Ten Tribes Studies (10 July, 2014, 12 Tammuz, 5774)
Contents:
1. New Article. North Gomer
Cimmerians from the Middle East? Summary and notes on an article by Vladimir Eiujj
2. Does the Nickname Yank Really Stand for Jacob?
3. A Wikipedia Article on the Scottish Pork Taboo and Remarks by Brit-Am.
================================================================
================================================================
1. New Article. North Gomer
Cimmerians from the Middle East? Summary and notes on an article by Vladimir Eiujj
http://hebrewnations.com/articles/16/nthgomer.html
Extracts:
The Cities of the Medes was in the region of Media. It adjoined Mannae.
The Aramaic Translation to Amos (4:3) says that the Israelites were exiled to Beyond the Mountains of Mannae. This region involved the Kingdoms of both Assyria and Urartu. Israelite Exiles were in both areas as reflected in the Histories of Armenia.
In these areas the Israelites federated with other peoples known generically as the Sons of Gomer. They included the Cimmerians and Scythians. Other scholars reached similar conclusions before us. They usually equated all of the Cimmerians and company with the Lost Ten Tribes. We however only make such an equation for a portion of them.
Two separate possible scenarios exist.Â
Which of the two is the more correct, does not overduly affect our understanding as to what happened.
(1) Did the Cimmerians come mainly from the north, go south, link up with Israel, and then move back northwards?
Or:
(2) Did they originate in the Middle East and then later move northward?
Classical, especially Roman, sources support the first possibility. That is how most authorities also describe the situation. It is also the view we incline to.
 Archaeological findings, as distinct from archaeologists, are more supportive of the second option.
Even though we may not consider the Cimmerians to have mainly come from the Middle East the fact that such a possibility is considered to have existed is important. It highlights the feasibility of Israelites have comprised a good portion of those Cimmerians who really were in the Middle East and later moved northward.
================================================================
================================================================
2. Does the Nickname Yank Really Stand for Jacob?
Sean Kraft wrote:
Yair,
the numerous stories as to the origin of the word "Yankees" never cease to amaze me. I had not heard the "Jacob" version of this until I read it on your site. This is simply not possible for several verifiable reasons.
Tradition and heritage here in the United States tells that the name "Yankees" comes from native American Indians poorly pronouncing the word "English". "Yankees" is then a poor pronunciation of this, which originally sounding more like "ying-eese".Â
Before we declared independence, inhabitants of New England referred to themselves as "colonials" and "English". And this is what they called themselves to the Indians as well. The mispronunciation however, was passed down in a joking manner by English speakers until it was invigorated into the culture to refer to the heavily British influenced north. There are centuries old writings bearing this out.
The original word "English" is both plural (the English men) and singular (an English man), but the "-ees" portion in the mispronunciation sounded in the English language as a pluralizing suffix, and therefore in the United States it has always been used thusly; "Yankees", plural and "Yankee" singular.
As it was largely considered a derogatory slur for those living in the northern New England states, during the Civil War it came into use with great vigor in the south; "Damn Yankees", for "Damned English". And during this war, the northerners in the New England states then spitefully adopted this name with pride.
Ironically, it was the actual English of England who adopted this term for Americans and shortened it from "Yankees", to "Yanks" when referring to all Americans.
Americans have have never referred to all of Americans as "Yanks" or "Yankees". This would be absurd to most and insulting to many. To this day, "Yankees" is still used to refer to northern New Englanders, and largely to contrast them with Southerners.
thanks for listening,
Sean Kraft
===============================================================
Brit-Am Reply:
Fair enough.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that all you have said above on the subject is correct:
Yank in Ashkenazic Hebrew would still be the equivalent of Jack i.e. Jacob.
[I also received an e-mail some time ago from a widow of central European origin whose husband had been named Jacob but everyone referred to him as Yank.]
Divine Providence may be relied upon to find its own pathways to bring about the desired effect.
===============================================================
Sean Replies to Brit-Am Reply:
Yair,
makes a nice circle back to it, doesn't it?
sean
================================
================================
3. A Wikipedia Article on the  Scottish Pork Taboo  and Remarks by Brit-Am.
Yair,
thank you for your work. I thought you would like to see this.
Scottish pork taboo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_pork_taboo
blessings,
Sean Kraft
================================
Brit-Am Remarks:
Thank you for this source.
This Wikipedia article is based on the work of
Donald Alexander Mackenzie (1873-1936).
Donald A. Mackenzie, in "Scottish Folf Lore and Folk Life. Studies in Race, Culture, and Tradition", U.K., 1935, ch.1. Mackenzie was the main source for our own article.
The Food Taboos of Old Scotland. The Law of Moses and of CaledoniaÂ
http://britam.org/foodtaboos.html#Mackenzie
Hebrew Scotland. Ancient Scotts Only Ate Kosher Animals!
http://hebrewnations.com/articles/tribes/scot.html
This sources was mentioned in all our early weeks, some time before the Internet existed or at least became what it now is and certainly well before Wikipedia.
It may even be that our publicizing this information led to the interest that resulted in the Wikipedia article.
Paraphrases and even verbatim extracts from our writings are to be found all over the Web, sometimes without accrediting our humble selves.
Our work bears fruit in many forms and numerous forums.
Anyway, the fact exists that the Scottish kept a taboo against pigs.
Some of them associated this with Old Testament traditions.
The Irish eat pork BUT had the idea that they had once not done so.
Our own explanation for this phenomenon, that it derived from Israelite origins, is still the most plausible answer in so far as it answers all the questions.
People who wish at all costs to avoid accepting such an explanation will naturally find some kind of rationale for doing so.
cf.
http://hebrewnations.com/articles/tribes/scot.html#a7
Inhabitants of the British Isles in general had some kind of attraction to Hebrew Practices. This was especially noticeable in Scotland. Several different explanations exist for this phenomenon. An instinctive Remembrance of Israelite Ancestry is the one answer that actually answers the question: Aspects of the Mosaic Law were kept in Scotland because the people felt themselves obliged to keep them since they too had once received these laws.
Here are extracts from the Wikipedia article.
================================
Scottish pork taboo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_pork_taboo
Quote:
The Scottish pork taboo was Donald Alexander Mackenzie's phrase for discussing an aversion to pork amongst Scots, particularly Highlanders, which he believed to stem from an ancient taboo. Several writers who confirm that there was a prejudice against pork, or a superstitious attitude to pigs, do not see it in terms of a taboo related to an ancient cult. Any prejudice is generally agreed to have been fading by 1800. Some writers attribute a scarcity or dislike of pork in certain periods to a shortage of pig fodder.
Donald Mackenzie's ideas
He gave a lecture on the Scottish pork taboo in 1920[1] when he explained his idea that prejudices against pork-eating could be traced back to a centuries-old religious cult. When he published these theories in the 1930s he suggested the taboo was imported to Scotland in pre-Roman times by Celtic mercenaries, influenced by the cult of Attis in Anatolia. (The cult of Attis did not abstain permanently from pork; it was a purification for their ceremonies.[2])
He dismissed any possibility that the pork taboo originated from a literal reading of the Bible, and disputed this with various arguments, noting that early Christian missionaries did not snub pork. He conceded that there was archaeological evidence of pigs being eaten in prehistoric Scotland, but suggested this might have come from pork-eating peoples living near others who did observe the taboo, or be related to ceremonial use of pigs. Later pork production was for export, not for local use, just as eels were caught to send to the English market, while they were unacceptable as food in Scotland. The taboo died out in the Lowlands earlier than in the Highlands.
Other Folklorists, such as Isabel Grant, have accepted this theory of a taboo.[3]
Writers cited by Mackenzie
In addition to proposing ideas developed from studying the mythology and folk-lore of Scotland and other cultures, Mackenzie quoted writers of the 18th and 19th centuries.
Walter Scott referred to Scottish Highlanders' dislike of pork in more than one book,[4] and around 1814 explained that
Pork or swine's flesh, in any shape, was, till of late years, much abominated by the Scotch, nor is it yet a favourite food amongst them. King Jamie carried this prejudice to England, and is known to have abhorred pork almost as much as he did tobacco.[5]
Scott's remark that Ben Jonson "recorded" the king's aversion to pork in his masque The Gipsies Metamorphosed, when the king has his hand read, is based on these words:
You should, by this line,
Love a horse and a hound, but no part of a swine.
Samuel Johnson found an "abhorrence" of pork and bacon on Skye in the 1770s.
It is not very easy to fix the principles upon which mankind have agreed to eat some animals, and reject others; and as the principle is not evident, it is not uniform. ['] The vulgar inhabitants of Sky, I know not whether of the other islands, have not only eels, but pork and bacon in abhorrence, and accordingly I never saw a hog in the Hebrides, except one at Dunvegan.[6]
Mackenzie suggested that a verse in the English satirical song The Brewer from A Collection of Loyal Songs referred to the taboo:
The Jewish Scots that scorn to eat
The flesh of swine and Brewer's beat
'Twas the sight of this hogshead made 'em retreat
Which nobody can deny!
He believed that this, and other comments associating Scots with Jews, confirm the existence of the taboo, but have nothing to do with its origin.
He described a superstition about touching or saying "cauld airn" (cold iron) when pigs are mentioned. This was discussed by Dean Ramsay, and is also included in Walter McGregor's Notes on the folk-lore of the north-east of Scotland (Folklore Society 1881).[7]
Among the many superstitious notions and customs prevalent among the lower orders of the fishing towns on the east coast of Fife, till very recently, that class entertained a great horror of swine . . . .[8]
Mackenzie disagreed with Edward Burt, whose Letters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland (1754)[9] discusses an 'aversion' to pork in the Highlands, but says it is not 'superstitious'.
Other writers referring to a prejudice against pork
Bishop John Lesley's History of Scotland talks of "our cuntrie peple" having "lytle plesure" in pork in the 1570s.[10]
At least four ministers writing about their parishes for the Statistical Accounts of Scotland in the 1790s speak of a prejudice which is starting to fade: for instance, "The deep rooted prejudice against swine's flesh is now removed: most of the farmers rear some of that species, which not 30 years ago, they held in the utmost detestation." (Ardchattan, County of Argyle) Account of 1791-99, volume 6, page 177)[11]
20th century historian Christopher Smout speaks of "a universal superstitious prejudice".[12]
An archaeological survey of pork consumption in Scotland by the Society of Antiquities in Scotland in 2000 states: "Whether there is any archaeological evidence of this prejudice against pigs, for whatever reason, is open to question." and that "During the medieval period, it has been noted that rural sites contained more pig bones than urban sites, and that the lowest relative frequencies come from the most southerly of the burghs considered, Peebles and Perth. This contradicts the notion that it was the 'Highlanders' who abhorred pork, unless it is assumed that, despite this dislike, they continued to produce it for sale to others."[13]
Two writers disputing Donald Mackenzie's theories
The historian William Mackay Mackenzie published his thoughts in the Scotsman letters pages (8 October 1921) as part of a long-running debate arising from D. A. Mackenzie's lecture in 1920. While agreeing there had been a "sporadic prejudice" against pork in parts of Scotland, and offering illustrations of this, he was against the idea of a link to a "religious cult". He saw economic factors at work between 1500 and 1800 which would discourage pig-keeping. He cited several examples of pork consumption in the Middle Ages, and described a "temporary lapse" when "the great forests disappeared from Scotland".
In 1983 the American anthropologist Eric B. Ross put forward arguments based on a detailed study of Scottish agricultural history, and asserted the value of cultural materialism rooted in evolutionary anthropology for studying dietary customs, thus avoiding explanations based on "relatively esoteric" beliefs. Because of deforestation there was a loss of beech mast and acorns for feeding pigs, and it was not until the late 18th century that potatoes were produced in sufficient quantity to offer a useful alternative. Throughout this gap in pork consumption by the general population, many of the Scottish upper classes continued to eat the meat.[citation needed]
"In the years of the eighteenth century and probably earlier, swine were rarely raised in Scotland, particularly in the Scottish Highlands, and subsequent writers have gone so far as to postulate the operation of a taboo on the eating of pork. Unfortunately there is almost nothing known today about local sentiments of that era, and we have only the intellectual rationalizations of educated writers who all too easily found an explanation for the scarcity of pigs in the assumption that a 'foolish prejudice' was at work."[14]
End Quote.