What history was Eclectus concerned about? I guess it was less the mistake on dates and omission of the Germanic influence in Spain, than the theory on Jewish origins. Perhaps he does not like the Jews being placed as a Steppe tribe of not most ancient ME descent. What I mean is that they were not originally Arabic or other darker skinned Semitic speaking ME tribe. It seems they came into Southern Babylon about 5800 BC from the Black Sea area after the earthquake at the Dardanelles and change in sea level known as the flood in the Gilgamesh literature. This makes them one of the earliest civilizations in the area that is written about. If the Sumerians, or Hungarian predecessors, notably a non semitic speaking tribe, were earlier, so be it. I doubt that is true. Origin of the Jews is tenuous, but they could be from their monotheistic religion, pictographic early alphabet, and non Arabic traits, an oriental-origin caucasoid tribe. This is supported by their very light hair and skin colour, and their rejection, since Phineas, of intermarriage with other races of the area. Some research should be done with association with the Tocharians in the region of China. Most of this info comes from late archaeology and geological research in the past 30 years, much of which has been suppressed, and is not assimilated into modern histories yet. It is now supported by some prominent Jewish historians and researcher. Many of the areas are ME trouble spots and the governments suppress archaeology by western interests. They do things like eradicate Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. China, fearing independence movements of its people also suppresses the Turko-Ugric theories or those of a Caucasoid people in China and won't allow further research and digs in northern China. these digs have turned up European-clothed Caucasoid mummies whose origins may go back to much more than 4000 BC. But we know the Turks, early Anatolians, and Iranians are oriental in origin, and are not closely related to the Arabics near the present areas in which they live. Also, some of the info comes from German archaeology and anthropology done pre-WWII. Some of this work was wrongly discredited because the work was commissioned by the Socialist regime of pre-war Germany and was meant to support Aryan migration theories. In that these theories are partially supported by the Golden Bough, (the mythological text), and could be in part true if not racially conirmed, this research has never been refuted. Perhaps four or more, so-called Aryan migrations west from China and the Steppes north of there, culiminating in a late Indo European invasion. Possible Aryan advances started with Caucasoid Indo-Europeans, were mixed in intervals with other races and ended with Indo Europeans.
It must be emphasized that Aryan in archeaological terms or ethnological terms has no racial meaning per se. It more properly refers to warlike tribes from the east. They probably had Indo European roots and incorporated, Armenian, Phrygian, Tocharian, Indian, Iranian, Hungarian-Sumerian and other ancient peoples. There could have been proto-Germanic people in the mix, as the Germanic language is older than Sanskrit in its oldest form and has common roots with Indo-Iranian. The real gripping question is what race lived in Europe prior to 7,000 BC? Were the 6,000 BC natives recent migrants? I tend to think they were, and moved into Europe as it warmed after the last Ice Age.
EC<:-} |
