A critical review of the sermon Historic Proof of Israel's Migrations, by Bertrand Comparet

Christogenea Internet Radio, October 30th, 2015 - A critical review of the sermon Historic Proof of Israel's Migrations, by Bertrand Comparet

Since we are still on the road we are going to present another paper by Bertrand Comparet, along with some hopefully constructive criticism. We are doing this with the hope of putting Comparet's sermons in perspective. Over the years, we have had many critics who have expressed chagrin for many of the things we have said about Bertrand Comparet, or Wesley Swift and others, and that is quite unfortunate. We can appreciate our teachers, as we should. But we should not put them on pedestals. Rather, we must build on their work, and offer corrections when it is needed. So when we offer criticism of Bertrand Comparet, it should certainly not be seen as a condemnation of a good man. Rather, we must move forward from where he and others have left us, and continue to develop a better Christian Identity understanding, through further study of the Scriptures along with history and archaeology. Comparet helped to point the way, but he alone is certainly not the destination.

Last week, we presented a critical review of Bertrand Comparet's sermon Israel's Fingerprints. After doing so, this week we listened to a little more of Comparet's original recording. Disappointingly, we have found that apparently Jeanne Snyder had left out a portion of Comparet's words when she transcribed the sermon, or we may have been a little more critical of Comparet than we were. I do not know why Jeanne did that, and since she passed on in 2008 I may never know. But I do know that she had always seemed to be sincere and sought to defend Comparet and help protect his legacy. We can only be left guessing. Perhaps realizing that some of his comments on prophecy were not entirely accurate, she having had the benefit of maybe twenty additional years of hindsight, simply omitted some of his comments. For my part, I would rather she had transcribed all of Comparet's original words.

Historic Proof of Israel’s Migrations by Bertrand L. Comparet

In my lesson called Israel’s Fingerprints, I have briefly sketched for you some of the Bible’s evidence that the Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian and Germanic people of today are the living descendants of the Israel of the Bible. This evidence is in the form of many Bible prophecies of Israel’s future, which has been accurately fulfilled by these nations and by no others. If the people who have actually done all the things which Yahweh said Israel would do, and who have received the exact blessings which Yahweh said He would give to Israel, if they are not Israel, how could Yahweh be so greatly mistaken? No, Yahweh was not mistaken, He knew what He would do and for whom He would do it. By making good all His prophecies and promises, He has identified these nations as Israel.

Here Comparet himself made reference to the sermon of his which we presented last week, Israel's Fingerprints, and last week we commented on his repeated use of the phrase “Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian” in reference to the modern children of Israel. We said that by it he had to have meant to include the Germanic people as a whole. Here he substantiates that claim for us, because he himself adds the word Germanic to the equation. We spoke about the dangers of oversimplification. Even this clause, “Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian and Germanic”, does not represent all of the children of Israel in the world today with complete accuracy. Some may attempt to exclude the Irish, or original Spaniards or Greeks or Italians. Yet all of these peoples were also descended from Israel in great degree, as well as some of the other Adamic tribes. Are they all Israelites today? Certainly not, because of the Arab and Turkic conquests in Europe. However the original stock of these nations cannot be easily discarded.

So we see how hard it is to make an accurate description for a sermon, and therefore we should realize that sound doctrine cannot be based on sermons alone. So much for the Identity Christians who refuse to admit that we must build upon Comparet, and not stop with what he had left us. Returning to Comparet:

There are some people that won’t believe Yahweh and will not accept His identification of these nations as Israel. In fact, one clergyman with whom I discussed this, a minister of a church in this country, wrote to me demanding to know what other historians of the time, in what books, chapters and verses record their migrations into northern and western Europe and the British Isles? He is only one of many skeptics who ask this and to these skeptics the answer is yes, various historians of those centuries have traced many steps of this migration.

This is certainly true, but few scoffers actually take the time to investigate it. Often when they hear us, people exclaim something like “oh, that is British Israel”. One appropriate answer should be, “no it is not, it is Genesis chapters 48 and 49 and the purpose of the prophets”! Returning to Comparet:

What I propose to do for you now is to trace this migration historically. Remember, within the time limits which must necessarily be fixed on such a lesson as this, I can only hit the high spots. You know how large a library can be filled with history books, so I can’t quote them all verbatim. However, I will have time enough to show you that the historians have traced this migration from Israel’s old Palestinian home into the European homes as the Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian and Germanic peoples. Not under their old names of course, but that also is the fulfillment of Yahweh’s prophesy that He would call His servants by another name. Surely you now know that the Bible identifies Israel and only Israel, as Yahweh’s servants.

The migration of the Israelites covered about 12 centuries, during which time they were mentioned by various historians, writing in different languages, during different centuries so therefore they are mentioned under different names. Even today, if you were to read a London newspaper, a Paris newspaper and a Berlin newspaper, all dated about the end of 1940, you would find that the British newspaper said that in that year France was invaded by the Germans. The French newspaper said that the invasion was by Les Allemans and the German newspaper said that the invasion was by der Deutsch. Yet, all three were talking about the same people and the same invasion. We must not be surprised to find the Israelites were given different names in the Assyrian, Greek and Latin languages. Even in the same language names change from century to century, just as today we never speak of Bohemia, as it was called a century ago, but only of Czechoslovakia.

Remember, the original 12 tribed nation of Israel broke up into two nations upon the death of King Solomon, about 975 B.C.. The northern 2/3rds of the land, containing the ten tribes, kept the name Israel, while the southern 1/3rd, containing the tribes of Benjamin and Judah, with many of the Levites, took the name of Judah after the royal tribe. From that time on, they kept their separate existence until they were finally merged into a vast migration, as we will see. Most of the kings of the 10 tribed northern kingdom of Israel were distinguished more for their wickedness than for any ability. However Omri, who reigned from 885 B.C. to 874 B.C., was a vigorous and able king. Although as wicked as the others, his reign was considered, among the other nations of western Asia, as the foundation upon which the national identity thereafter rested. The language of that day spoke of a family, a tribe, or even a whole nation as a house or household. If you have read your Bible much, you must surely remember Yahweh’s many references to the house of Israel or the kingdom of Judah. The phrase was also used in those days to refer to a nation as the house of a great king who ruled it. The Assyrians among others, began calling the 10 tribed kingdom of Israel, the house of Omri. In Hebrew, house was babyith or bayth, in English it was usually spelled beth and pronounced beth. In the related Semitic languages of Assyrian, this was bit. The Hebrew Omri, was in Assyrian sometimes written Humari, sometimes Kumri.

Now all of this was well and good. However the distribution of Israel into various nations did not begin with the Assyrian deportations. Rather, it began as early as the captivity in Egypt. Solomon's ships of Tarshish were sailing to Iberia, a land named by the Hebrews, long before Omri was king in Israel. We have, much to our consternation, heard Identity Christians comment on the Romans and make the very errant claim that the Romans descended from Israelites of the Assyrian deportations, something which is quite ludicrous considering the history of ancient Rome. Those who made such a claim meant to do well, trying to fit the Romans into the picture of Israel's migrations drawn here by Comparet, because reading Paul's epistle to the Romans it is certain that the Romans were Israelites. But they were certainly not Israelites in that manner.

The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus quoting from the earlier historian Hecataeus of Abdera, who gave a strange account of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt from an Egyptian viewpoint, said that “the aliens were driven from the country, and the most outstanding and active among them banded together and, as some say, were cast ashore in Greece and certain other regions; their leaders were notable men, chief among them being Danaus and Cadmus. But the greater number were driven into what is now called Judaea ... The colony was headed by a man called Moses, outstanding both for his wisdom and for his courage.”

By all of their own accounts, the Romans were derived from the Trojans, and the Trojans can be connected to the ancient Israelites through Darda, the legendary founder of Troy, and Chalcol, a name very similar to that of the Greek legendary founder of Pamphylia, in 1 Kings chapter 4. Even better recorded among the Greeks is the fact that the Danaan Greeks had originally come into Argos from Egypt, at a time when the only people of such a name in Egypt were the Israelite tribe of Dan. Then it may be established through Homer and more explicitly through Flavius Josephus that the Dorians, who appeared in Greece in the 12^th century BC, had come from the Israelites through Dor in Palestine. Shortly after that time, the Phoenicians began colonizing the western Mediterranean and the British isles. So the migrations of Israel must be extended some 8 centuries back before Comparet claims that they begin here. Returning to Comparet:

With this preface in mind, let’s start tracing the Israelites from their Palestinian homeland, in the Assyrian conquest and deportation. In II Kings 15:29 we read, “in the days of Pekah, king of Israel, came Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, and took Ijon and Abel-beth-maachah and Janoa and Kedesh and Hazor and Gilead and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali and carried them captive to Assyria.” I Chronicles 5:26 [the citation was incorrectly given in the podcast because it was originally incorrect here] records, “And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul, king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria and he carried them away, even the Reubenites and the Gadites and the half tribe of Manasseh and brought them unto Halah and Habor and Hara and to the river Gozan, unto this day.”

Confirmation of this is found in inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser, which archaeologists have dug up and are in our museums today. One of these says, “The cities of Gala’za (probably Assyrian for Galilee), Abilkka (probably Assyrian for Abel-beth maacha), which are on the border of Bit Humria, the whole land of Naphtali in its entirety, I brought within the border of Assyria. My official I set over them as governor. The land of Bit Humria, all of its people, together with all their goods, I carried off to Assyria. Pahaka their king they deposed and I placed Ausi as king.” In confirmation of this change in kings, we read in II Kings 15:30, “And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah son of Remaliah and smote him and slew him and reigned in his stead.”

2 Kings 15:29 agrees with the information in the ancient inscriptions. 2 Kings 15:30 is rectified with the inscriptions, if it is understood that the conspiracy made by Hoshea against Pekah had been made in cooperation with Tiglath-Pileser, which the Bible does not mention. Returning to Comparet:

The conquest thus had begun in the northeastern and northern parts of the kingdom about 740 B.C. Then it worked southward, down to the heavily fortified capital city to Samaria, which was captured about 721 B.C. Another king of Assyria reigned by that time, II Kings 18:9-11 records it as follows. “And it came to pass in the 4th year of King Hezekiah (of Judah), which was the 7th year of Hoshea, son of Elah, king of Israel, that Shalmanezer, king of Assyria, came up against Samaria and besieged it. And at the end of 3 years they took it, even in the 6th year of Hezekiah, that is the 9th year of Hoshea, king of Israel, Samaria was taken. And the king of Assyria did carry away Israel unto Assyria and put them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan and in the cities of the Medes.”

We know King Shalmanezer died toward the latter part of this siege and the final conquest and deportation was carried on by his successor, King Sargon II. In confirmation of this an inscription of Sargon II says, “In the beginning of my reign, the city of Samaria I besieged, I captured 27,280 of its inhabitants which I carried away.” The deportation of a whole nation naturally took a considerable period of time. The journey had to be organized, with adequate supplies for each convoy on each stage of the journey and proper organization of the places selected to receive them. We know that Sargon II did not hold the cities of the Medes east of the Zagros mountains until a few years after 721 B.C. So about 715 B.C. to 712 B.C. is the correct date for the deportation to Media. The places to which Israel was deported by the Assyrians can be summed up as constituting an arc or semi-circle, around the southern end of the Caspian Sea.

The inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser and Sargon II which Comparet cites here are found on pages 283 and 284 of Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, a book of important inscriptions found by archaeologists which was published by Princeton University Press in 1969. There are older books, such as those written by D.D. Luckenbill written in the early 20th century, which also contain translations of those inscriptions, to which Comparet may have had access. But with some of Comparet's details we would disagree, as he seems to be conjecturing. The 27,280 Israelites would not have been kept at a totally destroyed city such as Samaria for several years before being led captive. The Assyrian concept of deportation and resettlement was developed as a way to control rebellious subject peoples, and there was no better control than forcing them to live in wilderness encampments. Returning to Comparet:

This deportation took in the entire population of the ten northern tribes constituting the nation of Israel. From this point on, the separation into tribes is apparently lost and it is as a nation that the kingdom of Israel moved into its Assyrian captivity. This left part of the other two tribes still living in the southern kingdom of Judah. Assyria and Egypt were the two giant empires of that day, each seeking domination over all the smaller and weaker nations. Assyria had driven Egyptian influence out of western Asia, back to the continent of Africa and had made all the smaller nations surrounding Judah into vassal states, paying heavy tribute to Assyria. The brutal and rapacious character of the Assyrians made them no friends. Their vassal states were always hopefully looking for any means of escape from Assyrian power. Egypt kept the hope of revolt alive, by offers of military assistance to those who would rebel against Assyria. The death of a king seemed the most opportune time for revolt, since his successor would need time to get his power organized. He might even face some competition at home for his throne. Therefore, when King Sargon II of Assyria died about 705 B.C., revolts began in western Asia, the kingdom of Judah under King Hezekiah taking part in the hope of military aid from Egypt. The prophet Isaiah had warned the revolt would fail.

It is another gross oversimplification of history to say that the Assyrian deportations “took in the entire population of the ten northern tribes constituting the nation of Israel.” This leads to a lack of understanding as to why Christ would accept the words of the Samaritan woman concerning her heritage from Jacob, in John chapter 4, or why the apostles would be converting certain of the Samaritans to Christ, in Acts chapter 8.

There is evidence in Scripture, such as in 2 Chronicles chapter 34, that at least some Israelites were left behind in the land after the Assyrian deportations. There, in words attributed to King Josiah, it says at verse 21: “Go, enquire of the LORD for me, and for them that are left in Israel and in Judah, concerning the words of the book that is found: for great is the wrath of the LORD that is poured out upon us, because our fathers have not kept the word of the LORD, to do after all that is written in this book.” Josiah was king 80 years after the fall of Samaria. Some of the Samaritans were these people “left in Israel” which were later converted to Christ. However because they had long lost their genealogies, they were never considered Israelites by the Judaeans of the later second temple period, and they were despised. Returning to Comparet:

The new king of Assyria, Sennacherib, set about recovering his empire. One rebellious city after another was reconquered, with the hideous cruelty characteristic of Assyria. In 701 B.C., Sennacherib’s huge army invaded the kingdom of Judah. Midway through it, they paused briefly to defeat the Egyptian army, then moved on to besiege Jerusalem. None of the smaller cities of Judah were able to resist. II Kings 18:13 and Isaiah 36:1 record, “In the 14th year of King Hezekiah, Sennacherib came up against all the fortified cities of Judah and captured them.” Then followed the siege of Jerusalem, which was ended when the angel of Yahweh killed 185,000 Assyrian soldiers in one night, and Sennacherib gave up the siege and fled back to his own land.

While Comparet missed any mention of this in his earlier sermon Israel's Fingerprints, we are pleased that he discussed it here. Many Identity Christians discount the tribe of Judah entirely, not realizing that much of Judah was included along with Israel in the Assyrian deportations. This is another important facet of the history of Israel and Judah which is often overlooked.

Comparet did do well to point out the constant rebellion and reconquest which occurred practically every time a new Assyrian king came to power. Returning to Comparet:

In confirmation of this, Sennacherib’s own record of this says, “I then besieged Hezekiah of Judah, who had not submitted to my yoke, and I captured 46 of his strong cities and fortresses and innumerable small cities which were round about them, with the battering of rams and the assault of engines and the attack of foot soldiers, and by mines and breaches made in the walls. I brought out from there 200,150 people, both small and great. Hezekiah himself, like a caged bird, I shut up within Jerusalem his royal city.” Ancient kings were boastful of their victories, but never of their defeats. King Sennacherib tactfully fails to state how the siege of Jerusalem ended, but he does confirm the capture of all the other cities of Judah and the deportation of 200,150 people.

The inscription of Sennacherib which Comparet cites here is found on pages 287 and 288 of Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. When I first read these sermons, as well as other material such as that of E. Raymond Capt, I wanted to learn and prove these things for myself from the original sources. Because these men very often did not supply citations, the process was long and arduous. It is imperative that Identity Christians be able to prove all of these things, which are certainly true, and to do so we need to have references to our sources. Returning to Comparet:

Remember, all the people of the 10 northern tribes, were already settled around the southern end of the Caspian Sea, in the Assyrian deportation of Israel. To them was now added a large portion of the 2 southern tribes of Benjamin and Judah. The Assyrian deportation included all of the ten tribes and a substantial representation from the other two. These were the people who became your ancestors and mine when they moved into Europe.

Now, these were a large part of our ancestors, but we discredit ourselves if we ignore the inhabitants of the various countries in Europe before the 8th century BC, many of whom also came from Israel, but many of whom came from the Japhethite as well as other Shemite and Hamite tribes. There is not much discussion at all in any of Comparet's sermons concerning Trojans, Dorians, Danaans or even Phoenicians in connection with Israel and the early settlement of Europe. Therefore it is the obligation of other Christian Identity students to provide an illustration of this earlier history. Returning to Comparet:

Over the years, the increasing numbers of the Israelite tribes expanded northward along both sides of the Caspian Sea. They were not basically city builders, but farmers and herdsmen. Probably in the earlier part of their stay here, the Assyrians sternly discouraged the building of cities which would naturally be fortified centers of resistance. As the Israelites were moved into this area, herded along as prisoners, robbed of all their belongings, they had to make themselves brush shelters or booths where they stopped for any length of time. Here in the southwest our Indians call such a brushy shelter a wickiup, the Hebrews called it a soocaw applying the name also to a tent, it was the only house a nomad owned. The plural of soocaw was succoth, gradually this was slurred over into scuth, used of a tent dweller or nomad and finally became Scythian.

The great carving on the Behistun Rock, made about 516 B.C., carried inscriptions showing the many different nations who were tributary to King Darius I of Persia. These inscriptions were written in old Persian, Median and Assyrian. They showed that among these were a Scythian nation, called in Assyrian and Babylonian Gimiri, which means the tribes. From Gimiri was derived the name of the Cimmerians, who settled somewhat to the north and into the Ukraine. The Behistun inscriptions also stated that these people were called Sakae in Persian and Median, already the later names are beginning to evolve.

This was E. Raymond Capt's position, however I have not yet been able to establish that Gimiri simply means “the tribes”. Others had made that assertion before Capt did. However checking the Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute compiled at the University of Chicago, it can be verified that the letters g and k were often interchanged in Assyrian, and Gimiri could easily have been a permutation of Khumri. We would argue, in any event, that the true source of the Greek word Kimmeroi was actually Khumri, the Assyrian form of Omri. Sir Henry Rawlinson made the connection of the Gimiri to the Khumri, and many academic historians have followed. Returning to Comparet:

The great Greek historian Herodotus, who lived from 484 B.C. to 425 B.C., and was generally called the father of history, speaking of these people says, “The Sacae, or Scyths, were clad in trousers and had on their heads tall, still caps rising to a point. They bore the bow of their country and the dagger, besides which they carried the battle axe or sagaris. They were in truth Amyrgian Scythians, but the Persians called them Sacae, since that is the name which they gave to all Scythians.” Incidentally, some of the magnificent carved walls of the ancient ruins of the Persian palace at Persepolis show illustrations of those Sacae, in their trousers and pointed caps, bringing tribute to the Persian king.

In Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, on page 316, there is a record of an Akkadian inscription which reads very much like the one from Herodotus which Comparet quotes here. Only on the inscription, rather than it saying Scythians we find references to “the Amyrgian Cimmerians” and “the Cimmerians (wearing) pointed caps”, testifying that the Scythians of Herodotus were indeed the Cimmerians of the Assyrians. Returning to Comparet:

We are now getting further clues to these people. Herodotus says that the Scythians or Sacae, first appeared in that land in the seventh century B.C. This is the same period in which the tribes of Israel were settled there by their Assyrian conquerors. Their use of the battle axe as a weapon is a carry over from their history as Israel. In Jeremiah 51:20 Yahweh says of Israel, “Thou art My battle axe and weapons of war, for with thee will I break in pieces the nations and with thee will I destroy kingdoms”. We will see later that the name evolved from Sakae to Saxon. It is noteworthy that the battle axe was the great weapon of the Saxons.

I do not know where Herodotus may have said anything concerning the dating of the Scythians, although we do not need any such testimony to establish as much since we can identify their origin in the Assyrian records. Perhaps Comparet deduced this assertion from things he read in Herodotus which placed the Scythians in certain areas in the 7th century. But we recall nothing Herodotus said which indicates that they first appeared in those places at this time. Herodotus' history is really not concerned with much from the Assyrian period, but instead focuses on the Medes and the rise of Persia, as his objective was to describe the history leading up to the Persian invasion of Greece. Returning to Comparet:

These Scythians or Sacae lived up to Yahweh’s description of Israel as His battle axe and weapons of war. They became a military people of great power, who did much to break up ancient nations. The Greek geographer and historian Strabo, who lived between 63 B.C. and about 21 A. D. says, “Most of the Scythians, beginning from the Caspian Sea, are called Dahae Scythae and those situated more towards the east, Massagatae and Sacae. The rest have the common name of Scythians, but each tribe has its own peculiar name.... The Sacae had made incursions similar to those of the Cimmerians and Treres, some near their own country, others at a greater distance. They occupied Bactriana, and got possession of the most fertile tract in Armenia, which was called after their own name, Sacasene. They advanced even as far as the Cappadocians, those particularly situated near the Euxine Sea, today called the Black Sea. They are now called Pontici.”

Here Comparet quoted from Book 11, chapter 8, paragraph 2 and also from paragraph 4 of Strabo's Geography. He continues:

This was but the early part of their expansion. When a century had elapsed since their deportation to this land of Scythia, they had grown strong enough to begin the long series of harassing wars against their conquerors, the Assyrians. They lacked the strength to capture the powerfully fortified group of cities about the Assyrian capitol and in turn, their nomadic habits made it easy for them to retreat before a too powerful Assyrian army. Generations of this constant warfare wore down the Assyrians and bled them white, so that when the Medes finally overran Assyria and captured Nineveh in 612 B.C., their victory was a fairly easy one against the exhausted Assyrians.

Actually, the conquest of Assyria was made by a coalition of nations which included the Medes, Persians, Scythians and Babylonians. Isaiah chapter 10 is one place where it is prophesied that the children of Israel would participate in the destruction of Assyria, which also helps to establish that the Scythians are the Israelites of Scripture. Returning to Comparet:

From this point on, I could refer you to just one historical work which fully traces the Scythians on to their settlement in England as the Anglo-Saxons. A History of the Anglo-Saxons by Sharon Turner, does a magnificent job of this. As most of you know, I am a lawyer by profession. A lawyer soon learns to distinguish between the man who actually knows the facts and the man who is merely repeating hearsay, which is gossip and rumor he has heard from others. How do we know whether these others actually know what they are talking about? Unless a man has seen the occurrence with his own eyes, his ideas on the subject are no better than the accuracy of the information he has received.

No historian in our times, can have any personal knowledge of what happened 2,000 years ago. His writings can be no better than the source material he has obtained from people who lived and wrote at a time when accurate information could still be had. Most modern history books are based on rather scanty documentation from early sources, as it is so much easier for one historian to copy from another. Sharon Turner’s A History of the Anglo-Saxons is one of the most thoroughly documented historical studies ever produced and its reliability is beyond question. He traces the Anglo-Saxons of Britain back to the Scythians. Unfortunately, he doesn’t go the one step further and trace the Scythians back to Israel but, we can do that from other sources.

We also read Sharon Turner's history based at least in part on Bertrand Comparet's recommendation here. Turner's work is exactly what Comparet says it is, and interestingly, Turner also started his professional adult life as a lawyer. Returning to Comparet:

Let’s go back to the Scythians, as the people of Israel became known in the land to which they were deported. Diodorus Siculus, a Greek historian who lived in the times of Julius and Augustus Caesar, says this. “The Scythians anciently enjoyed but a small tract of ground, but (through their valor) growing stronger by degrees, they enlarged their dominion far and near and attained at last to a vast and glorious empire. At the first, a very few of them, and those very despicable for their mean origin, seated themselves near to the Araxes river. Afterwards, one of their ancient kings, who was a warlike prince and skillful in arms, captured for their country all the mountainous parts as far as to Mount Caucasus. Some time afterwards their posterity, becoming famous and eminent for valor and martial affairs, subdued many territories. Then, turning their arms the other way, they led their forces as far as to the Nile river, in Egypt.”

Here Comparet is paraphrasing from Diodorus Siculus' comments on the Scythians found in his Library of History, Book 2, chapter 43. It does not seem to be from the Loeb Classical Library edition which we are accustomed to reading. He continues:

Other historians record that blond Scythians made an expedition against Palestine and Egypt about 626 B.C. The town of Scythopolis, in the Jordan valley, is named for a settlement on this raid. To continue with Diodorus Siculus he wrote, “This nation prospered more and more and had kings that were very famous, from whom the Sacans and the Massagetae and the Arimaspians and many others, called by other names, derive their origin amongst others. There were two remarkable colonies that were drawn out of the conquered nations by those kings. The one they brought out of Assyria and settled in the country lying between Paphlagonia and Pontus. The other was drawn out of Media, which they placed near the river Tanais which people are called Sauromatians.”

Comparet continues paraphrasing Diodorus' Library of History, Book 2, chapter 43. The other historians who discussed the Scythian pillage of Palestine and the temporary settlement they had at the place which became known as Scythopolis are probably Josephus and Herodotus. Returning to Comparet:

Note how Yahweh’s destiny for these people worked, they would not leave behind any pockets of their people in the lands where their conquerors had settled them. When they had gained great power, they came back and picked up any who remained, taking them into the migrating mass. Likewise, history records that they raided Babylon, after its overthrow by the Medes and Persians, carrying off with them such of the people of Judah and Benjamin as were not going back to Jerusalem.

This attitude is somewhat disappointing, as it seems to reflect some of the errors of old British Israel. Comparet takes it for granted... conjecturing. There certainly were pockets of Israelites left behind in Armenia, Pontus, Iberia, Georgia, the Crimea, Ukraine, and so forth, as the Scythians migrated west. Many Eurasians, now race-mixed with Mongols, had descended from tribes of the Scythians, as well as Afghans and other now-Turkic and Arabic peoples of the east. Many Scythians went east instead of west, and were later mingled into the great mongol melting pot. The Parthians are another example of a great Israelite tribe which stayed in the east until they were bred out of existence. This is the meaning of Micah 4:7 where Yahweh says “And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever.”

However in his critical notes on this sermon, in relation to the second half of Comparet's statement here Clifton Emahiser pointed out that “This being so, the greater part of good-fig members of Judah, rather than returning to Jerusalem after the 70 years of captivity, joined the 10 tribes in their migrations.” This is important to understand: that much of Judah and Benjamin did go into captivity with Israel, and were among those Scythians who migrated into Europe. There are many clowns calling themselves Identity Christians today who would deny that a legitimate tribe of Judah still exists which is distinct from the people who are now called Jews.

Returning to Comparet:

Even in early times, before the final mass movement into Europe, the Scythians had begun their march to their new homelands, where some of them had already arrived before the beginning of the Christian era. Pliny the Elder, a Roman historian who lived from 23 to 79 A.D., says this. “The name Scythian has extended in every direction, even to the Sarmatae and the Germans. But this ancient name is now only given to those who dwell beyond those nations and live unknown to nearly all the rest of the world. Beyond the Danube, are the peoples of Scythia. The Persians have called them by the general name of Sacae, which properly belongs only to the nearest nation of them. The more ancient writers give them the name of Aramii (Arameans). The multitude of these Scythians is quite innumerable. In their life and their habits they much resemble the people of Parthia (Persia). The tribes among them that are better known are the Sacae, the Massagetae, the Dahae, etc.”

Comparet is overlooking an important point here, because where Pliny says of the Sakae that the name “properly belongs only to the nearest nation of them”, Pliny meant the nation nearest to the Persians. But in fact, earlier Greek writers had traced those same Sakae into Europe, where they were also known as Scythians and later as Galatae, whom the Romans called Gauls and Germans. Pliny's persepective is a first-century Roman perspective, but the connection of the Germans to those same Sakae should not be doubted. As for the Aramii, or Aramaspi, that is another can of worms, because Aram is the name for the Syrians of Scripture, and there were Syrians who were deported by the Assyrians. However if the connection to the name is linguistic rather than ethnic, many of the Israelites were also speaking Aramaic by the first century, as Josephus attests in the preface to his Wars of the Judaeans. Returning to Comparet:

Others have noted this early migration into Germany. For example, Herodotus mentions a migration and settlement of a people he calls the Sigynae, who themselves claimed to be colonists from Media and who migrated as far as the Rhine river. Remember that among the places the Israelites were resettled were in the cities of the Medes.

Also note that Pliny the Elder said, “The more ancient writers give them the name of Aramii”, – an Aramean, in modern language called Syrian. In Deuteronomy 26:5, every Israelite was commanded to confess, “A Syrian ready to perish was my father, and he went down into Egypt and sojourned there with a few and became a nation, great, mighty and populous.” Hence, such ancient writers could correctly identify the Israelite Scythians as Arameans, for they had come from a land which was part of Syria.

I do not know if Deuteronomy 26:5 is the best verse to show a connection between Aramaeans and Israelites. We have already explained that the dispersed Israelites who had remained in those places to which they were originally deported in Josephus' time, whom he called the upper barbarians, understood Aramaic. While the Aramaeans were a people related to the Israelites, the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 26:5 says in part “My father abandoned Syria [Hebrew Aram], and went down into Egypt, and sojourned there with a small number, and became there a mighty nation and a great multitude.” Abraham had originally come from Padan-Aram, or the Plain of Aram in northern Syria. Returning to Comparet:

Among the tribes of the Scythians, the Massagetae attracted the notice of all the ancient historians by their numbers and warlike ability. Those who described them in more detail, divided them into the Massagetae and Thyssagetae. The Getae part of the name soon evolved into Goth. The Massagetae were the Greater Goths and the Thyssagetae were the Lesser Goths. Thus we already find among the Scythians names we can identify as the people who later conducted the great migrations into Europe. The Goths as we know, were later called Ostrogoths, meaning East Goths and Visigoths, meaning West Goths.

Now to go back a few centuries, the Sacae were allies of the Medes and Persians in the attack upon Babylon in 536 B.C. Remember that Yahweh had said that Israel was, “My battle axe and weapons of war; for with thee will I break in pieces the nations and with thee will I destroy kingdoms.” Yahweh had used Scythian Israel to maintain constant war against Assyria for nearly a century, until Assyria was too weakened to resist the Medes and Persians. Then Yahweh used Scythian Israel, the Sacae, to help in the conquest of Babylon when its time had come. Later, King Cyrus of Persia was foolish enough to try to conquer his former allies the Sacae, but he was killed in the battle. King Darius also tried to conquer them, but they being a nomadic people, retreated before his massive armies until he gave up and retired.

Just about everything which Comparet says here can be verified in the pages of Herodotus. However Darius did successfully subjugate many of the Scythians around the Black Sea and above ancient Thrace, and he also subjugated the Thracians, as he needed to do for his plans to invade Greece. His son Xerxes continued those plans after the death of Darius. Clifton Emahiser added a critical note in reference to the death of Cyrus which said:

At another place, Comparet commented: “Now to go back a few centuries, the Sacae were allies of the Medes and Persians in the attack upon Babylon in 536 B.C. ... Later, King Cyrus of Persia was foolish enough to try to conquer his former allies the Sacae, but he was killed in the battle.” The story of how Cyrus was killed is found in Herodotus 1.205 through end of book 1. I don’t know if you have ever heard of Queen Tomyris or not, but she was of the tribe of Massagetae (of Royal blood), and after her husband the King had died, she had to take charge of their army, and she out-maneuvered and outwitted the Biblical Cyrus who was killed in battle when he tried to subdue her and her tribe.

Returning to Comparet:

Professor George Rawlinson says that the original development of the Indo-European language took place in Armenia which you will remember, was at that time occupied by Scythian Israel. Certainly from these people we can trace the introduction of this language into Europe.

In our own essays on the origins of the Germans, we have also presented work from a Russian anthropologist named Grigoyev who corroborates what Comparet repeated here from Rawlinson concerning language.

This powerful and increasingly numerous people thereafter spread farther north, both east and west of the Caspian Sea. To the west of it, they penetrated into the Volga and Don River valleys as the Sauromatians and the Royal Scyths, nomadic peoples. To reach these lands, they had come up through the Caucasus mountains by a great pass which is today occupied by the Georgian military road. Perhaps the communists have changed the name of this pass in recent years, but from ancient times, until within our own life times, this pass was known as the Pass of Israel. The white race of Europe is often called Caucasian because the ancestors of many of them did come out of the Caucasus mountains.

When Alexander the Great began his great marauding expedition across western Asia and as far as India, he had to skirt the edge of the lands held by the Scythians. [Namely Bactria and Sogdiana, but there were others.] In his limitless vanity and ambition, he wanted to conquer them also. It is recorded that their ambassadors said that they would never surrender to him, that they were nomadic peoples who, if they could not resist, could retreat indefinitely before his armies. They had no wealthy cities for him to conquer and loot. Alexander invaded their lands long enough to fight one severe battle with them, defeating the Scythian forces he met. This was evidently just a lesson to them not to attack the flanks of his forces, for he led his forces out of their territory and never returned to the attack.

This is all well and good, but Alexander the Makedonian was also descended from ancient Israel, at least for the most part. Continuing with Comparet:

Remember, Israel is Yahweh’s battle axe and weapons of war. They had already weakened Assyria and as allies of the Medes and Persians, had helped overthrow Assyria and Babylon. They had beaten off attempts of the Persians to conquer them. The article “Scythians”, Chambers Encyclopedia (1927) records, “The Scythians, after about 128 B.C. overran Persia, routed several Persian armies and levied tribute from the Persian kings. During the first century before and the first century after Christ, hordes of Scythians, having overthrown the Bactrian and Indo-Greek dynasties of Afghanistan and India, invaded northern India and there they maintained themselves with varying fortune for five centuries longer. The Jats of India and the Rajputs have both been assigned the Scythian ancestry.” [Today they are all bastards.]

Madison Grant writes, “Ancient Bactria maintained its Nordic and Aryan aspect long after Alexander’s time and did not become Mongolized and receive the sinister name of Turkestan until the seventh century A.D.. The Sakae were the blond peoples who carried the Aryan language to India.”

It is recorded in the same Greek classics which Comparet quotes here, that the Massagetae and other Scythians dwelt for a long time along the Oxus and Jaxartes river valleys in central Asia. Continuing with Comparet:

A land so vast and not the original home of the Israelite Scythians, but already having some inhabitants when they were settled there, must of course show varying types of people. The Nordic, or Aryan Israelite Scythians, conquered these other races. While some speak of a Mongoloid type found in some parts of Scythia, ancient writers pretty well agree that the dominant Sakae or Massagetae Scythians were a Nordic people. Dr. Hans Gunther, professor at Berlin University, in his Racial Elements of European History, published in the 1920s writes, “The investigations into the traces left behind them by that wide spread Nordic people, the Sacae (Scythians), with its many tribes, are well worthy of attention. They had been living on the steppes of southeastern Europe and spread as far as Turkestan and Afghanistan and even to the Indus.”

The ancient writers such as Polemon of Ilium, Galionos, Clement of Alexandria, and Adamantios, state that the Sacae were like the Celts and Germans and describe them as ruddy-fair. The Scythian tribe of the Alans are also described as having a Nordic appearance. Ammianus, about 300-400 A. D., calls them “almost all tall and handsome, with their hair almost yellow and a fierce look.”

We have seen that the names of the Massagetae and the Thyssagetae evolved into Goths, the Ostrogoths (or east Goths) and Visigoths (or west Goths). The historian Ptolemy, who died about 150 A.D., mentions a Scythian people descended from the Sakae, called Saxons who had come from Media. Albinus, who lived in the first century B.C., also says, “The Saxons were descended from the ancient Sacae in Asia and in the process of time they came to be called Saxons,” Prideaux reports that the Cimbrians came from between the Black and Caspian Seas and that with them came the Angli.

Here Comparet must be referring to the 2nd century AD Greek geographer and mathematician Claudius Ptolemy, who died in 170 AD. By Albinus we imagine that Comparet must have meant the 2nd century AD Greek philosopher Albinus. We have not read his extant work, and should investigate in the future. [We are skeptical that an early Greek would have used a term for Saxon in distinction to Sakae. There were later medieval writers who also used the name Albinus, and perhaps Comparet was confused.] The reference to Prideaux must be to Humphrey Prideaux, the 17th century English churchman and scholar. He is often quoted by his title, as Dean Prideaux by later Christian historians, since he was dean of the Norwich cathedral. Continuing with Comparet:

We are now well into established European history. By the beginning of the 4th century A.D., many of the Goths were already Christians. In the 4th century, there were several collisions between Visigoths and Rome and in 410 A.D., the Visigoths became the masters of Italy and captured Rome. Later, they moved on into southern France and northern Spain where they settled permanently. The Ostrogoths settled in what is modern Hungary about 455 A.D., under Theodoric the Great. They conquered Italy about 493 A.D. and set up an Ostrogoth kingdom in Italy which however, was short lived. Their descendants are the fair skinned, blond Italians of northern Italy. However, the Goths had ended the Roman Empire, Yahweh’s battle axe again destroying the kingdoms of the Babylonian order of empires.

The Angli and the Saxons moved up the Danube valley and settled in Germany and along the Baltic shores, as is well known. From there the Jutes, Angles and Saxons colonized England after the Roman legions were withdrawn in 408 A.D.

Actually, the earliest waves of migration penetrated to the farthest edges of the European continent, partly because they could move through nearly empty lands, without meeting any people strong enough to effectively resist them. It was partly because they were pushed farther by the later waves of Israelite migration coming behind them. Hence, we find the settlement of the Scandinavian peninsula pretty well completed before the arrival of the Jutes, Angles and Saxons along the southern shore of the Baltic Sea.

The tribes that settled along the shores of the Baltic were a great maritime people, as some of the Israelites had been even when still in Palestine, as Yahweh had prophesied. The Jutes, Angles and Saxons came from within the Baltic Sea, but their ocean borne raids on England were heavy and continuous. Later, by invitation of the British, they settled along the eastern shores, in East Anglia, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex, Wessex, Essex and Kent.

The first century before and the first century after Yahshua, hordes of Scythians, having overthrown the Bactrian and Indo-Greek dynasties of Afghanistan and India, invaded northern India and there they maintained themselves with varying fortune for five centuries longer. The Jats of India and the Rajputs have both been assigned the Scythian ancestry. [Comparet repeats himself.]

William the Conqueror invaded England in 1066 A.D., with the Normans. They were actually Vikings who had settled on the coast of France in the province of Normandy, Norman really being derived from Norseman. So we see that the migrations of Israel, first into Scythia, expanding there, then gaining the names of Goths, Angli and Saxons. Under those names moving into their present European homelands, is a well established historical fact. There is also the fascinating story of the early migrations by sea, but that is another subject in itself.

So finally, in the end, Comparet does mention the earlier migrations by sea, but he never really got around to telling that story, so far as we know of his ministry. However where he follows Goths, Angles, Saxons and Jutes at the end, we feel that he falls short, because the other Germanic tribes which were never called by these names were indeed just as much Israelites as the Angles and Saxons. There were British Israel writers long before Comparet who had very unfairly denied any relation between Anglo-Saxons and Germans.

In conclusion, we shall offer the critical notes of Clifton A. Emahiser which he published with this sermon:

This has been an excellent historical presentation by Bertrand L. Comparet that I would rate nearly 100%. This demonstrates why it is so important to study history in unison with the Bible. This subject has been so well covered by Comparet that I can only amplify on certain portions. Much of this history has been repudiated as it flies-in-the face of the faulty premises of nominal churchianity. The rediscovery of the Identity of Israel was the enlightenment brought forward by John Wilson and Edward Hine in the second half of the 1800s. The Israel message then spread worldwide with Wilson and Hine receiving large quantities of mail. But because it went against the flawed teachings of the “church”, it was soon suppressed and almost died out being labeled a cult. In spite of all of the resistance to the message, it has survived, and represents the only authentic narrative.

Comparet made the statement: “There are some people that won’t believe Yahweh ...” which is true. I could cite numerous examples where once brought face-to-face with a Bible passage, they will simply say, “I don’t believe that.” It is like where Daniel said at 2:44, “... and the kingdom shall not be left to other people”, yet nearly all of churchianity will insist we must take the gospel to everyone. There’s only one gospel, and that’s the gospel of the kingdom.