| Site Contents by Subject |
Home Research Revelation Reconciliation |
  Publications |
Site Map Contents in Alphabetical Order |
 This Site |
|
Brit-Am Reply:
(a) The Racial Question
(1) DNA confounds Accepted Racial
Science
(2) Ancient Israelite Origins Versus the Modern White Man
(b) The Linguistic Question
(1) Languages Spread More than
People
(2) Theory Versus Reality.
(3) The Linguistics and John
Tillotson.
(4) A Partial Answer on Linguistics. Terry Blodgett.
(5) Beowulf as an Example.
(c) The Answer
| Site Contents by Subject |
Home Research Revelation Reconciliation |
|
Publications |
Site Map Contents in Alphabetical Order |
This Site |
|
The Questions:
From: Jonathan Tillotson <jon_tillotson@yahoo.co.uk>
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1468
#1. Some Limitations (and strengths) of the Brit-Am Exposition
http://britam.org/now2/1468Now.html#Some
Dear Yair,
Re the mainstream contention both that The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people, and the
English language, are of the Indo-European family of peoples and languages; and
not Semitic, what would you say is Brit-Am's response.
I don't so much mean how would you re-state Brit am's argument in favour of what
it believes, so much as what would you say is wrong about what this mainstream
argument says, and how it is flawed.
Regards and best Wishes
Jonathan
================================================
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am Reply:
" The Indo-European family of peoples and languages" is an idea taken from the
late 19th century
in which an attempt was made to equate language with race.
It more or less says that originally the ancestors of the Europeans and of the
white castes in India were all one big happy family
who lived together near the Caucasus or near Central Asia. From wherever they
may have been they split off some going to Europe
others to Persia and India. All these peoples speak languages that belong to the
same Indo-European linguistic grouping.
We may divide the question into two sections (a) racial and (b) linguistic.
================================================
================================================
(a) The Racial Question
================================================
(1) DNA confounds Accepted Racial
Science
Nowadays the conception of Indo-European has been replaced or at least
greatly modified by DNA findings. Speaking very roughly (and possibly not too
accurately) Indian white men are a mixture of J, G, and R1a with R1a in the
majority. R1a is the majority of Slavic people such as Russians, Serbs, Poles.
Persians are mainly ca.30% R1a, 30% J, and others though the female mtDNA may
have a higher proportion closer to Russians etc. Arabs are mainly J1 while a
third of the Jews are J2. Turkey is like Iran with only 7% R1a,
but 15% R1b, 11% E1b1b, J2 24%, 9% J1. The rest are a mixture of Mediterranean
and Asiatic groupings. Greece is like Turkey but with ca. 30% E1b1b which is a
white version of black African [Negro] E1b. Parts of southeast Europe are
similar to Greece. Italy has 40% R1b, 2.8% R1a, 20% J2 and 2% J1, E1b1b 12.6
%.
In the west we have mixtures of the others but R1b is predominant. R1b is
distantly related to Slavic-Indian R1a. R1b begins from Germany and extends
westwards into Scandinavia, France, Spain, Netherlands, Britain, Ireland, etc.
It peaks in Ireland. Small pockets of R1b (usually associated with groups once
linked with the Khazars) are also found in the east in former USSR territories.
In Europe we also have I (related to J) which is found in Scandinavia, Germany,
Sardinia, and Southeast Europe.
We may therefore tentatively identify the so-called "Indo-Europeans" as R1a and
R1b.
Classical "Indo-European" Peoples such as the Persians, Kurds, Armenians,
Greeks, Italians, etc do not really belong.
The foreroots of R1a and R1b are types of R# which is found in the Cameroons of
Black West Africa, amongst a small group in Jordan, in small minorities of Egypt
and amongst Australian Aborigines.
R1a may be traced to Central Asia.
R1b however is considered to have begun in Turkey or Mesopotamia.
We find that tye distribution of most Ychromosome (male-associated) DNA haplotypes do not fit any Indo-European scenario.
The two haplotypes (R1a and R1b) that it may be somehow possible to associate with a good portion of the Indo-Europeans
are found to also belong to other ethnicities
and in locations that contradict the Indo-European idea.
DNA therefore does not give us much.
We may therefore answer that the term "Indo-European Peoples" from a racial
point of view does not really mean anything. In common parlance however the term
is often used as synonymous with European White man.
================================================
(2) Ancient Israelite Origins Versus the
Modern White Man
Forgetting DNA for the moment and concentrating only on the phenotype or
Classical Racial Classification we may re-phrase your question:
By "The Indo-European family of peoples" we may say we mean white European
Peoples. "The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people" are part of the
"white European Peoples". How can they therefore be from the Lost Ten Tribes who
belonged to the Middle East?
In reply we could say that the "The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people" are not
necessarily all so white and European and the Lost Ten Tribes were not
so Middle Eastern. We also have the known influence of environment and racial
admixture to some degree.
In other words there is no substantial proven "racial" phenotypical difference
between the Ancient Ten Tribes and present-day "Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people".
See our articles:
Israel and the White Race
http://www.britam.org/white.html
THE PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY OF THE HEBREW PEOPLES
http://www.britam.org/anthropology.html
Hebrew Pictures
http://www.britam.org/HebrewTypes.html
================================================
================================================
(b) The Linguistic Question
We may rephrase the question:
Why if the "Anglo-Saxon-Celtic people" are descended from the Ten Tribes of
Israel do they speak languages that are related to those of other Europeans
and not to Hebrew?
================================================
(1) Languages Spread More than People
It is estimated that by 2050 the majority of US citizens will be colored people
i.e. their ancestors will not have come from Europe.
Nevertheless it may be assumed that most of them will speak English as a mother
tongue. The same applies for Holland where despite
a majority of its citizens by that time being of non-European ancestry the
mother tongue of the majority will continue to be Dutch.
We have millions of Spanish speakers in Central and South America who are of
non-European descent.
Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian, Sicilian, etc, are all Latin Languages
that to some degree are mutually intelligible to each other
and derive in part from Latin. For most of them the original Roman speakers of
Latin comprise a negligible proportion of their ancestry.
The inhabitants of Turkey speak Turkish but most of them are descended from peoples who lived there before it was conquered by the Turks who came from Central Asia.
And so on. Languages spread. German is spoken in east Germany by people of
Slavic origin.
Many historians nowadays assume that the original Celts were a small ruling
minority who imposed their language and culture on the conquered masses subject
to them. In Ireland, Wales, and Scotland, English is spoken by people of
non-Anglo-Saxon origin.
In the Caribean Islands English is the mother tongue of a mainly black African
population.
================================================
(2) Theory Versus Reality
Indo-European languages
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
# The Indo-European languages are a family (or phylum) of several
hundred related languages and dialects,[1] including most major languages of
Europe, languages of Iran, Afghanistan and India, and historically also
predominant in Anatolia and Central Asia. Attested since the Bronze Age, in the
form of Mycenaean Greek and Anatolian [Turkey] languages, the Indo-European
family is significant to the field of historical linguistics as possessing the
longest recorded history after the
Afroasiatic
family. #
We saw from above that Genetic reality does not indicate any Indo-European roots
for most Indo-European speakers.
The present-day Greeks and inhabitants of Turkey are to a significant extent
descendants of the ancient inhabitants of those areas.
The same may be said of the Iranians. Even if we adjust out figures to allow for
a great degree of subsequent racial intermixture
we still will not be left with anything to indicate racial origins in common
with most other Indo-European speakers.
================================================
(3) The Linguistics and John Tillotson
A question from John Tillotson provoked the writing of this article. John
on a visit to Jerusalem saw the announcement of a Brit-Am lecture pasted on a wall in the
Old City. This piqued his curiosity and he later obtained a copy of "The
Tribes". Subsequently on another visit to the Holy City he met up with my
humble self and we had a chat over coffee in the center of town. John is an
inhabitant of the UK and at the time was teaching English in Slovakia. He is
intelligent, well-read, personable, and pleasant of disposition. Being an
English teacher, interested in linguistics, and with experience elsewhere in
Europe it is natural that the obvious European affinities of the English raise
questions in respect to Brit-Am beliefs.
================================================
(4) A Partial Answer on Linguistics: Terry Blodgett
Terry Blodgett (see The Hebrew
Sources of Northern Tongues)
http://britam.org/tongues.html
shows how linguistic patterns unique to the Germanic Languages may be explained by an
infusion of Hebrew Speakers.
The recent researches of Theo Venneman are also permanent.
See: "Brit-Am Now"-863
#3. Runes in Hebrew and/or Cathaginian/Phoenician?
and scroll down a little.
http://britam.org/now/863Now.html
Venneman however posits Semitic type elements in the sub-stratum of Germanic
tongues whereas Terry Blodgett speaks of a later addition.
As for Irish and Welsh it is now widely accepted that a non-European substratum
existed that was related to Hamitic and Semitic tongues and could well have been
a dialogue of Hebrew.
A lot of words in so-called Germanic and Celtic tongues are similar to Hebrew ones.
Comparisons of vocabulary are often simply dismissed as due to chance since they
do not follow fixed linguistic rules that determine the transference of elements
from one language into another.
Studies of Ancient Greece however, such as "The Sea Peoples in the Bible" by
Othniel Margalit, 1988 (originally in Hebrew but now available in English
translation), quote sources showing that the Greeks borrowed words and names and transmitted them
to others quite freely and in ways that defy accepted linguistic rulings.
================================================
(5) Beowulf as an Example
Beowulf was written in ca. 700 CE in an English dialect. 1300 years separate us
from Beowulf. The Israelites were exiled in ca. 720 BCE according to
conventional dating. The Hebrew they spoke was a bit different from Biblical
Hebrew. It had already absorbed Canaanite, Aramaic and some Indo-European
influences. Different areas spoke different dialects. They moved to the west by
different routes absorbing linguistic and other influences in their journeying.
There are ca. 1400 years between the time of Israelite Brit-Am Exile and Beowulf.
I would say that the differences between Biblical Hebrew and the English of
Beowulf are not much greater than the differences between the language of
Beowulf and the English we speak today!
================================================
================================================
================================================
(c) The Answer
John
Tillotson
asked,
"What is wrong about what this mainstream [Indo-European Origins] argument says,
and how it is flawed?"
We would say that from a racial genetic point-of-view the Indo-European
thesis does not fit the facts as they are accepted today.
From the point of view of linguistics the axiomatic
assumptions no longer hold and other explanations for the observed
phenomena exist.
For information as How To Make an Offering to Brit-Am,
Go to:
http://www.britam.org/contribute-Brit-Am.html
or deposit a donation in our
PayPal Account
http://britam.org/books.html#donate
Offering to Brit-Am
Correspond with us
Send Comments or Criticisms
You may not always receive an immediate answer
but anything you say will be considered and appreciated
Send us an
e-mail
Books and Offering Opportunities
Main Page
