"The able Panch ['Phoenicians'] setting out to invade the Earth, brought the whole World under their sway."-Maha-Barata Indian Epic of the Great Barats.1
"The Brihat ['Brit-on']2 singers belaud Indra . . . Indra hath raised the Sun on high in heaven . . . Indra leads us with single sway-The Panch [Phoenic-ian Brihats] leaders of the Earth. Ours only, and none others is He!"-Rig Veda Hymn.3
IN the Preface it is explained that the most suitable starting point to begin unravelling the tangled skein of History for the lost threads of Origin of the Britons, Scots and Anglo-Saxons is from the fresh clues gained on the solid ground of the newly deciphered Phoenician inscriptions in Britain.
The chief of these Phoenician inscriptions, and the first to be reported in Britain, is carved upon a hoary old stone of about 400 B.C. (see Frontispiece), dedicated to Bel, the Phoenician god of the Sun (see Fig. 1), by a votary who
calls himself therein by all three titles of "Phoenic-ian," "Brit-on" and "Scot," by ancient forms of these titles; and whose personal appearance is presumably illustrated in the nearly contemporary sculpture from his homeland, Fig. 10 (p. 46). In thus preserving for us the name and titles of a "prehistoric" literate Phoenician king of North Britain upon his own original monument, it at the same time supplies a striking proof of the veracity of the ancient tradition cited in the heading, which the Eastern branch of Aryans has
faithfully preserved in their famous epic, "The Great Barats" (Maha Barata), in regard to the prehistoric world- wide civilizing conquests of the Panch or "Phoenicians," the greatest ruling clan of the Aryan Barats, or Brihats, who, we shall find, were the ancestors of the "Brits" or Brit-ons, our own ancestors. And the amplifying second quotation in the heading, from the Early Aryan psalms, also preserved
by the same Eastern branch of the Aryan Barats or Brit-ons, discloses the Phoenician motive for erecting this inscribed monument in Early Britain to the God of the Sun with his special symbol of the Swastika Cross-an emblem embroidered on the dress of the priests1 and priestesses of the Sun (see Fig. 2), and figured freely with other solar symbols on Phoenician and Early Briton monuments and on pre-Roman Briton coins, as we shall see later.
This Brito-Phoenician inscription in Britain, in recording unequivocally the Aryan character of the Phoenicians, as well as the Phoenician ancestry of the Britons and Scots, merely confirmed the historical results which I had previously
elicited many years before, from altogether different sources, by discovering new keys to the Phoenician Problem. These unlocked the sealed stores of history regarding the origin and activities of the Early Phoenicians, and disclosed them to be the leading branch of the Aryan race, and Aryan also in speech and script, and the lineal parents of the Britons, Scots and Anglo-Saxons.
Before proceeding further, therefore, it is desirable to
indicate briefly here what these new keys are, and the manner in which I was led to discover them.
In attacking the great unsolved fascinating Aryan Problem-the lost origin of our fair, long-headed, civilized ancestors of the Brito-Scandinavian and Ancient Greco-Medo-Persian race who gave to Europe and Indo-Persia their Aryan languages and Higher Civilization-a problem which had so completely baffled all enquiring historians that, after failing to find any traces of them as a race, they threw it up in despair about half a century ago, I took up the problem at its eastern or Indo-Persian end and devoted to it most of my spare time during over a quarter of a century spent in India.
There were some manifest advantages in attacking the problem from its eastern end. Philologists, ethnologists and anthropologists were generally agreed that the eastern branch of the ancient ruling Aryan race in India. had presumably preserved in the Sanskrit dialect a purer form of the original Aryan speech than was to be found in the European dialects, from Greek to Gothic and English; whilst they also preserved a great body of traditional literature regarding the original location, doings and achievements of the Early Aryans which had been lost by the western or European branch in the vicissitudes and destructive turmoil of long ages of migration and internecine wars. Besides this, the long prevalence in India of the rigid caste system, by restricting intermarriage between different tribes and the dusky aborigines, was supposed to have preserved the Aryan physical type in the ruling Aryan caste there, in relatively purer form than in Europe.
After acquiring a working knowledge of Sanskrit and the vernaculars, and studying the Indian traditions, written and unwritten at first hand, as well as all the reports of the archaeological survey department on excavations, etc., and personally visiting all of the most reputed ancient sites, and making several fresh explorations and excavations at first hand, and measuring the physical types of the people, I eventually found that, despite all that has been written about the vast antiquity of Civilization in India, mostly
by theorists who had never visited India, there was absolutely no trace of any civilization, i.e., Higher Civilization in India before the seventh century B.C. Indeed, nothing whatever of traces of Civilization, apart from the rude Stone Circles, has ever been found by the scientifically equipped Indian Archaeological Survey Department, in their more or less exhaustive excavations on the oldest reputed sites down to the virgin soil during over half a century, which can be specifically dated to before 600 B.C.
On the other hand, I observed, that historical India, like historic Greece, suddenly bursts into view about 609 B.C. in the pages of Buddhist literature, and in the Maha Barat epic, with a multitude of Aryan rulers speaking the Aryan language, with a fully-fledged Aryan Civilization, of precisely the same general type which has persisted down to the present day.
The question then arose: whence came these Aryan invaders suddenly into India about the seventh century B.C., with their fully-fledged Aryan Civilization, into a land previously uncivilized?
On analysing this early Aryan Civilization thus suddenly introduced into India, in regard to its culture, social structure, customs, folklore and religion, and the traditional topography and climate of its ancestral homeland as described in the Vedas-descriptions wholly inapplicable to India-I was led by numerous clues to trace these "Aryan," or as they called themselves "Arya," invaders of India back to Asia Minor and Syria-Phoenicia.
I then observed that the old ruling race of Asia Minor and Syria-Phoenicia, from immemorial time, were the great imperial, highly civilized, ancient people generally known as "Hitt-ites," but who called themselves "Khatti" or "Catti," which is the self-same title by which the early Briton kings of the pre-Roman Period called themselves and their race, and stamped it upon their Briton coins-the so-called "Catti" coins of early Britain (see Fig. 3). And the early ruling race of Aryans who first civilized India also called themselves "Khattiyo," as we shall see presently.
This ancient Khatti or "Catti" ruling race of Asia
Minor and Syrio-Phoenicia also called themselves "Arri" with the meaning of "Noble Ones." Now this was the identical racial title which was also applied to themselves by the Indo-Aryans or Eastern branch of the Aryans, who called themselves "Arya," the "Ariya" of the older Pall, which had also the literal meaning of "Noble," and which is the actual word from which our modern English term "Aryan" has been coined. And these ancient Khatti or "Hittites" are represented in their ancient sculptures in Gothic dress. Here then already I seemed to have found not only the origin of the Indo-Aryans, but also the original land of the Aryan Race, and the homeland of the Goths and of our own ancestral Britons and Anglo-Saxons. And further examination soon confirmed this.
The civilization of this Arri (or Aryan) race of Khatti or "Catti" was essentially of the kind which is now called the Aryan type, and of the same type as that introduced into India by the Eastern branch of the Aryas or Aryans. In appearance also these Khatti, who were called "The White Syrians" by Strabo1 are seen in their own rock-sculptures and sculptured monuments of between 3000 and 2000 B.C., to be of the Aryan type. They are tall in stature, with conical "Phrygian" caps and snow boots with turned-up toes, and garbed significantly in what is now commonly called the "Gothic" style of dress (see Fig. 4), for the reason, as we shall see later, that they were the prim- itive Goths, and the Goths were typically Aryan in race.
The ruins of their great walled cities, built of cyclopean masonry and adorned with sculptures and hieroglyphic writing, are found throughout the length and breadth of Asia Minor and extend into Syria-Phoenicia; and the country is intersected by their great arterial highways, the so-called "royal roads," radiating from their ancient capital at
Boghaz Koi or Pteria in the heart of Cappadocia, the traditional home of St. George of England, and the country in which St. Andrew, the apostle and patron saint of the Scots, is reported to have travelled in his mission to the
Scythsl or Getae, the Greco-Roman form of the name "Goth" - the historical significance of this fact will be seen later.
These ancient imperial Khatti people of Asia Minor and Syria-Phoenicia, are the same ruling race which are now generally known as the "Hittites"; for, although calling themselves "Khatti" and called also thus by the Babylonians and Ancient Egyptians, the Hebrews corrupted the spelling of that name into "Heth" and "Hitt" in their Old Testament, when referring to them as the ruling race in Phoenicia and Palestine on the arrival of Abraham there; and the translators of our English version of the Hebrew text have further obscured the original form of the name by adding the Latin affix ite, thus arbitrarily coining the modern term "Hitt-ite."
The identity of these Khatti Arri, or "Hitt-ites" with the eastern branch of the Aryans who invaded and civilized (by Aryanizing) India, was now made practically certain by my further observation that the latter people also called themselves in their Epics by the same title as did the Hitt-ites. They called themselves Khattiyo Ariyo in their early Pali vernacular, and latterly Sanskritized it by the intrusion of an r into Kshatriya2 Arya (in Hindi Khattri Arya), and these Indian names (Khattiyo, Kshatriya) have the same radical meaning of "cut, or ruler," as the Hittite Khatti has. Later I observed that the early Khatti or "Hitt-ites," as well as the Phoenicians, called themselves by an early form of Barat, i.e. as we shall see the original of "Brit" or "Brit-on," and that they also used that form itself (see Fig. 5 and later); and that their language was essentially Aryan in its roots and structure. This practically established the identity of the Khatti or Hitt-ites with the Indo-Aryans, and disclosed Cappadocia in Asia Minor as the lost cradle-land of the Aryans.
This now led to my discovery of the key, or rather the complete bunch of keys to the lost early history, not only of the Indian branch of the Aryans and its parent Aryan stock back to the rise of the Aryan race, but also to the lost history of the Khatti or Hitt-ites themselves, who have
hitherto been known no earlier than about 2000 B.C.,1 or still later.2
I had long observed that amongst the most cherished ancestral possessions which the Indian branch of the Khattiyo Ariyo Barats had brought with them from their old homeland to their new colony in India, like AEneas in his exile jealously bringing with him his "rescued household gods" from his old Trojan homeland,3 were their treasured traditional lists of their ancestral Aryan kings, extending back continuously to the first Aryan dynasty in prehistoric times.
Those treasured ancestral Aryan King Lists they embedded in their great epic the Maha Barata in summary; but in their "Older Epics" (the Purana) they religiously preserved them in full detail. There they cover many hundreds of pages, recording in full detail the main line and numerous branch line dynasties from the commencement of the Aryan period down to historical times; and specifying the names and titles of the various kings, reproduced with scrupulous care, and citing in regard to the more famous of them their chief achievements, thus making the record something of a chronicle of the kings as well. These traditional Aryan kings are implicitly believed by all Brahmins and modern orthodox Hindus to be the genuine lineal ancestors of the present day ruling Indo-Aryan caste in
India. And often I observed, in my travels through the country, groups of villagers listening with wrapt attention and reverence as one of them read out the narrative of great achievements by some of these traditional early Aryan kings, who are confidently believed to be the genuine historical kings of the Early Aryans and the ancestors of the purer Aryan ruling princes in India to-day, some of whom trace their ancestry back to them.
But modern western Vedic scholars, without a single exception as far as I am aware, have summarily rejected all this great body of Epic literary historical tradition as mere fabulous fabrications of the Brahmin priests and bards - just as modern writers on British history have arbitrarily rejected the old traditional Ancient British Chronicles preserved by Geoffrey and Nennius. The excuses offered by Vedic scholars for thus rejecting these ancient epic traditional records are twofold. Firstly, they say that, as these voluminous King-Lists are not contained in the Vedas, and only a very few of the individual kings therein are mentioned in the Vedas, which books they assume to be the sole source of ancient Aryan tradition, these King-Lists must be fabulous. In making such an objection, they entirely overlook the patent fact that the Vedas are merely a collection of psalms, and not at all historical in their purpose, so that one would no more expect to find in them systematic lists of kings and dynasties than one would expect to find detailed lists of kings and prophets in the "Psalms of David." The second argument of Vedic scholars for rejecting these ancient Epic King-Lists is, as they truly say, that no traces whatever of any of these Early Aryan Kings can be found in India. But this fact is now disclosed by the new evidence to be owing to the very good reason that none of these Early Aryan Kings had ever been in India, but were kings of Asia Minor, Phoenicia and Mesopotamia centuries and millenniums before the separation of the Eastern branch to India.
Picking up these despised traditional Epic King-Lists of the Early Aryans, thus contemptuously rejected by Vedic scholars, I compared the names of their later main-line
dynasties with the names of the later historical Hitt-ite kings of Asia Minor, as known from their own still extant monuments, as well as from the contemporary Babylonian and Assyrian records, and I found that the father of the first historical Aryan king of India (as recorded in the Maha-Barata epic and Indian Buddhist history) was the last historical king of the Hitt-ites in Asia Minor, who was killed at Carchemish on the Upper Euphrates on the final annexation of that last of the Hitt-ite capitals to Assyria by Sargon II. in 718 BC. And I further found that the predecessors of this Hitt-ite king, as recorded in the cuneiform monuments of Asia Minor and in the Assyrian documents, back for several centuries, were substantially identical with those of the traditional ancestors of this first historical Aryan king of India as found in these Indian Epic King-Lists.1
Thus the absolute identity of the Indian branch of the Aryans with the Khatti or Hitt-ites was established by positive historical proof; and at the same time the Khatti or Hitt-ites were disclosed to be Aryans in race, and of the primary Aryan stock; and the truly historical character of the Indian Epic King-Lists was also conclusively established.
On further scrutinizing the earlier dynasties of these Epic King-Lists, I observed that several of the leading kings of the earlier Aryan dynasties in these lists bore substantially the same names, with the same records of achievements, and in the same relative chronological order as several of the leading kings of early Mesopotamia-the so-called "Sumerians" and "Akkads," as recorded in their own still extant monuments and in the fragmentary ancient chronicles of that land. Still further, I observed that isolated early kings of Mesopotamia, who are only known to Assyriologists from their stray inscribed monuments as solitary kings of unknown dynasty and unknown origin and race, were mostly recorded in my King-Lists in their due order and chronological succession in their respective dynasties with full lists of the Aryan Kings of these dynasties
who had preceded and succeeded them.1 It thus became obvious that these Indian Epic King-Lists supplied the key to the material required for filling up the many great blanks in the early history of Ancient Mesopotamia in the dark and "prehistoric period" there.
Not only did these Epic King-Lists lighten up the dark period of Early Mesopotamian history, but they shed a similar illuminating light upon the dark period of Early Egyptian history and pre-history as well, and disclosed the wholly unsuspected fact that Menes and his "pre-dynastic" civilizers of Early Egypt were also of this race of Khatti or Hitt-ite "White Syrians" or Aryans.
The Phoenicians also were now disclosed to be Aryans in race and Khatti Arri or "Hitt-ite Aryans" by these new historical keys thus placed in my hands. This, therefore, corroborated the fact found by anthropologists from the examination of Phoenician tombs that the Phoenicians were a long-headed race, like the Aryans, and of a totally different racial type from the Jews,2 to whom they have hitherto been affiliated on merely linguistic arguments by Semitists. This eastern or Indian branch of the Aryans, the Khattiyo Ariyo Barats, call themselves in their epic, the Maha Barata, by the joint clan-title of Kuru-Panch(ala),-a title which turned out to be the original of "Syrio-Phoenician." These Kuru and Panch(-ala) are described as the two paramount kindred and confederated clans of the ruling Aryans; and they are repeatedly referred to under this confederate title in the Vedas. Now "Kur," I observed, was the ancient Sumerian and Babylonian name for "Syria" and Asia Minor of the Hitt-ites or "White Syrians"; and it was thus obviously the original of the Suria of the Greeks, softened into "Syria" by the Romans.3 Whilst "Panch(-ala)" is defined in the Indian Epics as meaning "The able or accomplished Panch," in compliment, it is there explained, to their great ability-
also an outstanding trait of the Phoenicians in the classics of Europe. This disclosed "Panch" to be the proper name of this ruling Aryan clan, whom I at once recognized as the "Phoenic-ians," the Fenkha or Panag or Panasa sea-going race of the eastern Mediterranean of the Ancient Egyptians,1 the "Phoinik-es" of the Greeks, and the Phoenic-es of the Romans.
This "Panch" ruling Aryan clan was celebrated in the Vedas as the most ardent of all devotees of the Sun and Fire cult associated with worship of the Father-god Indra, as in the Vedic verses cited in the heading, and we shall see that the Hitto-Phoenicians were especial worshippers of the Father-god Bel (also called by them "Indara") who was of the Sun-cult, and whose name is recorded in the early Briton monuments to be examined later on. The "Panch" Aryan clan was also significantly the foremost sea-going Aryan people of the ancient world in the Vedas, in which most, if not all, of the many Aryan kings, celebrated in the Vedic hymns as having been miraculously rescued from shipwreck by Indra or his angels, were kings of the Panch Aryan clan, and "a ship of a hundred oars" is mentioned in connection with them.2 These Panch Aryans are also sometimes called "Krivi"3 in the Vedas, which word is admitted by Sanskritists to be a variant of "Kuru,"4 which we have seen means "of Kur" or "Syria." This confederate Vedic title for them and their kinsmen, the later Syrians, namely "Kuru-Panch(-ala)," is thus seen to be the equivalent of the later title for these two confederate Aryan ruling clans, the Syrians and Phoenicians, which is referred to in the New Testament as "Suro-Phoiniki" and Englished into "Syrio-Phoenician."5
Further, I found that the Early Phoenician dynasties in Syrio-Phoenicia or "The Land of the Amorites" of the Hebrews, as well as in Early Mesopotamia on the shores of the Persian Gulf (where Herodotus records that the Phoeni-
cians were located before about 2800 B.C.).1 also called themselves by the "Khatti" or "Hitt-ite" title and also by the early form of "Barat" in their own still extant monuments and documents, and dated back to about 3100 B.C.2
The Phoenician Khatti Barat ancestry of the Britons and Scots, and of the pre-Roman Briton "Catti" kings was then elicited and established by conclusive historical evidence in due course. The "Anglo-Saxons" also were disclosed, as we shall see, to be a later branchlet of the Phoenician-Britons, which separated after the latter had established themselves in Britain.
This identity of the Aryans with the Khatti or Hitt-ites was still further confirmed and more firmly established by further positive and cumulative evidence. In 1907, at the old Hittite capital, Boghaz Koi in Cappadocia, Winckler discovered the original treaty of about 1400 B.C. between the Khatti or Hittites and their kinsmen neighbours on the east, in Ancient Persia, the Mitani3 (who, I had found, were the ancient Medes, who also were famous Aryans and called themselves "Arriya"). In this treaty they invoked the actual Aryan gods of the Vedas of the Indian branch of the Aryans and by their Vedic names. Significantly the first god invoked is the Vedic Sun-god Mitra (i.e. the "Mithra" of the Greco-Romans), as some of the later Aryans made separate gods out of different titles of the Father God. His name is followed by In-da-ra, that is the solar Indra or "Almighty," the principal deity of the Indo-Aryan Vedic scriptures, and as instanced in the verses cited in the heading, the especial god of the Barats or Brihats (or "Brits") and of their Panch or Phoenic-ian clan-and his image and title are represented on Ancient Briton monuments and coins. But even this striking historical evidence of itself did not induce either the Assyriologists or the Vedic scholars to seriously entertain the probability
that the Hittites were Aryans, obsessed with the preconceived notion that the Hittites, whatever their affinities might be, were certainly not Aryans.
The present work is the first instalment of the results disclosed by the use of my new-found keys to the Lost History of the Aryan Race and their authorship of the World's Higher Civilization. It offers the results in regard to the lost history of our own Aryan ancestors in Britain; and discloses them, the Early Britons and Scots and Anglo-Saxons, to have been a leading branch of the foremost world-pioneers of Civilization, the Aryan-Phoenicians.