RECENT RESEARCH DISCOVERY OF WORLD HISTORY LEFT OUT OF MOST HISTORY TEXTBOOKS – USING EXCERPTS FROM H G WELLS “SHORT HISTORY OF THE WORLD”

[Beginning with an added insertion re: the similarity of the birth legends of Assyrian king Sargon II (722 B.C. – 705 B.C.)  who conquered the Kingdom of Israel  – and the Hebrew leader of the Israelites, Moses]

Werner Keller, The Bible As History, 2nd Revised Edition (William Morrow and Company:  New York), 1955, 1956, 1980,1981, pp. 122-123, 138:

It was indicated that those (Syrians) in higher offices were sometimes given Egyptian names, usually compounded with the name of the reigning king.

The Biblical Joseph lived in Egypt in the days of the Hyksos and the following was given with regard to Moses, the great liberator of his people:

Moses is a Hebrew who was born in Egypt, brought up by Egyptians, whose name can be connected with a semitic root meaning >bringor take out, remove, extract,= (from the bulrushes)but can also be interpreted as Egyptian >Moses= means simply >boy, son.=  A number of Pharaohs are called Ahmose, Amasis, Thutmose. 

 TThese are facts, Egyptologists know that, but the general public picks on the famous Biblical story of Moses in the bulrushes, and it is not difficult for the eternal skeptic to produce it as an apparently valid argumen against the credibility of Moses himself.

It is simply the birth-legend of Sargon= – they say.  But they add mentally:  >plagiarism. [Keller  1981: 122-123]

Cuneiform texts have this to say of King Sargon, the founder of the semitic dynasty of Akkad in 2360 B.C.

‘I am Sargon, the powerful king, the king of Akkad.  My mother was an Enitu priestess, I did not know any father.  Y My mother conceived me and bore me in secret.  She put me in a little box made of reeds, sealing its lid with pitch.  She put me in the river Y the river carried me away and brought me to Akki, the drawer of water.  Akki, the drawer of water, adopted me and brought me up as his son.’ [Keller  1981: 123]

“The similarity with the Biblical story of Moses in in fact astounding:

‘and when she could no longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes,and daubed it with slime and with pitch and put the child therein; and she laid it in the flags by the river’s brink.’ (Exodus 2:3)

One date of the Sargon Legend by Werner Keller:

The basket story is a very old semitic folk-tale.  It was handed down by word of mouth for many centuries.  The Sargon legend of the third millennium B.C. is found on neo-Babylonian cuneiform tablets of the first millennium B.C.

IT IS UTTERLY AMAZING WHERE RESEARCH WILL TAKE YOU!  PARTICULARLY THE PREVIOUSLY “HIDDEN” OR KNOWN ONLY TO SPECIALISTS “WORLD HISTORY.”  THOUGH I HAVE SEVERAL OF H.G. WELLS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED BOOKS:

IN THE www.bartleby.com/86/18.html the following was indicated

This is my first time coming across H G Wells’ “Short History”  Most world history textbooks, including the ones I taught from, and other books intended to cover the entire world history, never went into the details of where the “Semitic” (used to denote “non-African” or “non-Black” !) tribes  came from who first conquered the Sumerians  who they pointed out as being non-Semitic and “race” UNKNOWN !  Only a few stating they came “from the east.”

NOTE BELOW THE DETAILS WHICH H G WELLS GAVE IN HIS 1922 “SHORT HISTORY OF EUROPE” THAT THE DIDN’T INCLUDE IN 1930 BOOK.

===========

HOWEVER, IT WAS H G WELLS WHO IN THE 1930 BOOK  H. G. Wells, The Outline of History:  Being a Plain History of Life and Mankind (The Macmillan Company:  New York) 1930

DARED TO MENTION OR REFER TO THE AFRICAN “GRIMALDIS” !

H G WELLS STATED THAT THERE WERE TWO RACES OF HUMANKIND IN EUROPE:  THE GRIMALDIS AND THE CRO-MAGNON.  ALL OTHER WORLD HISTORY TEXTBOOKS EITHER OMITTED ANY MENTION OF THE “GRIMALDIS” OR WROTE DISCLAIMERS INDICATING DOUBT ABOUT THEIR AUTHENTICITY AS “NEGROID” FOSSILS, THOUGH SOME ADMITTING THEY WERE INAPPEARANCE AND OBSERVTION “NEGROID-LOOKING” !

[ALSO NOTE:  H G WELL WAS UNAWARE OF LATER ARCHAOLOGICAL FOSSI DISCOVERIES AND THE MORE MODERN DATING TECHNIQUES THAT INDICATED THE CRO-MAGNONS WERE THE AFRICAN MIGRANT AURIGNACIAN TOOL-MAKERS AND ANY OTHER DIFFERING FOSSILS WERE ANCESTRALTO OTHER MORE “PHENOTYPICALLY” CAUCASIAN-LOOK FOSSILS THAT WERE DISCOVERED.  HE ADOPTED RIPLEY’S CLASSIFICATION OF THE RACES OF HUMANKIND, PARTICULAR THE “CAUCASIAN” RACE AS IT HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THAT PERIOD OF TIME.  – BY WILLIAM RIPLEY WHO CLASIFIED THE RACES OF EUROPE INTO “THREE DISTINCT RACES”:  THE “TEUTONIC’ – THE “MEDITERRNIEAN” – AND THE “ALPINE”  —  Ripley, “The Races of Europe” (1899)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Races_of_Europe_(Ripley)

[THOUGH A MORE COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY OF EFFORTS TO DEFINE A “CAUCASIAN RACE” BEFORE BLUMENBACH IS GIVEN IN A RECENT WIKIPEDIA ENCYCLPEDIA “CAUCSIAN RACE” HISTORY –

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_(race)

==========

NOTE VERY CAREFULLY THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DETAILS IN THIS “H G WELLS, “A SHORT HISTORY OF HE WORLD – EGYPT, BABYLON AND ASSYRIA” (1922) – THE LATER BOOKS WRITTEN BY HIM AFTER 1922 OMITTED THESE HISTORICAL FACTS – FOR WHATEVER REASON OR REASONS!

FOUND ON:

bartleby.com H G Wells (1866-1946) “A Short History of the World” (1922), XVIII.  Egypt, Babylon and Assyria” :

THERE IN THE 1922 BOOK, H G WELLS INDICATED:

… following the Hyksos conuest of Ancient Egypt:

“the Pharaohs became aggressive conquerors.  They had now acquired the war horse and the war chariot, which the Hyksos had brought to them.  Under Thotmes III and Amenophis III Egypt had extended her rule into Asia (Note:  Eurasia) as far as the Euphrates.”

“We are entering now upon a thousand years of warfare between the once quite separated civilizations of Mesopotamia and the Nile.  At first Egypt was ascendant.  The great dynasties, the 17th Dynasty,[Note:  correction 17th and 18th Dynasties, and the 18th Dynasty ]  which included Thotmes III and Amenophis III and IV and a great queen Hatasu (Hatshepsut – “the first great woman in history”:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatshepsut

“and the 19th Dynasty when Rameses II supposed by some to have been the Pharaoh of Moses, reigned for 67 years raised Egypt to high levels of prosperity.  … In between there were phases of depression for Egypt, conquest by the Syrians and later conquest by the Ethiopians from the South.

“In Mesopotamia Babylon ruled, then the Hittites and the Syrians of Damascus rose to a transitory predominance; at one time the Syrians conquered Egypt, the fortunes of the Assyrians of Nineveh ebbed and flowed, sometimes the city was a conquered city; sometimes the Assyrians ruled in Babylon and assailed Egypt. … Tushratta,King ofMitanni, who captured Nineveh, Tiglath Pileser I of Assyria who conquered Babylon.  At lat the Assyrians became the greatest military power of the time.

Tiglath Pileser III conquered Babylon in 745 B.C. and founded what historians call the New Assyrian Empire.

Iron hadalso come now into civilization out of the north; the Hittite, the precursors of the Armenians, had it first and communicated its use to the Assyrians,and an Assyrian usurper, Sargon II, armed his troops with it.

[Note:  Assyrian king Sargon II (722 B.C. – 705 B.C.) assume the name Sargon of Akkad and under his rule the Kingom of Israel was defeated.  In the Bible his name is mentioned in Isaiah 20:1 ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_II

=============

[Borrowing by Hebrew rabbinicl writers from a Babylonian story about the birth of Sargon II];

Werner Keller, The Bible As History, 2nd Revised Edition (William Morrow and Company:  New York), 1955, 1956, 1980,1981, pp. 122-123, 138:

It was indicated that those (Syrians) in higher offices were sometimes given Egyptian names, usually compounded with the name of the reigning king.

The Biblical Joseph lived in Egypt in the days of the Hyksos and the following was given with regard to Moses, the great liberator of his people:

Moses is a Hebrew who was born in Egypt, brought up by Egyptians, whose name can be connected with a semitic root meaning “bringor take out, remove, extract, (from the bulrushes)” but can also be interpreted as Egyptian Moses= means simply >boy, son. A number of Pharaohs are called Ahmose, Amasis, Thutmose.

THESE ARE FACTS, EGYPTOLOGISTS KNOW THAT, BUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC PICKS ON THE FAMOUS BIBLICAL STORY OF MOSES IN THE BULRUSHES, AND IT IS NOT DIFFICULT FOR THE ETERNAL SKEPTIC TO PRODUCE IT AS AN APPARENTLY VALID ARGUMEN AGAINST THE CREDIBILITY OF MOSES HIMSELF.

It is simply the birth-legend of Sargon – they say.  But they add mentally:  “plagiarism.” [Keller  1981: 122-123]

CUNEIFORM TEXTS HAVE THIS TO SAY OF KING SARGON, THE FOUNDER OF THE SEMITIC DYNASTY OF AKKAD IN 2360 B.C.

“I AM SARGON, THE POWERFUL KING, THE KING OF AKKAD.

“MY MOTHER WAS AN ENITU PRIESTESS, I DID NOT KNOW ANY FATHER.   MY MOTHER CONCEIVED ME AND BORE ME IN SECRET.  SHE PUT ME IN A LITTLE BOX MADE OF REEDS, SEALING ITS LID WITH PITCH.  SHE PUT ME IN THE RIVER – THE RIVER CARRIED ME AWAY AND BROUGHT ME TO AKKI, THE DRAWER OF WATER.  AKKI, THE DRAWER OF WATER, ADOPTED ME AND BROUGHT ME UP AS HIS SON.”[Keller  1981: 123]

The similarity with the Biblical story of Moses is in fact astounding:

“AND WHEN SHE COULD NO LONGER HIDE HIM, SHE TOOK FOR HIM AN ARK OF BULRUSHES,AND DAUBED IT WITH SLIME AND WITH PITCH AND PUT THE CHILD THEREIN; AND SHE LAID IT IN THE FLAGS BY THE RIVER’S BRINK.” (Exodus 2:3)

THE BASKET STORY IS A VERY OLD SEMITIC FOLK-TALE.  IT WAS HANDED DOWN BY WORD OF MOUTH FOR MANY CENTURIES.  THE SARGON LEGEND OF THE THIRD MILLENNIUM B.C. IS FOUND ON NEO-BABYLONIAN CUNEIFORM TABLETS OF THE FIRST MILLENNIUM B.C.”   ]

=======

“ …. Assyria became the first power to expound the doctrine of blood and iron.  Sargon’s son Sennacherib’s grandson Assurbanipal (who is also known in history by his Greekname of Sardanapalus) did actually conquer Egypt in 670 B.C.  But Egypt was already a conquered country then under an Ethiopian dynasty.  Sardanapalus (Assurbanipal) simply replaced one conqueror by another.

… if one had a series of political maps of this long period of history, this interval of 10 centuries, … we should see these various Semitic states of the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Hittites and the Syrians coming and going eating each other up and disgorging each other again.

To the wet of Asia Minor (Eurasia) there would be little Aegean states like Lydia, whose capital was Sardis and Caria.  But after about1200 B.C. and perhaps earlier, a new set of names would come into the map of the ancient world FROM THE NORTHEAST AND FROM THE NORTHWEST.

THESE WOULD BE THE NAME OF CERTAIN BARBARIC TRIBES (NOTE:  GERMANIC AND CELTIC TRIBES OF NORTHEASTERN EURASIA] ARMED WITH IRON WEAPONS AND USING HORSECHARIOTS, WHO WERE BECOMING A GREAT AFFLICTION TO THE AEGEAN AND SEMITIC CIVILIZATIONS ON THE NORTHERN BORDERS.

They all spoke variants of what once must have been the same language, ARYAN.

Round the NORTHEAST OF THE BLACK AND CASPIAN SEAS WERE COMING THE MEDES AND PERSIANS.  Confused with  these in the records of the time WERE SCYTHIANS AND SAMATIANS.

FROM NORTHEAST OR NORTHWEST CAME THE ARMENIANS, FROM THE NORTHWEST OF THE SEA-BARRIERS THROUGH THE BALKAN PENINSULA

CAME CIMMERIANS, PHRYGIANS AND THE HELLENIC TRIBES WHOM WE CALLTHE GREEKS.  THEY WERE RAIDERS AND ROBBERS AND PLUNDERERS OF CITIES, THESE ARYANS, EAST AND WEST ALIKE.  [NO WONDER THIS DIDN’T APPEAR IN HIS 1930 BOOK – THERE MUST HAVE BEEN STRONG CRITICISM ABOUT SUCH A STATEMENT ! ]

THEY WERE ALL KINDRED AND SIMILAR PEOPLES, HARDY HERDSMEN WHO HAD TAKEN TO PLUNDER.  IN THE EAST THEY WERE STILL ONLY BORDERERS AND RAIDERS, BUT IN THE WEST THEY WERE TAKING CITIES AND DRIVING OUT THE CIVILIZED AEGEAN POPULATIONS. 

[NOTE:  THESE WERE THE “MAR TU” TRIBES REFERRED TO BY RUNOKO RASHIDI IN HIS AFRICAN PREENCE IN ASIA DESCRIBED BY HIM AS THOSE WHO WHO INVADED AND CONQUERED THE SUMERIANS QUOTING THE HISTORIAN ]

THE AEGEAN PEOPLES WERE SO PRESSED THAT THEY WERE SEEING NEW HOMES IN LANDS BEYOND THE ARYAN RANGE.  SOME WERE SEEKING A SETTLEMENT IN THE DELTA OF THE NILE AND BEING REPULSED BY THE EGYPTIANS, SOME, THE ETRUSCANS,

============

FROM THE 1930 BOOK, THE FOLLOWING EXCERPT TELLS WHY AFTER WORLD WAR I THERE HAD BEEN A DEEP CONCERN TO FIND OUT WHY THE WORLD HAD BEEN ENMESHED INTO A WORLD WAR DURING WHICH MILLIONS DIED AND IF “HISTORY” COULD PROVIDE THE ANSWER.  THE PROBING, DIGGING DEEPER INTO THE AVAILABLE RESEARCH SOURCES RESULTED AND H G WELLS WROTE HIS “SHORT HISTORY OF THE WORLD” – ABOUT THE MOST TRUTHFUL AUTHENTIC ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAD HAPPENED USING WHAT RESOURCES WERE AVAILABLE TO HIM AND THE EXTENT OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT IT AT THAT TIME.  THE “SHORT HISTORY OF THE WORLD” GOES MUCH FURTHER IN DETAIL THAN WHAT WAS WRITTEN BY H G WELL IN “THE OUTLINE OF HISTORY” (1918-1919, 1926, AND 1930.  THE BOOK THAT I HAVE IN MY LIBRARY IS THE 1930 PUBLICATION:

H. G. Wells, The Outline of History:  Being a Plain History of Life and Mankind (The Macmillan Company:  New York) 1930:

IN IT H G WELLS INDICATED THE FOLLOWING:

The Outline of History was first written in 1918-1919.  It was published in illustrated parts, and it was carefully revised and printed again as a book in 1920.  It was again revised very severely and rearranged for a reprint in 1923 (January), and now this again is a quite fresh edition, recast, rewritten in many places, and with much added new matter. Y There were many reasons to move a writer to attempt a World History in 1918.  It was the last, the weariest, most disillusioned year of the great war.  Everywhere there were unwonted privations:  everywhere there as mourning.  Men felt they had come to a crisis in the world=s affairs.  They were too weary and heart-sick to consider complicated possibilities.  They were not sure whether they were facing a disaster to civilization or the inauguration of a new phase of human association:  they saw things with the simplicity of such flat alternatives and they clung to hope.  There was copious discussion of possible new arrangements of world politics; of world-treaties for the abolition of war, of leagues of nations, leagues of peoples.  Everyone was >thinking internationally,= or at least trying to do so.

But there was a widespread realization that everywhere the essentials of the huge problems that had been thrust so suddenly and tragically upon the democracies of the world were insufficiently understood. >How had these things come about?= they asked, trying to probe behind the disputes about Sarajevo and the Belgian >scrap of paper= to the broader remoter causes of things.   What were the beginnings of this tragic feud across the Rhine?  Why had it come to affect the whole world?  Y What had converted Germany from a diversity of little states into one aggressive will and power, and put the fear of German energy into half mankind?

Since the Outline was revised there have been such interesting events as the   the first intimation of something definitely historical in India earlier than 600 or 700 B.C.  And the time has come to rewrite the portion devoted to the history of Europe after the war:  the perspectives have changed:  we begin to realize much more definitelyy than at first the quality of the new Russia, the new Italy and Germany, that the great catastrophe has given us.

In the Universal History, published by a syndicate of booksellers in London in 1779, it is stated that the world was created in 4004 B.C. and (with a pleasant exactitude) at the autumnal equinox, and that the making of man crowned the work of creation at Eden upon the Euphrates, exactly two days= journey above Basra.  The evidence of these statements arose from a too literal interpretation of the Bible narrative.  Very few even of the sincerest believers in the inspiration of the Bible now accept them as matter-of-fact statements.  It is the science of geology and particularly the science of palaeontology which has broken through this time barrier and opened beyond that little yesterday of scarcely six thousand years a million such yesterdays.   pp. 13-15

p. 128, Chapter XI:  The Races of Mankind@:  Main races of mankind B

131 B 132 – 3 divisions of white race  —

134 B Brunet people  /

135 belt of brown skinned men from India to Spain –

135 – Cro-Magnons and Grimaldis – two main races in Europe

137 Heliolithic culture – 15,000 B.C. –  1000 B.C. [NOTE:  AFRICAN AURIGNACIAN CRO-MAGNONS – 15,000 TO 1000 B.C. ! ] …

VERY CLOSE BUT NOT ACCURATE IN ITS DETAILS AS THE “SHORT HISTORY” !

HERE IS THE SHORT HISTORY THAT I JUST LOCATED FOR YOU TO READ:

http://www.bartleby.com/86/18.html

Advertisements

About Harold L Carter

Bachelor of Science, Columbia University Masters degree, Ohio State University Undergraduate National Officer, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Eastern Asst Vice President, when a student at Columbia University Profile Photograph: Mom & Me, when I was a graduate student
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s