribes of barbarians that inhabit it, is regarded by the Persians as their own; but Europe and the Greek race they look on as distinct and separate.

[1.5] Such is the account which the Persians give of these matters. They trace to the attack upon Troy their ancient enmity towards the Greeks. The Phoenicians, however, as regards Io, vary from the Persian statements. They deny that they used any violence to remove her into Egypt; she herself, they say, having formed an intimacy with the captain, while his vessel lay at Argos, and perceiving herself to be with child, of her own free will accompanied the Phoenicians on their leaving the shore, to escape the shame of detection and the reproaches of her parents. Whether this latter account be true, or whether the matter happened otherwise, I shall not discuss further. I shall proceed at once to point out the person who first within my own knowledge inflicted injury on the Greeks, after which I shall go forward with my history, describing equally the greater and the lesser cities. For the cities which were formerly great have most of them become insignificant; and such as are at present powerful, were weak in the olden time. I shall therefore discourse equally of both, convinced that human happiness never continues long in one stay.

[1.6] Croesus, son of Alyattes, by birth a Lydian, was lord of all the nations to the west of the river Halys. This stream, which separates Syria from Paphlagonia, runs with a course from south to north, and finally falls into the Euxine. So far as our knowledge goes, he was the first of the barbarians who had dealings with the Greeks, forcing some of them to become his tributaries, and entering into alliance with others. He conquered the Aeolians, Ionians, and Dorians of Asia, and made a treaty with the Lacedaemonians. Up to that time all Greeks had been free. For the Cimmerian attack upon Ionia, which was earlier than Croesus, was not a conquest of the cities, but only an inroad for plundering.

Did Slaves Build the Pyramids? Part I: The Bible

By Nathan P. Hoffman Posted on December 29, 2013

Israelite slaves have been depicted building the great pyramids of Egypt for many decades. Tales have been told about their hardships, and some even compare their suffering to that of the blacks during the pre-civil war era.   Even the Israeli Prime Minister in 1970 said “We built the pyramids” while visiting the Cairo museum in Egypt.  So, the bible says so right? Actually, while this story has been widely spread by Hollywood and a Greek historian who has also been called “the father of lies”, the story does not come from the Bible.

Although Exodus does describe Israelite slaves, and it makes mention that they built the cities of Pithom and Ramm’ses for “Pharaoh.” (Exodus 1:11 King James Edition), Exodus does not make any mention of a pyramid, tomb, grave, or any other thing that could possible be associated to the Great Pyramids at Giza.  The majority of all cities, be it Pithom or Ramm’ses, were built on the east side of the Nile.  This is because the sun rose in the east and set in the west, so the east side of the Nile was reserved for the living while the west side was reserved for the dead.  If the King of Egypt did commission a tomb, why would he commission it in the middle of a city on the east “living” side of the Nile, and furthermore, why is there no evidence of this, it is certainly not the Bible as it makes no mention of tombs or pyramids in Exodus.

Truth About 10-15 Ft. Giants in Solomon Islands – Eye witness Report

We know giant graves were found on the Fiji island of Rotuma, on Pulau Upeh island in Malaysia, on Easter island, the Aleutians, and in Hawaii, as you can read in our other articles, all over the Pacific, but also in the Solomon islands. The reports of giants are suppressed by mainstream academia for ideological reasons, to uphold debunked Darwinism, as living giants do not fit their official narrative & mass propaganda.

Watch this video from LA Marzulli who interviews a man who dealt with the Solomon Island government and met a 70 yr. old former cannibal who hunted and ate the 10-15 ft. cannibal giants who STILL live and hide in caves in the mountains. Watch the very interesting interview.