a) per Bisshop Ussher's Annals of the World; Newton, Kepler, etc): Flood ~ 2349 - 2348 BC

b) 'Begat' = Generation markers and not father-son relationships: Camping, et al ~5000 BC.

18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan. {Canaan: Heb. Chenaan}

19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.

21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness.

24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. {his servant: or, servant to them}

27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. {enlarge: or, persuade}

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

2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

4 And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. {Dodanim: or, as some read it, Rodanim}

5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.

7 And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtecha: and the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan.

9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.

10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. {Babel: Gr. Babylon}

11 Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, {went…: or, he went out into Assyria} {the city…: or, the streets of the city}

18 And the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite: and afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad.

19 And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha. {Gaza: Heb. Azzah}

20 These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations.

21 Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, even to him were children born.

22 The children of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram. {Arphaxad: Heb. Arpachshad}

25 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan. {Peleg: that is Division}

30 And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a mount of the east.

31 These are the sons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations.

32 These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.

Europe, and generally the areas north of Mesopotamia were settled by Japheth and his sons. Ham went to Africa. And the Middle East was covered by Shem (he and his sons apparently didn't move that far along after the Flood)…

2) Heth (one of Canaan's sons) was the father of the Hittites and these made it at least to Asia Minor. There are also some claims that the Hittites made their way to China (quite a jump from Asia Minor, but some say this is so).

Secular Literature is unclear regarding the speculation of what brothers went to Asia; and scripture is fairly silent (other than knowing that Elam [Shem] made it towards Persia, and that Japheth also struck towards the East):

a) Some say Ham went to southern Asia (e.g., Heth), and then to Australia. The arguments for this conjecture went along the following lines:

i. I believe this is unlikely (other than Elam, the Ham clan headed West from Shinar). It also seemed that the rationale for these claims are due to the Australian Aborigenes and some southern Indians as having black skin. The reality is that the amount of skin melatonin is just one small feature amongst many genetic traits, and the prevalent evidence seems to be that other than Heth, the Hammites went west from Shinar (Sumer).

ii. 'Sin(ite)' and Tsin, Tchin (reference to China) 'sound' similar. Claim that Hittites and Sin(ites) were progenitors of Chinese.

iii. Early 'Great Civilizations' may have Hammitic roots: Nimrod/Babylon (Sumer); Egypt (Mizriam); ?Indus Valley? (no evidence which Noah line these folks came from - but they arose around the same time as Sumer); Chinese pictographs share some similarities to cuneiform or Egyptian hieroglyphics.

i. See reference from Ethel Nelson (at the end) regarding some similarities in ShangDi (one of the earliest references to God in Chinese literature/mythology) and El Shaddai…e.g., early evidence of reference towards the God of Genesis.

c) Some say Japheth went to Asia (Indo-Aryans went into India - evidenced by the Language … not clear who the predecessors were, though)

i. Japheth seems to have had a 'head' start towards the Eastern migration (at least towards the North -- not so clear regarding Southern Asia).

iii. Miao (native 'aborigenes' of China - south of the Yangtze River) Flood legend make references to their Patriarch being Gomer.

d) I lean towards the Japheth argument (they clearly got around a lot), but there certainly could have been intermingling amongst 'cousins'…

What follows are some excerpts from various sources - concentrating on the Japheth line.

1. The seven sons of Japheth

First published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 20(4):22–25 September–November 1998)

Genesis 10:1–2 reads:

‘Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.’

The first of Noah’s grandsons mentioned is Gomer. Ezekiel locates the early descendants of Gomer, along with Togarmah (a son of Gomer), in the north quarters (Ezekiel 38:6: "Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee"). In modern Turkey is an area which in New Testament times was called Galatia. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus records that the people who were called Galatians or Gauls in his day (c. AD 93) were previously called Gomerites.¹

They migrated westward to what are now called France and Spain. For many centuries France was called Gaul, after the descendants of Gomer. North-west Spain is called Galicia to this day.

Some of the Gomerites migrated further to what is now called Wales. The Welsh historian, Davis, records a traditional Welsh belief that the descendants of Gomer ‘landed on the Isle of Britain from France, about three hundred years after the flood’.²He also records that the Welsh language is called Gomeraeg (after their ancestor Gomer).

Other members of their clan settled along the way, including in Armenia. The sons of Gomer were ‘Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah’ (Genesis 10:3). Encyclopaedia Britannica says that the Armenians traditionally claim to be descended from Togarmah and Ashkenaz.³ Ancient Armenia reached into Turkey. The name Turkey probably comes from Togarmah. Others of them migrated to Germany. Ashkenaz is the Hebrew word for Germany.

The next grandson mentioned is Magog. According to Ezekiel, Magog lived in the north parts (Ezekiel 38:15, 39:2). Josephus records that those whom he called Magogites, the Greeks called Scythians.¹ According to Encyclopædia Britannica, the ancient name for the region which now includes part of Romania and the Ukraine was Scythia.⁴

The next grandson is Madai. Along with Shem’s son Elam, Madai is the ancestor of our modern-day Iranians. Josephus says that the descendants of Madai were called Medes by the Greeks.¹ Every time the Medes are mentioned in the Old Testament, the word used is the Hebrew word Madai (maday). After the time of Cyrus, the Medes are always (with one exception) mentioned along with the Persians. They became one kingdom with one law — ‘the law of the Medes and Persians’ (Daniel 6:8, 12, 15). Later they were simply called Persians. Since 1935 they have called their country Iran. The Medes also ‘settled India’.⁵

The name of the next grandson, Javan, is the Hebrew word for Greece. Greece, Grecia, or Grecians appears five times in the Old Testament, and is always the Hebrew word Javan. Daniel refers to ‘the king of Grecia’ (Daniel 8:21), literally ‘the king of Javan’. Javan’s sons were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim (Genesis 10:4), all of whom have connections with the Greek people. The Elysians (an ancient Greek people) obviously received their name from Elishah. Tarshish or Tarsus was located in the region of Cilicia (modern Turkey).

Encyclopædia Britannica says that Kittim is the biblical name for Cyprus.⁶The Greeks worshipped Jupiter under the name of Jupiter Dodanaeus, possibly a reference to the fourth son of Javan, with Jupiter a derivative of Japheth. His oracle was at Dodena.

Next is Tubal. Ezekiel mentions him along with Gog and Meshech (Ezekiel 39:1). Tiglath-pileser I, king of Assyria in about 1100 BC, refers to the descendants of Tubal as the Tabali. Josephus recorded their name as the Thobelites, who were later known as Iberes.¹

‘Their land, in Josephus’ day, was called by the Romans Iberia, and covered what is now (the former Soviet State of) Georgia whose capital to this day bears the name Tubal as Tbilisi. From here, having crossed the Caucasus mountains, this people migrated due north-east, giving their tribal name to the river Tobol, and hence to the famous city of Tobolsk.’⁷

Meshech, the name of the next grandson, is the ancient name for Moscow. Moscow is both the capital of Russia, and the region that surrounds the city. To this day, one section, the Meschera Lowland, still carries the name of Meshech, virtually unchanged by the ages.

According to Josephus, the descendants of grandson Tiras were called Thirasians. The Greeks changed their name to Thracians.¹ Thrace reached from Macedonia on the south to the Danube River on the north to the Black Sea on the east. It took in much of what became Yugoslavia. World Book Encyclopedia says: ‘The people of Thrace were savage Indo-Europeans, who liked warfare and looting.’⁸ Tiras was worshipped by his descendants as Thuras, or Thor, the god of thunder.

Literally the progenitor of many nations, all the Indo-European peoples, in fact - it would be surprising indeed if his name had gone unremembered among them. As it is, we find that the early Greeks worshipped him as IAPETOS, or IAPETUS, whom they regarded as the son of heaven and earth, and the father of many nations. Likewise, in the ancient Sanskrit vedas of India, he is remembered as PRA-JAPATI, the sun and ostensible Lord of Creation. His name was further corrupted and assimilated into the Roman pantheon as IUPATER, which eventually became that of Jupiter. None of these names are recognized as being of Greek, Indian or Latin origin; but are rather mere corruptions of the Hebrew name of Japheth. Similarly, the early Saxon races perpetuated his name as Sceaf, (Pr. 'sheef,' or 'shaif,') and recorded his name in their early genealogies as the son of Noah, the forebear of their various peoples.

He was the father of the Cimmerians who settled originally on the shores of the Caspian Sea. They were later driven away by the Elamites (see 49). At the time of the Babylonian Exile, the Jews knew them as the tribes that dwell in the 'uttermost parts of the north' (Ezekiel 38:6). The Assyrians referred to them as the Gimirraya. Esarhaddon (68l-668 BC) records his defeat of the Gimirrai; whilst Ashurbanipal tells us of the Cimmerian invasion of Lydia (see Lud, 52), in the days of the Lydian king Gugu around the year 660 BC (see Map l).

His descendants settled originally in what is now Armenia; although in later Jewish traditions he was associated with his father Gomer with the Germanic races. Hence, Germanic Jews are still known as Ashkenazi (see Figure 3). More immediately, perhaps, the Assyrians tell us in their inscriptions of the Askuza, a tribe who allied themselves with the Mannai in a revolt during the seventh century BC - an incident that is also mentioned by Jeremiah 51:27. Indeed, it is in this statement that Jeremiah incidentally confirms the identity of the Ashchenazim with the Askuza. This name, the Askuza of the Assyrian records, later became the Skythai (Scythians) of Herodotus. Other early sources confirm their place of settlement in what was later to become Pontus and Bythinia, where the peoples of Ashchenaz gave their name to the lake and harbour of Ascanius, and to the district of Ascania. Somewhat more tentatively, perhaps, they are also said to have give their name to the Axenus or Euxine Sea (the modern Black Sea), on whose shores they first settled. Josephus tells us they were subsequently known to the Greeks as the Rheginians (see Map 1).

His descendants gave their name to the Riphaean mountains, which early cosmographers thought of as constituting the then northern boundary of the world. More certainly, Pliny, Melo and Solinus record the name of Riphath as that of the Riphaei, Riphaces and Piphataei who were later known to history as the Paphlagonians, the descent and identification of which is confirmed by Josephus (see Map 1).

His earliest descendants settled in Armenia. We know from certain Hittite documents that in the fourteenth century BC, the then region of Tegarama, which lay between Carchemish and Haran, was sacked by 'the enemy from Isuwa, (that is from beyond the Euphrates).' Both Sargon II and Sennacherib mention the city of Tilgarimanu, the capital of Kammanu which lay on the border of Tabal (see 13). This city lay some 30 miles due east of present-day Malatya, and was not finally destroyed until the year 695 BC. It is after this destruction of Tilgarimanu that the descendants ofTogarmah become lost in obscurity. In line with the Assyrian policy of that time, the survivors would have been uprooted and transported to other lands within the Assyrian empire (see Map 1).

His immediate descendants being known as the Magogites, Josephus tells us that they were later known to the Greeks as the Scythians. However, given the subsequent history of the peoples of Ashchenaz (see 3), who are far more certainly identified as the later Scythians (Greek Skythai and Assyrian Askuza), it is much more likely that the early Magogites' were assimilated into the peoples of Ashchenas, thus making up merely a part of the Scythian hordes (see Map 1).

His descendants became the Madaeans, who are better known to us as the Medes. The Assyrians recorded the name as Amada; the Greeks as Medai; and the Old Persian inscriptions speak of them as the Mada. The earliest reference to the Medes that is found in secular records is in the inscriptions of Shalmaneser III, King of Assyria from c.858-24 BC, in which he tells us that he invaded their lands for their famous and excellent horses. Both Strabo and Herodotus confirm the fact that the Medes were of Indo-European (that is, Japhetic) extract, and we know also that their language was of this group. After 63l BC, the Medes joined with the children of Ashchenas (that is the Askuasa or Scythians), and those of Gomer (the Cimmerians), in order to throw off the Assyrian yoke (see Map 1).

The name of Javan's descendants appears in Assyrian documents as the Iamanu, where we are told that they engaged the Assyrians in a major naval battle during the reign of Sargon II (721-705 BC). The Archaemenian inscriptions also refer to them as the Yauna. Homer wrote in the Iliad that Iawones (Hebrew Iawan) was the father of the Ionians (Greek Iones); a nation that was later famed in the old world for the high quality of their yarn and bronze vessels. The Hebrews knew the Greek races as the Jevanim (Iewanim) (see Map 1).

He was the ancestor of the Aeolians, and hs name constantly appears in Greek history and mythology. Two Greek cities were named after him, namely Elis and Elissus; and a district was named Ellas in his memory. There is also reason to believe that his name is perpetuated in the Greek paradise, the Elysian Fields. The Amarna tablets refer to his descendants as the Alashia, and the Hittites knew them as the Alasiya. Their name also appears in the Ugaritic inscriptions (see Map I).

The father of the peoples of Tarshish or Tartesis, whose descendants are thought by most to have settled in Spain. The Mediterranean Sea was once known as the Sea of Tarshish, and it is known that the Phoenicians built a class of sailing vessel called a ship of Tarshish. However, Phoenician inscriptions that have been found on Sardinia, and which date to the ninth century BC, mention Tarshish without, unfortunately, providing us with a positive identification of its geographical location. Josephus records the name as Tharsus, and tells us that it used to be the name under which Cilicia was once known, the chief and 'Noblest' city of which was Tarsus. For various reasons this is unlikely, and the matter remains as yet unresolved (see Map 1).

Referred to in the old Phoenician inscriptions as the 'kt' or 'kty,' this people settled on the island of Cyprus. They were to give their name to the ancient Cypriot city of Kition, that is modern Larnaka. This city was known to the Romans as Citium (see Map 1).

This is the collective name of the people descended from Dodan, who were known to the Greeks as the Donlani, the Dardanians of Asia Minor. They settled initially around the area of Troy, whose coastal regions are known to this day as the Dardanelles. The original progenitor of this people was to be subsequently deified and worshipped as Jupiter Dodonaeus. (Here we have a mingling of the names of Japheth and Dodan). The propagators of this cult built the priestly city of Dodona as the chief seat of his worship. Egyptian records tell us that the 'drdny' were allies of the Hittites (see 38) at the battle of Kadesh (see Map 1).

The descendants of Tubal first come to our notice in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser I, King of Assyria c.1100 BC. He refers to them as the Tabali, whose original area of settlement (that is, Tabal) was adjacent to that of Tegarama (that is, Togarmah, see 5). Suhsequently, Josephus was to record the name of Tubal's descendants as the Thobelites, who later became the Iberes. Their land, in Josephus' day, was known to the Romans as Iberia, and covered what is today the state of Georgia in the USSR. From here, having crossed the Caucasus mountain range, this people migrated due north-east, where they gave their old tribal name to the river Tobol, and hence to the modern-day city of Tobolsk (see Map 1).

The descendants of Mesheeh are often spoken of in close association with those of Tubal (see 13), the Assyrians, for example, mentioning the Tabal and Musku, whilst Herodotus also writes of the Tiberanoi and Moschoi. A very much earlier reference to the posterity of Mesbech is an inscription of c.1200 BC which tells us how they overran the Hittite kingdom; and an inscription of Tiglath-Pileser I c. 1100 BC, who tells us that, in his own day, the Muska-a-ia were able to put an army of 20,000 men into the field. The activities of this same people are also subsequently reported by Tukul-ti-ninurta II, Ashurnasirpal II, Sargon and Shalmaneser III, who refers to them as the Mushki. Josephus knew them as the Mosochenu (LXX. Mosoch), whom, he says were known in his days as the Cappadocians (but see 34). He also points out that their chief city was known to his contemporaries as Mazaca, which was also once the name of the entire nation.

Some later writers have pointed out that the name is preserved in the old tribal name of the Muscovites of Russia, who gave their name in turn to the city of Moscow. Such an identification, it must be said, is not at all unlikely, especially when we consider the subsequent history of their historically close associates, the people of Tubal, and the fact that the name of the city is still today rendered in the Russian tongue as Moskva - an exceedingly close, not to say identical relationship to the Assyrian Musku. Intriguingly, we read in the book of Ezekiel 38:2 of 'Gog of the land of Magug' (see 6), the prince of Rosh, (Rosh is the name under which the modern Israelis know Russia), Meshech and Tabal. All these, with the armies of Gomer (see 2), Togarma (see 5), Persia (modern Iran), Ethiopia and Libya, are to come against the restored land of Israel in the last days. In view of this prophecy, the present-day political stance of these various nations is instructive and immensely sobering (see Map 1).

Merenptah of Egypt, who reigned during the thirteenth century BC, provides us with what is so for our earliest reference to the people of Tiras, recording their name as the Tursha, and referring to them as invaders from the north. The Greeks were later to know them as the Tyrsenoi, whom they feared as marauding pirates. Josephus identifies them as the tribe who were known to the Romans as Thirasians, but to the Greeks as Thracians. History attests that they were indeed a most savage race, given over to a perpetual state of 'tipsy excess'. as one authority put it. They are also described as a 'ruddy and blue-eyed, people'. Tiras himself was worshipped by his descendants as the god Mars, but under his own name of Thuras. The river Athyras was also named after him, and it is not at all unlikely that the Eturscans, a nation of hitherto mysterious origin, owe to him both their name and descent. The ancient city of Troas (Troy) appears to perpetuate his name, as also does the Taunrus mountain range (see Map l).

3. GENESIS ACCORDING TO THE MIAO PEOPLE
- IMPACT No. 214 April 1991
translated by Edgar A. Truax

© Copyright 2004 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved

Introductory Note:
The Miao tribes, or as it is spelled in most encyclopedias "Miautso," at one time occupied most of inland China south of the Yangtze River, but have been gradually driven into the mountains of the southwest by the better-armed and better-organized Chinese. The Miao of our section claim to have been driven out of Kiangsi Province.

The Miao traditions are very precise, as compared with those of many primitive peoples, because they are not only handed down in metrical form, but, also, they are in couplets, in which the same or similar meaning is expressed in different wording, so that the second sentence acts as a definition of the first, where it might otherwise not be clear. This is very much like one form of Hebrew poetry - an example of which is found in Psalm 21:1,2.

On the day God created the heavens and earth.
On that day He opened the gateway of light.
In the earth then He made heaps of earth and of stone.
In the sky He made bodies, the sun and the moon.
In the earth He created the hawk and the kite.
In the water created the lobster and fish.
In the wilderness made He the tiger and bear,
Made verdure to cover the mountains,
Made forest extend with the ranges,
Made the light green cane,
Made the rank bamboo.

On the earth He created a man from the dirt.
Of the man thus created, a woman He formed.
Then the Patriarch Dirt made a balance of stones.
Estimated the weight of the earth to the bottom.<!#[p.9]> (Note 1)<!#[p.255]>
Calculated the bulk of the heavenly bodies.
And pondered the ways of the Deity, God.
The Patriarch Dirt begat Patriarch Se-teh.
The Patriarch Se-Teh begat a son Lusu.
And Lusu had Gehlo and he begat Lama.
The Patriarch Lama begat the man Nuah.
His wife was the Matriarch Gaw Bo-lu-en.
Their sons were Lo Han, Lo Shen and Jah-hu.
So the earth began filling with tribes and with families.
Creation was shared by the clans and the peoples.

These did not God's will nor returned His affection.
But fought with each other defying the Godhead.
Their leaders shook fists in the face of the Mighty
Then the earth was convulsed to the depth of three strata.
Rending the air to the uttermost heaven.
God's anger arose till His Being was changed;
His wrath flaring up filled His eyes and His face.
Until He must come and demolish humanity.
Come and destroy a whole world full of people.

So it poured forty days in sheets and in torrents.
Then fifty-five days of misting and drizzle.
The waters surmounted the mountains and ranges.
The deluge ascending leapt valley and hollow.
An earth with no earth upon which to take refuge!
A world with no foothold where one might subsist!
The people were baffled, impotent and ruined,
Despairing, horror stricken, diminished and finished.
But the Patriarch Nuah was righteous.
The Matriarch Gaw Bo-lu-en upright.
Built a boat very wide.
Made a ship very vast.
Their household entire got aboard and were floated,
The family complete rode the deluge in safety.
The animals with him were female and male.
The birds went along and were mated in pairs.
When the time was fulfilled, God commanded the waters.
The day had arrived, the flood waters receded.
Then Nuah liberated a dove from their refuge,
Sent a bird to go forth and bring again tidings.
The flood had gone down into lake and to ocean;
The mud was confined to the pools and the hollows.
There was land once again where a man might reside;
There was a place in the earth now to rear habitations.
Buffalo then were brought, an oblation to God,
Fatter cattle became sacrifice to the Mighty.
The Divine One then gave them His blessing;
Their God then bestowed His good graces.

Lo-han then begat Cusah and Mesay.
Lo-shan begat Elan and Nga-shur.
Their offspring begotten became tribes and peoples;
Their descendants established encampments and cities.
Their singing was all with the same tunes and music;
Their speaking was all with the same words and language.
Then they said let us build us a very big city;
Let us raise unto heaven a very high tower.
This was wrong, but they reached this decision;
Not right, but they rashly persisted.
God struck at them then, changed their language and accent.
Descending in wrath, He confused tones and voices.
One's speech to the others who hear him has no meaning;
He's speaking in words, but they can't understand him.
So the city they builded was never completed;
The tower they wrought has to stand thus unfinished.
In despair then they separate under all heaven,
They part from each other the globe to encircle.
They arrive at six corners and speak the six languages.

The Patriarch Jahphu got the center of nations.
The son he begat was the Patriarch Go-men.
Who took him a wife called the Matriarch Go-yong.
Their grandson and his wife both took the name Tutan.
Their descendants are given in order as follows:
Patriarch Gawndan Mew-wan,
Matriarch Cawdan Mew-jew;
Patriarch Jenku Dawvu, Matriarch Jeneo Boje;
Patriarch Gangen Newang (wife not given);
Patriarch Seageweng, Matriarch Maw gueh.
Their children, eleven in number, was each the head of a family.
Five branches became the Miao nation.
Six families joined with the Chinese.

The story continues through many more pages, telling of the separation of the Chinese and Miao; their travels and demon worship, their division into families.

The Miao at funerals and weddings recite the ancestry of the principal or principals clear back to Adam. Their frequent use of it may account for its accuracy.

The Miao did not originally worship idols, but learned this from the Chinese after having been subdued by them. This poem, which is learned by heart and transmitted from generation to generation, is translated and brought to you with the hope that you will be inspired to PRAY MUCH for these people. They evidently once knew the true God. Pray that they may learn to know Him as Father, and Jesus, whom He has sent to be the Way back to Him.

This remarkable account of creation and the flood apparently has been handed down generation after generation from the ancestors of the Miao tribespeople in the mountains of southwest China, for they possessed this legend before they met missionaries. It was translated into English by a missionary, Ernest Truax, who spent most of his life working for the Lord among these people. He sent me the story many years ago, before Acts & Facts began publication. Recently, Mr. James Honeyman also acquired a copy and sent it to me. He also was able to find the address of Mrs. Ellen Truax, widow of the missionary, and make contact with her.

Mrs. Truax has now copyrighted the translation and has graciously given us permission to publish it as an "Impact" article, so that Christians everywhere could become aware of this amazing record, and also could pray for the Miao people as Mr. Truax desired.

Although many legends of creation and the flood have been preserved, only a few have included the story of Babel and the post-flood dispersion. This is surely one of the most Bible-like of all these traditions, and bears significant independent testimony to the truth of the record in Genesis. Even though we have been unable so far to locate anyone who can confirm the authenticity of the Miao tradition or the accuracy of its translation, it clearly has the ring of truth about it and we can believe it is authentic until someone can prove otherwise. Its differences from the Biblical account clearly show its source was not directly from the Bible or early Christian missionaries (if any), but its similarities are so striking as to imply that it came from the same original source - namely, the events themselves!

In any case, it is certainly of sufficient importance to warrant sharing it with our readers. If anyone has any additional information about the Miao tradition, or their history in general, we would be pleased to hear from them.

4. 'Website' (biblebelievers.org.au): Some questionable comments, but overall 'OK'.

Japheth, literally means "opened" or "expanded". Naturally in the sense that his descendents settled all Europe and the greater part of Asia, and later colonised and developed the Western Hemisphere previously ruled by Ham and Canaan, as Shem replaced Canaan in the Promised Land. For obvious reasons, Japheth never expanded to the Far East. And Spiritually through the fulfillment of Genesis 9:27 and Matthew 21:43 wherein Jesus said to Shem, "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation, ("ethnos" or Gentile culture), bringing forth the fruits thereof". That is, a people with the faith of Abraham (Galatians 3:26-29).

From Japheth derive the Indo-Europeans and the Medes. The early Aryans knew Japheth as Djapatischta (chief of the race); Greeks referred to Japheth as Iapetos or Japetos; East Indians called him Iyapeti or Pra-Japati; Romans deified him by the name Ju-Pater or Jupiter. The Saxons perpetuated his name as Iafeth, subsequently transliterated as Sceaf (pronounced sheef or shaif), and recorded in their early genealogies as the son of Noah the forebear of their various peoples (Anglo-Saxon Chronicles). The variant Seskef was used by the early Scandinavians. All of these peoples, we must remember, were pagans whose knowledge or even awareness of the book of Genesis was non-existent.

The Japhetic tribes being furthest from the theocratic centre were last in attaining to historic eminance, and "enlarging" with much greater minuteness to detail the Hamitic and Arabian nations which were soonest developed and with which the Hebrews came most into contact in the initial stages of their journey through time.

History has recorded Japheth's geographical enlargement. The entire Western hemisphere of our globe is settled by Japhetic peoples, and East Indians are of the same stock. The record of Japheth's spread (enlargement) over the earth has been marred consistently by his destruction of the cultures which were already in existence wherever he arrived in sufficient force to achieve dominion. It happened in the Americas, Africa, Asia, Australia, and only numerical superiority of the native population has hitherto preserved parts of Africa from the same fate. Indeed, in early historic times the pattern of events is repeated again and again, whatever cultural advances the pioneering Hamites had achieved tended to be swallowed up by the succeeding Japhethites. The "enlargement" of Japheth has continued to this day, an enlargement greatly accelerated geographically in the last few centuries -- frequently at the expense of the Hamites (or Canaanites) who first possessed the land.

Gomer, literally means "completion" and is the progenitor of the early Cimmerians and other branches of the Celtic family. Settling in eastern Europe near the Black Sea, he became the Gauls/French, Galatians, Gaels/Scots, Celts/Irish, Goths/Germans/Scandinavians, Saxons/Britons/Welsh, Dutch, Armenians, Romans and related groups.

Magog, means "overtopping" or "covering". Settling first in Georgia, a region between the Black and Caspian Seas south of the Caucasus Mountains, he became the Synthians, Russians, Belorussians and Ukranians.

Madai, means "middle land". He settled northwest of Persia proper, south and southwest of the Caspian Sea, east of Armenia and Assyria, and west and northwest of the great salt desert of Iran in the ancient kingdom of Media, now Iraq and the northern part of Iran. He is the father of the Medes and East Indians.

Javan, means "effervescing" or one in a state of bubbling heat". He fathered the Ionians and Greeks. His sons occupy Cyprus, Rhodes, and other islands and coasts of the Mediterranean and the coast of Spain, Italy and Portugal.

Tubal, means, "thou shalt be led". The city of Tobolsk was named after him. He settled near Cappadocia in Asia Minor and fathered the Bulgarians, Hungarians, Albanians, Romanians, other related groups.

Meshech means "led along". The city of Moscow (Muskovi) is named after him. Initially settling in northern Turkey south east of the Caspian Sea, he fathered the Poles, Finns, Czechs, Yugoslavs and other related groups.

Tiras, means "expulsion", "impoverish" or "disinherit". He settled across the Propontis and fathered the Thracians, maritime groups, and possibly the Etruscans of Italy.

Through his sons Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah, Gomer peopled much of Armenia and the Carpathian Mountains.

Ashkenaz, means "a man as sprinkled: fire as scattered". He settled first in Armenia, migrating thence to Bithynia, the northern islands of Europe and European west coast: Germany, Scandinavia and Denmark.

Riphath, means "slander: fault". He settled in Czechslovakia, Romania, and Turkey.

Togarmah, means "thou wilt break her". His earliest descendants settled in Armenia, Turkey and Germany. In the late eighth century BC, Assyria probably uprooted and transported most of those still living in Armenia.

Elishah, means "my God has disregarded". The Greek translation is "Hellas". His descendants settled in Greece.

Tarshish, means "she will cause poverty: she will shatter". He settled Spain.

Kittim, means "beaters-down" or "bruisers". Kittim settled Cyprus, other Mediterranean islands, and Macedonia.

Dodanium, means "leaders". He settled Rhodes and the Dardanelles and was subsequently deified and worshipped as Jupiter Dodonaeus.

3) The sixteen Grandsons of Noah by Harold Hunt with Russell Grigg; First published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 20(4):22–25; September–November 1998)

5) Mike Gascoigne; Forgotten History of the Western People; From Noah to Dardanus

7) The sixteen Grandsons of Noah by Harold Hunt with Russell Grigg; First published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 20(4):22–25 September–November 1998)

8) The original ‘unknown’ god of China; An Ancient pictogram script points to the Bible; by Ethel Nelson.

CONTAINING THE INTERVAL OF THREE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND THIRTY-THREE YEARS.

FROM THE CREATION TO THE DEATH OF ISAAC.

1. Now they were the grandchildren of Noah, in honor of whom names were imposed on the nations by those that first seized upon them. Japhet, the son of Noah, had seven sons: they inhabited so, that, beginning at the mountains Taurus and Amanus, they proceeded along Asia, as far as the river Tansis, and along Europe to Cadiz; and settling themselves on the lands which they light upon, which none had inhabited before, they called the nations by their own names. For Gomer founded those whom the Greeks now call Galatians, [Galls,] but were then called Gomerites. Magog founded those that from him were named Magogites, but who are by the Greeks called Scythians. Now as to Javan and Madai, the sons of Japhet; from Madai came the Madeans, who are called Medes, by the Greeks; but from Javan, Ionia, and all the Grecians, are derived. Thobel founded the Thobelites, who are now called Iberes; and the Mosocheni were founded by Mosoch; now they are Cappadocians. There is also a mark of their ancient denomination still to be shown; for there is even now among them a city called Mazaca, which may inform those that are able to understand, that so was the entire nation once called. Thiras also called those whom he ruled over Thirasians; but the Greeks changed the name into Thracians. And so many were the countries that had the children of Japhet for their inhabitants. Of the three sons of Gomer, Aschanax founded the Aschanaxians, who are now called by the Greeks Rheginians. So did Riphath found the Ripheans, now called Paphlagonians; and Thrugramma the Thrugrammeans, who, as the Greeks resolved, were named Phrygians. Of the three sons of Javan also, the son of Japhet, Elisa gave name to the Eliseans, who were his subjects; they are now the Aeolians. Tharsus to the Tharsians, for so was Cilicia of old called; the sign of which is this, that the noblest city they have, and a metropolis also, is Tarsus, the tau being by change put for the theta. Cethimus possessed the island Cethima: it is now called Cyprus; and from that it is that all islands, and the greatest part of the sea-coasts, are named Cethim by the Hebrews: and one city there is in Cyprus that has been able to preserve its denomination; it has been called Citius by those who use the language of the Greeks, and has not, by the use of that dialect, escaped the name of Cethim. And so many nations have the children and grandchildren of Japhet possessed. Now when I have premised somewhat, which perhaps the Greeks do not know, I will return and explain what I have omitted; for such names are pronounced here after the manner of the Greeks, to please my readers; for our own country language does not so pronounce them: but the names in all cases are of one and the same ending; for the name we here pronounce Noeas, is there Noah, and in every case retains the same termination.

2. The children of Ham possessed the land from Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire. For of the four sons of Ham, time has not at all hurt the name of Chus; for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites. The memory also of the Mesraites is preserved in their name; for all we who inhabit this country [of Judea] called Egypt Mestre, and the Egyptians Mestreans. Phut also was the founder of Libya, and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself: there is also a river in the country of Moors which bears that name; whence it is that we may see the greatest part of the Grecian historiographers mention that river and the adjoining country by the apellation of Phut: but the name it has now has been by change given it from one of the sons of Mesraim, who was called Lybyos. We will inform you presently what has been the occasion why it has been called Africa also. Canaan, the fourth son of Ham, inhabited the country now called Judea, and called it from his own name Canaan. The children of these [four] were these: Sabas, who founded the Sabeans; Evilas, who founded the Evileans, who are called Getuli; Sabathes founded the Sabathens, they are now called by the Greeks Astaborans; Sabactas settled the Sabactens; and Ragmus the Ragmeans; and he had two sons, the one of whom, Judadas, settled the Judadeans, a nation of the western Ethiopians, and left them his name; as did Sabas to the Sabeans: but Nimrod, the son of Chus, staid and tyrannized at Babylon, as we have already informed you. Now all the children of Mesraim, being eight in number, possessed the country from Gaza to Egypt, though it retained the name of one only, the Philistim; for the Greeks call part of that country Palestine. As for the rest, Ludieim, and Enemim, and Labim, who alone inhabited in Libya, and called the country from himself, Nedim, and Phethrosim, and Chesloim, and Cephthorim, we know nothing of them besides their names; for the Ethiopic war (17) which we shall describe hereafter, was the cause that those cities were overthrown. The sons of Canaan were these: Sidonius, who also built a city of the same name; it is called by the Greeks Sidon

Amathus inhabited in Amathine, which is even now called Amathe by the inhabitants, although the Macedonians named it Epiphania, from one of his posterity: Arudeus possessed the island Aradus: Arucas possessed Arce, which is in Libanus. But for the seven others, [Eueus,] Chetteus, Jebuseus, Amorreus, Gergesus, Eudeus, Sineus, Samareus, we have nothing in the sacred books but their names, for the Hebrews overthrew their cities; and their calamities came upon them on the occasion following.

3. Noah, when, after the deluge, the earth was resettled in its former condition, set about its cultivation; and when he had planted it with vines, and when the fruit was ripe, and he had gathered the grapes in their season, and the wine was ready for use, he offered sacrifice, and feasted, and, being drunk, he fell asleep, and lay naked in an unseemly manner. When his youngest son saw this, he came laughing, and showed him to his brethren; but they covered their father's nakedness. And when Noah was made sensible of what had been done, he prayed for prosperity to his other sons; but for Ham, he did not curse him, by reason of his nearness in blood, but cursed his prosperity: and when the rest of them escaped that curse, God inflicted it on the children of Canaan. But as to these matters, we shall speak more hereafter.

4. Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons, who inhabited the land that began at Euphrates, and reached to the Indian Ocean. For Elam left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians. Ashur lived at the city Nineve; and named his subjects Assyrians, who became the most fortunate nation, beyond others. Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans. Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians; as Laud founded the Laudites, which are now called Lydians. Of the four sons of Aram, Uz founded Trachonitis and Damascus: this country lies between Palestine and Celesyria. Ul founded Armenia; and Gather the Bactrians; and Mesa the Mesaneans; it is now called Charax Spasini. Sala was the son of Arphaxad; and his son was Heber, from whom they originally called the Jews Hebrews. (18) Heber begat Joetan and Phaleg: he was called Phaleg, because he was born at the dispersion of the nations to their several countries; for Phaleg among the Hebrews signifies division. Now Joctan, one of the sons of Heber, had these sons, Elmodad, Saleph, Asermoth, Jera, Adoram, Aizel, Decla, Ebal, Abimael, Sabeus, Ophir, Euilat, and Jobab. These inhabited from Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Asia adjoining to it. And this shall suffice concerning the sons of Shem.

5. I will now treat of the Hebrews. The son of Phaleg, whose father Was Heber, was Ragau; whose son was Serug, to whom was born Nahor; his son was Terah, who was the father of Abraham, who accordingly was the tenth from Noah, and was born in the two hundred and ninety-second year after the deluge; for Terah begat Abram in his seventieth year. Nahor begat Haran when he was one hundred and twenty years old; Nahor was born to Serug in his hundred and thirty-second year; Ragau had Serug at one hundred and thirty; at the same age also Phaleg had Ragau; Heber begat Phaleg in his hundred and thirty-fourth year; he himself being begotten by Sala when he was a hundred and thirty years old, whom Arphaxad had for his son at the hundred and thirty-fifth year of his age. Arphaxad was the son of Shem, and born twelve years after the deluge. Now Abram had two brethren, Nahor and Haran: of these Haran left a son, Lot; as also Sarai and Milcha his daughters; and died among the Chaldeans, in a city of the Chaldeans, called Ur; and his monument is shown to this day. These married their nieces. Nabor married Milcha, and Abram married Sarai. Now Terah hating Chaldea, on account of his mourning for Ilaran, they all removed to Haran of Mesopotamia, where Terah died, and was buried, when he had lived to be two hundred and five years old; for the life of man was already, by degrees, diminished, and became shorter than before, till the birth of Moses; after whom the term of human life was one hundred and twenty years, God determining it to the length that Moses happened to live. Now Nahor had eight sons by Milcha; Uz and Buz, Kemuel, Chesed, Azau, Pheldas, Jadelph, and Bethuel. These were all the genuine sons of Nahor; for Teba, and Gaam, and Tachas, and Maaca, were born of Reuma his concubine: but Bethuel had a daughter, Rebecca, and a son, Laban.

Gomer, literally means "completion" and is the progenitor of the early Cimmerians and other branches of the Celtic family. Settling in eastern Europe near the Black Sea, he became the Gauls/French, Galatians, Gaels/Scots, Celts/Irish, Goths/Germans/Scandinavians, Saxons/Britons/Welsh, Dutch, Armenians, Romans and related groups.

Magog, means "overtopping" or "covering". Settling first in Georgia, a region between the Black and Caspian Seas south of the Caucasus Mountains, he became the Synthians, Russians, Belorussians and Ukranians.

Madai, means "middle land". He settled northwest of Persia proper, south and southwest of the Caspian Sea, east of Armenia and Assyria, and west and northwest of the great salt desert of Iran in the ancient kingdom of Media, now Iraq and the northern part of Iran. He is the father of the Medes and East Indians.

Javan, means "effervescing" or one in a state of bubbling heat". He fathered the Ionians and Greeks. His sons occupy Cyprus, Rhodes, and other islands and coasts of the Mediterranean and the coast of Spain, Italy and Portugal.

Tubal, means, "thou shalt be led". The city of Tobolsk was named after him. He settled near Cappadocia in Asia Minor and fathered the Bulgarians, Hungarians, Albanians, Romanians, other related groups.

Meshech means "led along". The city of Moscow (Muskovi) is named after him. Initially settling in northern Turkey south east of the Caspian Sea, he fathered the Poles, Finns, Czechs, Yugoslavs and other related groups.

Tiras, means "expulsion", "impoverish" or "disinherit". He settled across the Propontis and fathered the Thracians, maritime groups, and possibly the Etruscans of Italy.

Through his sons Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah, Gomer peopled much of Armenia and the Carpathian Mountains.

Ashkenaz, means "a man as sprinkled: fire as scattered". He settled first in Armenia, migrating thence to Bithynia, the northern islands of Europe and European west coast: Germany, Scandinavia and Denmark.

Riphath, means "slander: fault". He settled in Czechslovakia, Romania, and Turkey.

Togarmah, means "thou wilt break her". His earliest descendants settled in Armenia, Turkey and Germany. In the late eighth century BC, Assyria probably uprooted and transported most of those still living in Armenia.

Elishah, means "my God has disregarded". The Greek translation is "Hellas". His descendants settled in Greece.

Kittim, means "beaters-down" or "bruisers". Kittim settled Cyprus, other Mediterranean islands, and Macedonia.

Dodanium, means "leaders". He settled Rhodes and the Dardanelles and was subsequently deified and worshipped as Jupiter Dodonaeus.

Heth (Hittites) and Sin (Sinites) are the progenitors of Chinese and Mongoloid stock. "Hittite" in Cuneiform appears as Khittae, representing a once powerful nation from the Far East, preserved through the centuries in the more familiar Chinese term, Cathay. The Cathay were Mongoloids and considered a part of early Chinese stock. Links between the known Hittites and Cathay include, for example, their modes of dress, their shoes with turned-up toes, and the custom of wearing their hair in a pigtail. Representations show them to have possessed high cheekbones, and craniologists have observed that they had the common characteristics of Mongoloids.

"Sin", a brother of Heth, has many occurrences in variant forms in the Far East. The place most closely associated by the Chinese themselves with the origin of their civilization is the capital of Shensi, namely, Siang-fu or "Father Sin", on the Wei, a tributory of the Yellow River, near important gold and jade mines. The Chinese have a tradition that their first king, Fu-hi, made his appearance on the Mountains of Chin after the world had been covered with water. Their character for ship signifies eight souls in a boat. Sin himself was the third generation from Noah, a circumstance which would provide about the right interval of time. (J. Pye Smith and J. Inglis, Notes on the Book of Genesis, Gall & Inglis, London, 1977, p.89).

Moreover, those who came from the Far East to trade with the Scythians were called Sinae (Sin). Ptolemy, a Greek astronomer, referred to China as the land of Sinim or Sin. Reference to the Sinim in Isaiah 49:12 notes they came "from afar," specifically not from the north and not from the west (see Revelation 16:12). Arabs called China Sin, Chin, Mahachin, or Machin. The Sin were spoken of as a people in the remotest parts of Asia. Their most important town was Thin, a great trading emporium in western China. This city is now known as Thsin or simply Tin, and it lies in the province of Shensi. The Sin became independent in Western China, their princes reigning there for some 650 years before they finally gained dominion over the whole land. In the third century B.C., the dynasty of Tsin became supreme. In 217 B.C., Prince Cheng, founder of the Ch'in Dynasty (from which the name "China" is taken) unified China and took the title of Shih Hwang-ti (First Emperor). Shih Hwang-ti built much of the Great Wall of China, and a network of roads and canals that converged on his capitol, near modern Sian, in Shensi province.

The word Tsin itself came to have the meaning of purebred. Hence non-Chinese are regarded as barbarians. This word was assumed as a title by the Manchu Emperors and is believed to have been changed by the Malays into the form Tchina and brought into Europe by the Portuguese as China. Chinese and surrounding languages form part of the Sino-Tibetan language family. Years ago, newspapers regularly carried headlines with reference to the conflict between the Chinese and Japanese in which the ancient name reappeared in its original form, for they commonly spoke of the Sino-Japanese war.

With respect to the Cathay people of historical reference, it would make sense to suppose that the remnants of the Hittites, after the destruction of their empire, traveled towards the east and settled among the Sinites who were relatives, contributing to their civilization, and thus becoming the ancestors of many Asian people groups including the Khazar or Ashkenazim "Jews". Still others migrated throughout the region and beyond, making up the present-day Mongoloid races in Asia and the Americas. What the Chinese call "Hsiung-nu" are the Turko-Mogul nomad tribes we know as "Huns".

J. Pye Smith & J. Inglis, Notes on the Book of Genesis, Gall & Inglis, London, 1977, p.89; Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Record, p.247-249; William M. Branham, An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages; The Revelation of the Seven Seals; and, We Have Seen His Star and Have Come to Worship Him; The Works of Josephus; Arthur C. Custance, Noah's Three Sons, Zondervan, 1975, p.368; Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons; Lenurmant, "La Legende de Semiramis", 1873; Historical Review, January 1888, "The Legend of Semiramis" A. H. Sayce; Anglo-Saxon Chronicles; Bill Cooper, Table of Nations www.biblebelievers.org.au/nation01.htm bb000319.htm

When Noah and his family stepped out of the Ark, they were the only people on Earth. It fell to Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and their wives, to repopulate the earth through the children that were born to them after the Flood. Of Noah’s grandchildren, 16 grandsons are named in Genesis chapter 10.

God has left us ample evidence to confirm that these 16 grandsons of Noah really lived, that the names the Bible gives were their exact names, and that after the Babel dispersion (Genesis 11) their descendants fanned out over the earth and established the various nations of the ancient world.

The first generations after the Flood lived to be very old, with some men outliving their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. This set them apart. The 16 grandsons of Noah were the heads of their family clans, which became large populations in their respective areas. Several things happened:

People in various areas called themselves by the name of the man who was their common ancestor.

They called their land, and often their major city and major river, by his name.

Sometimes the various nations fell off into ancestor worship. When this happened, it was natural for them to name their god after the man who was ancestor of all of them, or to claim their long-living ancestor as their god.

All of this means that the evidence has been preserved in a way that can never be lost, and all the ingenuity of man cannot erase. We will now examine it.

‘Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.’

The first of Noah’s grandsons mentioned is Gomer. Ezekiel locates the early descendants of Gomer, along with Togarmah (a son of Gomer), in the north quarters (Ezekiel 38:6). In modern Turkey is an area which in New Testament times was called Galatia. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus records that the people who were called Galatians or Gauls in his day (c. AD 93) were previously called Gomerites.

They migrated westward to what are now called France and Spain. For many centuries France was called Gaul, after the descendants of Gomer. North-west Spain is called Galicia to this day.

Some of the Gomerites migrated further to what is now called Wales. The Welsh historian, Davis, records a traditional Welsh belief that the descendants of Gomer ‘landed on the Isle of Britain from France, about three hundred years after the flood’. He also records that the Welsh language is called Gomeraeg (after their ancestor Gomer).

Other members of their clan settled along the way, including in Armenia. The sons of Gomer were ‘Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah’ (Genesis 10:3). Encyclopaedia Britannica says that the Armenians traditionally claim to be descended from Togarmah and Ashkenaz. Ancient Armenia reached into Turkey. The name Turkey probably comes from Togarmah. Others of them migrated to Germany. Ashkenaz is the Hebrew word for Germany.

The next grandson mentioned is Magog. According to Ezekiel, Magog lived in the north parts (Ezekiel 38:15, 39:2). Josephus records that those whom he called Magogites, the Greeks called Scythians. According to Encyclopædia Britannica, the ancient name for the region which now includes part of Romania and the Ukraine was Scythia.

The next grandson is Madai. Along with Shem’s son Elam, Madai is the ancestor of our modern-day Iranians. Josephus says that the descendants of Madai were called Medes by the Greeks. Every time the Medes are mentioned in the Old Testament, the word used is the Hebrew word Madai (maday). After the time of Cyrus, the Medes are always (with one exception) mentioned along with the Persians. They became one kingdom with one law — ‘the law of the Medes and Persians’ (Daniel 6:8, 12, 15). Later they were simply called Persians. Since 1935 they have called their country Iran. The Medes also ‘settled India’.

The name of the next grandson, Javan, is the Hebrew word for Greece. Greece, Grecia, or Grecians appears five times in the Old Testament, and is always the Hebrew word Javan. Daniel refers to ‘the king of Grecia’ (Daniel 8:21), literally ‘the king of Javan’. Javan’s sons were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim (Genesis 10:4), all of whom have connections with the Greek people. The Elysians (an ancient Greek people) obviously received their name from Elishah. Tarshish or Tarsus was located in the region of Cilicia (modern Turkey).

Encyclopædia Britannica says that Kittim is the biblical name for Cyprus. The Greeks worshipped Jupiter under the name of Jupiter Dodanaeus, possibly a reference to the fourth son of Javan, with Jupiter a derivative of Japheth. His oracle was at Dodena.

‘Their land, in Josephus’ day, was called by the Romans Iberia, and covered what is now (the former Soviet State of) Georgia whose capital to this day bears the name Tubal as Tbilisi. From here, having crossed the Caucasus mountains, this people migrated due north-east, giving their tribal name to the river Tobol, and hence to the famous city of Tobolsk.’

Meshech, the name of the next grandson, is the ancient name for Moscow. Moscow is both the capital of Russia, and the region that surrounds the city. To this day, one section, the Meschera Lowland, still carries the name of Meshech, virtually unchanged by the ages.

According to Josephus, the descendants of grandson Tiras were called Thirasians. The Greeks changed their name to Thracians.1 Thrace reached from Macedonia on the south to the Danube River on the north to the Black Sea on the east. It took in much of what became Yugoslavia. World Book Encyclopedia says: ‘The people of Thrace were savage Indo-Europeans, who liked warfare and looting.’ Tiras was worshipped by his descendants as Thuras, or Thor, the god of thunder.

Next we come to the sons of Ham: Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan (Genesis 10:6).

The descendants of Ham live mainly in south-west Asia and Africa. The Bible often refers to Africa as the land of Ham (Psalms 105:23,27; 106:22). The name of Noah’s grandson Cush is the Hebrew word for old Ethiopia (from Aswan south to Khartoum). Without exception, the word Ethiopia in the English Bible is always a translation of the Hebrew word Cush. Josephus rendered the name as Chus, and says that the Ethiopians ‘are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites’.

Noah’s next grandson mentioned was Mizraim. Mizraim is the Hebrew word for Egypt. The name Egypt appears hundreds of times in the Old Testament and (with one exception) is always a translation of the word Mizraim. E.g. at the burial of Jacob, the Canaanites observed the mourning of the Egyptians and so called the place Abel Mizraim (Genesis 50:11).

Phut, the name of Noah’s next grandson is the Hebrew name for Libya. It is so translated three times in the Old Testament. The ancient river Phut was in Libya. By Daniel’s day, the name had been changed to Libya (Daniel 11:43). Josephus says, ‘Phut also was the founder of Libia [sic], and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself’.

Canaan, the name of Noah’s next grandson, is the Hebrew name for the general region later called by the Romans Palestine, i.e. modern Israel and Jordan. Here we should look briefly at a few of the descendants of Ham (Genesis 10:14–18). There is Philistim, obviously the ancestor of the Philistines (clearly giving rise to the name Palestine), and Sidon, the founder of the ancient city that bears his name, and Heth, the patriarch of the ancient Hittite empire. Also, this descendant is listed in Genesis 10:15–18 as being the ancestor of the Jebusites (Jebus was the ancient name for Jerusalem — Judges 19:10), the Amorites, the Girgasites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites, ancient peoples who lived in the land of Canaan.

The most prominent descendant of Ham was Nimrod, the founder of Babel (Babylon), as well as of Erech, Accad and Calneh in Shinar (Babylonia).

Last we come to the sons of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram (Genesis 10:22).

Elam is the ancient name for Persia, which is itself the ancient name for Iran. Until the time of Cyrus the people here were called Elamites, and they were still often called that even in New Testament times. In Acts 2:9, the Jews from Persia who were present at Pentecost were called Elamites. The Persians are thus descended from both Elam, the son of Shem, and from Madai, the son of Japheth (see above). Since the 1930s they have called their country Iran.

It is interesting to note that the word ‘Aryan’, which so fascinated Adolf Hitler, is a form of the word ‘Iran’. Hitler wanted to produce a pure Aryan ‘race’ of supermen. But the very term ‘Aryan’ signifies a mixed line of Semites and Japhethites!

Asshur is the Hebrew word for Assyria. Assyria was one of the great ancient empires. Every time the words Assyria or Assyrian appear in the Old Testament, they are translated from the word Asshur. He was worshipped by his descendants.

‘Indeed, as long as Assyria lasted, that is until 612 BC, accounts of battles, diplomatic affairs and foreign bulletins were daily read out to his image; and every Assyrian king held that he wore the crown only with the express permission of Asshur’s deified ghost.’

Arphaxad was the progenitor of the Chaldeans. This ‘is confirmed by the Hurrian (Nuzi) tablets, which render the name as Arip-hurra — the founder of Chaldea.’ His descendant, Eber, gave his name to the Hebrew people via the line of Eber-Peleg-Reu-Serug-Nahor-Terah-Abram (Genesis 11:16–26). Eber’s other son, Joktan, had 13 sons (Genesis 10:26–30), all of whom appear to have settled in Arabia.

Lud was the ancestor of the Lydians. Lydia was in what is now Western Turkey. Their capital was Sardis — one of the seven churches of Asia was at Sardis (Revelation 3:1).

Aram is the Hebrew word for Syria. Whenever the word Syria appears in the Old Testament it is a translation of the word Aram. The Syrians call themselves Arameans, and their language is called Aramaic. Before the spread of the Greek Empire, Aramaic was the international language (2 Kings 18:26 ff). On the cross, when Jesus cried out, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani’ (Mark 15:34),13 He was speaking Aramaic, the language of the common people.

We have only taken the briefest glance at Noah’s sixteen grandsons, 14 but enough has been said to show that they really did live, that they were who the Bible says they were, and that their descendants are identifiable on the pages of history. Not only is the Bible not a collection of myths and legends, but it stands alone as the key to the history of the earliest ages of the world.

Josephus: Complete Works, Kregal Publications, Grand Rapids, Michigan, ‘Antiquities of the Jews’, 1:6:1 (i.e. book 1, chapter 6, section 1).

J. Davis, History of the Welsh Baptists from the Year Sixty-three to the Year One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy, D.M. Hogan, Pittsburgh, 1835, republished by The Baptist, Aberdeen, Mississippi, p. 1, 1976.

A.C. Custance, Noah’s Three Sons, Vol.1, ‘The Doorway Papers’, Zondervan, Michigan, p. 92, 1975.

Bill Cooper, After the Flood, New Wine Press, Chichester, England, p. 203, 1995.

Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 quote the Aramaic form of Psalm 22:1, but Matthew reconverted Eloi to the Hebrew Eli.

For example, we made no attempt here to trace the origins of the Chinese. For evidence on this subject see ‘The original, "unknown" God of China’, Creation 20(3):50–54, 1998. See also how ancient Chinese Characters show that the ancient Chinese knew the Gospel message found in the book of Genesis.

Answers in Genesis is a member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability

'When all men were of one language, some of them built a high tower as if they would thereby ascend up to heaven, but the gods sent storms of wind and overthrew the tower, and gave everyone his peculiar language and for this reason it was that the city was called Babylon' The Sybil.

'After this they were dispersed abroad, on account of their languages, and went out by colonies everywhere and each colony took possession of that land which they lighted upon, and unto which God led them; so that the whole continent was filled with them, both the inland and maritime countries. There were some also who passed over the sea in ships and inhabited the islands: and some of these nations do still retain the names which were given to them by their first founders; but some also have lost them . . ' (Flaius Josephus, Antiquities, Book 1, Chapter V.)

* * * * * __________________________________________________________________________ TABLE 1. A CHART SHOWING THE EARLY IRISH GENEALOGY.

(1 and 2) BAATH and JOBHATH. These two names also occur in the earliest portions of the British genealogy (see Table 4) where JOBAATH is rendered IOBAATH. An intriguing thought is the possibility that these two names may betray the origins of the European royal blood. The very concept of royalty has long been a mystery, as has the reason why descendants of a certain family have always been set apart from and above the common herd. The royal families of Europe have always been interrelated to a greater or lesser degree throughout history and it seems very likely that the blood-royal began with Baath and Iobaath. The fact that here Baath and Jobaath are depicted as brothers, whereas in British genealogy, they are depicted as father and son, testifies to the distortion these records underwent in transmission. Their historicity, however, is convincingly demonstrated in their appearance in such diverse records as the Irish-Celtic and British.

(3) PARTHOLAN. The first person to colonize Ireland after the Flood, His people landed in Ireland in the year 1484 BC, Patholan died in 1454 BC, and the entire colony was wiped out by plague 300 years later in 1184 BC.

(4 and 5) EASRU and SRU. These two names, along with those of Baath and Iobaath, also occur in the earliest portions of the British genealogy (see Table 2) where they are rendered IZRAU and EZRA, and again they appear to be the names of important founders of European royalty who lived before the division and dispersal of the various races and tribes of Europe.

(6) GADELAS. The founder of the Gaels and the Galic language.

(7) HEBER and EREMON. The leaders of the Milesian settlement who landed in Ireland in the year 504 BC. From Heber, from whom Ireland derives its name Hibernia, are descended the great southern clans of Ireland, the McCarthy's and O'Brien's, and so-on, while from Eremon are descended the northern clans of O'Connor, O'Donnnell and O'Neill.

(8) NEMEDIUS. Otherwise Nemedh, the leader of the Nemedian invasion of 1145 BC. His ancestry is a little more detailed than Heber and Eremon.

* * * *

The appearance of Magog's name in the Milesian ancestry is of great significance, for we saw in Part I of our study how Magog was the founder, or co-founder, of the Scythian peoples, and the early Irish chroniclers were emphatic in their claim that the Irish were descended from Scythian stock. This claim is confirmed in many points, not the least of which is the fact that "Scot" and "Scythian" share the same etymological root:

"Scot (is) the same as Sythian in etymology; the root of both is Sct. The Greeks had no c, and would change "t" into "th" making the root "skth," and by adding a phonetic vowel, we get Skuth-ai (Scythians,) and Skoth-ai (Skoths.) The Welsh disliked "s" at the beginning of a word, and would change it to "ys;" they would also change "c" or "k" to "g," and "th" to "d;" whence the Welsh root would be "Ysgd," and Skuth or Skoth would become "ysgod." Once more, the Saxons would cut off the Welsh "y," and change the "g" back again to "c," and the "d" to "t," converting the Ysgod to Scot." 10

The early Irish were originally known as Scots, of course, and they were later to leave Ireland and invade and settle the country that still bears their name, displacing and subduing the native Picts in waves and waves of invasion that have tested the sanity of school children ever since! 11

It is obvious from other points the early Irish looked back to the time when their ancestors had left the Aegean, or Eastern Mediterranean seaboard in search of a land in which they could settle; and it is equally obvious that in such a westward maritime migration, the Spanish Peninsula would be the most convenient stopping-off point during the first stage of migration.

In this context it is important for us to take special note of the names of the two patriarches who were to lead the Milesian (or Scythian) invasion of Ireland, Eber and Eremon; for in his own account of the matter, the Portuguese historian, Emanuel de Faria y Sousa, tells us that Iberus and Himerus were said to have "sailed into Ireland, and given the name Hibernia to it." 12

The early Irish historians further deduced their origins lay with the Phoenician colonists who had also previously settled that Spanish Peninsula, later to migrate to Ireland. In this context it is of additional interest to note that the ancient Greeks once held the Phoenician nation to have been founded by Phoenix, whose brother Cadmus had invented the alphabet. Likewise, the Irish also recalled the time when they lived under a king named "Phenius, who devoted himself especially to the study of languages, and composed an alphabet and the elements of grammar." It is agreed among scholars the system of alphabetic writing originated among the Phoenicians, and this is deduced from hard and independent archaeological evidence, not Irish myths. So it is clear at the very least, the early Irish chroniclers were passing on an account, albeit garbled in places, of authentic historical events, and of the equally historic descent of their own race from Phoenician and/or Scythian stock (see Table 1).

Further to these claims, we have already noticed the Irish chroniclers even attempted to date certain events in the early post-Flood history of Ireland and if we allow the records to simply tell their own story, we come to one particular corroboration that should at least give us pause for thought, and which argues strongly against the notion these early historians simply made it all up as they went along. Their account, though confused in places, must have derived from a body of solid historical data.

These early chroniclers dated events from the Creation of the World, (Anno Mundi,) and so we that may unravel the information they were attempting to convey, and purely for the purposes of this present study, we shall rely on Ussher's Chronology for the date of the Creation, 4004 BC. It must be stressed that we are using Ussher's Chronology, not because it is the best (it isn't,) but because someone had obviously reached Ussher's conclusions many centuries before him. This will become evident as we progress. 13

Thus, if the chronicles give a date for a certain event of, say Anno Mundi 2000, then we simply deduct 2000 from 4004 and arrive at a date of 2004 BC for the event in question. The conversion is that simple. As an instance, the date for the first colonization of Ireland (by Partholan,) is given in the chronicles as Anno Mundi 2520. For our own system, we deduct 2520 from 4004, and arrive at the year 1484 BC for this event (Table 2 and notes.)

Following Genesis chapter five, we see the Creation and the Flood is 1656, which converts to 2348 BC as the date for the Flood according to Ussher (and, apparently, the early Irish chroniclers.) Thus, deducting 1484 (the date of the Flood), we learn that Partholan's colony arrived in Ireland 864 years after the Flood; a period of time that is in remarkable accord with the general history of Europe and the Middle East as laid down in other ancient histories, and in the Genesis record.

However, more certain confirmation concerning the general reliability of these dates as given in the early Irish accounts, is the date given for the fourth (and final) colonization of Ireland by the Milesians. The chronicles tell us that this event occurred in Anno Mundi 3500, in other words in the year 504 BC; and a look at what was happening in Asia Minor at this moment in time is most instructive.

The city of Miletus, whose ruins stand on the present-day Turkish mainland, was finally overrun and destroyed by the Persian army in the year 494 BC, (14) and in the decades prior to this disaster, the people of Miletus had been under an ever-increasing threat. Life, such as it was, was neither comfortable nor certain, and nothing would have been more natural than that a colony of Milesians should decide to flee the Persian menace. They would seek a land sufficiently far away to be safe, was fertile, and which was well-known to the mariners (in particular the Phoenician mariners) of the Eastern Mediterranean. That the city of Miletus should be known to us today as having been an essentially Ionian outpost should be of no real consequence, for we have already seen the Irish accounts traced descent of the Irish variously from both Phoenician and Scythian stock, and both Phoenicians and Scythians would certainly have been found amongst the city's population; and we are thus compelled to take the claims of the early Irish chroniclers very seriously indeed.

TABLE 2. Important events in the early Irish-Celtic history, and their dates according to the chroniclers compared to Ussher's chronology.

The first column of Table 2 shows the dates given Anno Mundi for various events in early Irish-Celtic history. The equivalents of these dates, for both BC and PD (i.e. Post Diluvian = after the Flood,) appear in the other two columns. The early Irish, however, were not alone in establishing chronologies for their history. The early Britons and the Saxons did the same, and they all looked back to both a recent Creation and the Flood as historical, datable events. They differed in details, of course: the Irish chronicles generally favoured a date of 4000 BC for the Creation; the early British looked back a few hundred years further, counting instead of the 1656 years given in Genesis 5 for the Creation-Flood era, a period of 2242 years. (A principio mundi usque ad diluvium anni IICCXLII. Nennius, i. See Bibliography.) Interestingly, the British chronicles agree exactly with the Saxon for this figure, ("Fran Adame" to the "flod.....twa hund wintra & twa thusenda & twa flowertig." MS. Cotton. Vesparsian. D. IV. fol. 69.v.)

It would be interesting to find the sources for both the British and Saxon chronologies. It could not have been the Latin Bible, which agrees with the Hebrew in giving 1656 years for the Creation-Flood era. Likewise, it could not have been the Septuagint version, for that gives 2256 years for that period, and was also virtually unheard of in these islands until the 16th century Renaissance. It is equally unlikely that the British and Saxons borrowed from one another, simply because the Britons looked with disdain upon the historical claims that the Saxons had brought over with them. For example, Nennius informs us that although he had included certain Saxon genealogies in the first edition of his history of the Britains, he was later "advised" to omit them from subsequent editions. This "advice" came from Beulan, his master, who gave as his reason the "pointless" nature of Saxon claims and records. (Set cum inutiles magistro meo id est Beulano presbytero ulsae sunt genealogiae Saxonum at allarum genealogiae gentium nolul eas scribere)* Saxon chronology would therefore have received an equally short shrift.

Whatever the sources, they differed yet again from those used, for example, by Stowe in his Chronicle of England (see Bibliography,) whose dates give the Creation as occurring in only 3962 BC. Obviously, any date (Anno Mundi) for a certain event would differ drastically from one preferred date of Creation to the next. Indeed, Stowe has Partholan landing in Ireland over 1,000 years later (375 BC) than the date given for that event in the Irish Chronicles (1484 BC!)

As fascinating as they are, however, these differences in dating are relatively unimportant, and fairly easily resolved. What is important for our present study is the fact that these entirely diverse races and cultures all looked back to the same historical events, namely the recent Creation of the World and the universal Flood of Noah.

*(Morris, p.3 and Sisam, p. 292. See Bibliography.) __________________________________________________________________________

We are also obliged to take seriously the fact that these Irish accounts in spite of some admittedly garbled content, are more sensible and realistic in both their dates and narrative than those of certain other nations. We meet with none of the impossibly long reigns of which the Babylonians, for example, were so fond. In stark contrast to the historically perverse legends of Babylon, and the plainly fanciful accounts of many other peoples the early Irish chronicles give every indication they have been built upon carefully preserved and mainly accurate records reaching back to Ireland's earliest times, and that they are, consequently, possessed of a general trustworthiness.

Equally reliable are the pre-Christian genealogies that are presented in the ancient Irish chronicles, and which trace the descent of certain clans and tribes back to those same patriarches whose names appear in the Genesis record:

"The Books of Genealogies and Pedigrees form a most important element in Irish pagan history. For social and political reasons, the Irish Celt preserved his genealogical tree with scrupulous precision. Property rights and the governing power were transmitted with patriarchal exactitude on strict claims of primogeniture, which could only be refused under certain conditions defined by law...and in obedience to an ancient law, established long before the introduction of Christianity, all the provincial records, as well as those of the various chieftains, were required to be furnished every third year to the convocation at Tara, where they were compared and corrected." 15

It thus becomes clear the Irish genealogies were compiled at a time when it would have been beyond all possibility for the Christian monks to have influenced or altered them in any way, and we are left with the simple conclusion that these genealogies owed their existence to the preservation of records that was entirely independent of either the Jewish or Christian churches; and we see that the ancient Irish, in common with their forebears in the Middle East, preserved records of events that significantly confirm the Genesis account concerning the descent and dispersal of the nations.

The same can be said for an equally neglected series of documents that belong to another race altogether:

THE BRITISH CHRONICLES

We shall begin this section of our study by considering the work of a British scholar named Nennius. (The term British means he descended from the original peoples who settled in Britain after the Flood. The modern Welsh are descended from that same stock.) Nennius completed his famous work, the Historia Brittonum, towards the very end of the eighth century AD, and his achievement was to gather together, and thus preserve, a whole series of documents and sources that collectively shed much light specially upon the early pagan (i.e. pre-Christian) history of the early Britons. 16 In the preface to his work, he tells us (in Latin) that he is recording certain facts that the British had stupidly thrown away (quae hebitudo gentis Brittaniae deiecertat.)

As his work proceeds, he lists some of the sources he has used, and we see these ranged from oral traditions to certain written chronicles and annals. As far as his oral sources are concerned, he tells us that certain items in his history were imparted by Irish scholars (sic mihi peritissimi Scottorum nuntiauerunt,) and a certain genealogy was "in the writing of the writer's mind" (set in scriptione mentis scriptoris fuit.) Of his written sources, he lists the annals of the Romans; the Law; "another explanation" (aliud experimentum;) and, lapsing into his native Welsh, informs us that a noble elder named Cuana compiled a British genealogy from a certain Roman chronicle (i Guanach geitilach Breatan a cronicib na Romanach.)

In common with other historical writings from the Saxon period, it has been fashionable for scholars to denigrate much of his work as fictitious or mythical. However, the tide is now turning, and not without good reason. One of the latest scholars to study Nennius' work in any real depth wrote:

"Nennius' SELECT DOCUMENTS (Excerpta) of Early British History is almost unique in ancient and Medieval historical writing, both in concept and form and in originality and quality of scholarship." 17

As with the Irish chronicles, we shall meet with certain corroborations in Nennius' history that confirm the fact he was not just inventing stories to either flatter, deceive or entertain his readers. But before we proceed, let us set our minds at rest over any unease that may be felt regarding the reliability or otherwise of "oral tradition." What type of information can we reasonably expect oral tradition to convey, that is, with any degree of accuracy.

Oral tradition can, in fact, remain surprisingly accurate, even over vast periods of time. Events sometimes become exaggerated during transmission, or lose their chronological sequence, to be sure. But for the most part, they remain recognizable. However, as well as events, oral transmission is especially effective in the preservation of personal names. A most interesting example of this from modern times, and one which illustrates the principle exactly, is the following account. It concerns an old man of a certain author's acquaintance:

"This man was rich in ancient lore. For instance, through tradition handed down from father to son for untold generations, he could trace the poor condition of certain farms to what he called "a bad setback." When pressed for details he would say, "Mi grandfaither told me, and his grandfaither told him, that 'Willy Norman burnt 'em down.' Who 'Willy Norman' was he had no idea. Yet here was a folk memory preserved in local dialect and handed down as a kind of family secret." 18

"Willy Norman," of course, was William, the Norman Conqueror of England, his burning down certain farms in the area was a well-attested historical incident of a punitive raid carried out under William's orders and by his troops. It would, no doubt, have come as a great surprise to the old man who, remembered the incident, to learn no less than 900 years lay between him and the facts behind the story he was so fond of relating! Yet, he was accurately conveying to his listeners, both the name of the culprit and the nature of the crime, in spite of his own unawareness of the passage of so many centuries. And this is typical of oral traditions as a whole. They can be surprisingly accurate in the information they convey, even though time-scales and chronological sequences may suffer in the process, and as we begin our consideration of the rest of Nennius' work, we would do well to bear in mind that the same principle applies to certain ancient written records too.

Nennius, as we have seen, gathered together a number of sources from which he compiled the Historia; one especially, contains remarkable information. He begins chapter ten of his work with the statement he has come across two "alternative explanations" (hoc experimetum bifarie inueni) concerning the origins of the early British people. The first account, which appears in the same chapter, is of doubtful reliability, to say the least, although a historicity of sorts could be argued for some of its details.

However, in chapters 17 and 18, he deals more plainly, with the origins of the British, stating that "I found another explanation.... in the ancient books of our elders, (Aliud experimentum inueni.... ex ueteribus libris ueterum nostrorum.) There then follows a genealogy whose scope embraces a surprising amount of verifiable history. We can only deal with it briefly here, but the genealogy is best understood by studying Table 3 and its accompanying notes. (For the full Latin text, and a translation, see Appendix I.) Here, we may content ourselves with the observation that Nennius has passed down to us the contents of a very ancient document; and he has preserved it warts and all.

TABLE 3. A chart showing the lines of descent to the European nations, including the British

If we compare Nennius' Table of European Nations with Table 1 of Part 1 of this study, the genealogy of Japheth's descendants as based on the Genesis record, we find Nennius and Genesis are in remarkable agreement with one another, yet Nennius adds details not included in Genesis (for natural and obvious reasons.)

*Gomer (1), for example, is merely cited by Nennius as being the ancestor of the Gauls, Nennius omitting the Biblical names of Gomer's three immediate descendants, Ashchenaz, Riphath and Togarmah.

He cites Magog (2) as the ancestor of both the Scythians and Goths, and Madai (3) as the father of the Medes. So far, so good. From this point, however, the document from which Nennius is working shows one or two telltale signs of the (albeit remarkably little) distortion that it has suffered in transmission (oral or written.)

Tubal (4) - (see Part 1, Table 1, no. 13) - was father of a people known to the Assyrians as the Tabali, whose land, (present-day Georgia in the USSR,) lay adjacent to that of Tegaramah. The descendants of Tubal eventually migrated north-east to found the city that still bears their name, Tobolsk. The document Nennius has handed down to us adds the details that from Tubal came the Iberians, the Spanish and the Italians! Such a descent is unlikely on racial grounds alone, yet is an echo of an earlier assumption that was recorded by Josephus some seven hundred years before. (Josephus wrote that Tubal was the ancestor of the Thobelites, who were known as the Iberes - Iberians - of his own day.)

Likewise Nennius' source cites Meshech (5) as father of the Cappadocians, an error that once again had already been recorded by Josephus. (It is doubtful Josephus originated these errors, for he himself relied on even earlier records for his own information.) The confusion was easily brought about, for Genesis does record the existence of two Meshechs, not one! The Meshech with whom we are immediately concerned was a son of Japheth whereas the Meshech with whom he was often confused, was descended from Shem (see Part 1, Table 3, no. 57!)

The people descended from the Semitic Meshech were known to the Akkadians as the Mashu, and to the Egyptians as the Msh'r, both names referring to a people then inhabiting Lebanon (hence Cappadocia.) This is the source of Josephus' error, and of those on whom he relied. We find it perpetuated also here in Nennius.

Other examples of distortion (albeit of a minor nature) are seen in that the Goths are shown as being descended both from Magog, the Biblical patriarch, and from Armenon, the son of Alanus. Armenon himself is stated to have had five sons, yet only four are named. (Five nations are later shown to have descended from him.) Likewise, Negue is stated at first to have had three sons, yet four nations derive from him. The significance of all this is that Nennius could easily have edited out or corrected these points thereby enhancing his own credibility, yet he chose to simply leave them as they are. Almost paradoxically, this enhances his standing as a trustworthy and reliable historian, and it further assures us that we are reading these ancient documents exactly as Nennius read them.

Furthermore, the exactitude of this genealogy in showing both the male and female lines of descent of Alanus from Javan is surprising as it is unusual and rather than contain any overtly mythical material both lines give every appearance of being simple registers of ancestral names.

From Alanus onwards appears a comprehensive table of European nations. One or two of these names were archaic even in Nennius' times, and would long have fallen into disuse. They are all, however, familiar to any historian today whose studies touch upon the history of Europe at about the time of the collapse of the Roman Empire. For some two or three centuries, Europe was a seething cauldron as nation vied with nation in a bewildering array of invasion and counter-invasion and yet not one of the names in this table is historically unattested! (Not even the unlikely sounding Gepids.) Again, this assures us that these names were carefully and faithfully preserved in the document that Nennius copied, and we also note with interest, various nations are seen to have descended from patriarches whose names are also to be found in the Genesis record. (See Appendix I.)

*There is an etymological link between the ancient tribes of Gomer, and the modern Welsh. An equivalent of the adjective "Welsh," is Cambrian, (see Table 4, no. 4. Kamber.) Today, Welshmen still know their country as Cymru, and the link between them and the early peoples of Gomer is illustrated in the following:

"...the ancient Gomery and Cymbry descended of Japhet, the first possessors of this Island, after the dispersion of Babell..." (Stowe, p.1. See Bibliography.) __________________________________________________________________________

A compatriot of Nennius, though he lived some 350 years after him, was Geoffrey of Monmouth who published his own History of the Kings of Britain (the Historia Regum Britanniae) in about 1136 AD. Geoffrey's Historia deserves our closest consideration, not least for the fact that it is today perhaps the most disparaged of all the works of the Middle Ages. Experience has shown, the re-examination of a work that is too readily dismissed by modernist scholars, usually reveals evidence that should not be ignored, and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia is no exception to this rule.

Geoffrey's work undoubtedly contains errors, and it is allegedly on these grounds that his Historia is dismissed as myth or plain fiction. Yet, as we have already seen, such errors are exactly what we should expect to find! They in no way indicate that a given work is necessarily spurious. Rather, they are, paradoxically, the very hallmarks of a work's genuineness.

We must also bear in mind the fact that material passed down by Geoffrey, errors and all, is not original to him. Rather, according to his own account, the Historia is merely, for the most part his translation into Latin of a certain ancient British (i.e. Welsh) book (quendam britannici sermonis librum uetustissimum), which was given to him for this very purpose by Walter of Oxford, "a man most learned in all branches of history."

There are admittedly portions of Geoffrey's Historia tend to grate on the modern ear. It contains, for example the usual literary conventions of his time, such as long and flowery speeches, and unlikely tales of heroism. Yet, this is the very stuff and substance of Welsh Bardic lore, and it should come as no surprise to meet it in what was, after all, originally a Welsh book.

However, shorn of its magic tales and accounts of heroic deeds, Geoffrey's Historia is seen to be built around a solid framework of perfectly acceptable historical data. In the first few books of the Historia appear the names of some 110 successive holders of the British crown, and I have arranged these names into their proper genealogical order. (See Table 4 and accompanying notes.) The list is strictly a genealogy only as far as Lucius (54), after whom it becomes a king-list. However, this table embraces a period of history that extended over some 2,000 years, from Brutus (c. 13th century BC) to Yvor, who lived at the end of the 7th century AD.

Set against the acknowledged and expected errors in Geoffrey of Monmouth's work, are the equally expected (though too-rarely acknowledged) historical vindications. As Thorpe was compelled to concede:

"Finally, there is the archaeological evidence, the fact that strange light has been thrown upon certain of the alleged fancies of Geoffrey of Monmouth by subsequent archaeological discoveries." 21

A short discussion of these vindications is given in Appendix II of this article, and together they assure us of the general reliability of most of Geoffrey's historical material. Certainly, scholars in the Middle Ages found little to criticize in this regard. More modern scholars, however, justify their own rejection of Geoffrey's work by pointing out that a near-contemporary of his, namely William of Newburgh, condemned Geoffrey out of hand as a liar. But, such would do well to consider exactly what William was criticizing. In his own words:

"It is quite clear.... that everything this man wrote about Arthur and his successors, or indeed about his predecessors from Vortigern onwards, was made up, partly by himself and partly by others, either from an inordinate love of lying, or for the sake of pleasing the Britons." (Thorpe, p. 17.)

Thus, we see that William of Newburgh's criticism in fact was aimed at only the last portion of Geoffrey's Historia, namely its long section dealing with king Arthur. This, however, had more to do with William's sensitivity as a Saxon-cum-Norman scholar, whose efforts to establish the historical respectability of his Norman masters was not at all advanced by Geoffrey's reminding the Normans (and Saxons) that they were relative newcomers to this island! In this context, however, it is important to note William was careful not to disparage the historical material contained in Geoffrey's work for the ages prior to Arthur! That much, at least, was acceptable even to his jaundiced eye, and it becomes clear that when they reject all of Geoffrey's account on the basis of William of Newburgh's accusation, then modernist scholars can be said to have overstated their case.

Yet, why should Geoffrey's Historia suffer such out-of-hand rejection when a great part of it is verifiable and acceptable history? The answer is not hard to find. On Thursday 6th July 1600, a certain Baron Waldstein visited London's Lambeth Palace. He tells us that in one of the rooms he saw:

"..a splendid genealogy of all the Kings of England, and another genealogy, a historical one, which covers the whole of time, and is traced down from the Beginning if the World." 22

"...beautifully set out on parchment, a genealogy of the kings of England which goes back to Adam. "23

Such genealogies were immensely popular, and as fascinating to the general public as they were to historians and other scholars. As tables of descent they provide a continuous record of human history from the Creation through the post-Flood era, down to modern times. The material of which they were based was undoubtedly that which Geoffrey of Monmouth has passed down to us as well as various details gleaned from the Saxon records (Table 5.) It is important to realize the disparagement of these genealogies only really began in the 18th century, when so-called Rationalists were already seeking to replace man's recorded history with certain anti-Biblical notions of their own! Such is the extend of their success in this, that today hardly a scholar can be found who would dare to base his history on the truth and reliability of these records. Instead, the student of history is presented with a complete blank when he comes to inquire into the history of Britain for the period preceding the Roman; and when Sellar and Yeatman wrote satirically that history did not begin until 55 BC (the date of the first Roman invasion of Britain,) they were not entirely joking (Appendix II.)

The British chronicles, however, are not alone in suffering such disparagement at the hands of modern sceptics. Rather, their treatment is mirrored exactly in the present-day handling of another set of records that far exceed those of the early British in both quality and quantity:

NB The Line from Noah to Brutus (with the exception of Silvius), is taken directly from chapter 18 of Nennius' Historia Brittonum, and these names thus appear in bold Letters. A other names are from Geoffery of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae.

(1) Brutus. He was the first to colonize the British mainland after the Flood, and was Britain's first king. The land of Britain and its people, the Britons, derived their name from him. His wife, Ignoge, the daughter of a "Greek" king named Pandrasus, was married to Brutus against her will.

(2) Corineus. He joined forces with Brutus in his migration to the British mainland and shared the same ancestry as Brutus, although their exact relationship is unclear. During the process of colonization, Corineus was apportioned that part of Britain that still bears his name - Cornwall. For some time, Cornwall was a separate and independent kingdom.

(3) Locrins. On the death of Brutus the island was divided up between Locrins and his brother. Locrinus' kingdom consisted of what is now England, with the exception of Cornwall, which retained its independence. His kingdom was long known by his name, i.e. Loegria, and even today the Welsh know England as Loegr.

(4) Kamber. His inheritance on the death of Brutus was the kingdom that bears his name, Cambaria, present-day Wales. It is interesting to note that his name is perpetuated whenever we speak of Cambrian and Precambrian rocks.

(5) Albanactus. He was apportioned present-day Scotland which then bore his name, Albany. Nennius tells us in chapter 18 of his own Historia Brittonium that the early Albans were directly related to the early Britons.

(6) Gwendolen. The daughter of Corineus. Loctrinus had married her in accordance with an earlier pledge, but on the death of her father, Loctrinius deserted her in favour of Estrildis. In vengeance, Gwendolen roused up her father's kingdom of Cornwall against Locrinus and Locrinus was killed in the ensuing battle. As now undisputed ruler of Loegria, Gwendolen gave the order to execute by drowning Estrildis, and her daughter Habren, born of Locrinus' adultery. Gwendolen ruled Loegria for a further 15 years, retiring eventually to her native Cornwall, where she died.

(7) Estrildis. Temporarily became Queen of Loegria when Locrinus deserted his legitimate wife. On the death of Locrinus, Estrildis was drowned on Queen Gwendolen's orders.

(8) Habren. The daughter born of Locrinus' adultery with Estridis, she was drowned with her mother in the river that long bore her name, the Habren in the early British tongue. The Romans transposed the name as Sabrina. We know it today as the river Severn.

(9) Maddan. His mother, Gwendolen, abdicated the throne in Madden's favour after ruling for fifteen years. Maddan was to rule in her place for forty years.

(10) Malin. His ambition for the crown on his father's death resulted in his murder at his own brother's hands. The assassination occurred at a conference called between the two brothers.

(11) Mempricius. A noted tyrant, he murdered his brother Malin, deserted his lawful wife in favour of unnatural practices, and generally misruled the kingdom. In the twentieth year of his reign he was separated from his companions in a hunting party, surrounded by wolves, and eaten.

(12) Ebraucus. He took the crown on his father's death, and subsequently ruled the kingdom for 39 years. In an eventful and fondly remembered reign, he sacked Gaul, and founded the city of Kaerbrauc which bore his name. The Romans later preserved his name as Eboracum, modern York.

(13) Brutus. Greenshield Ebraucus' eldest son, he took the crown on his father's death.

(14) Leil. Succeeding the throne on his father's death, he founded the city that still bears his name, Kaerfeil - known today as Carlisle. Leil's reign of 25 years ended in civil war due to his ineffectiveness and lack of resolve as a leader.

(15) Hudibras. Ending the civil war of his father's making, Hudibras ruled for 39 years. This great builder founded the cities of Kaerreint (Canterbury,) Kaerguenit (Winchester) and the fortified township of Paladur, present-day Shaftsbury.

(16) Bladud. Not mentioned by Geoffrey of Monmouth, is the fact that Bladud was a leper. He ruled Leogria for 20 years, founding the city of Kaerbadum, present-day Bath. He outlawed the practise of necromancy throughout his kingdom, and was killed in one of the earliest recorded attempts to fly.

(17) Leir. Leir succeeded his father to enjoy a reign of 60 years. He founded the city of Kaefeir, known today as Leicester, and "immortalised" in Shakespeare's play, King Lear, which recalls the events of his reign.

(18) Goneril. King Leir's eldest daughter, she married Maglaurus, Duke of Albany. (By now Albany, Cambria and Cornwall were duchies subservient to the kingdom of Loegria.)

(19) Regan. Leir's second eldest daughter, she married Henwinus, the Duke of Cornwall. With her sister Goneril, she was to depose Cordelia, the lawful Queen.

(20) Queen. Cordelia After marrying Aganippus, King of the Franks, Cordelia became Queen of all Britain on her father's death. Five years later, she was deposed by her sisters, and committed suicide in prison.

(21) Marganus. I He ruled (unlawfully) the territory north of the Humber. After attacking Cunedagius he was pursued into Wales where he met his death at Cunedagius's hands. The place where he died was long known as Margon (Morganwc - present day Margam.)

(22) Cunedagius. Originally ruling the territory south of the Huber, Cunedagius became King of all Britain in the death of Marganus I.

(23) Rivallo. A notable young king who ruled wisely and "frugally," and is remembered for a "rain of blood" which fell from the skies, (freak weather conditions that produced red showers of rain,) a great swarm of flies, and a plague that took a heavy toll of the population.

(24) Jago. Jago was Gurgustius' nephew, not grandson as the genealogy would imply.

(25) Judon. Gorboduc's queen, Judon was caused much grief over her quarrelling sons. On learning that Porrex had killed Ferrex her favourite, she became insane, and later murdered Porrex in his sleep by hacking him to pieces.

(26) Porrex. He killed his elder brother in battle, and was later murdered by his own mother in revenge.

(27) Ferrex. He constantly quarrelled with his younger brother, over who should succeed their now sterile father. At one point, Ferrex fled to Gaul from where, with the help of Suhard, King of the Franks, he led a military expedition against his brother. He died in the ensuing battle.

(28) An unspecified period of strife and civil war, as five rival kings fought for supremacy. Unfortunately, the lineal royal descent for this period is untraceable.

(29) Pinner. Emerged from the civil war period as King of Loegria. He was later killed in battle by his successor but one.

(30) Cloten. King of Cornwall, Cloten may have been one of the previously unnamed kings. The provinces of Britain had reverted to separate kingdoms during the civil war period.

(31) Dunvallo. (Molmutius) Erstwhile successor to his father Cloten's kingdom of Cornwall, Dunvallo's military prowess gained him the title King of Britain. He codified the Molmutine Laws, a law-code that Geoffrey of Monmouth tells us was still famed and revered in his day. Dunvallo reigned for some 40 years, during which crimes of violence were virtually unheard of in his kingdom, such was the severity of punishment meted out to such criminals during his reign.

(32) Belinus. Dunvallo's eldest son, Belinus ruled Leogria, Cambria and Cornwall. His brother Brennius held Northumbria and Albany. Belinus eventually defeated Brennius, and thus came to rule all of Britain. Geoffery of Monmouth tells us that Belinus was a great road-builder, and that Billingsgate in London was built by and named after him. In an eventful reign, Belinus subdued the then King of Denmark, exacting from him a great tribute.

(33) Gurguit. The son and successor of Belinus, Gurguit was renowned as a "lover of peace and justice." During Gurguit's reign, the King of Denmark withdrew the tribute Belinus had exacted from him, and Gurguit promptly invaded Denmark to assert his authority there. It was during his return from Denmark that Gurguit intercepted the ships of Partholan and his fellow-exiles. Gurguit assigned Partholan the otherwise uninhabited land of Ireland. His death was a peaceful one, and he lies buried in the city of Caerleon-on-Usk.

(34) Guithelin. Succeeding to the crown after his father's death, Guithelin was a noted and benevolent ruler. He married Marcia, a learned woman, who codified the Marcian Laws, the Lew Martiana. King Alfred the Great later translated the code as the Mercian Laws, believing them to have been named after the much later Saxon kingdom of Mercia. Queen Marcia ruled Britain for many years after Guithelin's death, and during their son's minority.

(35) Morvidus. An otherwise heroic ruler, Morvidus was noted and feared for his ferocious and uncontrollable temper. He was also possessed of a merciless cruelty towards those whom he defeated in battle. After one particular attempted invasion of his kingdom, Morvidus personally put to death his prisoners of war, one by one. "When he became so exhausted that he had to give up for a time, he ordered the remainder to be skinned alive, and in this state he had them burnt." During his reign, he received reports a monstrous animal was causing havoc in the west. With typical, if hasty, bravado Morvidus fought the beast single-handedly. The dinosaur killed him and devoured his corpse.

(36) Gorbonianus. He was much renowned for his goodness as a ruler.

(37) Archgallo. He was the very opposite of his elder brother. Such was his tyranny he was eventually deposed by the nobility, and his younger brother elected king in his place.

(38) Elidurus. Surnamed the Dutiful because of the compassion he showed towards his elder brother. Elidrus exercised this compassion to the point of temporarily abdicating in favour of a now reformed Archgallo, whose behaviour as king was now a complete reversal of his former conduct. Archgallo died after ten years, at which point Elidrus resumed the crown. Elidrus' reign, however, was to be interrupted once again...

(39) Ingenius and Peredurus. The two younger brothers of Elidurus, they both organized his deposition by rebellion, during which Elidurus was seized and incarcerated in a tower. Ingenius then ruled the southern half of Britain, and Peredrus ruled the north, including Albany. Ingenius died seven years later, and Peredurus gained the whole kingdom. Peredurus now became a wise and benevolent king, but died after only a short reign. Elidurus thus regained the crown for a third time.

(40) Marganus II. A wise and good king whose reign was noted for its tranquillity.

(41) Ennianus. His tyrannical behaviour brought about his deposition after only a six-year reign.

(42) Beldgabred. This "king surpassed all the musicians of ancient times, both in harmony and in playing every kind of musical instrument, so that he was called the god of the minstrels."

(43) Digueillus. A notably just and fair king.

(44) Heli. Heli ruled for forty years.

(45) Lud. He ordered the rebuilding of London's walls and towers. The city, hitherto known as Trinovantum, thus became the city of Lud, i.e. Kaerlud. This was later corrupted to Kaerfundein, from whence came its present name. Lud was eventually buried in London, close to Ludgate that still bears his name. Lud's sons were not considered fit to succeed him, so the crown passed to his younger brother, Cassivelaunus.

(46) Cassivelaunus. It was this king who withstood, in the year 55 BC, the invading armies of Julius Caesar. Cassivelaunus was starved into submission after betrayal by Androgeus, his brother Lud's eldest son. The British resistance, however, had been great and fierce, evoking from the Roman author Lucan much praise concerning one particular engagement: Territa quaesitis ostendit terga Britannis, when Caesar fled in terror from the very Britons whom he'd come to attack!" (Lucan's Pharsallia, ii, 572. See Thorpe, p. 117.)

(47) Androgeus. In his minority he received the duchy of Kent from his uncle Cassivelaunus. His betrayal of the British forces, later leaving the country, ensured that he would not inherit the crown.

(48) Tenvantius. During his minority, he received the duchy of Cornwall.

(49) Cymbeline. Son and heir of Tenvantius, he received a Roman upbringing in the Imperial household. Like Leir before him, Cymbeline has been "immortalised" by Shakespeare, whose play, Cymbeline, recalls his reign.

(50) Guiderius. On his succession to the crown, he promptly refused to pay tribute to Rome. Emperor Claudius was attacked by Guiderius' forces at Porchester. During the attack, Guiderius was betrayed and killed.

(51) Arvirgus. Taking command of the British forces on the death of his brother Guiderius, Arvirgus emerged victor from a major skirmish with Claudius' troops. He eventually ruled the British as Rome's puppet-king, being interred in the city of Gloucester. British warriors at that time were famed for their ability to fight whilst standing on the pole of the chariot, and Arviragus was particularly adept at this as a certain Roman author testified: "Either you will catch a certain king, or else Arviragus will tumble from the British chariot-pole." (Juvenal, I, 1v, 126-127. See Thorpe, p. 123.)

(52) Marius. Inheriting the crown from his father Marius enjoyed friendly relations with Rome. During his reign, he defeated and killed Soderic, the king of the Picts, in a great battle. The present country of Westmorland was so named in his honour because of the battle and Marius accordingly had a stone inscribed commemorating his victory set up in the county.

(53) Coilus. The son of Marius, he was raised and educated as a Roman and was to rule his kingdom in peace and prosperity.

(54) Lucius. Taking up the crown on his father Coilus' death. According to Bede, Lucius was to become Britain's first Christian king. He died in the year 156 AD.

(55) Geta. His rule marks a break in the strict lineal descent of the British kings. Geta was a son of the Roman Severus, and on the death of Lucius was elected king of the Britons by the Roman Senate. He was eventually killed by his half-brother Bassianus.

(56) Bassianus. The Britons elected Bassianus king after he had killed his half-brother. Like Geta, he was a son of Severus, but by a British noblewoman.

(57) Carausius. After raising a fleet of ships (with the blessing of the Roman Senate,) he invaded Britain. He compelled the Britons to proclaim him king, and killed Bassianus in the ensuing battle. He was eventually murdered by Allectus.

(58) Asclepiodotus. He held the duchy of Cornwall when he was elected king by the Britons in their attempt to break the tyranny of the Roman legate Allectus. Allectus was defeated by Asclepiodotus in the battle of London. It was during his reign that the Diocletian Persecution began, (303-312 AD.)

(59) Coel. Becoming king by rebelling against and killing Ascliepiodotus, Coel is commemorated in the children's nursery-rhyme Old King Cole. He founded the city of Colchester that still bears his name.

(60) Constantius. Originally a Roman Senator, he was sent to Britain as Legate, and reduced Coel to submission. He married Coel's daughter, Helen, and became king on Coel's death.

(61) Constantine I. The son of Constantius and Helen, He ruled Britain on his father's death. He went on to become the famous Emperor of Rome who legalized the Christian religion.

(62) Octavius. He revolted while Constantine was in Rome, and assumed the British crown.

(63) Trahern. He was the brother of Coel, and was ordered by Constantine to put down the revolt of Octavius. Eventually defeating Octavius in battle, Trahern was later murdered by one of Octavius' men.

(64) Maximianus. He was a nephew of Coel, and he held the crown by virtue of that descent. He was, however, later assassinated in Rome by friends of his successor, Gracianus.

(65) Gracianus. He was originally sent to Britain by Maximianus to fight off an invasion by the Picts and Huns. However, upon successfully expelling the invaders, he assumed the crown and ordered the murder of Maximianus. He was himself to suffer death at the hands of an assassin.

(65) Consantantine II. Crowned king at Silchester and later killed by an unknown Pict; he invaded Britain at the request of Guithelinus.

(67) Constans. Constantine's eldest son, he tried to avoid the perils of the crown, becoming a monk at Winchester. He was forcibly crowned by Vortigern, who later had him murdered.

(68) Vortigern. He became king after the murder of Constans. It was Vortigern who invited the Saxon adventurers, Hengis and Horsa, (see Table 5,) to Britain to help fight the Picts. After a disastrous reign, during which he married Renwein, the daughter of Hengist, Vortigern was burned alive in a tower by Aurelius Ambrosius.

(69) Hengist. With his brother Horsa he was invited to Britain by Vortigern to help expel the invading Picts. However, Hengist availed himself of the opportunity to settle his own people permanently in Britain. He gave his daughter Renwein to Vortigern in exchange for the county of Kent. His treachery became Proverbial, and he was eventually caught and executed.

(70) Vortimer. The son of Vortigern by his first wife, Vortimer achieved four notable victories in his attempts to drive out the Saxons, but for this he was poisoned by his Saxon step-mother.

(71) Katigern. The second son of Vortigern by his first wife, Katigern was killed at the battle of Epiford by Horsa, brother of Hengist (69)

(72) Paschent. Vortigern's third son by his first wife, Paschent fled to Germany where he raised an army of mercenaries to invade and defeat Aurelius Ambrosius (73). This invasion failed, and Paschent then fled to Ireland. Raising another army, he was killed at the subsequent battle of Menevia by Utherpendragon.

(73) Aurelius (Ambrosius). Too young to take up the crown, he was smuggled to Brittany on Constans' murder (see 67), and was raised in the household of king Budicius. Eventually declared king, Aurelius planned Vortigern's death. During his reign, Ambrosius forced the Saxons to retreat to Albany (Scotland,) and captured and executed Hengist at Kaerconan, present-day Conisborough. He was eventually poisoned by Eopa the Saxon.

(74) Utherpendragon. Named Uther at birth he assumed the surname pen-Dragon after the appearance of a dragon in the sky. Like his brother Aurelius, he was smuggled abroad on the murder of Constans.

(75) Arthur. Certainly the most glamorous of all the British kings, and the main subject of Geoffrey's Hisioria. Arthur succeeded to the crown at only 15 years of age. After an eventful reign, he died in the year 542 AD.

(75) Constantine III. The son of Cador, duke of Cornwall, he succeeded Arthur in 542 AD. His succession was complicated by an immediate revolt of the Saxons, which was violently crushed. Constantine was struck down some four years later "by God's vengeance."

(77) Aurelius. Conanus Nephew of Constantine III, he gained the crown only by imprisoning another uncle who was next in line to the throne. He reigned for only three years before his death.

(78) Vortiporius. Succeeding Auralius Conanus, he put down an invasion from Germany. His subsequent fate is unrecorded.

(79) Malgo. According to a recorded speech of Cadwallo (82), He had two sons, Ennianus and Run, neither of whom succeeded him.

(80) Keredic. Of unknown origin and descent, he succeeded Malgo. In a subsequent battle, he was driven to seek refuge in Wales.

(81) Cadvan. Of Northern Welsh descent, he "succeeded" to the kingship by engaging in battle Ethelfrid, the king of Northumbria. They divided Britain between them, Cadvan ruling over the southern half.

(82) Cadwallo. The son of Cadvan, he had a relatively long and eventful reign, eventually dying of old age.

(83) Cadwallader. The son of Cadwallo, he succeeded his father as king. Bede knew him as Cliedvalla, and the Welsh knew him as Cadwaladr. He died in 689 AD.

(84) Yvor. Ruled over the remaining Britons who had been driven into Wales. The last king of strictly British descent, during Yvor's reign the British came to be known as the Welsh.

5. Mike Gascoigne

Forgotten History of the Western People

From Noah to Dardanus

This article describes the descendants of Noah, up to the foundation of Troy by Dardanus, and is based on Greek mythology which is thought to be an embellished version of real history.

The Real History Behind The Greek Mythology

Oceanus and Tethys were additional children of Noah, born after the flood (and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that this should not happen). They got married and had both sons and daughters. Their sons were called 'River Gods' and their daughters were called 'Oceanids'. One of the Oceanids, either Clymene or Asia, married Iapetus (Japheth) and they had a son called Atlas who had a daughter called Electra. She married Zeus who is the same as the Egyptian Osiris and the Biblical Mizraim. Zeus and Electra had a son called Dardanus who became the first king of Troy.

Dardanus married Batia, the grand-daughter of Scamander the River God, who represents the river near Troy. Her father was Teucer, king of the Teucrians. Dardanus and Batia had a son called Ericthoneus who succeeded him as the next king of Troy, and the line continues as far as the Trojan war. Virgil (3) tells the story of how Aeneas fled from the burning city of Troy and established his kingdom in Italy. Then there is Brutus, the great-grandson of Aeneas, who came to Britain and founded of the British (Welsh) monarchy, despite claims to the contrary which I have dealt with in Why All The Fuss About Geoffrey and The Good Book of Oxford.

Taking all this together, we have a continuous genealogy from Noah to the Welsh monarchy, but that's not all. Berosus (4), a Babylonian priest of the third century BC, gives a list of ten kings before the flood, corresponding to the ten patriarchs from Adam to Noah. So the genealogy goes all the way back to Adam.

Note: There is a more elaborate version of the descent from Noah to Dardanus, but it is based on sources that cannot be authenticated. See From Noah to Dardanus (according to Annius).

References

1. Hodges, E.R., Cory's Ancient Fragments, A New and Enlarged Edition, Reeves & Turner, London, 1876. Facsimile reprints from Ballantrae, Ontario, Canada. This Chaldean fragment is from Alexander Polyhistor.

4. Cory's Ancient Fragments. See the fragments of Berosus from Apollodorus and Abydenus.

6. Are black people the result of a curse on Ham?

First published in One Blood
Chapter 6

It has been clearly shown that the blackness of, for example, ‘black’ Africans is merely one particular combination of inherited factors (see Chapter 4). This means that these factors themselves, though not in that combination, were originally present in Adam and Eve. The belief that the skin color of black people is a result of a curse on Ham and his descendants is taught nowhere in the Bible. Furthermore, it was not Ham who was cursed; it was his son, Canaan (Gen. 9:18, 25; 10:6), and Canaan’s descendants were probably brown-skinned (Gen. 10:15–19).

The following two quotes illustrate how people have been falsely misled concerning Ham and Canaan.

In 1958, from the writings of the Mormon church:

We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were cursed with what we call Negroid racial characteristics.¹

In 1929, a Jehovah’s Witnesses publication stated:

The curse which Noah pronounced upon Canaan was the origin of the black race.²

False teaching about Ham has been used to justify slavery and other nonbiblical, racist attitudes. It is traditionally believed that the African nations are largely Hamitic, because the Cushites (Cush was a son of Ham—Gen. 10:6) are thought to have lived where Ethiopia is today. Genesis suggests that the dispersion was probably along family lines, and it may be that Ham’s descendants were on average darker than, say, Japheth’s. However, it could just as easily have been the other way around.

Let’s consider some of the details surrounding the curse on Canaan. In Genesis 9:18–27 we read:

And the sons of Noah that went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham is the father of Canaan. These are the three sons of Noah, and the whole earth was overspread from them. And Noah began to be a husbandman. And he planted a vineyard. And he drank of the wine and was drunk. And he was uncovered inside his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. And Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders. And they went backwards and covered the nakedness of their father. And their faces were backwards, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and came to know what his younger son had done to him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan. He shall be a servant of servants to his brothers. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem. And Canaan shall be their servant.

Notice that when the sons of Noah are listed, Ham is described as being ‘the father of Canaan.’ The names of the other two sons are mentioned, but Ham is particularly singled out as being the father of Canaan. Why is this so?

Now Ham had four sons, Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan. However, consider the descendants of Canaan.

The descendants of Canaan were some of the most wicked people to ever live on the earth—the people of Sodom and Gomorrah for instance. What is interesting to note is that the Bible seems to indicate, in Genesis 9:22, that when Ham was disrespectful to his father Noah, this involved some sort of sexual connotation.

It is indeed possible that Noah saw in Canaan the same sin problem that his father Ham had. It is a sad fact of history (there are a number of recorded instances in the Bible) that when the father sins, the next generation learn from the father and are often more wicked than their father.

Therefore, it seems that Noah understood that Canaan’s descendants would also reflect this rebellious nature. Remember, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were judged for their sexual perversion.

The curse of Canaan has nothing whatsoever to do with skin color, but is in fact an example warning fathers to train their children in godly principles. If this is not done in one generation, then generations to come will express their rebellious nature as seen in the wickedness of Canaan’s descendants.

References

7. The sixteen grandsons of Noah

Secular history gives much evidence to show that the survivors of Noah’s Flood were real historical figures, whose names were indelibly carved on much of the ancient world …

When Noah and his family stepped out of the Ark, they were the only people on Earth. It fell to Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and their wives, to repopulate the Earth through the children that were born to them after the Flood. Of Noah’s grandchildren, 16 grandsons are named in Genesis chapter 10.

1. People in various areas called themselves by the name of the man who was their common ancestor.

2. They called their land, and often their major city and major river, by his name.

3. Sometimes the various nations fell off into ancestor worship. When this happened, it was natural for them to name their god after the man who was ancestor of all of them, or to claim their long-living ancestor as their god.

All of this means that the evidence has been preserved in a way that can never be lost, and all the ingenuity of man cannot erase. We will now examine it.

The seven sons of Japheth

Genesis 10:1–2 reads:

The first of Noah’s grandsons mentioned is Gomer. Ezekiel locates the early descendants of Gomer, along with Togarmah (a son of Gomer), in the north quarters (Ezekiel 38:6). In modern Turkey is an area which in New Testament times was called Galatia. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus records that the people who were called Galatians or Gauls in his day (c. AD 93) were previously called Gomerites.¹

They migrated westward to what are now called France and Spain. For many centuries France was called Gaul, after the descendants of Gomer. North-west Spain is called Galicia to this day.

The four sons of Ham

Next we come to the sons of Ham: Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan (Genesis 10:6).

The descendants of Ham live mainly in south-west Asia and Africa. The Bible often refers to Africa as the land of Ham (Psalms 105:23,27; 106:22). The name of Noah’s grandson Cush is the Hebrew word for old Ethiopia (from Aswan south to Khartoum). Without exception, the word Ethiopia in the English Bible is always a translation of the Hebrew word Cush. Josephus rendered the name as Chus, and says that the Ethiopians ‘are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites’.⁹

Noah’s next grandson mentioned was Mizraim. Mizraim is the Hebrew word for Egypt. The name Egypt appears hundreds of times in the Old Testament and (with one exception) is always a translation of the word Mizraim. E.g. at the burial of Jacob, the Canaanites observed the mourning of the Egyptians and so called the place Abel Mizraim (Genesis 50:11).

Phut, the name of Noah’s next grandson is the Hebrew name for Libya. It is so translated three times in the Old Testament. The ancient river Phut was in Libya. By Daniel’s day, the name had been changed to Libya (Daniel 11:43). Josephus says, ‘Phut also was the founder of Libia [sic], and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself’.⁹

Canaan, the name of Noah’s next grandson, is the Hebrew name for the general region later called by the Romans Palestine, i.e. modern Israel and Jordan. Here we should look briefly at a few of the descendants of Ham (Genesis 10:14–18). There is Philistim, obviously the ancestor of the Philistines (clearly giving rise to the name Palestine), and Sidon, the founder of the ancient city that bears his name, and Heth, the patriarch of the ancient Hittite empire. Also, this descendant is listed in Genesis 10:15–18 as being the ancestor of the Jebusites (Jebus was the ancient name for Jerusalem — Judges 19:10), the Amorites, the Girgasites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites, ancient peoples who lived in the land of Canaan.

The most prominent descendant of Ham was Nimrod, the founder of Babel (Babylon), as well as of Erech, Accad and Calneh in Shinar (Babylonia).

The five sons of Shem

Last we come to the sons of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram (Genesis 10:22).

Elam is the ancient name for Persia, which is itself the ancient name for Iran. Until the time of Cyrus the people here were called Elamites, and they were still often called that even in New Testament times. In Acts 2:9, the Jews from Persia who were present at Pentecost were called Elamites. The Persians are thus descended from both Elam, the son of Shem, and from Madai, the son of Japheth (see above). Since the 1930s they have called their country Iran.

Asshur is the Hebrew word for Assyria. Assyria was one of the great ancient empires. Every time the words Assyria or Assyrian appear in the Old Testament, they are translated from the word Asshur. He was worshipped by his descendants.

Arphaxad was the progenitor of the Chaldeans. This ‘is confirmed by the Hurrian (Nuzi) tablets, which render the name as Arip-hurra — the founder of Chaldea.’¹¹ His descendant, Eber, gave his name to the Hebrew people via the line of Eber-Peleg-Reu-Serug-Nahor-Terah-Abram (Genesis 11:16–26). Eber’s other son, Joktan, had 13 sons (Genesis 10:26–30), all of whom appear to have settled in Arabia.¹²

Lud was the ancestor of the Lydians. Lydia was in what is now Western Turkey. Their capital was Sardis — one of the seven churches of Asia was at Sardis (Revelation 3:1).

Aram is the Hebrew word for Syria. Whenever the word Syria appears in the Old Testament it is a translation of the word Aram. The Syrians call themselves Arameans, and their language is called Aramaic. Before the spread of the Greek Empire, Aramaic was the international language (2 Kings 18:26 ff). On the cross, when Jesus cried out, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani’ (Mark 15:34),¹³ He was speaking Aramaic, the language of the common people.

Conclusion

We have only taken the briefest glance at Noah’s sixteen grandsons,¹⁴ but enough has been said to show that they really did live, that they were who the Bible says they were, and that their descendants are identifiable on the pages of history. Not only is the Bible not a collection of myths and legends, but it stands alone as the key to the history of the earliest ages of the world.

References

Harold Hunt has pastored churches in Tennessee, Georgia and Mississippi for 40 years. He is currently writing a verse by verse commentary on Paul’s epistles. Return to top.

8. The original ‘unknown’ god of China
An Ancient pictogram script points to the Bible

Mystery concerns the 450-year-old Temple of Heaven complex in Beijing, China. Why did the emperors sacrifice a bull on the great white marble Altar of Heaven at an annual ceremony, the year’s most important and colourful celebration, the so-called ‘Border Sacrifice’? This rite ended in 1911 when the last emperor was deposed. However, the sacrifice did not begin a mere 450 years ago. The ceremony goes back 4,000 years. One of the earliest accounts of the Border Sacrifice is found in the Shu Jing (Book of History), compiled by Confucius, where it is recorded of Emperor Shun (who ruled from about 2256 BC to 2205 BC when the first recorded dynasty began) that ‘he sacrificed to ShangDi.’ ¹

Who is ShangDi? This name literally means ‘the Heavenly Ruler.’ By reviewing recitations used at the Border Sacrifice, recorded in the Statutes of the Ming Dynasty (AD 1368), one may begin to understand the ancient Chinese reverence for ShangDi. Participating in this rite, the emperor first meditated at the Temple of Heaven (the Imperial Vault), while costumed singers, accompanied by musicians, intoned:

‘To Thee, O mysteriously-working Maker, I look up in thought. … With the great ceremonies I reverently honor Thee. Thy servant, I am but a reed or willow; my heart is but that of an ant; yet have I received Thy favouring decree, appointing me to the government of the empire. I deeply cherish a sense of my ignorance and blindness, and am afraid, lest I prove unworthy of Thy great favours. Therefore will I observe all the rules and statutes, striving, insignificant as I am, to discharge my loyal duty. Far distant here, I look up to Thy heavenly palace. Come in Thy precious chariot to the altar. Thy servant, I bow my head to the earth reverently, expecting Thine abundant grace. … O that Thou wouldest vouchsafe to accept our offerings, and regard us, while thus we worship Thee, whose goodness is inexhaustible!’²

Thus we find the emperor worshipping ShangDi. Can we possible trace the original intention of this magnificent ceremony of antiquity? As the emperor took part in this annual service dedicated to ShangDi, the following words were recited, clearly showing that he considered ShangDi the Creator of the world:

‘Of old in the beginning, there was the great chaos, without form and dark. The five elements [planets] had not begun to revolve, nor the sun and moon to shine. You, O Spiritual Sovereign, first divided the grosser parts from the purer. You made heaven. You made earth. You made man. All things with their reproducing power got their being’ ³

For the Christian, the above recitation sounds strangely familiar. How closely it reads to the opening chapter of the biblical Genesis! Note the similarity with excerpts from the more detailed story as recorded in the Hebrew writings:

‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. …

‘And God said, “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters called He Seas. …

‘And God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: He made the stars also. …

‘So God created man in His own image; …’ (Genesis 1:1-2, 9-10, 16, 27-28)

ShangDi, the Creator-God of the Chinese, surely appears to be one and the same as the Creator-God of the Hebrews. In fact, one of the Hebrew names for God is El Shaddai, which is phonetically similar to ShangDi. Even more similar is the Early Zhou pronunciation of ShangDi which is ‘djanh-tigh’ [Zhan-dai].⁴ Another name for their God which the ancient Chinese used interchangeable with ShangDi was Heaven (Tian). Zheng Xuan, a scholar of the early Han dynasty said, “ShangDi is another name for Heaven (Tian)”.⁵ The great philosopher Motze (408-382 BC) also thought of Heaven (Tian) as the Creator-God:

‘I know Heaven loves men dearly not without reason. Heaven ordered the sun, the moon, and the stars to enlighten and guide them. Heaven ordained the four seasons, Spring, Autumn, Winter, and Summer, to regulate them. Heaven sent down snow, frost, rain, and dew to grow the five grains and flax and silk so that the people could use and enjoy them. Heaven established the hills and river, ravines and valleys, and arranged many things to minister to man’s good or bring him evil.’ ⁶

How did ShangDi create all things? Here is one further recitation from the ancient Border Sacrifice rite:

‘When Te [ShangDi], the Lord, had so decreed, He called into existence [originated] heaven, earth, and man. Between heaven and earth He separately placed in order men and things, all overspread by the heavens.’ ⁷

Note that ShangDi ‘called into existence,’ or commanded heaven and earth to appear.

Compare this with the way the Hebrew text describes the method of creation by El Shaddai, who, we suspect, is identical with ShangDi, and the similarity in name and role would suggest:

‘… by the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. … For He spake, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast’ (Psalm 33:6, 9).

We have not yet explained the reason for the emperors’ bull sacrifice to ShangDi. Let us compare this Chinese sacrifice with the instruction given by God to the Hebrews:

‘Take thee a young calf for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, without blemish, and offer them before the LORD’ (Leviticus 9:2)—a practice which began in earliest times (Genesis 4:3,4; 8:20).

The origin of the Border Sacrifice would appear to be explained in the book, God’s Promise to the Chinese.⁸ The authors, Nelson, Broadberry, and Chock have analyzed the most ancient forms of the pictographic Chinese writing and found the foundational truths of Christianity. In these ideograms, which date from before the time of Moses—we have the entire story of creation, the temptation, and fall of man into sin, and God’s remedy for sin in the animal sacrifices, which pointed to the coming Savior, Jesus Christ. All the elements of the Genesis narrative are found recorded, and still in use, in the Chinese character-writing.

The associated box shows some startling realities about the written Chinese language, indicating that we are all related—and not so long ago. All people in the world, not just the Chinese, are descended from the inhabitants of Babel, the first civilization after the Flood. God first gave His promise of a coming saviour, the ‘Seed of the Woman,’ in Genesis (3:15). The foreshadowed sacrifice of the coming Lamb of God, Creator and Saviour, is as old as mankind.

Should a Chinese person tell you that Christianity is a ‘foreigner’s religion,’ you can explain that the Chinese in antiquity worshipped the same God as Christians do today. Like the Hebrews often did, the ancestors of today’s Chinese wandered off after false gods; the memory of who their original God was dimmed with time.⁹ The ancient Chinese script gives powerful evidence for the historical truth of Genesis.

Recommended Resources

References

Ethel Nelson, M.D., F.A.S.C.P., is a retired pathologist living in Tennessee who was a medical missionary in Thailand for 20 years. Return to text.

1. The seven sons of Japheth

3. GENESIS ACCORDING TO THE MIAO PEOPLE - IMPACT No. 214 April 1991 translated by Edgar A. Truax © Copyright 2004 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved

FROM THE CREATION TO THE DEATH OF ISAAC.

(3) PARTHOLAN. The first person to colonize Ireland after the Flood, His people landed in Ireland in the year 1484 BC, Patholan died in 1454 BC, and the entire colony was wiped out by plague 300 years later in 1184 BC.

(6) GADELAS. The founder of the Gaels and the Galic language.

(8) NEMEDIUS. Otherwise Nemedh, the leader of the Nemedian invasion of 1145 BC. His ancestry is a little more detailed than Heber and Eremon.

* * * *

*(Morris, p.3 and Sisam, p. 292. See Bibliography.) __________________________________________________________________________

THE BRITISH CHRONICLES

*Gomer (1), for example, is merely cited by Nennius as being the ancestor of the Gauls, Nennius omitting the Biblical names of Gomer's three immediate descendants, Ashchenaz, Riphath and Togarmah.

Furthermore, the exactitude of this genealogy in showing both the male and female lines of descent of Alanus from Javan is surprising as it is unusual and rather than contain any overtly mythical material both lines give every appearance of being simple registers of ancestral names.

"...the ancient Gomery and Cymbry descended of Japhet, the first possessors of this Island, after the dispersion of Babell..." (Stowe, p.1. See Bibliography.) __________________________________________________________________________

NB The Line from Noah to Brutus (with the exception of Silvius), is taken directly from chapter 18 of Nennius' Historia Brittonum, and these names thus appear in bold Letters. A other names are from Geoffery of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae.

(1) Brutus. He was the first to colonize the British mainland after the Flood, and was Britain's first king. The land of Britain and its people, the Britons, derived their name from him. His wife, Ignoge, the daughter of a "Greek" king named Pandrasus, was married to Brutus against her will.

(4) Kamber. His inheritance on the death of Brutus was the kingdom that bears his name, Cambaria, present-day Wales. It is interesting to note that his name is perpetuated whenever we speak of Cambrian and Precambrian rocks.

(5) Albanactus. He was apportioned present-day Scotland which then bore his name, Albany. Nennius tells us in chapter 18 of his own Historia Brittonium that the early Albans were directly related to the early Britons.

(7) Estrildis. Temporarily became Queen of Loegria when Locrinus deserted his legitimate wife. On the death of Locrinus, Estrildis was drowned on Queen Gwendolen's orders.

(8) Habren. The daughter born of Locrinus' adultery with Estridis, she was drowned with her mother in the river that long bore her name, the Habren in the early British tongue. The Romans transposed the name as Sabrina. We know it today as the river Severn.

(9) Maddan. His mother, Gwendolen, abdicated the throne in Madden's favour after ruling for fifteen years. Maddan was to rule in her place for forty years.

(10) Malin. His ambition for the crown on his father's death resulted in his murder at his own brother's hands. The assassination occurred at a conference called between the two brothers.

(11) Mempricius. A noted tyrant, he murdered his brother Malin, deserted his lawful wife in favour of unnatural practices, and generally misruled the kingdom. In the twentieth year of his reign he was separated from his companions in a hunting party, surrounded by wolves, and eaten.

(12) Ebraucus. He took the crown on his father's death, and subsequently ruled the kingdom for 39 years. In an eventful and fondly remembered reign, he sacked Gaul, and founded the city of Kaerbrauc which bore his name. The Romans later preserved his name as Eboracum, modern York.

(13) Brutus. Greenshield Ebraucus' eldest son, he took the crown on his father's death.

(14) Leil. Succeeding the throne on his father's death, he founded the city that still bears his name, Kaerfeil - known today as Carlisle. Leil's reign of 25 years ended in civil war due to his ineffectiveness and lack of resolve as a leader.

(15) Hudibras. Ending the civil war of his father's making, Hudibras ruled for 39 years. This great builder founded the cities of Kaerreint (Canterbury,) Kaerguenit (Winchester) and the fortified township of Paladur, present-day Shaftsbury.

(16) Bladud. Not mentioned by Geoffrey of Monmouth, is the fact that Bladud was a leper. He ruled Leogria for 20 years, founding the city of Kaerbadum, present-day Bath. He outlawed the practise of necromancy throughout his kingdom, and was killed in one of the earliest recorded attempts to fly.

(17) Leir. Leir succeeded his father to enjoy a reign of 60 years. He founded the city of Kaefeir, known today as Leicester, and "immortalised" in Shakespeare's play, King Lear, which recalls the events of his reign.

(18) Goneril. King Leir's eldest daughter, she married Maglaurus, Duke of Albany. (By now Albany, Cambria and Cornwall were duchies subservient to the kingdom of Loegria.)

(19) Regan. Leir's second eldest daughter, she married Henwinus, the Duke of Cornwall. With her sister Goneril, she was to depose Cordelia, the lawful Queen.

(20) Queen. Cordelia After marrying Aganippus, King of the Franks, Cordelia became Queen of all Britain on her father's death. Five years later, she was deposed by her sisters, and committed suicide in prison.

(21) Marganus. I He ruled (unlawfully) the territory north of the Humber. After attacking Cunedagius he was pursued into Wales where he met his death at Cunedagius's hands. The place where he died was long known as Margon (Morganwc - present day Margam.)

(22) Cunedagius. Originally ruling the territory south of the Huber, Cunedagius became King of all Britain in the death of Marganus I.

(23) Rivallo. A notable young king who ruled wisely and "frugally," and is remembered for a "rain of blood" which fell from the skies, (freak weather conditions that produced red showers of rain,) a great swarm of flies, and a plague that took a heavy toll of the population.

(24) Jago. Jago was Gurgustius' nephew, not grandson as the genealogy would imply.

(25) Judon. Gorboduc's queen, Judon was caused much grief over her quarrelling sons. On learning that Porrex had killed Ferrex her favourite, she became insane, and later murdered Porrex in his sleep by hacking him to pieces.

(26) Porrex. He killed his elder brother in battle, and was later murdered by his own mother in revenge.

(27) Ferrex. He constantly quarrelled with his younger brother, over who should succeed their now sterile father. At one point, Ferrex fled to Gaul from where, with the help of Suhard, King of the Franks, he led a military expedition against his brother. He died in the ensuing battle.

(28) An unspecified period of strife and civil war, as five rival kings fought for supremacy. Unfortunately, the lineal royal descent for this period is untraceable.

(29) Pinner. Emerged from the civil war period as King of Loegria. He was later killed in battle by his successor but one.

(30) Cloten. King of Cornwall, Cloten may have been one of the previously unnamed kings. The provinces of Britain had reverted to separate kingdoms during the civil war period.

(36) Gorbonianus. He was much renowned for his goodness as a ruler.

(37) Archgallo. He was the very opposite of his elder brother. Such was his tyranny he was eventually deposed by the nobility, and his younger brother elected king in his place.

(40) Marganus II. A wise and good king whose reign was noted for its tranquillity.

(41) Ennianus. His tyrannical behaviour brought about his deposition after only a six-year reign.

(42) Beldgabred. This "king surpassed all the musicians of ancient times, both in harmony and in playing every kind of musical instrument, so that he was called the god of the minstrels."

(43) Digueillus. A notably just and fair king.

(44) Heli. Heli ruled for forty years.

(47) Androgeus. In his minority he received the duchy of Kent from his uncle Cassivelaunus. His betrayal of the British forces, later leaving the country, ensured that he would not inherit the crown.

(48) Tenvantius. During his minority, he received the duchy of Cornwall.

(49) Cymbeline. Son and heir of Tenvantius, he received a Roman upbringing in the Imperial household. Like Leir before him, Cymbeline has been "immortalised" by Shakespeare, whose play, Cymbeline, recalls his reign.

(50) Guiderius. On his succession to the crown, he promptly refused to pay tribute to Rome. Emperor Claudius was attacked by Guiderius' forces at Porchester. During the attack, Guiderius was betrayed and killed.

(53) Coilus. The son of Marius, he was raised and educated as a Roman and was to rule his kingdom in peace and prosperity.

(54) Lucius. Taking up the crown on his father Coilus' death. According to Bede, Lucius was to become Britain's first Christian king. He died in the year 156 AD.

(55) Geta. His rule marks a break in the strict lineal descent of the British kings. Geta was a son of the Roman Severus, and on the death of Lucius was elected king of the Britons by the Roman Senate. He was eventually killed by his half-brother Bassianus.

(56) Bassianus. The Britons elected Bassianus king after he had killed his half-brother. Like Geta, he was a son of Severus, but by a British noblewoman.

(57) Carausius. After raising a fleet of ships (with the blessing of the Roman Senate,) he invaded Britain. He compelled the Britons to proclaim him king, and killed Bassianus in the ensuing battle. He was eventually murdered by Allectus.

(58) Asclepiodotus. He held the duchy of Cornwall when he was elected king by the Britons in their attempt to break the tyranny of the Roman legate Allectus. Allectus was defeated by Asclepiodotus in the battle of London. It was during his reign that the Diocletian Persecution began, (303-312 AD.)

(59) Coel. Becoming king by rebelling against and killing Ascliepiodotus, Coel is commemorated in the children's nursery-rhyme Old King Cole. He founded the city of Colchester that still bears his name.

(60) Constantius. Originally a Roman Senator, he was sent to Britain as Legate, and reduced Coel to submission. He married Coel's daughter, Helen, and became king on Coel's death.

(61) Constantine I. The son of Constantius and Helen, He ruled Britain on his father's death. He went on to become the famous Emperor of Rome who legalized the Christian religion.

(62) Octavius. He revolted while Constantine was in Rome, and assumed the British crown.

(63) Trahern. He was the brother of Coel, and was ordered by Constantine to put down the revolt of Octavius. Eventually defeating Octavius in battle, Trahern was later murdered by one of Octavius' men.

(64) Maximianus. He was a nephew of Coel, and he held the crown by virtue of that descent. He was, however, later assassinated in Rome by friends of his successor, Gracianus.

(65) Gracianus. He was originally sent to Britain by Maximianus to fight off an invasion by the Picts and Huns. However, upon successfully expelling the invaders, he assumed the crown and ordered the murder of Maximianus. He was himself to suffer death at the hands of an assassin.

(65) Consantantine II. Crowned king at Silchester and later killed by an unknown Pict; he invaded Britain at the request of Guithelinus.

(67) Constans. Constantine's eldest son, he tried to avoid the perils of the crown, becoming a monk at Winchester. He was forcibly crowned by Vortigern, who later had him murdered.

(70) Vortimer. The son of Vortigern by his first wife, Vortimer achieved four notable victories in his attempts to drive out the Saxons, but for this he was poisoned by his Saxon step-mother.

(71) Katigern. The second son of Vortigern by his first wife, Katigern was killed at the battle of Epiford by Horsa, brother of Hengist (69)

(74) Utherpendragon. Named Uther at birth he assumed the surname pen-Dragon after the appearance of a dragon in the sky. Like his brother Aurelius, he was smuggled abroad on the murder of Constans.

(75) Arthur. Certainly the most glamorous of all the British kings, and the main subject of Geoffrey's Hisioria. Arthur succeeded to the crown at only 15 years of age. After an eventful reign, he died in the year 542 AD.

(75) Constantine III. The son of Cador, duke of Cornwall, he succeeded Arthur in 542 AD. His succession was complicated by an immediate revolt of the Saxons, which was violently crushed. Constantine was struck down some four years later "by God's vengeance."

(77) Aurelius. Conanus Nephew of Constantine III, he gained the crown only by imprisoning another uncle who was next in line to the throne. He reigned for only three years before his death.

(78) Vortiporius. Succeeding Auralius Conanus, he put down an invasion from Germany. His subsequent fate is unrecorded.

(79) Malgo. According to a recorded speech of Cadwallo (82), He had two sons, Ennianus and Run, neither of whom succeeded him.

(80) Keredic. Of unknown origin and descent, he succeeded Malgo. In a subsequent battle, he was driven to seek refuge in Wales.

(81) Cadvan. Of Northern Welsh descent, he "succeeded" to the kingship by engaging in battle Ethelfrid, the king of Northumbria. They divided Britain between them, Cadvan ruling over the southern half.

(82) Cadwallo. The son of Cadvan, he had a relatively long and eventful reign, eventually dying of old age.

(83) Cadwallader. The son of Cadwallo, he succeeded his father as king. Bede knew him as Cliedvalla, and the Welsh knew him as Cadwaladr. He died in 689 AD.

(84) Yvor. Ruled over the remaining Britons who had been driven into Wales. The last king of strictly British descent, during Yvor's reign the British came to be known as the Welsh.

5. Mike Gascoigne

3. GENESIS ACCORDING TO THE MIAO PEOPLE
- IMPACT No. 214 April 1991
translated by Edgar A. Truax

© Copyright 2004 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved

8. The original ‘unknown’ god of China
An Ancient pictogram script points to the Bible