"Brit-Am Now"- 436
1. Question on Phocia (Ionian Greece) and Phaeacia (Britain)?
2. Samnites, Italy: Addition to chapter on Simeon
3. Welsh Settlers in Argentina
4. "Tim Lick (rcn)": Ephraim/Manasseh identity
5. Answer to Criticism

1. Question on Phocia (Ionian Greece) and Phaeacia (Britain)?

>Greetings, Yair.  Short question: I can't seem to locate a source
>explaining the difference between Phaeacians (Jurgen Spanuth's "Atlantis
>of the North") and Phocians (from your book, "Lost Israelite Identity,"
>pages 229 and 247.  It seems to me they are the same, but could you
>clarify this for me.  Thanks.
>Walt Baucum

Phaeacians are people described by Homer in the Odyssey conventionally
assumed to be a place in the Ionian Sea
but I gained the impression from "Ulysses" and commentators that it was
apparently referring to the inhabitants of Britain.
Phocians are people from Phocia in Ionia of the Greeks (present-day Western
Turkey) which city was quite active in overseas colonization and seafaring
in general. The people of Phocia left their city when the Persians invaded
and moved to marseilles in Southern France.

It may be that by Phaeacians Homer was hinting at a relationship at the
and suggesting that they were a kind of Phoenician.
The Greeks sometimes did this by a slight change of the name, e.g.
"Tartarus" is the name given to the Under world
but Strabo suggests it is a play on the name for Tartrssos  in Spain and
wanted to indicate that since "Tartessos" was to be found in
the Atlantic Ocean area so to was Tartarus in the same region..

>2. Samnites, Italy: Addition to chapter on Simeon
>In South Central Italy (Campania) in ancient times dwelt the Samnites.
>These are considered to have originally been a Celtic people amongst whom
>settlers from the region of Sparta (Lacedaemonia) settled. The Samnites
>fought on the side of Carthage against Rome in the Second Punic War (218-
>201 BCE). Consequently, <<He [the Roman leader, Sulla] did not rest
>satisfied until he had destroyed, or driven from Italy, every one who bore
>a Samnite name.>> (Strabo IV;11). Nevertheless, remnants of the Samnite
>people must have remained in Italy.
>3. Welsh Settlers in Arentina
>From: Robert Howard Smith
>Subject: RE: "Brit-Am Now"-435
>Shalom Yair
>Further to Rob in the USA information regarding European settlement in
>Argentina, did any of you know that there is a sizeable Welsh population in
>the area of Patagonia, in fact there are several towns in the Chubut with
>Welsh names - Trelew and Trefelin (Trevelin).
>There are approximately 20,000 people there of Welsh descent, almost 2,000
>people speak the Welsh language which is undergoing a remarkable revival
>there and they hold Eisteddfodau annually.
>Legend has it that there were several nations who tried to settle there -
>the Spanish and the English, but they couldn`t get on with the local
>Tepihuelche Indians and so failed to establish communities there. It was a
>different story once the Welsh arrived though, they respected and trusted
>the Tepihuelche and so built a good relationship which allowed the Welsh to
>irrigate and cultivate the desert lands.
>It`s very good reading!
>All the best

4. "Tim Lick (rcn)": Ephraim/Manasseh identity
I was looking over your site with great interest.  I side with you
regarding Britain being Ephraim and the United States being Manasseh.  For
those who would reverse the roles, I think the problem can be summed up in
this general thought:  Ephraim was to be many nations AND more in
population.  However, supposedly Britain fits her "many nations" role well,
but lacks population compared to the United States.  Therefore, for those
who reverse the roles find ways to  make the United States sound like many
nations while Britain was and is just one.  I do not buy that.  Clearly,
Britain become the many nations.  What about the population? I want to ask
who says the Ephraimites cannot live where they want? In other words, the
United States is Manasseh politically started form a core of those from
Manasseh, but others came over.  And again, Ephraim have or had all their
nations politically but some of the population decided to live here (like
having a summer home away from home so-to-speak).  That's how we can be
together (in one sense but not limited to this sense in Deut 33:17)

A specific example I had in mind (and forgive me if you had something about
this on your web site that I missed) are the people of the southern United
States.  They almost became a Confederate of states--- (another colony like
Britian?)  Ever notice how the Confederate flag is similar to the Union
Jack? They outnumber the Northerners. But politically they come under
Manasseh, and yet the are of the people of the (other) many nations living
amongst Manasseh.  I see no Biblical contradiction here--- in this sense
Ephraim would still be a multitude of nations, and yet her (vacationing)
people :-) are more numerous.  God knows the individual identity of each

One other point I want to mention is that according to J. H. Allen, who
wrote Judah's Sceptre/Joseph's Birthright, he claimed the British
Commonwealth of nations had 400 million in population (and that was about
100 years ago).  Today, the US has less than 300 million, still short of
that number.  Those who would argue that not all the 400 million are
Israelites, but a melting pot of people from other nations, I would say
that probably the same (and maybe more so) could be said of our 290 million
today (or whatever the number is) here in the United States.  Those who
reverse the roles openly admit that the US is only a fraction, (something
like 6%) of the world population. The British Empire once encompassed 25%
or more (c.f. Numbers 23:10).

These were just some of my thoughts on this supposed contradiction..... and
the answers you offer seem similar, maybe just stated a little differently.

Tim Lick

5. Answer to Criticism
>"Evidence" given for certain claims is very dubious at best. For example,
>the very idea that Runic writing comes from Hebrew is ridiculous at best.
>I've noticed really wild-eyed theories that are being promoted as fact. Of
>course, based upon a Christian bias. Some of these theories would make even
>the more open minded academic world roll under the table with laughter.
>I would like to know this, leave out the liguistic side of things (which can
>be very deceptive), but give me archaeological evidence, that is tangible or
>real, that shows a direct correlation between the 10 lost tribes and ancient
>Indo-European migrations or show that Runes come from Hebrew script.

I doubt that you have read any of our publications ore even seriously
looked at our website.
Regarding runes we never advanced the subject as major evidence just
as an additional point of evidence. The work on the runes was not done by
us but by
Orjan Svensson.
If you are referring to the script itself then the derivation of runic
writing from Ancient Hebrew (Phoenician)
was once the view of most researchers in the field and is still considered
an acceptable possibility
in academic circles.
Concerning the language in which the runes were written in then you should
read the professional literature.
Most early runes remain undeciphered and even those that have been
deciphered are doubtful.
The possibility that the language employed was not an Indo-European one is
also accepted.
Orjan says that at least two languages were used: one was a dialect of
Hebrew and the other of Aramaic.
We agree with him BUT we never made it a major point in our presentation.

Our evidence relies upon Biblical and related proof combined with
historical evidence.
The interpretation of archaeological findings changes from time to time.
It used to be accepted that changes in the culture, fortifications,
settlement patterns ,etc
indicated a change of population.  Later the tendency was to regard these
changes as the fruit
of cultural influences with no substantial alteration amongst the people
Now things are beginning to swing in the other direction and the possibility of
population changes due to invasion and immigration is again in fashion.

We give explanations of the migratory paths of Israelites to the west and
in our published works
provide explanations and archaeological proofs to substantiate ourselves.
if you were to find anything we say insufficient we would expect to receive
specific examples.
We use our own method that has proven itself of see  Biblical,
archaeological, linguistic,
mythological, epigraphical, and all related historical sources as one whole
complex in which
one field can help explain findings in another. In several instances
suggestions made by us have been
verified by later researches.
If you want to know what headline-making discoveries researchers are liable
to make tomorrow read
"Brit-Am" writings today.

Now Index