Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Sons of Liberty: Patriots or Terrorists?

Sons of Liberty: Patriots or Terrorists?
How A Secret Society of Rebel Americans Made Its Mark on Early America
by Todd Alan Kreamer

SONS OF LIBERTY, or Sons of something altogether different? I suppose it all depends on a particular individual's point of view.
For the American "armchair historian," this American Revolutionary organization conjures up a myriad of confusing images. But, what of this "secret" organization that played such an integral part in advancing the idea of American independence from Great Britain? What were the Sons of Liberty? Who were its members and how widespread was its support among the thirteen colonies comprising British America? What was the ideology and degree of political affiliation within the organization?
Shrouded in secrecy, the origins of the Sons of Liberty are in dispute. Some historical sources claim that the movement began in New York City in January 1765. A more popular claim is that the movement began in Boston, Massachusetts through the leadership of one Samuel Adams (a well known American Revolutionary firebrand) in early 1765. It is quite likely that the Boston and New York City chapters of the Sons of Liberty were organized and developed simultaneously.

Tradition has it that the Boston chapter gathered beneath the Liberty Tree for meetings while the New York City chapter met beneath the Liberty Pole for its meetings. For reasons of safety and secrecy, Sons of Liberty groups tended to meet late at night so as not to attract attention and detection of British officials and the American Loyalist supporters of the British Crown.
This secret patriotic society had its roots in the Committees of Correspondence. The "Committees" were colonial groups organized prior to the outbreak of the American War for Independence and were established for the purpose of formally organizing public opinion and coordinating patriotic actions against Great Britain. These original committees were loosely organized groups of private citizens formed in the New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island colonies from 1763-1764.

It was the Boston Committee of Correspondence that directed the Boston Tea Party action of December 16, 1773.1 Upset with the lack of redress concerning the new tax on tea established by the British government for importation of tea to Boston, a small band of the Boston Committee of Correspondence members (approximately fifty in number) led by Samuel Adams, proceeded to empty three ships worth and 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor in protest.2
Was this an early terrorist action or a patriotic action. Surely, the answer lies with perspective. If you were a British official, this action was treasonous and punishable by death. If you were an American colonial citizen, this event would be seen as a glorious action of the freedom fighters worthy of praise, pride, and acclaim.

Essentially, the Sons of Liberty organized into patriotic chapters as a result of the Stamp Tax imposed by the British government on the American colonists in 1765. As a result of the heavy debt incurred from the French and Indian War (1754-1763) and the resulting burden of increased British possessions in the Americas gained as a result of victory in the war (Canada, Louisiana land area known as "New France," and several former French islands of the West Indies), British Parliament decided to station British "regular" troops in the American colonies to keep the French from attempting to recapture Canada and to defend the colonies against the Native American Indians.3 It should be noted that the vast majority of Native Americans sided with the French in the North American Theater of the Seven Years War (1756-1763) and had a notorious record of carrying out terrifying raids against British colonists in the frontier regions of the New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia, Maryland, and Carolina colonies dating back to the middle seventeenth century.

The Stamp Act of March 1765 was instituted to help defray the costs of maintaining British troops in the American colonies by issuing tax stamps for a wide range of public documents including: customs documents, newspapers, legal papers, and licenses. The British government believed that this stamp tax passed specifically for the American colonies was quite fair and just as a means to help pay their share of the huge national debt incurred from the Seven Years War. After all, reasoned Parliament, had not the colonies directly benefited from the war and the expulsion of the French threat from Canada? While Parliament felt that the American colonies should pay their fair portion of the war debt, the colonists responded with outrage and indignation.

The Stamp Act, like the Sugar Act before it, reasoned the colonists, was yet another example of Parliament trampling on the colonial legislature's right to tax their own people. Actions and attitudes of colonists regarding perceived British monetary atrocities against their well being formed the foundation for the rallying cry of American patriots across the land namely, "no taxation without representation." The American colonists had no physical representation or voice in London Parliament, nor did they ever wish to, assert many historians. With actual American representation in Parliament, there would be no need for seeking independence.4
The Sons of Liberty organizations responded to the Stamp Act of 1765 in various ways.

The New York Sons of Liberty declared in December 1765 that they would "go to the last extremity" with their lives and fortunes to prevent the enforcement of the Stamp Act. This declaration included the use of violence if necessary. Acts of rebellion against the Stamp Tax in New York City included an incident from January 9, 1766 in which ten boxes of parchment and stamped paper were delivered to City Hall and immediately confiscated, unpacked, and burned by secret leaders of the New York Sons group.5 Some merchants simply refused to pay the stamp excises. Printers, lawyers, laborers and small shopkeepers simply ignored paying the duty and carried on business as usual.6

Sometimes, the actions and reactions of the Sons of Liberty to the Stamp Act took a violent turn as recorded in a local New York City merchant's diary in April, 1765. Violence broke out with the arrival of a shipment of stamped paper to the Royal Governor's residence. Cadwallder Colden, the acting Royal Governor of the New York colony and scholarly correspondent of Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Samuel Johnson, was extremely frightened of the patriotic group and so locked himself up securely inside Fort George immediately after he received the stamped paper from British officials. A few hours after receiving the official papers, a raucous mob captured the governor's gilded and spectacular coach and reduced it to a pile of ashes. From here the mob (consisting largely of extremist elements of the New York Sons of Liberty) raced uptown to the home of Fort George's commander, smashing numerous windows and breaking into the wine cellar to sustain their "patriotism" before descending on the rest of the house in a convulsion of vandalism.7 Tarring and feathering Loyalists — those individuals who sympathized and were supportive of the British Crown, royal tax collectors, and other officials — was a common practice carried out by the more radical elements of the organizations.

Ironically, the Sons of Liberty ultimately took their name from a debate on the Stamp Act in Parliament in 1765. Charles Townshend, speaking in support of the act, spoke contemptuously of the American colonists as being "children planted by our care, nourished up by our indulgence...and protected by our arms." Isaac Barre, member of Parliament and friend of the American colonists, jumped to his feet in outrage in this same session to counter with severe reprimand in which he spoke favorably of the Americans as "these Sons of Liberty."8 American colonists had several friends supportive of their views on the tax situation including: William Pitt (the Elder), Charles James Fox, Edmund Burk, and others.

The two original Sons of Liberty organizations (New York City and Boston) quickly established correspondence and communications with ever emerging Sons of Liberty groups in New England, the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia. Typically, members of this organization were men from the middle and upper classes of American colonial society. Although the movement began as a secret society, for reasons of safety and anonymity, the organization quickly sought to build a broad, public base of political support among the colonists. Frequently, cooperation with undisciplined and extralegal groups (city gangs) set off violent actions. Even though the Sons seldom looked for violent solutions and eruptions, they did continue to elicit and promote political upheaval that tended to favor crowd action.

While British officials accused the Sons organizations of scheming to overthrow the true and legitimate government of the American colonies, the Sons of Liberty viewed their official aims in more narrow terms, organizing and asserting resistance to the Stamp Act. Outwardly, the Sons of Liberty proclaimed their unfaltering loyalty and allegiance to King George III of Great Britain and emphasized their support of the English Constitution against the usurpation of royal officials.9 For eleven years, 1765 to 1776, American colonists saw British Parliament as the collective "bad guy," not the king!

The Sons of Liberty as a viable movement first broke up with the repeal of the Stamp Act in 1766. However, the organizational network was revived in 1768 in response to the Townshend Acts (a series of excise duties on glass, lead, paints, paper, and tea imported into the colonies.) From 1768 until the end of the American Revolution, Sons of Liberty groups remained in active correspondence with one another throughout the thirteen American colonies and each group took charge of organizing and effecting resistance movements against what they perceived as unfair British taxation and financial strangulation within their respective colonies. The Sons of Liberty as an active movement disbanded in late 1783.10

In the end, no universal conclusions, judgments or definitive statements can be made about the Sons of Liberty. Were they a terrorist organization? The British certainly believed they were. After all, the Sons were advocating overthrow of the status quo government and independence for the thirteen colonies. Were they a patriotic organization? Many American colonists certainly believed they were. The Sons represented to them the American freedom fighter personified, fighting for their rights and ultimate independence. It should be noted that the Loyalists also had their version of Committees of Correspondence and Sons of Liberty namely: the United Empire Loyalists.

One thing is certain about the Sons of Liberty organization: it gave American colonists a voice and vital chance to actively participate in the independence movement.

Finally, the decision on the Sons of Liberty comes down to a variation on an old saying, "one man's terrorist is another man's patriot." The ultimate conclusion must be left to the individual.

Sons of Liberty

Sons of Liberty

The Sons of Liberty was a secret organization of American Patriots which originated in the Thirteen Colonies during the American Revolution. British authorities and their supporters known as Loyalists considered the Sons of Liberty as seditious rebels, referring to them as "Sons of Violence" and "Sons of Iniquity." Patriots attacked the apparatus and symbols of British authority and power such as property of the gentry, Customs officers, East India Company tea, and as the war approached, vocal supporters of the Crown.

In the popular imagination (as in the novel Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes), the Sons of Liberty was a formal underground organization with recognized members and leaders. More likely, the name was an umbrella term for any men resisting new Crown taxes and laws. Newspaper articles, handbills, referred to "True Born Sons of Liberty," "Sons of Freedom," "Liberty Boys", and "Daughters of Liberty."
The label let organizers issue anonymous summons to a Liberty Tree, "Liberty Pole", or other public meeting-places, let Patriot groups in one town communicate with those elsewhere, and let any man or boy imagine himself a Son of Liberty.
While the officers and leaders of the Sons of Liberty “were drawn almost entirely from the middle and upper ranks of colonial society, they recognized the need to expand their power base to include "the whole of political society, involving all of its social or economic subdivisions."[1] Prominent leaders included Paul Revere, Thomas Young, Joseph Warren, Alexander McDougall, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Isaac Sears, John Lamb, James Otis, Marinus Willett, John Adams, and his cousin, Samuel Adams, who was a leader of the New England resistance. Silas Downer, a so-called "Forgotten Patriot", spoke as a Sons of Liberty member at one of the famed Liberty Trees in 1766.[2]
Members were drawn from across class distinctions, although these borders were less well-defined in colonial America. In order to do this, the Sons of Liberty relied on large public demonstrations to expand their base.[3] They learned early on that controlling such crowds was problematical, although they strived to control "the possible violence of extra-legal gatherings."[4] While the organization professed its loyalty to both local and British established government, possible military action as a defensive measure was always part of their considerations. Throughout the Stamp Act Crisis, the Sons of Liberty professed continued loyalty to the King because they maintained a "fundamental confidence" in the expectation that Parliament would do the right thing and repeal the tax.[5]

Groups identifying themselves as Sons of Liberty existed in almost every colony. The organization spread month by month after independent starts in several different colonies. August 1765, was celebrated as the founding of the group in Boston.[6] While Samuel Adams was the organizer of the Boston group[7], this group had formerly existed as the "Loyal Nine" and there is no evidence it was originally a tool of radicals such as Adams and Otis.[8] By November 6, a committee was set up in New York to correspond with other colonies, and in December an alliance was formed between groups in New York and Connecticut.

In January, there was established a correspondence link between Boston and Manhattan, and by March, Providence had initiated connections with New York, New Hampshire, and Newport, Rhode Island. Also, by March, Sons of Liberty organizations had been established in New Jersey, Maryland, and Norfolk, Virginia, and a local group established in North Carolina was attracting interest in South Carolina and Georgia.[9]

North American colonists from Savannah to Halifax resisted the Stamp Act in 1765, through legislative resolutions (starting in Province of Virginia), public demonstrations (starting in Province of Massachusetts), threats, and occasional violence. The success of this popular movement — the Stamp Act became unenforceable and was repealed in May 1766 — emboldened colonial Whigs to resist other new taxes with similar measures in the following years. In 1768, in response to the Townshend Act, the Sons of Liberty were able to impose a virtual blockade of British goods.

The burning of the HMS Gaspée
In 1766, the Sons of Liberty (a.k.a. "Liberty Boys") in the Province of New York erected a Liberty Pole in New York City to celebrate the repeal of the Stamp Act. There was a long-running skirmish over these Liberty Poles with the British troops stationed there (the most notable engagement being the Battle of Golden Hill on 19 January 1770). As poles were alternately erected by Patriots and cut down by troops, violent outbreaks over it raged intermittently from 1766 until the Patriots gained control of New York City government in April 1775. The last liberty pole was cut down by occupying British troops on 28 October 1776.[10]
The Sons of Liberty were responsible for the burning of HMS Gaspée in 1772.

In December 1773, the Sons of Liberty issued and distributed a declaration in New York City called the Association of the Sons of Liberty in New York which formally stated their opposition to the Tea Act and that anyone who assisted in the execution of the act was "an enemy to the liberties of America" and that "whoever shall transgress any of these resolutions, we will not deal with, or employ, or have any connection with him". The Sons of Liberty took direct action to enforce their opposition to the Tea Act at the Boston Tea Party. Members of the group, wearing disguises meant to evoke the appearance of Native American Indians, poured several tons of tea into the Boston Harbor in protest of the Tea Act.

The Sons of Liberty were widely accused of tarring and feathering.

Early in the American Revolution, the Sons of Liberty generally evolved into or were superseded by more formal groups such as the Committee of Safety.
After the end of the American Revolutionary War, Isaac Sears along with Marinus Willet and John Lamb, in New York City, revived the Sons of Liberty. In March 1784, they rallied an enormous crowd which called for the expulsion of any remaining Loyalists from the state starting May 1. The Sons of Liberty were able to gain enough seats in the New York assembly elections of December 1784 to have passed a set of punitive laws against Loyalists. In this time period, it is said that John Adams and Sam Adams fought in jurisdiction due to the public offholding of public society as a system. In violation of the Treaty of Paris (1783) they called for the confiscation of the property of Loyalists.[11]

Nine stripe Sons of Liberty flagIn 1767, the Sons of Liberty adopted a flag called the rebellious stripes flag with nine uneven vertical stripes (five red and four white). It is supposed that nine represented the number of colonies that were to attend the Stamp Act Congress. A flag having thirteen horizontal red and white stripes, used by American merchant ships during the war, was also associated with the Sons of Liberty. While red and white were common colors of the flags, other color combinations, such as green and white, in addition to yellow and white, were used.[12][13]

Later societiesThe name was also used during the American Civil War.
Early in 1864, the Copperhead organization, the Knights of the Golden Circle, was reorganized as the Order of the Sons of Liberty.

The Improved Order of Red Men, a patriotic fraternal secret society, claims to actually be the Sons of Liberty, having adopted the Native American motive after the Boston Tea Party.

One of the secret societies at the University of Virginia calls itself the Sons of Liberty. Some of its actions seem designed to echo those of the colonial Sons of Liberty, including pouring tea down the chimney of an individual of whom the society was publicly critical.[14]
Sons of Liberty/ Sons of the American Revolution

The Sons of the American Revolution is an historical, educational, and patriotic organization that seeks to maintain and extend the institutions of American freedom, an appreciation for true patriotism, a respect for our national symbols, the value of American citizenship and the unifying force of "e pluribus unum" that has created, from the people of many nations, one nation and one people. We do this by perpetuating the stories of patriotism, courage, sacrifice, tragedy, and triumph of the men who achieved the independence of the American people in the belief that these stories are universal ones of man's eternal struggle against tyranny, relevant to all time, and will inspire and strengthen each succeeding generation as it too is called upon to defend our freedoms on the battlefield and in our public institutions.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008



John Adams - (Spoke favorably of Freemasonry)
Samuel Adams - (Close associate of Hancock, Revere & other Masons)
Ethan Allen - Mason
Edmund Burke - Mason
John Claypoole - Mason
William Daws - Mason
Benjamin Franklin - Mason
John Hancock - Mason
Thomas Jefferson - (Deist with Masonic connections)
John Paul Jones - Mason
Robert Livingston - Mason
James Madison - (Some evidence of Masonic membership)
Paul Revere - Mason
Colonel Benjamin Tupper - Mason
George Washington - Mason
Daniel Webster - (Some evidence of Masonic connections)


Known Masons

Benjamin Franklin
John Hancock
Joseph Hewes
William Hooper
Robert Treat Payne
Richard Stockton
George Walton
William Whipple

Evidence of Membership And/or Affiliations

Elbridge Berry
Lyman Hall
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Nelson Jr.
John Penn
George Read
Roger Sherman


Known Masons

Gunning Bedford, Jr.
John Blair
David Brearly
Jacob Broom
Daniel Carrol
John Dickinson
Benjamin Franklin
Rufus King,
George Washington

Evidence of Membership And/or Affiliations

Abraham Baldwin
William Blount
Elbridge Gerry
Nicholas Gilman
Alexander Hamilton
Thomas Jefferson,
John Lansing, Jr.
James Madison
George Mason
George Read
Robert Morris
Roger Sherman
George Wythe

Those Who Later Became Masons

William Richardson Davie, Jr.
Jonathan Dayton
Dr. James McHenry
John Francis Mercer
William Patterson
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer


- Lafayette, French liason to the Colonies, without whose aid the war could not have been won, was a Freemason.
- The majority of the commanders of the Continental Army were Freemasons and members of "Army Lodges."
- Most of Washington's Generals were Freemasons.
- The Boston Tea Party was planned at the Green Dragon Tavern, also known as the Freemasons' Arms, and "the Headquarters of the Revolution."
- George Washington was sworn in as the first President of the United States by Robert Livingston, Grand Master of New York's Masonic lodge. The Bible on which he took his oath was from his own Masonic lodge.
- The Cornerstone of the Capital building was laid by the Grand Lodge of Maryland.

Masonic Presidents USA

George Washington
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
James Polk
James Buchanan
Andrew Johnson
James Garfield
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
William Taft
Warren Harding
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Lyndon Johnson
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
George Bush

Political Leaders USA

Bill Clinton, Senior Demolay (Masonic youth group)
Newt Gingrich, 33rd Degree Freemason
Bob Dole, 33rd Degree Freemason
Jack Kemp, 33rd Degree Freemason
Storm Thurmond, 33rd Degree Freemason
Colin Powell, 33rd Degree Freemason, U.S. Secretary of State
Jesse Helms, 33rd Degree Freemason
Barry Goldwater, 33rd Degree Freemason
Al Gore, Freemason

"God may have other words for other worlds, but His supreme Word for this world, yesterday, today, forever, is Christ! He is the central Figure of the Bible, its crown, its glory, its glow-point of vision and revelation. Take Him away and its light grows dim. He fulfilled the whole Book, its history, its poetry, its prophecy, its ritual, even as He fulfills our deepest yearning and our highest hope. Ages have come and gone, but He abides-abides because He is real, because he is unexhausted, because He is needed. Little is left today save Christ-Himself smitten and afflicted, bruised of God and wounded-but He is all we need. If we hear Him, follow Him, obey Him, we shall walk together in a new world wherein dwelleth righteousness and love-He is the Word of God "
Joseph Fort Newton,
"The Great Light in Masonry,"
Little Masonic Library, Vol. 3, p. 177)

Norman Vincent Peale was also a Freemason and prelate of the Grand Encampment of the Knights Templar of the United States.
There is reportedly some anecdotal evidence to suggest that Kenneth Copeland, Billy Graham and Robert Schuller were Freemasons but there has been no proof of that.

North America

In 1634 the first documented record of a Freemason in North America was that of Lord Alexander in New France (Canada). The "Viscount Canada", founded a colony of Scots on the banks of the St. Lawrence River, and was a member of Edinburgh Lodge No. 1 at Saint Mary's Chapel.

Freemasonry's spread around the world was facilitated by British Military Field Lodges, and in North America the most important figure was Lord Jeffrey Amherst. From Amhersts' base in Nova Scotia, (1738 - 1st Masonic Lodge in Canada is constituted at Annapolis, Nova Scotia.) the Commander in Chief of British North America saw field lodges spread to virtually every segment of his command. Of the nineteen Regiments under Amherst, thirteen had verifiable field lodges.
The American RevolutionFreemasons were on both sides of the American War of Independence and the fact that several of the key writers and signatories of the Declaration of Independence were Masons' is well known.

Documented evidence abounds to the Masonic influence that permeated the revolution. From the goals and ideals of the Declaration of Independence, to the philosophy of the commanders - both British/Canadian and American.

During the American War of Independence it was not uncommon for a field lodge's warrants and regalia to be captured by the opposing force. Invariably they were returned. One such occurrence was the capture of the warrant of the British Regiment 17th Foot. The warrant was returned with a letter signed by Continental General Samuel Parsons. It stated,

"Brethren, When the ambition of monarch's, or the jarring interests of States, call forth their subjects to war, as Masons we are disarmed of that resentment which stimulates to undistinguished desolation, and however our political sentiments may impel us in the public dispute, we are still Brethren, and (our professional duty apart) ought to promote the happiness and advance the weal of each other. Accept, therefore, at the hands of a Brother, the Constitution of the Lodge 'Unity, No. 18' held in the 17th British Regiment, which your late misfortunes have put in my power to restore to you. - I am, your Brother and obedient servant, Samuel H. Parsons."

The Bat Creek Stone

The Bat Creek Stone
by J. Huston McCulloch

Cherokee or Hebrew?
The Bat Creek Stone was professionally excavated in 1889 from an undisturbed burial mound in Eastern Tennessee by the Smithsonian's Mound Survey project. The director of the project, Cyrus Thomas, initially declared that the curious inscription on the stone were "beyond question letters of the Cherokee alphabet." (Thomas 1894: 391:4)

In the 1960s, Henriette Mertz and Corey Ayoob both noticed that the inscription, when inverted from Thomas's orientation to that of the above photograph, instead appeared to be ancient Semitic. The late Semitic languages scholar Cyrus Gordon (1971) confirmed that it is Semitic, and specifically Paleo-Hebrew of approximately the first or second century A.D. According to him, the five letters to the left of the comma-shaped word divider read, from right to left, LYHWD, or "for Judea." He noted that the broken letter on the far left is consistent with mem, in which case this word would instead read LYHWD[M], or "for the Judeans."

Hebrew scholar and archaeologist Robert Stieglitz (1976) confirmed Gordon's reading of the longer word, and identifed the second letter of the shorter word as a qoph. Mertz (1964) herself had first proposed that the first letter is a (reversed) resh. The main line would then read RQ , LYHWD[M], i.e. "Only for Judea," or "Only for the Judeans" if the broken letter is included.
In Paleo-Hebrew, words are required to be separated by a dot or short diagonal stroke serving as a word divider, rather than by a space as in English or modern Hebrew. The short diagonal word divider used on the Bat Creek inscription is less common than the dot, but appears both in the Siloam inscription and the Qumran Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus scroll.

In 1988, wood fragments found with the inscription were Carbon-14 dated to somewhere between 32 A.D. and 769 A.D.(McCulloch 1988). This range is consistent with Gordon's dating of the letters.

In McCulloch (1988) I note that although a few of the letters could be taken for Cherokee in either orientation, and although several of the letters are not perfect as Paleo-Hebrew, the inscription matches Hebrew much better than Cherokee. As English, for example, the main line could be forced to read "4SENL , YP" (sic) in the Mertz/Gordon orientation, or "dh ' 7NESb" in Thomas's orientation. The match to Cherokee is no better than to English, and no one has ever proposed a Cherokee reading of the inscription.

The lone letter below the main line is problematic, but could conceivably be either an aleph or a waw, in which case it might be a numeral indicating Year 1 or 6, respectively, of some era. The two vertical strokes above the main line are test scratches made by an unknown party while the stone was at the Smithsonian, sometime between 1894 and 1971.

Surely Hebrew, but Masonic? American archaeologists Robert C. Mainfort, Jr., and Mary L. Kwas have recently argued in American Antiquity (2004) that the inscription was copied from an illustration in an 1870 Masonic reference book, and is therefore clearly a nineteenth century forgery that must have been introduced by the Smithsonian field assistant who found it. The entry in question, an 1860s artist's impression of how the Biblical phrase QDSh LYHWH, or "Holy to Yahweh," would have looked in Paleo-Hebrew letters, is reproduced below:
Macoy (1868, p. 134)

Both inscriptions do contain two words, with the identical string LYHW- beginning the longer second word in both cases. However, the fifth letter of the second word is clearly different in the two cases. The Bat Creek word ends with a daleth, which also happens to be the second letter of the first word in the Masonic illustration, making the Bat Creek word "for Judea." The Masonic word ends with a second he, which makes it "for Yahweh" instead. The Bat Creek word also has the remnant of a sixth letter, presumably mem, that is completely absent from Macoy's illustration.

In fact it is not surprising that two Hebrew inscriptions would both contain the string LYHW-. The common prefix L- simply forms the dative case, indicating for, to, or belonging to the word that follows. The string YHW-, or Yahu-, the first three letters of the name YHWH or Yahweh of the Hebrew God, is a common theophoric component of Hebrew names. Judah or Yehud (YHWD in the Persian era, according to Gordon) is one such "Yahwist" name. A modern example of such a name is that of Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel from 1996-1999.

The January/February 2006 Biblical Archaeology Review happens to contain a photograph of a bulla (seal impression) that was recently excavated from Jersualem's City of David under the supervision of Hebrew University archaeologist Eilat Mazar. The inscription, in Old Hebrew letters closely related to those in the Macoy illustration, begins with the Masonic string LYHW- in the word LYHWKL, or "belonging to Yehucal" (Mazar 2006: 26). The second line actually contains the tell-tale string -YHW again, in the name of Yehucal's father, ShLMYHW or Shelemiyahu. However, the presence of the string LYHW- on both the Yehucal bulla and the Masonic illustration does not prove that the Mazar assistant who supposedly found the new bulla cribbed it from Macoy's book, but merely that this is a common component of Hebrew inscriptions. Likewise, the presence of this string on Bat Creek does not require it to have been copied from Macoy.

The shorter first words of the Bat Creek and Masonic inscriptions are also clearly different, the Bat Creek word having two letters and the Masonic word three. The distinctive W-like shin of the Biblical QDSh (Qedosh) is entirely missing on Bat Creek. The first letters of the two words do have essentially the same form, but are in fact different: In Macoy's illustration, this is clearly meant to be a qoph, but as such is not well made, since in Paleo-Hebrew it should have, in addition to a loop on the right, an arm to the left with an uptick at the end. This arm in fact appears on the second Bat Creek letter, which was consequently identified by Stieglitz as a qoph. Since this alternate form of Q is already present on Bat Creek, the first letter must be something different, and makes most sense as an inverted (rho-wise) resh, as originally proposed by Mertz. The second letter (D) on the Masonic inscription does look a little like the second letter (Q) on Bat Creek, but in fact there is already a D on Bat Creek, at the end of the second word, that looks nothing like the second Bat Creek letter. These are therefore different letters as well.
However, the most telling difference between the Bat Creek and Masonic inscriptions is in the different ways the two words are separated. Macoy's illustrator, who was undoubtedly working from a newly-available dictionary chart of Jewish War coinscript letters to transcribe standard Square Hebrew into the older alphabet, erroneously assumed that the words should be separated by a space, as in English or modern Hebrew. Bat Creek instead correctly uses a word divider. There is no way this subtle detail could have been copied from Macoy's illustration, even if the copyist threw in a few random changes to disguise his or her source.

If nothing else, the Masonic illustration newly discovered by Mainfort and Kwas does show that Bat Creek has an undeniable affinity to Paleo-Hebrew, and that this affinity should have been recognized already in 1889 by any competent student of antiquities. The fact that Thomas and subsequent American archaeologists failed to see this affinity until it was pointed out by Mertz, Ayoob and Gordon demonstrates their incompetence to adequately classify and evaluate ancient material. It does not, however, reflect on the Mound Survey's data-collecting abilities per se.
My reply to the new Mainfort and Kwas article, enumerating these and other considerations, was summarily rejected by American Antiquity as being "far outside the expertise and interests of the readership." It has nevertheless been accepted for publication in Pre-Columbiana, and a PDF of the draft is online at

Or is it Welsh Coelbren?

In 2002, researchers Alan Wilson, Baram A. Blackett, and Jim Michael announced that the Bat Creek stone is in fact inscribed with the the ancient Welsh Coelbren alphabet, and reads, in Welsh, "Madoc the ruler he is." These authors identify the Bat Creek tumulus as "the likely tomb of Prince Madoc" (Wilson et al. 2002).

Madoc was a Welsh prince who is reputed to have sailed to America in 1170 A.D. (see, e.g. Kimberley (2000)). However, Wilson et al. maintain that he was in fact a brother of King Arthur II, and sailed in 562 A.D. This would reconcile their reading of the inscription with the C-14 date of 32 A.D. - 769 A.D.

Wilson et al. give no reference for what they regard as an authoritative source for the Coelbren alphabet, and give no indication as to how they read the letters on the Bat Creek stone in this alphabet, or what Welsh words they find there. A Coelbren alphabet is provided online by Serenwen (undated). However, I see no obvious relation of the Serenwen alphabet to the Bat Creek letters.

A further complication is that it is widely believed, even among Celtic enthusiasts, (e.g. Jones 2004) that Coelbren itself is the modern invention of Edward Williams (1747-1826), known also as Iolo Morgannwg.
Although Gordon's Paleo-Hebrew reading of the Bat Creek inscription works much better than Thomas's original Cherokee interpretation, the fit as Hebrew is by no means perfect (McCarter 1993). If it could be shown to work even better as Coelbren, or any other alphabet, the Hebrew reading would have to be abandoned. Furthermore, if the Bat Creek stone, which was professionally excavated and whose context been carbon-dated to ancient times, were clearly engraved in Coelbren letters, that would itself be sufficient to vindicate the authenticity of Coelbren and to exonerate Morgannwg. However, until Wilson et al. publish the details of their claim, there is no basis for either of these conclusions.
Where it's at. The Bat Creek stone long lay out of sight in a back room of the National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., but currently it is on indefinite loan to the McClung Museum of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, where it is prominently on display.
The findspot was about 40 miles south of Knoxville, in what is now a TVA recreational area on the shore of Lake Telico at the mouth of Bat Creek. The mound itself has been plowed flat, and only its approximate location is known.
Perhaps the TVA could be prevailed upon to mark a path from old highway 72 to the approximate site, possibly making a complete loop around High Top, with a spur trail to the summit. A picnic table and a small sign at the approximate site of the mound would make an appropriate memorial for the find, as well as a pleasant destination for hikers and boaters.
Even more ambitiously, the mound and its vegetation could be reconstructed at a plausible spot. Bat Creek Mound #3, with the inscription and 9 burials, was "of small size, measuring but 28 feet in diameter and 5 feet in height," according to the offical report. Rebuilding it would require only about 38 cubic yards of earth. The mound had some large sassafras trees standing on it when it was exacavated. The owner stated that he had cut trees from the mound 40 years before the excavation and that it "had been covered by a cluster of trees and grapevines as long ago as the oldest settler in the locality could recollect. At the time the excavation was made there was an old rotten stump yet on the top, the roots of which ran down to the skeletons." A 3-foot black oak tree still stood on nearby Bat Creek Mound #2 at the time of excavation, so it is not unlikely that Mound #3's trees were of the same type. A cluster of black oak and sassafras trees, along with some grape vines, planted on the rebuilt mound, would therefore provide an authentic reconstruction of the 19th century setting, as well as shade for picnickers.

Calalus- medieval America

Calalus: A Jewish Catholic State in Early Medieval America
Nehushtan of CalalusIn the 1920’s in Tucson Arizona were found objects and writings in Latin, Greek and Hebrew with both Catholic and Jewish ritual objects and symbols. Cyclone Covey describes this discovery in his book “Calalus: A Roman Jewish colony in America from the time of Charlemagne through Alfred the Great”. Covey and other researchers are amazed at the mixture of Jewish, Christian and Kabbalistic objects and symbols. However this very much fits this period in the 8th century when in the Carolingian Empire there is a Jewish Principality in southern France called Septimania ruled by Theodoric of Narbonne (Makhir Todros ben Judah/Magnario/Aimeri/Amer) [born 710 died 765]. Many members of this family descended from the Exilarchs of Babylon embraced a Jewish form of Catholicism while other members remained outwardly orthodox Jews.

The Calalus records speak of a Theodorus as the leader of many peoples who leave the Roman lands for Calalus in 775 AD. Covey and others believe that Theodorus is a Jewish leader in the city of Rome. However this is a too literal reading of the term Rome. Theodorus is none other than the Jewish King of Septimania – a Roman Jewish state in southern France. He is the son of the first Jewish King of Septimania also called Theodoric (Theuderic/Thierry/Aimeri de Narbonne/ Makhir Todros). Theodorus (Dietrich/Theodoric/Amery l’Chetif/Nehemiah/Namon/ Aumer ben Aumer) is also known as Theodoric King of Saxony and as Namus Duke of Bavaria. He and his brothers were great Warrior Davidic princes of the time of Charlemagne. Professor Arthur Zuckerman in his book “A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France” confuses him with his father who bears the same Frankish names of Theuderic and Aimeri. On the death of his father Makhir Theodoric in about 765 AD Nehemiah Theodoric becomes the Western Exilarch and leader of all the Jews of the revived Western Roman Empire of Charlemagne.

In 775 AD Nehemiah Theodoric reconquered the American Empire of Calalus.

Calalus was ruled by the ‘Silvanus Tolteczus’ [Solomon the Builder] the hereditary ruler of this former Jewish ruled Roman colony. Calalus was founded in the 1st century BC by the Babylonian Exilarch known as Silvanus Ogam or Silvanus Brabo (Solomon II Babylonian Exilarch, Nasi of Mara, Ruler of Sumer (Somerset)in Britain) a great Roman Jewish ruler, soldier and ancestor of the Swan Knights (Barbur haKatzin). He also had a fleet of trading vessels known as the ships of Solomon or the Swan boats. The ships are shaped like a Swan with its sails like the wings of a beautiful gliding white Swan. After the defeat of the Silvanus Toltezus the members of the Royal Family were sent back to Europe where they were under the protection of Nehemiah Theodorus and his family. The legends of Doon and Ogier are based on the activities of this family descended from Duon (Duon) Antigoon (Ogier) and Silvanus Brabo (Solomon Barbur).

In the fifth century Calalus was part of the Revived Western Empire of King Arthur a descendant of the Swan Knights. By the eighth century due to admixture with the American Indians the state had reverted to paganism. Nehemiah Theodorus led an expedition in 775 to return Calalus to Jewish and Roman rule. He conquered the ancient city of Rhoda and the Jewish law was restored. After 4 years in 779 AD Nehemiah Theodorus left Calalus for his kingdom in France which he had left in the hands of his brother Guillame de Gellone (Mar Nathan Kalonymus)[b.739 d.793 killed in the battle of Carcasonne). He then appointed a British Davidic Prince Jacob as the Jewish King of Calalus as regent for his young son Israel who was married to Jacob’s daughter. Jacob was a descendant of King Arthur as well as the Jewish Royal family of Bernicia. Jacob was the leader of the British Jewish settlers in Calalus. The Roman Jewish Settlers of Calalus in the 8th century were made up of two main groups – the Latin Jewish group from the Frankish Empire and the British Jewish group from the British Isles.

The Olmec/Ogre image which the Ogre is based on

Nehemiah Theodoric ha Makhiri reigned in Germany until his death in 790 AD. He was one of Charlemagne’s leading advisers. He learnt about the land of Calalus from Gerard a member of the Swan Knight family that came to Charlemagne’s court in a Swan boat. He married Adalis a daughter of Nehemiah (aka Duke Namon). The Swan Knight’s ancestors had come to Ireland from Calalus in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD and intermarried with the descendants of Nathan the Red (Nathan the Rhodan) a son of Mar Joseph of Arimathea. Mar Joseph was a grandson of Silvanus Ogam or Brabo (Barbur) the great Roman Jewish warrior who defeated the giant American Emperor of Ogam or Ogier called Druon Antigoon in later European legends. Druon means oak and describes the stature of Antigoon. The Ogam script was named for Silvanus Ogam (Solomon II/ Shalom/ Sulam/ Selim/ Silvius/Salvius /Salvo)who brought it from America to Europe. Ogam or Ogham is the legendary home of the Ogres and I believe that they refer to the Olmec culture of Mexico.

The Swan Knight

Mar Joseph’s son Nathan had travelled to America with his kinsman Nathaniel Bar Tolmai (St. Bartholomew). Nathaniel was a grandson of Silvanus Ogam the Jewish ruler of Calalus. Solomon II ben Nathan I Zisutra was succeeded as Babylonian Exilarch by his son Nathan II Ukba , as Ruler of Somerset and the tin mines by his son Mar Chunya the father of Mar Joseph of Arimathea and as Ruler of Calalus by his son Mar Tolmai ha Barbur the father of St. Bartholomew. St. Bartholomew is remembered in America as Quetzalcoatl the white bearded priest. His son Eliud ha Barbur was the father of Silvanus Tolmai the ruler of Atala (America) and the Lord Master (Baal)of Anahuac/Anu (Mexico) and Calalus (North America).
On Nehemiah Theodorus’ return to the Frankish Roman Empire in 779 he left his brother as the Jewish ruler of Septimania and he became the Jewish ruler of the German lands of Bavaria and Saxony in Germany under Charlemagne’s authority. His son Isaac Kalonymus (also called William of Gellone like his uncle) later in life with his wife became Catholics and he is remembered as St William of Gellone. He has been confused with his uncle Nathan Kalonymus (b.739 d.793) who was also known as William of Gellone and Toulouse who died fighting the Muslims. St William Isaac of Gellone and Toulouse(b.755 d.814 as a monk) as a new Christian went to visit his brother Israel I of Calalus and converted him to his mystical Jewish brand of Catholicism as practiced by the royal and noble families of Western Europe. Israel I had become the King of Calalus in 785 AD on the death of his father-in-law Jacob. In 800 AD Isaac Kalonymus and his two converted brothers Benjamin and Judah went to reinforce the colony with 700 soldiers. Israel I and many of the people embraced Catholicism under the teaching of the three converso brothers of the Makhiri dynasty (Magnarvm). Israel I established his brothers as High Priests of Calalus. From this time Calalus becomes a Jewish Catholic state with a ritual and spirituality derived from both Jewish and Catholic sources. Israel I Guriat reigned for 67 years until 852 AD when he was succeeded by his son Israel II (852-858). St William Isaac of Gellone was two years in America (800-802) which was also known as the Isles of Barzel (Iron/Brazil)and from this time he also was known as Barzillai or Barzelay.
Israel II ha Magnarvm (Merfyn/Merwan/Mermin/Makhiri) spend some of his earlier years in Septimania and Wales where his son Israel Septimus (or Israel the Septimani) was born in 832 AD. Israel II as Merfyn became King of Gwynedd in 825 in right of his mother the granddaughter and heiress of King Cynan. In 844 Merfyn left Wales for Septimania with his other children, leaving his son Mar Jacob ha Rhodri as King of Gwynedd. He was known as Rhodri Mawr. Israel Merfyn returned to Calalus (which was called Manaan in Wales) and succeeded his father as Israel II. Israel III Septimus became King of Calalus in 858 at the age of 26. He fought many battles and later he granted the conquered pagan Tolteczas independence in 880. He was deposed by the Sanhedrin of Calalus and his son Israel IV replaced him and Israel III was banished. Israel IV began a campaign of war against the Tolteczas that would lead to the eventual end of the colony in the 10th century. The descendants of Israel III Septimus’ son Isaac became the Priest-Kings of the Toltecs who moved south to Mexico. They abolished the human sacrifices of the natives but they were restored (c.1018) after the Rhodans left America.

Another Nehushtan of Calalus

Israel III went south to the Toltec lands of Mexico and his grandson Makhir/Americ (Meurig in the Welsh genealogies /Mixcoatl of the Toltecs)was the grandfather of Topiltzin (Israel VII/Idwal) priest of Quetzalcoatl who left Cholula for Rhoda in about 1000 AD. He rejoined the remnant of the Rhodans who he led east and then back to Europe and some of the Latin Jewish Rhodans settled in North Western Spain where as trained Warriors they were welcomed in the fight to preserve the freedom of North Western Spain from the Muslims. Rhodrigo El Cid was Topiltzin’s great-grandson. Topiltzin’s son was called Lain Calvo (Lancelin of Calalus/Lachlan/Llewellyn). Rhodrigo El Cid and his father Diego Lainez (Jacob) married into the Davidic Exilarch family of Barcelona and Este. His daughter Maria Rodriguez was the wife of Raymond Berenger IV Arnold Count of Barcelona [descended in the direct male line from Guibelin (Gui Alberic/Bellon/Yakar ben Judah) of Narbonne, the youngest son of Makhir Todros of Septimania]. Lain Calvo's sister Ximena of Calalus married Fernan Nunez of the Counts of Amaya family. Some genealogists have confused the ancestors of this family of the El Cid
Rhodrigo El Cid

The British Jewish Rhodans settled in Wales. In the 12th century their descendants in Wales went with Prince Madoc ap Owain to America where they established themselves in a series of forts in Alabama and Georgia. The 'Alabama Welsh' website states in regards to Prince Madoc: "...In 1170AD, ten small ships assembled off Lundy Island in the Bristol Channel, which flows between South Wales and Southern England. He and his ten ships were never heard from again. It was many years later when the archealogical discovery of European style structures in the Southeast, built centuries before Columbus' journey, prompted a review of the Welsh histories of Madoc's voyage. A series of pre-Columbian, dressed stone fortifications built up the Alabama River were discovered by later settlers. Three major forts, completely unlike any known Indian structure, were constructed along the route that settlers arriving in Mobile Bay would have taken. The first fort, erected on top of Lookout Mountain, near Desoto Falls, Alabama was found to be nearly identical in setting, layout and method of construction to Dolwyddelan Castle in Gwynedd, the presumed birth place of Madoc of Wales...". It is said that the white Indian tribe of the Mandan were the descendants of these Welsh settlers.

The Basque and Portuguese descendants of the Latin Jewish Rhodans went to America after 1492. Another group of the Jewish Rhodans never left America and they eventually moved to the Appalachian Mountains and were later called the Melungeons. Prince Madoc was a descendant of King Jacob ben Israel ha Rhodri (or "the Rhodan") (aka Iago ap Idwal) of Wales. King Jacob (Iago) of Gwynedd (1033-1039) was the brother of Lain Calvo (or Lancelin of Calalus)of Spain. His father was King Israel VII of Calalus (999-1018) not King Idwal of Gwynedd (950-979) as supposed in some genealogies.

Mar Joseph of Arimathea

Some researchers have sought to discredit the Tucson discoveries. They claim that it was the cult objects of a Freemason group because of the mixture of Jewish, Christian and Kabbalistic symbols and because of the poor use of Latin. However the Kabbalah came forth from the region of Septimania through the Makhiri family. Many other factors that were not commonly known in the 1920's and the 19th century confirm for me that these discoveries are indeed genuine and they fit with the evidence from numerous other sources found in the mythology, legends, genealogies and histories of Spain, France, Ireland, and Britain among others. There are still many anti-semitic forces who do not want to see this Jewish connection with the history of America. The cult objects of the Nehushtan and the monstrance and chalices, menorah and the prominence of the Cross demonstrate the religion of Rhodan Calalus is a Jewish brand of Catholicism centred on Eucharistic Adoration themes. The Serpent (Nehushtan) raised in the wilderness is a Eucharistic symbol of the Messiah raised up on the Cross and also raised up in the Monstrance. Covey writes: “Besides the names of the kings, much else on gunbarrel blue to light-lead gray artifacts confirms the colony to be Jewish: a menorah with seven burning candles, a pair of Hebrew goblet-chalices (habdalah), incense spoons, burning incense...and words in carefully-drawn Hebrew script...Their central symbol of the cross, though not unknown to Jewish tradition, was atypical...two of the crosses were nehushtans...” The feathered Serpent associated with Topiltzin as priest of Quetzalcoatl recalls these Nehushtans that were the symbol of the religion of Rhodan Calalus. Topiltzin's grandfather Makhir (Americ) Mixcoatl is also associated with the Serpent (nahash) and is known as the Cloud Serpent. These heavenly Serpents are the Seraphim of Jewish tradition. Topiltzin's grandfather Mixcoatl is also associated with the colour 'Red'- and rhoda means Red. In some accounts Mixcoatl is referred to as the father of Topiltzin but there is disagreement with this in other American Indian traditions.

Nehushtan and Moses

Another reason that academics are so keen to dismiss these discoveries is they provide evidence that some dinosaurs lived in historic times as one of the swords discovered has a diplodocus dinosaur on it. The ruins of Angkor Wat in Asia also demonstrate that 800 years ago the builders of Angkor Wat knew what a Stegosaurus looked like long before the modern day discovery of dinosaur artifacts. These artifacts are embarassing to those who follow an evolutionary dating of the age of the dinosaurs. It is alot harder to dismiss the Stegosaurus on Angkor Wat than it is the Diplodocus on the Calalus Sword. The Diplodocus skeletons are interestingly found in the North Western part of North America.

Sword of Calalus with a diplodocus on it

The dinosaur diplodocus

The diplodocus remains were first discovered in 1877. Even those who think that Calalus is connected to a 19th century group of Freemasons do not believe the finds are a hoax. However the first discoveries at the site were made in 1884 and already the ground had been hard for a long time which leaves little time for the so-called'Freemasons' to design a sword and place a diplodocus on it. The Calalus discovery is anathema to those who uphold the present orthodoxies in history and science. The Bible itself speaks of the diplodocus as the Behemoth who has a tail like a cedar tree. The 'New York Times' article of 1925 states: "Dr. Neil Judd of the Smithsonian Institution visited the excavation and completely excavated two of the articles himself. He stated that the articles were very old and that there was absolutely no evidence of disturbance of the earth surrounding them. He reached this conclusion after chopping these two pieces loose with a miner's pick." Another 1925 article on the discovery states:"The articles have been found at about the same level, that is, between five and six feet below the surface, and in a well- cemented stratum of caliche, the caliche, or lime formation, being so hard that it is necessary to chop each piece out with a pick. There is no evidence of burial, either in recent or in historic times; in fact, the articles have been covered by a natural process of the washing down of the debris from above, until time has resulted in building up of from five to six feet of overhead. The many scientists who have assisted in the research are unanimous in the opinion that the covering-over process has taken many hundreds of years; in fact, their conclusions tend to place the age of the relics at about the eighth century."

Donald Panther-Yates in his book "Los Lunas Mystery Stone" also believes that the symbols on the objects have their source in the Kabbalah of the Frankish Roman Jewish Kingdom of Septimania rather than a later masonic source. He also sees Kabblaistic symbols on the Los Lunas Stone.

Stegosaurus on Angkor Wat building

Ancestry of Prince Madoc

1. Prince Madoc ap Owain of Gwynedd
2. King Owain I of Wales (b.1100 d.1170)
3. Gryffudd II ap Cynan King of Gwynedd (b.1055 d.1137)
4. Prince Cynan ap Iago the Rhodan (Chunan ben Jacob ha Rhodri)[b.1020 d.1060]married Princess Ragnhild of Dublin
5. King Iago ap Idwal (Jacob ben Israel ha Rhodri)of Gwynedd 1033-1039 [b.990 d.1039] [ younger brother of Mar Isaac ha Nehushtan (Huacmar Quetzalcoatl) of the Toltecs and Prince Lancelin of Calalus (Lain Calvo of Castile)]married Sussanah of Barcelona
6. King Israel VII ha Nehushtan of Rhoda and Calalus 999-1018 Priest- King of the Toltecs 977-999 King of Gwynedd 1023-1033 (Idwal of Wales/ Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl of the Toltecs) [b.960 d.1033]married Ximena of Rhoda daughter and heiress of King Israel VI
7. Isaac (Huacmar/ Huetzin) Priest-King of the Toltecs [b.930 d.977] [cousin of Israel VI of Calalus 955-994]
8. Prince Makhir of Calalus (Meurig/ Mixcoatl of the Toltecs/ Americ)Priest-King of the Toltecs [b.900 d.974] [cousin of King Israel V of Rhoda and Calalus 920-955]married Chimalman (Ximena/ Chimena)daughter of Israel IV of Calalus
9. Prince Isaac ha Nehushtan (Quetzalcoatl) of Rhoda Priest-King of the Toltecs [younger brother of King Israel IV of Rhoda and Calalus 883-920] [b.856 d.921]
10. King Israel III Septimus of Rhoda and Calalus [b. 832 d.900] [brother of King Rhodri Mawr of Gwynedd]married Ximena of Auvergne daughter of Makhir Bernard of Auvergne and Septimania [son of Warin of Macon b.779 son of St William of Gellone] and his wife Ava of the Spanish March [daughter of Solomon of the Spanish March]
11. King Israel II Magnarvm (Merfyn/ Mermin/ Merwan/ Makhiri) of Rhoda and Calalus (b.805 d.858) married Nest of Powys daughter of King Cadell12. King Israel I Guriad ha Makhiri (Magnarvm) of Rhoda and Calalus (b.770 d.852) [brother of St. William Isaac of Gellone (b.755 d.814)] married Atala (Ethyl) daughter of Jacob (Iago) of Gwynedd and Bernicia King of Calalus (779-785) son of Cynan (Chunya) of Gwynedd
13. Mar Nehemiah Theodorus ha Makhiri (Deitrich/Namon) [b. 735 d.790] Ruler of Ripaurien, Saxony, Bavaria (779-790)and King of Calalus (775- 779) Jewish King of Septimania (765-775)
14. Makhir Todros ben Yehuda (Amorai/ Theodoric)[b. 710 d.765] Western Exilarch and Jewish King of Septimania