OT series takeaways - so far

Jerry Russell

Staff member
So here's an article for you...


The case for red haired Phoenicians is not strong, but not necessarily out of the question either.

I’ve long been fascinated by red hair. There were two dominant waves of Indo-Europeans that could draw their origins from early Persians. The first wave, which went north and east around the Black Sea, would eventually end up populating most of central Europe all the way to Russia (with one big exception around the Volga river) and would end up in Y-Haplogroup R1a. They would have largely missed the Hittite populations. The second group of Persians would go almost due West, through the Hittite and Canaanite populations. It’s unclear whether the Hittites originally had red hair, though they were known to have blonde hair (the blonde Helen of Troy, a Hittite city, comes to mind), but the aboriginal Phoenicians may have had the MC1R mutation.

There’s a very curious phenomenon that affects hair color: at 45° N Latitude, hair color begins to lighten in response to lower amounts of ultraviolet radiation. Hair that is normally very dark becomes lighter shade of browns and eventually blonde. If the MC1R mutation exists as a dual recessive trait, then it appears red instead.

R1b is found in greatest concentration in a few places — Ireland, Scotland, Wales, England (stronger in the West than the East), Portugal, Spain and southern Italy, Romania, in the Volga … and Lebanon and with Ashkenazi Jews. Given the close proximity (and shared history) of Canaan and Israel, it is very likely that the Jews of Galilee especially frequently traveled on Phoenician ships, settled into Phoenician enclaves (or vice versa) and took Phoenician spouses. By the 11th century AD, Ashkenazi Jews made up only 3% of the worldwide population of Jews, and they were concentrated in Sicily, Spain and Tunisia, all areas associated with the Phoenicians. They have R1b markers, but also have markers for J2 Y-haplogroup, which most likely reflects the ancient Babylonian origins of both Phoenicians and Israelis. This hints that the MC1R mutation may be connected to in some way to both markers, though this is just speculation on the author’s part.
As indicated by the title: the author, Kurt Cagle, also speculates that Jesus Christ was a Phoenician, and that Christianity spread through Phoenician trading routes. Which is a little bit odd, considering that at least according to conventional wisdom, the Phoenician trading network had suffered a series of blows after its high point around 800BC, and was a mere shadow of its former self by the 1st century AD. Unlike 'Gerry' and his web host Miles Mathis, Cagle doesn't give any indication that he thinks that Alexander the Great, Hannibal or the Punic Wars were fake news.

The offhand mention that Ashkenazi were 3% of the worldwide population of Jews in the 11th century AD, is also odd. Unsourced, like everything else in the article.
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

As indicated by the title: the author, Kurt Cagle, also speculates that Jesus Christ was a Phoenician, and that Christianity spread through Phoenician trading routes. Which is a little bit odd, considering that at least according to conventional wisdom, the Phoenician trading network had suffered a series of blows after its high point around 800BC, and was a mere shadow of its former self by the 1st century AD.
That period of time is roughly compatible with the colonization period of the Italian peninsula by such as the Sabini and Latini tribes. Same for the later "Lost Tribes" forced migrations.
Unlike 'Gerry' and his web host Miles Mathis, Cagle doesn't give any indication that he thinks that Alexander the Great, Hannibal or the Punic Wars were fake news.
Back then they said "Phony News".
The offhand mention that Ashkenazi were 3% of the worldwide population of Jews in the 11th century AD, is also odd. Unsourced, like everything else in the article.
Yes, this is interesting. How to go from 3% to 90+%?

The references to the 'Roman' Ascanius may have to make me rethink the whole Khazar / Ashkenazi situation however. One one hand it makes the link back to the legendary Ashina, similar behaviorly to the Medes, even more attractive. And these very similar to the Royal Saka Scythians, i.e. top clans (not tribes). And all these consistent, it seems to me, with Ashe's Dawn Before the Dawn premise.

Imagine if Ahmose (or Iahmose) actually said he kicked out the 'Hyksos', but instead the whole 18th Dynasty line was infiltrated from that time, not just with Amenhotep III.

Miles Mathis made some comments about the Jewish descendency upon matrilineal lines in relation to the discussion about Solomon and his mother. Even more explicit is that David's mother is accounted as being the Moabite, Ruth. Various authors, such as Sand/Zand, The Invention of the Jewish People, and Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion, discuss that this law of descent is adhered to rather loosely at times and that here there was, as exists today, conversion and intermarriage.

Gerry brings up the book, When Scotland Was Jewish, from Miles works, and the book does mention the Jews entering Britain in conjunction with the Norman Conquest, which preceded the Crusades in 'back to Canaan'. However, it seems that we are talking abut numerous waves of migration, just as is suggested more generally for migrations into Europe from the Fertile Crescent, over thousands of years (Fagan's The Long Summer).

In Part 4, Gerry brings up the trading aspect of the name Tamar, and this seems interesting in light of the metaphoric pun that Tamar's 'phony' prostitution conjures. A prostitute trades sex for some quid pro quo.

In any case, Gerry's thesis, building on Mathis's, is based upon the use of massive and constant deception, in the course of ever maintaining their trading advantages - and all while engaging in 'globalization' (as we know it yet today). This reminds me of Cyrus H. Gordon's premise that the OT is recording the guile that was considered morally apropos for the time. I suggest that it records the guile that exists under the double standard system still in play. This is consistent too with that of the psychological notion of Consciousness of Deceit, which should presuppose that humans, generally, are capable of deceit to a great extent. There would be little need for 'consciousness' of deceit unless this were indeed the case. The next question one might pose to this is whether such elite deceit is from nature or nurture, or both.

Richard Stanley

In looking at King David, I noticed the following 'storyboard' image from 3rd century CE Dura Europos, Syria. This is what Jews of that day thought King David and his retinue would look like. I believe that the Jews of Dura Europos are thought to have been the logistics providers for the Roman garrison there. How to reconcile these faces with such as Egyptian depictions of Phoenicians and other 'Semites'? Or the later traditional scary Easter depictions of Jews by the Catholic Church?

Samuel anointing David:


Richard Stanley

DNA from a 6th century BC Phoenician was found to belong to mitochondrial haplogroup U5b2cl, which is found today mostly in the British Isles, France and Germany.
It should also be noted that the mother of this individual was of this U5 haplogroup, while we don't know what the father had, because this is mitochondrial DNA. So is this an instance of a Phoenician mating with a shiksa, or is it more complicated than this?

The age of haplogroup U5 is uncertain at present. It could have arisen as recently as 35,000 years ago, or as early was 50,000 years ago. U5 appear to have been a major maternal lineage among the Paleolithic European hunter-gatherers (known as Cro-Magnons), and even the dominant lineage during the European Mesolithic. ... Overall, it appears that U5 arrived in Europe with the Gravettian tool makers, and that it particularly prospered from the end of the glacial period (from 11,700 years ago) until the arrival of Neolithic farmers from the Near East (between 8,500 and 6,000 years ago).

Those familiar with alternative pre-history are familiar with the association by some of Cro-Magnons (said to have larger skulls), and today's Basques and Berbers, with the Atlantis story. The latter which dates, if Plato was correct, to the time around the end of the last ice age.

Sgt Pepper

Speaking of Atlantis, have you seen this?

Seems like the most plausible theory.

Although, one commenter says:
These videos are awesome, but I had to start writing down all of its flaws. Mostly the core problem is in the sources, for example: The ONLY source of information regarding Atlantis is Plato.Not Solon, not Kritias, not Egyptian priests. All of that is said by Plato, who is by the way famous for using alegories to describe philosophical issues of his time. Other problems include use of wrong measurements (the city itself is only about 5 kilometres in diametre and the island itself is much bigger. Plus the distance from the sea should not be more than 10 kilometres.) There are many flaws in this, I'm working on a video already (I do not do reaction videos, but this deserves it, in a good way). And I usually do analytic videos in Czech, but this motivates me to finally add English :) Anyway, great job on the videos, just the interpretation of sources and information in them is used in a wrong way, at least by my opinion. Personally, I would love you to discover the Atlantis, but my previous research on this topic has taught me to by careful and sceptical. (And sorry for my English, I have to work on that)
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Yes, Sarge, we looked at this not too long ago: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/atlantis-hidden-in-plain-sight.2448/

It does seem possible that, as Jerry noted, that this site might likely be but a concentrically collapsed volcano cone.

I also like the notion of the collapsed tectonic plate that the Azores Islands sit upon. There is also an interesting site of concentric circles just inland on Spain's Rio Guadalquivir, just north of Cadiz. Probably not 'Atlantis', but it suggests a site that was meant to evoke same. And, it has evidence of ancient mining for metals in the region.

It's interesting how many Western-ophiles like to brag on the Classical Greeks as the founders of our civilization, yet those modest Greeks claimed they learned most all of it from the Egyptians and others. Somehow, Plato just happened to pull a time period out of his ass that generally accords with the melting of all that ice. Then we have Göbekli Tepe, which dates back to almost this same time, and just so happens to be only miles from Urfa (Edessa) and Harran, home of the Sabeans and the alleged start of Abraham's career.

I'm also reminded that I forgot to mention that Gerry's mentions of the common Phoenician use of offshore islands is felt to be that they also made use of such islands as secure warehouses for the goods that they would import and export. This in addition to using them as fortresses. Cadiz is a similar situation in fact.

Richard Stanley

Thx again Sarge.

From page 16:

... Apart from Joseph, none of the patriarchs’ stories are literally about finance, at least not in our current version.

Actually, the patriarchal stories are about various financial arrangements:
  • Abraham uses Sarah to financially bamboozle a prior pharaoh and then the Canaanite king Abimelech
  • Jacob steals the birthright blessing of Abraham from his twin Esau
  • Jacob and father-in-law Laban fool each other
  • Judah convinces his brothers to sell Joseph into slavery
  • A narrative ruse is employed to explain why the descendants of Ham will be slaves forever
  • Another ruse is employed by Moses and Aaron to garner a load of gold taken from naughty Hebrews that had to executed
  • Somehow the Egyptians let the 'Hebrews' walk off with a ton of loot during the Exodus
Gerry discusses the relationship between Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, and he may indeed be correct about the 'financial' punning involved. But as well, the OT makes frequent use of inverting the traditional order of sons as to what they inherit from the father (even with Jacob and Esau at their birth). Some feel that this was meant to reflect the similar manner in which lowly and 'young' Israel rose up between its powerful 'brother' nation/empires. Whatever the case, this particular inversion of norms seems fitting with the near complete cultural inversion in the making of Judaism in the first place, via the 613 Mosaic laws. As such these inversions seem all part of one synthetic piece, the Mosaic laws, as constituted and stated, would not have needed Moses, or God, to provide them had the Hebrews been following them in the first place. They were mostly normative Canaanites to begin with.

Gerry talks about the Levites, and here should kept in mind how upon the completion of the Conquest, the Levites were placed in administrative control over the 48 largest cities thoughout the 12 tribal areas, including Judea. The tribe of Levi was thus accorded no respective tribal territory, and the number of 12 was maintained by dividing the tribe of Joseph between his two sons.

Even if all of those stories are all figurative and metaphorical, this was the essential methodology used during the Norman Conquest, where Norman 'lords' were placed in their feudal domains. The American colonies were established along similar lines, but this time the number 13 was used. The ultimate capitol was established in the 'Judea' of the colonies, the Catholic colony of Mary-land. The typology is the same, as the Judeans were not liked by the Israelites, just as the Protestants colonists distrusted the Catholics. And similarly, by hook or crook, the Judeans and Catholics have come out on top over their respective 'buddies'.

Jerry Russell

Staff member
In the conclusion of Part 3, 'Gerry' wrote:

I hope... that you still believe in whatever you believed before, and that you got some new insights... nonetheless.
An oddly kind and realistic benediction. In my case, it fits rather well.

I still believe that Judaism, at its inception, was a front operation created by the Egyptians, not the Phoenicians. Egypt and Assyria, the major regional powers, are attested archaeologically at least 1000 years before the Phoenicians. At the time of the Amarna Letters, which is at or shortly before the time of Moses in our account, the major Phoenician cities of the Levant were Egyptian vassals. The Phoenician governors were writing nervously to Pharaoh, soliciting help against the approaching 'Habiru' raiders.

Phoenician cities were not able to act independently of Egypt until after the advent of the Sea Peoples and the Bronze Age Collapse. By that time, Israel and Judah existed as distinct geographical entities to the south of Phoenicia. They were, moreover, highly distinct from a doctrinal standpoint. The Jews were called upon to reject polytheism, to foreswear idols, and specifically to reject the Phoenician god Baal. Furthermore, at least according to their foundation myth, the Israelites had established their beachhead in the Levant in a bloody war of conquest against Canaanites similar to the Phoenicians.

So I don't think it's reasonable to treat the Phoenicians as fundamentally equivalent to Jews, even though there are strong cultural & linguistic ties between them. Phoenicia retained its distinctive polytheistic religion, with some evolutionary changes of course, from the first emergence of its existence as an independent entity, up until its official termination at the fall of Carthage.

Regarding the contentions that Alexander the Great's conquests and the Punic wars were both fake, stage-managed spectacles under Phoenician management, I'm withholding judgment for the moment. It seems to me that 'Gerry' is arguing mostly from incredulity. And yet I have to agree, that the circumstances do seem suspicious. If the thesis is correct, it would mean that Greece of the Hellenistic era, as well as Rome, were both Phoenician fronts. And perhaps Judaism was also ultimately subsumed into this neo-Phoenician empire -- but only after the creation of Christianity as the successor to Phoenician religion and culture, and placing Judaism into the role of Christianity's eternal enemy, just as Yahweh was Baal's eternal enemy.

I've bought myself a copy of a recent book about this topic: In Search of the Phoenicians, by Josephine Quinn. I'll report back when I've had a chance to look through it.

Richard Stanley

In the conclusion of Part 3, 'Gerry' wrote:

I hope... that you still believe in whatever you believed before, and that you got some new insights... nonetheless.
Shouldn't the first part depend upon just what exactly you believed in before? o_O And, possibly, then what's the point in writing such a new and different interpretation?

Yes, I agree with you Jerry, that the Egyptians still appear to be the dominant influence in the Yahud project's foundations. But, then at some point influence seems to shift to the Persians, of whom Cyrus seems to have been helped to power by the Medes. But it is hard to separate out the influence of the Phoenicians with their vast trading empire, going in all directions.

The new monotheism of Israel, which we presented the latter as a synthetic contrivance, is part of the evolution of religion as we discussed happening with such as McEvilley. These quantum evolutions of religions seem to parallel the gradual coalescence of kingdoms into expanding 'empires', where fewer gods is less confusing and enables more conformance. As such, if the thesis that the elites of most all germane regions are generally cooperative, being related and in communication, then it seems likely that elite Egyptians, Phoenicians, Assyrians, ..., and thus would understand the necessary nature of the phenomenon in its functional relationship to 'globalization'. Given peoples' reluctance to abandon their mother cultures Judaism was thus created as the ever irritating grain of sand in the oyster to form the pearl of Western Civilization.