“Allen” and the Nordic Covenant
In a previous post, I considered the link between Mount Gerizim sacred to the Samaritans who regard it as the place chosen by God to be the location of the holy temple rather than Jerusalam’s Temple Mount. This is the place where the patriarch Jacob buried the idols of strange gods, which may have included the Ark of the Covenant and possibly the Holy Grail, in a sanctuary marked by an oak tree.
In that post I concentrated on the figure of Jacob who we know from the C’s was also Abraham and Moses, so any chronological timings given in the Bible will have little or no application here. However, there is more to this place than the burying of idols (disguised high tech) and erecting a pillar. I set out below the Biblical account provided in Wikipedia to show how this place, the
Sanctuary of El-Berith, meaning God or Lord of the Covenant, may possibly have been connected with the Nordic Covenant the C’s have spoke of in the transcripts:
Moses instructed the Israelites, when first entering Canaan, to celebrate the event with ceremonies of blessings and cursings on Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal respectively. The
Pulpit Commentary suggests that these mountains were selected for blessings and curses "
doubtless, because of their relative position, and probably also because they stand in the centre of the land both from north to south, and from east to west". It has been suggested that "Ebal was appointed for the uttering of the curse, and Gerizim for the uttering of the blessing, because the former was barren and rugged, the latter fertile and smooth", but the
Pulpit Commentary editors state that "this is not borne out by the actual appearance of the two hills, both being equally barren-looking, though neither is wholly destitute of culture and vegetation". However, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges argues that "the [north] face of Gerizim, the mount of blessing, is the more fertile; the opposite face of Ebal, the mount of curse, much the more bare."
The Masoretic Text of the
Tanakh says the Israelites later built an altar on Mount Ebal, constructed from natural (rather than cut) stones, to place stones there and whiten them with lime, to make
korban (peace offerings on the altar), eat there, and write the words of
this law on the stone. The
Samaritan Pentateuch version of Deuteronomy, and a fragment found at Qumran, holds that the instruction actually mandated the construction of the altar on Mount Gerizim, which the Samaritans view as the site of the tabernacle, not
Shiloh. Recent Dead Sea Scrolls work supports the accuracy of the Samaritan Pentateuch's designation of Mount Gerizim rather than Mount Ebal as the sacred site.
The Twelve Curses
An instruction immediately subsequent to this orders that, once this is done, the Israelites should split into two groups, one to stay on Mount Ebal and pronounce curses, while the other goes to Mount Gerizim and pronounces blessings.The tribes
of Simeon,
of Levi,
of Judah,
of Issachar,
of Joseph, and
of Benjamin were to be sent to Gerizim, while those
of Reuben,
of Gad,
of Asher,
of Zebulun,
of Dan, and
of Naphtali, were to remain on Ebal. No attempts to explain this division of tribes either by their Biblical ethnology or by their geographical distribution have been generally accepted in academic circles.
The text goes on to list twelve curses, which were to be pronounced by the Levite priesthood and answered by the people with Amen. These curses heavily resemble laws (e.g. "cursed be he who removes his neighbour's landmark"), and they are not followed by a list of blessings described in a similarly liturgical framework; some scholars believe that these more likely represent what was written on the stones, and that the later list of six explicit blessings, six near-corresponding explicit curses, were originally in this position in the text. The present position of these explicit blessings and curses, within a larger narrative of promise, and a far larger narrative of threat (respectively), is considered by these scholars to have been an editorial decision for the post-Babylonian-exilic second version of Deuteronomy (
Dtr2), to reflect the
Deuteronomist's worldview after the Babylonian Captivity had occurred.
In the
Book of Joshua, after the Battle of
Ai, Joshua built an altar of unhewn stones there, the Israelites then made peace offerings on it, the
law of Moses was written onto the stones, and the Israelites split into the two groups specified in Deuteronomy and pronounced blessings and curses as instructed there. There is some debate between textual scholars as to whether this incident in Joshua is one account or two different accounts spliced together, where one account refers to Joshua building an altar, and making sacrifices on it, while the other account refers to Joshua placing large stone slabs there that had been whitened with lime and then had
the law inscribed on them. Either way there are some who believe that the sources of Joshua predate Deuteronomy, and hence that the order to build the altar and make the inscription is likely based on these actions in the sources of Joshua, rather than the other way round, possibly to provide an etiology for the site acceptable to the Deuteronomist's theology.
Much later in the Book, when Joshua was old and dying, he gathered the people together at Shechem, and gave a farewell speech, and then wrote
these words in the book of the law of Yahweh, and set up a stone as a witness, placing it next to the
sanctuary of Yahweh, under
the oak tree. Depending on the way in which the sources of Joshua were spliced together, this may just be another version of the earlier narrative Joshua placing the whitened stones slabs with
the law inscribed on them, and some scholars believe that this narrative may have originally been in an earlier location within the Book of Joshua.
A Nordic Coven
Now it is interesting that the C’s told Laura, when first discussing the Nordic Covenant, linked the word “
covenant” to the word “coven” as in a coven of witches or wizards. Normally the term covenant is taken to mean a formal and serious agreement or promise. The word "coven" derives from Anglo-Norman
covent, cuvent, from Old French “
covent” and from the Latin “
conventum” meaning “convention”. However, it seems the term remained largely unused in English until 1921 when
Margaret Murray promoted the idea that all witches across Europe met in groups of thirteen which they called "covens". Hence, the word as we use it today may be a fairly modern usage of the term.
That being said the thought of a group of people gathering together on a hilltop to utter explicit curses does kind of make one think of witches uttering curses or spells around a cauldron or fire.
Wikipedia goes on to add that Scholars consider it plausible for the sanctuary at El-Berith to have been
pre-Israelite. It is possible that the name of the mountain is indicative of this, as it is thought that
Gerizim may mean
mountain of the Gerizites, a tribe in the vicinity of the Philistines that, according to the Hebrew Bible, was conquered by David. A straightforward etymology for
Gerizim would give the meaning of
mountain cut in two. According to the narrative about Jotham in the Book of Judges, Shechem was a site where there was a sanctuary of
El-Berith, also known as
Baal-Berith, meaning
God of the covenant and
Lord of the covenant, respectively; scholars have suggested that the Joshua story about the site derives from
a covenant made there in Canaanite times. In the narrative of Judges, the
pillar that was in Shechem is seemingly significant enough to have given its name to a nearby plain, and this pillar is thought to be likely to have been a
totem of El-Berith; the Joshua story, of a stone being set up as a witness, simply being an attempt to provide an aetiology in accordance with later Israelite theology.
Hence, some scholars believe the sanctuary of El-Berith may have been pre-Israelite and the pillar or totem erected at Shechem was erected by an earlier group, perhaps a non-Philistine tribe called the Gerizites, to mark a covenant not with Yahweh but with Baal-Berith, Lord of the Covenant. This means that the provenance of the sanctuary may have been much older than the Biblical narrative would have us believe. The question is how much older. Could the pillar have been erected more than 5,000 years ago perhaps?
The Nordic Covenant
Here is what the C’s had to say about the blood covenant that Moses made in the
Session dated 12 December 1998:
Q: At the making of the Covenant at Mt. Sinai, there was a bunch of sacrificed animals, and Moses took the blood, dividing it in half, he cast one half on the altar. Taking the book of the covenant, he read it to the people, and they said 'we will observe all that Yahweh has decreed. We will obey.' And then Moses took the blood and cast it on the people saying 'this is the blood of the covenant that Yahweh has made with you containing all these rules.' What is this blood of the covenant?
A: Has to do with bloodline.
Q: So this symbolized the bloodline of the Jews?
A: No.
Q: What bloodline are we talking about here?
A: Aramaic/Aryan.
Q: Are you saying that the Jews are Aramaic/Aryan?
A: No. Jews are not bloodline categorizable, per se.
Q: When the person who was later represented as Jesus lived, was that, as Paul described it, a New Covenant of Blood?
A: No.
Q: Was any of this related to the Nordic Covenant?
A: In a parallel sense.
[ ]
Q: Is the Nordic Covenant in any sense similar to any of the things I have read here?
A: It is a mystical thing, not related to theology in a direct sense.
Q: How long has the Nordic Covenant been in existence?
A: 5129 years.
Q: Is the Nordic Covenant made between humans and other humans, or between humans and higher density beings?
A: Mostly between humans and humans, but some of the other.
Q: Does this Nordic Covenant exist on the earth today in similar format as it did at its inception?
A: Yes.
Q: Is this Nordic Covenant the same as you have referred to as the Quorum?
A: No.
Q: Would you say that the Nordic Covenant and the Quorum are in opposition, or just different?
A: Segmented relationship.
Q: Is there any particular thing about this that I ought to ask at the moment that I am not going to discover in the course of my research? The mail group asked a few questions about this, so I thought I ought to approach the subject. Is the Nordic Covenant made between people who are blond and blue-eyed?
A: Not the central issue.
Q: What is the central issue of the Nordic Covenant?
A: Bloodline extends off the planet.
Q: Is this Nordic Covenant a group that is in place on the planet for the purpose of guarding or propagating a particular bloodline?
A: To guard secrets.
Q: What does this secret have to do with a bloodline?
A: You should be able to figure this one out!
Thus, the C’s are telling us that this Covenant was entered into in 3127 BC and it relates to an Aramaic/Aryan bloodline that extends off the planet. It is a mystical thing and those involved in the covenant are guarding secrets that no doubt have a lot to do with our ancient past and perhaps our near future.
Is it possible that this covenant was entered into at El-Berith long before the time of Abraham/Moses and this covenant involved oaths of secrecy dedicated to Baal the god of the Canaanites and Phoenicians? Is that bloodline still preserving these secrets right down to our own age? At this distance in time, it is hard for us to prove, particularly as the god Baal seems to have had an older pedigree that may tie in with the ancient deities of Mesopotamia, such as Hadad, who was worshipped as a storm god in Sumer. The worship of Baal has even been conflated with the worship of Yahweh. However, it was the program of
Jezebel, the wife of Ahab, King of Israel, in the 9th century BC, to introduce into Israel's capital city of Samaria her Phoenician worship of Baal as opposed to the worship of Yahweh that made the name anathema to the Israelites.
Baal - Wikipedia. This certainly creates a somewhat confused picture for us.
The Peoples of Canaan
It is worth pondering here who were the peoples or tribes occupying Canaan at the time of Joshua. There were the
Philistines,
Phoenicians (the sea people), the
Arameans (an ancient semitic-speaking people in the Near East, first recorded in historical sources from the late 12th century BC) and
other Canaanites, including the Anikim. The
Anikim would seem to be a surviving remnant of the Nephilim giants who were said to have lived in the southern part of the land of Canaan, near Hebron. According to Genesis 14:5-6, they inhabited the region later known as Edom and Moab in the days of Abraham. However, it seems that nobody can pin down who the
Gerizites were other than to say that they were a tribe conquered subsequently by King David.
We should also bear in mind that Abraham/Moses, although described as a semite in the Bible, may according to the C’s have been an ancient Briton or Celt. In addition we know that
Sargon the Great had conquered the Sumerian city states to become the first ruler of the
Akkadian Empire in the 24th to 23rd centuries BC. We also know that he was a Scythian Celt from the C’s and these Celts had migrated from Northern China at some stage. Mummified remains have been found in the Tarim Basin in present-day
Xinjiang, China. These mummies date from 1800 BC and are
Caucasoid.
Tarim mummies - Wikipedia.
The mummies share many typical Caucasian body features (tall stature, high cheekbones, deep-set eyes), and many of them have their hair physically intact, ranging in colour from
blond to red to
deep brown, and generally long, curly and braided. Their costumes, and especially textiles, may indicate a common origin with Indo-European, Neolithic clothing techniques or a common low-level textile technology.
Chärchän man wore a red twill tunic and
tartan leggings. [A bit of a Celtic marker to me, given the Scottish love of tartan that persists to this day.]
Victor Mair has claimed that:
“
The new finds are also forcing a re-examination of old Chinese books that describe historical or legendary figures of great height, with deep-set blue or green eyes, long noses, full beards, and red or blond hair. Scholars have traditionally scoffed at these accounts, but it now seems that they may be accurate.”
He has also suggested that they may have arrived in the region by way of the
Pamir Mountains about 5,000 years ago.
Hence, Scythian Celts under the leadership of Sargon had come to dominate the Middle East and the Levant in the era of Abraham through their empire of
Akkad, which sounds somewhat similar etymologically to “
Arcadia” when you think about it.
The Scythians and the Alans
According to modern scholars the Scythians are generally believed to have been of Iranian origin. They spoke a language of the Scythian branch of the Iranian languages, and practiced a variant of ancient Iranian religion. Among the earliest peoples to master mounted warfare, the Scythians replaced the
Cimmerians as the dominant power on the Pontic Steppe in the 8th century BC. During this time they and related peoples came to dominate the entire Eurasian Steppe from the Carpathian Mountains in the west to
Ordos Plateau in the east, creating what has been called the first Central Asian nomadic empire. Based in what is modern-day Ukraine and southern Russia, they called themselves
Scoloti (
Skolotoi to the Greeks
) and were led by a nomadic warrior aristocracy known as the
Royal Scythians.
In the 7th century BC, the Scythians crossed the Caucasus and frequently raided the Middle East along with the Cimmerians, playing an important role in the political developments of the region. Around 650–630 BC, Scythians briefly dominated the Medes of the western Iranian Plateau, stretching their power to
the borders of Egypt. After losing control over Media, they continued intervening in Middle Eastern affairs, playing a leading role in the destruction of the Assyrian Empire in the Sack of Nineveh in 612 BC. The Scythians subsequently engaged in frequent conflicts with the
Achaemenid Empire, and suffered a major defeat against Macedonia in the 4th century BC and were subsequently gradually conquered by the
Sarmatians, a related Iranian people living to their east. In the late 2nd century BC, their capital at Scythian Neapolis in the Crimea was captured by
Mithridates VI and their territories incorporated into the
Bosporan Kingdom. By this time they had been largely Hellenized. By the 3rd century AD, the Sarmatians and last remnants of the Scythians were dominated by the
Alans, and were being overwhelmed by the
Goths. By the early Middle Ages, the Scythians and the Sarmatians had been largely assimilated and absorbed by early Slavs. The Scythians were instrumental in the ethnogenesis of the
Ossetians, who are believed to be descended from the Alans,
Hence, we see that the Scythians nearly 1700 years after Sargon are still playing a major part in the Middle East of the 7th century BC until they are conquered by their cousins, the Sarmatians and they end up being dominated by the Alans. One thing that strikes me though is the closeness etymologically speaking between the names “
Sarmatian” and “
Samaritan”. Given that we may be looking at two groups of Celts, they may even be the same people.
But what of the Alans, who were they? The
Alans (
Latin:
Alani) were an ancient and medieval Iranaian nomadic pastoral people of the North Caucasus - generally regarded as part of the
Sarmatians, and possibly related to the
Massagetae. So these guys were another bunch of Sarmatians and by extension were originally Scythian Celts.
Having migrated westwards and become dominant among the Sarmatians on the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, the Alans are mentioned by Roman sources in the 1st century AD. At that time they had settled the region north of the Black Sea and frequently raided the Parthian Empire and the Caucasian provinces of the Roman Empire. From 215–250 AD, their power on the Pontic Steppe was broken by the Goths.
Upon the Hunnic defeat of the Goths on the Pontic Steppe around 375 AD, many of the Alans migrated westwards along with various Germanic tribes. They crossed the Rhine in 406 AD along with the Vnadals and Suebi, settling in Orleans and Valence. Around 409 AD, they joined the Vandals and Suebi in crossing the Pyrenees into the Iberian Peninsula, settling in Lusitania and
Hispania Carthaginensis. The Iberian Alans were soundly defeated by the Visigoths in 418 AD and subsequently surrendered their authority to the Hasdingi Vandals.
The fourth-century Roman historian
Ammianus Marcellinus wrote this on the appearance of the Alans:
“
Nearly all the Alani are men of great stature and beauty; their hair is somewhat yellow, their eyes are terribly fierce.”
Prior to their Christianisation, the Alans were Indo-Iranian polytheists, subscribing either to the poorly understood Scythian pantheon or to a polytheistic form of Zoroastrianism. Some traditions were directly inherited from the Scythians, like embodying their dominant god in elaborate rituals.
Laura has already pointed out on this thread that the Sarmatians also came to Roman Britain as cavalry auxiliaries in 175 AD, when the Emperor Marcus Aurelius stationed 5,500 of them in Britain. They were famous for flying their dragon pennant (as ‘dragon slayers’) or standard in battle, which the Welsh may have adopted for their own flag. Although they only stayed for a short period, one company remained behind in what today is Lancashire and intermarried with local women.
I attach an interesting article on the Sarmatians in the Roman Empire and their possible link with our old Merovingian friends, the Franks. The article states that the German historian
Schmoeckel saw much evidence that
the Merovingians and other Frankish nobility, as the
Carolingians, are
descendants of the Sarmatians. This link is, of course, of the utmost importance to our own bloodline quest.
Sarmatic Traces
Skull Deformation
However, perhaps the most surprising thing shown in the article is this skull of a Sarmatian, which readily puts one in mind of Tutankhamun and Nefertiti’s hybrid elongated skulls.
Gothic egghead skull, in youth deformed,
4th century AD, Globasnitz (Austria)
Besides the grave goods in the Merovingian Necropolis, the eastern origin of the individuals can be attested by the presence of an intentionally deformed skull. Burials such as this have been discovered in isolation in northern Gaul, Germany and Eastern Europe and often include rich furnishings.
They would appear to represent the graves of dignitaries and their families who were incorporated into the Roman army at the time of the great migration
In
Valence (France) in the Rhône valley there are graves found from the 4th century AD with skulls as seen in the Ukraine in steppe peoples such as the Sarmatians and also the Goths with a characteristic skull deformation, caused by tight bandaging of the growing skulls of new born babies.
Here is another example of a deformed skull found in the Merovingian necropolis in Obernai, Bas-Rhin.
In an area around
Lake Geneva there are many places with names of Alanian origin. These must have been Alanian settlements. There are also graves from the 5th century AD of people that have the same typical Sarmatian skull deformation.
In graves in Valais (South West France) in the 5th century, and Valence (France) in the 4th century, skulls have been found that are the same as those found in the Ukraine, with the characteristic skull deformation caused by tight bandaging of the growing skulls of new born babies as seen in the Steppe peoples known as Sarmatians.
We obviously must take the archaeologists’ word for it that these elongated skulls were the result of tight bandaging of the growing infant skull rather than an inherited physical condition. Such practices can still be found today in Africa and were also practised in Peru and other parts of South America. No doubt this was in imitation of these peoples’ gods or ancestors who had such skulls. One may wonder though whether a larger skull is a bloodline trait and whether their descendents today still have slightly larger skulls than the rest of the population. If anyone has knowledge of this, I would be glad to hear from them.
King Arthur and Excalibur
The article also links the Sarmatians with the King Arthur legend and discusses how the ‘Sword in the Stone legend’ may have come from the
Kalybers (‘Excalibur’) the Sarmatian tribe of that name that lived in the Western Caucasus and was most famous for forging weapons. Apparently, the Sarmatians worshipped a god that was a sword stuck into the ground or in a woodpile.
In the Alanian Nart Saga there is a tale of a large magical scale the
Nartyamonga that appears at their banquets and always fills itself again after emptying [MJF: this reminds me of the Horn of Plenty in Norse mythology]. Only the most impeccable heroes are allowed to drink out of it. In the Arthurian legends, this is the
Holy Grail, from which only the noblest knights may drink. According to ancient texts, he was brought from Rome to Britain by a certain
Alan. The Grail comes from 12th century Christian association.
Have we finally drawn the sword from the stone here?
The article also points out that an example of the assimilation of the Alans may be the appearance and later the popularity in Europe of the first or Christian name “
Alain”/”
Allen” (see below for more on this name).
However, returning to the Alans, they spoke an Eastern Iranian language, which derived from
Scytho-Sarmatian and which in turn evolved into modern Ossetian. The name
“Alan” is an
Iranian dialectal form of Aryan.
Hence, to the Iranians, the name Alan means Aryan. And remember when Laura asked “
what is this blood of the covenant?” The C’s responded:
A: Has to do with bloodline.
Q: What bloodline are we talking about here?
A: Aramaic/Aryan.
The Arameans
Well we know the Celts are an Aryan group but what of Aramaic? Historically and originally, Aramaic was the language of the
Arameans, a Semitic-speaking people of the region between the northern Levant and the northern Tigris valley. By around 1000 BC, the Arameans had a string of kingdoms in what is now part of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and the fringes of southern Mesopotamia and Anatolia (modern day Turkey). Aramaic rose to prominence under the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–605 BC), under whose influence Aramaic became a prestige language after being adopted as a lingua franca of the empire, and its use spread throughout Mesopotamia, the Levant and parts of Asia Minor. At its height, Aramaic, having gradually replaced earlier Semitic languages, was spoken in several variants all over what is today
Iraq,
Syria,
Lebanon,
Palestine,
Israel,
Jordan,
Kuwait,
Eastern Arabia,
Bahrain,
Sinai, parts of southeast and south central Turkey, and parts of northwest Iran. Royal Aramaic inscriptions from the Aramean city-states date from 10th century BC, making Aramaic one of the world's oldest recorded living languages.
Aramaic - Wikipedia
"Aram" is used as a proper name of several people including descendants of Shem, Nahor, and
Jacob. Ancient
Aram, bordering northern Israel and what is now called Syria, is considered the linguistic center of Aramaic, the language of the Arameans who settled the area during the Bronze Age circa 3500 BC. The language is often mistakenly considered to have originated within Assyria (Iraq). In fact, Arameans carried their language and writing into Mesopotamia by voluntary migration, by forced exile of conquering armies, and by nomadic Chaldean invasions of Babylonia during the period from 1200 to 1000 BC. Hence, there is a distinct likelihood that Abraham/Moses/Jacob’s people mixed with the Arameans, the resulting children being Aramean/Aryan just as the C’s indicated.
Moreover, the historians Josephis and Strabo (the latter citing Posidonius) both stated that the “Syrians” called themselves “
Arameans”.
What we should bear in mind is that many Assyrians/Syrians were taken as slaves to Rome by the Romans during the peak of the Western Roman Empire. They were renowned for their trading and monetary skills, as were the Jews, in Rome. In time many of these slaves gained their freedom and became rich and prominent citizens of Rome in their own right. This can be attested to by the large numbers of non-Roman names found in Rome’s cemeteries, many of Syrian origin. However, when the Huns invaded Italy and threatened Rome, many of these Romanised Syrian families fled to the swampland that eventually became Venice. Some of these families were of the bloodline and would go on to form the ‘
Black Nobility’ that we have previously encountered on this thread.
Continued in Part 2
