A Theory about Troy

When Troy fell is a common subject in revised Chronology.  But Velikovsky also questions if the current proposed site of Troy fits the geography of Homer.

I however have come to think that regardless of where Homer thought Troy was, perhaps the origin of the Legend of Troy wasn’t in Anatolia at all?

The myth of Laomedon (Priam’s father) and Herakles has been noted to strongly resemble that of Perseus and Joppa/Jaffa.  A Princess being offered as a sacrifice to appease a Sea Monster, and a Greek Hero who’s a son of Zeus saves the day.  The oldest version of the Trojan Horse legend also refers to a sea monster off the coast of Troy.

Greek Mythology also has three Flood Legends.  So it’s possible there are other cases of different myths based on the same historical inspiration, yet later given distinct points on the mythical timeline.  So could Joppa and Troy be the same city?  Or different cities of the same kingdom?

Joppa is located in Israel, the Book of Jonah also affiliates it with a Sea Monster, (in the Septuagint and New Testament it’s referred to as Cetos).  Which Kingdom it was part of during the Divided Kingdom period is difficult to tell, it possibly changed over time as the borders shifted, in Jonah it’s seemingly part of the North.  And the story of Omri's rise to power implies the original Danite allotment was under the Norther's control since the north was battling the Philistines over Gibbethon.

There is an 18th Dynasty Egyptian text known as The Taking of Joppa.  In which an Egyptian general named Djehuty captures Joppa by offering them a gift of many baskets and claiming he was surrendering but hidden in the Baskets were his soldiers.  The similarity of this to the Trojan Horse legend has been noted before.  In any Chronology however this event predates the fall of Troy, and was certainly before Homer and any other written accounts of Troy.

Djehuty is independently verified to have lived during the reign of Tuthmosis III.  But Egyptologists now suspect the campaign that is the story’s intended setting is from the reign of Amenhotep II.

Could the name of Troy possibly be connected to Tirzah?  A City that sometimes served as the royal capital of the Northern Kingdom.   I've suggested before the Teresh of the Sea People could have come from Tirzah, and I think others have suggested connecting the Teresh to Troy.

Memnon in the Prose Edda.  Some people question if Memnon was in fact who’s meant.  The spelling it uses is “Munon or Mennon”, which could instead refer to Menon, a Trojan soldier mentioned in The Iliad.  In Greek translations of the Old Testament the Hebrew name Menahem sometimes becomes Manaem or Manaen.  A name most notably associated with a Northern Kingdom ruler near the end of it's history who came from Tirzah.

But the name Memnon itself could be viewed as referencing the first two letters of the Hebrew spelling of Menahem.  Memnon was a king of the mythical "Aethiopia" which was also linked to Joppa and thus the same dynasty as Cepheus and Andromeda.

The Prose Edda is just one of many examples of European Royalty claiming descent from Troy (many Norse and Anglo-Saxon royal houses traced their ancestry to Odin).  It seems before British Israelism made Ephraim popular, it was Troy the nations of Western Europe sought to use to give themselves a more ancient/classical heritage.  Virgil and Livy weren’t the first to connect Aeneas to Rome, Homer himself directly supports no such connection, but does imply people will descend from Aeneas.  Nennius and Geoffrey of Monmouth further connects the Britons to Aeneas.  Geoffrey of Tours traced the Franks back to Helenus and Andromache.

But it is in the Prose Edda we see an early clue this descent from Troy may have been code for, or a middle stage of, descent from Israel all along.  Because the Prose Edda says Troy was 12 Kingdoms with one High King.  And it says Troy was in the middle of the Earth, a location traditionally given to Israel in Judeo-Christian thinking, justified by it being where Africa and Eurasia meet.

Given my past speculations of a connection between the Ketos of Greek Mythology and the creature that swallowed Jonah.  And the fact that Jonah, Amos, Hosea (and traditionally Joel) were all contemporaries of Jeroboam II.  I think Laomedon and Cepheus may both be Greek mythological corruptions of the memory of Jeroboam II. And thus all royal families who claimed descent from either the House of Laomedon or Andromeda were descendants of the House of Jehu.  And all tracing descent back to Mennon were the House of Menahem ben Gadi.  And the Dorians were of those of Manasseh who dwelt in Dor, while the Thesselians were of Asher and their royal family of the governor of Dor who married Solomon's Daughter.  And those claiming descent from Perseus and/or Herakles were Danites or Ephraimites.  Sometimes Hercules rather then Mars is given as the father of Romulus and Remus.

Some writers wanting to argue for Troy actually being in the British isles say they find the claimed presence of Chariots in the Trojan myths implausible for a north western Asia Minor setting. Chariots are definitely present in Biblical Canaan/Israel, being associated with Solomon, Ahab and Jehu.  Solomon is just the oldest example I can think of of the Israelites using them, the Canaanites Joshua was warring with had them, which is strategically why he started by capturing the mountainous regions.

Amazons and the Tribe of Dan

Since it's Wonder Woman month, I figure it's time I explore this idea I've been wanting to explore for awhile.  (The embryo of this theory has been in my mind since before Gal Gadot was cast, so it's not just inspired by an Israeli actress playing Wonder Woman.)

At least one prior writer has looked into the possibly of a Lost Tribes connection for the Amazons,  John R. Salverda.  Salverda's many theories on Greek Mythology are something I want to do a separate post on in the future.  For now I just want to comment that while I find his research useful much of it I feel is way off base.  I do not identify Myrina with Mariam.  Also Salverda is very anti-Feminist, talking about how "Hebrew Women saved the ancient world from Amazonian Feminism", I however feel part of the intent of the New Testament is to save the world from Patriarchy.  And that the Prophetess Office held by Mariam is the same one later held by Deborah, and other Prophetesses of the Hebrew Bible all the way down to Anna at the Birth of Christ, and now since Pentecost by many Christian women starting with the Daughters of Philip.  Mariam and her group of Women were not sinning, in fact I feel they are vital to understanding the importance of the word Almah.

The Geography of the Amazons is a complicated matter.  In Homer they were in Lycia or west of Lycia when encountered by Bellerphon.  The stories of their encounters with Herakles and Theseus focus on the Thermodon river south of the Black Sea near Pontus.  Herodotus says they later migrated north of the Black Sea and intermarried with Scythians.  The legends surrounding queens Marpesia, Lysippe, Lampedo, Hippo and Otheria connect them to the founding of cities like Ephesus and Smyrna and to eastern Aegean islands like Lemnos, Lesbos and Samothrace. Hypsipyle encountered by Jason and the Argonaughts on Lemnos I think was another Amazon queen and the usual origin story for her women was a made up myth.

Allied with the Amazons mentioned in the Iliad were the Solymi.  Josephus in Against Apion argues the Solymi mentioned by Herodotus as being in Xerxes army were Jews.   William Whiston in his footnotes for his translation agrees with that by contrasting them with other Solymi he feels were pagan gentiles.  But if those Solymi were Danites rather then Judeans then they were similar yet different, and had fallen into Idolatry.

East of Lycia takes us to Cilicia and Adana, definitely early Denyen colonies.  And winding up north of the Black Sea takes them to the Danube.  So Geographically there is good reason to see the Amazons as a Danite offshoot.  And lots of notable Danites of the Bible seem to be Danites mater-lineally, like Huram or the incident in Leviticus 24.  But perhaps the real key to this mystery is looking into who the Goddess of the Amazons was.

Greek sources on their Goddess(es) are confusing.  It's often said to be Artemis but some researches say that was a late development of the classical writers.  Their Queens are often called Daughters of Ares yet that was a male deity.

The Caananite/West Semitic deity who served the function of Ares, as god of War, was a female, the goddess Anath.  This caused attempts of the Greeks to identify her with one of their Goddesses to be similarly complicated.  Her status as a Virgin goddess invited comparisons with both Athena and Artemis, but her association with the Bow and Arrow makes Artemis a bit more popular.  In the middle east direct analogues to Anath are easier to find, Tanith/Tanis among the Carthaginians and Libyians, Neith in Egypt (but perhaps also Nephethys/Nebtheth).  And it's also possible to see some of Anath in the Hindu Kali.

The name of Anath, or at least the same Semitic root it comes from, appears in The Hebrew Bible.  Like in the location Anathoth.  But in Judges an Anath is the parent of judge Shamgar.  Not much is said about Shamgar, but the vague similarities to Samson can encourage one to see him as another Danite.  Since I agree with Veilikvosky in dating the Ugarit texts to the Kingdom Period, maybe the origin of Anath was in part a deification of the much earlier mother of Shamgar?  But it's also theorized that "Ben Anath" may just have been a title for great warriors, paralleling theories about why Amazons were called daughters of Ares.

In the Ugarit texts, the most important narrative for Anath after her role in the Baal Cycle is in the legend about Danel and his children.  Danel is a name very likely related to Dan, maybe it could be Dan himself deified by his descendants, combining Dan and El.  Anath kills Danel's son Aghat because she wanted his Bow forged by Kothar-Wa-Khasis (who the Greeks would have identified with Hephaestus, also strongly linked to Lemnos) by sending Yatpan after him.  But it seems Aghat's death was not her intent.  The protagonist of the story then becomes Paghat, the younger sister of Aghat, she sets out to avenge her brother.  The narrative is incomplete, some scholars have theorized Paghat and Anath would be reconciled in the end, with Yatpan as their common enemy.  Maybe the story would have ended with Paghat founding an Amazon tribe?

Myrina and the Libyian Amazons of Diodorus I believe were not Israelites but from Phut.  Diodorus sees no continuity between the Libyan Amazons and later Amazons of Asia Minor even though he says Myrina conquered all those same regions.  However a key distinction with the Libyan Amazons is they worshiped a different kind of Goddess seemingly, a mother Goddess like Cybele.   Also in the context of Myrina's story, I think maybe the Gorgons/Gorgos were an offshoot of the Girgashite tribe of Canaan.

The Artemis of Ephesus is sometimes said to be a mother goddess, sort of Artemis fused with Cybele.  But this is based on the common assumption the images of the Ephesian Artemis are of a woman with countless breasts.  I prefer the theory that that is Bee Hive imagery rather then breasts.  And the Bee Hive imagery can further back up a Danite connection thanks to Samson.

Some texts, including maybe the Iliad itself, imply Dardanus was a consort of Myrina.  So Myrina's Amazons could have intermarried with Danites.  But it's also possible some Danite women later starting their own tribe drew inspiration from the earlier legacy of Myrina.

Because of revised Chronology concerning the Dark Ages of Greece, and my belief that Homer merged together different Trojan wars.  I think Myrina and Dardanus can be re-dated to the 900s BC (the traditional date for Dardanus becoming King is 1475 BC).  Herakles and Bellerphon to the 700s BC, and Perseus to the early 700s or late 800s.  And the final fall of Troy to about 678 or the 660s BC.

For the most part I still date Theseus to the 1200s BC, due to the unbroken chronology of Athenian Kings and Archons.  And that that time period becomes in Revised Chronology the Minoan rather then Mycenean age archeologically fits the story of Theseus and Minos even better.  But perhaps the particular myths about Theseus and Antiope and Hippolytus were about some Athenian from the 800s BC that got applied to Theseus later.  In fact it's unlikely the same Theseus could have married another Minoan princess, Phaedra, after abandoning Ariadne.  Or maybe this story originally involved a prince of a different City-State in Attica.

A lot of modern treatments of Norse Mythology (including Marvel comics and the MCU's Thor franchise) treat the Valkyries as being like the Amazons of Norse Mythology.  But that is not at all what the Valkyreis actually were, they were basically the same thing as the Houris from Islamic belief, beautiful women who serve fallen warriors in paradise.  Instead I think maybe the Vanir were Amazons, what we know about the Vanir is greatly distorted, but it is possible all the wives of the AEsir gods were Vanir.

The myths of the AEsir and Vanir being at war and later intermarrying I think are partly inspired by two Ancient tribes warring then coming together.  The AEsir I think descend from Ashkenaz, who were the Askuza of Assyrian records and once dwelt around Lake Ascanius, thus making them Phyrgians during the Trogan War.  Another group of people in Phyrgia yet also treated as distinct were the Mygdons.  The name Mygdon could come from Megiddo/Megiddon.  Mygdon of Greek mythology's mother had an Amazonina name, Anaxineme, but he's also said to have waged war with the Amazons.

The descendants of Ashkenaz are sometimes said to have been Scythians ( a term the Greeks used of all the tribes north of the Black Sea, so not necessarily all from the same Genesis 10 ancestor).   And Herodotus says the Amazons intermarried with Scythians at some point.

I think a number of women in Greek Mythology not usually labeled Amazons are given away to have been Amazons or of Amazonian ancestry by their names.  Including Adromache wife of Hector.  In the oldest depictions Andromache not Hippolyta was the name of the Amazon Queen defeated by Herakles.

One such name is Clymene, an attested Amazon name in at least one source.  But a name given to some Aquatic Nymphs, including the wife of Deucalian.  But is also the name of a mother of Atalanta, who's not considered an Amazon but is thematically similar given her connection to Artemis and being the only woman among the Argonauts.  And her father was Iasus, a name I think cold be a more archaic Greek form of Yehoshua/Yeshua, which in Koin Greek becomes Iesous.

Myrtilus's mother is said variantly both to be an Amazon and a Daughter of Danaus.

The folk Etymology of Amazon meaning "one Breast" and that they had to cut one off to use a Bow and Arrow properly has long annoyed me.  It super annoyed me when I was reading the first House of Night book and a teacher is talking specifically about many claims the Greeks made about Amazons being wrong, but then states the "one Breast" story as fact.  All artistic depictions of Amazons show them with both Breasts.

But what caught my attention lately, as I've been watching an endless amount of Anime, is it seems in Japanese School Archery Clubs, the females wear costumes that kinda resemble Miko costumes but with different coloring.  But also have a sort of protective covering over the breasts, which could maybe make it look kinda like they have one larger breast rather then two.  Perhaps it hurts my Otaku cred that I don't know what this thing is properly called.  This is interesting since I support some theories about Lost Tribes coming to Japan.

On the subject of anthropologically speculating on what a hypothetical Matriarchal society might be like.  One area where I feel it would be flawed to assume it'd be the exact gender flip of most patriarchal societies is in how it practiced Polygamy.  In the Pre-Christian world the only societies that frowned on Polygamy were Greece and later Rome who borrowed from Greece.  It may be the the devotion to Monogamy in the Christian world is largely another Greco-Roman rather then Hebrew influence.

Polygyny has been far more common then Polyandry.  But there have been Polyandrous cultures that were still very patriarchal in how they practiced it, still viewing the woman as property just as shared property.  The difference between Polygynus cultures and Polandrous cultures was whether their situation needed them to encourage or discourage rapid reproduction.

In The Bible the followers of YHWH are told to be fruitful and multiple.  But the Leverite marriage custom could provide a basis for allowing conditional Fraternal Polyandry.

So I suspect even a Matriarchal culture would still have encouraged men to have multiple sexual partners.  But how it was practiced would have been different.

Of course the Amazons are generally seen as not practicing Marriage as we'd think of it at all.  But mating either with foreigners or with the Gargareans.

It's also maybe not a coincidence that many goddesses associated with the Amazons, like most ancient Virgin Goddesses, were also associated with Lesbianism.  This is perhaps most well documented with Artemis.  But there is possibly homoerotic subtexts in myths about Anath too, her relationships with Shapash and Astarte, and again we don't know how Paghat's story ends.

Another interesting clue just came to my attention.  Harmonia is a name given in Greek Mythology to both the woman by whom Ares fathered the Amazons (though Otrera is said to be both Ares daughter and mother by him of other Amazons) and the wife of Cadmus and mother of his children.  Cadmus was originally a Sidonian Prince, we know from The Bible that they intermarried with Danites often.  It's also said that some Amazons became Meaneds of Dionysus.  Three of the Meaneds were daughters of Cadmus.  Eurypyle is the name of both a Meaned and an Amazon.

In Judges 9:50-57 a Woman of Thebez killed King Abimelech.  Veilikvosky talked about there being two ancient cities named Thebes, well in The Bible we have a third.  Perhaps originally this was the Thebes of Cadmus.  Perhaps the traditional identification of Biblical Thebez with modern Tubas is off and it was really further north?  What if Thebez could be part of the region elsewhere refereed to as Geshur? (Usually placed in the Golan Heights.)  Geshur had a King named Talmai who's daughter married King David.  Talmai is also the Aramaic form of the name Ptolemy.  And one of the Kings of Thebes of Greek mythology was a Ptolemy.  This is the only Ptolemy of Greek mythology, the other examples of the name don't pop up till later Classical history.

Psalm 68:14-16 uses Zalmon in a way that could support it being another name for Bashan, which was near Gesher.  It could be the Tower of Shechem wasn't in Shechem proper s we think of it.  The Etymology of Megiddo is no agreed on.  When Herodotus refers to the Battle of Megiddo that involved Necho, he called it Magdolos, which could support it being derivative of Migdal, the Hebrew word for Tower, including when Judges 9 refers to the Tower of Shechem.  Shechem and Megiddo are both connected to Western Manasseh, while Geshur and Bashan were both allotted to Eastern Manasseh.  But after Dan left their original allotment for the northern Dan, they took over much land originally allotted to Naphtali and Eastern Manasseh.  Deuteronomy 33 prophetically says Dan would leap from Bashan.

Or maybe I should even rethink my position on Myrina.  Another Myrina in Greek Mythology was a daughter of Cretheus, who also had a daughter named Hippolyte.   And Cretheus was a brother of Sisyphus and Salmoneus who Salverda argues for identifying with Joseph and Judah.  And the Myrina of Cretheus was the wife of Thoas father of Hypsipyle.  The starting point of Queen Myrina's story being in Libya is the connection to Mont Atlas, but Salverda argues for Atlas being Sinai, which I view as Sana'a in Yemen.  A Middle Eastern location fits better for my Gorgons=Girgashites hunch.  And linking the Amazons to Arabia fits well with my Feminism of Pre-Islamic Arabia observations.  Also King Lycurgus is sometimes alternatively placed in Arabia.

Hippolyta I think was a title or throne name many or maybe even all Amazon Queens held, and that is part of what confused the Amazons history chronologically.

There were probably multiple people behind the legends of Herakles.  Him being sometimes the father of Romulus and Remus fits Velikvosky's date for the final fall of Troy by giving us a Hercules in the 700s BC.

But I want to pay close attention to the myths about Herakles and Omphale.  The Lydians called the father of Omphale's children Tylons, clearly he was a distinct national hero of Lydia the Greeks just identified with Herakles similarly to how they did Melkart of Tyre and others.

Omphale herself was the daughter of a river god, Iardanus.  That is clearly the Jordon, the Strongs explains that the name of Jordon comes from the same root as my name, Jared, which the Greek of Luke 3 renders Iared.

Some of the accounts of the Kings of Lydia say the descendants of Herakles and Omphale took over a few generations later, and weren't the immediate children of them.  This can very much support the idea that Herakles and Omphale's relationship originally took place elsewhere.

I have argued that Delilah was an Israelite not a Philistine.  While at the same time arguing she was the mother of Micah in chapter 17.  Maybe Herakles and Omphale were inspired by Samson and Delilah, and the dynasty that ruled Lydia before Gyges took over were of Danite ancestry?

A brief summery of my proposed Amazon chronology.

Myrina conquers much of Syria and Turkey in the early 900s BC. 

Lysippe becomes a key founder of the Thermodon Amazon nation.

Marpesia, her sister Lampedo, and Hippo are the successors of Lysippe.  They conquer more land and found more cities.

Antiope and Orithyia are the successors of Marpesia.  Antiope is captured by an Athenian (but not the original Theseus) and marries him.  Othyria then leads an Amazon expedition against Athens.  Antiope is killed in the battle by the Amazon Molpadia, why isn't agreed on.

Eurypyle campaigns against Samshi-Adad V, (husband of Shammuramat (Semiramis) and so might have become confused with Ninus) with an all female army.

Otrera was the Amazon Queen defeated by Bellerphon.

Andromache is defeated by a Herakles, as well as her sister Melanippe.

Priam and Mygdon fight against Amazons in the same region Bellerphon did earlier.

Pentheselia is an ally of Priam during the 7th Century BC Trojan War.  She was the sister rather then daughter of her predecessor.

Antianeira succeeds Pentheselia.

The Thermodon Amazons migrate north of the Black Sea.

Since I've argued reasons to possibly place Myrina's Queendom in Arabia, maybe even specifically Yemen.  And also for making her contemporary with Solomon, or nearly.  Maybe it's not implausible to connect her to the Biblical Queen of Sheba?  The same Queen or perhaps her Daughter?  I've mentioned on this blog before traditions that say Sheba was ruled solely by Queens for over a Thousand years, before the Patriarchal Kings List starts in the 8th Century BC.

Maybe even her home city/island in the Marsh being eventually submerged could have something to do with the history of the Marib Dam.  The Dam as we generally known it was constructed in the 8th Century BC. Dams being constructed often result in other areas being submerged.

Thera and Ice Core dateing

There is an article talking about how the Ice Core dating of Thera's eruption hurts Velikovsky.

I'm a creationist, and know full well the Science behind Ice Core dating is bunk. Same with Radiometric dating.  As well as Tree Ring dating.

The Ice Core dating of Thera has not been adequately acknowledged by Egyptian Chronologists for how it hurts conventional chronology.  If they acknowledged it, it would force them to move down the Hycsos period.  As talked about here.  That link seems to ignore Velikovsky's work on the Dark Ages of Greece showing there is a connection between Thera and revised Chronology.  It's also over all not a Creationist website.

Because I agree with Ussher's dates for David and Solomon's reigns my date for Thera's eruption would probably be a few decades before Velikovsky's.  950s BC would be during Solomon's reign from the timeline Velikovsky assumed I think.  I place Solomon's reign from 115 BC to 975 BC.

I as I said before I do not agree with or care for the Worlds in Collision premise, I'm just into the Revised Chronology.

Velikovsky and some of his later followers also argued the Minoan civilization lasted longer then the Mycenean civilization which can bring it down to the 7th Century BC.  But I'm not inclined to agree with making Tarshish the Minoan civilization.

The main synchronization is that the Eruption effected the Minoans during or very soon after the Hycsos period.  Anytime in the 11th Century BC could work I feel.

I've read a claim (from someone not trying to connect it to Thera) that the chronology of the Kings of Athens refers to a disaster happening around the time of the Death of it's last king Cordus around 1068/9 BC.  But I haven't yet been able to verify this.

Shem, Ham and Japheth

Tradition has usually worked under an assumption that Japheth = Europe, Ham = Africa and Shem = Asia.

Today there is a growing though still minority trend to line them up instead with modern (or rather Victorian) "racial" classifications as Japheth = Mongoloid, Ham = Negroid and Shem = Caucazoid.  This happens to be attractive to British Israelism and similar theories since Semites and Indo-Europeans (including White people) are both Caucazoid it can make the idea of Israelites becoming European seem less absurd then it does at face value.

I consider both those assumptions equally flawed.  Regardless however of what may or may not determine descent from Ham there is nothing wrong with being descended from Ham.

Before I elaborate I want to recommend everyone familiarize themselves with Ken Ham's explanation for how all the different "races" of people we see today could have all came from Noah and his sons.  His and other Creationists discussions of the subject are why I don't even like to use the word "race" we are all the Human Race, I prefer ethnicity when referring to these kinds of distinctions.  (I of course disagree with his hints at disapproving of Homosexuality but that's not the point of those discussions).

Everyone on the Ark and at the building of Babel I believe looked about the same (probably like Arabs) and had the same Genetic variability.

After they dispersed what determined the kinds of features they developed was mostly the climates of the regions they traveled to.  The darkest skinned people were those who first settled in the heart of Africa where it's the hottest.  The lightest skinned people come from those who settled in the north in the coldest regions.  I don't know why the climate and conditions in East Asia (and to a lesser extent the Americas possibly) would be where almond shaped eyes developed, but I'm sure there is a reason.

From the Biblical clues we have it was mostly Ham's offspring who went to Africa.  But if some Semites and Japhethites had went with them they'd have developed the exact same dark skinned features.  And likewise Hamites who settled in cold regions would have developed light skin.

Now over time loss of genetic information made it so it wouldn't be so easy for those features to change after migrating to a different region.  That is why today we have ethnically diverse populations living in the same locations.  But some groups might have maintained more genetic variability then others, especially those who are Medium Brown, and that can help explain why descendants of various Israelite Diasporas look so different from each other.

I said before that I don't believe Genesis 10 and 11 name all Noah's grandsons.  It just names the founders of various early tribes.  I also want to suggest that even the early groups those leaders lead were maybe not made up only of descendants of that one of Noah's grandsons and that they may even have included some people who's pater-lineal ancestry did not go back the same one of Noah's sons.

This is also important to understand when it comes to the desire of evolutionists to label Neanderthals or Homo-Floresiensis and other fossils as Non-Humans.  They clearly seem basically human but Evolutionists insist that have so many differences that don't fit our modern scientific definition of Human as a species.  Any examples that are petrified fossils were probably Pre-Flood and descendants of Adam and Eve but possibly not through Seth and Enosh.  But even ones that aren't petrified and so probably are from Noah might be people who developed distinct features that Noah's genetic potential had. But because they were not well known to enlightenment and Victorian era scientists who defined our modern "racial" distinctions were thus excluded from the modern definition of Human.  The fact remains that those people weren't "Ape like" either.

The problem with either simplistic way of defining descent from Shem, Ham and Japheth is that the Canaanites and probably also the Philistines are labeled by secular "racial" scientists as Semitic even though Biblically they are from Ham.  Likewise the primary nation identified with Shem's son Lud is classical Lydia which is not considered Semitic.

I think the early descendants of Aram's son Gether were the Gutians who some have argued became the Goths or at least some of the Goths.  I'm also open to theories about Edom and Dan contributing to the European gene pool.  But mostly I think the Lost Tribes went East. And I overall see the Indo-Europeans as mostly coming from Japhethite tribes, and very much recommend Bill Cooper's research in After The Flood.  In addition I recommend material out there about how Ashkenaz became the Aseir.

I definitely think Japheth also contributed greatly to Asia.  The Mongols and Huns seem to be among the descendants of Magog like the Scythians.

But let's look at the arguments for denying Japheth's traditional association with Europe/"White" people.

The association between Javan and Greece is the foundation of the traditional association of Japheth with Europe.  Greeks and other Mediterraneans are sometimes not considered to be "white" under the strictest definition today, but regardless they are definitely Indo-European.  Yavan was and still is the Hebrew name for Greece.  The Bible uses it in passages about Alexander The Great (Daniel 8 and 10-11) leaving no dispute the Aegean world is what's meant by it, not just the Ionians.

This new view argues that the original inhabitants of Greece were of Javan but that Semites displaced them eventually, Javan's name remained associated with the geographical region even though his offspring were no longer there.  The argument for that can be compelling when you have a thorough knowledge of Greek history and their myths about their pre-history and how they developed.  But not when they try to make it sound like one simple invasion or migration.

The Greeks themselves believed other people lived in their lands first.  Pelesgian was a name for one of the pre-Hellenic tribes that became a general term for all of them.  I've argued before that Pelesgians could have came from Pelegian, meaning of Peleg son of Heber of Shem.  But I also think the Arcadians could have came from the Arkite tribe of the Canaanites and the Sintians from the Sinite tribe of the Canaanites.

That however makes it look like the non-Japhethites were the ones who came first.  Well it gets more complicated.  The Javanites no doubt came after these people but before the proper "Heroic Age" of Greek mythology, which conventionally correlates with the Mycenaean age Archaeologically.  But we believe the Mycenaean age should be moved down, and that the myths associated with the Heroic age had when they took place confused by Homer and Hesiod and others re-imagining them during the Classical period.

The Heroic Age can be said to begin with Cecrops founding or refunding Athens.  That event being dated to 1556 BC I don't think should change because that's based on the ancient chronology of the Kings and Archons of Athens which is pretty solid and unbroken.  This means I place Theseus (a later king of Athens) during the Minoan rather then Mycenaean period.  This makes perfect sense with the context of the myth (the origin story part of it at least).  It is about Greece being subject to a Cretan tyrant.  In some versions Cecrops came from Egypt but not always, in my chronology this was likely during the Hycsos period of Egypt.  Since I lean towards dating the death of Joshua to 1557 BC.

I have seen two references to placing Theseus in the 800s BC, neither gave a reason and I suspect they were just pure fiction.  But both were in the context of specifically Theseus interactions with the Amazons.

Later between 1490-1450 BC Cadmus and Dannus lead what I think were likely Edomite migrations into Greece.  Whether or not those dates should be changed I'm unsure.  But all those were isolated to specific parts and clearly were always mingling with those already there.  Ultimately Italy is where Edom mainly settled.

Some people think Rhodes is the only Greek location the Dodonim should be linked to.  I disagree with identifying Dodonim with Dardanus, but there is a location on the Greek Peninsula called Dodona.

Madai is the ancestor of the Medes and the Medes are indeed Indo-European, they seem to be the root of the Indo half.  But British Israelists may be inclined to argue that they became "Indo-European" because the Cities of the Medes were where many Northern Israelites were taken in II Kings 17.  However that their language was Indo-Eurpean seems to be pretty firmly established well before that.

The new theory will try to argue for connecting Javan to Eastern peoples by linking Javan to names like Yuan.  Or even arguing that Japan came from Javan via the V becoming a B (which does happen) and the B later becoming a P.  (Problem is Nippon is what the Japanese call themselves)  There is also the Javanese People to consider.  One could also try to use the Yavanas of the Mahabarata as evidence of Javan in India, but the Mahabarata is not as old as Ancient Aliens says it is, it's post Alexander The Great.

I agree entirely with Bill Cooper that the name Iapetos/Iapetus/Japetus in Greek mythology comes from Japheth.  Iapetos was an ancestral deity, but Greek mythology as we know it has confused things and he is made an ancestor of the Flood survivor rather then his son.  Iapetos is also a Titan, and it is believed by many scholars that the Titans were the gods of the Pre-Hellenic inhabitants of the Aegean and that the Olympians overthrowing The Titans is a myth that allegorises the change in pantheon.  Iapetos wife in some myths was named Asia.

So the argument can become very compelling.  The problem is it begins with the flawed assumption that what we label Oriental ethnic features is the sign of descent from Japheth.  And no ancient depictions I know of can justify saying that Ancient Greece was ever inhabited by people with Almond shaped eyes.  Whether or not there is a kinship between some of the early tribes of Ancient Greece and many Far Eastern peoples, it would still say nothing about what Ethnic features prove.

While I believe Japheth contributed to the Asiatic gene pool, so did the other two.  The Early Chinese I believe likely have a connection to the Sinite tribe, one Psalm calls the Chinese the Sinim.  I also think there was a major Semtic contribution, I don't think Joktan's sons were limited to Arabia, I agree that the name Yucatan could come from Joktan.  But not how that argument is used by Mormons and people wanting to put Ophir in Peru.

Tarshish is interesting.  I agree largley with the argument that Tarshish is Britain, Chuck Missler makes a good argument there, Herodotus says Tarshish was beyond the Pillars of Herakles (Straight of Gibraltar).  I think the cities in Spain and Turkey people like to point to were merely outposts.

Some insist that the Tarshish in Solomon and Jehoshaphat's times were in the East rather then West because of leaving for it via the Red Sea.  It could be because this was an unusual Tarshish linked mission involving Ophir in Arabia that they circumnavigated Africa.

Arguing that Tarshsish is Japan doesn't work because even Japan's possibly exaggerated mythological history doesn't have their Nation being founded until the 7th Century BC.  Well after both Solomon and Jehoshaphat.

It could also be this early British sea faring nation had outposts in South Africa or Madagascar.

Advocates of this modern theory will say that Genesis 9 foretells Japheth being enlarged and thus we should identify him with the world's largest populations.  Enlarged there could also mean Geo-Political influence however.  In that context Genesis 9 was abused to support European Imperialism and Slavery.

When it comes to being foretold that the number of individuals descended from you would be a large number, that's mainly Abraham and his decedents.  Genesis 12 and 15 talk about his Seed being as the stars in Heaven, which is in turn compared to the sands of the seashore.  Rebecca was foretold to be ancestral to Thousands of Millions.  In Genesis 35 Jacob is told a company of Nations would come out of him.  In Genesis 48 Ephraim also was told a "multitude of nations" would come out of him. In Deuteronomy 33, Reuben's blessing says "Let not his men be few" and God promises to bless them that enlarge Gad.

So this factors into my view I already linked to that the Lost Tribes went East.

How did Edom become Rome?

On my Blog on Bible Prophecy I argued based mainly on Biblical Eschatology that Edom became Rome.  Then I further backed that up with a look at what we know about Edomite and Roman Religon.  All of that is also relevant to my current view on Daniel 11:36-45.

On this Blog I've previously touched on the Edom=Rome issue when discussing the Hycsos as the Amalekites.  And to some extent what I said there overlaps with my study on Dan.

Now I want to get into my recently developed thoughts on how Edom became Rome.  Major reason why that's relevant here has to do with Veilkovsky and his followers work on The Dark Age of Greece.

Clearly Greek and Roman mythology are frequently more distorted from the real history behind them then even many other highly distorted mythologies.  A product of them reinventing their mythology multiple times.

I agree that Homer probably actually wrote in the 7th century BC as opposed to the traditional 8th, and that The Iliad is probably an imaginative mixing of characters and events linked to both the 7th century BC fall of Troy VIII and the 12th century BC fall of Troy II.  With perhaps sprinklings of myths not originally linked to Troy at all.

Dating when Aeneas lived based on when Dido lived is a mistake however.  None of the myths connecting Aeneas to Dido began to pop up until after the Punic Wars, or at least after they started.  It was prompted by a desire to give a Romantic background to Rome and Carthage's rivalry for dominance of the Western Mediterranean.

Thing is, I've grown skeptical that Aeneas originally had anything to do with Rome at all.  His connection to Rome did exist before Virgil and Livy, but it still seems late, after they began borrowing more and more from Greece.  Aeneas was definitely an unresolved sequel hook in The Iliad, which I think Roman imagination latched onto.

I think originally like most City-States Rome had one key mythical founder, Romulus.   Now I think some Edomite tribes came to Italy well before Romulus, like the Italian Pelasgians, and the Sabines who were a Spartan offshoot.  But I think Romulus and Remus are the key to how the Edomite kingdom that had been subject to Davidic Kings for generations became Rome.

Now I'm going to do some copying from Wikipedia.

Romulus and Remus were the twin brothers and main characters of Rome's foundation myth. (The pronunciation in English is different from the Latin original Rōmulus and Rĕmus). Their mother was Rhea Silvia, daughter of Numitor, king of Alba Longa. Before their conception, Numitor's brother Amulius seized power, killed Numitor's male heirs and forced Rhea Silvia to become a Vestal Virgin, sworn to chastity. Rhea Silvia conceived the twins by the god Mars, or by the god Hercules. Once the twins were born, Amulius had them abandoned to die in the Tiber river. They were saved by a series of miraculous interventions: the river carried them to safety, a she-wolf (in Latin, lupa) found and suckled them, and a woodpecker fed them. A shepherd and his wife found them and fostered them to manhood as simple shepherds. The twins, still ignorant of their true origins, proved to be natural leaders. Each acquired many followers. When they discovered the truth of their birth, they killed Amulius and restored Numitor to his throne. Rather than wait to inherit Alba Longa, they chose to found a new city.

My hypothesis is, all of this part of the story was only later in it's passing down changed geographically to being already in Italy.  Alba Longa replaced an Edomite City south of the Dead Sea.  And The Tiber replaced a river in that area.  They decided to travel and found a new city somewhere else because this is during the time when Assyria was becoming a threat to the whole area. The Northern Kingdom's fall was approaching.

Eventually 753 BC was settled on as the official Date of Rome's founding, but Ancient sources actually had dates varying from 758 BC to 728 BC.  Ussher argued that it was really in 748 BC.  It could be the restored King Numitor is the king known from Assyrian inscriptions as Kaus-Malaka around 745 BC.  Kaus-Malaka sounds like it's probably a throne name and not a personal one.  But Numitor could also be changed with the people's language change to Latin.

A potential Semitic origin for the name of Romulus (and thus Rome) could be words like Rowmah (Strongs 7317) or Rowman (Strongs 7318) .  Remus could interestingly enough derive from the controversial Semitic word the KJV translates Unicorn.

It might be that as Aeneas was made part of Roman Mythology, stories originally affiliated with Romulus and Remus became attached to him.  At least the key part about being someone who traveled from across the Mediterranean to found a new city.

Later as Romulus's city became successful more Edomites might have migrated there.

Update: Second Hypothosis

I've come up with a second one, still based on the premise that the cycle of myths around Aeneas in Italy were originally peeled off from myths about Romulus.

This time I'm thinking maybe Romulus and Remus should be identified with Ascanius and Silvius, the sons of Aeneas and Lavina.  Lavina could be identified with Rea Silvia and Latinus with Numitor.  Or Numitor and Armulius represent a generation between Latinus and Lavina that had been removed.

And when Aeneas was added to Roman mythology Troy replaced Edom and Aeneas was put in place of a man later deified as Mars.  Mars is another of the Roman deities who's name wasn't borrowed from the Etruscan pantheon, the Etruscan war god was Laran.  The name Mars could have a Semitic origin as Mari (Strongs number  4805) which means rebel or rebellious, it's easy to make a connection between Rebellion and War. Also Mar/Mari is the Aramaic word for "lord" and is in Aramaic Judaeo-Christian texts equated with Adonai and sometimes associated with The Holy Name.

The last reference to Edom in their Biblical region is before the time of the three Edomite kings referred to in Assyrian inscriptions.  I'm actually starting to think the people we assume to be Edomites of Assyrian inscriptions may actually be the Ishmaelite tribe of Dumah, who later became the Idumeans and were also affiliated with Mount Sier.  Since the Assyrian inscriptions actually say Udumi or Udumu.

Speaking of the Etruscans, the official theory on their connection to the Sea Peoples doesn't work well with Velikovskian chronology. Where they came from I'm working on.  That Etruscans are present in the Aeneas cycle of myths could be evidence against whoever was behind those stories living in the 1100s since the Etruscan civilization began around 900 BC.

I think since I'm a writer I may someday write a fictional narrative based on how I think this might have played out.  I really like the 1962 Steve Reeves film The Avenger where he played Aeneas.  He also did one where he played Romulus I haven't seen yet.