The Pelasgians: An Important Proto-Jewish Group

One of the more salient appearances of Jews or proto-Jews in the ancient world appears under the name Pelasgian. Herodotus describes the expulsion of the Pelasgians by the Athenians. In his account, they are driven to Lemnos in a repetition of Vulcan’s expulsion. To wit, Vulcan is also understood to have landed in Lemnos when cast from Olympus by Jupiter. The island was sacred to Vulcan and a center of the Vulcan’s/Hephaestus’ cult. Indeed, I will advance the theory that Mount Sinai is possibly a reference to Lemnos named in the ancient history Sinteis. Likewise, the Pelasgians were understood as establishing the cult of Hephaestus in Greece.

This expulsion of Pelasgians was very likely a reaction to “class ambition” on the part of the Pelasgians who were, at that point, certainly Jews or proto-Jews. Yet according to Herodotus, there was little subtlety to this ambition. These Pelasgians, awarded land for their construction of a city wall, nevertheless, plotted against the city.

An ancient etymology that connects their name to “pelargos,” or stork, postulates that, like the Jews, they came from Egypt, as this is where it was believed storks nested. Aristophanes, teasing the Pelasgians, indicates in his play Birds that these “storks” must support their parents by migrating elsewhere to conduct warfare. This reminds us of the Phoenix that smuggles his parent into the temple of the sun in a ball of myrrh. Here an itinerant sense, that conforms with Jewry, is likewise gained.

Aristophanes, a playwright who lampooned Semitic Gods like Dionysus and Heracles in the play Frogs and Semitic philosophers like Socrates in Clouds, is a figure worthy of consideration. He perhaps hints at the constructive use of comedy as a genre. Aristophanes gave us the incredible term “The Thinkery” which, by its irony, sums up a great deal of Western “philosophy” including its most important and insane product, Christian Theology.

The much-ballyhooed Aeschylus, on the other hand, gives us Prometheus Bound, which asks us to identify with a Semitic Fire Titian vis-à-vis the Aryan Sky God Jupiter. Another hero he gives us is the anti-archon, pro-democratic, King Pelasgus of Argos. King Pelasgus, after putting it to a vote, allows the Daniads, a group of “fleeing Egyptian refuges” into his land. King Pelasgus is doubtlessly a reference to the eponymous ancestor of the Pelasgians who bore the same name. There is something very familiar and “modern” here. This is a tale of “immigrant rights.”

Egypt itself is a Greek word meaning “home of the soul of Ptah.” Here we discern a Greek consciousness of a “Judaized” Egypt. Ptah was also the “Demiurge.” Thus Vulcan and Ptah alike are the same figure appearing in Platonism and Gnosticism. They are understood in the latter explicitly as the Jewish God. With the cult of Ptah, which would spread throughout the Mediterranean, we sense a trade guild that gives credence to the idea that perhaps the Jews did, indeed, build the Pyramids, yet not as slaves but as economically ambitious architects and overseers.

In Greece also we see a clear repetition of the flood story. Here, predictably, Jupiter gets angry with these mysterious Pelasgians and creates a flood to destroy them. Understanding the symbolism around water, perhaps we understand this as an effort to forcefully assimilate them. Or perhaps the story indicates a coy reference to the castration of the Sky God Caelus which may also be related to rain fall or the “opening of an Aryan heaven” as this study explicates. Certainly some racial element of these “Pelasgians” was “washed away,” becoming more permanently autochthonous to the Peloponnese. This sense of surviving “assimilation,” whether forced or otherwise, persists in the Bible.

The “Noah” in the Greek Myth is Deucalion. Tellingly it is the Semitic Prometheus and the creator of “man” who takes pity on the Deucalion. He’s the one that builds the vessel. Here it is a simple chest. Though this is consistent. In truth, Noah’s Ark was a simple box as well. Indeed, in the Hebrew, Noah’s ark or Tevat Noah, נח תיבת, translates as “Noah’s box.” Likewise the word “ark,” as the word has developed in the English language, refers always to a chest, except in one case: Noah’s boat.

This shows clearly the connection between the ark that Prometheus built for Deucalion and the ark God inspired Noah to build. The famous size of Noah’s Ark, 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits is almost certainly an excuse to insert a vulgar numerology. Here the numbers can be reduced to 3 and 5. The first number indicates Semitic, Aryan admixture, the second number indicates a blinding or desensitizing of Aryan adversaries. This numerology is explicated in this study.

We remember that this Gopher wood or “sulphurized wood” is a metaphor for Judaized breeding stock. The Jewish figure of Adonis too is delivered by Venus to Proserpina in the underworld in a chest or Ark. Pandora’s Box, actually an earthen Jar, is, nevertheless, a similar reference. Both the ark and jar are vaginal references.

Deucalion’s son Hellen will become a mythic founding father of Greece. It is from him we get the term Hellenic. In some sense we might understand the relationship of the Greeks to Hellen as precisely the Christians relationship to Noah. Here they venerate a figure from a Semitic Myth and abide the JEM inherent in that. Hence please consider this whilst droning on about the Aryan brilliance of “Hellenic culture.”

Indeed, the Athenians would at some point call themselves the Erechtheidai or “sons of Erechtheus.” Erechtheus, understood by the Athenians as their common ancestor, was the son of the Semitic Vulcan and Semitic Gaia or Terra. Likewise they would even inaugurate Pelasgus the eponymous ancestor of the Pelasgians as a “first man” akin to Adam. Of course as well, the Semitic fire God Prometheus would become known as the creator of man, much like the Jewish God of Genesis.

To the extent the Peloponnese become Pelasgian or was Semitized certainly Prometheus did prove the father of men. To be sure these Semitic common ancestors represent a Semitic “retconning” of Greece much as occurred by the insertion of a Jewish God over Aryans through Christianity. This attests to the success of the Pelasgian “Hephaestus cult.” Today we see this “retconning” of history occurring ubiquitously hence understand this phenomenon precisely.

Though in Greece the cults of Apollo and Zeus or Jupiter were for a period a salubrious mitigating factor. Here as well appeared a useful distinction between Aryan immortal and Semitic, ephemeral mortal. One, ostensibly, was here to stay, the other, just visiting. But then again even Bacchus would appear on a “democratizing” Olympus one day.

The Myth would record Bacchus returning a drunken Vulcan to Olympus on the back of a Donkey. Vulcan was returned to free Juno from a throne he had sent her. Indeed the throne was designed to imprison her when she sat in it. He was returned to make amends. Doubtlessly Jupiter was drunk at this point as well. Do we find a “sincere” Jewish “conservative” returning to free Aryan woman from a Jewish contrived “feminism” and matriarchy”? Here we understand the decline of Greece.

Regardless it is quite possible that Pelasgian or Lemnian were the last racial terms by which Proto-Jews or Jews were known before concealing themselves into an “ark” and changing their “brand.” Here a serpent’s shedding of its skin also becomes an apt metaphor. This is a metaphor concerning Jewish behavior accepted and known esoterically to Jews as this study will explicate. Indeed, the JEM reveals a consciousness among Jewish esotericists of the ancestry I’ve detailed here. Hence, words like Cretan, Pelasgian and Lemnian become appropriate epithets.

In any case, the first origin and identity of Jews, which might be traced in the mytho-history, appears in the Mesopotamian cult of Sin, as this study will explicate. It was evidently as “Chthonic” as it sounds. The term Sinite appears in the Hebrew Bible. It may at least be etymologically related as this study explicates. Hence, it likewise becomes appropriate.

The mytho-history roughly outlined here, and the method demonstrated here for reconstructing this history, should be regarded as canonical among us. It is of course much more plausible and useful than the mytho-history appearing in the Hebrew Bible, where “history” is told in a deliberately opaque and deceptive manner. Indeed, it is important for a people to have a firm, clear and accurate perspective of their history vis-à-vis others. Likewise it is important for a people to have their own perspective of these things. This is Interpretatio Romana.