Fresh Batch #117: Are the Etruscans Older Than the Phoenicians?

Saxon Staff-Craft, the Ring and the King, the Seekers, and Noah (the Sun)

The following is my continued commentary on Nelme’s publication The Origins and Elements of Language from the 18th century.

Chapter IV

Of the Patriarchs

The following is relevant, not for its historicity, but for its presumed historicity, because if we’re looking to correct mistakes, or correct course, we need to identify where we went wrong or erred in our output of information.

The problem with accepting Mosaic history, and then using it as the foundation of the body of your work, is that it is entirely dependent on forgery and presuppositions. By presuming something is true rather than demonstrating that it is (with evidence), the researcher has fallen into a trap. The inability to prove a claim ought to be posited as an idea or possibility, and left open to interpretation till more evidence can be found, but for some reason, that is not what happens. Instead, people appeal to authority to coerce others to accept their ideas as Truth, rather than letting the evidence prove the Truth.

I do not accept Mosaic history. I do not accept we are descended from Adam or Noah in a literal sense. However, in a deeper allegory, the root of Adam can signify the earth, and were our physical bodies to be manifested by the earth, perhaps that could be the underlying symbolism laid up in the allegory. I’m open to possibilities and am perfectly comfortable yielding and conceding what I don’t know. But I will not yield to claims that cannot be proven. In this regard I am unvanquishable.

The alleged Greek term for the wanderers by sea was Pelasgoi (plural), or Pelasgos (singular). Some scholars in the status quo have attributed the etymology of this term to the Hebrew פלג (plg; Peleg), but this is speculation, not demonstration, and in my opinion, it is the result of Abrahamic nonsense. I reserve the right to change my opinion. However, it is important for researchers to be aware of this because it will most likely be what status quo researchers will defer to. This concept, among several others, is a presupposition that the status quo’s claim of Phoenicians being from the Orient hinges upon.

I don’t think there is any modern researcher who won’t concede that Bacchus is the sun. Yet, here we have, in antiquity, people believing that Bacchus was real, and that he was likely Noah. Again, I am adamant about recognizing the astrotheology being proposed as history because once you debunk its historicity, everything else unravels and demonstrates that the status quo’s version of history is either a construct created by profane rabble or a meticulous web of deceit created by monkish despots. If you are not a monk or an initiated priest, and you perpetuate this nonsense as history, then your best case scenario is that you’re profane rabble, which is embarrassing for you, your ancestors, your progeny, and human posterity, but at least you can concede that you didn’t know you were preaching lies and doing the proverbial devil’s bidding. However, now is the time to repent and correct. Those of you initiated into the societies, which are not so secret anymore, who spouted this hot garbage and sank your civilization’s minds into the collective gutter, causing more divide and conquer behavior than anything in the history of mankind, are in a much graver spiritual position, and God willing, you will be punished for what you’ve done, in this life; not the next. You are drenched in the blood of innocents from the wars and slavery you’ve cultivated. And now you’re up to the same greedy, murderous schemes again.

Surely you can appreciate what it means for the sun, or Noah, to divide the world among his sons (3 of them) if you know how many portions that the old year was divided into, before they went down to Shinaar, which is philologically be the River of Sin in Hebrew; anecdotal, but it’s there. If there were any doubt, would you at least concede Hercules is the sun? Most people would, and the status quo thought Hercules was Noah as well. What does that make Noah?

As a brief aside, I use the term status quo and make generalizations, which is a stereotype fallacy, but I do so for convenience, as the aim of my work is not to necessarily single anyone out and blame their stupidity for the corruption and fraud that’s occurred at an institutional level spanning centuries. The aim of my work is to empower you, not to make a list of the numpty liars throughout history. It’s to give you the knowledge to take responsibility for the lies, correct them, and refuse to repeat them unless it’s for the purposes of teaching others why the lies are wrong.

Ch. V.

It’s not my intention to make fun of learned men who were completely ignorant of astrotheology, but if you’re a researcher, scholar, or historian and you don’t account for it, the body of your work will not stand the test of time. The following is a great example, where Nelme pretends Noah is historical and all of the old epithets for sun-gods are actually just different cultures’ names for the same historical man. It’s difficult for me to believe someone as learned as him was also as ignorant and foolish as the following passage reveals, but judging his Abrahamic disposition, it either blinded him or he confounded the astrotheology with history at the behest of the priesthood, or the nobility that funded his work.

The entire history of Europe is predicated on this nonsense, yet even by Nelme’s admission, the Pelasgi were a maritime people 232 years before the Phoenicians acquired a maritime power in the Mediterranean sea. Yet, according to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Myrsilius of Lesbos called the Tyrhennians (Etruscans) by the name of Pelasgians, and the rest of the world called the same people both Tyrhennians and Pelasgians.

This would make the Etruscans older than the Phoenicians, which would be why there is not enough literature remaining from the ancient Italians to decipher their language, and why that which does remain doesn’t correspond to Indo-European, yet there are volumes of literature from the so-called contemporaries of Etruscans, such as the Greeks, Romans, Hebrews, etc., and archaeologists concede that Rome was quasi-Etruscan. Institutional chronology is not adding up. The Pelasgian is of Phoenician original, which would mean their alphabet originated in Italy, not the Orient.

Even by the standards of the status quo and Abrahamics, you’ll notice Nelme wrote (Ib. p. 81), “—some of their descendants improved upon the novelty, by exchanging the name of Pelasgians for that of Etrurians, for which they were detested by the Scythians, etc.”

He continued (pp. 81, 82.), “Their detection operated in the declension of their civil power, and the loss of their language: thereto the Roman succeeded, which was a mixture of various dialects, all derived from the Pelasgic, but corrupted by the Oscans, Sabines, Samnites, and other nations (all Italian); which in process of time became blended with the Greek, another branch of the Pelasgic, or Etruscan tongue, of which Linus is called the refiner; and is also said to have written the exploits of Bacchus (Noah) in Pelasgic letters, about 1067 years after the deluge, and 1281 years before Christ. Orpheus, Pronapides, (Homer’s master) and Thymætes, did the same.”

My analysis and conclusions are not that controversial. I acknowledge much of what the status quo discovered about the structure of language, mapping it out, and the interchanging of letters. The primary difference between our conclusions is that they are content with the causing of the system being Jehovah, while I do not accept that. Instead, I demonstrate that it is the result of a priesthood: mortals, not gods.

Nelme mentioned the interchangeability of B and V. In Hebrew (bet & vet), and other languages, it is the same letter. In Greek, the B (beta) functions like an English V. Notice how Nelme compared the English word over and the Hebrew word עבר (obr/ovr). This word is pronounced ah-var and it is transliterated as abar, something that is unnecessary if your intention was to help others understand. It should be ovar if you’re going to include the vowel to assist in pronunciation because the ayin (ע) comes from the Phoenician or Etruscan O, which begets the Greek Omicron. It is the etymological root of the word Hebrew, which is עברי (obri) and pronounced eev-ree. There is no need to transliterate this to an English speaker using the letter B, just like there is no reason to transliterate Ιωβ as Job, when it is pronounced Yohv. With this slight adjustment in perception, you can see how easy it is for this word Ιωβ (Tetragrammaton, יהוה, Ieue, Ieve, Jewe, JHVH, Jove, etc.; pronounced Yoh-vuh) to be John, given that the Greek N (Nu) takes the symbolic form of the English V when it is in lowercase form: ν.

If this skillset intrigues you, invest in yourself and learn it. Read Spirit Whirled.

Become a member to access the rest of this article.