body style="margin-left: 70px;margin-right: 70px;margin-top: 70pt;margin-bottom: 70pt;">

Brit-Am Now no. 1379
The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel Movement
17 August 2009, 27 Av 5769
1. Cam Rea:
World Domination by Scythian Descendants
Foretold in Indian Text?
Parthia, Israelites, and the Present by Merle Nelson
3. Michelle Bowie: An Alternative definition of Jewish


Discussion Group
Contents by Subject Research

Site Map
Contents in Alphabetical Order
This Site

1. Cam Rea: World Domination by Scythian Descendants Foretold in Indian Text?
From: Cam Rea <>

Shalom Mr. Davidiy.

I found something of interest in the ancient India text:

Sakas after Kurukshetra War

A passage which is rendered as a futuristic prediction in Mahabharata mentions thus:- The Andhhas, the Sakas, the Pulindas, the Yavanas, the Kamvojas, the Valhikas and the Abhiras, will then become possessed of bravery and the sovereignty of the whole earth (3:187).

Brit-Am Reply:

Old British Israel writings also mention references to the Isle of Britian in Hindu sacred writings.
This could be worth following up on.
On the other hand, the texts in question are often claimed to be based on sources dating back thousands of years whereas in fact they were only recorded in their present form in ca the 1800s CE.
This was the period of British Predominance in India and some degree of deliberate retro-projection should be suspected.
We are not suggesting that this may be some kind of British inspired insertion but rather that Hindu Sages themselves may have (or perhaps did not?) re-interpreted the traditions in the light of the reality of their own age.
If this was so it could be EVEN MORE INTERESTING!
Did the Indians recognize an identity between  the Scythians Sakas,Yavanas, Abhiras, etc, and the British?

We already have Arab Sources (based on Jewish Traditions) that in effect locate the Lost Ten Tribes in Britain, France, and the West.
See our articles:

Aed and Israel
The Lost Tribes in Celtic and Arabic Lore


2. Parthia, Israelites, and the Present by Merle Nelson
From: M N <>

My following comments are taken from information obtained from the book by George Rawlinson titled 'The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy '.

Introduction:  Those scholars/students who write and continue to investigate the subject of the scattered Tribes of Israel have used various applications to track and identify .  Sometimes the connections are very clear and stand out and other times challenge the extension of your logic.  Unquestionably, the approach is well proven . 

The extent of the investigation shows that America  originated with the Tribes of Israel and this is well documented by Y. Davidiy and S. Collins and others.   Their efforts have been refined to the point of identifying the particular tribes that can be found in various geographical areas including the United States. 

While reading the account of the coming demise of Parthia in chapter XXI , I could not help but see an interesting connection with the present background of our country today.  Using the same techniques of tracing and matching historical accounts , the following comments will identify another possible relationship on this subject of the 'lost ' 10 Tribes. 


 The constitution of Parthia settled by Mithridates I established two bodies which were: 1) The Royal House: Here was found the males of the house of the Arsacides. All kings were elected from this group of males who came from a single linage.  According  to the authors mentioned above , this linage was from the House of Judah .  2) The Senate: Two groups of ruling officials comprised this body ; the 'wise men' and the Magi/Priests.

These bodies together had a superior role over the reigning monarch in the sense of 'check and balances'. The very detailed powers of these bodies are not well defined but it appears that the 'wise men' were considered qualified to provide the king counsel ( liken to the President's  Chief of Staff/czars) and the Magi had the privilege of playing a superior role due to their wealthy status, great numbers,  and more importantly probably because of they were considered to be descendants of a priestly class. Discounting the priestly heritage, there is similarity here of what we have today in that several government people who have come from various power structures backed by great wealth and have the respect by others to the extent that this lends itself for them to walk on the edge of legality , many times crossing over that line with no challenge while exercising their official powers and even abusing such in their personal affairs.

About a decade before the complete fall of Parthia , there became a feud between two ruling kings. This division continued for some years which meant the two governing bodies must have become less important in regard to their official role.  Although one king was dominate, each had kingship over different areas of the empire.  The feud was so intense that Rome took delight in their internal strife. This was shown by the Roman Emperor actually congratulating the Senate for achieving such a state. Rome recognize only one man as King of Parthia and that was Artabanus. 

 Ultimately, the Romans and Parthia fought a battle that lasted for three days .  The dead were piled so high it became difficult to fight over them .  No numbers were stated of the men involved but considering the likeness of other battles between the two powers it must have been in the tens of thousands.  They both prepared over the winter months - amassing weapons, equipment and men .  The picture of this event leaves us with an horrible image- the bodies , and the debris of weapons, etc.. 

Persia was a large and subjected nation under the Parthia regime.  They were given impunity and favored in some areas so it becomes hard to establish a single reason for them to revolt . With Parthia very weaken by the battles with Rome , it seemed the right time for Persia to expand itself and break from under the Parthian yoke.  G. Rawlinson records that the Magi lost their influence at this time which leads to the suspicion of how orderly the government was and if it was accountable at all to the subject nations.  He notes further that there was dissensions in the Royal House.  The eventual take over by Persia indicates the chaos that must have prevailed in Parthia. The Persians swung into action and only after considerable gains by Persia did Parthia finally react.  When they did defend themselves , they suffered defeat and the lost of the King , Artabanus.  A few years later the final blow was struck and Parthia was no more.

Connections With Today:

The above is a brief account of the events as described , in large part, by G. Rawlinson, a 19th century historian. 

The premise for any relationship of those times with America is that this country does indeed consist of the tribes of Israel.  In addition, it is necessary to recognize that the Nation of Parthia was comprised mostly of the exiled tribes of Israel and were ruled by the Arsacides who were from the House of Judah.

Relationship for Today:

The Nation of Israel when it was divided by [the ALMIGHTY] lasted about 200 years before it was exiled. ( 921-721 BCD)  .  The Nation of Parthia  existed for approximately 480 years ( 256 BCE - 224 CE) .  To seek any correlation with the U.S. , a match could be made in two ways-- 1)  2009-1776 ~ 232 years, 2) If you consider when Columbus  came over , then 2009 - 1492 ~ 516 years.  Thus you have a loose connection of time duration with the existence of the U.S. and the countries of Israel and Parthia. 

The following briefly characterizes and summarizes the state of affairs of Parthia upon its demise.   Internal decay developed with the ruling class of Arsacids because of dissension. Such state of affairs consumed the governing body's energy and attention .  Foreign elements had their sway upon them. Such activities without doubt had a demoralizing effect upon the military .  The subject nations lost confidence and loyalty as they witnessed the debilitating development of the hierarchy.  The success of Persia was not because of its military might for Parthia still held a vast number of soldiery from its subjects. Parthia just didn't have the fortitude for any aggression. An indication of the attitude of Parthia can be found as early as 58 CE when Hyrcania  succeeded without any reaction from Parthia. 

This country has displayed a lack of willingness to maintain its hold on world affairs.  It has been slow to respond to crisis.  We gave back the Panama canal.  We were tardy in entering WW2.  So just as Parthia lost its control over extended providences , so we relinquished holdings.  Islands were given back to Japan after the war.  Now , this country has slowly developed into a split of opinions that carry a deep resentment between factions. This can be found on many levels.  Political parties lead the way and instigate measures that give impetus to instability .  Although attention is still given to military matters outside the country, the growing dissension within is bringing the country to a consuming frenzy that has to have consequences to come.  Certainly  our financial status started its decline in 1973 when we left the gold standard and our debt has escalated to alarming levels.  We now have potential programs being implemented that will take this to levels that will seriously affect our financial stability and accountability to other nations. Such were the general traits of Parthia upon its later days.  Of course the fine details are different but the characteristics of the background is the same. This country still has a military might that is the best but the question is becoming more valid as to our willingness to press forward when outside powers show a growing move against us.  Given that these connections are valid at such time periods of the two nations- U.S. and Parthia, it is time for us who are TORAH minded to take notice with a greater awareness. 

Is this the preamble to Ezekiel 37 : 14-28?

Merle Nelson

Makom Kadosh

3. Michelle Bowie: An Alternative definition of Jewish
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1378
In response to:
#1. Question on the Mistaken Use of the term "Jew" for Ten Tribe Israelites

Wouldn't it be more accurate to state that "Jews" are by definition, those of Israelite heritage who Follow Torah, study Talmud and Oral Law and are raised as such from childhood?
That there are those of Judah, Benjamin and Levi who have no idea that they are Israelite and most likely are Christians so have not been raised in the religion of Judaism, orthodox or otherwise.
This to me seems to be more defining and less confusing.
Shalom, michelle b.

Brit-Am Reply:
We said:
#The term Jew/Judean means someone belonging to Judah which was the southern Kingdom ruled over [by] the House of David.#
This definition is correct historically.
We could extend the definition according to your parameters by saying:
"Jews" are by definition, those of Israelite heritage who are obligated to Follow Torah to its fullest extent as commanded by Moses and explained by Rabbinical defintion.


Pleased with what you read?
The Brit-Am enterprise is a Biblical work.
God willing, they who assist Brit-Am will be blessed.
Brit-Am depends on contributions alongside purchases of our publications

Click Here to make an offering.
Click Here to view our publications.

'It is impossible to rightly govern the world without
God or the Bible.'
  George Washington

Brit-Am is the "still small voice" that contains the truth.